CoreWeave Closes $2.6 Billion Loan Facility (DDTL 5.5)
$2.6bn DDTL at SOFR+550, ~5yr, Ba2/BB+, JPMorgan/MUFG; >$30bn debt+equity raised YTD. ~5yr facility against ~3yr average customer contracts — lenders now financing shorter-dated contracts, taking re-lease/residual risk.
CoreWeave — DDTL 5.5, $2.6bn (closed 2026-08-10)
Lead
CoreWeave closed a $2.6 billion delayed draw term loan ("DDTL 5.5 Facility") priced at SOFR + 5.50%, tenor approximately five years, rated Ba2 (Moody's) / BB+ (Fitch). JPMorgan and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group acted as joint lead arrangers and bookrunners. Proceeds fund purchase and deployment of HPC-backed infrastructure dedicated to customer contracts. The company states it has now raised more than $30 billion in debt and equity capital year to date. The transaction was meaningfully oversubscribed.
Key figures
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Size | $2.6bn |
| Pricing | SOFR + 5.50% |
| Tenor | ~5 years |
| Underlying customer contracts | ~3 years average |
| Ratings | Ba2 / BB+ |
| Arrangers | JPMorgan, MUFG |
| Raised YTD (debt + equity) | >$30bn |
The structural change, in the company's own words
"Lenders are now comfortable financing shorter-dated contracts, which allows us to target a wider variety of customers, including global enterprises that typically favor shorter-term agreements" — Brannin McBee, co-founder and CDO
That is the substantive novelty and it is a term-mismatch statement: a ~5-year facility against ~3-year average customer contracts. The facility explicitly contemplates renewal of existing contracts or re-leasing capacity to other customers at contract end, subject to credit-agreement criteria. The residual-value risk on the GPU fleet has, in other words, been partly moved onto the lender — priced, presumably, in the spread.
Why it is on this rung — read as a series, not a row
This rung's value here is comparative. Across three CoreWeave facilities on the same borrower and broadly the same collateral, inside about one year:
| Facility | Date | Size | Pricing | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDTL 4.0 | (2025, unpicked 08-30 candidate) | $8.5bn | SOFR + 225 / ~5.9% fixed | A3 / A(low) |
| DDTL 5.0 | 2026-05-18 | $3.1bn | SOFR + 450 | Ba2 / BB+ |
| DDTL 5.5 | 2026-08-10 | $2.6bn | SOFR + 550 | Ba2 / BB+ |
SOFR+225 → +450 → +550, with ratings falling from A3/A(low) to Ba2/BB+, and facility size shrinking $8.5bn → $3.1bn → $2.6bn. That is a cost-of-capital curve on GPU-backed debt, and it exists only as a comparison — no single release contains it.
Limitations — and the honest complication
- Issuer press release, not a filed credit agreement. No covenants, advance rates, amortisation schedule, draw conditions or collateral haircuts are disclosed. Those are where the real risk sits.
- The three facilities are not strictly like-for-like. DDTL 4.0 was rated investment grade and structured differently (fixed-rate component, different customer concentration); comparing headline spreads across differently-structured facilities overstates precision. The direction is solid; the magnitude is not a clean spread series.
- Widening spread ≠ closing market. Each of these was oversubscribed, and DDTL 5.0 priced tighter than launch. A close read that reported only the widening would be wrong — see the DDTL 5.0 file.
- ">$30bn raised YTD" mixes debt and equity and is unaudited company framing; it is a fundraising total, not leverage.
- Customer names and contract counterparty credit are not disclosed here.
Source: CoreWeave, "CoreWeave Closes $2.6 Billion Loan Facility", 2026-08-10.