- Armchair Insider
- Posts
- Gentlemen Prefer Bonds
Gentlemen Prefer Bonds
2 Sales, 1 Buy, 2 Increases, 1 Hold On Tight

Tempted to add some FSCO on the dip but I’m at my max 5% allocation. Swapped some preferred shares for bonds. Sold BST because they’re ditching their options income strategy, and added more UTF and QDVO.
Some of the trades below took place after I recorded the upcoming “Top 10 Income Investments” episode on Youtube. The videos take at least a week to produce, and sometimes things can change over that period. Good thing we have… this newsletter!
The current portfolio yield is 11.07%.
3 Reasons Why I’m Sticking with FSCO
FSCO has taken a beating recently. A minor correction was in order given the recent interest rate cuts, and the bankruptcy of one of FSCO’s borrowers…but the beating was out of order.
First Brands…1 of FSCO’s approx 77 borrowers, represented less than 2% of their loan portfolio, when they declared bankruptcy in September. The market reacted as if FSCO took a 10% loss, when in fact it was a small fraction of that.
The scale of the loss was immediately visible on websites including CEFConnect, and FSCO’s home page. A chart comparing NAV to Price shows a very slight NAV decline in September.

First Brands going BK caused the NAV to dip…slightly.
Per the 8-K statement filed with the SEC by FSCO on October 13, 2025, FSCO has no further exposure to First Brands.
Additionally:
The net effect of the loss will be less than the original value of the loan after deducting a/ Income received from loan repayments prior to bankruptcy and b/ Recoveries from the securitization of the loan.
First Brands announced a lawsuit against its former chief executive and founder, Patrick James. If the fraud is proven, it would imply that the loan loss was an isolated event, and not necessarily foreseeable by an underwriter.
2/ Interest Rate Cuts Won’t Crush Dividends
Fed rate cuts will reduce revenue for floating rate lenders, until they can refinance their own source of debt at lower rates. However, there’s historical precedent for the (moderate) effect of lower interest rates on floating rate lenders….all the way down to a Fed Funds rate of almost zero in 2009 to 2015 and 2021.
During those periods, higher quality floating rate lenders in the BDC sector maintained or increased their regular dividends, despite low interest rates (eg. MAIN, ARCC, HTGC). A major recession would pose a substantial risk to the investment income for FSCO and BDC’s, but interest rate fluctuations are a regular, and anticipated factor of economic cycles.
It’s reasonable to expect that Fed rate cuts will affect the ability of FSCO to continue raising its dividend. However, I don’t expect a few 25 basis point interest rate cuts to cause FSCO to make substantial reductions to its dividend, if any.
3/ PIK is Misunderstood
Some concerns have been raised over the level of Payment in Kind (PIK) income in the FSCO loan portfolio. It is higher than the level found in a typical Business Development Company (BDC). However, FSCO is a Closed End Fund, not a BDC.
Historically, FSCO has originated loans with a higher than average level of PIK incorporated into the original loan terms. While shifting income from interest to PIK (eg. when a loan has reached non-accrual status) would be a warning sign of loan distress, it is not the same as structuring loans to incorporate PIK in the first place.
In summary, the First Brands bankruptcy and the Fed rate cuts were both minor negatives for FSCO, but the market reacted as if they were severe threats to FSCO’s operations.
Holding on Tight: I maintain a 5% allocation to FSCO.
FSCO NAV is available at either of the 2 links below:
FSCO 8-K Filing re First Brands is linked here:
First Brands Lawsuit article is linked here:
Trades
Sold BST (3.78%)
BST has had a great year, outpacing the S&P 500 for Total Return. I was planning to keep it unless the yield fell too low, or the price went too high (versus the NAV). However, as one of our Armchair Insider Lounge members pointed out, they’re changing their distribution policy.
The nature of the change is unclear, but per their press release linked below, they included the word “income” and deleted the phrase “current income” from their objectives. On a related note, they won’t be using options to generate income for the fund. These changes are effective tomorrow (Nov 10, 2025).
The BST Press Release is linked here:
What does this mean?
I don’t know…and that’s the point. They may reduce distributions, keep them the same, or increase them using capital gains and/or return of capital instead of option premiums. The net effect may be good or bad, but I’m not comfortable holding an income investment without knowing how it works.
Down the road, if the policy is clarified, and it remains a desirable income investment, I’m open to buying back in.
To learn more about BST and changes to their distribution policy (pros and cons), here’s a link to analysis of BST by Nick Ackerman on Seeking Alpha:
Sold DX.C (3.2% Allocation)
Love is a strong word, but I really really like this preferred stock. As mortgage REIT’s go, Dynex Capital is good. This past year it has outperformed the S&P 500!

DX common stock is impressive but wild.
Not bad for a lender. However, that price action is a roller coaster and mREIT’s are generally too risky for my taste. Their preferred share however, has been rock solid. Lower yield, lower risk, and almost no volatility.

This is what I like about Preferred Shares….Low Volatility.
I want to hold DX.PR.C forever, but it has become a little too popular, and the price shot past $26. Preferred shares are supposed to hover around their $25 par value if they’re “Callable”. This is another word for “Redeemable”, meaning the issuer has the right to buy the preferred share back for $25.
As I write this, DX.C is priced at $26.11. If Dynex Capital “Called” this preferred share, a shareholder would only receive $25 plus accrued and unpaid dividends. It’s a small risk, but the higher price goes, the greater the risk becomes.
Bought ADAMH (3.2% Allocation)
This is a simple switch…
Sold mREIT the DX Series C preferred shares as explained above, and bought mREIT corporate bonds (ADAMH).
Mortgage REIT’s (mREIT’s) invest in real estate loans (as opposed to physical real estate). They generate income from the spread between their cost of debt, and the interest they receive from the mortgages (or mortgage backed securities) they hold. The yields are far higher (often more than 10%) than regular REIT’s, but the dividends are less reliable, and the prices are volatile. I generally avoid holding mREIT common shares.
However, the preferreds and bonds issued by mREIT’s are a different story. Their income doesn’t rise and fall with the profitability of the business. They pay shareholders based on the terms defined in advance (eg. 7% of $25 per year, paid quarterly, or SOFR + 5% of $25 per year, paid quarterly). There’s no change to the distribution policy unless the business itself comes under threat. In that scenario, the distributions for the common stock would need to go to zero before the preferred or bond dividends were at risk.
ADAMH is one of several bonds issued by Adamas Trust (formerly known as New York Mortgage Trust). The common stock yields 13.14%, and the ADAMH bond currently yields 9.71%. The income is fixed at 9.875% of $25 per year, paid quarterly.
Further information about the types of single family and multi family loans held by Adamas Trust can be found on their website, here:
Full terms of the ADAMH bond are available at Quantum Online, here:
UTF: Increased Allocation (from 2.16% to 4.05%)
Adding to last month’s purchase of this utility fund. The price remains attractive at a 7.6% discount to NAV. The recent price dip was caused by a rights offering. These tend to confuse investors, and result in some short term selling.
With the exception of the 2008 recession, UTF has a 21 year history of consistent distribution payments.
If you want to learn more about UTF, here’s a review.
QDVO: Increased Allocation (from 2.06 to 3.96%)
This covered call ETF is a blend of growth and income (much like BST). It’s only been around since August 2024, but it is leading the pack of tech focused income funds. Despite offering a current yield of 9.5%, over the past year it has outperformed the NASDAQ 100 for Total Return.

QDVO still a nose ahead of the NASDAQ 100 (QQQ)
Typically, a covered call fund would underperform a benchmark index because it's selling some of the upside in exchange for current income. The implication is that the stock selection for this actively managed fund is its advantage. Whether this is sustainable over the long term, or during a major correction remain to be seen. So far, it handled the tariff correction in April 2025 like a champ.
If you want to learn more about QDVO, here’s a review:
Recent Videos
(Published Since the Last Edition of Armchair Insider)
Armchair Insider Portfolio
|
(*If you have difficulty opening the portfolio directly from your email, try opening the newsletter in a browser, then opening the portfolio)
Basic Resources
Dividend Tracker: Snowball
Primary Research Tool: Seeking Alpha
How I Use Seeking Alpha to Find Income Stocks/Funds: Video Tutorial
Closed End Fund Database: CEF Connect
Advanced Resources
How to Buy Preferred Shares: 67 Page Guide to Preferred Shares
Preferred Stock Profiles (Rates, Call Dates, etc): Quantum
BDC Weekly Insights Report: Raymond James
BDC, Preferred Stock, & Bond News, Portfolios, and Trades: Systematic Income Investing
Thanks for stopping by…see you in the next issue!
Regards,

Armchair Income
Disclaimer: I’m sharing information about my investments, but I’m not making any recommendations to you to buy or sell anything. Each investor has their own goals, risk tolerance, and timeline, and must make their own investments decisions…then take responsibility for those decisions. I’m not a financial advisor, and I don’t advise anybody regarding their investments. If the information in this newsletter is useful or helpful in any way, then my goal is achieved :) Some of the links provided above may be associated with affiliate programs. If so, use of those links will not incur any additional cost to the user (and will, in many cases, provide a benefit to the user) and may result in a referral commission to this newsletter.

