MAIN keeps coming up in these yield-chasing articles and I get it

Saw another one of those "invest X and collect Y forever" pieces making the rounds. MAIN always ends up in the list, and honestly I understand why it looks attractive to someone running the numbers on a spreadsheet. But here is what I actually think about when I see MAIN pitched as a high-yield solution: the business development company structure means the payout quality depends heavily on net investment income, credit quality in the underlying portfolio, and management's ability to originate decent deals through a full credit cycle. MAIN has a pretty good track record on all three counts compared to most BDCs. The Nashville team has been doing this a long time and the externally managed vs internally managed distinction matters a lot here. MAIN is internally managed, which removes a significant conflict of interest that quietly eats shareholder value at other BDCs. What I keep coming back to is the supplemental dividend history. A company that pays specials on top of the regular monthly dividend, consistently, over years, is telling you something about the underlying cash generation. That is not nothing. The 12% blended yield these articles promise requires reaching for things that tend to break. MAIN is not at 12%. It is nowhere near that. Which is sort of the point. Anyone here been holding it long enough to live through 2020 with it? Curious how the income stream actually behaved.

Not financial advice.