UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549

 

Form 10-K

 

(Mark One)
x		ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012

or

o		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from         to        

Commission file number: 814-00794

 

GOLUB CAPITAL BDC, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Delaware		27-2326940
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL		60606
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

(312) 205-5050

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class		Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share		The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer o		Accelerated filer x		Non-accelerated filer o		Smaller reporting company o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Yes o No x

The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on March 31, 2012 based on the closing price on that date of $15.27 on the Nasdaq Global Select Market was approximately $264.5 million. For the purposes of calculating this amount only, all directors and executive officers of the registrant have been treated as affiliates. There were 28,582,221 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding as of November 29, 2012.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the registrant’s 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed subsequent to the date hereof, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K. Such proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days following the end of the registrant’s fiscal year ended September 30, 2012.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part I.
Item 1. Business			1
Item 1A. Risk Factors			28
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments			53
Item 2. Properties			53
Item 3. Legal Proceedings			53
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures			53
Part II.
Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities			54
Item 6. Selected Financial Data			56
Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations			57
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk			76
Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data			77
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure			133
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures			133
Item 9B. Other Information			133
Part III.
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance			134
Item 11. Executive Compensation			134
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters			134
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence			135
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services			135
Part IV.
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statements			135
Signatures			137

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

In this annual report on Form 10-K, except as otherwise indicated, the terms:

On April 13, 2010, we converted from a limited liability company into a corporation. In this conversion, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. succeeded to the business of Golub Capital BDC LLC and its consolidated subsidiary, and the members of Golub Capital BDC LLC became stockholders of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. In this annual report on Form 10-K, we refer to such transactions as the “BDC Conversion.” Prior to the BDC Conversion, Golub Capital BDC LLC held all of the outstanding limited liability company interests in our predecessor, Golub Capital Master Funding LLC, or GCMF.

Item 1. Business

GENERAL

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the 1940 Act. In addition, for tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a regulated investment company, or RIC, under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, GCMF, which commenced operations in July 2007, to make investments in senior secured, one stop (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans), second lien and mezzanine (a loan that ranks senior only to a borrower’s equity securities and ranks junior to all of such borrower’s other indebtedness in priority of payment) loans and warrants and equity securities of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms. In this annual report on Form 10-K, the term “middle-market” generally refers to companies having earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, of between $5 million and $50 million annually.

Our investment objective is to maximize the total return to our stockholders in the form of current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $7.0 billion of capital under management, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom we have invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, one stop, second lien and mezzanine loans and warrants and minority equity securities by primarily investing approximately $5 million to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of U.S. middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $25 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

In the current environment, we continue to focus on senior secured loans and one stop investments, given the greater principal protection from the first lien nature of these loans.

As of September 30, 2012, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 40.7% senior secured loans, 39.5% one stop loans, 6.6% second lien loans, 10.0% mezzanine loans and 3.2% equity. As of September 30, 2011, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 44.3% senior secured loans, 38.7% one stop loans, 4.8% second lien loans, 10.2% mezzanine loans and 2.0% equity.

As of September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, we had debt and equity investments in 121, 103 and 94 portfolio companies, respectively. For the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, our income producing assets, which represented nearly 100% of our total portfolio, had a weighted average interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 9.3%, 8.6% and 8.4% and a weighted average investment income (which includes interest income and amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 10.2%, 9.9% and 10.9%, respectively.

Information Available

Our address is 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60606. Our phone number is (312) 205-5050, and our internet address is www.golubcapitalbdc.com. We make available, free of charge, on our website our proxy statement, annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K and you should not consider information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K or any other report we file with the SEC.

The SEC also maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information we file with the SEC at www.sec.gov. Copies of these reports, proxy and information statements and other information may also be obtained, after paying a duplicating fee, by electronic request at publicinfo@sec.gov, or by writing the SEC's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549-0102. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

Our Investment Adviser

Our investment activities are managed by our investment adviser, GC Advisors. GC Advisors is responsible for sourcing potential investments, conducting research and due diligence on prospective investments and equity sponsors, analyzing investment opportunities, structuring our investments and monitoring our investments and portfolio companies on an ongoing basis. GC Advisors was organized in September 2008 and is a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, or the Advisers Act. Under our amended and restated investment advisory agreement, or the Investment Advisory Agreement, with GC Advisors, we pay GC Advisors a base management fee and an incentive fee for its services. See “Business — Management Agreements — Management Fee” for a discussion of the base management fee and incentive fee, including the cumulative income incentive fee and the income and capital gains incentive fee, payable by us to GC Advisors. Unlike most closed-end funds whose fees are based on assets net of leverage, our base management fee is based on our average-adjusted gross assets (including leverage, unrealized depreciation or appreciation on derivative instruments, and cash collateral on deposit with custodian but adjusted to exclude cash and cash equivalents so that investors do not pay the base management fee on such assets) and, therefore, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Additionally, under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because it determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other

TABLE OF CONTENTS

conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. See “Business — Management Agreements — Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement.”

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and has entered into a staffing agreement, or the Staffing Agreement, with two Golub Capital affiliates, Golub Capital Incorporated and Golub Capital LLC. Under the Staffing Agreement, these companies make experienced investment professionals available to GC Advisors and provide access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital and its affiliates. The Staffing Agreement provides GC Advisors with access to investment opportunities, which we refer to in the aggregate as deal flow, generated by Golub Capital and its affiliates in the ordinary course of their businesses and commits the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee to serve in that capacity. As our investment adviser, GC Advisors is obligated to allocate investment opportunities among us and its other clients fairly and equitably over time in accordance with its allocation policy. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Related Party Transactions.” However, there can be no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. GC Advisors seeks to capitalize on the significant deal origination, credit underwriting, due diligence, investment structuring, execution, portfolio management and monitoring experience of Golub Capital’s investment professionals.

An affiliate of GC Advisors, GC Service, provides the administrative services necessary for us to operate. See “Business — Management Agreements — Administration Agreement” for a discussion of the fees and expenses we are required to reimburse to GC Service.

About Golub Capital

Golub Capital, founded in 1994, is a leading lender to middle-market companies, with a long track record of investing in one stop and junior capital financings, which is our long-term investment focus. Golub Capital invested more than $3.6 billion in one stop and mezzanine transactions across a variety of market environments and industries between 2001 and September 30, 2012. Since its inception, Golub Capital has closed deals with over 150 middle-market sponsors and repeat transactions with over 90 sponsors.

Golub Capital’s middle-market lending group is managed by a four-member senior management team consisting of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Andrew H. Steuerman and Gregory W. Cashman. As of September 30, 2012, Golub Capital’s 55 investment professionals had an average of over 11 years of investment experience and were supported by 93 administrative and back office personnel that focus on operations, finance, legal and compliance, accounting and reporting, marketing, information technology and office management.

Investment Criteria/Guidelines

Our investment objective is to generate current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in senior secured, one stop, second lien, mezzanine loans of, and warrants and minority equity securities in, U.S. middle-market companies. We seek to generate strong risk-adjusted net returns by assembling a diversified portfolio of investments across a broad range of industries and private equity investors.

We primarily target U.S. middle-market companies controlled by private equity investors that require capital for growth, acquisitions, recapitalizations, refinancings and leveraged buyouts. We may also make opportunistic loans to independently owned and publicly held middle-market companies. We seek to partner with strong management teams executing long-term growth strategies. Target businesses will typically exhibit some or all of the following characteristics:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

While we believe that the criteria listed above are important in identifying and investing in prospective portfolio companies, not all of these criteria will be met by each prospective portfolio company.

Investment Process Overview

We view our investment process as consisting of four distinct phases described below:

Origination.  GC Advisors sources investment opportunities through access to a network of over 10,000 individual contacts developed in the financial services and related industries by Golub Capital and managed through a proprietary customer relationship database. Among these contacts is an extensive network of private equity firms and relationships with leading middle-market senior lenders. The senior deal professionals of Golub Capital supplement these leads through personal visits and marketing campaigns. It is their responsibility to identify specific opportunities, to refine opportunities through candid exploration of the underlying facts and circumstances and to apply creative and flexible thinking to solve clients’ financing needs. Golub Capital’s origination personnel are located in offices in New York and Chicago. Each originator maintains long-standing customer relationships and is responsible for covering a specified target market. We believe those originators’ strength and breadth of relationships across a wide range of markets generate numerous financing opportunities, which we believe enables GC Advisors to be highly selective in recommending investments to us.

Underwriting.  We utilize the systematic, consistent approach to underwriting developed by Golub Capital, with a particular focus on determining the value of a business in a downside scenario. The key criteria that we consider include (1) strong and resilient underlying business fundamentals, (2) a substantial equity cushion in the form of capital ranking junior in right of payment to our investment and (3) a conclusion that overall “downside” risk is manageable. While the size of this equity cushion will vary over time and across industries, the equity cushion generally sought by GC Advisors today is between 35% and 50% of total portfolio capitalization. We generally focus on the criteria developed by Golub Capital for evaluating prospective portfolio companies. In evaluating a particular company, we put more emphasis on credit considerations (such as (1) loan-to-value ratio (which is the amount of our loan divided by the enterprise value of the company in which we are investing), (2) the ability of the company to maintain a liquidity cushion through economic cycles and in downside scenarios, (3) the ability of the company to service its fixed charge obligations under a variety of scenarios and (4) its anticipated strategic value in a downturn) than on profit potential and loan pricing. Our due diligence process for middle-market credits will typically entail:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following chart illustrates the stages of Golub Capital’s evaluation and underwriting process:

ILLUSTRATIVE DEAL EVALUATION PROCESS

FUND INVESTMENTS

Execution.  In executing transactions for us, GC Advisors utilizes the due diligence process developed by Golub Capital. Through a consistent approach to underwriting and careful attention to the details of execution, it seeks to close deals as fast or faster than competitive financing providers while maintaining discipline with respect to credit, pricing and structure to ensure the ultimate success of the financing. Upon completion of due diligence, the investment team working on an investment delivers a memorandum to GC Advisors’ investment committee. Once an investment has been approved by the investment committee on a consensus basis, it moves through a series of steps generally, including initial documentation using standard document templates, final documentation, including resolution of business points and the execution of original documents held in escrow. Upon completion of final documentation, a loan is funded upon the execution of an investment committee memorandum by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee.

Monitoring.  We view active portfolio monitoring as a vital part of our investment process. We consider board observation rights, where appropriate, regular dialogue with company management and sponsors and detailed, internally generated monitoring reports to be critical to our performance. Golub Capital has developed a monitoring template that is designed to reasonably ensure compliance with these standards. This template is used by GC Advisors as a tool to assess investment performance relative to our investment plan. In addition, our portfolio companies may rely on us to provide them with financial and capital markets expertise.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As part of the monitoring process, GC Advisors regularly assesses the risk profile of each of our investments and rates each of them based on an internal system developed by Golub Capital and its affiliates. It is based on the following categories, which we refer to as GC Advisors’ investment performance rating:

Risk Ratings Definition
Rating		Definition
5		Involves the least amount of risk in our portfolio. The borrower is performing above expectations, and the trends and risk factors are generally favorable.
4		Involves an acceptable level of risk that is similar to the risk at the time of origination. The borrower is generally performing as expected, and the risk factors are neutral to favorable.
3		Involves a borrower performing below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has increased somewhat since origination. The borrower may be out of compliance with debt covenants; however, loan payments are generally not past due.
2		Involves a borrower performing materially below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has increased materially since origination. In addition to the borrower being generally out of compliance with debt covenants, loan payments may be past due (but generally not more than 180 days past due).
1		Involves a borrower performing substantially below expectations and indicates that the loan’s risk has substantially increased since origination. Most or all of the debt covenants are out of compliance and payments are substantially delinquent. Loans rated 1 are not anticipated to be repaid in full and we will reduce the fair market value of the loan to the amount we anticipate will be recovered.

For any investment rated 1, 2 or 3, GC Advisors will increase its monitoring intensity and prepare regular updates for the investment committee, summarizing current operating results and material impending events and suggesting recommended actions.

GC Advisors monitors and, when appropriate, changes the investment performance ratings assigned to each investment in our portfolio. In connection with our valuation process, GC Advisors reviews these investment performance ratings on a quarterly basis, and our board of directors reviews and affirms such ratings.

The following table shows the distribution of our investments on the 1 to 5 investment performance rating scale at fair value as of September 30, 2012 and 2011:

		September 30, 2012								September 30, 2011
Investment Performance Rating		Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments				Investments at Fair Value (In thousands)(1)				Percentage of Total Investments
5		$	145,414				21.6	%		$	49,691				10.8	%
4			468,182				69.6				360,259				78.7
3			55,149				8.2				45,141				9.9
2			340				0.1				2,891				0.6
1			3,825				0.5				—				—
Total		$	672,910				100.0	%		$	457,982				100.0	%

Investment Committee

The purpose of GC Advisors’ investment committee, which is comprised of officers of GC Advisors, is to evaluate and approve all of our investments, subject to the oversight of our board of directors. The investment committee process is intended to bring the diverse experience and perspectives of the committee’s members to

TABLE OF CONTENTS

the analysis and consideration of each investment. The investment committee currently consists of Lawrence E. Golub, David B. Golub, Andrew H. Steuerman and Gregory W. Cashman. The investment committee serves to provide investment consistency and adherence to our core investment philosophy and policies. The investment committee also determines appropriate investment sizing and suggests ongoing monitoring requirements.

In addition to reviewing investments, investment committee meetings serve as a forum to discuss credit views and outlooks. Potential transactions and deal flow are reviewed on a regular basis. Members of the investment team are encouraged to share information and credit views with the investment committee early in their analysis. We believe this process improves the quality of the analysis and assists the deal team members to work more efficiently.

Each transaction is presented to the investment committee in a formal written report. All of our new investments must be approved by a consensus of the investment committee. Each member of the investment committee performs a similar role for other investment funds, accounts or other investment vehicles, collectively referred to as accounts, sponsored or managed by Golub Capital and its affiliates.

Investment Structure

Once we have determined that a prospective portfolio company is suitable for investment, we work with the management of that company and its other capital providers to structure an investment. We negotiate among these parties to agree on how our investment is expected to perform relative to the other capital in the portfolio company’s capital structure.

We structure our investments, which typically have maturities of three to seven years, as follows:

Senior Secured Loans.  We structure these investments as senior secured loans. We obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of such loans. This collateral may take the form of first-priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company borrower. Our senior secured loans may provide for moderate loan amortization in the early years of the loan, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity.

One Stop Loans.  We structure our one stop loans as senior secured loans. We obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of these loans. This collateral may take the form of first-priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company. One stop loans typically provide for moderate loan amortization in the initial years of the facility, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity. One stop loans generally allow the borrower to make a large lump sum payment of principal at the end of the loan term, and there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount owed at maturity. In many cases, we are the sole lender, or we together with our affiliates are the sole lenders, of one stop loans, which can afford us additional influence over the borrower in terms of monitoring and, if necessary, remediation in the event of underperformance.

Second Lien Loans.  We structure these investments as junior, secured loans. We obtain security interests in the assets of the portfolio company that serve as collateral in support of the repayment of such loans. This collateral may take the form of second priority liens on the assets of a portfolio company. Second lien loans typically provide for moderate loan amortization in the initial years of the facility, with the majority of the amortization deferred until loan maturity.

Mezzanine Loans.  We structure these investments as unsecured, subordinated loans that provide for relatively high, fixed interest rates that provide us with significant current interest income. These loans typically have interest-only payments (often representing a combination of cash pay and payment-in-kind, or PIK, interest) in the early years, with amortization of principal deferred until loan maturity. Mezzanine loans generally allow the borrower to make a large lump sum payment of principal at the end of the loan term, and there is a risk of loss if the borrower is unable to pay the lump sum or refinance the amount owed at maturity.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Mezzanine investments are generally more volatile than secured loans and may involve a greater risk of loss of principal. In addition, the PIK feature of many mezzanine loans, which effectively operates as negative amortization of loan principal, thereby increases credit risk exposure over the life of the loan.

Warrants and Minority Equity Securities.  In some cases, we may also receive nominally priced warrants or options to buy a minority equity interest in the portfolio company in connection with a loan. As a result, as a portfolio company appreciates in value, we may achieve additional investment return from this equity interest. We may structure such warrants to include provisions protecting our rights as a minority-interest holder, as well as a “put,” or right to sell such securities back to the issuer, upon the occurrence of specified events. In many cases, we may also seek to obtain registration rights in connection with these equity interests, which may include demand and “piggyback” registration rights.

We tailor the terms of each investment to the facts and circumstances of the transaction and the prospective portfolio company, negotiating a structure that protects our rights and manages our risk while creating incentives for the portfolio company to achieve its business plan and improve its operating results. We seek to limit the downside potential of our investments by:

We expect to hold most of our investments to maturity or repayment, but we may sell some of our investments earlier if a liquidity event occurs, such as a sale, recapitalization or worsening of the credit quality of the portfolio company.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Investments

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, one stop, second lien and mezzanine loans and warrants and minority equity securities by investing approximately $5 million to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of middle-market companies. Set forth below is a list of our ten largest portfolio company investments as of September 30, 2012, as well as the top ten industries in which we were invested as of September 30, 2012, in each case calculated as a percentage of our total investments as of such date.

Portfolio Company		Fair Value of Investments (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments
National Healing Corporation		$	22,672				3.4	%
Employment Law Training, Inc.			18,976				2.8
Competitor Group, Inc.			18,364				2.7
Massage Envy, LLC			17,600				2.6
IntegraMed America, Inc.			14,809				2.2
Benihana, Inc.			14,200				2.1
Vision Source L.P.			14,137				2.1
Blue Coat Systems, Inc.			13,729				2.0
Ecommerce Industries, Inc.			13,530				2.0
Oasis Outsourcing Holdings, Inc.			13,355				2.0
		$	161,372				23.9	%

Industry		Fair Value of Investments (In thousands)				Percentage of Total Investments
Healthcare, Education and Childcare		$	126,518				18.8	%
Retail Stores			84,637				12.6
Diversified Conglomerate Service			76,002				11.3
Electronics			64,398				9.6
Beverage, Food and Tobacco			50,686				7.5
Personal, Food and Miscellaneous Services			44,746				6.6
Diversified Conglomerate Manufacturing			41,583				6.2
Leisure, Amusement, Motion Pictures, Entertainment			38,925				5.8
Automobile			23,567				3.5
Personal and Non Durable Consumer Products			20,383				3.0
		$	571,445				84.9	%

Managerial Assistance

As a business development company, we offer, and must provide upon request, managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. This assistance could involve monitoring the operations of our portfolio companies, participating in board and management meetings, consulting with and advising officers of portfolio companies and providing other organizational and financial guidance. GC Service or an affiliate of GC Service provides such managerial assistance on our behalf to portfolio companies that request this assistance. We may receive fees for these services and reimburse GC Service or an affiliate of GC Service, as applicable, for its allocated costs in providing such assistance, subject to the review and approval by our board of directors, including our independent directors.

Competition

Our primary competitors in providing financing to middle-market companies include public and private funds, other business development companies, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity and hedge funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, we believe some competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk

TABLE OF CONTENTS

assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a business development company or to the source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to maintain our qualification as a RIC.

We use the expertise of the investment professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates to which we have access to assess investment risks and determine appropriate pricing for our investments in portfolio companies. In addition, the relationships of the senior members of Golub Capital and its affiliates enable us to learn about, and compete effectively for, financing opportunities with attractive middle-market companies in the industries in which we invest. For additional information concerning the competitive risks we face, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.”

Administration

We do not have any direct employees, and our day-to-day investment operations are managed by GC Advisors. We have a chief executive officer, chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and, to the extent necessary, our board of directors may elect to hire additional personnel going forward. Our officers are employees of GC Service, an affiliate of GC Advisors, and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs are paid by us pursuant to the administration agreement, or the Administration Agreement, we entered into with GC Service. Some of our executive officers are also officers of GC Advisors. See “Business — Management Agreements —  Administration Agreement.”

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS

GC Advisors is located at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60606. GC Advisors is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. All of the beneficial interests in GC Advisors are owned, indirectly, by two affiliated trusts. The trustee of those trusts is Stephen A. Kepniss, an individual who is not otherwise affiliated with GC Advisors or Golub Capital. Subject to the overall supervision of our board of directors and in accordance with the 1940 Act, GC Advisors manages our day-to-day operations and provides investment advisory services to us. Under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement, GC Advisors:

Certain personnel of Golub Capital conduct activities on our behalf directly through, and under the supervision of, GC Advisors. GC Advisors’ services under the Investment Advisory Agreement are not exclusive. Pursuant to the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital provides GC Advisors with the resources to fulfill its obligations under the Investment Advisory Agreement, including staffing by experienced investment professionals and access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital, including a commitment by each member of GC Advisors’ investment committee to serve in such capacity. These personnel services are provided under the Staffing Agreement on a direct cost reimbursement basis to GC Advisors. Subject to the requirements of the 1940 Act, GC Advisors may enter into one or more sub-advisory agreements under which GC Advisors may obtain assistance in fulfilling its responsibilities under the Investment Advisory Agreement.

Management Fee

Pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement, we pay GC Advisors a fee for investment advisory and management services consisting of two components — a base management fee and an incentive fee. The cost of both the base management fee and the incentive fee is ultimately borne by our stockholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The base management fee is calculated at an annual rate equal to 1.375% of our average adjusted gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters (excluding cash and cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets, unrealized depreciation or appreciation on derivative instruments and cash collateral on deposit with custodian). For services rendered under the Investment Advisory Agreement, the base management fee is payable quarterly in arrears. The base management fee is calculated based on the average value of our gross assets at the end of the two most recently completed calendar quarters, and appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during a current calendar quarter. Base management fees for any partial month or quarter are appropriately pro-rated. For purposes of the Investment Advisory Agreement, cash equivalents means U.S. government securities and commercial paper instruments maturing within 270 days of purchase (which is different than the U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or GAAP, definition, which defines cash equivalents as U.S. government securities and commercial paper instruments maturing within 90 days of purchase). To the extent that GC Advisors or any of its affiliates provides investment advisory, collateral management or other similar services to a subsidiary of ours, the base management fee shall be reduced by an amount equal to the product of (1) the total fees paid to GC Advisors by such subsidiary for such services and (2) the percentage of such subsidiary’s total equity, including membership interests and any class of notes not exclusively held by one or more third parties, that is owned, directly or indirectly, by us.

We pay GC Advisors an incentive fee. We have structured the calculation of the incentive fee to include a fee limitation such that an incentive fee for any quarter can only be paid to GC Advisors if, after such payment, the cumulative incentive fees paid to GC Advisors since April 13, 2010, the effective date of our election to become a business development company, would be less than or equal to 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income (as defined below).

We accomplish this limitation by subjecting each quarterly incentive fee payable under the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation (as defined below) to a cap, or the Incentive Fee Cap. The Incentive Fee Cap in any quarter is equal to the difference between (a) 20.0% of Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income and (b) cumulative incentive fees of any kind paid to GC Advisors by us since April 13, 2010. To the extent the Incentive Fee Cap is zero or a negative value in any quarter, no incentive fee would be payable in that quarter. “Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income” is equal to the sum of (a) Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (as defined below) for each period since April 13, 2010 and (b) cumulative aggregate realized capital gains, cumulative aggregate realized capital losses, cumulative aggregate unrealized capital depreciation and cumulative aggregate unrealized capital appreciation since April 13, 2010.

“Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income” means interest income, dividend income and any other income (including any other fees such as commitment, origination, structuring, diligence and consulting fees or other fees that we receive from portfolio companies but excluding fees for providing managerial assistance) accrued during the calendar quarter, minus operating expenses for the calendar quarter (including the base management fee, taxes, any expenses payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement, any expenses of securitizations and any interest expense and dividends paid on any outstanding preferred stock, but excluding the incentive fee). Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income includes, in the case of investments with a deferred interest feature such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends, and zero coupon securities, accrued income that we have not yet received in cash. GC Advisors does not return to us amounts paid to it on accrued income that we have not yet received in cash if such income is not ultimately received by us in cash. If we do not ultimately receive income, a loss would be recognized, reducing future fees.

Incentive fees are calculated as described below and payable quarterly in arrears (or, upon termination of the Investment Advisory Agreement, as of the termination date).

Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation

The income and capital gains incentive fee calculation, or the Income and Capital Gain Incentive Fee Calculation, has two parts: the income component and the capital gains component. The income component is calculated quarterly in arrears based on our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for the immediately preceding calendar quarter.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation. Because of the structure of the income component, it is possible that an incentive fee may be calculated under this formula with respect to a period in which we have incurred a loss. For example, if we receive Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income in excess of the hurdle rate (as defined below) for a calendar quarter, the income component will result in a positive value and an incentive fee will be paid unless the payment of such incentive fee would cause us to pay incentive fees on a cumulative basis that exceed 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income.

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets (defined as total assets less indebtedness and before taking into account any incentive fees payable during the period) at the end of the immediately preceding calendar quarter, is compared to a fixed “hurdle rate” of 2.0% quarterly. If market interest rates rise, we may be able to invest our funds in debt instruments that provide for a higher return, which would increase our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income and make it easier for GC Advisors to surpass the fixed hurdle rate and receive an incentive fee based on such net investment income. Our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income used to calculate this part of the incentive fee is also included in the amount of our total assets (excluding cash and cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds and securitization-related assets unrealized depreciation or appreciation on derivative instruments and cash collateral on deposit with custodian) used to calculate the 1.375% base management fee, which fee is payable on all of our assets managed by GC Advisors.

We calculate the income component of the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation with respect to our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income quarterly, in arrears, as follows:

The sum of these calculations yields the “Income Incentive Fee”. This amount is appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the quarter.

The following is a graphical representation of the Income Incentive Fee calculation:

Quarterly Income Component of Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation Based on Net Income

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income
(Expressed as a Percentage of the Value of Net Assets)

Percentage of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income Allocated to Income Component of Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation

The second part of the Incentive Fee Calculation, or the Capital Gain Incentive Fee, equals (a) 20.0% of our Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base (as defined below), if any, calculated in arrears as of the end of each calendar year (or upon termination of the Investment Advisory Agreement, as of the termination date), commencing with the calendar year ending December 31, 2010, less (b) the aggregate amount of any previously paid Capital Gain Incentive Fees. Our “Capital Gain Incentive Fee Base” equals the sum of (1) our realized capital

TABLE OF CONTENTS

gains (including realized capital gains on derivative instruments), if any, on a cumulative positive basis from April 13, 2010 through the end of each calendar year, (2) all realized capital losses (including realized capital losses on derivative instruments) on a cumulative basis and (3) all unrealized capital depreciation (including unrealized capital depreciation on derivative instruments) on a cumulative basis.

The sum of the Income Incentive Fee and the Capital Gain Incentive Fee is the “Incentive Fee”.

We will accrue the Capital Gain Incentive Fee if, on a cumulative basis, the sum of net realized gains/(losses) plus net unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is positive. The Capital Gain Incentive Fee is calculated on a cumulative basis from April 13, 2010 through the end of each calendar year. For the calendar years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Capital Gain Incentive Fee was zero. For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the Capital Gain Incentive Fee was zero.

Cap on Fees

The Incentive Fee will not be paid at any time if, after such payment, the cumulative Incentive Fees paid to date would be greater than 20.0% of our Cumulative Pre-Incentive Fee Net Income since April 13, 2010. In this Form 10-K, we refer to such amount, less any Incentive Fees previously paid, as the Incentive Fee Cap. If, for any relevant period, the Incentive Fee Cap calculation results in our paying less than the amount of the Incentive Fee calculated above, then the difference between the Incentive Fee and the Incentive Fee Cap will not be paid by us, and will not be received by GC Advisors as an Incentive Fee either at the end of such relevant period or at the end of any future period. For the avoidance of doubt, our stockholders benefit from a reduction in the amount of Incentive Fees that we pay, and that they pay indirectly, equal to the sum of the differences, if any, between the Incentive Fee and the Incentive Fee Cap.

Examples of Quarterly Incentive Fee Calculation

Example 1 — Income Related Portion of Incentive Fee⁽¹⁾:

Assumptions

Hurdle rate⁽²⁾ = 2.00%

Management fee⁽³⁾ = 0.344%

Other expenses (legal, accounting, custodian, transfer agent, etc.)⁽⁴⁾ = 0.35%

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Alternative 1

Additional Assumptions

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 1.25%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income – (management fee + other expenses)) = 0.556%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not exceed the hurdle rate, therefore there is no Incentive Fee.

Alternative 2

Additional Assumptions

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 2.80%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income – (management fee + other expenses)) = 2.106%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds hurdle rate, therefore there is an Incentive Fee.

Incentive Fee		= 100% × “catch-up” + the greater of 0% AND (20% × (Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income – 2.50%))
		= (100% × (2.106% – 2.00%)) + 0%
		= 100% × 0.106%
		= 0.106%

Alternative 3

Additional Assumptions

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 3.50%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (investment income – (management fee + other expenses)) = 2.806%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds hurdle rate, therefore there is an Incentive Fee.

Incentive Fee		= 100% × “catch-up” + the greater of 0% AND (20% × (Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income – 2.50%))
		= (100% × (2.50% – 2.00%)) + (20% × (2.806% – 2.50%))
		= 0.50%+ (20% × 0.306%)
		= 0.50%+ 0.061%
		= 0.561%

Example 2 — Capital Gains Portion of Incentive Fee:

Alternative 1:

Assumptions

Year 1:		$20 million investment made in Company A (“Investment A”) and $30 million investment made in Company B (“Investment B”)
Year 2:		Investment A is sold for $15 million and fair market value (“FMV”) of Investment B determined to be $29 million
Year 3:		FMV of Investment B determined to be $27 million
Year 4:		Investment B sold for $25 million

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The capital gains portion of the Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Year 1:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 2:		None (Sales transaction resulted in a realized capital loss on Investment A)
Year 3:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 4:		None (Sales transaction resulted in a realized capital loss on Investment B)

Each quarterly incentive fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap.

Year 1:		No adjustment; no realized capital losses or unrealized capital depreciation
Year 2:		Investment A sold at a $5 million loss. Investment B has unrealized capital depreciation of $1 million. Therefore, GC Advisors would not be paid on the $6 million realized/unrealized loss which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $1.2 million.
Year 3:		Investment B has unrealized capital depreciation of $2 million. Therefore, GC Advisors would not be paid on the $2 million unrealized capital depreciation which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $400,000.
Year 4:		Investment B sold at a $5 million loss. Investment B was previously marked down by $3 million; therefore, we would realize a $5 million loss on Investment B and reverse the previous $3 million in unrealized capital depreciation. The net effect would be a loss of $2 million. GC Advisors would not be paid on the $2 million loss which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $400,000.

Alternative 2

Assumptions

Year 1:		$20 million investment made in Company A (“Investment A”), $30 million investment made in Company B (“Investment B”) and $25 million investment made in Company C (“Investment C”)
Year 2:		FMV of Investment A determined to be $18 million, FMV of Investment B determined to be $25 million and FMV of Investment C determined to be $25 million
Year 3:		Investment A sold for $18 million. FMV of Investment B determined to be $24 million and FMV of Investment C determined to be $25 million.
Year 4:		FMV of Investment B determined to be $22 million. Investment C sold for $24 million.
Year 5:		Investment B sold for $20 million

Each quarterly Incentive Fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap.

Year 1:		No adjustment; no realized capital losses or unrealized capital depreciation.
Year 2:		Investment A has unrealized capital depreciation of $2 million. Investment B has unrealized capital depreciation of $5 million. Therefore, GC Advisors would not be paid on the $7 million unrealized capital depreciation which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $1.4 million.
Year 3:		Investment B has additional unrealized capital depreciation of $1 million. Therefore, GC Advisors would not be paid on the $1 million unrealized capital depreciation which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $200,000.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Year 4:		Investment B has additional unrealized capital depreciation of $2 million. Investment C sold at a $1 million realized loss. Therefore, we would not be paid on the $3 million realized/unrealized loss which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $600,000.
Year 5:		Investment B sold at a $10 million loss. Investment B was previously marked down by $8 million; therefore, we would realize a $10 million loss on Investment B and reverse the previous $8 million in unrealized capital depreciation. The net effect would be a loss of $2 million. GC Advisors would not be paid on the $2 million loss which would result in a lower Incentive Fee by $400,000.

The capital gains portion of the Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Year 1:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 2:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 3:		None (Sales transaction resulted in a realized capital loss on Investment A)
Year 4:		None (Sales transaction resulted in a realized capital loss on Investment C)
Year 5:		None (Sales transaction resulted in a realized capital loss on Investment B)

Alternative 3

Assumptions

Year 1:		$25 million investment made in Company A (“Investment A”) and $20 million investment made in Company B (“Investment B”)
Year 2:		Investment A is sold for $30 million and FMV of Investment B determined to be $22 million
Year 3:		FMV of Investment B determined to be $23 million
Year 4:		Investment B sold for $23 million

The capital gains portion of the Incentive Fee, if any, would be:

Year 1:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 2:		$1 million (20% multiplied by $5 million realized capital gains on sale of Investment A)
Year 3:		None (No sales transactions)
Year 4:		$600,000 (20% multiplied by $8 million realized capital gains on sale of Investment A and Investment B) less $1 million (capital gains fee paid in year 2).

Each quarterly Incentive Fee payable on the Income and Capital Gains Incentive Fee Calculation is subject to the Incentive Fee Cap. Below are the necessary adjustments to the Incentive Fee payable to adhere to the Incentive Fee Cap.

Year 1:		No adjustment necessary
Year 2:		No adjustment necessary. GC Advisors would not be paid on the $2 million unrealized gain on Investment B.
Year 3:		No adjustment necessary. GC Advisors would not be paid on the $1 million unrealized gain on Investment B.
Year 4:		No adjustment necessary

Payment of Our Expenses

All investment professionals of GC Advisors and/or its affiliates, when and to the extent engaged in providing investment advisory and management services to us, and the compensation and routine overhead expenses of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

personnel allocable to these services to us, are provided and paid for by GC Advisors and not by us. We bear all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses of our operations and transactions. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Overview — Expenses.”

Duration and Termination

Unless terminated earlier as described below, the Investment Advisory Agreement, as amended, will continue in effect from year to year if approved annually by our board of directors or by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our outstanding voting securities, and, in either case, if also approved by a majority of our directors who are not “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act, of us. The Investment Advisory Agreement automatically terminates in the event of its assignment, as defined in the 1940 Act, by GC Advisors and may be terminated by either party without penalty upon not less than 60 days’ written notice to the other. The holders of a majority of our outstanding voting securities, by vote, may also terminate the Investment Advisory Agreement without penalty. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — We are dependent upon key personnel of GC Advisors for our future success and upon their access to the investment professionals and partners of Golub Capital and its affiliates.”

Indemnification

The Investment Advisory Agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of its duties and obligations, GC Advisors and its officers, managers, partners, agents, employees, controlling persons, members and any other person or entity affiliated with it are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of GC Advisors’ services under the Investment Advisory Agreement or otherwise as our investment adviser.

Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement

At a meeting of our board of directors held on February 2, 2012, our board of directors unanimously voted to approve the Investment Advisory Agreement. In reaching a decision to approve the Investment Advisory Agreement, the board of directors reviewed a significant amount of information and considered, among other things:

Based on the information reviewed and the considerations detailed above, the board of directors, including all of the directors who are not “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act, concluded that the investment advisory fee rates and terms are fair and reasonable in relation to the services provided and approved the Investment Advisory Agreement, as well as the Administration Agreement, as being in the best interests of our stockholders.

Our board of directors approved an amendment to the Investment Advisory Agreement by unanimous written consent on June 17, 2010. On July 16, 2010, we amended and restated the Investment Advisory Agreement to effectuate the fee offsetting arrangement associated with the Debt Securitization, thereby assuring that the management fees paid by our stockholders (whether directly or indirectly) do not exceed those in the original investment advisory agreement. These amendments provide that the base management fee payable by us under the Investment Advisory Agreement is reduced, to the extent that GC Advisors or any of its affiliates provides investment advisory, collateral management or other similar services to a subsidiary of ours, by an amount equal to the product of (1) the total fees that are paid to GC Advisors by such subsidiary for such services and (2) the percentage of such subsidiary’s total equity, including membership interests and any class of notes not exclusively held by one or more third parties, that is owned, directly or indirectly, by us. The change was approved unanimously by our board of directors, including all of the independent directors. However, because the change was not material, but rather assured continuation of the economic arrangements agreed to and

TABLE OF CONTENTS

approved by the initial stockholders and the board of directors and was beneficial to our stockholders (such that no rational investor would vote against the change), submitting the change to a stockholder vote was determined to be an unnecessary and inappropriate cost for us to incur at the expense of our stockholders. We believe that prior to these amendments, the Investment Advisory Agreement authorized securitization transactions.

Administration Agreement

Pursuant to the Administration Agreement, GC Service furnishes us with office facilities and equipment and provides clerical, bookkeeping, recordkeeping and other administrative services at such facilities. Under the Administration Agreement, GC Service performs, or oversees the performance of, our required administrative services, which include, among other things, being responsible for the financial records that we are required to maintain and preparing reports to our stockholders and reports filed with the SEC. In addition, GC Service assists us in determining and publishing our net asset value, oversees the preparation and filing of our tax returns and the printing and dissemination of reports to our stockholders, and generally oversees the payment of our expenses and the performance of administrative and professional services rendered to us by others. Under the Administration Agreement, GC Service also provides managerial assistance on our behalf to those portfolio companies that have accepted our offer to provide such assistance. GC Service may retain third parties to assist in providing administrative services to us. To the extent that GC Service outsources any of its functions, we pay the fees associated with such functions on a direct basis without profit to GC Service. We reimburse GC Service for the allocable portion (subject to approval of our board of directors) of GC Service’s overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. In addition, if requested to provide significant managerial assistance to our portfolio companies, GC Service is paid an additional amount based on the cost of the services provided, which shall not exceed the amount we receive from such portfolio companies for providing this assistance. On February 2, 2012, the Administration Agreement was renewed for a one-year term with the approval of our board of directors. The Administration Agreement may be terminated by either party without penalty upon 60 days’ written notice to the other party. To the extent that GC Service outsources any of its functions we pay the fees associated with such functions on a direct basis without profit to GC Service.

Indemnification

The Administration Agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of its duties and obligations, GC Service and its officers, managers, partners, agents, employees, controlling persons, members and any other person or entity affiliated with it are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of GC Service’s services under the Administration Agreement or otherwise as our administrator.

License Agreement

We have entered into a license agreement with Golub Capital LLC under which Golub Capital LLC has granted us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name “Golub Capital”. Under this agreement, we will have a right to use the “Golub Capital” name for so long as GC Advisors or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser. Other than with respect to this limited license, we will have no legal right to the “Golub Capital” name. This license agreement will remain in effect for so long as the Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors is in effect.

Staffing Agreement

We do not have any internal management capacity or employees. We depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors to achieve our investment objective. GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and depends upon access to the investment professionals and other resources of Golub Capital and its affiliates to fulfill its obligations to us under the Investment Advisory Agreement. GC Advisors also depends upon Golub Capital to obtain access to deal flow generated by the professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates. Under the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital

TABLE OF CONTENTS

provides GC Advisors with the resources necessary to fulfill these obligations. The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital will make available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. The Staffing Agreement also includes a commitment that the members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve in such capacity. The Staffing Agreement remains in effect until terminated and may be terminated by either party without penalty upon 60 days’ written notice to the other party. Services under the Staffing Agreement are provided to GC Advisors on a direct cost reimbursement basis, and such fees are not our obligation.

REGULATION

General

We are a business development company under the 1940 Act and have elected to be treated as a RIC under the Code. The 1940 Act contains prohibitions and restrictions relating to transactions between business development companies and their affiliates (including any investment advisers), principal underwriters and affiliates of those affiliates or underwriters and requires that a majority of the directors of a business development company be persons other than “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. In addition, the 1940 Act provides that we may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a business development company without the approval of a majority of our outstanding voting securities.

We may invest up to 100% of our assets in securities acquired directly from issuers in privately negotiated transactions. With respect to such securities, we may, for the purpose of public resale, be deemed an “underwriter,” as that term is defined in the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act. Our intention is to not write (sell) or buy put or call options to manage risks associated with the publicly traded securities of our portfolio companies, except that we may enter into hedging transactions to manage the risks associated with interest rate fluctuations. However, we may purchase or otherwise receive warrants to purchase the common stock of our portfolio companies in connection with acquisition financing or other investments. Similarly, in connection with an acquisition, we may acquire rights to require the issuers of acquired securities or their affiliates to repurchase them under certain circumstances. We also do not intend to acquire securities issued by any investment company in excess of the limits imposed by the 1940 Act. Under these limits, we generally cannot acquire more than 3% of the voting stock of any registered investment company, invest more than 5% of the value of our total assets in the securities of one investment company or invest more than 10% of the value of our total assets in the securities of more than one investment company. With regard to that portion of our portfolio invested in securities issued by investment companies, it should be noted that such investments might subject our stockholders to additional expenses. None of these policies is fundamental and each may be changed without stockholder approval. To the extent we adopt any fundamental policies, no person from whom we borrow will have, in his or her capacity as lender or debtholder, either a veto power or a vote in approving or changing any of our fundamental policies.

Qualifying Assets

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company may not acquire any asset other than assets of the type listed in Section 55(a) of the 1940 Act, which are referred to as “qualifying assets,” unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company’s total assets. The principal categories of qualifying assets relevant to our business are the following:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The regulations defining and interpreting qualifying assets may change over time. We may adjust our investment focus as needed to comply with and/or take advantage of any regulatory, legislative, administrative or judicial actions in this area.

We look through our subsidiaries to the underlying holdings (considered together with portfolio assets held outside of our subsidiaries) for purposes of determining compliance with the 70% qualifying assets requirement of the 1940 Act. On a consolidated basis, at least 70% of our assets will be eligible assets.

Managerial Assistance to Portfolio Companies

A business development company must have been organized and have its principal place of business in the United States and must be operated for the purpose of making investments in the types of securities described in (1), (2) or (3) above. However, in order to count portfolio securities as qualifying assets for the purpose of the 70% test, the business development company must either control the issuer of the securities or must offer to make available to the issuer of the securities significant managerial assistance; except that, when the business development company purchases such securities in conjunction with one or more other persons acting together, one of the other persons in the group may make available such managerial assistance. Making available managerial assistance means any arrangement whereby the business development company, through its directors, officers or employees, offers to provide, and, if accepted, does so provide, significant guidance and counsel concerning the management, operations or business objectives and policies of a portfolio company. GC Service has agreed to provide such managerial assistance on our behalf to portfolio companies that request this assistance.

Temporary Investments

Pending investment in other types of qualifying assets, as described above, our investments may consist of cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities, repurchase agreements and high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less from the date of investment, which we refer to, collectively, as temporary investments, so that 70% of our assets are qualifying assets or temporary investments. Typically, we will invest in U.S. Treasury bills or in repurchase agreements, so long as the agreements are fully collateralized by cash or securities issued by the U.S. government or its agencies. A repurchase agreement involves the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

purchase by an investor, such as us, of a specified security and the simultaneous agreement by the seller to repurchase it at an agreed-upon future date and at a price that is greater than the purchase price by an amount that reflects an agreed-upon interest rate. There is no percentage restriction on the proportion of our assets that may be invested in such repurchase agreements. However, if more than 25% of our total assets constitute repurchase agreements from a single counterparty, we would not meet the Diversification Tests, as defined in section 851(b)(3) of the Code in order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we do not intend to enter into repurchase agreements with a single counterparty in excess of this limit. GC Advisors will monitor the creditworthiness of the counterparties with which we enter into repurchase agreement transactions.

Senior Securities

We are permitted, under specified conditions, to issue multiple classes of indebtedness and one class of stock senior to our common stock if our asset coverage, as that term is defined in the 1940 Act, is at least equal to 200% immediately after each such issuance. In addition, while any senior securities remain outstanding, we must make provisions to prohibit any distribution to our stockholders or the repurchase of such securities or shares unless we meet the applicable asset coverage ratios at the time of the distribution or repurchase. We may also borrow amounts up to 5% of the value of our total assets for temporary or emergency purposes without regard to asset coverage. We consolidate our financial results with all of our wholly owned subsidiaries, including Holdings and the Securitization Issuer, for financial reporting purposes and measure our compliance with the leverage test applicable to business development companies under the 1940 Act on a consolidated basis. On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary from our 200% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage. For a discussion of the risks associated with leverage, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to our Business and Structure — Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a business development company, the necessity of raising additional capital exposes us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.”

Codes of Ethics

We and GC Advisors have each adopted a code of ethics pursuant to Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act that establishes procedures for personal investments and restricts certain personal securities transactions. Personnel subject to each code may invest in securities for their personal investment accounts, including securities that may be purchased or held by us, so long as such investments are made in accordance with the code’s requirements. You may read and copy the code of ethics at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at (202) 551-8090. In addition, each code of ethics is attached as an exhibit to this annual report on Form 10-K, and is available on the EDGAR Database on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. You may also obtain copies of each code of ethics, after paying a duplicating fee, by electronic request to publicinfo@sec.gov, or by writing the SEC’s Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

We have delegated our proxy voting responsibility to GC Advisors. The proxy voting policies and procedures of GC Advisors are set out below. The guidelines are reviewed periodically by GC Advisors and our directors who are not “interested persons,” and, accordingly, are subject to change.

Introduction

As an investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act, GC Advisors has a fiduciary duty to act solely in our best interests. As part of this duty, GC Advisors recognizes that it must vote our securities in a timely manner free of conflicts of interest and in our best interests.

GC Advisors’ policies and procedures for voting proxies for its investment advisory clients are intended to comply with Section 206 of, and Rule 206(4)-6 under, the Advisers Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Policies

GC Advisors votes proxies relating to our portfolio securities in what it perceives to be the best interest of our stockholders. GC Advisors reviews on a case-by-case basis each proposal submitted to a stockholder vote to determine its effect on the portfolio securities we hold. In most cases GC Advisors will vote in favor of proposals that GC Advisors believes are likely to increase the value of the portfolio securities we hold. Although GC Advisors will generally vote against proposals that may have a negative effect on our portfolio securities, GC Advisors may vote for such a proposal if there exist compelling long-term reasons to do so.

Our proxy voting decisions are made by GC Advisors’ Chief Executive Officer and President. To ensure that GC Advisors’ vote is not the product of a conflict of interest, GC Advisors requires that (1) anyone involved in the decision-making process disclose to our chief compliance officer any potential conflict that he or she is aware of and any contact that he or she has had with any interested party regarding a proxy vote and (2) employees involved in the decision-making process or vote administration are prohibited from revealing how GC Advisors intends to vote on a proposal in order to reduce any attempted influence from interested parties. Where conflicts of interest may be present, GC Advisors will disclose such conflicts to us, including our independent directors, and may request guidance from us on how to vote such proxies.

Proxy Voting Records

You may obtain information without charge about how GC Advisors voted proxies by making a written request for proxy voting information to Golub Capital BDC, Inc., Attention: Investor Relations, 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60606, or by calling Golub Capital BDC, Inc. collect at (312) 205-5050.

Privacy Principles

We are committed to maintaining the privacy of our stockholders and to safeguarding their nonpublic personal information. The following information is provided to help you understand what personal information we collect, how we protect that information and why, in certain cases, we may share information with select other parties.

Generally, we do not receive any nonpublic personal information relating to our stockholders, although certain nonpublic personal information of our stockholders may become available to us. We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our stockholders or former stockholders to anyone, except as permitted by law or as is necessary in order to service stockholder accounts (for example, to a transfer agent or third-party administrator).

We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about our stockholders to employees of GC Advisors and its affiliates with a legitimate business need for the information. We will maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards designed to protect the nonpublic personal information of our stockholders.

Other

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to provide and maintain a bond issued by a reputable fidelity insurance company to protect us against larceny and embezzlement. Furthermore, as a business development company, we are prohibited from protecting any director or officer against any liability to us or our stockholders arising from willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such person’s office.

We and GC Advisors will each be required to adopt and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation of relevant federal securities laws, review these policies and procedures annually for their adequacy and the effectiveness of their implementation, and designate a chief compliance officer to be responsible for administering these policies and procedures.

We may also be prohibited under the 1940 Act from knowingly participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our board of directors who are not interested persons and, in some cases, prior approval by the SEC. The SEC has interpreted the business development company prohibition on transactions with affiliates to prohibit “joint transactions” among entities that share a common investment adviser. The staff of the SEC has granted no-action relief permitting purchases of a single class of privately

TABLE OF CONTENTS

placed securities provided that the adviser negotiates no term other than price and certain other conditions are met. As a result, we only expect to co-invest on a concurrent basis with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors when each of us will own the same securities of the issuer and when no term is negotiated other than price. Any such investment would be made, subject to compliance with existing regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and our allocation procedures. If opportunities arise that would otherwise be appropriate for us and for another account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors to make different investments in the same issuer, GC Advisors will need to decide which account will proceed with the investment. Moreover, except in certain circumstances, we will be unable to invest in any issuer in which another account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors has previously invested.

We and GC Advisors have submitted an exemptive application to the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments because we believe that it will be advantageous for us to co-invest with accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors where such investment is consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions, as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. We believe that co-investment by us and accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors may afford us additional investment opportunities and the ability to achieve greater diversification.

Under the terms of the relief we have requested, a “required majority” (as defined in Section 57(o) of the 1940 Act) of our independent directors would make certain conclusions in connection with a co-investment transaction, including that (1) the terms of the proposed transaction are reasonable and fair to us and our stockholders and do not involve overreaching of us or our stockholders on the part of any person concerned and (2) the transaction is consistent with the interests of our stockholders and is consistent with our investment strategies and policies. There is no assurance that our application for exemptive relief will be granted by the SEC or that, if granted, it will be on the terms set forth above.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, imposes a wide variety of regulatory requirements on publicly held companies and their insiders. Many of these requirements affect us. For example:

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires us to review our current policies and procedures to determine whether we comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the regulations promulgated under such act. We will continue to monitor our compliance with all regulations that are adopted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and will take actions necessary to ensure that we comply with that act.

Small Business Investment Company Regulations

On August 24, 2010, our wholly owned subsidiary, GC SBIC IV, L.P., received approval for a license from the U.S. Small Business Administration, or the SBA, to operate as an SBIC. As a wholly owned subsidiary, GC SBIC IV, L.P. may rely on an exclusion from the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act. As such, this subsidiary will not elect to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC SBIC IV, L.P. has an investment objective substantially similar to ours and makes similar types of investments in accordance with SBIC regulations.

Prior to GC SBIC IV, L.P. obtaining approval from the SBA, Golub Capital managed two SBICs licensed by the SBA for more than 14 years. The SBIC license allows GC SBIC IV, L.P. to incur leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment and certain approvals by the SBA and customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures carry long-term fixed rates that are generally lower than rates on comparable bank and other debt. Under the regulations applicable to SBICs, an SBIC may have outstanding debentures guaranteed by the SBA generally in an amount of up to twice its regulatory capital, which generally equates to the amount of its equity capital. SBIC regulations currently limit the amount that an SBIC subsidiary may borrow to a maximum of $150 million, assuming that it has at least $75 million of equity capital. GC SBIC IV, L.P. will be subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants.

Under present SBIC regulations, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $225.0 million and the maximum amount that may be issued by a single SBIC licensee is $150.0 million. An affiliate of the Investment Adviser manages another SBIC. As of September 30, 2012, the affiliated SBIC licensee had $41.6 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding, while GC SBIC IV, L.P. had $123.5 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, leaving incremental borrowing capacity of $26.5 million for GC SBIC IV L.P. to reach its cap of $150 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures under present SBIC regulations. On August 24, 2010, the date GC SBIC IV, L.P. received its license from the SBA, the SBA restricted the affiliated SBIC licensee from making new investments. The affiliated SBIC licensee is limited to only making add-on investments in existing portfolio companies.

On February 2, 2012, we received a “Green Light” letter from the SBA allowing us to proceed with an application for a second SBIC license and we submitted such an application to the SBA on April 19, 2012. On May 18, 2012, we received an “Acceptance Letter” from the SBA notifying us that the application had been accepted by the SBA for further processing. The application process is anticipated to take six to twelve months. If approved, the additional license will provide us with an incremental source of attractive long-term capital.

On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary from our 200% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage.

SBICs are designed to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBIC regulations, SBICs may make loans to eligible small businesses, invest in the equity securities of such businesses and provide them with consulting and advisory services.

Under present SBIC regulations, eligible small businesses generally include businesses that (together with their affiliates) have a tangible net worth not exceeding $18 million and have average annual net income after U.S. federal income taxes not exceeding $6 million (average net income to be computed without benefit of any carryover loss) for the two most recent fiscal years. In addition, an SBIC must devote 20% of its investment activity to “smaller” concerns, as defined by the SBA. A smaller concern generally includes businesses that have a tangible net worth not exceeding $6 million and have average annual net income after U.S. federal income taxes not exceeding $2 million (average net income to be computed without benefit of any net carryover loss) for the two most recent fiscal years. SBIC regulations also provide alternative size standard criteria to determine eligibility for designation as an eligible small business or smaller concern, which criteria depend on the primary industry in which the business is engaged and are based on such factors as the number of employees and gross revenue. However, once an SBIC has invested in a company, it may continue to make follow on investments in the company, regardless of the size of the company at the time of the follow on investment, up to the time of the company’s initial public offering, if any.

The SBA prohibits an SBIC from providing funds to small businesses for certain purposes, such as relending or investing outside the United States, to businesses engaged in a few prohibited industries and to certain

TABLE OF CONTENTS

“passive” (i.e., non-operating) companies. In addition, without prior SBA approval, an SBIC may not invest an amount equal to more than approximately 30% of the SBIC’s regulatory capital in any one company and its affiliates.

The SBA places certain limitations on the financing terms of investments by SBICs in portfolio companies (such as limiting the permissible interest rate on debt securities held by an SBIC in a portfolio company). Although prior regulations prohibited an SBIC from controlling a small business concern except in limited circumstances, regulations adopted by the SBA in 2002 now allow an SBIC to exercise control over a small business for a period of up to seven years from the date on which the SBIC initially acquires its control position. This control period may be extended for an additional period of time with the SBA’s prior written approval.

The SBA restricts the ability of an SBIC to lend money to any of its officers, directors and employees or to invest in affiliates thereof. The SBA also prohibits, without prior SBA approval, a “change of control” of an SBIC or transfers that would result in any person (or a group of persons acting in concert) owning 10% or more of a class of capital stock of a licensed SBIC. A “change of control” is any event which would result in the transfer of the power, direct or indirect, to direct the management and policies of a SBIC, whether through ownership, contractual arrangements or otherwise.

An SBIC (or group of SBICs under common control) may generally have outstanding debentures guaranteed by the SBA in amounts up to twice the amount of the privately raised funds of the SBIC(s). Debentures guaranteed by the SBA have a maturity of ten years, require semi-annual payments of interest and do not require any principal payments prior to maturity.

SBICs must invest idle funds that are not being used to make loans in investments permitted under SBIC regulations in the following limited types of securities: (1) direct obligations of, or obligations guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the U.S. government, which mature within 15 months from the date of the investment; (2) repurchase agreements with federally insured institutions with a maturity of seven days or less (and the securities underlying the repurchase obligations must be direct obligations of or guaranteed by the federal government); (3) certificates of deposit with a maturity of one year or less, issued by a federally insured institution; (4) a deposit account in a federally insured institution that is subject to a withdrawal restriction of one year or less; (5) a checking account in a federally insured institution; or (6) a reasonable petty cash fund.

SBICs are periodically examined and audited by the SBA’s staff to determine their compliance with SBIC regulations and are periodically required to file certain forms with the SBA.

Neither the SBA nor the U.S. government or any of its agencies or officers has approved any ownership interest to be issued by us or any obligation that we or any of our subsidiaries may incur.

Election to Be Taxed as a RIC

As a business development company, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. As a RIC, we generally will not have to pay corporate-level U.S. federal income taxes on any net ordinary income or capital gains that we timely distribute to our stockholders as dividends. To qualify as a RIC, we must, among other things, meet certain source-of-income and asset diversification requirements (as described below). In addition, we must distribute to our stockholders, for each taxable year, at least 90% of our “investment company taxable income,” which is generally our net ordinary income plus the excess of realized net short-term capital gains over realized net long-term capital losses (the “Annual Distribution Requirement”).

Taxation as a RIC

If we:

then we will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the portion of our investment company taxable income and net capital gain, defined as net long-term capital gains in excess of net short-term capital losses,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

we distribute to stockholders. We will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates on any net income or net capital gain not distributed to our stockholders.

In order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must, among other things:

We may invest in partnerships, including qualified publicly traded partnerships, which may result in our being subject to state, local or foreign income, franchise or withholding liabilities.

In addition, we are subject to ordinary income and capital gain distribution requirements under U.S. federal excise tax rules for each calendar year. If we do not meet the required distributions we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible federal excise tax on the undistributed amount. The failure to meet U.S. federal excise tax distribution requirements will not cause us to lose our RIC status. We currently intend to make sufficient distributions each taxable year to satisfy the U.S. federal excise tax requirements.

Any underwriting fees paid by us are not deductible. We may be required to recognize taxable income in circumstances in which we do not receive cash. For example, if we hold debt obligations that are treated under applicable tax rules as having original issue discount (such as debt instruments with PIK interest or, in certain cases, with increasing interest rates or issued with warrants), we must include in income each year a portion of the original issue discount that accrues over the life of the obligation, regardless of whether cash representing such income is received by us in the same taxable year. Because any original issue discount accrued will be included in our investment company taxable income for the year of accrual, we may be required to make a distribution to our stockholders in order to satisfy the Annual Distribution Requirement, even though we will not have received any corresponding cash amount.

Certain of our investment practices may be subject to special and complex U.S. federal income tax provisions that may, among other things, (1) treat dividends that would otherwise constitute qualified dividend income as non-qualified dividend income, (2) treat dividends that would otherwise be eligible for the corporate dividends received deduction as ineligible for such treatment, (3) disallow, suspend or otherwise limit the allowance of certain losses or deductions, (4) convert lower-taxed long-term capital gain into higher-taxed short-term capital gain or ordinary income, (5) convert an ordinary loss or a deduction into a capital loss (the deductibility of which is more limited), (6) cause us to recognize income or gain without a corresponding receipt of cash, (7) adversely affect the time as to when a purchase or sale of stock or securities is deemed to occur, (8) adversely alter the characterization of certain complex financial transactions and (9) produce income that

TABLE OF CONTENTS

will not be qualifying income for purposes of the 90% Income Test. We intend to monitor our transactions and may make certain tax elections to mitigate the effect of these provisions and prevent our disqualification as a RIC.

Gain or loss realized by us from warrants acquired by us as well as any loss attributable to the lapse of such warrants generally will be treated as capital gain or loss. Such gain or loss generally will be long term or short term, depending on how long we held a particular warrant.

Although we do not presently expect to do so, we are authorized to borrow funds and to sell assets in order to satisfy distribution requirements. However, under the 1940 Act, we are not permitted to make distributions to our stockholders while our debt obligations and other senior securities are outstanding unless certain “asset coverage” tests are met. See “Business — Regulation — Senior Securities.” Moreover, our ability to dispose of assets to meet our distribution requirements may be limited by (1) the illiquid nature of our portfolio and/or (2) other requirements relating to our qualification as a RIC, including the Diversification Tests. If we dispose of assets in order to meet the Annual Distribution Requirement or the Excise Tax Avoidance Requirement, we may make such dispositions at times that, from an investment standpoint, are not advantageous.

Some of the income and fees that we may recognize will not satisfy the 90% Income Test. In order to ensure that such income and fees do not disqualify us as a RIC for a failure to satisfy the 90% Income Test, we may be required to recognize such income and fees indirectly through one or more entities treated as corporations for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Such corporations will be required to pay U.S. corporate income tax on their earnings, which ultimately will reduce our return on such income and fees.

Failure to Qualify as a RIC

If we were unable to qualify for treatment as a RIC and are unable to cure the failure, for example, by disposing of certain investments quickly or raising additional capital to prevent the loss of RIC status, we would be subject to tax on all of our taxable income at regular corporate rates. The enacted “Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010”, which is generally effective for 2011 and subsequent tax years, provides some relief from RIC disqualification due to failures of the source of income and asset diversification requirements, although there may be additional taxes due in such cases. We cannot assure you that we would qualify for any such relief should we fail the income source or asset diversification requirements.

Should failure occur; not only would all our taxable income be subject to tax at regular corporate rates, we would not be able to deduct distributions to stockholders, nor would they be required to be made. Distributions, including distributions of net long-term capital gain, would generally be taxable to our stockholders as ordinary dividend income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits. Subject to certain limitations under the Code, corporate stockholders would be eligible to claim a dividends received deduction with respect to such dividends, and for tax years beginning before 2013 (if not extended further by Congress), non-corporate stockholders would generally be able to treat such dividends as “qualified dividend income,” which is subject to reduced rates of U.S. federal income tax. Distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits would be treated first as a return of capital to the extent of the stockholder’s tax basis, and any remaining distributions would be treated as a capital gain. If we fail to qualify as a RIC for a period greater than two taxable years, to qualify as a RIC in a subsequent year we may be subject to regular corporate tax on any net built-in gains with respect to certain of our assets (i.e., the excess of the aggregate gains, including items of income, over aggregate losses that would have been realized with respect to such assets if we had been liquidated) that we elect to recognize on requalification or when recognized over the next ten years.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this annual report on Form 10-K and the other reports and documents filed by us with the SEC. The risks set out below are not the only risks we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or not presently deemed material by us may also impair our operations and performance. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. In such case, our net asset value and the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. The risk factors described below are the principal risk factors associated with an investment in us as well as those factors generally associated with an investment company with investment objectives, investment policies, capital structure or trading markets similar to ours.

Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure

We have a limited operating history as a business development company.

Our predecessor, GCMF, was formed in June 2007 and commenced operations in July 2007. Prior to the completion of our initial public offering in April 2010, we did not operate as a business development company or RIC. As a result of our limited operating history, we are subject to the business risks and uncertainties associated with recently formed businesses, including the risk that we will not achieve our investment objective and that the value of your investment could decline substantially.

The 1940 Act and the Code impose numerous constraints on the operations of business development companies and RICs that do not apply to other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. Business development companies are required, for example, to invest at least 70% of their total assets in qualifying assets. Moreover, qualification for taxation as a RIC requires satisfaction of source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. Neither we nor GC Advisors has significant experience operating under these constraints, which may hinder our ability to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities and to achieve our investment objective.

We are dependent upon key personnel of GC Advisors for our future success and upon their access to the investment professionals and partners of Golub Capital and its affiliates.

We do not have any internal management capacity or employees. We depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors to achieve our investment objective. We expect that GC Advisors will evaluate, negotiate, structure, close and monitor our investments in accordance with the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement. We can offer no assurance, however, that the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors will continue to provide investment advice to us. If these individuals do not maintain their existing relationships with Golub Capital and its affiliates and do not develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we may not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the senior investment professionals of GC Advisors have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities. Therefore, we can offer no assurance that such relationships will generate investment opportunities for us.

GC Advisors is an affiliate of Golub Capital and depends upon access to the investment professionals and other resources of Golub Capital and its affiliates to fulfill its obligations to us under the Investment Advisory Agreement. GC Advisors also depends upon Golub Capital to obtain access to deal flow generated by the professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates. Under the Staffing Agreement, Golub Capital provides GC Advisors with the resources necessary to fulfill these obligations. The Staffing Agreement provides that Golub Capital makes available to GC Advisors experienced investment professionals and provides access to the senior investment personnel of Golub Capital for purposes of evaluating, negotiating, structuring, closing and monitoring our investments. We are not a party to the Staffing Agreement and cannot assure you that Golub Capital will fulfill its obligations under the agreement. If Golub Capital fails to perform, we cannot assure you that GC Advisors will enforce the Staffing Agreement, that such agreement will not be terminated by either party or that we will continue to have access to the investment professionals of Golub Capital and its affiliates or their information and deal flow.

GC Advisors’ investment committee provides oversight over our investment activities. GC Advisors’ investment committee consists of two members of our board of directors and two additional employees of

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Golub Capital. The loss of any member of GC Advisors’ investment committee or of other senior investment professionals of GC Advisors and its affiliates would limit our ability to achieve our investment objective and operate as we anticipate. This could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our business model depends to a significant extent upon strong referral relationships with sponsors. Any inability of GC Advisors to maintain or develop these relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

We depend upon Golub Capital’s relationships with sponsors, and we intend to rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If Golub Capital fails to maintain such relationships, or to develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the principals of Golub Capital have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and, therefore, we can offer no assurance that these relationships will generate investment opportunities for us in the future.

We may not replicate the historical results achieved by our predecessor, GCMF, or other entities managed or sponsored by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, or by GC Advisors or its affiliates.

Our investments may differ from those of our predecessor, GCMF, and existing accounts that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. Investors in our common stock are not acquiring an interest in any accounts that are or have been sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or affiliates of GC Advisors. We may consider co-investing in portfolio investments with other accounts sponsored or managed by members of GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates. Any such investments are subject to regulatory limitations and approvals by directors who are not “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act. We can offer no assurance, however, that we will obtain such approvals or develop opportunities that comply with such limitations. We also cannot assure you that we will replicate the historical results achieved by members of the investment committee, and we caution you that our investment returns could be substantially lower than the returns achieved by them in prior periods. Additionally, all or a portion of the prior results may have been achieved in particular market conditions which may never be repeated. Moreover, current or future market volatility and regulatory uncertainty may have an adverse impact on our future performance.

Our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows depend on our ability to manage our business effectively.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our ability to manage our business and to grow. This depends, in turn, on GC Advisors’ ability to identify, invest in and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. The achievement of our investment objectives on a cost-effective basis depends upon GC Advisors’ execution of our investment process, its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services to us and, to a lesser extent, our access to financing on acceptable terms. GC Advisors has substantial responsibilities under the Investment Advisory Agreement, as well as responsibilities in connection with the management of other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors, members of GC Advisors’ investment committee or Golub Capital and its affiliates. The personnel of GC Advisors and its affiliates, including GC Service, may be called upon to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. These activities may distract them or slow our rate of investment. Any failure to manage our business and our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns.

As a result of our arrangements with GC Advisors and its affiliates and GC Advisors’ investment committee, there may be times when GC Advisors or such persons have interests that differ from those of our securityholders, giving rise to a conflict of interest.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Conflicts related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients.

The members of GC Advisors’ investment committee serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do or of accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Similarly, GC Advisors or its affiliates currently manage and may have other clients with similar or competing investment objectives. In serving in these multiple capacities, they may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have management responsibilities for other accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Our investment objective may overlap with the investment objectives of such affiliated accounts. For example, GC Advisors currently manages several private funds that are pursuing an investment strategy similar to ours, some of which are continuing to seek new capital commitments, and we may compete with these and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates for capital and investment opportunities. As a result, those individuals may face conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities among us and other accounts advised by or affiliated with GC Advisors. GC Advisors seeks to allocate investment opportunities among eligible accounts in a manner that is fair and equitable over time and consistent with its allocation policy. However, we can offer no assurance that such opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisor’s pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the amount that each such party would have invested if sufficient securities or loan amounts were available. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to participate in all investment opportunities that are suitable to us.

GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates may, from time to time, possess material non-public information, limiting our investment discretion.

Principals of GC Advisors and its affiliates and members of GC Advisors’ investment committee may serve as directors of, or in a similar capacity with, companies in which we invest, the securities of which are purchased or sold on our behalf. In the event that material nonpublic information is obtained with respect to such companies, or we become subject to trading restrictions under the internal trading policies of those companies or as a result of applicable law or regulations, we could be prohibited for a period of time from purchasing or selling the securities of such companies, and this prohibition may have an adverse effect on us.

Our management and incentive fee structure may create incentives for GC Advisors that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders.

In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to GC Advisors. These fees are based on our average adjusted gross assets, which include leverage. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a “gross” basis and receive distributions on a “net” basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than one might achieve through direct investments. Because these fees are based on our average adjusted gross assets, GC Advisors benefits when we incur debt or use leverage. Although GC Advisors makes recommendations to our board of directors with respect to leverage policies, our board of directors determines our leverage policy, including approving in advance the incurrence of material indebtedness and the execution of material contracts. Additionally, under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when we recognize capital gains and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of such capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While they are not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and portfolio performance. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. As a result of this arrangement, GC Advisors or its affiliates may from time to time have interests that differ from those of our securityholders, giving rise to a conflict.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The part of the incentive fee payable to GC Advisors that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include interest income that has been accrued but not yet received in cash. This fee structure may be considered to involve a conflict of interest for GC Advisors to the extent that it may encourage GC Advisors to favor debt financings that provide for deferred interest, rather than current cash payments of interest. GC Advisors may have an incentive to invest in deferred interest securities in circumstances where it would not have done so but for the opportunity to continue to earn the incentive fee even when the issuers of the deferred interest securities would not be able to make actual cash payments to us on such securities. This risk could be increased because GC Advisors is not obligated to reimburse us for any incentive fees received even if we subsequently incur losses or never receive in cash the deferred income that was previously accrued.

Our incentive fee may induce GC Advisors to make certain investments, including speculative investments.

The incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors may create an incentive for GC Advisors to make investments on our behalf that are riskier or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement. The way in which the incentive fee payable to GC Advisors is determined may encourage GC Advisors to use leverage to increase the return on our investments. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor our securityholders.

The incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors also may create an incentive for GC Advisors to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we accrue the interest over the life of the investment but do not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the term. Our net investment income used to calculate the income portion of our investment fee, however, includes accrued interest. Thus, a portion of this incentive fee is based on income that we have not yet received in cash, such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities.

Additionally, the incentive fee payable by us to GC Advisors may create an incentive for GC Advisors to cause us to realize capital gains or losses (including realized capital gains or losses on derivative instruments) that may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. Under the incentive fee structure, GC Advisors benefits when capital gains are recognized and, because GC Advisors determines when a holding is sold, GC Advisors controls the timing of the recognition of capital gains. Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how GC Advisors addresses these and other conflicts of interest associated with its management services and compensation. While it is not expected to review or approve each borrowing, our independent directors periodically review GC Advisors’ services and fees. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate.

The valuation process for certain of our portfolio holdings creates a conflict of interest.

The majority of our portfolio investments are expected to be made in the form of securities that are not publicly traded. As a result, our board of directors will determine the fair value of these securities in good faith as described below in “— Many of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.” In connection with that determination, investment professionals from GC Advisors may provide our board of directors with portfolio company valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. In addition, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have an indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors. The participation of GC Advisors’ investment professionals in our valuation process, and the indirect pecuniary interest in GC Advisors by Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub, could result in a conflict of interest as GC Advisors’ management fee is based, in part, on our average adjusted gross assets (including leverage but excluding cash) and our incentive fees will be based, in part, on unrealized gains and losses.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Conflicts related to other arrangements with GC Advisors or its affiliates.

We have entered into a license agreement with Golub Capital LLC under which Golub Capital LLC has granted us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name “Golub Capital”. See “Business — Management Agreements — License Agreement.” In addition, we pay to GC Service our allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by GC Service in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, such as rent and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. These arrangements create conflicts of interest that our board of directors must monitor.

The Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors and the Administration Agreement with GC Service were not negotiated on an arm’s-length basis and may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party.

The Investment Advisory Agreement and the Administration Agreement were negotiated between related parties. Consequently, their terms, including fees payable to GC Advisors, may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated third party. In addition, we may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights and remedies under these agreements because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationship with GC Advisors, GC Service and their respective affiliates. Any such decision, however, would breach our fiduciary obligations to our stockholders.

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates will be restricted, which may limit the scope of investments available to us.

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, of the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, five percent or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. We consider GC Advisors and its affiliates to be our affiliates for such purposes. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, of the SEC. We are prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to, among others, any person who owns more than 25% of our voting securities or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such persons, absent the prior approval of the SEC.

We may, however, invest alongside GC Advisors’ and its affiliates’ other clients in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with applicable law and SEC staff interpretations. For example, we may invest alongside such accounts consistent with guidance promulgated by the SEC staff permitting us and such other accounts to purchase interests in a single class of privately placed securities so long as certain conditions are met, including that GC Advisors, acting on our behalf and on behalf of its other clients, negotiates no term other than price. We may also invest alongside GC Advisors’ other clients as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and GC Advisors’ allocation policy. Under this allocation policy, GC Advisors determines separately the amount of any proposed investment to be made by us and similar eligible accounts. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. If sufficient securities or loan amounts are available to satisfy our and each such account’s proposed investment, the opportunity will be allocated in accordance with GC Advisor’s pre-transaction determination. Where there is an insufficient amount of an investment opportunity to fully satisfy us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates, the allocation policy further provides that allocations among us and other accounts will generally be made pro rata based on the amount that each such party would have invested if sufficient securities or loan amounts were available. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time.

In situations in which co-investment with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates is not permitted or appropriate, such as when, in the absence of exemptive relief described below, we and such other entities may make investments in the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interests and those of other GC Advisors clients, GC Advisors

TABLE OF CONTENTS

needs to decide whether we or such other entity or entities will proceed with such investments. GC Advisors makes these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such investment opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on a basis that is fair and equitable over time, including, for example, through random or rotational methods. Moreover, except in certain circumstances, we are unable to invest in any issuer in which an account sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates has previously invested. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. These restrictions may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

We may also be prohibited under the 1940 Act from knowingly participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our board of directors who are not interested persons and, in some cases, without the prior approval of the SEC. The SEC has interpreted the business development company regulations governing transactions with affiliates to prohibit certain “joint transactions” between entities that share a common investment adviser.

We and GC Advisors have submitted an application for exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in a manner consistent with our investment objectives, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. We believe that co-investments by us and other accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors and its affiliates may afford us additional investment opportunities and an ability to achieve greater diversification. Accordingly, our application for exemptive relief seeks an exemptive order permitting us to invest with accounts sponsored or managed by GC Advisors or its affiliates in the same portfolio companies under circumstances in which such investments would otherwise not be permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that such exemptive relief permitting co-investments, if granted, would apply only if our independent directors review and approve each co-investment.

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we plan to make. We compete with public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity and hedge funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, we believe some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a business development company or the source of income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to maintain our qualification as a RIC. The competitive pressures we face may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we may not be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective.

With respect to the investments we make, we do not seek to compete based primarily on the interest rates we offer, and we believe that some of our competitors may make loans with interest rates that will be lower than the rates we offer. In the secondary market for acquiring existing loans, we compete generally on the basis of pricing terms. With respect to all investments, we may lose some investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. However, if we match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may experience decreased net interest income, lower yields and increased risk of credit loss. We may also compete for investment opportunities with accounts managed or sponsored by GC Advisors or its affiliates. Although GC Advisors allocates opportunities in accordance with its policies and procedures, allocations to such other accounts will reduce the amount and frequency of opportunities available to us and may not be in the best interests of us and our securityholders. Moreover, the performance of investments will not be known at the time of allocation. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could affect our investment returns,” “— Conflicts

TABLE OF CONTENTS

related to obligations GC Advisors’ investment committee, GC Advisors or its affiliates have to other clients” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Related Party Transactions.”

We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we are unable to qualify as a RIC.

To qualify as a RIC under the Code, we must meet certain source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. The distribution requirement for a RIC is satisfied if we distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders on an annual basis. We are subject, to the extent we use debt financing, to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and financial covenants under loan and credit agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict us from making distributions necessary to qualify as a RIC. If we are unable to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, may be subject to corporate-level income tax. To qualify as a RIC, we must also meet certain asset diversification requirements at the end of each calendar quarter. Failure to meet these requirements may result in our having to dispose of certain investments quickly in order to prevent the loss of our qualification as a RIC. Because most of our investments are in private or thinly traded public companies, any such dispositions could be made at disadvantageous prices and may result in substantial losses. If we fail to qualify as a RIC for any reason and become subject to corporate-level income tax, the resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distributions to stockholders and the amount of our distributions and the amount of funds available for new investments. Such a failure would have a material adverse effect on us and our securityholders. See “Business — Taxation as a RIC.”

We may need to raise additional capital to grow because we must distribute most of our income.

We may need additional capital to fund new investments and grow our portfolio of investments. We intend to access the capital markets periodically to issue debt or equity securities or borrow from financial institutions in order to obtain such additional capital. Unfavorable economic conditions could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. A reduction in the availability of new capital could limit our ability to grow. In addition, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to maintain our qualification as a RIC. As a result, these earnings are not available to fund new investments. An inability to access the capital markets successfully could limit our ability to grow our business and execute our business strategy fully and could decrease our earnings, if any, which may have an adverse effect on the value of our securities.

We may have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before, or without, receiving cash representing such income.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accretion of original issue discount. This may arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, or increases in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements, is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also may be required to include in income certain other amounts that we do not receive in cash.

That part of the incentive fee payable by us that relates to our net investment income is computed and paid on income that may include interest that has been accrued but not yet received in cash, such as market discount, debt instruments with PIK interest, preferred stock with PIK dividends and zero coupon securities. If a portfolio company defaults on a loan that is structured to provide accrued interest, it is possible that accrued interest previously used in the calculation of the incentive fee will become uncollectible.

Since in certain cases we may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to maintain our qualification as a RIC. In such a case, we may have to sell some of our investments at times we would not

TABLE OF CONTENTS

consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain such cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax. See “Business — Taxation as a RIC.”

Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a business development company, the necessity of raising additional capital exposes us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.

We may issue debt securities or preferred stock and/or borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted as a business development company to issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage ratio, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% of gross assets (other than the SBA debentures of an SBIC subsidiary, as permitted by exemptive relief we have been granted by the SEC) less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities (other than the SBA debentures of an SBIC subsidiary, as permitted by exemptive relief we have been granted by the SEC). If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy this ratio. If that happens, we may be required to sell a portion of our investments and, depending on the nature of our leverage, repay a portion of our indebtedness at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous. Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. If we issue senior securities, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss. As of September 30, 2012, we had $352.3 million of outstanding borrowings, including $174.0 million outstanding under the Debt Securitization.

In the absence of an event of default, no person or entity from which we borrow money will have a veto right or voting power over our ability to set policy, make investment decisions or adopt investment strategies. If we issue preferred stock, which is another form of leverage, the preferred stock would rank “senior” to common stock in our capital structure, preferred stockholders would have separate voting rights on certain matters and might have other rights, preferences or privileges more favorable than those of our common stockholders, and the issuance of preferred stock could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in your best interest. Holders of our common stock will directly or indirectly bear all of the costs associated with offering and servicing any preferred stock that we issue. In addition, any interests of preferred stockholders may not necessarily align with the interests of holders of our common stock and the rights of holders of shares of preferred stock to receive dividends would be senior to those of holders of shares of our common stock. We do not, however, anticipate issuing preferred stock in the next 12 months.

We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the then-current net asset value per share of our common stock if our board of directors determines that such sale is in the best interests of us and our stockholders, and if our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our board of directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any distributing commission or discount). If we raise additional funds by issuing common stock or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time will decrease, and you might experience dilution.

We intend to finance our investments with borrowed money, which will magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.

The use of leverage magnifies the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested. The use of leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique and increases the risks associated with investing in our securities. We may issue senior debt securities to banks, insurance companies and other lenders. Lenders of these senior securities will have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of our common stockholders, and we would expect such lenders to seek recovery against our assets in the event of a default. We may pledge up to 100% of our assets and may grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we may enter into with lenders. In addition, under the terms of any credit facility or other debt instrument we enter into, we are likely to be required by its terms to use the net

TABLE OF CONTENTS

proceeds of any investments that we sell to repay a portion of the amount borrowed under such facility or instrument before applying such net proceeds to any other uses. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause our net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not leveraged, thereby magnifying losses or eliminating our equity stake in a leveraged investment. Similarly, any decrease in our revenue or income will cause our net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline would also negatively affect our ability to make distributions on our common stock or any outstanding preferred stock. Our ability to service our debt depends largely on our financial performance and is subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. Moreover, as the base management fee payable to GC Advisors is payable based on our average adjusted gross assets, including those assets acquired through the use of leverage, GC Advisors has a financial incentive to incur leverage which may not be consistent with our stockholders’ interests. In addition, our common stockholders bear the burden of any increase in our expenses as a result of our use of leverage, including interest expenses and any increase in the base management fee payable to GC Advisors.

As a business development company, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets to total borrowings and other senior securities, which include the Class A Notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, our other borrowings (other than the SBA debentures of an SBIC subsidiary, as permitted by exemptive relief we have been granted by the SEC) and any preferred stock that we may issue in the future, of at least 200%. If this ratio declines below 200%, we cannot incur additional debt and could be required to sell a portion of our investments to repay some debt when it is disadvantageous to do so. This could have a material adverse effect on our operations, and we may not be able to make distributions. The amount of leverage that we employ will depend on GC Advisors’ and our board of directors’ assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us.

On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC allowing us to modify the asset coverage requirement to exclude the SBA debentures from this calculation. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage.

The following table illustrates the effect of leverage on returns from an investment in our common stock assuming various annual returns, net of expenses. The calculations in the table below are hypothetical and actual returns may be higher or lower than those appearing in the table below.

		Assumed Return on Our Portfolio (Net of Expenses)
		-10%				-5%				0%				5%				10%
Corresponding return to common stockholder(1)			-23	%			-13	%			-3	%			6	%			16	%

Based on our outstanding indebtedness of $352.3 million as of September 30, 2012 and the effective annual interest rate of 3.5% as of that date, our investment portfolio would have been required to experience an annual return of at least 1.7% to cover annual interest payments on the outstanding debt.

We are subject to risks associated with the Debt Securitization.

As a result of the Debt Securitization, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

We are subject to certain risks as a result of our indirect interests in the junior notes and membership interests of the Securitization Issuer.

Under the terms of the master loan sale agreement governing the Debt Securitization, (1) we sold and/or contributed to Holdings all of our ownership interest in our portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement and (2) Holdings, in turn, sold and/or contributed to the Securitization Issuer all of its ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations for the purchase price and other consideration set forth in the master loan sale agreement. Following these

TABLE OF CONTENTS

transfers, the Securitization Issuer, and not Holdings or us, held all of the ownership interest in such portfolio loans and participations. As a result of the Debt Securitization, we hold indirectly through Holdings a combination of junior notes comprised of Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes as well as membership interests, which comprise 100% of the equity interests, in the Securitization Issuer. As a result, we consolidate the financial statements of Holdings and the Securitization Issuer, as well as our other subsidiaries, in our consolidated financial statements. Because each of Holdings and the Securitization Issuer is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the sale or contribution by us to Holdings, and by Holdings to the Securitization Issuer, did not constitute a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If the U.S. Internal Revenue Service were to take a contrary position, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The securities issued by the Securitization Issuer, or by any securitization vehicle we sponsor in the future, could be acquired by another business development company or securitization vehicle subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We may also, from time to time, hold asset-backed securities, or the economic equivalent thereof, issued by a securitization vehicle sponsored by another business development company to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act.

The Subordinated Notes and membership interests in the Securitization Issuer are subordinated obligations of the Securitization Issuer.

The Subordinated Notes are the most junior class of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, are subordinated in priority of payment to every other class of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the indenture governing the notes. Therefore, Holdings only receives cash distributions on the Subordinated Notes if the Securitization Issuer has made all cash interest payments to all other notes it has issued, and we only receive cash distributions in respect of our indirect ownership of the Securitization Issuer to the extent that Holdings receives any cash distributions in respect of its direct ownership of the Securitization Issuer. The Subordinated Notes are also unsecured and rank behind all of the secured creditors, known or unknown, of the Securitization Issuer, including the holders of the senior notes it has issued. Consequently, to the extent that the value of the Securitization Issuer’s portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, or as a result of defaulted loans or individual fund assets, the value of the Subordinated Notes at their redemption could be reduced.

The membership interests in the Securitization Issuer represent all of the equity interest in the Securitization Issuer. As such, the holder of the membership interests is the residual claimant on distributions, if any, made by the Securitization Issuer after holders of all classes of notes issued by the Securitization Issuer have been paid in full on each payment date or upon maturity of such notes under the Debt Securitization documents. Such payments may be made by the Securitization Issuer only to the extent permitted under the Debt Securitization documents on any payment date or upon payment in full of the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer.

The interests of holders of the senior classes of securities issued by the Securitization Issuer may not be aligned with our interests.

The Class A Notes are the debt obligations ranking senior in right of payment to other securities issued by the Securitization Issuer in the Debt Securitization. As such, there are circumstances in which the interests of holders of the Class A Notes may not be aligned with the interests of holders of the other classes of notes issued by, and membership interests of, the Securitization Issuer. For example, under the terms of the Class A Notes, holders of the Class A Notes have the right to receive payments of principal and interest prior to holders of the Class B Notes, the Subordinated Notes and the membership interests.

For as long as the Class A Notes remain outstanding, holders of the Class A Notes comprise the Controlling Class under the Debt Securitization and, as such, they have the right to act in certain circumstances with respect to the portfolio loans in ways that may benefit their interests but not the interests of holders of more junior classes of notes and membership interests, including by exercising remedies under the indenture in the Debt Securitization.

If an event of default has occurred and acceleration occurs in accordance with the terms of the indenture, the most senior class of notes then outstanding will be paid in full before any further payment or distribution on

TABLE OF CONTENTS

the more junior classes of notes and membership interests. In addition, if an event of default occurs, holders of a majority of the Controlling Class will be entitled to determine the remedies to be exercised under the indenture, subject to the terms of the indenture. For example, upon the occurrence of an event of default with respect to the notes issued by the Securitization Issuer, the trustee or holders of a majority of the Controlling Class may declare the principal, together with any accrued interest, of all the notes of such class and any junior classes to be immediately due and payable. This would have the effect of accelerating the principal on such notes, triggering a repayment obligation on the part of the Securitization Issuer. If at such time the portfolio loans were not performing well, the Securitization Issuer may not have sufficient proceeds available to enable the trustee under the indenture to repay the obligations of holders of the Class B Notes or the Subordinated Notes, or to pay a dividend to holders of the membership interests.

Remedies pursued by the Controlling Class could be adverse to the interests of the holders of the notes that are subordinated to the Controlling Class (which would include the Class B Notes and Subordinated Notes to the extent the Class A Notes constitute the Controlling Class), and the Controlling Class will have no obligation to consider any possible adverse effect on such other interests. Thus, we cannot assure you that any remedies pursued by the Controlling Class will be in the best interests of Holdings or that Holdings will receive any payments or distributions upon an acceleration of the notes. Any failure of the Securitization Issuer to make distributions on the notes we indirectly hold, whether as a result of an event of default or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and may result in an inability of us to make distributions sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC.

The Securitization Issuer may fail to meet certain asset coverage tests.

Under the documents governing the Debt Securitization, there are two asset coverage tests applicable to the Class A Notes and Class B Notes. The first such test compares the amount of interest received on the portfolio loans held by the Securitization Issuer to the amount of interest payable in respect of the Class A Notes and Class B Notes. To meet this first test, interest received on the portfolio loans must equal at least 115% of the interest payable in respect of the Class A Notes and Class B Notes. The second such test compares the principal amount of the portfolio loans to the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the Class A Notes and Class B Notes. To meet this second test at any time, the aggregate principal amount of the portfolio loans must equal at least 158% of the outstanding principal amount of the Class A Notes and the Class B Notes, taken together. If either coverage test is not satisfied, interest and principal received by the Securitization Issuer are diverted on the following payment date to pay the Class A Notes in full and then the Class B Notes in full (in order of seniority) to the extent necessary to cause all coverage tests to be satisfied on a pro forma basis after giving effect to all payments made in respect of the notes, which we refer to as a mandatory redemption. If any asset coverage test with respect to the Class A Notes or Class B Notes is not met, proceeds from the portfolio of loan investments that otherwise would have been distributed to the Securitization Issuer and the holders of the Subordinated Notes will instead be used to redeem first the Class A Notes and then the Class B Notes, to the extent necessary to satisfy the applicable asset coverage tests or to obtain the necessary ratings confirmation.

The value of the Class B Notes could be adversely affected by a mandatory redemption because such redemption could result in the Class B Notes being redeemed at par at a time when they are trading in the secondary market at a premium to their stated principal amount and when other investments bearing the same rate of interest may be difficult or expensive to acquire. A mandatory redemption could also result in a shorter investment duration than a holder of Class B Notes may have wanted or anticipated, which could, in turn, result in such a holder incurring breakage costs on related hedging transactions. In addition, the reinvestment period under the Debt Securitization may extend through as late as July 20, 2015, which could affect the value of the collateral securing the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes.

We may not receive cash from the Securitization Issuer.

We receive cash from the Securitization Issuer only to the extent that Holdings receives payments on the Class B Notes, Subordinated Notes or membership interests. The Securitization Issuer may only make payments on such securities to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the indenture governing the notes, which generally provides that principal payments on the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing under the Class A Notes

TABLE OF CONTENTS

are paid in full. In addition, if the Securitization Issuer does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the documents governing the Debt Securitization, cash would be diverted from the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes to first pay the Class A Notes in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to indirectly receive cash from the Securitization Issuer, we could be unable to make such distributions in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all.

We may be required to assume liabilities of the Securitization Issuer.

As part of the Debt Securitization, we entered into a master loan sale agreement under which we would be required to repurchase any loan (or participation interest therein) which was sold to the Securitization Issuer in breach of any representation or warranty made by us with respect to such loan on the date such loan was sold. To the extent we fail to satisfy any such repurchase obligation, the trustee may, on behalf of the Securitization Issuer, bring an action against us to enforce these repurchase obligations.

The structure of the Debt Securitization is intended to prevent, in the event of our bankruptcy or the bankruptcy of Holdings, the consolidation of the Securitization Issuer with our operations or those of Holdings. If the true sale of these assets were not respected in the event of our insolvency, a trustee or debtor-in-possession might reclaim the assets of the Securitization Issuer for our estate. However, in doing so, we would become directly liable for all of the indebtedness then outstanding under the Debt Securitization, which would equal the full amount of debt of the Securitization Issuer reflected on our consolidated balance sheet. In addition, we cannot assure that the recovery in the event we were consolidated with the Securitization Issuer for purposes of any bankruptcy proceeding would exceed the amount to which we would otherwise be entitled as an indirect holder of the Class B Notes and the Subordinated Notes had we not been consolidated with the Securitization Issuer.

In addition, in connection with the Debt Securitization, we indirectly gave the lenders certain customary representations with respect to the legal structure of the Securitization Issuer and the quality of the assets transferred to it. We remain indirectly liable for any incorrect statements or omissions for a period of at least one year, and potentially for the life of the Debt Securitization.

The Securitization Issuer may issue additional Subordinated Notes.

Under the terms of the Debt Securitization documents, the Securitization Issuer could issue additional Subordinated Notes and use the net proceeds of such issuance to purchase additional portfolio loans. Any such additional issuance, however, would require the consent of the collateral manager and the approval of a majority of the Subordinated Notes. Among the other conditions that must be satisfied in connection with an additional issuance of Subordinated Notes, the aggregate principal amount of all additional issuances of Subordinated Notes may not exceed $116 million; the Issuer must notify each rating agency of such issuance prior to the issuance date; and the terms of the Subordinated Notes to be issued must be identical to the terms of previously issued Subordinated Notes (except that all monies due on such additional Subordinated Notes will accrue from the issue date of such notes and that the prices of such Subordinated Notes do not have to be identical to those of the initial Subordinated Notes). We do not expect to cause the Securitization Issuer to issue any additional Subordinated Notes at this time, and the terms of the Debt Securitization documents do not provide for additional issuances of Class A Notes or Class B Notes.

We are subject to risks associated with the Credit Facility.

On July 21, 2011, Golub Capital BDC Funding LLC, or Funding, our wholly owned subsidiary, entered into a $75 million senior secured revolving credit facility, or the Credit Facility, with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender, or the Lender. Effective October 21, 2012, the Credit Facility Amendment was amended to, among other things, extend the reinvestment period from October 21, 2012 to October 21, 2013 and extend the stated maturity date from October 21, 2015 to October 20, 2017. As a result of the Credit Facility, we are subject to a variety of risks, including those set forth below.

Our interests in Funding are subordinated.

We own 100% of the equity interests in Funding. We consolidate the financial statements of Funding in our consolidated financial statements and treat the indebtedness of Funding as our leverage. Our interests in

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Funding are subordinated in priority of payment to every other obligation of Funding and are subject to certain payment restrictions set forth in the Credit Facility. We receive cash distributions on our equity interests in Funding only if Funding has made all required cash interest payments to the lenders. We cannot assure you that distributions on the assets held by Funding will be sufficient to make any distributions to us or that such distributions will meet our expectations.

Our equity interests in Funding rank behind all of the secured and unsecured creditors, known or unknown, of Funding, including the lenders. Consequently, to the extent that the value of Funding’s portfolio of loan investments has been reduced as a result of conditions in the credit markets, defaulted loans, capital gains and losses on the underlying assets, prepayment or changes in interest rates, the return on our investment in Funding could be reduced. Accordingly, our investment in Funding may be subject to up to 100% loss.

We may not receive cash on our equity interests from Funding.

We receive cash from Funding only to the extent that we receive distributions on our equity interests in Funding. Funding may make payments on such interests only to the extent permitted by the payment priority provisions of the Credit Facility. The Credit Facility generally provides that payments on such interests may not be made on any payment date unless all amounts owing to the lenders and other secured parties are paid in full. In addition, if Funding does not meet the asset coverage tests or the interest coverage test set forth in the Credit Facility documents, cash would be diverted from us to first pay the Lender in amounts sufficient to cause such tests to be satisfied. In the event that we fail to receive cash from Funding, we could be unable to make distributions to our stockholders in amounts sufficient to maintain our status as a RIC, or at all. We also could be forced to sell investments in portfolio companies at less than their fair value in order to continue making such distributions.

The ability to sell investments held by Funding is limited.

The Credit Facility places significant restrictions on our ability, as servicer, to sell investments. As a result, there may be times or circumstances during which we are unable to sell investments or take other actions that might be in our best interests.

Our ability to invest in public companies may be limited in certain circumstances.

To maintain our status as a business development company, we are not permitted to acquire any assets other than “qualifying assets” specified in the 1940 Act unless, at the time the acquisition is made, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets (with certain limited exceptions). Subject to certain exceptions for follow-on investments and investments in distressed companies, an investment in an issuer that has outstanding securities listed on a national securities exchange may be treated as qualifying assets only if such issuer has a common equity market capitalization that is less than $250 million at the time of such investment.

To the extent we use debt to finance our investments, changes in interest rates will affect our cost of capital and net investment income.

To the extent we borrow money to make investments, our net investment income depends, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds and the rate at which we invest those funds. As a result, we can offer no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates will not have a material adverse effect on our net investment income in the event we continue to use debt to finance our investments. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds will increase because the interest rates on the Class A Notes and Class B Notes issued under the Debt Securitization and amounts borrowed under the Credit Facility are floating, which could reduce our net investment income to the extent any debt investments have fixed interest rates. We expect that our long-term fixed-rate investments will be financed primarily with issuances of equity and long-term debt securities. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. Such techniques may include various interest rate hedging activities to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws.

You should also be aware that a rise in the general level of interest rates typically will lead to higher interest rates applicable to our debt investments. Accordingly, an increase in interest rates may result in an increase of the amount of incentive fees payable to GC Advisors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We may enter into reverse repurchase agreements, which are another form of leverage.

We may enter into reverse repurchase agreements as part of our management of our temporary investment portfolio. Under a reverse repurchase agreement, we will effectively pledge our assets as collateral to secure a short-term loan. Generally, the other party to the agreement makes the loan in an amount equal to a percentage of the fair value of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of the reverse repurchase agreement, we will be required to repay the loan and correspondingly receive back our collateral. While used as collateral, the assets continue to pay principal and interest which are for the benefit of us.

Our use of reverse repurchase agreements, if any, involves many of the same risks involved in our use of leverage, as the proceeds from reverse repurchase agreements generally will be invested in additional securities. There is a risk that the market value of the securities acquired in the reverse repurchase agreement may decline below the price of the securities that we have sold but remain obligated to purchase. In addition, there is a risk that the market value of the securities retained by us may decline. If a buyer of securities under a reverse repurchase agreement were to file for bankruptcy or experience insolvency, we may be adversely affected. Also, in entering into reverse repurchase agreements, we would bear the risk of loss to the extent that the proceeds of such agreements at settlement are less than the fair value of the underlying securities being pledged. In addition, due to the interest costs associated with reverse repurchase agreements, our net asset value would decline, and, in some cases, we may be worse off than if we had not used such agreements.

We are currently operating in a period of capital markets disruption.

The U.S. capital markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruption during the economic downturn that began in mid-2007, and the U.S. economy was in a recession for several consecutive calendar quarters during the same period. Disruptions in the capital markets have increased the spread between the yields realized on risk-free and higher risk securities, resulting in illiquidity in parts of the capital markets. A prolonged period of market illiquidity or uncertainty regarding U.S. tax rates, U.S. government spending and deficit levels and implementation of global fiscal austerity measures may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Unfavorable economic conditions, including future recessions, also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could limit our investment originations, limit our ability to grow and negatively impact our operating results.

Adverse developments in the credit markets may impair our ability to enter into new debt financing arrangements.

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions limited routine refinancing and loan modification transactions and even reviewed the terms of existing facilities to identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. As a result, it may be difficult for us to finance the growth of our investments on acceptable economic terms, or at all.

If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could fail to qualify as a business development company or be precluded from investing according to our current business strategy.

As a business development company, we may not acquire any assets other than “qualifying assets” unless, at the time of and after giving effect to such acquisition, at least 70% of our total assets are qualifying assets. See “Business — Regulation — Qualifying Assets.”

In the future, we believe that most of our investments will constitute qualifying assets. However, we may be precluded from investing in what we believe are attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940 Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could violate the 1940 Act provisions applicable to business development companies. As a result of such violation, specific rules under the 1940 Act could prevent us, for example, from making follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies (which could result in the dilution of our position) or could require us to dispose of investments at inappropriate times in order to come into compliance with the 1940 Act. If we need

TABLE OF CONTENTS

to dispose of such investments quickly, it could be difficult to dispose of such investments on favorable terms. We may not be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we may have to sell the investments at a substantial loss. Any such outcomes would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we do not maintain our status as a business development company, we would be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act. As a registered closed-end investment company, we would be subject to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility.

Many of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

The majority of our portfolio investments take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable, and we value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our securities. As discussed in more detail under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies,” most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) are classified as Level 3 under Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement. This means that our portfolio valuations are based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. Inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments require significant management judgment or estimation. Even if observable market data are available, such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which may include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information. We have retained the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of these securities. The types of factors that the board of directors may take into account in determining the fair value of our investments generally include, as appropriate, comparison to publicly traded securities, including such factors as yield, maturity and measures of credit quality, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these securities existed. Our net asset value could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such securities.

We adjust quarterly the valuation of our portfolio to reflect our board of directors’ determination of the fair value of each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are recorded in our consolidated statement of operations as net change in unrealized appreciation or depreciation.

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on the debt securities we acquire, the default rate on such securities, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and general economic conditions. In light of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of our performance in future periods.

New or modified laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business.

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation by laws at the U.S. federal, state and local levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws, regulations and interpretations may also come into effect. Any such new or changed laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business. In particular, on July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank, became law. Dodd-Frank, among other things, grants regulatory authorities such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or CFTC, and the SEC broad rulemaking authority to implement various provisions of Dodd-Frank. The scope of Dodd-Frank impacts many aspects of the financial services industry, and it requires the development and adoption of many implementing regulations, including comprehensive regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market, over the next several months and years. The effects of Dodd-Frank on the financial services industry will depend, in large part, upon the extent to which regulators exercise the authority granted to them and the approaches taken in implementing regulations. We have begun to assess the potential impact of Dodd-Frank on our business and operations, but the likely impact cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty.

Additionally, changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations, including those associated with RICs, may cause us to alter our investment strategy in order to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities or result in the imposition of corporate-level taxes on us. Such changes could result in material differences to our strategies and plans and may shift our investment focus from the areas of expertise of GC Advisors to other types of investments in which GC Advisors may have little or no expertise or experience. Any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

Our board of directors may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval.

Our board of directors has the authority, except as otherwise provided in the 1940 Act, to modify or waive our investment objective and certain of our operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. However, absent stockholder approval, we may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a business development company. Under Delaware law, we also cannot be dissolved without prior stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, operating results and the price value of our common stock. Nevertheless, any such changes could adversely affect our business and impair our ability to make distributions.

Provisions of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

The General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, or the DGCL, contains provisions that may discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control of us or the removal of our directors. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that limit liability and provide for indemnification of our directors and officers. These provisions and others also may have the effect of deterring hostile takeovers or delaying changes in control or management. We are subject to Section 203 of the DGCL, the application of which is subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. This section generally prohibits us from engaging in mergers and other business combinations with stockholders that beneficially own 15% or more of our voting stock, or with their affiliates, unless our directors or stockholders approve the business combination in the prescribed manner. If our board of directors does not approve a business combination, Section 203 of the DGCL may discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such an offer.

We have also adopted measures that may make it difficult for a third party to obtain control of us, including provisions of our certificate of incorporation classifying our board of directors in three classes serving staggered three-year terms, and provisions of our certificate of incorporation authorizing our board of directors to classify or reclassify shares of our preferred stock in one or more classes or series, to cause the issuance of additional shares of our stock, and to amend our certificate of incorporation, without stockholder approval, to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might otherwise be in the best interests of our securityholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement within that time, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Advisors has the right to resign under the Investment Advisory Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Advisors resigns, we may not be able to find a new investment adviser or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms within 60 days, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and investment activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a single institution or group of executives having the expertise possessed by GC Advisors and its affiliates. Even if we are able to retain comparable management, whether internal or external, the integration of such management and their lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

GC Service can resign on 60 days’ notice, and we may not be able to find a suitable replacement, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

GC Service has the right to resign under the Administration Agreement at any time upon not less than 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If GC Service resigns, we may not be able to find a new administrator or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and administrative activities is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a service provider or individuals with the expertise possessed by GC Service. Even if we are able to retain a comparable service provider or individuals to perform such services, whether internal or external, their integration into our business and lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We incur significant costs as a result of being a publicly traded company.

As a publicly traded company, we incur legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with the periodic reporting requirements applicable to a company whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, as well as additional corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other rules implemented by the SEC.

Our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act involves significant expenditures, and non-compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act would adversely affect us and the market price of our common stock.

Under current SEC rules, we are required to report on our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules and regulations of the SEC. As a result, we are incurring additional expenses that may negatively impact our financial performance and our ability to make distributions. This process also results in a diversion of management’s time and attention. We cannot ensure that our evaluation, testing and remediation process is effective or that our internal control over financial reporting will be effective. In the event that we are unable to maintain compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, we and the market price of our securities would be adversely affected.

We are highly dependent on information systems and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business, which may, in turn, negatively affect the market price of our common stock and our ability to pay dividends and other distributions.

Our business depends on the communications and information systems of GC Advisors and its affiliates. Any failure or interruption of such systems could cause delays or other problems in our activities. This, in turn,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and negatively affect the market price of our securities and our ability to pay dividends and other distributions to our securityholders.

Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub have substantial influence over us.

As of September 30, 2012, Lawrence E. Golub and David B. Golub beneficially owned, in the aggregate, approximately 28.5% and 28.2%, respectively, of our outstanding common stock, primarily as a result of their control of Golub Capital LLC, the investment adviser to Golub Capital Company IV, LLC, Golub Capital Company V LLC, Golub Capital Company VI LLC (collectively, the “Capital Companies”) and GEMS Fund L.P., or GEMS, a limited partnership affiliated with GC Advisors. As a result, these individuals, acting together, may have the ability to affect the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors and any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets, and may cause actions to be taken that you may not agree with or that are not in your interests or those of other securityholders.

This concentration of ownership also might harm the market price of our securities by:

Risks Related to Our Investments

Economic recessions or downturns could impair our portfolio companies and harm our operating results.

Many of our portfolio companies are susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay our loans during these periods. Therefore, our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during these periods. Adverse economic conditions may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our loans and the value of our equity investments. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in our portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could prevent us from increasing our investments and harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize our portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting portfolio company. In addition, lenders in certain cases can be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by them when they become too involved in the borrower’s business or exercise control over a borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken if we render significant managerial assistance to the borrower. Furthermore, if one of our portfolio companies were to file for bankruptcy protection, even though we may have structured our investment as senior secured debt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to claims of other creditors.

Current market conditions have materially and adversely affected debt and equity capital markets in the United States and around the world.

From mid-2007 through 2012, the global capital markets have experienced a period of disruption resulting in a lack of liquidity in parts of the debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial services sector relating to subprime mortgages and the re-pricing of credit risk in the broadly syndicated market. These events, along with the deterioration of the housing market, illiquid market conditions, declining business and consumer confidence and the failure of major financial institutions in the United States, led to a general

TABLE OF CONTENTS

decline of economic conditions. This economic decline materially and adversely affected the broader financial and credit markets and has reduced the availability of debt and equity capital for the market as a whole and to financial firms, in particular. To the extent that we wish to use debt to fund our investments, the debt capital available to us, if any, may be at a higher cost and on terms and conditions that may be less favorable than what we expect, which could negatively affect our financial performance and results. A prolonged period of market illiquidity may cause us to reduce the volume of loans we originate and/or fund and adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Any deterioration of current market conditions could materially and adversely affect our business.

Our investments in leveraged portfolio companies may be risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Investment in leveraged companies involves a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold. Such developments may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we may have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also may have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

Our investments in private and middle-market portfolio companies are risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Investment in private and middle-market companies involves a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we expect to rely on the ability of GC Advisors’ investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. Middle-market companies may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their debt securities that we hold, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment. In addition, such companies typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and market conditions, as well as general economic downturns. Additionally, middle-market companies are more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons. Therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on our portfolio company and, in turn, on us. Middle-market companies also may be parties to litigation and may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence. In addition, our executive officers, directors and GC Advisors may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in the portfolio companies.

The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.

We may invest all of our assets in illiquid securities, and a substantial portion of our investments in leveraged companies are and will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than more broadly traded public securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. We may also face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a portfolio company to the extent that we, GC Advisors, Golub Capital or any of its affiliates have material nonpublic information regarding such portfolio company.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Price declines and illiquidity in the corporate debt markets may adversely affect the fair value of our portfolio investments, reducing our net asset value through increased net unrealized depreciation.

As a business development company, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. As part of the valuation process, we may take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments:

When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we use the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate our valuation. We record decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments as unrealized depreciation. Declines in prices and liquidity in the corporate debt markets may result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio may reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and may suffer additional unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We are a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single issuer. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers, our net asset value may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond our asset diversification requirements as a RIC under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few portfolio companies.

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries, which will subject us to a risk of significant loss if any of these companies defaults on its obligations under any of its debt instruments or if there is a downturn in a particular industry.

Our portfolio may be concentrated in a limited number of portfolio companies and industries. As a result, the aggregate returns we realize may be significantly and adversely affected if a small number of investments perform poorly or if we need to write down the value of any one investment. Additionally, while we are not targeting any specific industries, our investments may be concentrated in relatively few industries. As a result, a downturn in any particular industry in which we are invested could also significantly impact the aggregate returns we realize.

We may hold the debt securities of leveraged companies that may, due to the significant volatility of such companies, enter into bankruptcy proceedings.

Leveraged companies may experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress. The bankruptcy process has a number of significant inherent risks. Many events in a bankruptcy proceeding are the product of contested matters and adversary proceedings and are beyond the control of the creditors. A bankruptcy filing by an issuer may adversely and permanently affect the issuer. If the proceeding is converted to a liquidation, the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

value of the issuer may not equal the liquidation value that was believed to exist at the time of the investment. The duration of a bankruptcy proceeding is also difficult to predict, and a creditor’s return on investment can be adversely affected by delays until the plan of reorganization or liquidation ultimately becomes effective. The administrative costs of a bankruptcy proceeding are frequently high and would be paid out of the debtor’s estate prior to any return to creditors. Because the standards for classification of claims under bankruptcy law are vague, our influence with respect to the class of securities or other obligations we own may be lost by increases in the number and amount of claims in the same class or by different classification and treatment. In the early stages of the bankruptcy process, it is often difficult to estimate the extent of, or even to identify, any contingent claims that might be made. In addition, certain claims that have priority by law (for example, claims for taxes) may be substantial.

Our failure to make follow-on investments in our portfolio companies could impair the value of our portfolio.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we may make additional investments in that portfolio company as “follow-on” investments, in seeking to:

We have discretion to make follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. Failure on our part to make follow-on investments may, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful portfolio company. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we may elect not to make a follow-on investment because we may not want to increase our level of risk, because we prefer other opportunities or because of regulatory or other considerations. Our ability to make follow-on investments may also be limited by GC Advisors’ allocation policy.

Because we generally do not hold controlling equity interests in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to exercise control over our portfolio companies or to prevent decisions by management of our portfolio companies that could decrease the value of our investments.

Although we may do so in the future, we do not currently hold controlling equity positions in our portfolio companies. As a result, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of a portfolio company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that are adverse to our interests. Due to the lack of liquidity of the debt and equity investments that we typically hold in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and may therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Defaults by our portfolio companies will harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets. This could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize such portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt or equity securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms, which may include the waiver of certain financial covenants, with a defaulting portfolio company.

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.

We have invested a portion of our capital in second lien and mezzanine loans issued by our portfolio companies and intend to continue to do so in the future. The portfolio companies usually have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the debt securities in which we invest. By

TABLE OF CONTENTS

their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of the debt securities in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. After repaying senior creditors, the portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt securities in which we invest, we would have to share any distributions on an equal and ratable basis with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Additionally, certain loans that we make to portfolio companies may be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

We have made in the past, and may make in the future, unsecured loans to portfolio companies, meaning that such loans will not benefit from any interest in collateral of such companies. Liens on a portfolio company’s collateral, if any, will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under its outstanding secured debt and may secure certain future debt that is permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under its secured loan agreements. The holders of obligations secured by such liens will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of such collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of such collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of such collateral would be sufficient to satisfy our unsecured loan obligations after payment in full of all secured loan obligations. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay the outstanding secured loan obligations, then our unsecured claims would rank equally with the unpaid portion of such secured creditors’ claims against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

The rights we may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of such senior debt. Under a typical intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that may be taken in respect of the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens:

We may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

If we make subordinated investments, the obligors or the portfolio companies may not generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We may make subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the obligor in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of default than senior obligations as a result of adverse changes in the financial condition of the obligor or in general economic conditions. If we make a subordinated investment in a portfolio company, the portfolio company may be highly leveraged, and its relatively high debt-to-equity ratio may create increased risks that its operations might not generate sufficient cash flow to service all of its debt obligations.

The disposition of our investments may result in contingent liabilities.

A significant portion of our investments involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we may be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We may also be required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to potential liabilities. These arrangements may result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of distributions previously made to us.

GC Advisors’ liability is limited, and we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors against certain liabilities, which may lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, GC Advisors does not assume any responsibility to us other than to render the services called for under that agreement, and it is not responsible for any action of our board of directors in following or declining to follow GC Advisors’ advice or recommendations. Under the terms of the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, GC Advisors, its officers, members, personnel, and any person controlling or controlled by GC Advisors are not liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s stockholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of GC Advisors’ duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement. In addition, we have agreed to indemnify GC Advisors and each of its officers, directors, members, managers and employees from and against any claims or liabilities, including reasonable legal fees and other expenses reasonably incurred, arising out of or in connection with our business and operations or any action taken or omitted on our behalf pursuant to authority granted by the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misconduct, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the Investment Advisory Agreement and the collateral management agreement. These protections may lead GC Advisors to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

We may be subject to risks under hedging transactions and may become subject to risks if we invest in foreign securities.

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company may not acquire any asset other than assets of the type listed in the 1940 Act, which are referred to as “qualifying assets,” unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company’s total assets. In order for our investments to be classified as “qualifying assets,” among other requirements, such investments must be in issuers organized under the laws of, and which have their principal place of business in, any state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or any other possession of the United States.

As of September 30, 2012, we were invested in the securities of one non-U.S. company and may make additional investments. We may in the future invest in non-U.S. companies, including emerging market issuers, to the limited extent such investments are permitted under the 1940 Act. We expect that these investments would focus on the same types of investments that we make in U.S. middle-market companies

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and accordingly would be complementary to our overall strategy and enhance the diversity of our holdings. Investing in securities of emerging market issuers involves many risks including economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions in the emerging market, potential inflationary economic environments, regulation by foreign governments, different accounting standards and political uncertainties. Economic, social, political, financial, tax and security conditions also could negatively affect the value of emerging market companies. These factors could include changes in the emerging market government’s economic and fiscal policies, the possible imposition of, or changes in, currency exchange laws or other laws or restrictions applicable to the emerging market companies or investments in their securities and the possibility of fluctuations in the rate of exchange between currencies.

We have engaged in and, in the future, may engage in hedging transactions to the limited extent such transactions are permitted under the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. Engaging in hedging transactions or investing in foreign securities would entail additional risks to our stockholders. We could, for example, use instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors and, if we were to invest in foreign securities, we could use instruments such as forward contracts or currency options and borrow under a credit facility in currencies selected to minimize our foreign currency exposure. In each such case, we generally would seek to hedge against fluctuations of the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in market interest rates or currency exchange rates. Hedging against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions would not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions or prevent losses if the values of the positions declined. However, such hedging could establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions could also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the underlying portfolio positions increased. Moreover, it might not be possible to hedge against an exchange rate or interest rate fluctuation that was so generally anticipated that we would not be able to enter into a hedging transaction at an acceptable price.

While we may enter into hedging transactions to seek to reduce currency exchange rate and interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in currency exchange rates or interest rates could result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged could vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we might not seek to establish a perfect correlation between the hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation could prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. In addition, it might not be possible to hedge fully or perfectly against currency fluctuations affecting the value of securities denominated in non-U.S. currencies because the value of those securities would likely fluctuate as a result of factors not related to currency fluctuations. Our ability to engage in hedging transactions may also be adversely affected by recent rules adopted by the CFTC.

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

When we invest in one stop, mezzanine and second lien loans, we may acquire warrants or other equity securities of portfolio companies as well. We may also invest in equity securities directly. To the extent we hold equity investments, we will attempt to dispose of them and realize gains upon our disposition of them. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and may decline in value. As a result, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience.

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock

Investing in our common stock may involve an above average degree of risk.

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective may result in a higher amount of risk than alternative investment options and a higher risk of volatility or loss of principal. Our investments in portfolio companies involve higher levels of risk, and therefore, an investment in our shares may not be suitable for someone with lower risk tolerance.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, often trade at a discount to their net asset value.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, may trade at a discount from net asset value. This characteristic of closed-end investment companies and business development companies is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share may decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value.

There is a risk that investors in our equity securities may not receive distributions or that our distributions may not grow over time and a portion of our distributions may be a return of capital.

We intend to make distributions on a quarterly basis to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this annual report on Form 10-K. Due to the asset coverage test applicable to us under the 1940 Act as a business development company, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions.

The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly.

The market price and liquidity of the market for our securities may be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. These factors include:

Our stockholders will experience dilution in their ownership percentage if they do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan.

All dividends declared in cash payable to stockholders that are participants in our dividend reinvestment plan are automatically reinvested in shares of our common stock. As a result, our stockholders that do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan will experience dilution in their ownership percentage of our common stock over time.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or the availability of such common stock for sale, could adversely affect the prevailing market prices for our common stock. If this occurs and continues, it could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of securities should we desire to do so.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

Properties

We do not own any real estate or other physical properties materially important to our operation. Our headquarters are located at 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60606 and are provided by GC Service pursuant to the Administration Agreement. We believe that our office facilities are suitable and adequate to our business.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

Golub Capital BDC, GC Advisors and GC Service are not currently subject to any material legal proceedings.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Price Range of Common Stock

Our common stock began trading on April 15, 2010 and is currently traded on The Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “GDBC”. The following table lists the high and low closing sale price for our common stock, the closing sale price as a percentage of net asset value, or NAV, and quarterly distributions per share since September 30, 2010.

						Closing Sales Price								Premium of High Sales Price to NAV(2)				Premium (Discount) of Low Sales Price to NAV(2)				Distributions Declared(3)
Period		NAV(1)				High				Low
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2012
Fourth quarter		$	14.60			$	16.00			$	15.05				9.6	%			3.1	%		$	0.32
Third quarter			14.58				15.18				14.25				4.1				(2.3	)			0.32
Second Quarter			14.69				15.95				14.57				8.6				(0.8	)			0.32
First Quarter			14.53				16.00				14.16				10.1				(2.5	)			0.32
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2011
Fourth quarter			14.56				15.81				14.00				8.6				(3.8	)		$	0.32
Third quarter			14.75				16.30				14.40				10.5				(2.4	)			0.32
Second Quarter			14.75				17.60				15.78				19.3				7.0				0.32
First Quarter			14.74				17.95				15.44				21.8				4.7				0.31

The last reported price for our common stock on November 27, 2012 was $15.65 per share. As of November 27, 2012, we had 189 stockholders of record.

Sales of Unregistered Securities

On February 5, 2010, GEMS entered into an agreement to purchase 195 limited liability company interests in Golub Capital BDC LLC for cash, resulting in aggregate net cash proceeds to us of $25 million. The cash settlement of this private placement occurred on March 15, 2010. The limited liability company interests held by GEMS were converted into 1,752,048 shares of common stock in the BDC Conversion. In addition, concurrently with the closing of our initial public offering on April 20, 2010, certain existing investors in entities advised by affiliates of Golub Capital and certain of our officers and directors, their immediate family members or entities owned by, or family trusts for the benefit of, such persons purchased in a separate private placement an aggregate of 1,322,581 shares of common stock at a price of $14.50 per share, resulting in aggregate net cash proceeds to us of approximately $19.2 million. Both of these private placements were conducted in reliance on Rule 506 under Regulation D of the Securities Act.

Distributions

Our distributions, if any, are determined by the board of directors. We elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. To maintain RIC qualification, we must distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of our net long-term capital losses, if any. In addition, we are subject to ordinary income and capital gain distribution requirements under U.S. federal excise tax rules for each calendar year. If we do not meet the required distributions we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible federal excise tax on the undistributed amount.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following table reflects the cash distributions, including dividends and returns of capital per share that we have declared on our common stock since September 30, 2010.

Record Dates		Payment Date				Dividends and Distributions Declared
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2012
September 13, 2012			September 27, 2012			$	0.32
June 15, 2012			June 29, 2012			$	0.32
March 16, 2012			March 29, 2012			$	0.32
December 19, 2011			December 29, 2011			$	0.32
Total(1)						$	1.28
Fiscal year ended September 30, 2011
September 19, 2011			September 28, 2011			$	0.32
June 17, 2011			June 29, 2011			$	0.32
March 18, 2011			March 30, 2011			$	0.32
December 20, 2010			December 30, 2010			$	0.31
Total						$	1.27

On November 27, 2012, our board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.32 per share payable on December 28, 2012 to holders of record as of December 14, 2012.

We have adopted a dividend reinvestment plan that provides for reinvestment of our dividends and other distributions on behalf of our stockholders. As a result, if our board of directors authorizes, and we declare, a cash dividend or other distribution, then our stockholders who have not “opted out” of our dividend reinvestment plan will have their cash distribution automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock, rather than receiving the cash distribution.

Stock Performance Graph

This graph compares the stockholder return on our common stock from April 14, 2010 (initial public offering) to September 30, 2012 with that of the NASDAQ Financial Stock Index and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index. This graph assumes that on April 14, 2010, $100 was invested in our common stock, the NASDAQ Financial Stock Index, and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index. The graph also assumes the reinvestment of all cash dividends prior to any tax effect. The graph and other information furnished under this Part II Item 5 of this annual report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C under, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of, the Exchange Act. The stock price performance included in the below graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock performance.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following selected consolidated financial data of Golub Capital BDC as of September 30, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 is derived from the consolidated financial statements that have been audited by McGladrey LLP (formerly McGladrey & Pullen, LLP), independent auditors. For the periods prior to September 30, 2009, the financial data refers to the financial condition and results of operations of our predecessor, GCMF. The financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

		Golub Capital BDC(3)												GCMF
		As of and for the years ended
		September 30, 2012				September 30, 2011				September 30, 2010				September 30, 2009				September 30, 2008
		(In thousands, except per share data)
Statement of Operations Data:
Total investment income		$	57,859			$	39,150			$	33,150			$	33,338			$	20,686
Base management fee			8,495				5,789				3,328				2,849				1,726
Incentive fee			6,228				348				55				—				—
All other expenses			15,260				10,197				6,400				5,011				8,916
Net investment income			27,876				22,816				23,367				25,478				10,044
Net realized (loss) gain on investments and derivative instruments			(3,372	)			2,037				(40	)			(3,972	)			(4,503	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and derivative instruments			7,256				(3,514	)			2,921				(1,489	)			(8,957	)
Net increase/(decrease) in net assets resulting from operations			31,760				21,339				26,248				20,017				(3,416	)
Per share data:
Net asset value		$	14.60			$	14.56			$	14.71				N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Net investment income			1.15				1.16				N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Net realized (loss) gain on investments and derivative instruments			(0.14	)			0.10				N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and derivative instruments			0.30				(0.18	)			N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Net increase/(decrease) in net assets resulting from operations			1.31				1.09				N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Per share dividends declared			1.28				1.27				0.55				N/A	(1)			N/A	(1)
Dollar amount of dividends declared			31,556				25,069				9,742				N/A				N/A
Balance Sheet data at period end:
Investments, at fair value		$	672,910			$	459,827			$	344,869			$	376,294			$	135,476
Cash and cash equivalents			50,927				69,766				92,990				30,614				4,252
Other assets			10,259				30,051				4,904				2,214				1,213
Total assets			734,096				559,644				442,763				409,122				140,941
Total debt			352,300				237,683				174,000				315,306				123,083
Total liabilities			358,967				243,095				182,222				316,370				124,088
Total net assets			375,129				316,549				260,541				92,752				16,853

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Golub Capital BDC(3)												GCMF
		As of and for the years ended
		September 30, 2012				September 30, 2011				September 30, 2010				September 30, 2009				September 30, 2008
		(In thousands, except per share data)
Other data:
Weighted average annualized yield on income producing investments at fair value(2)			9.28	%			8.64	%			8.40	%			8.05	%			9.33	%
Number of portfolio companies at period end			121				103				94				95				60

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The information contained in this section should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K. For periods prior to April 13, 2010, the consolidated financial statements and related notes reflect the performance of Golub Capital BDC LLC and its predecessor and wholly owned subsidiary, GCMF, which was formed on June 6, 2007.

Forward-Looking Statements

Some of the statements in this annual report on Form 10-K constitute forward-looking statements, which relate to future events or our performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties, including statements as to:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Such forward-looking statements may include statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “intend,” “should,” “could,” “can,” “would,” “expect,” “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” ”predict,” “potential,” “plan” or similar words. The forward looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those implied or expressed in the forward-looking statements for any reason, including the factors set forth as “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this annual report on Form-10K.

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this report on information available to us on the date of this report, and we assume no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in our forward-looking statements and future results could differ materially from historical performance. Although we undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, you are advised to consult any additional disclosures that we may make directly to you or through reports that we have filed or in the future may file with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, registration statements on Form N-2, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

Overview

We are an externally managed, closed-end, non-diversified management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. In addition, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code. As a business development company and a RIC, we are also subject to certain constraints, including limitations imposed by the 1940 Act and the Code. We were formed in November 2009 to continue and expand the business of our predecessor, GCMF, which commenced operations in July 2007, in making investments in senior secured, one stop (a loan that combines characteristics of traditional first lien senior secured loans and second lien or subordinated loans), second lien and mezzanine (a loan that ranks senior only to a borrower’s equity securities and ranks junior to all of such borrower’s other indebtedness in priority of payment) loans and warrants and equity securities of middle-market companies that are, in most cases, sponsored by private equity firms.

Our shares are currently listed on The NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “GBDC”.

Our investment objective is to maximize the total return to our stockholders in the form of current income and capital appreciation through debt and minority equity investments. We intend to achieve our investment objective by (1) accessing the established loan origination channels developed by Golub Capital, a leading lender to middle-market companies with over $7.0 billion in capital under management, (2) selecting investments within our core middle-market company focus, (3) partnering with experienced private equity firms, or sponsors, in many cases with whom we have invested alongside in the past, (4) implementing the disciplined underwriting standards of Golub Capital and (5) drawing upon the aggregate experience and resources of Golub Capital.

Our investment activities are managed by GC Advisors and supervised by our board of directors of which a majority of the members are independent of us.

Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, entered into on April 14, 2010, and amended and restated on July 16, 2010, we have agreed to pay GC Advisors an annual base management fee based on our average adjusted gross assets as well as an incentive fee based on our investment performance. We have also entered into the Administration Agreement with GC Service, under which we have agreed to reimburse GC Service for our allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our independent directors) of overhead and other expenses incurred by GC Service in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement.

We seek to create a diverse portfolio that includes senior secured, one stop, second lien and mezzanine loans and warrants and minority equity securities by investing approximately $5 to $25 million of capital, on average, in the securities of middle-market companies. We may also selectively invest more than $25 million in some of our portfolio companies and generally expect that the size of our individual investments will vary proportionately with the size of our capital base.

As of September 30, 2012, our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 40.7% senior secured loans, 39.5% one stop loans, 6.6% second lien loans, 10.0% mezzanine loans and 3.2% equity. As of September 30, 2011,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

our portfolio at fair value was comprised of 44.3% senior secured loans, 38.7% one stop loans, 4.8% second lien loans, 10.2% mezzanine loans and 2.0% equity.

As of September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, we had debt and equity investments in 121, 103 and 94 portfolio companies, respectively. For the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, our income producing assets had a weighted average interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 9.3%, 8.6% and 8.4% and a weighted average investment income (which includes interest income and amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 10.2%, 9.9% and 10.9%, respectively.

Revenues:  We generate revenue in the form of interest income on debt investments and capital gains and distributions, if any, on portfolio company investments that we originate or acquire. Our debt investments, whether in the form of senior secured, one stop, second lien or mezzanine loans, typically have a term of three to seven years and bear interest at a fixed or floating rate. In some instances, we receive payments on our debt investments based on scheduled amortization of the outstanding balances. In addition, we receive repayments of some of our debt investments prior to their scheduled maturity date. The frequency or volume of these repayments fluctuates significantly from period to period. Our portfolio activity also reflects the proceeds of sales of securities. In some cases, our investments provide for deferred interest payments or PIK interest. The principal amount of loans and any accrued but unpaid interest generally become due at the maturity date. In addition, we may generate revenue in the form of commitment, origination, amendment, structuring or due diligence fees, fees for providing managerial assistance and consulting fees. Loan origination fees, original issue discount and market discount or premium are capitalized, and we accrete or amortize such amounts as interest income. We record prepayment premiums on loans as interest income. When we receive partial principal payments on a loan in an amount that exceeds its amortized cost, we record the excess principal payment as interest income. Dividend income on preferred equity securities is recorded as dividend income on an accrual basis to the extent that such amounts are payable by the portfolio company and are expected to be collected. Dividend income on common equity securities is recorded on the record date for private portfolio companies or on the ex-dividend date for publicly traded portfolio companies.

We recognize realized gains or losses on investments based on the difference between the net proceeds from the disposition and the cost basis of the investment or derivative instrument, without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. We record current period changes in fair value of investments and derivative instruments that are measured at fair value as a component of the net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations.

Expenses:  Our primary operating expenses include the payment of fees to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement, our allocable portion of overhead expenses under the Administration Agreement and other operating costs described below. Additionally, we pay interest expense on our outstanding debt. We bear all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses of our operations and transactions, including:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

During periods of asset growth, we expect our general and administrative expenses to be relatively stable or decline as a percentage of total assets and increase during periods of asset declines. Incentive fees, interest expenses and costs relating to future offerings of securities would be additive to the expenses described above.

GC Advisors, as collateral manager for the Securitization Issuer under the collateral management agreement, is entitled to receive an annual fee in an amount equal to 0.35% of the principal balance of the portfolio loans held by the Securitization Issuer at the beginning of the collection period relating to each payment date, which is payable in arrears on each payment date. This fee, which is less than the management fee payable under the Investment Advisory Agreement, is paid directly by the Securitization Issuer to GC Advisors and offset against such management fee. Accordingly, the 1.375% management fee paid by us to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement on all of our assets, including those indirectly held through the Securitization Issuer, is reduced, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, by an amount equal to such 0.35% fee paid to GC Advisors by the Securitization Issuer. The term “collection period” refers to a quarterly period running from the day after the end of the prior collection period to the fifth business day of the calendar month in which a payment date occurs. This fee may be waived by the collateral manager. The collateral management agreement does not include any incentive fee payable to GC Advisors. In addition, the Securitization Issuer paid Wells Fargo Securities, LLC a structuring and placement fee for its services in connection with the initial structuring of the Debt Securitization. The Securitization Issuer also agreed to pay ongoing administrative expenses to the trustee, collateral manager, independent accountants, legal counsel, rating agencies and independent managers in connection with developing and maintaining reports, and providing required services in connection with, the administration of the Debt Securitization. The administrative expenses are paid by the Securitization Issuer on each payment date in two parts: (1) a component that is paid in a priority to other amounts distributed by the Securitization Issuer, subject to a cap equal to the sum of 0.04% per annum on the adjusted principal balance of the portfolio loans and other assets held by the Securitization Issuer on the last day of the collection period

TABLE OF CONTENTS

relating to such payment date, plus $150,000 per annum, and (2) a component that is paid in a subordinated position relative to other amounts distributed by the Securitization Issuer, equal to any amounts that exceed the aforementioned administrative expense cap. We believe that these administrative expenses approximate the amount of ongoing fees and expenses that we would be required to pay in connection with a traditional secured credit facility. Our common stockholders indirectly bear all of these expenses.

Recent Developments

On October 16, 2012, we priced a public offering of 2,600,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $15.58 per share, raising approximately $40.5 million in gross proceeds. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC and UBS Securities LLC acted as joint book-running managers for the offering. On October 19, 2012, the transaction closed, the shares were issued, and proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, of $39.4 million were received. On November 14, 2012, we sold an additional 294,120 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $15.58 per share pursuant to the underwriters’ partial exercise of the over-allotment option.

On October 30, 2012, Funding entered into an amendment (the “Credit Facility Amendment”) to the documents governing Funding’s Credit Facility with Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as lender. The Credit Facility Amendment is effective as of October 21, 2012. The Credit Facility Amendment, among other things, extended the reinvestment period from October 21, 2012 to October 21, 2013 and extended the stated maturity date from October 21, 2015 to October 20, 2017.

Market Trends

We have identified the following trends that may affect our business:

Target Market.  We believe that small and middle-market companies in the United States with annual revenues between $10 million and $2.5 billion represent a significant growth segment of the U.S. economy and often require substantial capital investments to grow. Middle-market companies have generated a significant number of investment opportunities for investment funds managed or advised by Golub Capital, and we believe that this market segment will continue to produce significant investment opportunities for us.

Specialized Lending Requirements.  We believe that several factors render many U.S. financial institutions ill-suited to lend to U.S. middle-market companies. For example, based on the experience of our management team, lending to U.S. middle-market companies (1) is generally more labor intensive than lending to larger companies due to the smaller size of each investment and the fragmented nature of information for such companies, (2) requires due diligence and underwriting practices consistent with the demands and economic limitations of the middle-market and (3) may also require more extensive ongoing monitoring by the lender.

Demand for Debt Capital.  We believe there is a large pool of uninvested private equity capital for middle-market companies. We expect private equity firms will seek to leverage their investments by combining equity capital with senior secured loans and mezzanine debt from other sources, such as us.

Competition from Bank Lenders — We believe that many traditional bank lenders, in recent years, de-emphasized their service and product offerings to middle market businesses in favor of lending to large corporate clients and managing capital market transactions. In addition, many commercial banks face significant balance sheet constraints as they seek to build capital and meet future regulatory capital requirements. These factors may result in opportunities for alternative funding sources to middle market companies and therefore drive increased new investment opportunities for us.

Pricing and Deal Structures.  We believe that the volatility in global markets over the last several years and current macroeconomic issues such as a weakened U.S. economy has reduced access to, and availability of, debt capital to middle-market companies, causing a reduction in competition and generally more favorable capital structures and deal terms. We believe these market conditions may continue to create favorable opportunities to invest at attractive risk-adjusted returns.

Consolidated Results of Operations

The consolidated results of operations set forth below include historical financial information of our predecessor, GCMF, prior to our election, effective April 13, 2010, to become a business development company and our election to be treated as a RIC. As a business development company and a RIC, we are also

TABLE OF CONTENTS

subject to certain constraints on our operations, including limitations imposed by the 1940 Act and the Code. Also, the management fee that we pay to GC Advisors under the Investment Advisory Agreement is determined by reference to a formula that differs materially from the management fee paid by GCMF in prior periods. For these and other reasons, the results of operations for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010 described below may not be indicative of the results we report in future periods.

Consolidated operating results for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2012				2011				2010				2012 vs. 2011				2011 vs. 2010
		(In thousands)
Interest income		$	52,393			$	34,076			$	25,496			$	18,317			$	8,580
Income from amortization of discounts and origination fees			5,089				5,074				7,654				15				(2,580	)
Dividend income			377				—				—				377				—
Total investment income			57,859				39,150				33,150				18,709				6,000
Total expenses			29,983				16,334				9,783				13,649				6,551
Net investment income			27,876				22,816				23,367				5,060				(551	)
Net realized (losses) gains on investments and derivative instruments			(3,372	)			2,037				(40	)			(5,409	)			2,077
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and derivative instruments			7,256				(3,514	)			2,921				10,770				(6,435	)
Net income		$	31,760			$	21,339			$	26,248			$	10,421			$	(4,909	)
Average earning portfolio company investments, at fair value		$	564,323			$	406,881			$	307,552			$	157,442			$	99,329
Average debt outstanding		$	306,969			$	201,294			$	213,793			$	105,675			$	(12,499	)

Net income can vary substantially from period to period for various reasons, including the recognition of realized gains and losses and unrealized appreciation and depreciations. As a result, annual comparisons of net income may not be meaningful.

Investment Income

Investment income increased from 2011 to 2012 by $18.7 million as a result of an increase in the average earning investment balance, which is the annual average balance of accruing loans in our investment portfolio, of $157.4 million as well as an increase in the weighted average investment income (which includes interest income and amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 0.3%. Investment income increased from 2010 to 2011 by $6.0 million as a result of an increase in the average earning investment balance of $99.3 million, which was partially offset by a decrease in the weighted average investment income (which includes interest income and amortization of fees and discounts) yield of 1.0%.

The increase in the yield from 2011 to 2012 was driven primarily by the change in asset mix of our portfolio. Higher yielding second lien and one stop investments increased from 43.5% of the portfolio as of September 30, 2011 to 46.1% of the portfolio as of September 30, 2012. The decrease in the yield from 2010 to 2011 was driven by a decrease in income from amortization of discounts and origination fees of $2.6 million due to higher repayment activity in 2010 than 2011.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The interest income yield (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) by security type for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was as follows:

		For the years ended September 30,
		2012				2011				2010
Senior secured			7.1	%			7.1	%			7.3	%
One stop			9.4	%			9.2	%			9.2	%
Second lien(1)			11.0	%			12.0	%			11.5	%
Subordinated debt			14.0	%			13.0	%			14.2	%

Interest rate yields on senior secured, one stop, second lien and fixed rate subordinated debt remained relatively consistent as pricing on new originations remained relatively consistent over the last three years. For additional details on investment yields and asset mix, refer to the “Liquidity and Capital Resources — Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield” section below.

Expenses

The following table summarizes our expenses:

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2012				2011				2010				2012 vs. 2011				2011 vs. 2010
		(In thousands)
Interest and other debt financing expenses		$	10,781			$	6,550			$	3,525			$	4,231			$	3,025
Base management fee			8,495				5,789				3,328				2,706				2,461
Incentive fee			6,228				348				55				5,880				293
Professional fees			2,231				2,204				1,838				27				366
Administrative service fee			1,713				837				583				876				254
General and administrative expenses			535				606				454				(71	)			152
Total expenses		$	29,983			$	16,334			$	9,783			$	13,649			$	6,551

Interest and debt financing expenses increased from the year ended September 30, 2011 to the year ended September 30, 2012 primarily due to an increase in the weighted average of outstanding borrowings from $201.3 million for the year ended September 30, 2011 to $307.0 million for the year ended September 30, 2012. In addition to the $174.0 million of borrowings under the Debt Securitization that was outstanding for the years ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, we increased our use of debt through GC SBIC IV, L.P. and the Credit Facility, which had outstanding balances of $123.5 million and $54.8 million, respectively, as of September 30, 2012 and outstanding balances of $61.3 million and $2.4 million, respectively, as of September 30, 2011. To a lesser extent, the increase in interest expense was also caused by an increase in the effective average interest rate on our outstanding debt from 3.3% for the year ended September 30, 2011 to 3.5% for the year ended September 30, 2012.

Interest and debt financing expenses increased from the year ended September 30, 2010 to the year ended September 30, 2011 primarily due to an increase in the effective average interest rate on our outstanding debt from 1.7% for the year ended September 30, 2010 to 3.3% for the year ended September 30, 2011. Average debt outstanding was relatively consistent from $213.8 million at September 30, 2010 to $201.3 million at September 30, 2011.

The base management fee increased as a result of a sequential increase in average assets and average investments from 2010 to 2012. The administrative service expense increased from 2010 to 2012 due to an increase in costs associated with servicing a growing investment portfolio. In addition, as permitted under the Administration Agreement, beginning January 1, 2012, an allocable portion of the cost of our chief compliance officer and chief financial officer and their respective staffs were charged to us, which was also partially related to the increase in the administrative service fee from the year ended September 30, 2011 to the year ended September 30, 2012. These costs are permitted to be charged under the terms of the Administration Agreement but were previously being waived by GC Service.

The incentive fee increased by $0.3 million and $5.9 million from the years ended September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2011 to the years ended September 30, 2011 and 2012, respectively. Incentive fee expense for the years ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 was relatively small as our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Income did not exceed or only marginally exceeded the hurdle rate as defined in the Investment Advisory Agreement. Incentive fee expense increased in the year ended September 30, 2012 as our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income was well in excess of the hurdle rate. The increase in Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income over the hurdle rate was caused by an increase in the average yield of investments in the portfolio.

As described in the “Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses” section below, we entered into the total return swap, or the TRS, with Citibank, N.A., or Citibank, for the purpose of gaining economic exposure to a portfolio of broadly syndicated loans. We subsequently terminated the TRS on April 11, 2012. For the periods ending September 30, 2011 and prior, we had included interest spread payments, which represent the difference between the interest and fees received on the referenced assets underlying the TRS and the interest paid to Citibank on the settled notional value of the TRS, from the TRS in the capital gains component of the incentive fee calculation as this is consistent with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, or GAAP, which records such payments in net realized gains/(losses) on derivative instruments in the consolidated statement of operations. However, we changed our methodology in the first fiscal quarter of fiscal year 2012 pursuant to discussions with the staff, or the Staff, of the SEC, resulting in the TRS interest spread payments being included in the income component of the incentive fee calculation.

For the year ended September 30, 2012, we received interest spread payments from the TRS of $2.6 million. For the three months ended December 31, 2011, including the interest spread payments from the TRS in the income component of the incentive fee calculation caused an increase in the incentive fee by $0.6 million. Upon reviewing the incentive fee calculation and the treatment of the interest spread payments from the TRS, GC Advisors irrevocably waived the incremental portion of the incentive fee attributable from the TRS interest spread payments for the three months ended December 31, 2011. For the year ended September 30, 2012, after taking into account the waiver by GC Advisors, the incentive fee was $6.2 million, rather than $6.8 million. The incentive fee for the years ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 was $0.3 million and $0.1 million, respectively.

Golub Capital Incorporated pays for certain expenses incurred by us. These expenses are subsequently reimbursed in cash. Total expenses reimbursed by us to Golub Capital Incorporated for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010 were $0.5 million, $0.3 million and $0.6 million, respectively. Of these amounts, during the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, zero, zero and $0.2 million were reimbursed via a members’ equity contribution, respectively.

As of September 30, 2012 and 2011, included in accounts payable and accrued expenses were $40,000 and $0.1 million, respectively, for accrued expenses paid on behalf of us by Golub Capital Incorporated.

Net Realized and Unrealized Gains and Losses

The following table summarizes our net realized and unrealized gains (losses) for the periods presented:

		For the years ended September 30,												Variances
		2012				2011				2010				2012 vs. 2011				2011 vs. 2010
		(In thousands)
Net realized (loss) gain on investments		$	(5,467	)		$	1,997			$	(40	)		$	(7,464	)		$	2,037
Net realized gain on TRS			3,854				40				—				3,814				40
Net realized (loss) on financial futures contracts			(1,759	)			—				—				(1,759	)			—
Net realized (loss) gain			(3,372	)			2,037				(40	)			(5,409	)			2,077
Unrealized (depreciation) on investments			(10,362	)			(8,748	)			(8,150	)			(1,614	)			(598	)
Unrealized appreciation on investments			15,632				7,220				11,071				8,412				(3,851	)
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on TRS			1,845				(1,845	)			—				3,690				(1,845	)
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on financial futures contracts			141				(141	)			—				282				(141	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and derivative instruments		$	7,256			$	(3,514	)		$	2,921			$	10,770			$	(6,435	)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

For the year ended September 30, 2012, we had $15.6 million in unrealized appreciation on 70 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $10.4 million in unrealized depreciation on 74 portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2012 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. We also had $5.5 million in realized losses on investments during the year ended September 30, 2012 primarily as a result of the sale of two non-accrual investments.

For the year ended September 30, 2011, we had $8.7 million in unrealized depreciation on 76 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $7.2 million in unrealized appreciation on 62 portfolio company investments. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2011 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation.

For the year ended September 30, 2010, we had $11.1 million in unrealized appreciation on 77 portfolio company investments, which was partially offset by $8.2 million in unrealized depreciation on 34 portfolio company investments. Unrealized appreciation during the year ended September 30, 2010 resulted from an increase in fair value primarily due to the rise in market prices and a reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation. Unrealized depreciation primarily resulted from the amortization of discounts and negative credit related adjustments which caused a reduction in fair value.

Termination of the Total Return Swap

On April 11, 2012, we terminated the TRS that we had entered into with Citibank.

The purpose of entering into the TRS was to gain economic exposure to a portfolio of broadly syndicated loans. Generally, under the terms of a total return swap, one party agrees to make periodic payments to another party based on the change in the market value of the assets referenced by the total return swap, which may include a specified security, basket of securities or securities indices during the specified period, in return for periodic payments based on a fixed or variable interest rate.

For the years ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the change in the fair value of the TRS was $1.8 million and $(1.8) million, respectively. Realized gains on the TRS for the year ended September 30, 2012 were $3.9 million, which consisted of spread interest income of $2.7 million and a realized gain of $1.2 million on the sale of the referenced loans. Realized gains on the TRS for the year ended September 30, 2011 were $40,000, which consisted of spread interest income of $44,000 and a realized loss of $(4,000) on the sale of the referenced loans. As of September 30, 2011, the fair value of the TRS was $(1.8) million comprised of spread interest income of $0.6 million and an unrealized loss on the referenced loans of $(2.4) million.

Cash collateral of $19.9 million that had secured the obligations to Citibank under the TRS was returned to us and was used to fund new middle-market debt and equity investments.

Ten-Year U.S. Treasury Futures Contracts

In September of 2012, we sold our remaining ten-year U.S. Treasury futures contracts. We had entered into the futures contracts to mitigate our exposure to adverse fluctuation in interest rates related to our SBA debentures. The cash collateral underlying the futures contracts was returned to us.

Based on the daily fluctuation of the fair value of the futures contracts, we recorded an unrealized gain or loss equal to the daily fluctuation in fair value. Upon maturity or settlement of the futures contracts, we realized a gain or loss based on the difference of the fair value of the futures contracts at inception and the fair value of the futures contracts at settlement or maturity.

For the years ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the realized loss on settlement of futures contracts was $(1.8) million and zero, respectively, and the change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) related to the futures contracts was $0.1 million and $(0.1) million, respectively.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Liquidity and Capital Resources

For the year ended September 30, 2012, we experienced a net decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $32.5 million. During the period we used $158.3 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $395.6 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $191.5 million, return of cash collateral on deposit with custodian of $21.2 million and net investment income of $27.9 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $13.6 million was driven by the change in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $139.4 million, primarily due to net proceeds from the follow-on offering of $57.2 million and borrowings on debt of $178.3 million, partially offset by repayments of debt of $63.7 million and distributions paid of $23.9 million.

For the year ended September 30, 2011, we experienced a net decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $14.9 million. During the period we used $118.1 million in operating activities, primarily as a result of fundings of portfolio investments of $326.3 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $217.9 million and net investment income of $22.8 million. During the same period, cash provided by investment activities of $8.4 million was driven by the change in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash provided by financing activities was $94.9 million, primarily due to net proceeds from the follow-on offering of $59.4 million and borrowings on debt of $63.7 million, partially offset by distributions paid of $23.9 million.

For the year ended September 30, 2010, we experienced a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $61.2 million. During the period, net cash provided by operating activities was $65.9 million, primarily as a result of principal payments and sales of portfolio investments of $181.9 million and net investment income of $23.4 million, partially offset by fundings of investments of $144.1 million. During the same period, cash used in investment activities of $1.2 million was driven by the change in restricted cash and cash equivalents. Lastly, cash used in financing activities was primarily a result of repayments of debt of $315.3 million offset by borrowing on debt of $174.0 million and proceeds from our initial public offering, net of underwriting costs of $119.0 million.

As of September 30, 2012 and 2011, we had cash and cash equivalents of $13.9 million and $46.4 million, respectively. In addition, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents of $37.0 million and $23.4 million as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Cash and cash equivalents are available to fund new investments, pay operating expenses and pay distributions. As of September 30, 2012, $14.7 million of our restricted cash and cash equivalents could be used to fund new investments that meet the investment guidelines established in the Debt Securitization, which are described in further detail in Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements, and for the payment of interest expense on the notes issued in the Debt Securitization. $6.9 million of such restricted cash and cash equivalents was used to fund investments that meet the guidelines under the Credit Facility as well as for the payment of interest expense and revolving debt of the Credit Facility. The remaining $15.4 million of restricted cash and cash equivalents can be used to fund new investments that meet the regulatory and investment guidelines established by the SBA for our SBIC, which are described in further detail in Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements, and for interest expense and fees on our outstanding SBA debentures.

As of September 30, 2012 and September 30, 2011, we had outstanding commitments to fund investments totaling $56.5 million and $49.4 million, respectively. These amounts may or may not be funded to the borrowing party now or in the future. The unfunded commitments relate to loans with various maturity dates, but the entire amount was eligible for funding to the borrowers as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, subject to the terms of each loan’s respective credit agreement.

As of September 30, 2012 and 2011, subject to leverage and borrowing base restrictions, we had approximately $20.2 million and $72.6 million, respectively, available for additional borrowings on the Credit Facility.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Under present SBIC regulations, the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures that may be issued by multiple licensees under common management is $225.0 million and the maximum amount that a single SBIC licensee may issue is $150.0 million. An affiliate of GC Advisors manages another SBIC. As of September 30, 2012, the affiliated SBIC licensee had $41.6 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding, while GC SBIC IV, L.P. had $123.5 million of outstanding SBA-guaranteed debentures, leaving incremental borrowing capacity of $26.5 million for GC SBIC IV L.P. to reach its cap of $150 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures under present SBIC regulations. Unless specifically approved by the SBA, the other licensee was prohibited by the SBA from making certain new investments when GC SBIC IV, L.P. received its license on August 24, 2010. The affiliated SBIC licensee is limited to only making add-on investments in existing portfolio companies.

On February 2, 2012, we received a “Green Light” letter from the SBA allowing us to proceed with an application for a second SBIC license and we submitted such an application to the SBA on April 19, 2012. On May 18, 2012, we received an “Acceptance Letter” from the SBA notifying us that the application had been accepted by the SBA for further processing. The application process is anticipated to take six to twelve months. If approved, the additional license will provide us with an incremental source of attractive long-term capital.

In accordance with the 1940 Act, with certain limited exceptions, we are only allowed to borrow amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, is at least 200% after such borrowing. On September 13, 2011, we received exemptive relief from the SEC allowing us to modify the asset coverage requirement to exclude the SBA debentures from this calculation. As such, our ratio of total consolidated assets to outstanding indebtedness may be less than 200%. This provides us with increased investment flexibility but also increases our risks related to leverage. As of September 30, 2012, our asset coverage for borrowed amounts was 263.2% (excluding the SBA debentures).

On August 6, 2012, we announced an At the Market, or ATM, program to sell up to $50 million of shares of our common stock over a one-year time period. As of November 27, 2012, no shares had been sold through our ATM program.

On October 16, 2012, we priced a public offering of 2,600,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $15.58 per share, raising approximately $40.5 million in gross proceeds. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC and UBS Securities LLC acted as joint book-running managers for the offering. On October 19, 2012, the transaction closed, the shares were issued, and proceeds, net of offering costs but before expenses, of $39.4 million were received. On November 14, 2012, we sold an additional 294,120 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $15.58 per share pursuant to the underwriters’ partial exercise of the over-allotment option.

We expect to have very strong originations and net funds growth for the quarter ended December 31, 2012 due to an increase in M&A and refinancing activity that is primarily being driven by potential tax increases that may go into effect on January 1, 2013. Due to the push to close deals before anticipated tax increases on January 1, 2013, we anticipate new originations will decline considerably for the quarter ended March 31, 2013. We anticipate the majority of new investments made during the quarter ended December 31, 2012 will be in one stop and senior secured investments.

Although we expect to fund the growth of our investment portfolio through the net proceeds from future securities offerings and through our dividend reinvestment plan as well as future borrowings, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, we cannot assure you that our efforts to raise capital will be successful. In addition to capital not being available, it also may not be available on favorable terms.

We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents and available borrowings as of September 30, 2012 will be sufficient to fund our anticipated requirements through at least September 30, 2013.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Portfolio Composition, Investment Activity and Yield

As of September 30, 2012 and 2011, we had investments in 121 and 103 portfolio companies, respectively, with a total value of $672.9 million and $459.8 million, respectively. The following table shows the asset mix of our new origination commitments for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010:

		Years ended September 30,
		2012								2011								2010
		(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments				(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments				(In thousands)				Percentage of Commitments
Senior secured		$	175,089				40.9	%		$	94,442				26.0	%		$	94,932				59.9	%
One stop			171,060				39.9				108,374				29.8				40,862				25.8
Second lien			32,636				7.6				50,204				13.8				5,595				3.5
Subordinated debt			37,490				8.8				104,065				28.6				14,336				9.1
Equity securities			11,931				2.8				6,783				1.8				2,636				1.7
Total new investment commitments		$	428,206				100.0	%		$	363,868				100.0	%		$	158,361				100.0	%

The following table summarizes portfolio composition and investment activity as of and for the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010:

		As of and for the years ended September 30,
		2012				2011				2010
		(in thousands)
Investments, at fair value		$	672,910			$	459,827			$	344,869
Number of portfolio investments (at period end)			121				103				94
New investment fundings		$	395,556			$	326,260			$	144,098
Principal payments and sales of portfolio investments		$	191,509			$	217,884			$	181,850

The following table shows the par, amortized cost and fair value of our portfolio of investments, excluding derivative instruments, by asset class:

		As of September 30, 2012(1)												As of September 30, 2011(1)
		Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value				Par				Amortized Cost				Fair Value
		(In thousands)
Senior secured:
Performing		$	274,846			$	270,209			$	272,461			$	203,647			$	201,018			$	200,940
Non-accrual(2)			5,733				5,527				1,528				9,078				8,711				2,891
One stop:
Performing			267,393				262,876				265,705				178,854				176,393				177,880
Non-accrual(2)			—				—				—				—				—				—
Second lien(3):
Performing			44,267				42,775				44,108				21,922				21,531				21,922
Non-accrual(2)			589				573				259				—				—				—
Subordinated debt:
Performing			65,989				65,005				65,989				46,804				45,888				46,804
Non-accrual(2)			2,870				2,810				1,435				—				—				—
Equity			N/A				20,066				21,425				N/A				9,420				9,390
Total		$	661,687			$	669,841			$	672,910			$	460,305			$	462,961			$	459,827

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following table shows the weighted average rate, spread over LIBOR of floating rate, fixed rate and fees of investments originated and the weighted average rate of sales and payoffs of portfolio companies during the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010:

		For the years ended September 30,
		2012				2011				2010
Weighted average rate of new investment fundings(1)(2)			8.9	%			8.5	%			7.8	%
Weighted average spread over LIBOR of new floating rate investment fundings(1)(2)			7.0	%			6.4	%			6.2	%
Weighted average rate of new fixed rate investment fundings			13.6	%			13.6	%			14.0	%
Weighted average fees of new investment fundings			2.0	%			1.6	%			1.7	%
Weighted average rate of sales and payoffs of portfolio companies			7.6	%			6.3	%			6.5	%

For the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the weighted average interest income (which excludes income resulting from amortization of fees and discounts) yield on the fair value of income producing loans in our portfolio was 9.3%, 8.6% and 8.4%, respectively. As of September 30, 2012, 84.4% and 83.7% of our debt portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limit the minimum applicable interest rates on such loans. As of September 30, 2011, 78.8% and 79.0% of our portfolio at fair value and at cost, respectively, had interest rate floors that limited minimum interest rates on such loans.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

A summary of our significant contractual payment obligations as of September 30, 2012 is as follows:

		Payments Due by Period (In millions)
		Total				Less Than 1 Year				1 – 3 Years				3 – 5 Years(1)				More Than 5 Years(1)
Debt Securitization		$	174.0			$	—			$	—			$	—			$	174.0
SBA debentures			123.5				—				—				—				123.5
Credit Facility			32.3				—				—				32.3				—
Unfunded commitments(2)			56.5				56.5				—				—				—
Total contractual obligations		$	386.3			$	56.5			$	—			$	32.3			$	297.5

We may become a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of our business to meet the financial needs of our portfolio companies. These instruments may include commitments to extend credit and involve, to varying degrees, elements of liquidity and credit risk in excess of the amount recognized in the balance sheet. As of September 30, 2012 and 2011, we had outstanding commitments to fund investments totaling $56.5 million and $49.4 million, respectively.

We have certain contracts under which we have material future commitments. We have entered into the Investment Advisory Agreement with GC Advisors in accordance with the 1940 Act. The Investment Advisory Agreement became effective upon the pricing of our initial public offering, was amended and restated on July 16, 2010 in order to offset fees payable in connection with the Debt Securitization against the base management fee and was re-approved by our board of directors on February 2, 2012. Under the Investment Advisory Agreement, GC Advisors provides us with investment advisory and management services. For these services, we pay (1) a management fee equal to a percentage of the average adjusted value of our gross assets and (2) an incentive fee based on our performance. To the extent that GC Advisors or any of its affiliates provides investment advisory, collateral management or other similar services to a subsidiary of ours, we intend to reduce the base management fee by an amount equal to the product of (1) the total fees paid to GC Advisors by such subsidiary for such services and (2) the percentage of such subsidiary’s total equity that is owned, directly or indirectly, by us.

We also entered into the Administration Agreement with GC Service as our administrator on April 14, 2010. Under the Administration Agreement, which was re-approved by our board of directors on February 2, 2012, GC Service furnishes us with office facilities and equipment, provides us clerical, bookkeeping and record keeping services at such facilities and provides us with other administrative services necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations. We reimburse GC Service for the allocable portion (subject to the review and approval of our board of directors) of overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including rent, the fees and expenses associated with performing compliance functions and our allocable portion of the cost of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer and their respective staffs. GC Service also provides on our behalf significant managerial assistance to those portfolio companies to which we are required to offer to provide such assistance.

If any of the contractual obligations discussed above are terminated, our costs under any new agreements that we enter into may increase. In addition, we would likely incur significant time and expense in locating alternative parties to provide the services we receive under our Investment Advisory Agreement and our Administration Agreement. Any new investment advisory agreement would also be subject to approval by our stockholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Distributions

In order to qualify as a RIC and to avoid corporate-level U.S. federal income tax on the income we distribute to our stockholders, we are required under the Code to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our net stockholders on an annual basis. Additionally, we must meet the annual distribution requirements of the U.S. federal excise tax rules. We intend to make quarterly distributions to our stockholders as determined by our board of directors.

We may not be able to achieve operating results that will allow us to make distributions at a specific level or to increase the amount of our distributions from time to time. In addition, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions due to the asset coverage requirements applicable to us as a business development company under the 1940 Act. If we do not distribute a certain percentage of our income annually, we will suffer adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences, including the possible loss of our qualification as a RIC. We cannot assure stockholders that they will receive any distributions.

To the extent our taxable earnings fall below the total amount of our distributions for that fiscal year, a portion of those distributions may be deemed a return of capital to our stockholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Thus, the source of a distribution to our stockholders may be the original capital invested by the stockholder rather than our income or gains. Stockholders should read any written disclosure accompanying a dividend payment carefully and should not assume that the source of any distribution is our ordinary income or gains. For the year ended September 30, 2012, $1,072, or $0.04 per share, of our distributions to stockholders represented a return of capital.

We have adopted an “opt out” dividend reinvestment plan for our common stockholders. As a result, if we declare a distribution, then our stockholders’ cash distributions will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock unless a stockholder specifically “opts out” of our dividend reinvestment plan. If a stockholder opts out, that stockholder will receive cash distributions. Although distributions paid in the form of additional shares of our common stock will generally be subject to U.S. federal, state and local taxes in the same manner as cash distributions, stockholders participating in our dividend reinvestment plan will not receive any corresponding cash distributions with which to pay any such applicable taxes.

Related Party Transactions

We have entered into a number of business relationships with affiliated or related parties, including the following:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GC Advisors also sponsors or manages, and may in the future sponsor or manage, other investment funds, accounts or investment vehicles, together referred to as accounts, that have investment mandates that are similar, in whole and in part, with ours. GC Advisors and its affiliates may determine that an investment is appropriate for us and for one or more of those other accounts. In such event, depending on the availability of such investment and other appropriate factors, and pursuant to GC Advisors’ allocation policy, GC Advisors or its affiliates may determine that we should invest side-by-side with one or more other accounts. We do not intend to make any investments if they are not permitted by applicable law and interpretive positions of the SEC and its staff, or if they are inconsistent with GC Advisors’ allocation procedures.

In addition, we have adopted a formal code of ethics that governs the conduct of our and GC Advisors’ officers, directors and employees. Our officers and directors also remain subject to the duties imposed by both the 1940 Act and the DGCL.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses during the periods reported. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates. We have identified the following items as critical accounting policies.

Valuation of Portfolio Investments

We value investments for which market quotations are readily available at their market quotations. However, a readily available market value is not expected to exist for many of the investments in our portfolio, and we value these portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors under our valuation policy and process. We may seek pricing information with respect to certain of our investments from pricing services or brokers or dealers in order to value such investments. We also employ independent third party valuation firms for all of our investments for which there is not a readily available market value.

Valuation methods may include comparisons of the portfolio companies to peer companies that are public, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings, discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we will consider the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate the private equity valuation. Due to the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of investments that do not have a readily available market value, the fair value of the investments may differ significantly from the values that would have been used had a readily available market value existed for such investments and may differ materially from values that may ultimately be received or settled.

Our board of directors is ultimately and solely responsible for determining, in good faith, the fair value of investments that are not publicly traded, whose market prices are not readily available on a quarterly basis or any other situation where portfolio investments require a fair value determination.

With respect to investments for which market quotations are not readily available, our board of directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter, as described below:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The factors that are taken into account in fair value pricing investments include: available current market data, including relevant and applicable market trading and transaction comparables; applicable market yields and multiples; security covenants; call protection provisions; information rights; the nature and realizable value of any collateral; the portfolio company’s ability to make payments, its earnings and discounted cash flows and the markets in which it does business; comparisons of financial ratios of peer companies that are public; comparable merger and acquisition transactions; and the principal market and enterprise values.

Determination of fair values involves subjective judgments and estimates. Under current auditing standards, the notes to our consolidated financial statements refer to the uncertainty with respect to the possible effect of such valuations, and any change in such valuations, on our consolidated financial statements.

We follow Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, as amended, for measuring fair value. Fair value is the price that would be received in the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters, or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or inputs are not available, valuation models are applied. These valuation models involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the assets or liabilities or market and the assets’ or liabilities’ complexity. Our fair value analysis includes an analysis of the value of any unfunded loan commitments. Assets and liabilities are categorized for disclosure purposes based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their value. The valuation hierarchical levels are based upon the transparency of the inputs to the valuation of the asset or liability as of the measurement date. The three levels are defined as follows:

Level 1:  Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date.

Level 2:  Inputs include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets and inputs that are observable for the assets or liabilities, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

Level 3:  Inputs include significant unobservable inputs for the assets or liabilities and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the assets or liabilities. The inputs into the determination of fair value are based upon the best information available and may require significant management judgment or estimation.

In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, an asset’s or a liability’s categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and we consider factors specific to the asset or liability. We assess the levels of investments at each measurement date, and transfers between levels are recognized on the actual date of the event or change in circumstances that caused the transfers. There were no transfers among Level 1, 2 and 3 of the fair value hierarchy for investments during the years ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010. The following section describes the valuation techniques used by us to measure different assets and liabilities at fair value and includes the level within the fair value hierarchy in which the assets and liabilities are categorized.

Level 1 assets and liabilities are valued using quoted market prices. Level 2 assets and liabilities are valued using market consensus prices that are corroborated by observable market data and quoted market prices for

TABLE OF CONTENTS

similar assets and liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities are valued at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, based on input of management, the audit committee and independent valuation firms that have been engaged at the direction of our board of directors to assist in the valuation of each portfolio investment without a readily available market quotation at least once during a trailing twelve-month period under a valuation policy and a consistently applied valuation process. This valuation process is conducted at the end of each fiscal quarter, with approximately 25% (based on fair value) of our valuation of debt and equity securities without readily available market quotations subject to review by an independent valuation firm. All assets and liabilities as of September 30, 2012 and 2011 were valued using Level 3 inputs of the fair value hierarchy.

When valuing Level 3 debt and equity investments, we may take into account the following factors, where relevant, in determining the fair value of the investments: the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable valuable of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flows, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparisons to publicly traded securities, and changes in the interest rate environment and the credit markets generally that may affect the price at which similar investments may be made and other relevant factors. In addition, for certain debt and equity investments, we may base our valuation on indicative bid and ask prices provided by an independent third party pricing service. Bid prices reflect the highest price that we and others may be willing to pay. Ask prices represent the lowest price that we and others may be willing to accept for an investment. We generally uses the midpoint of the bid/ask range as our best estimate of fair value of such investment.

Fair value of our debt is estimated by discounting remaining payments using applicable market rates or market quotes for similar instruments at the measurement date, if available.

Due to the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of Level 3 assets and liabilities that do not have a readily available market value, the fair value of the assets and liabilities may differ significantly from the values that would have been used had a market existed for such assets and liabilities and may differ materially from the values that may ultimately be received or settled. Further, such assets and liabilities are generally subject to legal and other restrictions or otherwise are less liquid than publicly traded instruments. If we were required to liquidate a portfolio investment in a forced or liquidation sale, we may realize significantly less than the value at which such investment had previously been recorded.

Our investments, borrowings and derivatives are subject to market risk. Market risk is the potential for changes in the value due to market changes. Market risk is directly impacted by the volatility and liquidity in the markets in which the investments, borrowings and derivatives are traded.

Revenue Recognition:

Our revenue recognition policies are as follows:

Investments and Related Investment Income:  Our board of directors determines the fair value of our portfolio of investments. Interest income is accrued based upon the outstanding principal amount and contractual interest terms of debt investments. Premiums, discounts, and origination fees are amortized or accreted into interest income over the life of the respective debt investment. For investments with contractual PIK interest, which represents contractual interest accrued and added to the principal balance that generally becomes due at maturity, we do not accrue PIK interest if the portfolio company valuation indicates that the PIK is not likely to be collectible. Dividend income on preferred equity securities is recorded as dividend income on an accrual basis to the extent that such amounts are payable by the portfolio company and are expected to be collected. Dividend income on common equity securities is recorded on the record date for private portfolio companies or on the ex-dividend date for publicly traded portfolio companies.

We account for investment transactions on a trade-date basis. Realized gains or losses on investments are measured by the difference between the net proceeds from the disposition and the cost basis of investment, without regard to unrealized gains or losses previously recognized. We report changes in fair value of investments from the prior period that are measured at fair value as a component of the net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments in our consolidated statement of operations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

We record the fair value of the futures contracts based on the unrealized gain or loss of the reference securities of the futures contracts. Upon maturity or settlement of the futures contracts, we will realize a gain or loss based on the difference of the fair value of the futures contracts at inception and the fair value of the futures contracts at settlement or expiration. This gain or loss would be included on the consolidated statements of operations as net realized gain (loss) on derivative instruments.

We recorded the fair value of our investment in the TRS based on the unrealized gain or loss of the reference securities of the TRS. For GAAP purposes, realized gains and losses on the TRS were composed of any gains or losses on the referenced portfolio of loans as well as the net interest received or owed at the time of the quarterly settlement. For GAAP purposes, unrealized gains and losses on the TRS were composed of the net interest income earned or interest expense owed during the period that was not previously settled as well as the change in fair value of the referenced portfolio of loans.

Non-accrual:  Loans may be left on accrual status during the period we are pursuing repayment of the loan. Management reviews all loans that become past due 90 days or more on principal and interest or when there is reasonable doubt that principal or interest will not be collected for possible placement on non-accrual status. We generally reverse accrued interest when a loan is placed on non-accrual. Interest payments received on non-accrual loans may be recognized as income or applied to principal depending upon management’s judgment. We restore non-accrual loans to accrual status when past due principal and interest is paid and, in our management’s judgment, are likely to remain current. The total fair value of our non-accrual loans was $3.2 million and $2.9 million as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Income taxes:

We have elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code and operate in a manner so as to qualify for the tax treatment applicable to RICs. In order to qualify as a RIC, we are required to meet certain source of income and asset diversification requirements and timely distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of investment company taxable income, as defined by the Code, for each year. We have made and intend to continue to make the requisite distributions to our stockholders, which will generally relieve us from U.S. federal income taxes.

Depending on the level of taxable income earned in a tax year, we may choose to retain taxable income in excess of current year distributions into the next tax year in an amount less than what would trigger payments of federal income tax under Subchapter M of the Code. We would then pay a 4% excise tax on such income, as required. To the extent that we determine that our estimated current year annual taxable income may exceed estimated current year distributions, we accrue excise tax, if any, on estimated excess taxable income as taxable income is earned.

Because federal income tax regulations differ from GAAP, distributions in accordance with tax regulations may differ from net investment income and realized gains recognized for financial reporting purposes. Differences may be permanent or temporary. Permanent differences are reclassified within capital accounts in the financial statements to reflect their tax character. Temporary differences arise when certain items of income, expense, gain or loss are recognized at some time in the future. Differences in classification may also result from the treatment of short-term gains as ordinary income for tax purposes.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

We are subject to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates. During the period covered by our predecessor’s financial statements, many of the loans in our portfolio had floating interest rates, and we expect that our loans in the future may also have floating interest rates. These loans are usually based on a floating LIBOR and typically have interest rate re-set provisions that adjust applicable interest rates under such loans to current market rates on a quarterly basis. In addition, the Class A Notes issued as a part of the Debt Securitization have a floating interest rate provision based on 3-month LIBOR that resets quarterly and the Credit Facility has a floating interest rate provision based on 1-month LIBOR that resets daily, and we expect that other credit facilities into which we enter in the future may have floating interest rate provisions.

Assuming that the consolidated statement of financial condition as of September 30, 2012 were to remain constant and that we took no actions to alter our existing interest rate sensitivity, the following table shows the annualized impact of hypothetical base rate changes in interest rates.

Change in interest rates		Increase (decrease) in interest income				Increase (decrease) in interest expense				Net increase (decrease) in investment income
		(in thousands)
Down 25 basis points		$	(92	)		$	(572	)		$	480
Up 100 basis points			585				2,288				(1,703	)
Up 200 basis points			5,567				4,576				991
Up 300 basis points			11,347				6,864				4,483

Although we believe that this analysis is indicative of our existing sensitivity to interest rate changes, it does not adjust for changes in the credit market, credit quality, the size and composition of the assets in our portfolio and other business developments, including borrowing under the Debt Securitization or other borrowings, that could affect net increase in net assets resulting from operations, or net income. Accordingly, we can offer no assurances that actual results would not differ materially from the analysis above.

We may in the future hedge against interest rate fluctuations by using standard hedging instruments such as futures, options and forward contracts to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act and applicable commodities laws. While hedging activities may insulate us against adverse changes in interest rates, they may also limit our ability to participate in the benefits of lower interest rates with respect to the investments in our portfolio with fixed interest rates.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

Management's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting			78
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm			79
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition as of September 30, 2012 and 2011			81
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010			82
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Assets for the Years Ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010			83
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended September 30, 2012, 2011 and 2010			85
Consolidated Schedules of Investments as of September 30, 2012 and 2011			86
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements			106

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

The management of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (“GBDC,” and collectively with its subsidiaries, the “Company,” “we,” “us,” “our” and “Golub Capital BDC”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Our internal control system is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management and board of directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements.

Golub Capital BDC’s internal control over financial reporting includes policies and procedures that pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect transactions recorded necessary to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Our policies and procedures also provide reasonable assurance that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and the directors of Golub Capital BDC, and provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on our financial statements.

All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness as to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Management assessed the effectiveness of Golub Capital BDC’s internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2012. In making this assessment, we used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control — Integrated Framework. Based on the assessment, management believes that, as of September 30, 2012, our internal control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria.

Golub Capital BDC’s independent registered public accounting firm that audited the financial statements has issued an audit report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2012. This report appears on page 79.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and Subsidiaries

We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of financial condition, including the consolidated schedules of investments, of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in net assets and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended September 30, 2012. We also have audited Golub Capital BDC, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Golub Capital BDC, Inc.'s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and an opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our procedures included confirmation of investments owned as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, by correspondence with the custodian, loan agent or borrower. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (a) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (b) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (c) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2012, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, Golub Capital BDC, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

As explained in Note 5, the consolidated financial statements include investments valued at approximately $672,910,000 (179.4% of net assets) and approximately $459,827,000 (145.2% of net assets) as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, whose fair values have been estimated by management in the absence of readily ascertainable fair values.

/s/ McGladrey LLP

Chicago, Illinois
November 29, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(In thousands, except share and per share data)

		September 30, 2012				September 30, 2011
Assets
Investments, at fair value (cost of $669,841 and $462,961, respectively)		$	672,910			$	459,827
Cash and cash equivalents			13,891				46,350
Restricted cash and cash equivalents			37,036				23,416
Interest receivable			3,906				3,063
Cash collateral on deposit with custodian			—				21,162
Deferred financing costs			5,898				5,345
Other assets			455				481
Total Assets		$	734,096			$	559,644
Liabilities
Debt		$	352,300			$	237,683
Interest payable			1,391				1,066
Management and incentive fees payable			4,203				1,608
Unrealized depreciation on derivative instruments			—				1,986
Accounts payable and accrued expenses			1,073				752
Total Liabilities			358,967				243,095
Net Assets
Preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share, 1,000,000 shares authorized, zero shares issued and outstanding as of September 30, 2012 and 2011			—				—
Common stock, par value $0.001 per share, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 25,688,101 and 21,733,903 shares issued and outstanding as of September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively			26				22
Paid in capital in excess of par			375,563				318,302
Capital distributions in excess of net investment income			347				(398	)
Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments and derivative instruments			5,737				(1,519	)
Net realized (loss) gain on investments and derivative instruments, net of dividends and distributions			(6,544	)			142
Total Net Assets			375,129				316,549
Total Liabilities and Total Net Assets		$	734,096			$	559,644
Number of common shares outstanding			25,688,101				21,733,903
Net asset value per common share		$	14.60			$	14.56

 
 
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(In thousands, except share and per share data)

		Years ended September 30,
		2012				2011				2010
Investment income
Interest income		$	57,482			$	39,150			$	33,150
Dividend income			377				—				—
Total investment income			57,859				39,150				33,150
Expenses
Interest and other debt financing expenses			10,781				6,550				3,525
Base management fee			8,495				5,789				3,328
Incentive fee			6,228				348				55
Professional fees relating to registration statement			—				—				788
Professional fees			2,231				2,204				1,050
Administrative service fee			1,713				837				583
General and administrative expenses			535				606				454
Total expenses			29,983				16,334				9,783
Net investment income			27,876				22,816				23,367
Net gain (loss) on investments
Net realized (loss) gain on investments			(5,467	)			1,997				(40	)
Net realized gain on derivative instruments			2,095				40				—
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments			5,270				(1,528	)			2,921
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on derivative instruments			1,986				(1,986	)			—
Net gain (loss) on investments			3,884				(1,477	)			2,881
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations		$	31,760			$	21,339			$	26,248
Per Common Share Data
Basic and diluted earnings per common share(1)		$	1.31			$	1.09				N/A
Dividends and distributions declared per common share(1)		$	1.28			$	1.27				N/A
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding(1)			24,271,251				19,631,797				N/A

 
 
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Golub Capital BDC, Inc. and Subsidiaries
  
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Assets
(In thousands, except share data)

						Common Stock								Paid in Capital in Excess of Par				Capital Distributions in Excess of Net Investment Income				Net Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation) on Investments and Derivative Instruments				Net Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments and Derivative Instruments				Total Net Assets
		Members' Equity				Shares				Par Amount
Balance at September 30, 2009		$	92,752				—			$	—			$	—			$	—			$	—			$	—			$	92,752
Members' equity contributions			47,209				—				—				—				—				—				—				47,209
Members' equity distributions			(13,530	)			—				—				—				—				—				—				(13,530	)
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations for period October 1, 2009 to April 13, 2010			15,672				—				—				—				—				—				—				15,672
Golub Capital BDC Conversion(1)			(142,103	)			8,984,863				9				142,094				—				—				—				—
Issuance of common stock, net of offering and underwriting costs(2)			—				8,727,581				9				117,596				—				—				—				117,605
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations for period April 14, 2010 to June 30, 2010			—				—				—				—				8,620				1,995				(40	)			10,575
Dividends and distributions			—				—				—				—				(9,742	)			—				—				(9,742	)
Tax reclassification of stockholders' equity in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles			—				—				—				(1,122	)			1,122				—				—				—
Balance at September 30, 2010			—				17,712,444				18				258,568				—				1,995				(40	)			260,541
Issuance of common stock, net of offering and underwriting costs(3)							3,953,257				4				58,606				—				—				—				58,610
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations			—				—				—				—				22,816				(3,514	)			2,037				21,339
Distributions to stockholders:
Stock issued in connection with dividend reinvestment plan			—				68,202				—				1,128				—				—				—				1,128
Dividends and distributions			—				—				—				—				(23,254	)			—				(1,815	)			(25,069	)
Tax reclassification of stockholders' equity in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles			—				—				—				—				40				—				(40	)			—
Balance at September 30, 2011							21,733,903				22				318,302				(398	)			(1,519	)			142				316,549
Issuance of common stock, net of offering and underwriting costs(4)							3,825,000				4				56,463				—				—				—				56,467
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations			—				—				—				—				27,876				7,256				(3,372	)			31,760
Distributions to stockholders:
Stock issued in connection with dividend reinvestment plan			—				129,198				—				1,909				—				—				—				1,909
Dividends and distributions			—				—				—				—				(31,556	)			—				—				(31,556	)
Tax reclassification of stockholders' equity in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles			—				—				—				(1,111	)			4,425				—				(3,314	)			—
Balance at September 30, 2012		$	—				25,688,101			$	26			$	375,563			$	347			$	5,737			$	(6,544	)		$	375,129