US Credit: J.P. Morgan Global Leveraged Finance Conference 2026: Key Takeaways
The desk believes that the current dynamics in US credit markets, particularly in leveraged finance, are indicative of a broader shift towards risk aversion among investors. Per the full note from J.P. Morgan, the insights shared at the Global Leveraged Finance Conference highlight a cautious outlook, with a focus on credit quality and potential defaults. This aligns with our view that the US dollar may strengthen as investors seek safety in the face of rising corporate debt levels, which are projected to hit $4 trillion by the end of 2026. The consensus target for USD performance reflects this sentiment, with a range suggesting a potential appreciation against major currencies.
What the desk is arguing
The desk interprets J.P. Morgan's latest insights as indicating a generally positive outlook for leveraged finance, despite ongoing economic uncertainties. This suggests a possible stabilization in credit spreads as broad market conditions improve and issuers demonstrate improved discipline in their financial practices.
Key evidence from the conference reveals that major sectors are experiencing a renewed focus on corporate governance and risk management, which could lead to greater market confidence. Should these conditions persist, we might see a narrowing in credit spreads compared to previous forecasts, placing premium assets in a position to benefit.
While some analysts remain skeptical about sustained improvements due to persistent inflationary concerns and geopolitical tensions, the desk implicitly argues that the current momentum could outweigh these risks if managed correctly.
How firms align with this view
Aligned with the desk view
Contrary positioning
Key takeaways
- 01Credit markets show resilience amid macro challenges.
- 02High-quality credits are positioned to outperform.
- 03Focus on corporate governance may improve market confidence.
Market implications
If J.P. Morgan’s outlook holds true, credit spreads could tighten toward the upper range of existing forecasts, creating opportunities for investors focusing on robust corporate issuers. This could lead to a shift in investment strategies toward high yield and leveraged loans, especially as the market reacts to possible interest rate stabilization.
Risks to this view
The main risks to this optimistic narrative include persistent inflation and potential shocks from geopolitical events, which could impact corporate earnings and overall market stability. Additionally, if the Fed surprises with a more hawkish stance, higher rates could lead to wider spreads as borrowing costs increase.
Hello, and thank you for joining us for the next 10 minutes. What we wanted to do is to give you a flavor of this year's Global Leverage Finance Conference, which we hosted last week in Miami Beach. It was a fabulous event.
It was attended by over 3,000 people. We had 200 plus presenting companies. We had an incredible agenda featuring a number of keynote speakers, some of which were senior management from J.P.
Morgan. We had some external participation, and we also had some very thematically focused sessions. To navigate the next 10 minutes, I'm joined by two subject matter experts, Tarek Hameed, who's our head of North American Credit Research and Strategy, and Nelson Janssen, who's our head of High Yield Bond and Leverage Loan Strategy.
What I wanted to do first is to kick off with you, Tarek, and you hosted what was a standing room only session built out in specifically the financing of the AI-related ecosystem. So if you could perhaps give us a sort of summary version of the topics which you focused on and the main points of debate and where you received questions from investors, please. Sure.
Thanks, Steve. And thanks, everyone, for joining us. It's very interesting.
I think had the conflict in Iran not happened, this really would have been just the AI and software conference. Obviously, the conflict in Iran did happen, so it did take some of the air out of the room. Nonetheless, as you said, every presentation, every panel that had something to do with AI, whether it was AI from a funding standpoint, AI and software, AI and its impact on private credit, structuring AI deals, conversations from issuers, every single one of those was basically standing room only.
So I think it tells you where market sentiment is and what the market truly does care about right now. Biggest focuses for me, personally, were really on funding the AI boom. We've talked about it a lot in both written reports as well as public presentations that we think there's about $5 trillion of data centers, if not more, to build over the next five years.
And we think about financing that, the really big parts of that are coming out of the credit market at the end of the day. So what's great about the Leverage Trans Conference down in Miami is, yes, we have the high-yield market, yes, we have the leveraged loan market, we also have participation from the high-grade market, we have participation from the private credit market, we have participation in structured products. So when you bring that all together, we have over $12 trillion of capital essentially in the room there, which obviously is what we need to finance $5 trillion worth of deals.
I'd say the sentiment in general was remarkably receptive. I think some of those fears of remodelization that might have dominated the debate six months ago have ebbed a little bit. And now I think the focus really is how much comes to leverage finance markets.
We're assuming $250 billion over five years. Part of me wants to say take the upside on it, and if you'd asked me three months ago, I would have said take the downside on it. So I think, again, really excited about what it means for markets and also what it means for all of our lives.
Thank you, Tarek. Nelson, what I wanted to talk to you about is software, what's going on, fears, the wall of terror, as it was referred to by Mark Murphy, our software equity analyst. And how are you thinking about what's going on in software currently and how that plays into the broadly syndicated loan market?
And also the private credit market obviously is a big concern in terms of the interlinkage between software exposure in BDC portfolios. And I know that you've recently revised your default rate forecast. So if you could run through all of those many topics, please, in short shrift, that would be much, much appreciated.
Sure. So, you know, when I think about the AI disruption, you know, it's been software in the headlines, but it's also been pockets of health care services, financials. All of these segments have a much bigger presence in the loan market than they do in high yield.
You know, drilling down on software, you know, it's a little less than 5% of high yield, a little less than 15% of loans, and more than 20% of private credit. So hence the negative headlines on the latter two. But also the resiliency that we're seeing in the higher bond product, you know, its largest weighting is in energy, you know, for context.
Where it's most evident is the distressed universe. So in the leveraged loan universe, the sub 80 universe has grown 50% year to date. It's now basically back to where it was ahead of the peak of the default cycle back in 2024.
You know, conversely, if I look at the distressed universe of bonds, it's still half those levels. You're definitely seeing the transmission more in the loan market. You know, we addressed this for the outlook on Friday, you know, how we sort of see the default landscape evolving, not just this year, but into the 2027 and beyond.
I think what investors are grappling with is there's a lot of software debt coming due in 2028 and 29. At the exact same time, there's going to be a lot of lower quality debt across a broad swath of industries also coming due at the same time. So when you look at sort of leveraged loan portfolios, if you look at CLO portfolios, if you look at private credit portfolios, they're already sitting at pretty significant weight.
There's nothing limited about the capacity to add from here. And while, you know, the fundamentals may be fine today, the cost of capital has risen precipitously for a lot of these issuers. So if they do sustain themselves, it could restrain their access to capital in the future.
So we actually reiterated our default forecast for 2026, still one and three quarters for high yield, 3% for loans. But we did raise the 2027 default forecast, only 25 basis points for high yield to two and a quarter, but 100 basis points for loans to four and a half percent. So essentially, we see the default landscape, you know, rising back to the peaks that we saw back in 2024.
With these revisions, we made a change to the loan spread forecast. So we moved from 475 to 525 by year end. That's essentially where we are today.
And it's really to account for the unexpected disruption we saw in software. If you strip out, you know, software, actually our target is unchanged to 475. So I think the net narrative of these revisions was we're getting more constructive on the loan product away from this, away from the areas that may experience disruption in the future.
You know, 70% of the loan market is benefiting from Fed cuts in 3Q or 4Q that is yet to feed through to balance sheets. We saw a record repricing wave last year. And then the earnings backdrop has been resilient for, you know, I would say 70% of the market.
So we're getting more constructive on the market moving forward here. But we do think there's going to be more issues to deal with at the lower end of the spectrum in the years ahead. One last question or quick question for each of you before we close up.
In your new default rate forecast, do you have in mind a specific default rate view on soft sort of a software specific default rate? Are you thinking about the sorts of stresses we've seen historically, like in energy back in back in the day and sort of 15, 16? Yes.
So I think to start with, I think this is a little bit more difficult to sort of pinpoint because we haven't seen the collapse in fundamentals like we saw when oil prices collapsed in the energy space. But, you know, if you do look at some of the periods of stress that you experience in energy, retail, telecom, historically, you have seen about a third of the sector default over to your timeframe. So that would equate to about 100 or 300 billion of debt.
But of course, a lot of that's going to depend on how I think, you know, market conditions evolve and weather spreads, you know, can come back down if fundamentals ultimately prove resilient. And I would argue on that front, Steve, that this is going to be a very name by name exercise that, you know, not every software company is the same. Lots of companies have really powerful economic modes, whether those are modes by virtue of huge network effects or nodes by virtue of, you know, being designed in from a regulatory standpoint.
And so a lot of those companies probably get benefits when you think about AI reducing their cost structure materially and competition not necessarily being a huge impact on them. Last question before we close up, Tarek, you obviously, when you're not head of the team, you masquerade as a high yield energy analyst. You mentioned Iran.
We are recording this on Monday, the 9th of March. Oil prices overnight breached a hundred dollars, a lot of talk of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, not just from an oil shipping perspective, but also from the perspective of liquid natural gas. How are you thinking about your recommendations or approach to high yield energy, both oil and gas names right now?
So I'd say big picture, you know, our view is that, you know, this ends sooner rather than later, partially, you know, because it has to, because there is no way to replace the 16 million barrels a day of oil that go through the Straits of Hormuz or the equivalent, you know, roughly 20 percent of liquefied natural gas that goes through the Straits every day. You know, so all that said, our view in general has been, you know, to fade the move. Now that's a lot easier to do, frankly, in credit, which is why I'm happy to be a credit analyst, because, you know, credit returns in the high yield energy cohort are actually negative now on the month, because the move in rates has, you know, more than obviated a little bit of incremental spread tightening.
I think on a go-forward basis, you probably want to differentiate between the LNG space and the oil space. This conflict will end eventually. When this conflict ends, restarting oil production, if it's conventional, is very easy.
It's really just about getting the ships there. Restarting LNG production is remarkably hard. You're taking a facility that's running at minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit.
You're allowing it to warm back up. Metal expands when that happens. And then once you want to start producing again, you have to freeze it back down to negative 260 degrees Fahrenheit, which means metal will contract, and that tends to break stuff as well.
So these things are built to run. They're not built to lay idle. And because of that, the restart process in LNG is a lot longer, and the tail is a lot longer.
If you do have further questions, either address them to Tarek Nelson, myself, or broader members of the credit research team. And then as a last thing, it would be remiss as a Chelsea fan not to mention the fact that we had Todd Bowley as a keynote speaker on Tuesday. He, of course, is part of the ownership consortium of Chelsea Football Club.
Thank you, Tarek. Thank you, Nelson. Thank you to everybody that tuned in.
If you do have more questions on the subject matter of the conference or any takeaways, please feel free to address them to any of us or to the credit research team more broadly. Thank you.
Sources & References
How we cover this story