Seven months into the U.S.–Iran conflict, few historical analogues have held. The trajectory of oil prices has been consistent with previous geopolitical shocks, but the market response elsewhere has looked strikingly different. U.S. Treasury yields have moved notably higher, for example, while credit spreads have remained remarkably resilient.

AI-related borrowers have accounted for nearly a quarter of nonfinancial U.S. dollar (USD) supply year-to-date, yet spreads for non-AI issuers have not widened meaningfully. Instead, hyperscaler spreads have widened, suggesting the market is absorbing the AI supply shock at its source.

A popular narrative for the rise in bond yields over the past few months is that the debt-funded AI capital expenditure cycle is crowding out the Treasury market. The crowding-out argument can appear compelling: AI companies are expected to continue to issue unprecedented amounts of debt at a time when Treasury supply remains elevated. Because both ultimately draw from the same pool of investor capital, yields must rise to clear the market.

Is the AI infrastructure buildout one big trade in credit? So far, the market seems to think so. Spread dispersion – differences in borrowing costs among issuers – across the financing chain remains limited despite sharp differences in underlying risk. This contrasts with equities, where performance has become increasingly differentiated.

For much of the past decade and a half, investors saw little reason to favor bonds over equities. Yields were low and returns were muted, especially in passive strategies. Equities seemed to offer a much clearer path to long-term capital appreciation. For many investors, bonds were, at best, ballast: a dull but generally stable component of a broader portfolio. Then the experience of 2022 had investors questioning even that view, as areas of high quality fixed income generated equity-like losses that eroded much of the prior decade’s real return.

The “K-shaped” divide endures even as it evolves. Higher-income households keep benefiting from equity gains, home price appreciation, and solid earnings, while lower-income households face mounting pressure from elevated costs and tighter credit. But recent data suggest the story is becoming more nuanced.

The backup in global yields since late February has reignited the debate over the potential knock-on effects for corporate borrowers, particularly through higher refinancing costs and weaker debt-servicing capacity.

As the credit cycle ages, defaults are likely to remain front and center. But for investors evaluating private credit alongside public markets, measuring defaults is not as straightforward as it may seem.

BDC bonds have recovered most of their underperformance while equities continue to lag, suggesting investors are demanding a higher risk premium to compensate for uncertainty around portfolio valuations.

The AI capital expenditure cycle remains solidly on track to eclipse the telecom boom of the late 1990s and become the largest investment cycle since the railway buildout of the 19th century in inflation-adjusted terms. T

Just as important, the dollar and U.S. Treasuries have continued to behave like hedges in periods of broader market unrest (driven by geopolitics or other conditions). When risk assets come under pressure, Treasury yields have generally fallen, or the dollar has tended to find support.

Leverage, ratings arbitrage, liquidity transformation, and a growing willingness to embrace complexity and illiquidity are becoming more visible across parts of the financial system.

The relative cheapness of Treasuries versus interest rate swaps mechanically affects how corporate bond spreads are measured, but it appears to have limited influence on how corporate bond spreads actually behave.

The first wave of upgrades came after the AI hyperscalers reported, by and large, strong earnings. But most of the improvement has stemmed from the rest of the non-financials index, with analysts quadrupling their one-year aggregate EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) growth expectations, from 5% at the end of January to more than 20% as of 30 June.

Higher rates, weaker underwriting, and software concentration are exposing vulnerabilities in direct lending and leveraged loans, while high yield bonds appear better positioned.

A widening confidence gap in non-traded investment vehicles is testing private credit valuations, sharpening the case for manager selection and diversification beyond direct lending.

Emerging market (EM) fixed income's risk-adjusted profile has meaningfully improved. Sharpe ratios across EM credit and local rates have rebounded, with EM credit delivering one of the strongest risk-adjusted performances in fixed income over the past two years.

One of the most debated topics in private credit is the size of the investment opportunity – or, in industry parlance, the total addressable market (TAM). But the way TAM is typically framed can be misleading.

The takeaway for both HY and EM corporates is straightforward. Once oil prices are above breakeven, further moves in oil tend to matter less for credit performance.

AI is a transformative technology with both near-term and long-term implications for the economy. For investors, while the debt-funded AI buildout has the potential to become a secular driver of risk premia, we believe any such shift would only play out through a multi-year adjustment and would not override the cyclical forces that affect markets.

Despite the move lower late last week, U.S. Treasury yields are still holding well above recent lows and close to highs not seen in more than a year. By contrast, risk assets are firmly bid: U.S. equities have been routinely touching new historical highs, and credit spreads over Treasuries remain tight.

Since the post-COVID recovery began, U.S. nonfinancial corporations have generally managed capital conservatively. They have kept credit metrics stable and, in many cases, actively improved them. That discipline was not entirely voluntary: The sharp adjustment in funding costs triggered by the Federal Reserve’s 2022–2023 rate hiking cycle raised the bar for incremental borrowing and pushed management teams toward balance sheet restraint.

For shareholders, the upside justifies the gamble. For bondholders, the downside is real and the upside belongs to someone else. That wedge – the classic asset substitution problem – is what credit investors are increasingly pricing, and until the re-leveraging impulse shows signs of reaching a plateau, the divergence across the capital structure is likely here to stay.

Within private credit, attempts to increase liquidity – the ability to buy or sell an asset quickly, in size, and at prices reflecting fundamental values – are welcome developments, in our view. Yet until these efforts address the market’s inherent structural constraints, including a lack of true price discovery, they will only increase the perception of liquidity without truly improving liquidity.

A persistent oil shock implies higher inflation and weaker growth, but risk assets appear unfazed, with equities and credit spread performance diverging from the caution implied by government bonds.

Sentiment toward BDCs – funds that invest in small and midsize private U.S. businesses – has improved since early March. BDC bond spreads have stabilized and outperformed the broader investment grade (IG) index, suggesting credit investors are increasingly comfortable with downside risk.

Despite compositional differences – public equities generally represent larger companies with more scale, liquidity, and financial flexibility than the typically smaller, private-equity-owned issuers that dominate the software loan market – the outcome is the same: Neither market has been able to fully retrace the year-to-date sell-off in a meaningful way.

The Middle East ceasefire sparked a relief rally last week as markets dialed back the risk of a deep, drawn‑out oil supply shock. Stocks have already erased much of the post-conflict drop. Bonds haven’t gotten the memo: Yields are still elevated, keeping a bit of extra term premium on the table.

Across corporate lending markets, some investments are easier to trade and exit than others – differences that deserve particular attention today.

Amid geopolitical uncertainty, dispersion across credit markets – rather than a broad risk-off move – has become the dominant investment signal.

Proposals to engineer secondary trading in private assets, often championed by vocal critics of public market liquidity, have gained renewed momentum. For some, enhanced tradability is viewed as a remedy to growing unease over the absence of transparent, real‑time valuation signals in private portfolios.

Concerns about private credit have intensified in recent months. Investors are grappling with questions about weakening credit quality, stale valuations, looser underwriting, redemption risk in certain types of funds, and the impact of AI‑driven disruption.