What Is Private Credit? A Complete Guide for European Borrowers

Private credit refers to any debt financing provided by non-bank institutional investors. Unlike syndicated loans or public bonds that trade on secondary markets, private credit instruments are originated bilaterally or through small lender groups and held to maturity. The borrower negotiates directly with the capital provider, and the resulting loan sits on the lender's balance sheet rather than being distributed to anonymous market participants.

The distinction matters for practical reasons. A company raising EUR 50M through a syndicated bank facility will deal with an arranging bank that then distributes portions of the loan to other institutions. The borrower has limited control over who ends up holding its debt. In a private credit transaction, the borrower knows exactly who its lender is and maintains a direct relationship throughout the life of the facility. This creates a fundamentally different dynamic around amendments, waivers, and ongoing dialogue.

The European private credit market has grown to over EUR 400 billion in assets under management, a figure that has roughly quadrupled since 2015. This growth reflects a structural shift in how mid-market companies access leverage. Where a EUR 30-150M financing requirement would historically have been the exclusive domain of commercial banks, today a significant share of that flow is captured by dedicated credit funds.

For borrowers, the core proposition is straightforward: private credit providers can offer greater certainty of execution, more flexible structures, and faster timelines than traditional bank channels. The trade-off is cost. Private credit typically prices at a premium to equivalent bank debt, reflecting the illiquidity premium that investors demand and the smaller lender groups involved. A borrower considering private credit needs to weigh that pricing differential against the structural and execution advantages that come with it.

Private credit encompasses a broad spectrum of instruments. At the senior end, direct lending funds provide first-lien term loans that closely resemble bank facilities. At the subordinated end, mezzanine funds and credit opportunity vehicles offer junior capital that sits behind senior debt in the capital structure. Between these extremes, unitranche facilities blend senior and subordinated risk into a single instrument with a blended cost of capital, eliminating the need for an intercreditor agreement.

The European private credit market as it exists today is largely a post-2008 phenomenon. Before the Global Financial Crisis, leveraged lending across Europe was dominated by banks. A typical mid-market buyout in 2006 or 2007 would have been financed by a club of three to five commercial banks providing senior debt, with a mezzanine tranche placed separately if needed. Non-bank credit funds existed but operated at the margins.

The GFC changed the structural landscape in several ways. Bank balance sheets contracted sharply as institutions absorbed losses, raised capital, and began deleveraging. Regulatory reform accelerated this trend. Basel III capital requirements, introduced progressively from 2013 onwards, increased the amount of equity capital banks needed to hold against leveraged lending exposures. The European Central Bank's leveraged lending guidance, implemented in 2017, further constrained bank appetite for higher-leverage transactions by setting supervisory expectations around deals above 6x total leverage.

As banks pulled back, institutional capital moved in. Pension funds, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds, and endowments had been increasing allocations to alternative credit strategies throughout the 2010s, drawn by the yield premium over liquid credit markets and the portfolio diversification benefits. Private credit fund managers raised progressively larger vehicles to deploy this capital. European direct lending fundraising grew from approximately EUR 10 billion in 2012 to over EUR 50 billion annually by 2022.

Several phases mark the market's development. From 2012 to 2016, private credit established itself primarily as an alternative for sponsor-backed mid-market buyouts where banks were unable or unwilling to provide the full quantum of leverage required. Deal sizes were typically EUR 20-75M, and lenders focused on defensive sectors with predictable cash flows.

From 2017 to 2020, the market expanded significantly. Deal sizes increased, with unitranche facilities regularly exceeding EUR 200M. Private credit moved beyond its core sponsor-backed buyout niche into growth financing, dividend recapitalisations, and corporate carve-outs. The lender base broadened as insurance companies established dedicated lending platforms and existing fund managers raised larger successor funds.

The period from 2021 onwards has seen private credit mature into a mainstream financing channel. Large-cap direct lending deals now compete directly with syndicated loan markets for transactions above EUR 500M. The distinction between "bank market" and "direct lending market" has blurred, with many borrowers running dual-track processes to test pricing and terms across both channels simultaneously.

Private credit is not a single product. It encompasses a range of instruments that occupy different positions in the capital structure and serve different borrower needs. Understanding the taxonomy is important because the choice of instrument directly affects pricing, covenant flexibility, and the overall cost and complexity of a financing package.

Unitranche

The unitranche facility is the workhorse of European private credit. It combines senior and subordinated risk into a single-tranche loan provided by one lender or a small club. The borrower sees a single interest rate, a single set of covenants, and a single counterparty to manage. Typical unitranche pricing in Europe ranges from EURIBOR/SONIA + 550bps to 800bps depending on leverage, sector, and credit quality. Leverage can extend to 5.5-6.5x EBITDA, materially higher than what most bank-only senior facilities will support.

The structural simplicity of unitranche is its primary advantage. There is no intercreditor agreement, no separate mezzanine negotiation, and no subordination mechanics to navigate. For borrowers, this translates into faster execution and fewer parties at the table during amendments or restructuring scenarios.

Senior Secured Term Loans

Direct lending funds also provide conventional first-lien senior secured term loans, particularly for transactions where leverage is moderate (3-4.5x) and a unitranche premium is unnecessary. These facilities closely mirror bank term loans in structure but are held by a single non-bank lender. Pricing typically ranges from EURIBOR/SONIA + 450bps to 650bps.

Mezzanine and Subordinated Debt

Mezzanine debt sits behind senior facilities in the capital structure, typically secured by a second-ranking charge or provided on an unsecured basis. It fills the gap between senior debt capacity and the total leverage a business can support. Mezzanine pricing in Europe generally falls between 10-15% total return (including cash pay and PIK components). Mezzanine is less common in today's market than it was pre-2015, having been partially displaced by unitranche, but it remains relevant for highly leveraged transactions and situations where the senior lender is a bank unwilling to stretch beyond 3-4x.

Holdco PIK Notes

Payment-in-kind notes issued at the holding company level provide additional leverage above operating company debt facilities. These instruments accrue interest rather than paying cash, preserving cash flow for the operating business. PIK notes typically price at 12-18% and are used in situations where sponsors want to maximise leverage without increasing debt service burden at the operating entity level.

Venture Debt

Venture debt provides non-dilutive capital to high-growth, often pre-profit companies, typically alongside or shortly after equity funding rounds. Facilities are structured as term loans of EUR 2-30M with 24-42 month tenors. Pricing includes a cash interest component (typically 9-14%) plus warrant coverage of 0.5-2% of fully diluted equity. European venture debt has grown significantly, with dedicated providers serving the UK, DACH, and Nordic startup ecosystems.

Asset-Backed Lending

Private credit funds increasingly provide lending against specific asset pools - receivables, inventory, real estate, equipment, or intellectual property. These facilities are underwritten primarily on asset value and cash flow generated by the collateral rather than enterprise-level metrics. Asset-backed private credit bridges the gap between traditional asset-based lending (typically provided by banks) and more bespoke structures that require specialist underwriting.

Real Estate Debt

Real estate private credit has become a substantial sub-market in its own right. Lenders provide whole loans, senior stretch facilities, and mezzanine financing for commercial property acquisition, development, and refinancing. Loan-to-value ratios typically range from 55-75% depending on property type and strategy. The real estate debt market in Europe has benefited from bank retrenchment in development and transitional lending, creating significant opportunities for non-bank providers.

The European private credit lender landscape has become increasingly diverse and stratified. Understanding who the key participants are, and what their respective mandates and constraints look like, is essential for borrowers seeking to identify the right capital partner.

Large Direct Lending Platforms

The largest private credit managers operate multi-billion euro vehicles that can underwrite individual transactions of EUR 200M or more. These platforms compete directly with the syndicated loan market for upper mid-market and large-cap transactions. They typically focus on sponsor-backed deals, offer rapid execution, and have the balance sheet capacity to hold significant concentrations in single credits.

For borrowers, these large platforms offer certainty and speed. A single lender can underwrite the full quantum without the need for syndication. The trade-off is that large platforms tend to have more standardised documentation and may be less flexible on bespoke structural features compared to smaller, more nimble managers.

Mid-Market Specialists

Below the large platforms sits a deep bench of mid-market focused credit funds managing EUR 1-5 billion in assets, focusing on transactions in the EUR 15-100M range. They often have sector specialisms or geographic focus areas that enable them to underwrite credits that fall outside the mandate of larger, more generalist platforms.

Mid-market specialists can be particularly valuable for borrowers with sector-specific complexities. A lender with deep healthcare expertise, for example, will evaluate a healthcare services business differently from a generalist underwriter, potentially resulting in better terms and a more informed counterparty.

Insurance Company Lending Arms

European insurance companies have become significant direct lenders, motivated by the yield premium over public fixed income and the favourable capital treatment of certain private credit instruments under Solvency II. Several major insurers operate dedicated lending operations that originate or co-invest in private credit transactions. Insurance company capital tends to favour longer-duration, lower-leverage credits with strong asset backing, making them particularly active in infrastructure debt, real estate lending, and investment-grade private placements.

Credit Opportunity Funds

A distinct category of private credit provider focuses on special situations, stressed and distressed credits, and complex transactions that fall outside the mandate of conventional direct lenders. These funds offer higher-cost capital but can accommodate structures and risk profiles that other lenders will not consider. For borrowers in transitional or challenged situations, credit opportunity funds may represent the only viable source of private financing.

Business Development Companies

BDCs are a US-specific vehicle structure that has no direct European equivalent, but several US-based BDCs have expanded their lending activities into Europe through affiliated funds. BDC-affiliated capital tends to be more yield-focused and may carry different structural preferences compared to traditional European credit funds. While BDCs are a less significant part of the European landscape than they are in the US market, they do contribute to the overall supply of private credit capital available to European borrowers.

Private credit terms are negotiated bilaterally rather than set by market convention, which means there is meaningful variation across transactions. That said, established market norms provide a useful framework for what borrowers should expect. The following parameters reflect European mid-market conditions as of late 2024 and early 2025.

Leverage

Senior leverage in private credit transactions typically ranges from 4.0x to 5.5x EBITDA for unitranche facilities and 3.0x to 4.5x for senior-only structures. Total leverage, including subordinated tranches or holdco PIK, can extend to 6.0-7.0x for high-quality credits with predictable cash flow profiles. Leverage multiples are assessed on a trailing or adjusted EBITDA basis, with negotiation around the treatment of add-backs representing a significant part of the credit assessment process. Lenders in the current market scrutinise add-backs more rigorously than they did in the 2020-2021 period, and borrowers should expect detailed diligence on any adjustments above 15-20% of reported EBITDA.

Pricing

Unitranche pricing in Europe currently ranges from EURIBOR/SONIA + 500bps to 900bps, with the spread depending on leverage, sector risk, sponsor quality, and transaction size. The median unitranche in the European mid-market prices around E + 600-650bps for a 4.5-5.0x leveraged transaction in a defensive sector. Senior-only direct lending facilities price tighter, typically E + 400-600bps. Floors on the reference rate are standard, typically set at 0-50bps.

In addition to the margin, borrowers should budget for an OID (original issue discount) of 1-3% of the facility amount, which reduces net proceeds at closing and functions as an upfront fee. Commitment fees on undrawn revolving facilities or delayed-draw term loans run at 30-50% of the applicable margin.

Tenor and Amortisation

Private credit facilities typically have tenors of 5 to 7 years, with the majority of European mid-market transactions structured at 6 years. Amortisation schedules are generally light - 1-2% per annum if any - with the majority of principal repaid at maturity through bullet repayment. This is a meaningful advantage over many bank facilities, which often require higher amortisation (5-10% annually), preserving cash flow for operational investment and bolt-on acquisitions.

Covenant Packages

European private credit documentation has migrated toward lighter covenant packages over the past decade. The standard mid-market unitranche today typically includes one to two financial maintenance covenants, most commonly a leverage covenant (tested at 7.5-8.0x, providing significant headroom over opening leverage) and occasionally a fixed charge coverage ratio or minimum liquidity test. This compares to bank facilities that often include three to four financial covenants with tighter headroom. Some larger or highly competitive transactions may feature covenant-lite or even covenant-loose structures, though these remain less common in the European mid-market than in the US.

Prepayment and Call Protection

Private credit facilities almost always include call protection provisions that constrain early repayment. The standard structure includes hard non-call periods of 12-24 months, followed by declining prepayment premiums (typically 2% in year one post non-call, 1% in year two, and par thereafter). Some transactions negotiate soft-call provisions that apply only in certain scenarios, such as a refinancing or change of control, while permitting penalty-free voluntary prepayments from excess cash flow.

Fees

Arrangement fees, covering the lender's underwriting and credit committee costs, typically run at 1.5-2.5% of the committed facility amount. Where an advisor is engaged, the advisory fee is separate and borne by the borrower. Legal costs for both borrower and lender counsel are also for the borrower's account. On a EUR 50M unitranche transaction, total transaction costs (excluding advisory fees) typically fall in the range of EUR 1.5-2.5M.

Understanding how a private credit transaction progresses from initial concept to closing helps borrowers plan timelines, allocate internal resources, and manage expectations. While every deal has its own nuances, the following process represents a typical mid-market European transaction.

Stage 1: Preparation and Advisor Engagement

The process begins with the borrower (or its sponsor) identifying the financing need and engaging a debt advisory firm. The advisor helps define the optimal capital structure, size the debt quantum based on the business's cash flow profile, and develop a preliminary view on which lenders are most likely to be competitive. This preparation phase typically takes 2-4 weeks and involves assembling a financial model, management presentation, and preliminary information memorandum. The quality of preparation at this stage directly impacts lender engagement and the speed of subsequent phases.

Stage 2: Lender Outreach and Indicative Terms

The advisor approaches a targeted group of lenders - typically 6-15 institutions depending on deal size and complexity - with the investment summary and headline financial metrics. Lenders assess the opportunity against their investment mandate and return preliminary indications of interest, including indicative leverage, pricing range, and any key structural parameters. This phase runs 2-3 weeks and is where the advisor's knowledge of lender appetite and mandate constraints adds significant value. Approaching the wrong lenders, or too many, wastes time and creates noise.

Stage 3: Term Sheet Negotiation

Based on indicative feedback, the borrower and advisor shortlist 2-4 lenders and invite them to submit detailed term sheets. These documents set out the proposed facility structure, pricing, covenants, security requirements, conditions precedent, and any key documentation features. Term sheet negotiation typically takes 2-3 weeks and involves iterative dialogue between the borrower, its advisor, and competing lenders. The objective is to generate genuine competitive tension while maintaining deal momentum.

Stage 4: Lender Due Diligence

Once a preferred lender (or lender group) is selected, formal due diligence begins. The lender engages its own advisors - legal counsel, financial and tax due diligence providers, and potentially commercial or insurance advisors - to verify the information presented and assess key risks. The borrower populates a virtual data room and makes management available for Q&A sessions. Due diligence runs 3-6 weeks depending on the complexity of the business and the lender's internal processes. For borrowers, the key to managing this phase efficiently is ensuring the data room is comprehensive and that management time is ring-fenced for lender engagement.

Stage 5: Documentation and Credit Approval

In parallel with the later stages of due diligence, legal documentation is negotiated between borrower and lender counsel. The facility agreement, security documents, intercreditor agreement (if applicable), and ancillary documents are drafted, marked up, and negotiated. Simultaneously, the lender seeks formal credit committee approval, a process that may involve presenting the transaction to an internal investment committee for final sign-off. Documentation and approval typically take 3-5 weeks, though this can be compressed if the transaction benefits from expedited timelines.

Stage 6: Closing and Funding

Once documentation is agreed and conditions precedent are satisfied (including delivery of executed security documents, legal opinions, and KYC documentation), the facility is signed and funds are drawn. In European private credit, there is often minimal lag between signing and funding - many transactions fund on the same day as signing or within a few business days thereafter.

End to end, a straightforward mid-market private credit transaction takes 8-14 weeks from advisor engagement to closing. Complex or larger transactions can extend to 16-20 weeks. Expedited processes, particularly for sponsor-backed deals where the lender has existing familiarity with the business, can close in 4-6 weeks.

The choice between private credit and bank lending is not binary, and many borrowers end up using both channels for different parts of their capital structure. Understanding the relative strengths and limitations of each helps inform that decision.

Speed and Certainty

Private credit providers can typically move faster than banks because their investment decision sits with a single credit committee rather than requiring syndication or credit approval across multiple institutions. For time-sensitive transactions - competitive M&A processes, for example - this speed advantage can be decisive. A direct lender can issue a committed term sheet within 2-3 weeks and close within 6-8 weeks. A bank syndication process for a comparable transaction might take 10-14 weeks and carry syndication risk until the market clears.

Leverage Capacity

Private credit can support higher leverage levels than most bank facilities. Where banks in the European mid-market typically cap senior leverage at 3.5-4.5x EBITDA (constrained by ECB guidance and internal risk appetite), unitranche facilities from private credit providers can extend to 5.5-6.5x. This additional leverage capacity is particularly relevant for sponsor-backed buyouts where the acquisition multiple requires a higher proportion of debt funding.

Pricing

Bank debt is almost always cheaper than private credit on a headline basis. A bank term loan for a mid-market corporate might price at EURIBOR + 200-350bps, compared to EURIBOR + 500-700bps for a comparable direct lending facility. However, comparing headline margins in isolation is misleading. Bank facilities often carry higher amortisation, more restrictive covenants, and require ancillary wallet share (hedging, cash management, working capital facilities) that represent additional implicit cost. When the total cost of the bank relationship is considered, the effective pricing gap narrows.

Flexibility

Private credit documentation tends to be more flexible than bank documentation in several respects. Permitted acquisition baskets are typically larger, dividend distribution capacity is wider, and the general permissions framework offers greater operational freedom. In practice, this flexibility can be valuable for businesses with active M&A strategies or cyclical cash flow patterns that might trigger covenant issues under tighter bank documentation.

Ongoing Relationship

With a private credit lender, the borrower maintains a direct relationship with a single counterparty (or a small group) throughout the life of the facility. Amendments, waivers, and operational discussions involve one phone call rather than a coordination exercise across a syndicate of five or six banks. This simplicity is valuable both in normal operations and in stress scenarios where rapid decision-making is critical.

When Banks Still Win

Banks remain the more efficient option for investment-grade credits, lower-leverage transactions, and situations where the borrower values ancillary banking products. A mid-market corporate with 2-3x leverage and stable, predictable cash flows will almost always find better economics in the bank market. Banks also retain an advantage for revolving credit facilities, where private credit providers are less naturally suited, and for multi-currency or multi-jurisdictional facility structures where banks have established infrastructure.

While private credit can finance businesses across most sectors, certain industries and transaction types particularly benefit from the structural advantages of non-bank lending. The common thread is situations where traditional bank underwriting frameworks struggle to accommodate complexity, growth profiles, or unconventional collateral.

Software and Technology

Software businesses with recurring revenue models have become a core focus for European private credit. Lenders have developed ARR-based (annual recurring revenue) underwriting methodologies that can extend leverage beyond what EBITDA-based bank models support. A software company with EUR 20M ARR but only EUR 3M EBITDA (due to reinvestment in growth) might receive a bank facility sized at 3x EBITDA (EUR 9M) but a private credit facility sized at 3-5x ARR (EUR 60-100M). This is a transformational difference for growth-stage technology businesses that need non-dilutive capital to fund expansion without equity dilution.

Healthcare and Life Sciences

Healthcare services businesses - clinics, diagnostics chains, care home groups, pharmaceutical services - attract private credit because of their defensive characteristics: non-discretionary demand, recurring patient flows, and often government-backed revenue streams. Private credit lenders with healthcare sector expertise can move quickly on acquisition financing for buy-and-build platforms in fragmented healthcare markets.

Business Services

Professional and business services firms with contracted revenue, high customer retention, and asset-light models are well suited to private credit. These businesses often lack the hard asset base that banks prefer for security purposes but generate highly predictable cash flows that credit fund underwriting can accommodate. Testing, inspection, and certification businesses are a prime example of this dynamic.

Sponsor-Backed M&A

Private equity-backed buyouts represent the single largest use case for European private credit. Sponsors value the speed, certainty, and leverage capacity that direct lenders provide, particularly in competitive auction processes where financing certainty can be a differentiator in winning a deal. The relationship between PE sponsors and direct lenders is well established, with many lenders maintaining dedicated origination teams focused on sponsor coverage.

Complex and Transitional Situations

Businesses undergoing operational transitions - carve-outs from larger groups, turnarounds, rapid international expansion, or significant capital investment programmes - often find that bank appetite is limited due to the execution risk involved. Private credit providers with appropriate risk appetite can underwrite these situations by taking a more holistic view of the business trajectory and pricing the additional risk accordingly. A company being carved out of a larger corporate, for example, may not have standalone audited financials, established banking relationships, or a clean operating history - all factors that complicate bank underwriting but can be addressed through private credit structuring and appropriate covenant protection.

Private credit is a powerful financing tool, but it is not without risks and limitations. Borrowers should evaluate the following factors carefully before committing to a private credit transaction.

Higher Cost of Capital

The most obvious consideration is pricing. Private credit will cost more than bank debt for an equivalent risk profile, typically by 200-400bps in margin terms plus higher upfront fees. Over a 5-7 year facility life, this premium compounds into a significant absolute cost difference. Borrowers need to be confident that the structural benefits of private credit - higher leverage, greater flexibility, or execution certainty - justify the additional cost. Running a parallel bank process alongside a private credit process is one way to benchmark the value of private credit terms against the bank alternative.

Concentration Risk

When a single private credit fund provides the entire debt facility, the borrower is exposed to concentration risk with that counterparty. If the lender encounters its own difficulties - a change in investment strategy, fund-level liquidity issues, or a change in key personnel - the borrower may find itself with a less supportive capital partner than anticipated. This risk can be mitigated by using small club deals (2-3 lenders) rather than relying on a single provider, though this adds complexity to the ongoing lender management process.

Limited Regulatory Oversight

Unlike banks, private credit funds are not subject to the same prudential regulatory framework. From a borrower perspective, this has both advantages (fewer constraints on lending decisions) and disadvantages. In particular, there is less regulatory pressure on private credit lenders to engage constructively with borrowers in financial difficulty. While most reputable credit funds manage workouts professionally, the absence of a banking regulator overseeing the process means borrowers should evaluate their lender's track record in handling stressed situations before signing up.

Illiquidity and Transfer Restrictions

Private credit instruments are illiquid by design. Loan transfer provisions in private credit documentation are typically more restrictive than in bank facilities, but transfers do occur. A borrower may find that its original lender has sold its position to a secondary buyer - potentially a credit opportunity fund with a different investment thesis and approach. Understanding the transfer mechanics in the loan documentation, including any borrower consent rights over transfers, is important at the documentation stage.

Documentation Complexity

Private credit facility agreements are substantial documents, often running to 200+ pages with detailed schedules and annexes. While covenant packages may be lighter than bank documentation, the overall documentation framework can be more complex, particularly around negative covenants, permitted actions, and default triggers. Borrowers need experienced legal counsel who understands private credit documentation conventions and can negotiate effectively on key provisions. Under-resourcing the legal review process is a common mistake that can result in unnecessarily restrictive terms.

Refinancing Considerations

Call protection provisions mean that refinancing a private credit facility early carries a real cost. If market conditions improve or the business de-risks sufficiently to qualify for cheaper bank financing within the first two to three years of a facility, the borrower will need to pay a prepayment premium (typically 1-2% of outstanding principal) to exit. Borrowers should model these costs into their financing plan and negotiate the call protection terms carefully at the outset.

Private credit transactions are bilateral negotiations where information asymmetry between lenders and borrowers can be significant. Lenders deploy full-time credit professionals who evaluate hundreds of opportunities annually and understand market pricing, documentation precedent, and structural norms in granular detail. Most borrowers, by contrast, access the private credit market infrequently. An experienced debt advisory firm bridges this gap.

Access to the Full Lender Universe

The European private credit market includes over 200 active institutional lenders, each with distinct mandates, sector preferences, geographic focus areas, and structural appetites. An advisor like Revelle Capital maintains active relationships across this landscape and can identify the 8-12 lenders most likely to offer competitive terms for a specific transaction. Without an advisor, borrowers typically approach the two or three lenders they have heard of, leaving significant value on the table by failing to generate competitive tension.

Competitive Tension and Price Discovery

Running a structured process with multiple lenders competing for the same transaction consistently produces better outcomes than bilateral negotiation with a single provider. Advisors manage this process to ensure genuine competition while maintaining deal momentum. In our experience, a well-run competitive process typically saves borrowers 50-150bps in margin and materially improves non-price terms (covenant headroom, flexibility baskets, call protection) compared to unadvised transactions.

Structuring Expertise

The optimal capital structure for a given transaction is not always obvious. Should the borrower use a unitranche or a senior/mezzanine combination? What leverage multiple maximises financial flexibility without creating undue risk? Is a revolving facility needed, or can working capital needs be met through other mechanisms? An advisor brings pattern recognition from dozens or hundreds of comparable transactions and can identify structures that the borrower may not have considered.

Documentation Negotiation

Private credit documentation is negotiated, not standardised. Knowing what is market, what is achievable, and what is worth fighting for requires experience across many transactions. Advisors work alongside the borrower's legal counsel to ensure that key commercial terms survive the translation from term sheet to definitive documentation, and that the borrower is not giving away flexibility that will be needed during the life of the facility.

Market Intelligence

Pricing, terms, and lender appetite shift continuously in response to macroeconomic conditions, fund-level dynamics, and competitive pressures. An advisor who is active in the market daily can provide real-time intelligence on which lenders are actively deploying, where pricing is trending, and how documentation terms are evolving. This information is difficult for infrequent market participants to access independently.

At Revelle Capital, we work with borrowers and sponsors across the European private credit market, providing independent advisory services that cover lender selection, process management, structuring, and documentation negotiation. Our network spans over 300 institutional lenders, and our focus is on delivering the most competitive terms available for each transaction we advise on.