MFA FINANCIAL INC

Previous wording

•Our investments in residential mortgage (including BPLs), residential mortgage securities, commercial mortgage loans and other assets involve credit risk.

Current wording

•Our investments in residential mortgage (including BPLs), residential mortgage securities, commercial mortgage loans and other assets involve credit risk, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Previous wording

Our investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.

Current wording

•Our ownership of Lima One and our investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.

Previous wording

The results of our business operations are affected by many factors, a number of which are beyond our control, and primarily depend on, among other things, the level of our net interest income, the market value of our assets and collateral, which is driven by numerous factors, including the supply and demand for residential mortgage assets in the marketplace, our ability to source new investments at appropriate yields, the terms and availability of adequate financing, general economic and real estate conditions (both on a national and local level), the impact of government actions, especially in the real estate and mortgage sector, our competition, and the credit performance of our credit sensitive residential mortgage assets. Our net interest income varies primarily as a result of changes in interest rates, the slope of the yield curve (i.e., the differential between long-term and short-term interest rates), market credit spreads, borrowing costs (i.e., our interest expense), delinquencies, defaults and prepayment speeds on our investments, the behavior of which involves various risks and uncertainties. Interest rates and conditional prepayment rates (or CPRs) (which are a measure the amount of unscheduled principal prepayment on a loan or security) vary according to the type of investment, conditions in the financial markets, fiscal and monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions, competition and other factors, none of which can be predicted with any certainty or is within our control. Therefore, a period of rising interest rates and flattening or inverted yield curves, such as the conditions experienced during 2022 and 2023, which may continue in 2024, presents challenges on our ability to effectively manage the risks associated with our business operations, including interest rate, prepayment, financing, liquidity and credit risks, while maintaining our qualification as a REIT.

Current wording

The results of our business operations are affected by many factors, a number of which are beyond our control, and primarily depend on, among other things, the level of our net interest income, the market value of our assets and collateral, which is driven by numerous factors, including the supply and demand for residential mortgage assets in the marketplace, our ability to source new investments at appropriate yields, the terms and availability of adequate financing, general economic and real estate conditions (both on a national and local level), the impact of government actions and changes in the U.S. political environment (including as a result of the change in administration), especially in the real estate and mortgage sector, our competition, and the credit performance of our credit sensitive residential mortgage assets. Our net interest income varies primarily as a result of changes in interest rates, the slope of the yield curve (i.e., the differential between long-term and short-term interest rates), market credit spreads, borrowing costs (i.e., our interest expense), delinquencies, defaults and prepayment speeds on our investments, the behavior of which involves various risks and uncertainties. Interest rates and conditional prepayment rates (or CPRs) (which are a measure the amount of unscheduled principal prepayment on a loan or security) vary according to the type of investment, conditions in the financial markets, fiscal and monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions, competition and other factors, none of which can be predicted with any certainty or is within our control. Therefore, a period of high interest rates and flattening or inverted yield curves, such as the conditions experienced during the past few years, which may continue in 2025, presents challenges on our ability to effectively manage the risks associated with our business operations, including interest rate, prepayment, financing, liquidity and credit risks, while maintaining our qualification as a REIT.

Previous wording

Our portfolio of residential whole loans (including BPLs) is by far our largest asset class and represented approximately 84% of our total assets as of December 31, 2023. We expect that our investment portfolio in residential whole loans will continue to increase during 2024. As an investor in residential whole loans, we are subject to the risk that the underlying borrowers may default or have defaulted on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest. A number of factors impact a borrower’s ability to repay including, among other things, changes in employment status, changes in interest rates or the availability of credit, and changes in real estate values. In addition to the credit risk associated with these assets, residential whole loans are less liquid than certain of our other credit sensitive assets, which may make them more difficult to dispose of if the need or desire arises. In addition, if actual results are different from our assumptions in determining the prices paid to acquire such loans, particularly if the market value of the underlying properties decreases significantly subsequent to purchase, we may incur significant losses, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Current wording

Our portfolio of residential whole loans (including BPLs) is by far our largest asset class and represented approximately 77% of our total assets as of December 31, 2024. We expect that our investment portfolio in residential whole loans will continue to be our primary asset class in 2025. As an investor in residential whole loans, we are subject to the risk that the underlying borrowers may default or have defaulted on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest. A number of factors impact a borrower’s ability to repay including, among other things, changes in employment status, changes in interest rates or the availability of credit, and changes in real estate values. In addition to the credit risk associated with these assets, residential whole loans are less liquid than certain of our other credit sensitive assets, which may make them more difficult to dispose of if the need or desire arises. In addition, if actual results are different from our assumptions in determining the prices paid to acquire such loans, particularly if the market value of the underlying properties decreases significantly subsequent to purchase, we may incur significant losses, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Previous wording

•We may change our investment strategy, operating policies and/or asset allocations without stockholder consent.

Current wording

We may change our investment strategy, operating policies and/or asset allocations without stockholder consent, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Previous wording

We are not required to limit our assets in terms of geographic location, diversification or concentration, except that we concentrate in residential mortgage-related investments. Accordingly, our investment portfolio may be concentrated by geography (see below), asset type (as is the case currently, as residential whole loans are by far our most concentrated asset type), property type and/or borrower, increasing the risk of loss to us if the particular concentration in our portfolio is subject to greater risks or is undergoing adverse developments. In addition, adverse conditions in the areas where the properties securing or otherwise underlying our investments are located (including business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics and other factors) and local real estate conditions (such as oversupply or reduced demand) may have an adverse effect on the value of our investments. A material decline in the demand for real estate in these areas may materially and adversely affect us. Lack of diversification can increase the correlation of non-performance and foreclosure risks to these investments.

Current wording

We are not required to limit our assets in terms of geographic location, diversification or concentration (including borrower concentration), except that we concentrate in residential mortgage-related investments. Accordingly, our investment portfolio may be concentrated by geography (see the Risk Factor below), asset type (as is the case currently, as residential whole loans are by far our most concentrated asset type), property type and/or borrower, increasing the risk of loss to us if the particular concentration in our portfolio is subject to greater risks or is undergoing adverse developments. In addition, adverse conditions in the areas where the properties securing or otherwise underlying our investments are located (including business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics, availability and cost of insurance, and other factors) and local real estate conditions (such as oversupply or reduced demand) may have an adverse effect on the value of our investments. A material decline in the demand for real estate in these areas may materially and adversely affect us. Lack of diversification can increase the correlation of non-performance and foreclosure risks to these investments.

Previous wording

While the determination of the fair value of our investment assets generally takes into consideration valuations provided by third-party dealers and pricing services, the final determination of exit price fair values for our investment assets is based on our judgment, and such valuations may differ from those provided by third-party dealers and pricing services. Valuations of certain assets may be difficult to obtain or may not be reliable (particularly as related to residential whole loans, as discussed below). In general, dealers and pricing services heavily disclaim their valuations as such valuations are not intended to be binding bid prices. Additionally, dealers may claim to furnish valuations only as an accommodation and without special compensation, and so they may disclaim any and all liability arising out of any inaccuracy or incompleteness in valuations. Depending on the complexity and liquidity of an asset, valuations of the same asset can vary substantially from one dealer or pricing service to another. Wide disparity in asset valuations may be more pronounced during periods when market participants are engaged in distressed sales.

Current wording

While the determination of the fair value of our investment assets generally takes into consideration valuations provided by third-party dealers and pricing services, the final determination of exit price fair values for our investment assets is based on our judgment, and such valuations may differ from those provided by third-party dealers and pricing services. Valuations of certain assets may be difficult to obtain or may not be reliable (particularly as related to residential whole loans, as discussed below). In general, dealers and pricing services heavily disclaim their valuations as such valuations are not intended to be binding bid prices.

Previous wording

The difficulty in valuation is particularly significant with respect to our less liquid investments such as our re-performing loans (or RPLs) and non-performing loans (or NPLs). RPLs are loans on which a borrower was previously delinquent but has resumed repaying. Our ability to sell RPLs for a profit depends on the borrower continuing to make payments. An RPL could become a NPL, which could reduce our earnings. Our investments in residential whole loans may require us to work with our designated third-party mortgage loan servicers to the extent that they engage in workout negotiations or a restructuring with a borrower and/or the possibility of foreclosure. These processes may be lengthy and expensive. If loans become REO, we, through a designated servicer that we retain, will have to manage these properties and may not be able to sell them. See the Risk Factor captioned “Credit and Other Risks Related to Our Investments - Our ability to sell REO on terms acceptable to us or at all may be limited.”

Current wording

The difficulty in valuation is particularly significant with respect to our less liquid investments such as our re-performing loans (or RPLs), non-performing loans (or NPLs) and Business purpose loans. RPLs are loans on which a borrower was previously delinquent but has resumed repaying. Our ability to sell RPLs for a profit depends on the borrower continuing to make payments. An RPL could become a NPL, which could reduce our earnings. Our investments in residential whole loans may require us to work with our designated third-party mortgage loan servicers to the extent that they engage in workout negotiations or a restructuring with a borrower and/or the possibility of foreclosure. These processes may be lengthy and expensive. If loans become REO, we, through a designated servicer that we retain, will have to manage these properties and may not be able to sell them. See the Risk Factor captioned “Credit and Other Risks Related to Our Investments - Our ability to sell REO on terms acceptable to us or at all may be limited.”

Previous wording

The U.S. Government, through the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury Department, the Federal Housing Administration (or FHA), the CFPB, and other agencies have in the past implemented, and may in the future implement, a number of federal programs designed to help homeowners avoid residential mortgage loan foreclosures, reduce or forgive certain mortgage payments, or otherwise mitigate losses for homeowners. In addition, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac implemented their Flex Modification foreclosure prevention program, developed at the direction of the FHFA. Federal loss mitigation programs, as well as private loss mitigation programs offered by investors and servicers, may involve, among other things, the modification of mortgage loans to reduce the principal amount of the loans (through forbearance and/or forgiveness) and/or the rate of interest payable on the loans, or to extend the payment terms of the loans. Especially with respect to residential whole loan investments, loan modifications with respect to a given underlying loan, including, but not limited to, those related to principal payment deferrals, forbearance agreements, forgiveness and coupon reduction, could negatively impact the realized yields and cash flows on such investments. These loan modification programs, future legislative or regulatory actions, including possible amendments to the bankruptcy laws, that result in the modification of outstanding residential mortgage loans, as well as changes in the requirements necessary to qualify for refinancing mortgage loans with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, may materially adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, these assets. See the Risk Factor captioned “Risks Associated with Adverse Developments in the Mortgage Finance and Credit Markets and Financial Markets Generally - Actions by the U.S. Government designed to stabilize or reform the financial markets may not achieve their intended effect or otherwise benefit our business, and could materially adversely affect our business.”

Current wording

The U.S. Government, through the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury Department, the Federal Housing Administration (or FHA), the CFPB, and other agencies have in the past implemented, and may in the future implement, a number of federal programs designed to help homeowners avoid residential mortgage loan foreclosures, reduce or forgive certain mortgage payments, or otherwise mitigate losses for homeowners. In addition, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac implemented their Flex Modification foreclosure prevention program, developed at the direction of the FHFA. Federal loss mitigation programs, as well as private loss mitigation programs offered by investors and servicers, may involve, among other things, the modification of mortgage loans to reduce the principal amount of the loans (through forbearance and/or forgiveness) and/or the rate of interest payable on the loans, or to extend the payment terms of the loans. Especially with respect to residential whole loan investments, loan modifications with respect to a given underlying loan, including, but not limited to, those related to principal payment deferrals, forbearance agreements, forgiveness and coupon reduction, could negatively impact the realized yields and cash flows on such investments. These loan modification programs, future legislative or regulatory actions, including possible amendments to the bankruptcy laws, that result in the modification of outstanding residential mortgage loans, as well as changes in the requirements necessary to qualify for refinancing mortgage loans with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, may materially adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, these assets. See the Risk Factor captioned “Risks Associated with Adverse Developments in the Mortgage Finance and Credit Markets and Financial Markets Generally - Actions and Regulations by the U.S. Government designed to stabilize or reform the financial markets may not achieve their intended effect or otherwise benefit our business, and could materially adversely affect our business.”

Previous wording

The Biden administration and Congress may propose and adopt changes in federal policies that have significant impacts on the legal and regulatory framework affecting the mortgage industry. These changes, including personnel changes at the applicable regulatory agencies, may alter the nature and scope of oversight affecting the mortgage finance industry generally and particularly the future role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Current wording

The new U.S. Presidential administration and Congress may propose and adopt changes in federal policies that have significant impacts on the legal and regulatory framework affecting the mortgage industry. These changes, including personnel changes at the applicable regulatory agencies, may alter the nature and scope of oversight affecting the mortgage finance industry generally and particularly the future role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Previous wording

We rely on third-party servicers to service and manage the mortgages underlying our residential whole loans. We do not interface with borrowers under the mortgage loans in which we invest or otherwise service the mortgage loans in which we invest. The ultimate returns generated by these investments may depend on the quality of the servicer. If a third-party servicer is not vigilant in seeing that borrowers make their required monthly payments, borrowers may be less likely to make these payments, resulting in a higher frequency of default. If a servicer takes longer to liquidate non-performing mortgages, our losses related to those loans may be higher than originally anticipated. Any failure by servicers to service these mortgages and/or to competently manage and dispose of REO properties could negatively impact the value of these investments and our financial performance. In addition, while we have contracted with third-party servicers to carry out the actual servicing of the loans (including all direct interface with the borrowers), for loans that we acquire together with the related servicing rights, we are nevertheless ultimately responsible, vis-à-vis the borrowers and state and federal regulators, for ensuring that the loans are serviced in accordance with the terms of the related notes and mortgages and applicable law and regulation. (See the Risk Factor captioned “Regulatory Risk and Risks Related to the Investment Company Act of 1940 - Our business is subject to extensive regulation.”) In light of the current regulatory environment, such exposure could be significant even though we might have contractual claims against our servicers for any failure to service the loans to the required standard.

Current wording

The ultimate returns generated by these investments may depend on the quality of the servicer. If a third-party servicer is not vigilant in seeing that borrowers make their required monthly payments, borrowers may be less likely to make these payments, resulting in a higher frequency of default. If a servicer takes longer to liquidate non-performing mortgages, our losses related to those loans may be higher than originally anticipated. Any failure by servicers to service these mortgages and/or to competently manage and dispose of REO properties could negatively impact the value of these investments and our financial performance. In addition, while we have contracted with third-party servicers to carry out the actual servicing of the loans (including all direct interface with the borrowers), for loans that we acquire together with the related servicing rights, we are nevertheless ultimately responsible, vis-à-vis the borrowers and state and federal regulators, for ensuring that the loans are serviced in accordance with the terms of the related notes and mortgages and applicable law and regulation. (See the Risk Factor captioned “Regulatory Risk and Risks Related to the Investment Company Act of 1940 - Our business is subject to extensive regulation.”) In light of the current regulatory environment, such exposure could be significant even though we might have contractual claims against our servicers for any failure to service the loans to the required standard.

Previous wording

REO properties are illiquid relative to other assets we own. Furthermore, real estate markets are affected by many factors that are beyond our control, such as general and local economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and supply and demand. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any REO for the price or on the terms set by us or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of an REO. In certain circumstances, we may be required to expend cash to correct defects, pay expenses or to make improvements before a property can be sold, and we cannot assure that we will have cash available to make these payments. As a result, our ownership of REOs could materially and adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations.

Current wording

REO properties are illiquid relative to other assets we own. Furthermore, real estate markets are affected by many factors that are beyond our control, such as general and local economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and supply and demand. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any REO for the price or on the terms set by us or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of an REO. In certain circumstances, we may be required to expend cash to correct defects, pay expenses (including insurance) or to make improvements before a property can be sold, and we cannot assure that we will have cash available to make these payments. As a result, our ownership of REOs could materially and adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2023, we had approximately $79.9 million of investments in financial instruments whose cash flows are considered to be largely dependent on underlying MSRs that either directly or indirectly act as collateral for the investment. Generally, we have the right to receive certain cash flows from the owner of the MSRs that are generated from the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with the MSRs. While we do not own MSRs, our investments in MSR-related assets indirectly expose us to risks associated with MSRs, such as the illiquidity of MSRs, the risks associated with servicing MSRs (that include, for example, significant regulatory risks and costs) and the ability of the owner to successfully manage its MSR portfolio. Furthermore, the value of MSRs is highly sensitive to changes in prepayment rates. Decreasing market interest rates are generally associated with increases in prepayment rates as borrowers are able to refinance their loans at lower costs. Prepayments result in the partial or complete loss of the cash flows from the related MSR. If these or other MSR-related risks come to fruition, the value of our MSR-related assets could decline significantly.

Current wording

As of December 31, 2024, we had approximately $54.6 million of investments in financial instruments whose cash flows are considered to be largely dependent on underlying MSRs that either directly or indirectly act as collateral for the investment. Generally, we have the right to receive certain cash flows from the owner of the MSRs that are generated from the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with the MSRs. While we do not own MSRs, our investments in MSR-related assets indirectly expose us to risks associated with MSRs, such as the illiquidity of MSRs, the risks associated with servicing MSRs (that include, for example, significant regulatory risks and costs) and the ability of the owner to successfully manage its MSR portfolio. Furthermore, the value of MSRs is highly sensitive to changes in prepayment rates. Decreasing market interest rates are generally associated with increases in prepayment rates as borrowers are able to refinance their loans at lower costs. Prepayments result in the partial or complete loss of the cash flows from the related MSR. If these or other MSR-related risks come to fruition, the value of our MSR-related assets could decline significantly.

Previous wording

•Our investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.

Current wording

Our ownership of Lima One and investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2023, we had approximately $19.8 million of non-controlling investments in certain loan originators from whom we acquire mortgage loans for investment on a periodic basis. These investments have taken the form of common equity and preferred equity. Unlike our investments in residential mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities, our investments in loan originators are unsecured and not collateralized by any property of the originators. In addition, we do not manage any of the loan originators in which we have made investments, and because none of our investments give us a controlling stake in any of the loan originators, our ability to influence the business and operations of the originators is limited, in some instances significantly so. Also, because these loan originators are private closely-held enterprises, there are significant restrictions on our ability to sell or otherwise transfer our investments (which are generally illiquid). In the event one or more of the loan originators in which we have made investments should experience a significant decline in its business and operations or otherwise not be able to respond adequately to managerial, compliance or operational challenges that it may encounter, we may be required to write-down all or a portion of the applicable investment, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

Current wording

As of December 31, 2024, we had goodwill of $61.1 million, which represents the excess of the fair value of consideration paid over the fair value of net assets acquired in connection with the acquisition of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Lima One. In addition, as of December 31, 2024, we had approximately $16.8 million of non-controlling investments in certain loan originators from whom we acquire mortgage loans for investment on a periodic basis. These investments have taken the form of common equity and preferred equity. Unlike our investments in residential mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities, our non-controlling investments in loan originators are unsecured and not collateralized by any property of the originators. In addition, we do not manage any of the loan originators in which we have made non-controlling investments, and because none of these investments give us a controlling stake in such loan originators, our ability to influence the business and operations of the originators is limited, in some instances significantly so. Also, because these loan originators are private closely-held enterprises, there are significant restrictions on our ability to sell or otherwise transfer our investments (which are generally illiquid). In the event Lima One or one or more of the loan originators in which we have made investments should experience a significant decline in its business and operations or otherwise not be able to respond adequately to managerial, compliance or operational challenges that it may encounter, we may be required to write-down all or a portion of the goodwill relating to Lima One or write down all or a portion of the applicable non-controlling investment, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

Previous wording

•If a counterparty to our repurchase transactions defaults on its obligation to resell the underlying security back to us at the end of the transaction term or if we default on our obligations under the repurchase agreement, we could incur losses. When we engage in repurchase transactions, we generally transfer securities to lenders (i.e., repurchase agreement counterparties) and receive cash from such lenders. Because the cash we receive from the lender when we initially transfer the securities to the lender is less than the value of those securities (this difference is referred to as the “haircut”), if the lender defaults on its obligation to transfer the same securities back to us, we would incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming there was no change in the value of the securities). Our exposure to defaults by counterparties may be more pronounced during periods of significant volatility in the market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets. At December 31, 2023, we had greater than 5% stockholders’ equity at risk to the following financing agreement counterparties: Wells Fargo (approximately 14.9%), Barclay’s Bank (approximately 8.9%) and Churchill (approximately 8.0%).

Current wording

•If a counterparty to our repurchase transactions defaults on its obligation to resell the underlying security back to us at the end of the transaction term or if we default on our obligations under the repurchase agreement, we could incur losses. When we engage in repurchase transactions, we generally transfer securities to lenders (i.e., repurchase agreement counterparties) and receive cash from such lenders. Because the cash we receive from the lender when we initially transfer the securities to the lender is less than the value of those securities (this difference is referred to as the “haircut”), if the lender defaults on its obligation to transfer the same securities back to us, we would incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming there was no change in the value of the securities). Our exposure to defaults by counterparties may be more pronounced during periods of significant volatility in the market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets. At December 31, 2024, we had greater than 5% stockholders’ equity at risk to the following financing agreement counterparties: Wells Fargo (approximately 9.1%) and Barclays (approximately 5.9%).

Previous wording

•Changes in interest rates, cyclical or otherwise, may materially adversely affect our profitability. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including fiscal and monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions, as well as other factors beyond our control. In general, we finance the acquisition of our investments through borrowings in the form of repurchase transactions, which exposes us to interest rate risk on the financed assets. The cost of our borrowings is based on prevailing market interest rates. Because the terms of our repurchase transactions typically range from one to six months at inception, the interest rates on our borrowings generally adjust more frequently (as new repurchase transactions are entered into upon the maturity of existing repurchase transactions) than the interest rates on our investments. During a period of rising interest rates, our borrowing costs generally will increase at a faster pace than our interest income on the leveraged portion of our investment portfolio, which could result in a decline in our net interest spread and net interest margin. The severity of any such decline would depend on our asset/liability composition (including the impact of hedging transactions) at the time, as well as the magnitude and period over which interest rates increase. Further, an increase in short-term interest rates could also have a negative impact on the market value of our residential mortgage investments. Interest rates increased significantly in 2022 and 2023 and may continue to remain high in 2024. As such, we could experience a decrease in net income or incur a net loss during these periods, which may negatively impact our distributions to stockholders.

Current wording

•Changes in interest rates, cyclical or otherwise, may materially adversely affect our profitability. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including fiscal and monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions, as well as other factors beyond our control. In general, we finance the acquisition of our investments through borrowings in the form of repurchase transactions, which exposes us to interest rate risk on the financed assets. The cost of our borrowings is based on prevailing market interest rates. Because the terms of our repurchase transactions typically range from one to six months at inception, the interest rates on our borrowings generally adjust more frequently (as new repurchase transactions are entered into upon the maturity of existing repurchase transactions) than the interest rates on our investments. During a period of rising interest rates, our borrowing costs generally will increase at a faster pace than our interest income on the leveraged portion of our investment portfolio, which could result in a decline in our net interest spread and net interest margin. The severity of any such decline would depend on our asset/liability composition (including the impact of hedging transactions) at the time, as well as the magnitude and period over which interest rates increase. Further, an increase in short-term interest rates could also have a negative impact on the market value of our residential mortgage investments. Interest rates increased significantly in 2022 and 2023, remained high in 2024 and may continue to remain high in 2025, particularly as concerns of inflation have continued into 2025. As such, we could experience a decrease in net income or incur a net loss during these periods, which may negatively impact our distributions to stockholders.

Previous wording

Inflation by some measures is at the highest readings since 1982, and inflationary pressures have broadened from goods earlier in the pandemic to include shelter costs and a number of labor-intensive services. The rapid acceleration of inflation led to an abrupt shift in the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy stance as they no longer consider these price pressures to be “transitory.” In an effort to control inflation, the Federal Reserve raised the federal funds rate seven times in 2022, followed by eleven rate raises in 2023. While markets expect rate cuts in 2024, it is unclear whether or when such rate cuts will happen. As the Federal Reserve lifts its federal funds target rate, the margin between short and long-term rates could further compress. Given our reliance on short-term borrowings to generate interest income and the fact that the yield curve continues to flatten and has even recently inverted, or if the Federal Reserve finds itself continuing to fall behind on inflation and more aggressively tightens its current projections, our results of operations, financial condition and business could be materially adversely impacted. For a detailed discussion of the impact of interest rates, see “Interest Rate Risk” included under Part II, Item 7A “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Current wording

Inflation by some measures is at the highest readings since 1982, and inflationary pressures have broadened from goods earlier in the pandemic to include shelter costs and a number of labor-intensive services. The rapid acceleration of inflation led to an abrupt shift in the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy stance as they no longer consider these price pressures to be “transitory.” In an effort to control inflation, the Federal Reserve raised the federal funds rate seven times in 2022, followed by eleven rate raises in 2023. While the Federal Reserve made three rate cuts in 2024, there is uncertainty as to the timing and extent of future rate cuts in light of ongoing inflationary challenges and generally resilient macroeconomic data. As the Federal Reserve lifts its federal funds target rate, the margin between short and long-term rates could further compress. Given our reliance on short-term borrowings to generate interest income and the fact that the yield curve remains relatively flat after the recent inversion ended, or if the Federal Reserve finds itself continuing to fall behind on inflation and more aggressively tightens its current projections, our results of operations, financial condition and business could be materially adversely impacted. For a detailed discussion of the impact of interest rates, see “Interest Rate Risk” included under Part II, Item 7A “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Previous wording

The Federal Reserve announced in November 2008 a program of large-scale purchases of Agency MBS in an attempt to lower longer-term interest rates and contribute to an overall easing of adverse financial conditions. Subject to specified investment guidelines, the portfolios of Agency MBS purchased through the programs established by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve may be held to maturity and, based on mortgage market conditions, adjustments may be made to these portfolios. This flexibility may adversely affect the pricing and availability of Agency MBS during the remaining term of these portfolios.

Current wording

The mortgage finance market is subject to extensive regulation and scrutiny; government actions and regulations, however, may not achieve their intended effect and could bring uncertainty to the operations of the industry, increase our cost of compliance or otherwise materially adversely affect our business. The Federal Reserve announced in November 2008 a program of large-scale purchases of Agency MBS in an attempt to lower longer-term interest rates and contribute to an overall easing of adverse financial conditions. Subject to specified investment guidelines, the portfolios of Agency MBS purchased through the programs established by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve may be held to maturity and, based on mortgage market conditions, adjustments may be made to these portfolios. The program was reinstated in 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This flexibility may adversely affect the pricing and availability of Agency MBS during the remaining term of these portfolios.

Previous wording

Our business is subject to extensive regulation by federal and state governmental authorities, self-regulatory organizations and securities exchanges. We are required to comply with numerous federal and state laws. We are required to comply with numerous federal and state laws. Laws, regulations, rules and judicial and administrative decisions relating to mortgage loans include those pertaining to Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (or RESPA), equal credit opportunity, fair lending, fair credit reporting, truth in lending, fair debt collection practices, service members protections, compliance with net worth and financial statement delivery requirements, compliance with U.S. federal and state disclosure and licensing requirements, the establishment of maximum interest rates, finance charges and other charges, qualified mortgages, secured transactions, payment processing, escrow, loss mitigation, collection, foreclosure, repossession and claims-handling procedures, and other trade practices and privacy regulations providing for the use and safeguarding of non-public personal financial information of borrowers. Our mortgage loan servicers must also comply with many of these legal requirements.

Current wording

Our business is subject to extensive regulation by federal and state governmental authorities, self-regulatory organizations and securities exchanges. We are required to comply with numerous federal and state laws. Laws, regulations, rules and judicial and administrative decisions relating to mortgage loans include those pertaining to Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (or RESPA), equal credit opportunity, fair lending, fair credit reporting, truth in lending, fair debt collection practices, service members protections, compliance with net worth and financial statement delivery requirements, compliance with U.S. federal and state disclosure and licensing requirements, the establishment of maximum interest rates, finance charges and other charges, qualified mortgages, secured transactions, payment processing, escrow, loss mitigation, collection, foreclosure, repossession and claims-handling procedures, and other trade practices and privacy regulations providing for the use and safeguarding of non-public personal financial information of borrowers. Our mortgage loan servicers must also comply with many of these legal requirements.

Previous wording

In particular, the Dodd-Frank Act resulted in a comprehensive overhaul of the financial services industry in the United States and includes, among other things (i) the creation of a Financial Stability Oversight Council to identify emerging systemic risks posed by financial firms, activities and practices, and to improve cooperation among U.S. federal agencies, (ii) the creation of the CFPB, authorized to promulgate and enforce consumer protection regulations relating to financial products and services, including mortgage lending and servicing, and to exercise supervisory authority over participants in mortgage lending and mortgage servicing, (iii) the establishment of strengthened capital and prudential standards for banks and bank holding companies, (iv) enhanced regulation of financial markets, including the derivatives and securitization markets, and (v) amendments to the Truth in Lending Act and RESPA, aimed at improving consumer protections with respect to mortgage originations and mortgage servicing, including disclosures, originator compensation, minimum repayment standards, prepayment considerations, appraisals and loss mitigation and other servicing requirements. Unpredictable events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may create economic shocks, to which federal, state, and local governments respond with new borrower and tenant rights and protections. Certain federal and state regulators continue to consider proposals to apply regulatory prudential standards to nonbank servicers, which may impact how our service providers, including the Servicer, are regulated. In addition, the current presidential administration may focus supervision and enforcement tools more aggressively on residential mortgage lenders and servicers, which could result in increased regulatory scrutiny and potentially increased penalties assessed for determinations of non-compliance with applicable requirements.

Current wording

In particular, the Dodd-Frank Act resulted in a comprehensive overhaul of the financial services industry in the United States and includes, among other things (i) the creation of a Financial Stability Oversight Council to identify emerging systemic risks posed by financial firms, activities and practices, and to improve cooperation among U.S. federal agencies, (ii) the creation of the CFPB, authorized to promulgate and enforce consumer protection regulations relating to financial products and services, including mortgage lending and servicing, and to exercise supervisory authority over participants in mortgage lending and mortgage servicing, (iii) the establishment of strengthened capital and prudential standards for banks and bank holding companies, (iv) enhanced regulation of financial markets, including the derivatives and securitization markets, and (v) amendments to the Truth in Lending Act and RESPA, aimed at improving consumer protections with respect to mortgage originations and mortgage servicing, including disclosures, originator compensation, minimum repayment standards, prepayment considerations, appraisals and loss mitigation and other servicing requirements. Unpredictable events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may create economic shocks, to which federal, state, and local governments respond with new borrower and tenant rights and protections. Certain federal and state regulators continue to consider proposals to apply regulatory prudential standards to nonbank servicers, which may impact how our service providers, including the Servicer, are regulated. In addition, the impact of a new U.S. Presidential administration may lead to changes in the capital markets and regulatory landscape, including federal supervision and enforcement tools on residential mortgage lenders and servicers, which could result in increased regulatory scrutiny and potentially increased penalties assessed for determinations of non-compliance with applicable requirements.

Previous wording

Federal consumer protection laws and regulations regulate residential mortgage loan underwriting and originators’ lending processes, standards, and disclosures to borrowers. These laws and regulations include, among others, the CFPB “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations. In addition, there are various other federal, state, and local laws and regulations that are intended to discourage predatory lending practices by residential mortgage loan originators. For example, the federal Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (or HOEPA), which was expanded under the Dodd Frank Act, prohibits inclusion of certain provisions in residential mortgage loans that have mortgage rates or origination costs in excess of prescribed levels and requires that borrowers be given certain disclosures prior to origination. Business purpose loans secured by 1-4 family residences are also subject to federal and state regulation. The Dodd-Frank Act grants enforcement authority and broad discretionary regulatory authority to the CFPB to prohibit or condition terms, acts or practices relating to mortgage loans that the CFPB finds abusive, unfair, deceptive or predatory, as well as to take other actions that the CFPB finds are necessary or proper to ensure responsible affordable mortgage credit remains available to consumers. The Dodd-Frank Act also affects the securitization of mortgages (and other assets) with requirements for risk retention by securitizers and requirements for regulating rating agencies. Numerous regulations have been issued pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, including regulations regarding mortgage loan servicing, underwriting and loan originator compensation and others could be issued in the future. These requirements can and do change as statutes and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended, and interpreted, and the recent trends among federal and state lawmakers and regulators have been toward stricter laws, regulations, and investigative procedures concerning the mortgage industry generally. As a result, we are unable to fully predict at this time how the Dodd-Frank Act, as well as other laws or regulations that may be adopted in the future, will affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, or the environment for repurchase financing and other forms of borrowing, the investing environment for Agency MBS, Non-Agency MBS and/or residential mortgage loans, origination of business purpose loans secured by 1-4 family residential property, and the securitization industry. We believe that the Dodd-Frank Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder are likely to continue to increase the economic and compliance costs for participants in the mortgage origination and securitization industries, including us.

Current wording

Federal consumer protection laws and regulations regulate residential mortgage loan underwriting and originators’ lending processes, standards, and disclosures to borrowers. These laws and regulations include, among others, the CFPB “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations. In addition, there are various other federal, state, and local laws and regulations that are intended to discourage predatory lending practices by residential mortgage loan originators. For example, the federal Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (or HOEPA), which was expanded under the Dodd-Frank Act, prohibits inclusion of certain provisions in residential mortgage loans that have mortgage rates or origination costs in excess of prescribed levels and requires that borrowers be given certain disclosures prior to origination. Business purpose loans secured by 1-4 family residences are also subject to federal and state regulation.

Previous wording

Some states have enacted, or may enact, similar laws or regulations, which in some cases may impose restrictions and requirements greater than those in place under federal laws and regulations. In addition, under the anti-predatory lending laws of some states, the origination of certain residential mortgage loans, including loans that are classified as “high cost” loans under applicable law, must satisfy a net tangible benefits test with respect to the borrower. This test, as well as certain standards set forth in the “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations, may be highly subjective and open to interpretation. As a result, a court may determine that a residential mortgage loan did not meet the applicable standard or test even if the originator reasonably believed such standard or test had been satisfied. Failure of residential mortgage loan originators or servicers to comply with federal consumer protection laws and regulations could subject us, or as an assignee or purchaser of these loans (or as an investor in securities backed by these loans), to monetary penalties and defenses to foreclosure, including by recoupment or setoff of damages and costs, which for some violations includes the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the consumer, and could result in rescission of the affected residential mortgage loans, which could adversely impact our business and financial results. Similarly, with respect to any mortgage loan that we originate, any failure by us or servicers to comply with federal or state laws and regulations could subject us, or an assignee or purchaser of these loans (to the extent that we sell them to an investor in securities backed by these loans), to monetary penalties and defenses to foreclosure, including by recoupment or setoff of damages and costs, which for some violations includes the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the borrower, and could result in rescission of the affected residential mortgage loans, which could adversely impact our business and financial results.

Current wording

Some states have also enacted, or may enact, similar laws or regulations, which in some cases may impose restrictions and requirements greater than those in place under federal laws and regulations. In addition, under the anti-predatory lending laws of some states, the origination of certain residential mortgage loans, including loans that are classified as “high cost” loans under applicable law, must satisfy a net tangible benefits test with respect to the borrower. This test, as well as certain standards set forth in the CFPB “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” regulations, may be highly subjective and open to interpretation. As a result, a court may determine that a residential mortgage loan did not meet the applicable standard or test even if the originator reasonably believed such standard or test had been satisfied. Failure of residential mortgage loan originators or servicers to comply with federal consumer protection laws and regulations could subject us, or as an assignee or purchaser of these loans (or as an investor in securities backed by these loans), to monetary penalties and defenses to foreclosure, including by recoupment or setoff of damages and costs, which for some violations includes the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the consumer, and could result in rescission of the affected residential mortgage loans.

Previous wording

We conduct our operations so that neither we nor any of our subsidiaries are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act. Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S.

Current wording

We conduct our operations so that neither we nor any of our subsidiaries are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act. Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of the issuer’s total assets (exclusive of U.S. Government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis (i.e., the 40% Test). Excluded from the term “investment securities,” among other things, are U.S. Government securities and securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are not themselves investment companies and are not relying on the exception from the definition of investment company for private funds set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act.