Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions
ARCC vs PFLT
Ares Capital Corporation versus PennantPark Floating Rate Capital Ltd. — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.
ARCC wins 4–1 on our six-dimension comparison, but PFLT can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.
Scorecard at a glance
| Dimension | ARCC | PFLT | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield | 10.32% | 16.36% | PFLT wins |
| Dividend safety | 3.8/10 | 1.9/10 | ARCC wins |
| Growth trend | +1.32% vs 5y | +5.44% vs 5y | ARCC wins |
| Volatility (beta) | 0.62 | 0.74 | ARCC wins |
| Scale | $13.5B | $734M | ARCC wins |
| Tax efficiency | Qualified-eligible | Qualified-eligible | Tie |
| Overall | 4 wins | 1 wins | ARCC wins |
Dimension by dimension
PFLT wins on yield (16.36% vs 10.32%)
On a $10,000 investment that's about $604 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
ARCC wins on safety (3.8/10 vs 1.9/10)
Our score combines yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size. ARCC scores better on the weighted average of those factors.
ARCC shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend
ARCC's yield is 1.32% above its 5y average, versus 5.44% for PFLT. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
ARCC is less volatile (beta 0.62 vs 0.74)
Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.
ARCC is 18.4× larger by market cap
Larger companies tend to have tighter spreads, deeper liquidity, and lower closure risk.
Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
How we compare these
Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.
This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.
Frequently asked
Which is better for income, ARCC or PFLT?
ARCC wins 4–1 on our six-dimension comparison, but PFLT can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.
ARCC vs PFLT: which has a higher dividend yield?
ARCC yields 10.32% and PFLT yields 16.36%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $604 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
Is ARCC or PFLT a safer dividend in 2026?
ARCC scores 3.8/10 (Weak) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. PFLT scores 1.9/10 (Risky). ARCC is the safer pick on our scoring model.
Which has better dividend growth, ARCC or PFLT?
ARCC's yield is 1.32% above its 5y average, versus 5.44% for PFLT. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
ARCC vs PFLT: which is more tax-efficient?
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
Already own ARCC or PFLT? See if the other adds anything.
Connect your brokerage and Infnits checks whether adding ARCC to your existing portfolio actually diversifies — or just duplicates exposure (ETF look-through included).
Check overlap with my portfolio →