Non-Traded BDC Redemption Suspensions: What Investors Need to Know
Investors in some of the largest non-traded business development companies (BDCs) are discovering they cannot get their money out. In June 2026, Apollo capped withdrawals from Apollo Debt Solutions BDC at 5% of shares outstanding after redemption requests in the second quarter reached approximately 16.8%, or $2.4 billion. Blackstone restricted withdrawals from its flagship Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED) to 5% the same month after requests surged to roughly 10%, and Partners Group imposed similar limits on one of its evergreen funds. Blue Owl went further, suspending tender offers entirely for one of its non-traded BDCs and winding the fund down.
The White Law Group is investigating potential claims involving financial advisors and brokerage firms that recommended non-traded BDCs to retail investors without adequately disclosing the products’ liquidity risks. If you are unable to redeem your shares or have suffered losses in a non-traded BDC, our FINRA arbitration attorneys may be able to help you recover your losses through FINRA arbitration.
What Is Happening with Non-Traded BDC Redemptions?
Non-traded BDCs pool investor capital to make loans to private companies. Because their shares do not trade on an exchange, investors’ only routine exit is the fund’s own share repurchase program, which is typically limited to 5% of outstanding shares per quarter and operates at the board’s discretion.
That structure is now being tested across the industry. According to a January 2026 Bloomberg report, investors requested more than $2.9 billion in redemptions from non-traded BDCs with over $1 billion in assets during the fourth quarter of 2025 — an increase of approximately 200% from the prior quarter — and the sector has since reportedly recorded its first-ever quarterly net outflow. When requests exceed the quarterly cap, investors are repurchased on a prorated basis and must resubmit their requests, quarter after quarter, with no guarantee the backlog will clear. Analysts have warned that credit conditions could worsen the squeeze, with Morgan Stanley reportedly forecasting that private credit default rates could reach 8%.
Fund-by-Fund: Redemption Caps, Suspensions, and Wind-Downs
Apollo Debt Solutions BDC (ADS): In the first quarter of 2026, ADS received redemption requests equal to 11.2% of shares outstanding and enforced its 5% quarterly cap, honoring less than half of the dollars requested. In the second quarter, requests climbed to approximately 16.8% of outstanding shares — roughly $2.4 billion — and the fund again repurchased only 5%. For more, see our full post on the Apollo Debt Solutions BDC investigation.
Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED): The largest fund in the sector honored elevated redemption requests in the first quarter of 2026, with investors reportedly withdrawing approximately 7.9% of the fund’s net assets. In June 2026, however, Blackstone restricted BCRED withdrawals to 5% after second-quarter requests reached approximately 10%. Read our full post on the Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED).
Blue Owl Technology Income Corp. (OTIC): OTIC honored redemption requests equal to 15.4% of net assets in the fourth quarter of 2025, but requests reportedly surged to approximately 40% of shares outstanding in the first quarter of 2026, and the fund enforced its 5% cap — meaning investors received only a small fraction of the liquidity they sought. See our post on the Blue Owl Technology Income Corp. investigation.
Blue Owl Capital Corporation II (OBDC II): After a proposed merger with its listed affiliate was called off following investor concerns, Blue Owl suspended all tender offers for OBDC II and began winding the fund down through asset sales, reportedly starting with the sale of about 30% of the portfolio to institutional investors at slightly below par. OBDC II shareholders no longer have a routine redemption option and must wait for wind-down distributions.
Other funds: Ares has reportedly capped redemptions in its non-traded credit vehicle, and Blue Owl Credit Income Corp. (OCIC), one of the largest funds in the sector, faces the same structural liquidity limits. The pressure is industry-wide, not fund-specific.
“Semi-Liquid” Funds and the Liquidity Mismatch
Non-traded BDCs were marketed to retail investors through the wealth-management channel as “semi-liquid” income products, often with the suggestion that quarterly repurchase programs offered reasonable access to invested capital. The events of the past year show what those programs actually provide: liquidity that exists only when relatively few investors want it, and that can be capped, prorated, or suspended entirely at the very moment investors most want out.
These funds hold loans to private companies — assets that cannot be quickly sold to meet withdrawals without risking losses for remaining shareholders. That mismatch between illiquid assets and investor expectations of access is a core risk that brokers and financial advisors were required to understand and disclose before recommending these products.
Were Non-Traded BDCs Unsuitable for You?
Under FINRA’s suitability rule and SEC Regulation Best Interest, brokerage firms must conduct due diligence on the products they sell and have a reasonable basis to believe a recommendation is in the customer’s best interest, taking into account the investor’s age, liquidity needs, risk tolerance, and investment experience. Non-traded BDCs pay significant selling commissions, which can create an incentive to recommend them to investors who need access to their money — including retirees drawing income from their accounts.
If your financial advisor recommended a non-traded BDC without explaining that your money could be locked up indefinitely, or if you were overconcentrated in illiquid alternative investments, you may have grounds for a FINRA arbitration claim against the brokerage firm that sold you the investment.
How to Recover Non-Traded BDC Investment Losses
FINRA arbitration is a dispute resolution process that is typically faster and less expensive than court litigation. Claims are generally resolved in 12 to 18 months. When brokerage firms fail to perform adequate due diligence, misrepresent the risks of a product, or make unsuitable recommendations, they can be held liable for the resulting losses through FINRA arbitration.
Free Consultation with a Securities Attorney
If you are unable to redeem your non-traded BDC shares or have suffered investment losses in Apollo Debt Solutions, BCRED, a Blue Owl BDC, or another non-traded BDC, the securities attorneys of The White Law Group may be able to help you. For a free consultation, please call (888) 637-5510 or contact us online.
The White Law Group is a national securities fraud and investor protection law firm with offices in Chicago, Illinois, and Seattle, Washington.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. Why can’t I withdraw my money from my non-traded BDC?
Non-traded BDC shares do not trade on an exchange, so investors depend on the fund’s quarterly share repurchase program, which is typically capped at 5% of outstanding shares and can be reduced or suspended at the board’s discretion. When redemption requests exceed the cap — as they have at Apollo Debt Solutions, BCRED, and Blue Owl funds in 2026 — investors receive only a prorated portion of their request and must resubmit in future quarters.
2. Can I sue my financial advisor over non-traded BDC losses?
If your advisor recommended a non-traded BDC without adequately disclosing its liquidity restrictions and risks, or if the investment was unsuitable given your income needs and risk tolerance, you may be able to recover your losses through FINRA arbitration against the brokerage firm. Firms can be held liable for unsuitable recommendations, misrepresentations, and due diligence failures.
3. Which non-traded BDCs have limited or suspended redemptions?
As of mid-2026, Apollo Debt Solutions BDC and Blackstone Private Credit Fund (BCRED) have capped quarterly withdrawals at 5% despite much higher demand, Blue Owl Technology Income Corp. enforced its cap against redemption requests reportedly approaching 40% of shares, and Blue Owl Capital Corporation II suspended tender offers entirely as part of a wind-down. Other sponsors, including Ares and Partners Group, have reportedly imposed similar limits.
