One Trump Photo & The Secret to Industry Growth by 2040

For most of 2026, the debate over Blue Owl Capital has been framed as a redemption story. The firm again limited withdrawals from two of its private credit funds at 5%, as fears around artificial intelligence kept requests at its flagship technology fund well above industry peers. Thursday’s Q3 earnings report, before the open, reframes the conversation entirely. The question allocators are now asking is not how many investors want out. It is what the loans are actually worth.

Why This Quarter Is Different

Blue Owl, with $319 billion in assets as of June 30 and stock down about 43% over the past year, sees easing redemption strain but persistent elevated withdrawal requests in select funds. Those two facts sit in uncomfortable tension. If the underlying loans are performing, the withdrawal queue is a distribution problem, fixable with time and better investor communications. If loan marks have quietly deteriorated, the queue is a leading indicator of something harder to repair.

The picture at Blue Owl Technology Income Corp., or OTIC, a roughly $5 billion vehicle focused on technology and software lending, was particularly stubborn: investors sought to withdraw $1.1 billion, equivalent to 39.0% of shares, up slightly from 38.1% in the second quarter, with the fund’s concentrated shareholder base and specialized investment mandate keeping redemption requests well above the industry average. By contrast, Blackstone’s private credit fund saw redemption requests of about 10%, Apollo Debt Solutions BDC had shareholders look to redeem 14.7%, down from 16.8%, and Ares Strategic Income Fund reported 13.1%, down from 14.4%. OTIC is not moving with the peer group. That divergence matters.

The Bull Case: Sentiment Mismatch, Not Credit Trouble

Blue Owl wrote to shareholders that the results “underscore the disconnect between the market’s fears of AI disintermediating software and OTIC’s resilient credit fundamentals,” adding that the submissions came largely from investors rejoining queues. That framing has a specific mechanism behind it. Non-traded BDCs let investors request redemptions on a schedule but typically limit cash-outs to about 5% of shares per quarter; when requests exceed that cap, investors often resubmit what wasn’t filled, so headline request figures can stay elevated even if fewer new people are heading for the exit.

The bull case, then, is that OTIC’s 39% withdrawal figure is partly a queue artifact. Asset management executives argue they have been treated too harshly, saying redemption pressures have been driven by perceived concerns around private credit, rather than the underlying performance of the funds.

The Bear Case: The Loans Absorbed the Risk

The opposing read is structural. AI-induced worries about software ushered in a change for private credit in the first quarter, when the launch of Anthropic’s Claude Cowork helped ignite investor fears that new AI tools would lead to the creation of bespoke software solutions and the end of costly subscriptions that had driven revenue for SaaS companies. Software exposure is significant in many direct lending portfolios and may be understated by traditional industry classifications; loans originated in the software boom years likely did not fully reflect emerging AI-related business risks.

PitchBook and LCD reporting has pointed to rising pockets of stress across BDC portfolios by mid-2026, with software exposure a key driver. Thursday’s marks on the OTIC portfolio will be the first full-quarter test of whether that pressure has migrated into Blue Owl’s books.

What Investors Are Missing

The redemption headlines have crowded out a quieter problem. Evercore analyst Glenn Schorr has argued that the more persistent challenge for non-traded BDCs may now be weak new subscriptions, as direct lending could take time to regain favour among wealth-management clients and advisers. Even if loan marks hold and credit quality is fine, a BDC that cannot attract fresh capital is running a slow erosion model. Fee revenue for OWL’s parent depends on AUM growth, and Wall Street is looking for roughly $0.22 to $0.23 per share on about $700 million of revenue for the quarter, only a modest step up from the roughly $687 million reported a year earlier. The market is pricing in continuity; Thursday’s marks and net flows will decide whether that assumption holds.

Stocks to Watch

• OWL: The parent reports Thursday. Loan marks, non-accrual levels, and management commentary on new subscriptions are the three numbers that will move the stock.
• OBDC: Blue Owl Capital Corporation reports November 4 and had a $15.0 billion portfolio at fair value across 229 portfolio companies as of June 30. Non-accrual trends here will show whether credit stress is spreading beyond the technology sleeve.
• ARES: Ares Strategic Income Fund saw withdrawal requests fall to 13.1% last quarter. Any commentary on software loan performance gives a rival data point for benchmarking OTIC’s marks.
• APO: Apollo Debt Solutions saw redemption pressure ease to 14.7%. If Apollo’s marks hold firm while Blue Owl’s do not, the divergence will accelerate capital rotation toward Apollo’s credit platform.
• BX: Blackstone’s private credit fund held steady at about 10% redemption requests and continues to take share. A clean Blue Owl quarter limits Blackstone’s recruiting pitch to advisers; a messy one accelerates it.