Thoughts on the Market

Inside Credit Market’s Issuance Boom and Private Lending Risks

March 27, 2026

Inside Credit Market’s Issuance Boom and Private Lending Risks

March 27, 2026

Our Global Head of Fixed Income Andrew Sheets and Head of U.S. Credit Strategy Vishwas Patkar discuss what’s driving record debt issuance and growing worries about private credit.

TotM

Transcript

Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley.

 

Vishwas Patkar: And I'm Vishwas Patkar, Head of U.S. Credit Strategy at Morgan Stanley.

 

Andrew Sheets: And today on the program, we're going to talk about two of the biggest questions facing global credit markets. A rush of issuance, and questions around private credit.

 

It's Friday, March 27th at 2pm in London.

 

Vishwas, it's great to have you in town, talking over what I think are two of the biggest questions that are hanging over the global credit market. A large wave of issuance and a lot of questions around a segment of that market, often known as private credit.

 

So, let's dig into those in turn. I want to start with issuance. You know, you and your team had a pretty aggressive forecast at the start of the year, for a significant level of supply. How's that going? How is it shaping out? We're now almost through the first quarter…

 

Vishwas Patkar: Yeah. So, we came into the year expecting a record, [$]2.25 trillion of gross issuance in investment grade. That's 25 percent higher than last year. That would mark a record one year number for investment grade and for the high yield market. We expected about [$]400 billion of issuance; up roughly 30 percent.

 

If I were to mark those, the forecast is roughly playing out as expected through mid-March. IG issuance is up about 21 percent. High yield issuance is up about 25 percent. So far at least it's along the lines of what we'd call for. More importantly though, when I think about the drivers of the issuance, that I think in some ways is a little more validating.

 

Because there were two big components of what was going to drive the issuance.

 

One was AI related issuance from the large hyperscalers, and the second was a decent uptick in M&A. And we've seen both of those. So, year-to-date, we've had north of [$]80 billion of issuance from hyperscalers alone in the dollar market. That's on top of significant non-USD issuance that we've had this year.

 

So, I think this idea of AI CapEx investments and by extension issuance being somewhat agnostic to macro, that seems to be playing out so far.

 

Andrew Sheets: So, let's talk a little bit more about that – because, you know, this is a new development. This kind of is a new regime to have this much supply, sort of, somewhat independent of a very volatile macro backdrop.

 

And you know, maybe if you could talk just a little bit more about what we're learning about the issuers. What do they care about, what is bringing them to market, and then maybe what would cause them to slow down or speed up?

 

Vishwas Patkar: Yeah, I think we've learned a couple of things, right? First is – this issuance is being driven by investments that are not opportunistic, right? They are competitive in nature. Clearly there is an arms race to figure out who will win the AI race.  I think a second leg of it is the issuance is somewhat spread agnostic. So, you know, in credit we look at this metric called new issue concessions, which is effectively how much is a company paying in terms of excess funding costs relative to their bonds outstanding. And what we've seen with some of the larger deals is that new issue concessions are well above average.

 

And that's pretty important in the grand scheme of things because, you know, we're talking about one sector that is driving AI infrastructure. But when you have issuance that comes in size, and it comes wide to where existing bonds are, we think that has knock-on effects repricing other companies that are downstream of those names.

 

Andrew Sheets: So, we have a market for issuing corporate debt that's pretty wide open. You know, as you mentioned, very high levels of issuance and supply going through, despite [what] would've been a lot of concerns. And one of those concerns is the conflict in Iran.

 

But another concern that's been cropping up is a concern around this market often known as private credit where you've seen a lot of focus, a lot of headlines, volatility in some of the managers of private credit. But also, I think this is an area where less is known. And where there's still a lot of confusion about what it is and how it's performing.

 

So, for the second set of questions, Vishwas, maybe we could just start with, you know, when you think about private credit, what is it to you? And how do you break up the market?

 

Vishwas Patkar: Yeah, so I think at a very high level, you can think about private credit as you know, capital that is provided by non-bank lenders. And in some ways – that is not broadly syndicated. So it's different from investment grade bonds or high yield bonds or leverage loans in that respect. You know, the second factor I laid out.

 

You know, private credit overarchingly is a big umbrella term. It includes direct lending to businesses. It includes infrastructure finance, project finance, the private placement market, asset-based finance. So, there are a lot of subcomponents.

 

Now, you know, to your point where the market's a little worried and there is growing anxiety is around the direct lending portion of private credit. That segment of the market has grown substantially over the last decade. It was about [$]500 billion or so 10 years ago. It's about [$]1.3 trillion right now.

 

Andrew Sheets: And this is lending directly to companies?

 

Vishwas Patkar: Yeah. This is lending directly to companies. Leverage typically tends to be higher than what you see in the public market. So, one of the challenges around navigating the risks are, you know, when you get a bunch of negative headlines that isn't necessarily the readily available information to either disprove or validate it.

 

So, I think that's some of the anxiety, which is building among the investor base. Our view is, you know, these risks are significant and investors should be cognizant of what's happening. 

Andrew Sheets: So maybe just to take a step back a little bit there. Why have investors been more worried about the private credit space?

 

Have we seen particular events? Or is it more, kind of, other factors that you think have driven this increased focus?

 

Vishwas Patkar: Yeah, I think it's been a rolling set of factors. This year the whole story has really been about software and concerns about AI disruption. But before I get into that, I think it was a process that really began, I would say, second half of last year.

 

So, private credit really had its moment in the sun a few years ago where inflows were massive. The public market was choppy while the Fed was hiking rates, and a lot of stress issuers were choosing to raise capital via direct lenders. And at that time, spreads in the private credit market were also very attractive.

 

What you've seen last year is private credit AUM was effectively flat. The fee income being generated on the loans has come down as the Fed has eased policy and the spread on private credit versus the public market has also narrowed. So, what started off, I think, was more macro. It was driven more by what was happening on the policy front…

 

Andrew Sheets: More yield compression. Less yield for investors, which caused them to be just a little bit less attracted to the space…

 

Vishwas Patkar: Absolutely, yeah. And I think that was largely the driver of, you know, the correction in some of these asset manager stocks to begin with. Then you had some of the headlines around specific single name headlines. Double pledging of collateral, some accounting malpractices, which, you know, I think we can say with the benefit of hindsight, those were idiosyncratic. Those were one offs. But again, you know, doesn't make for a positive headline when you get news flow to that effect.

 

And then this year, as I said, it's really been about concerns around the software…

 

Andrew Sheets: Which is a very big part of the private credit market.

 

Vishwas Patkar: It is a very big part of the private credit market. it made up for almost a third of all LBOs that were originated between 2018 through 2022. And in fact, really if you look at 2021 when interest rates were very low, a lot of the outstanding software loans were originated in those really weak vintages.

 

And so, you know, I think AI disruption has maybe been the catalyst to drive some of this price action. But that's on top of software, where a lot of loans were originated with high leverage.   But now that, you know, you have a very disruptive force around margins, potentially looming, the concern has now shifted towards what do balance sheets look like. And the software sector is very levered. In the bank loan market, for example, more than 50 percent of software loans outstanding are rated B- or lower.

 

And one extension of that is that, you know, you have a non-trivial amount of debt that is maturing in the next few years. So, through 2028, we see about [$]65 billion of software loans maturing largely in lower quality cohort.

 

So, you know, even before we get clarity around how AI will diffuse and disrupt or will not disrupt these names, the issue is really refinancing. In this period of uncertainty, will all these software loans over the next 12 to 18 months, will they have the capital to determine out their maturities?

 

Andrew Sheets: So, Vishwas, maybe just in closing, as you're going around and talking to credit investors at the moment, what do you think are the two or three biggest, kind of, high level takeaways and views that you're trying to get across?

 

Vishwas Patkar: A few things I would say. So, specifically on private credit, we are saying that, you know, I think we are in for a period where returns might be subpar. It is possible that private credit sees AUM growth that is sluggish, maybe even down year-over-year this year. But we would not conflate that with something that's systemic. And I think it's very important to lay that out. But importantly, some of the linkages to the banking system are through, you know, leverage that is significantly lower in this cycle than what we've seen in the past, say prior to the GFC. So that's one.

 

Second, I continue to think that the aspect of issuance being very high and somewhat agnostic to macro conditions, that's been validated so far. And when I look at what credit markets are priced for, in aggregate, we think valuations are still too tight. And that's not withstanding everything that's going on in the Middle East.

 

You know, we clearly have a commodity price shock to navigate. And that can have a feedback loop via what central banks will do. And the U.S. consumer. But I would say just the convexity of credit is very weak. If, let's say, we get a…

 

Andrew Sheets: Limited upside versus relative to more downside…

 

Vishwas Patkar: Very limited upside. And downside, if we get both a technical and a fundamental –   and why it is significant.

 

And the third thing I would say is it makes sense to own hedges here. You know, again, hedges can be expensive, can lead to loss of carry. But they can also be a very efficient way to protect yourself. And if you look at this time last year in the lead up to Liberation Day, credit had held up really well for the first, say, five or six weeks of that sell off.

 

But then when it moved, it moved very quickly. And in some ways, you know, if you; if investors were able to protect themselves through that last leg of volatility, that effectively provided a very good entry point to capture the rally that played out thereafter.

 

Andrew Sheets: Vishwas. I think that's a great thing to keep in mind. Thanks for taking the time to talk.

 

Vishwas Patkar: Alright. Thank you for having me here, Andrew.

 

Andrew Sheets: And thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

 

Hosted By
  • Andrew Sheets

Thoughts on the Market

Listen to our financial podcast, featuring perspectives from leaders within Morgan Stanley and their perspectives on the forces shaping markets today.

Up Next

Our Asia Energy Analyst Mayank Maheshwari discusses how the conflict in the Middle East is sending...

Transcript

Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I’m Mayank Maheshwari, Morgan Stanley’s  research analyst covering energy markets in India and Southeast Asia .

 

Today: how disruptions linked to Iran and the Strait of Hormuz are creating energy-related disruptions across Asia.

 

It’s Monday, March 23rd, at 8am in Singapore.

 

To understand the scale of the impact, let’s start with a simple fact: about a quarter of Asia’s energy – that is oil, liquefied natural gas, and propane – comes from the Middle East, much of it flowing through a single chokepoint, the Strait of Hormuz. Any disruption here affects more than just oil prices. It also hits power generation, industrial output and even food supply chains across the region.

 

Asia hasn’t seen a true energy access shock in over 50 years. So that makes this moment very critical. And  with oil around $100 per barrel, stress is building in the system. Diesel margins are double pre-conflict levels. Jet fuel premiums have nearly doubled. And Dubai crude – normally cheaper than Brent historically – is now trading at a premium of more than $20 per barrel. This kind of price move signals tightening supply chains.

 

Asia’s dependence on [the] Middle East runs deep. Refiners source up to 80 percent of crude from the region, and 30–40 percent of LNG imports originate there. For major economies like India and China, roughly 40–50 percent of oil demand passes through Hormuz. It’s a critical energy highway.  And when flows slow, the entire system backs up.

 

Inventories may look like a buffer. Asia holds around 65–70 days of crude. But the system reacts sooner than waiting to run out. Governments are already rationing energy, industries are cutting LNG and LPG usage, and export restrictions are limiting downstream production of fuels. The tightening has already begun.

 

The real pressure point may not be oil, but natural gas – particularly LNG, as Qatar, which is a big supplier of Asia's LNG, has seen infrastructure damage. Asia accounts for about half of global LNG consumption, with up to 40 percent secured from the Middle East. Unlike oil, LNG has very limited buffers; in number of days, and not in months.

 

This is where the story extends well beyond energy. Around 25 million tons per year of petrochemical capacity has been impacted, along with roughly 10 million tons of fertilizer production. Prices for key materials like polymers have risen 15–25 percent in just a few weeks, and the premiums are still rising. These inputs feed into everyday products—from cars and electronics to packaging and agriculture. Even basic services are affected, with cooking gas shortages hitting restaurants in parts of Asia.

 

Policymakers are responding, but options are limited. Around 100 million barrels of crude has been released from reserves. Countries are securing higher-cost LNG cargoes. And many are turning back to coal for reliability despite environmental trade-offs.

 

Ultimately, the longer this disruption persists, the more pressure builds across energy, power, chemicals, and food systems. And in a region as interconnected and import-dependent as Asia, those ripple effects spread quickly – and widely.

 

Thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

TotM
As the Iran conflict upends market narratives, our Global Head of Fixed Income Research Andrew She...

Transcript

Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley.

 

Today on the program, a survey of just how quickly key narratives have changed and how lasting that might be.

 

It's Friday, March 20th at 2pm in London.

 

The NCAA basketball tournament, also known as March Madness, is one of my favorite times of the year. The single elimination tournament of 64 teams is wonderfully chaotic with plenty of surprises, especially in the early games. And basketball is one of those sports where momentum often seems real. A team that has somehow forgotten how to shoot in the first half of the game can suddenly look unstoppable in the second.

 

As I said, March is one of my favorite times to watch sports. It is often not one of my favorite times to forecast markets. In 2005, 2008, 2020, 2022, 2023, and 2025, March saw outsized market volatility. And it’s the case again this year. I am sure, it's just a coincidence.

 

This time, it's not just about a historic disruption to the energy markets, which my colleague Martijn Rats and I discussed on this program last week. It's also a major reversal of the market storyline. If this were a basketball game, the momentum just flipped.

 

In January and February of 2026, there were strong overlapping signals that the U.S. and global economy were in a good – even accelerating – place, boosted by cheap energy, stimulative policy, and robust AI investment. Oil prices were down as metals, transports, cyclicals and financial stocks, all rose. Europe, Asia, and emerging market equities – all more sensitive to global growth – were outperforming. Inflation was moderating. Central banks were planning to lower interest rates. The yield curve was steepening and the U.S. dollar was weakening. The January U.S. Jobs report was pretty good.

 

And then … it all changed. In a moment, the Iran conflict and the subsequent risk of an oil price shock flipped almost every single one of those storylines on its head. Now, oil prices rose and the prices for metals, transports, cyclicals and financial stocks all fell. Equities in Europe and Asia – regions that rely heavily on importing oil – underperformed.

 

The U.S. dollar rose as investors sought out safe haven. Inflation jumped following oil prices. The yield curve flattened on that higher inflation, as we and many other forecasters adjusted our expectations for what central banks would do. And, as it happens, the last U.S. Jobs report was pretty bad.

 

If the Iran conflict ends and oil resumes flowing through the Strait of Hormuz, it's very possible that this story could once again swing back. But until it does, the speed of which this momentum has flipped means that almost by definition, many investors have been caught off guard and left poorly positioned.

 

If you couple that with the challenge of diversifying in this new environment – where the prices for stocks, bonds, and even gold have all been moving in the same direction – the path of least resistance for investors may be to continue to reduce their exposure to ride out the storm, driving further near term weakness.

Unfortunately, that could make for an uncomfortable few weeks. At least, there's some good basketball on.

 

Thank you as always, for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

 

 

TotM

More Insights