What We Don’t Compromise, Even When Markets Tempt It

Most problems in markets start with people knowing the rules, and choosing to relax them.

It usually happens in small steps. A deal that’s almost right. An assumption that feels reasonable in the moment. A structure that’s slightly more complex than usual, but defensible. Each decision on its own can be explained. Over time, those decisions change what you’re actually holding.

If you’ve spent enough time in lending, you get familiar with these moments. Competition picks up. Capital needs somewhere to go. Other participants start moving more quickly. Discipline gets framed as being overly conservative. Patience starts to look like hesitation.

Those are the periods we pay the closest attention to how we operate.

At GPS, there are a number of things we’re careful not to compromise on, even when the market makes it tempting.

One of them is credit quality.
When deal flow tightens, the pressure to stretch is real. It doesn’t usually come as a big leap, more a series of small adjustments that feel harmless at the time. We’ve seen enough cycles to know that those small adjustments tend to show up later, usually when conditions change. Staying busy isn’t the same as staying disciplined.

Another is structure.
Complexity can look reassuring, especially when markets are competitive. In practice, it often makes it harder to see where the risk actually sits. We prefer structures that are straightforward and well understood. They’re easier to assess going in, and they tend to behave more predictably when things don’t go to plan.

The third is patience.
There’s always an expectation that capital should be working. Not acting can feel uncomfortable, particularly when others are active. But waiting is also a decision. In our experience, forcing an opportunity usually creates more problems than it solves.

None of this is particularly exciting, and it isn’t meant to be.

Markets tend to reward movement in the short term. Over longer periods, outcomes are shaped more by consistency. That consistency comes from applying the same standards when it would be easier not to.

For investors, this approach isn’t about maximising upside in any given year. It’s about reducing the chance of unpleasant surprises and building something that behaves in a familiar way across different environments.

Looking back, the decisions that matter most are rarely the bold ones made under pressure. They’re the quieter ones made repeatedly, even when doing so feels unfashionable.

That’s the approach we take. And it’s what we don’t compromise.