When would a sponsor choose a unitranche facility over a traditional senior-plus-mezzanine structure?
An advanced Private Equity question — expect it in final rounds and case-heavy interviews (IB, PE, Big-4 Transaction Services).
THE SHORT ANSWER
A unitranche blends senior and subordinated debt into a single facility at one blended rate, provided by a direct lender or credit fund. Sponsors choose it for speed and certainty — one lender, one document, faster execution, helpful in a competitive auction — and simplicity (no intercreditor negotiation between senior and mezz, though an Agreement Among Lenders may sit behind it). It often offers higher leverage and more flexible, covenant-lite terms than a bank club, and a single relationship for add-on financing in a buy-and-build. The trade-off is cost: the blended rate is usually higher than the senior portion of a bank structure, and direct lenders price for the flexibility and the subordination they're taking. So you'd favor unitranche for mid-market deals prizing speed, certainty and leverage; a senior+mezz bank structure when minimizing all-in cost and accessing larger quantum matters more.
WHAT INTERVIEWERS LISTEN FOR
- ✓Unitranche = single blended senior+sub facility from a direct lender
- ✓Speed, certainty, simplicity (no senior/mezz intercreditor)
- ✓Often higher leverage, more flexible/cov-lite terms
- ✓Trade-off: higher blended cost than bank senior
COMMON MISTAKES
- ✗Thinking unitranche is just cheap senior debt
- ✗Ignoring the cost-vs-speed/flexibility trade-off
- ✗Not knowing it's direct-lender provided
Reading isn't the same as answering under pressure.
Interviewers don't hand you the model answer — you deliver yours on a clock. Practice this and 1,000+ questions with AI feedback on every answer.
RELATED QUESTIONS