KREF 2026年第三季度业绩电话会议:随着还款降低杠杆率,流动性上升
KKR Real Estate Finance Trust公布2026年第三季度GAAP净亏损600万美元,每股亏损0.11美元,每股账面价值10.14美元。今年迄今贷款还款额达24亿美元,超过全年预期。季度末流动性增至约8.53亿美元,总杠杆率降至3.1倍。管理层警告高利率和房地产流动性匮乏可能拉长处置周期并增加拨备,独立委员会的战略审查仍在进行中。
核心要点
- KKR Real Estate Finance Trust (KREF) 公布 2026 年第三季度 GAAP 净亏损为 600 万美元,合每股亏损 0.11 美元;截至 9 月 30 日,每股账面价值为 10.14 美元。
- 可分配亏损为 1.52 亿美元,合每股亏损 2.64 美元。扣除已实现亏损和战略审查费用后,可分配收益为 500 万美元,合每股 0.09 美元。
- 今年迄今的贷款还款额达到 24 亿美元,超过管理层 20 亿美元的全年预期。第三季度还款额总计 12 亿美元,其中 2026 年的还款有超过 80% 来自 2021 年和 2022 年发放的贷款。
- 季度末流动性增加至约 8.53 亿美元,同时产权比率从 2.6 倍降至 2.2 倍,总杠杆率从 4.3 倍降至 3.1 倍。
- 管理层警告称,较高的利率、再融资收益减少以及房地产市场流动性匮乏,可能会拉长处置周期,并导致近期增加计提拨备。
- 董事会独立委员会的战略审查仍在进行中。在宣布进行审查后股票回购有所放缓,因为包括回购在内的资本配置属于该审查流程的一部分。
关键财务数据
| 指标 | 2026年第三季度业绩 | 变化或背景 |
|---|---|---|
| GAAP 净亏损 | 600 万美元 | 相当于每股亏损 0.11 美元 |
| 账面价值 | 每股 10.14 美元 | 截至 2026 年 9 月 30 日 |
| 可分配亏损 | 1.52 亿美元 | 相当于每股亏损 2.64 美元 |
| 未扣除已实现亏损和战略审查费用前的可分配收益 | 500 万美元 | 每股 0.09 美元 |
| 现金股利 | 每股 0.10 美元 | 派发 2026 年第三季度股利 |
| 第三季度贷款还款额 | 12 亿美元 | 几乎与 2024 年和 2025 年各自的全年还款额相当 |
| 今年迄今还款额 | 24 亿美元 | 高于管理层 20 亿美元的全年预期 |
| 新增贷款发放额 | 1.57 亿美元 | 包含养老地产及德克萨斯州写字楼贷款 |
| 季度末流动性 | 约 8.53 亿美元 | 包含 1.66 亿美元现金及 6 亿美元未提取的循环贷款额度 |
| 产权比率(债务权益比) | 2.2倍 | 低于原先的 2.6 倍 |
| 总杠杆率 | 3.1倍 | 低于原先的 4.3 倍 |
业务与经营表现
KREF 继续退出 2021 年和 2022 年市场环境下发放的较早贷款。这些年份发放的贷款占今年迄今还款额的 80% 以上。该公司还在本季度处置了另外三笔密切关注名单(watchlist)上的贷款。
新增贷款发放额总计 1.57 亿美元。投资标的包括由全美四处物业作抵押的甲级养老地产组合,以及德克萨斯州的一处甲级写字楼物业。管理层表示,由于 KREF 优先考虑资产负债表的灵活性,而非等额接续还款资金,因此资金投放仍将保持审慎。
该公司对其仅存的两笔商业地产 CLO 实施了选择性赎回,完成了这两笔交易的终结。管理层表示,大量的抵押品还款使得这些结构化融资效率低于其他非盯市(non-mark-to-market)融资替代方案。
KREF 季度末拥有约 8.53 亿美元的流动性,属于其历史最高水平之一,且高于其约 6 亿美元的历史平均水平。总额包括 1.66 亿美元现金、季度末贷款结清后由服务商代收的 5300 万美元还款,以及 6 亿美元未提取的企业循环贷款额度。
管理层业绩指引
管理层预计,在 2026 年第四季度,总杠杆率将维持在 KREF 历史目标区间下方。在公司储备流动性并在房地产价值重置后评估投资机会的同时,新贷款发放的节奏预计也将保持审慎。
原先预计在年底前完成的部分资产处置,目前可能会延长至 2027 年上半年。管理层表示将继续推进变现,同时寻求回收价值的最大化。
战略审查费用主要为财务和法律咨询费,集中在第三季度末段。首席财务官 Kendra Decious 表示,按整季度计,预计这些费用在第四季度将有所增加。
风险与关注领域
- 潜在拨备增加:管理层表示,随着资产处置流程的推进以及市场流动性和估值的变化,拨备可能会增加。
- 多家庭住宅再融资风险:KREF 正在密切监控 2021 年和 2022 年发放的多家庭住宅贷款。平均债务收益率达到 6% 的中高水平,但处于较低水平的贷款面临更大的再融资压力。
- 借贷成本上升:近期利率上升提高了偿债成本,并减少了再融资收益,对于在估值顶峰时期获得融资的物业而言尤为明显。
- 处置延迟:缺乏流动性的市场和不确定的估值使得剩余关注名单资产的处置时机和最终回收价值难以确定。
- 高利率带来的收益提升有限:浮动利率债务规模与浮动利率贷款组合相对接近,而 REO 资产不产生利息收入。
- 战略审查不确定性:董事会委员会继续评估战略替代方案,由于该流程仍在推进中,管理层拒绝透露更多细节。
分析师问答环节要点
管理层表示,当前的 CECL 拨备反映了可获取的市场信息,但市场的不透明和流动性匮乏使得 KREF 无法确定每笔资产处置的具体结局。拨备水平将随着交易的推进和市场条件的变化而调整。
对于债务收益率在 5.5% 至 6% 左右的多家庭住宅贷款,再融资结果将取决于市场层面的增长、资本化率以及发起人的流动性。管理层指出,在高增长市场中相同的债务收益率,其影响可能不同于在仍消化新供给的市场中的情况。
当持有并稳定资产有助于提高回收率时,KREF 可能会接管部分多家庭住宅物业。然而,管理层目前并未看到需要采取这种方法的大规模多家庭住宅资产潮。
关于波士顿的一笔生命科学物业贷款,在估值发生变化后,KREF 已将该资产出让回无追索权融资贷款人。公司就其持有的那部分贷款确认了损失,该笔贷款目前已从组合中出清。
管理层确认,尽管杠杆率较低且流动性维持高位,KREF 仍活跃于信贷市场。管理层指出了季度末的大量还款、此前降低杠杆的目标以及保持灵活性的重要性,这些均是新贷款发放节奏保持审慎的原因。
业绩电话会议完整文字记录
完整财报电话会议逐字稿
管理层陈述
Operator
Good morning, and welcome to the KKR Real Estate Finance Trust, Inc. Third Quarter 2026 Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded.
I would now like to turn the conference over to Jack Switala. Please go ahead.
Jack Switala
Thanks, operator, and welcome to the KKR Real Estate Finance Trust earnings call for the third quarter of 2026. As the operator mentioned, this is Jack Switala. This morning, I am joined on the call by our CEO, Matt Salem; our President and COO, Patrick Mattson; and our CFO, Kendra Decious.
I would like to remind everyone that we will refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures on the call, which are reconciled to GAAP figures in our earnings release and in the supplementary presentation, both of which are available on the investor relations portion of our website. This call will also contain certain forward-looking statements, which do not guarantee future events or performance. Please refer to our most recently filed 10-Q for cautionary factors related to these statements.
Before I turn the call over to Matt, I will go through our results. For the third quarter of 2026, we reported GAAP net loss of $6 million, or negative $0.11 per share. Book value as of September 30th was $10.14 per share. We reported a distributable loss of $152 million, or negative $2.64 per share. Distributable earnings before realized losses and strategic review expenses were $5 million, or $0.09 per share. Lastly, we paid a $0.10 cash dividend with respect to the third quarter.
With that, I now like to turn the call over to Matt.
Matthew Salem
Thanks, Jack. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. Let me begin with a brief update on the strategic review process. As we announced in July, KREF's Board established a strategic review committee composed solely of independent directors to evaluate potential strategic alternatives. Since that announcement, the committee has retained a financial advisor and legal counsel and continues to evaluate the company's strategic alternatives. Given the review is ongoing, we will not be providing any further commentary on the process during today's call.
Turning to the broader commercial real estate market, the recent increase in interest rates has created renewed pressure on property values, presenting both opportunities and challenges for real estate lenders. Existing borrowers will be impacted by higher debt service costs and lower refinancing proceeds, particularly for assets financed at peak valuations in 2021 and early 2022. We expect this environment to extend resolution timelines, and in some cases, result in additional credit losses. At the same time, these dynamics should drive increased demand for refinancing and recapitalization capital as borrowers work through upcoming maturities.
Importantly, underlying property fundamentals remain generally constructive across most sectors, supported by tenant demand and a meaningful slowdown in new construction activity. As we continue to reposition KREF's portfolio, we believe this environment provides an attractive opportunity to redeploy capital into new loans with compelling credit characteristics and risk-adjusted returns. Portfolio repayment activity has been particularly strong, with $2.4 billion of repayments year-to-date, surpassing our $2 billion expectation for the year. This quarter, repayments totaled $1.2 billion. This quarter's repayments nearly matched our annual repayments for each of 2024 and 2025.
Importantly, much of this activity has been concentrated in our older vintage loans, accelerating the natural rotation of the portfolio and reducing our exposure to loans originated during the 2021 and 2022 market environment. Those vintages accounted for over 80% of the repayments this year. We continue to make substantial progress executing the portfolio action plan we outlined at the beginning of the year. Our priorities have been to accelerate the resolution of watchlist and legacy office exposure, address our life science portfolio, and reposition the portfolio toward newer vintage loans with more attractive credit characteristics.
During the quarter, we resolved 3 additional watchlist loans. While the pace of resolutions has been encouraging, the timing and ultimate valuations of remaining assets is challenging. We continue to actively pursue monetization strategies for these assets, although some transactions previously anticipated to close before year-end are now likely to extend into the first half of 2027. We remain focused on advancing these resolutions while maintaining a disciplined approach to maximizing recovery. Given the more challenging liquidity and valuation environment, we could see an increase in reserves in the near term as resolution processes advance and market conditions continue to evolve.
With that, I'll turn the call over to Patrick.
W. Mattson
Thanks, Matt. Good morning, everyone. I'll begin with origination activity. During the quarter, we originated $157 million of loans, including a Class A senior housing portfolio secured by 4 properties across the U.S. and a Class A Texas office property. From a broader market perspective, conditions for new investments remained constructive. Credit spreads have been relatively stable. Financing for loans remains readily available, and liquidity across markets remains healthy. We expect our pace of originations to remain measured. Given our focus on maintaining balance sheet flexibility, we have been deliberate in deploying capital rather than seeking to replace repayments with new loans on a dollar-for-dollar basis.
Turning next to balance sheet and liquidity. The combination of significant repayment activity and our disciplined approach to capital management has meaningfully strengthened KREF's financial position throughout the year. At quarter end, liquidity increased to approximately $853 million, including $166 million of cash, $53 million of loan principal repayments held by a servicer following a repayment on the last day of the quarter, and $600 million of undrawn capacity on our corporate revolver. This represents one of the highest liquidity positions for KREF's history, well above the historical average of approximately $600 million.
Importantly, this liquidity provides us with significant flexibility as we continue to execute our portfolio strategy. We also continue to further optimize our financing structure. During the quarter, we exercised optional redemptions on our 2 remaining CRE CLOs, completing the retirement of both transactions. Given the substantial repayment activity and reduction in the underlying collateral pools, these transactions have become less efficient financing structures relative to other non-mark-to-market financing alternatives available to KREF.
Strong repayment activity during the quarter also drove a meaningful reduction in leverage, with our debt-to-equity ratio declining from 2.6x to 2.2x, and total leverage declining from 4.3x to 3.1x below our historical target range, and we expect leverage to remain below the historical range for the fourth quarter. In summary, the third quarter represented another important step in executing the priorities established at the beginning of the year. We materially reduced the watchlist, advanced the resolution of legacy exposures, exceeded our full year repayment expectations ahead of schedule, and further strengthened our liquidity position.
With that, we are happy to take your questions.
Operator
[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Tom Catherwood with BTIG.
分析师问答
William Catherwood
Matt, I want to go back to something you said in your prepared remarks about that you could see or we could see more reserves in the near term as the resolution process advances. So the question that pops in my head is what is holding you back from getting ahead of that and taking worst-case scenario type marks right now? Is it that you don't have the market comps because transactions are slow, or is it something else that is holding you up from kind of getting ahead of that and kind of creating a worst-case baseline?
Matthew Salem
Tom, thanks for the question. I think if you think about what is on kind of the watchlist now and the kind of processes we are in, a lot of that is just a function of a little bit of opaqueness, and some of these markets are relatively illiquid. We obviously are marking even have CECL reserves appropriate for what we are seeing in the market today. But as we have seen over time, number one, markets can change, and number two, just given how the liquidity in some of these markets, we do not know exactly where these processes can end up. As we kind of continue to work through those, we will obviously adjust it in real time for what we are seeing. But just understanding kind of where the overall market is today, we wanted to obviously highlight that as we continue to work through the resolutions here.
William Catherwood
You mentioned resolutions on the watchlist. I assume, though, this applies to kind of the remaining legacy loans. Obviously, that amount came down in 3Q with the repayments, but are you expecting more modifications? Are you expecting more things that you think could have reserves or more migrations out of that legacy, but 3-rated or better portfolio?
Matthew Salem
I think everybody, including ourselves, is looking at their portfolios in a new light now, clearly with adjusted values and the interest rate that we are living in today. And I think where we are seeing potential noise, I would say, is certainly on some of the multifamily. That feels like it has been the most impacted in the rate hike environment in those vintages we called out on the call in terms of the 2021 and 2022 vintages. So that is probably the area we are watching closely.
We have got a lot of repayments and a lot of those loans, like we said, this was a huge repayment quarter for us, equaling almost all of last year and the year before. 80% of that, as we highlighted, was in those vintages. So we are seeing real velocity there. But values are down a little bit and some of those loans are close to the line, and so we will have to continue to monitor those as they come up for refinance.
William Catherwood
Just quick follow-up on that one, Matt. Just do you have a sense of -- for those legacy multifamily loans you mentioned, do you have a sense of where those debt yields sit right now?
Matthew Salem
Obviously, there's a huge range. I think on average, we're well into the 6s. But it's the stuff at the lower end of that range that is going to be the most acute and have the most problems, obviously, refinancing. So those are the ones we're really focused on. But we'll continue to see how the market evolves from a value perspective. I think it's changing, I'd say, on a day-to-day basis as the market resets expectations around not only cap rates, but just growth profile as well.
Operator
Your next question comes from Jade Rahmani with KBW.
Jade Rahmani
Can you give any color on the Boston Life Science resolution? I didn't see clearly in the 10-Q what happened to that loan. Was that sold or acquired? Any color would be helpful.
W. Mattson
Jade. It's Patrick. Happy to take that. So on that loan, we had financing on that. That was non-recourse financing. As values have changed on that asset, we assigned that loan back to the lender. What you see reflected in this quarter was the loss on our portion of that loan, and it is obviously removed from the portfolio at this point.
Jade Rahmani
Okay. That is helpful. On the multifamily portfolio, can you comment as to what percentage is pre-2023 vintage and what the in-place debt yields are on that? Also, can you further comment if there is a property that has, say, a 5.5% to 6% debt yield, would that require KREF to absorb a loss because that would imply close to 100% LTV, so not necessarily a loss, but it depends on the friction points and what happens in such a situation?
Matthew Salem
Yes, I do not have the exact percentage of the 2021 and 2022 multifamily in front of me, so we can follow up on that. On the second part of your question, the 5.5% to 6% debt yield area, I think certainly we would be watching those very closely. It really comes down to 2 things. It is number one, what is the embedded growth in the market? Because the 5.5% in New York City or San Francisco or some of these markets that are experiencing real growth is very different than some of the Sun Belt markets that are still absorbing supply, as you well know. So there is going to be a range of cap rates depending on the market.
The second thing is really around sponsor. Number one, what is their liquidity level? What else is in their portfolio that they're dealing with, and what's their willingness to continue to play forward and try to continue to grow cash flows over time to enhance their outcomes on their equity? These are all in play, and we've seen it across the board. I certainly think having a portfolio outside of KREF as well, that we're seeing marginally more capitulation in the multifamily sector from borrowers, just given this latest rate hike. That speaks a little bit to the second point. I'm making that I think you are seeing a little bit more velocity, whereas before we were getting a lot more pay downs and playing it forward. I think there's been slightly more capitulation in the market today around some of that. But that corridor is certainly the ones that we're focused on in terms of their ability to refinance.
Jade Rahmani
A follow-up would be with multifamily as a more liquid asset class and fundamentals potentially nearing a trough. Could you devise an alternative strategy to fund REO with leverage and hold some of these assets more so than you've done with, say, office? Does that make any sense, or do you think the better outcome is to just work these out, share in some of the value reduction, and take hits to book value?
Matthew Salem
Well, I think similar to every time we have an issue in the portfolio, we're going to look at all the options available to us and how do we optimize the outcome and maximize recovery for the balance sheet. You think about what we did in Raleigh, North Carolina, on that multifamily deal. We felt like we could go in and stabilize cash flow and operations there and then sell it into kind of a better environment. I think we're proving that out on the operations side for sure, and we feel very good about the occupancy there and where we are on a cash flow basis.
Obviously, they carry a lot easier, to your point, I think is what you might be suggesting, than some of the life science we have, for instance, where you just don't have the tenants there, and so there's a kind of a net cost on an ongoing basis. That certainly will factor into the analysis. Hard to predict the future. Obviously, the market's very dynamic right now. But when I look at our portfolio, I don't see a wave of opportunities to do that, if that's part of the question. I think we could have isolated situations where the loan is closed, and we ultimately have to take some reserves on it. But, I don't think we're looking at it like, wow, this is going to be a big portfolio of multi that we have to make decisions on. That may help you think through it a little bit.
Operator
Your next question comes from Rick Shane with J.P. Morgan.
Richard Shane
Look, you guys, I know you won't comment per se on the strategic review process, but at the same time, you have 2 other things going on. One is resolution of the existing portfolio. And then the real question is, how are you sort of approaching the market in terms of additional investment? You guys did originate loans this quarter, but leverage is now below target ratio. You are sitting on a lot of liquidity. Do you see yourselves as active participants in the market? And more importantly, from sort of a management perspective, how do you sort of motivate employees in the context of this sort of potential uncertainty?
Matthew Salem
Right. Thank you for the question. I guess just to be direct, 100% we are active participants in the market. We originated 2 loans this quarter. I will come back to that piece of the question here in a second. Let me answer your final piece of the question. Keep in mind that the team that invests on behalf of KREF invests for other pools of capital within KKR as well. This is a smaller piece of our overall business, and that business is continuing to grow, and we have lots of different types of capital that we invest there. We invest bank capital, we invest insurance capital, we invest debt fund capital. So there is lots of capital, and we are actively originating loans across our $43 billion of AUM within real estate credit at KKR.
There is lots going on, and so the motivation question you had, I don't think is particularly relevant for our team and our situation. When we just think about how we are positioned in the market, I think you are right to kind of put a few things in there. When I look at this quarter, in particular, let us just understand, last quarter, we were above our target leverage ratio, and we had talked about wanting to bring that down. So we were able to accomplish that.
The second thing which I highlighted earlier was we got a ton of repayments this quarter. You never quite know, especially in a market where the Fed starts hiking again, like, okay, what is going to come through? What is not? Do things get extended? Some of those were actually pretty back-ended in the quarter. So you have this moment in time where certainly that contributed to it, where there is a lot coming through in the quarter, a lot coming through towards the end. We weren't leaning in to originations either because we were trying to bring down leverage and trying to understand kind of where we were in the quarter.
So some of it is just the complexity around that. I would say the last piece of it is creating some more flexibility right now and optionality for ourselves, I do not think is a bad thing either, where we start to look at what is going on in the market. Values are resetting. Perhaps the loan you are going to make tomorrow is better than the loan you could have made 60 days ago. I think there is also a reason to just be prudent as we kind of think about what is going on in the market today. None of those factors are the single determinant of where we snap the line at the end of September, but they are all kind of factoring into it, of how we kind of think about the go forward here. But certainly closed loans in the quarter and are active.
Richard Shane
Look, it's a very fair point, and you linked up something that I didn't that I heard but didn't link up, which is how heavy the repayments were at the very end of the quarter and given the uncertainty that the third quarter events created, the macro events created, and the potential sort of extension of timelines on anything in the meeting of the minds makes sense to sort of be careful until all of that stuff closes. I don't know if you covered this, I apologize, but it looks like the cadence of the buyback really was just in July and then slowed down. Is that related to the strategic review or how should we think about that going forward, particularly given the leverage, et cetera?
Matthew Salem
Yes, I think you're right to call that out. I think we mentioned this on the last call. The buybacks is all. Think about that. Strategic review is one of the key things they're looking at, of course, is capital allocation. And so, share buybacks will be part of that, and that really effectively impacted, if you will, our participation in that investing piece of the business after that announcement.
Richard Shane
Got it. Okay. Actually, when I really think about that from a legal perspective, it totally makes sense. Thank you for pointing it out and answering that question timely, but totally. At the end of the day, it doesn't really make sense to be buying back stock when you're doing that, because you've got information. Anyway, I get it.
Matthew Salem
Thank you. Appreciate you joining.
Operator
[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Chris Muller with Citizens.
Christopher Muller
Looking at your slide deck, the interest sensitivity slide stands out. Can you just talk through why higher rates are not a more meaningful benefit to the bottom line?
W. Mattson
Chris, it's Patrick. I'll take that. Yes, it's a good sort of highlight. We would expect normally, right, that you would get some benefit from higher rates. A couple of factors here. One, we're at the point where we've got some floors that are effectively pretty close. As we think about going up a little bit higher, it's not changing that much. We're not getting the additional benefit on the asset side.
The other factor is just that if you look at our debt outstanding that's subject to a floating rate and look at our loan assets outstanding that are subject to a floating rate, they're fairly close to each other. We're not obviously levered one to one. We've got a lot of value tied up, for example, in the REO assets. But the REO assets aren't producing income, right? So they're not subject to the benefit of higher interest rates. So it's really the fact that the secured debt outstanding, the term loan B outstanding is fairly close to the loan portfolio size.
Christopher Muller
Got it. That makes sense. And then, looking at the strategic review expenses, I heard you guys mention the legal counsel and financial advisor. Is that all that is going into that bucket there? Is that an ongoing expense or was it more one-time in nature?
Kendra Decious
Chris, it's Kendra. Thanks for the question. So I would say that the strategic review costs predominantly include financial advisors and legal advisors. I would point out that it is ongoing, as you asked, and also consider that the timing of when the strategic review committee was formed. So the expenses were back ended in Q3. So I think you can assume from that in Q4, those expenses will grow on a full quarter basis.
Operator
Your next question comes from Gabe Poggi with Raymond James.
Gabriel Poggi
Matt, Patrick, I've got kind of a top of the house question. What is KKR doing holistically? I mean, Matt, you alluded to all the different buckets of capital that the team works on, right? What's KKR looking at across commercial real estate in this environment? What activity do they find is interesting? I noticed the life science JV with Alexandria that was publicly announced a few days ago. But any color you can provide as to kind of the opportunity to KKR or that you're seeing and doing in other pockets of capital away from the REIT, I think would be helpful.
Matthew Salem
Thank you for the question, Gabe. I guess you could break it down between equity and debt. I'd say on the debt side, we remain active with all of our pools of capital and think it's an attractive lending environment for all the reasons we talk about on this call and for our peers talk about ability to lend on reset basis with supply coming down in a higher interest rate environment. I think it's a good credit story. We're seeing that demand from our insurance company. But also on the private debt fund side, I think there's a lot of capital kind of getting allocated to the sector. I'd say there we're continuing to invest in what you would expect in terms of on-theme assets from a property type, so nothing too new there.
You saw in this quarter we did originate a loan within KREF on senior housing. So that's an area we certainly have a lot of experience and positive experience on the equity side of our business, and have been involved on the debt side. But in terms of new things we're looking at, that's probably one area that we're slightly more active. Otherwise, it continues to be heavily focused on multifamily and industrial lending for the most part. I think when you put the equity hat on, the market's probably opening up a little bit for us in terms of investing kind of the value add opportunistic funds. It's early days, but I think there's going to be a lot of investors, ourselves included, spending time in the multifamily segment of the market.
I think Jade was pointing out the fact that supply's coming down, yet now you have another kind of pressure point on value, and this could be an interesting entry point. Not to call the bottom, but certainly as you think about investing capital, it looks like an attractive place to go, and a lot of capital structures are coming due, like we talked about in our portfolio and in our peers. I think that's an area in particular we'll spend more time on.
Operator
This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Jack Switala for any closing remarks.
Jack Switala
Great. Thanks, operator, and thanks, everyone, for joining today. Please reach out to me or the team here if you have any questions. Take care.
Operator
The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.
本文部分内容由AI生成和翻译并经人工审核,仅供参考与一般资讯用途,不构成投资建议。









