The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved down 1.7% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 3%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 7%. The street (6 analysts) rates it none, with a mean price target of $14.
Golub Capital BDC, Inc. GBDC
Outside both standards
An entry written while the outcome is still unknown. It will be scored by what the market does next, and it will never be edited to look cleverer than it was.
In plain words · Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
read at $13.08
Golub Capital BDC, Inc. holds its Markup at $13.08.
- PHPhase · the trend structure carries the Markup label
- INInsiders · no filings inside 60 days, left as found
- POPositioning · no disclosures inside 60 days, left as found
- OPOptions · no verdict drawn today, left as found
- SCScreen · does not pass the values gate
- edge confirmed
- edge broken
- edge forming
Each arm is one independent read. Conviction is not a single call, it is how many edges converge.
The investor read · the season, not the day
| Phase | Markup |
| Quantitative state | The statistical read favours the sellers, held for 77 days |
| Price | $13.08 |
| Valuation | 16.56 trailing · 10.35 forward price to earnings |
| Values screen | FAIL · score 30.0 |
| Beta | N/A |
The opportunity · what the numbers say it is worth
Price history & projections · where it has been, where the models see it going
The valuation journey · where the price sits against fair value and the Street
Green marks levels above today's price, red below; the shaded band is the gap between the price and our fair value.
Reading the gap · Both our model and the analysts see meaningful upside from here.
| Revenue growth | -14.00% |
| Profit margin | 21.45% |
| Debt to equity | 122.48 |
| Analyst consensus | Buy · 6 covering |
Fair value and rating are our own model estimates; target range reflects third-party analyst estimates. Analysis, not advice.
The values screen, explained · five checks, plain English
This company is excluded by both standards. There are two widely recognised ways to check whether a company is suitable for a Muslim investor. It fails on both:
Used by most halal investing apps ✗ DOES NOT PASS
The one Titan applies ✗ DOES NOT PASS
Why it fails. The problem is its prohibited keyword in sector/industry: financial services. Because both standards agree on this, it is a clear exclusion, not a borderline case.
What these two standards are, and how they differ →
- Business activity Prohibited keyword in sector/industry: financial services Fail
- Debt load Interest-bearing debt is of its assets, above the one-third ceiling the screen allows. Fail
- Interest-bearing cash Interest-bearing cash and securities are of assets, above the one-third limit. Fail
- Receivables Money owed to the company is of assets, above the 49% limit. Fail
- Revenue purity of revenue comes from non-compliant sources, over the 5% line. Fail
Every security is read against two recognised standards: our stricter asset-based screen (ratios measured against total assets) and the more widely used market-value standard (measured against market capitalisation). Where they agree we say so plainly; where they part ways — almost always on the debt check — we show both readings and mark it, because that disagreement is the finding, not a fault. We report the score; you and your scholar make the call.
The business, in plain words · what the numbers mean
Middle Market Lender Trips Our Ethical Red Line
Picture a fund that lends to mid-sized US firms the big banks ignore, taking floating rate debt and the odd equity slice in return. Golub Capital BDC does exactly that, yet it fails our ethical screen outright because the entire financial services sector sits on the prohibited list. That single rule ends the conversation before any numbers are weighed.
The figures do little to change the mind. Revenue has fallen 12 percent, return on equity sits at just 5 percent, and the forward multiple of 10.4 times offers thin compensation for thin returns and an unknown moat. Six analysts see fair value around 14 dollars against the current 13 dollar price, but the ethical block removes any interest regardless of that narrow gap.
Credit cycles, rising defaults and squeezed spreads remain live risks for any business development company, and the low return on equity already hints at limited resilience when conditions turn. The screen exists precisely to keep such exposures off the table.
Analysis, not advice.
| Forward P/E | 10.4x reasonably valued |
| Trailing P/E | 16.6x reasonably valued |
| Revenue growth | -14.0% revenue is shrinking |
| Profit margin | 21.5% healthy profit margins |
| Return on equity | 4.5% a modest return on shareholder capital |
| Debt to equity | 1.22 a meaningful debt load worth watching |
| Current ratio | 1.47 adequate liquidity, worth monitoring |
| Market cap | $3.4B |
The risks · The main risks here are ordinary market swings and the chance our fair-value read proves too optimistic.
Plain-English interpretation of our own screen data. Analysis, not advice.
Related securities · others in GBDC's space worth a look
Screened names in the same industry · explore each on its own page.
Where & how to trade · wherever in the world you are
GBDC trades on Nasdaq. As a US-listed security it is accessible through almost any international broker offering US markets. New to this, or investing from outside the US? Our guide to accessing global markets covers brokers, currencies and the practical steps.
The trader read · the latest dated commentary
The dated journal · newest first, never edited
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive risk-adjusted returns. Our composite framework grades it D, carrying a low risk profile. Technically it is sitting below its long-term trend line with momentum reading neutral. Over the past year the shares are down 3%. Our forward projection puts the odds of a 10% gain over the next month near 7%. The street (6 analysts) rates it none, with a mean price target of $14.
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Price has moved down 0.0% since our last review. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive risk-adjusted returns.
The framework reads distribution. Smart money appears to be selling into strength. Institutional holders may be rotating out. Ethical screening: FAIL. This security does not pass our values-based screening criteria. The risk-adjusted return profile shows modest positive risk-adjusted returns.
Each entry above was written on its date, before the outcome. A journal you can prune is not a journal.
What holding actually paid · price plus dividends
| Period | Price then | Price return | Divs per share | $1,000 became | Total return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 month | $12.96 | +2.2% | · | $1,022 | +2.2% |
| 2 months | $12.71 | +4.2% | · | $1,042 | +4.2% |
| 3 months | $11.80 | +12.2% | $0.33 | $1,150 | +15.0% |
| 6 months | $13.45 | -1.6% | $0.72 | $1,038 | +3.8% |
| 1 year | $13.71 | -3.5% | $1.50 | $1,075 | +7.5% |
| 2 years | $13.11 | +1.0% | $2.91 | $1,232 | +23.2% |
| 3 years | $9.82 | +34.8% | $4.67 | $1,824 | +82.4% |
| 5 years | $9.56 | +38.5% | $7.15 | $2,133 | +113.3% |
Historical returns from market close data. Past performance does not guarantee future results.