8 Comments
 

Right. Covenants are meant to grant lenders access to remedies if performance or liquidity declines. So if you’re setting covenants to a 40% headroom / cushion, you’re setting it so that the covenant would be violated and lenders could exercise remedies if EBITDA decline by 40% from the level at close. More practically, covenants are typically set at cushions to the sponsors projection model. 

 

okay that makes sense. thank you

40% from opening ebitda is quite a large underperforme, particularly given ebitda is usually forecast to increase after Close

let me know if I've misunderstood

 

I think that’s it. One way to think about the covenant cushion is how far can ebitda decline before the company will no longer generate positive free cash flow after its debt service. So if ebitda can decline 40% but still cover fixed charges like principal amortization, interest, caped, etc., then that could be an ok covenant cushion. But if a 40% decline in ebitda means that they can’t pay their interest expense anymore, then that might be too much of a cushion. 

 

This is also a possibility should be pretty clear in the documentation and refer to “springing” or “RCF utilization” or something to that effect. 
 

I recently underwrite a deal with a 35% RCF springer set at a 40% cushion to closing leverage lol — absolutely zero teeth but that’s what the big boy sponsors can get done in the syndicated market (at least I hope it clears the market LOL)

 
Most Helpful

In eum rerum veritatis deleniti. Qui repellat esse tempore aut ad consequatur ut quae. Sapiente iste repellat fuga debitis qui. Aut saepe ipsum dolore sit iste.

Qui sit aspernatur ex sit quisquam commodi. Repellat iusto perspiciatis qui fugiat. Autem iusto sed veniam ut deleniti blanditiis. Similique mollitia laborum voluptatem. Soluta ea minima cum. Omnis veniam provident fugiat fugit. Recusandae quae ut nam a sed.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 03 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (51) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (26) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (15) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”