Why the interest coverage ratio focuses on net operating income insted of unlevered free cash flow?

A bank would prefer to know exactly how much money is available to pay interests, not just an approximation. Let's point out that after NOI there are still CapEx, Taxes, Admin Fees to pay. So why focusing on NOI instead of UFCF?

15 Comments
 
Best Response

The primary "below the line" (below NOI anyway) items you typically see are capex, tenant improvements, and leasing commissions. These can indeed be significant expenses. Lenders have a few ways of addressing this.

If the property is "unstabilized" (meaning there is significant work and/or vacancy to address and considerable cost in doing so) the lender will often structure a holdback or reserve. In other words, the lender will target a certain level of proceeds it is ultimately okay advancing to borrower, and will reduce that amount by whatever stabilization costs are budgeted. The lender will then advance cash from the reserve when there is proof those capital expenses have been paid, or once the property has achieved targeted operating performance. That way NOI more or less represents the cash flow that will be available from the property to cover debt service.

Alternatively, for a stabilized property, a lender might add a "capital reserve" line item in the formula used to calculate the debt service coverage ratio. So NOI as an owner thinks about it may not be the same (and is generally higher) than the NOI amount that the lender uses in its covenant test. When negotiating loan docs, it's important to pay careful attention to how these calculations work.

There are many other approaches (cash flow sweeps, springing letters of credit or springing recourse, etc), but in general NOI is used to approximate the long-run ability of the property to generate cash available for debt service, and one-time lumpy capital items are addressed separately.

 
re-ib-ny

The primary "below the line" (below NOI anyway) items you typically see are capex, tenant improvements, and leasing commissions. These can indeed be significant expenses. Lenders have a few ways of addressing this.

If the property is "unstabilized" (meaning there is significant work and/or vacancy to address and considerable cost in doing so) the lender will often structure a holdback or reserve. In other words, the lender will target a certain level of proceeds it is ultimately okay advancing to borrower, and will reduce that amount by whatever stabilization costs are budgeted. The lender will then advance cash from the reserve when there is proof those capital expenses have been paid, or once the property has achieved targeted operating performance. That way NOI more or less represents the cash flow that will be available from the property to cover debt service.

Alternatively, for a stabilized property, a lender might add a "capital reserve" line item in the formula used to calculate the debt service coverage ratio. So NOI as an owner thinks about it may not be the same (and is generally higher) than the NOI amount that the lender uses in its covenant test. When negotiating loan docs, it's important to pay careful attention to how these calculations work.

There are many other approaches (cash flow sweeps, springing letters of credit or springing recourse, etc), but in general NOI is used to approximate the long-run ability of the property to generate cash available for debt service, and one-time lumpy capital items are addressed separately.

Good stuff. I will add that lenders may even require many separate reserve accounts simply based on asset profile. Office space that is characterized by a few, large tenants with significant role during the term may require multiple tenant specific TI reserves.

 
DBI3171 re-ib-ny:

The primary "below the line" (below NOI anyway) items you typically see are capex, tenant improvements, and leasing commissions. These can indeed be significant expenses. Lenders have a few ways of addressing this.

If the property is "unstabilized" (meaning there is significant work and/or vacancy to address and considerable cost in doing so) the lender will often structure a holdback or reserve. In other words, the lender will target a certain level of proceeds it is ultimately okay advancing to borrower, and will reduce that amount by whatever stabilization costs are budgeted. The lender will then advance cash from the reserve when there is proof those capital expenses have been paid, or once the property has achieved targeted operating performance. That way NOI more or less represents the cash flow that will be available from the property to cover debt service.

Alternatively, for a stabilized property, a lender might add a "capital reserve" line item in the formula used to calculate the debt service coverage ratio. So NOI as an owner thinks about it may not be the same (and is generally higher) than the NOI amount that the lender uses in its covenant test. When negotiating loan docs, it's important to pay careful attention to how these calculations work.

There are many other approaches (cash flow sweeps, springing letters of credit or springing recourse, etc), but in general NOI is used to approximate the long-run ability of the property to generate cash available for debt service, and one-time lumpy capital items are addressed separately.

Good stuff. I will add that lenders may even require many separate reserve accounts simply based on asset profile. Office space that is characterized by a few, large tenants with significant role during the term may require multiple tenant specific TI reserves.

Agreed. Lenders will also distinguish between NOI DSCR and other expenses.

 

All of those things you listed are considered when making a mortgage. DSCR is just one metric and obviously not used alone. RE taxes, replacement reserve (ongoing cap ex) and management fees ("admin expense") are all included in underwritten NOI anyways. If there are big cap ex projects on the horizon the PCA will note them and the lender may require a reserve from loan proceeds be set aside for it.

 

Also, outside of the RE context many of those below the line items are somewhat discretionary. Yes I understand taxes is a big one that isn't really and there are certainly others but for ease of use and comparability the NOI is used. In the instance of say something like capex, a company is not likely going to default in order to build sink some money into a capital project.

 

I don't believe the OP was referring to RE taxes, I think he means income taxes, which are certainly irrelevant. Also, when you say "admin fees" are you referring to something along the lines of an Asset Management fee or management fees? In the case of a below the line asset management fee, this would be taken into account by the lender, but not necessarily used in DSCR calculation.

 

Sit nihil et culpa rerum. Nulla et reprehenderit voluptatibus accusantium dolor. Et ut id rerum repudiandae eaque voluptas ducimus.

Quas eos architecto omnis exercitationem eaque est ut. Vitae omnis eum odio asperiores quo excepturi laudantium. Nisi aliquam vitae inventore tempora quia voluptas saepe. Est temporibus repudiandae neque perspiciatis unde officiis.

Doloribus rerum nam est aspernatur debitis ab praesentium delectus. Quia voluptatem eum id ratione facilis labore. Eum qui ullam ut. Corrupti dolor voluptatem rerum perspiciatis sunt. Dolorem reiciendis nobis ab molestiae sed harum. Sint ut est natus dicta odit nulla.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
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...”