RADIAN GROUP INC

The success of our Mortgage Insurance business depends on our ability to assess and manage our mortgage insurance underwriting risks; and the mortgage insurance premiums we charge may not be adequate to compensate us for our liability for losses and the amount of capital we are required to hold against our insured mortgage risks. We expect to incur losses for future mortgage defaults beyond what we have reserved for in our financial statements.

The estimates and expectations we use to establish premium rates in our Mortgage Insurance business are based on assumptions made at the time our insurance is written. Our mortgage insurance premium rates are based on, among other items, our expectations about competitive and economic conditions and our cost of capital, as well as a broad range of other factors and risk attributes that we consider in developing our assumptions about the credit performance of the loans we insure and the economic benefits we expect to receive from our insurance policies. Our assumptions may ultimately prove to be inaccurate, especially in the event of an extended economic downturn or a period of market volatility and economic uncertainty, or if there is a change in law or the GSEs’ business practices that alter the performance of the loans we have insured in ways that are inconsistent with our assumptions, including the amount of premium we expect to receive from such insurance. The premium structure we apply is subject to approval by state regulatory agencies, which can delay or limit our ability to increase our premiums if further filings or approvals are necessary to institute pricing adjustments.

If the risk underlying a mortgage loan that we have insured develops more adversely than we anticipated, we generally cannot increase the premium rates on this in-force business, cancel coverage or elect not to renew coverage to mitigate the effects of such adverse developments. Similarly, we cannot adjust our premiums if the amount of capital we are required to hold against our insured risks increases from the amount we were required to hold at the time a policy was written or if the premiums we expected to receive from such insurance are less than anticipated, whether due to a change in the GSEs’ business practices or otherwise. As a result, if we are unable to compensate for or offset the increased capital requirements in other ways, the returns on our business may be lower than we assumed or expected. Our premiums earned and the associated investment income on those premiums may ultimately prove to be inadequate to compensate for the losses that we may incur and may not provide an adequate return on capital that may be required. As a result, our results of operations and financial condition could be negatively impacted.

From time to time, we change the processes we use to underwrite loans, including by automating certain underwriting processes and relying on information and processes of the GSEs. For example: we rely on information provided to us by lenders that was obtained from automated income verification tools in lieu of requiring traditional income documentation; we also accept GSE appraisal waivers for certain home purchase and refinance loans that may or may not require an onsite inspection of the property; and, when permitted by the GSEs, for certain purchase transactions we accept desktop appraisals for which the appraiser relies on data obtained from alternative methods or sources to identify property characteristics and condition and does not complete a current inspection of the subject property. Our acceptance of automated processes, valuation alternatives, and verification tools, could affect our pricing and risk assessment. We also continue to further automate our underwriting processes to incorporate risk-informed decision making, and it is possible that our use of automated processes could lead us to insure loans that we would not otherwise have insured under our prior processes or would have insured at a different premium rate.

Additionally, in accordance with industry practice, we generally do not establish reserves in our Mortgage Insurance business until we are notified that a borrower has failed to make at least two monthly payments when due. Because our mortgage insurance reserving does not account for the impact of future losses that we expect to incur with respect to performing (non-defaulted) loans, our obligation for ultimate losses that we expect to incur at any period end is not reflected in our financial statements, except if a premium deficiency exists. A premium deficiency reserve would be recorded if the present value of expected future losses and expenses exceeds the present value of expected future premiums and already established loss reserves on the applicable loans. As future defaults are not reflected in our Mortgage Insurance loss reserves, our loss reserves can be volatile and could increase significantly if we experience a high volume of new defaults in future periods, which would negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.

We establish our reserves for losses in our insurance businesses based on models, assumptions and estimates, which are subject to inherent uncertainties, and if incorrect, may result in us being required to take unexpected charges to income, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

We establish reserves for losses and LAE that represent estimates based on actuarial and statistical projections, at a given point in time, of our expectations of the ultimate future claims paid and costs of losses incurred. Setting our loss reserves requires significant judgment by management with respect to the likelihood, magnitude and timing of each potential loss. We use actuarial models as well as available historical insurance industry loss ratio experience and loss development patterns to assist in the establishment of loss reserves. Many of these factors are not directly quantifiable, particularly on a prospective basis, and the effects of these and unforeseen factors could negatively impact our ability to accurately assess the risks of the policies that we write. Changes in the assumptions used by these models or by management could lead to an increase in our estimate of ultimate losses in the future. In addition, the estimation of loss reserves is more difficult during times of adverse economic and market conditions, extended economic downturns and periods of market volatility, as further discussed below.

We establish loss reserves in our Mortgage Insurance business to provide for the estimated cost of future claims on defaulted loans. High levels of defaults and delays in foreclosures could delay our receipt of claims, resulting in an increase in the period of time that a loan remains in our inventory of defaulted mortgage loans, and as a result, the Claim Severity. Generally, foreclosure delays do not stop the accrual of interest or affect other expenses on a loan, and unless a loan is cured during such delay, once title to the property ultimately is obtained and a claim is filed, our paid claim amount may include additional interest and expenses, increasing the Claim Severity.

In our Specialty Insurance business, the estimation of loss reserves is inherently uncertain, particularly due to the unpredictability of catastrophic events. There also may be significant reporting lags between the occurrence of the insured event and the time it is reported, and additional lags between the time of reporting and final settlement of claims, any of which can increase the level of uncertainty related to our loss reserve estimates. Further, periods of geopolitical uncertainty and hostilities, such as we have experienced in recent years, involve highly unpredictable factors that can increase the level of uncertainty in our estimation of loss reserves. In our Specialty Insurance business in particular, in recent periods, the Russia-Ukraine war has raised numerous policy-related questions and challenges regarding scope of coverage and terrorism exceptions, which have increased reserving uncertainties. These periods of geopolitical uncertainty and hostilities can increase inflationary pressures in local economies, and changes in the level of inflation can also result in an increased level of uncertainty in our estimation of loss reserves. As a result, actual losses paid can deviate, perhaps substantially, from the reserve estimates reflected in our financial statements. As a compounding factor, although most insurance contracts in our Specialty Insurance business have policy limits, the nature of property and casualty insurance and reinsurance is such that losses and the associated expenses can exceed policy limits for a variety of reasons and could significantly exceed the premiums received on the underlying policies, thereby further adversely affecting our financial condition.

Because claims paid may be substantially different than our loss reserves, our loss reserves may be insufficient to satisfy the full amount of claims that we ultimately have to pay. In the past, changes to our loss reserve estimates have impacted our businesses and could in the future impact our results of operations and financial condition. If our loss reserve estimates are inadequate, we may be required to increase our reserves, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Radian Guaranty’s Loss Mitigation Activity could negatively impact our relationships with our mortgage insurance customers and the GSEs, and changes to these activities could reduce the benefit that Radian Guaranty receives.

As part of our claims management process, we pursue opportunities to mitigate losses both before and after we receive claims, including processes to ensure claims are valid.

Radian Guaranty’s Loss Mitigation Activities and claims paying practices have in the past resulted in disputes with certain of our customers and in some cases, damaged our relationships with customers, resulting in a loss of business. Radian Guaranty’s Loss Mitigation Activities or claims paying practices could in the future have a negative impact on relationships with our mortgage insurance customers or potential customers and the GSEs which are the primary beneficiaries of our insurance. In response to the potential for negative impact on customer relationships or the GSEs, Radian Guaranty may consider adjustments to its processes and Loss Mitigation Activities, which may reduce the benefit of its Loss Mitigation Activities. Disputes with customers that are not resolved could result in arbitration or judicial proceedings, requiring significant legal expenses. To the extent that Radian Guaranty’s past or future Loss Mitigation Activities or claims paying practices impact customer relationships, it could result in reduced use of Loss Mitigation Activities, changes in business processes, the potential loss of business and adverse effects on our competitive position, which could negatively impact our results of operations.

If our loss limitation strategy in our Specialty Insurance business is unsuccessful it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

We seek to mitigate loss exposure in our Specialty Insurance business through multiple methods that might prove to be unsuccessful. For example, we write a number of reinsurance contracts on an excess-of-loss basis that indemnifies the reinsured for losses in excess of a specified amount. We generally limit the line size for each client and each line of business in our insurance business, and purchase reinsurance/retrocession protection for many of our lines of business. We utilize proportional reinsurance and on an account-by-account basis, we may also put in place facultative reinsurance. We also purchase protection to limit the impact to us from large catastrophes, especially natural catastrophes arising from specific catastrophe perils (like hurricanes and earthquakes) in areas known to be exposed to such perils. This is achieved both through traditional reinsurance/retrocession covers, and through catastrophe bonds issued in the capital markets. We also seek to limit our loss exposure through geographic diversification. In addition, various provisions of our insurance policies and reinsurance contracts, such as limitations or exclusions from coverage or choice of forum negotiated to limit our risks, may not be enforceable in the manner we intend. We cannot be sure that these loss limitation methods will effectively prevent a material loss exposure, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We use models, including artificial intelligence and machine learning models, to assist our decision making in key areas, such as underwriting, claims, pricing, reserving, investment management, capital assessment, risk management, reinsurance purchasing and other risk distribution strategies and the evaluation of catastrophe risk, but actual results could differ materially from the model outputs and related analyses.

We use various modeling (for example, scenarios, predictive, stochastic and/or forecasting) and advanced learning techniques along with data analytics to analyze and estimate exposures and risks associated with our businesses, including to analyze and estimate loss trends and other risks associated with our insurance operations. We use the modeled outputs and related analyses to assist us in decision-making, for example, related to underwriting, claims, pricing, reserving, investment management, capital assessment, risk management, reinsurance purchasing or other risk distribution strategies and the evaluation of our catastrophe risk in our Specialty Insurance business through estimates of probable maximum losses (“PMLs”).

The modeled outputs and related analyses, both from proprietary and third-party models, are subject to various assumptions, professional judgment, uncertainties and the inherent limitations of any statistical analysis, including the use and quality of historical internal and industry data. These models may turn out to be inadequate representations of the underlying subject matter, including as a result of inaccurate inputs or application thereof (whether due to data error, human error or otherwise). Consequently, actual losses from loss events may differ materially from modeled results. If, based upon these models or other factors, we misprice our products or underestimate the frequency and/or severity of loss events, our results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Specifically, with respect to the evaluation of catastrophe risk in our Specialty Insurance business, our modeling uses a mix of historical data, scientific theory and mathematical methods. Outputs from multiple commercially available vendor models serve as key inputs in our PML estimation process. We believe that there is considerable inherent uncertainty in the data and parameter inputs used in these vendor models. In that regard, there is no universal standard in the preparation of insured data for use in the models and the running of modeling software. In our view, the accuracy of the models depends heavily on the availability of detailed insured loss data from actual recent large catastrophes. Due to the limited number of events, there is significant potential for substantial differences between the modeled loss estimate and actual loss experience for a single large catastrophe event. This potential difference could be even greater for catastrophic events with limited or no modeled annual frequency. We perform our own vendor model validation (including sensitivity analysis and backtesting, where possible) and supplement model output with historical loss information and analysis and management judgment. In addition to vendor catastrophe model outputs, we apply internally developed adjustments and alternative views of risk that reflect our assessment of event-specific characteristics and recent scientific research. These adjustments are informed by internal catastrophe research and exposure management analyses, including climate change assumptions, and are intended to align modeled results with our view of risk for underwriting and capital assessment purposes. However, the application of such adjustments involves professional judgment and inherent uncertainty, and actual catastrophe losses may differ materially from vendor model outputs and internally adjusted estimates. For non-modeled catastrophic events, we derive our own estimates, which involve significant judgment and subjective estimations of future events and assumptions. As a result, our PML estimates are subject to a high degree of uncertainty, and actual losses from catastrophe events may differ materially.

Further, incorporating automation and machine learning as part of our modeling process, may involve heightened risk. As with many technological innovations, artificial intelligence (“AI”) and machine learning present risks and challenges that could affect their adoption as well as our business. In general, AI algorithms may be flawed and datasets underlying AI algorithms may be insufficient or may contain biased information. If our use of AI, machine learning and statistical models produce analyses or recommendations that are or are alleged to be deficient, inaccurate or biased, it could subject us to liability or regulatory scrutiny, and our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

We may face increased competition due to the rapid development and rising use of AI and machine learning technologies. AI technologies have rapidly developed, and our businesses may be adversely affected if we cannot successfully integrate the technology into our internal business processes and product and service offerings in a timely, cost-effective, compliant and responsible manner.

Reinsurance may not be available, affordable or adequate to protect us against losses.

We use reinsurance as a capital and risk management tool. No assurance can be given that reinsurance will remain available to us in amounts that we consider sufficient and at rates and upon terms that we consider acceptable. Accordingly, we may be forced to incur additional expenses for reinsurance or may not be able to obtain sufficient reinsurance on acceptable terms, which could cause us to increase the amount of risk we retain, and could negatively affect our ability to mitigate losses in our portfolio, the returns we are able to achieve on the business we write and our ability to write future business. Further, reinsurance does not relieve us of our direct liability to policyholders; therefore, if the reinsurer is unable or unwilling to meet its obligations to us, we remain liable to make claims payments to our policyholders. As a result, our reinsurance arrangements do not fully eliminate our obligation to pay claims, and we have assumed counterparty credit risk with respect to our inability to recover amounts due from reinsurers due to their inability or unwillingness to pay the associated insurance recoveries, including due to dispute risk.

In our Mortgage Insurance business, we use reinsurance to manage Radian Guaranty’s capital position under the PMIERs financial requirements, including to maintain an appropriate PMIERs Cushion. Among other benefits, our risk distribution transactions have collectively reduced our required capital, including by significantly reducing our Required Minimum Assets under the PMIERs. The initial and ongoing credit that we receive under the PMIERs financial requirements for these risk distribution transactions is subject to the periodic review of the GSEs. See “Changes in the charters, business practices or role of the GSEs in the U.S. housing finance market generally, could significantly impact our Mortgage Insurance business.”

Our Specialty Insurance business uses reinsurance to mitigate the volatility of losses on our financial results. There is no guarantee that our desired amounts of reinsurance or retrocessional reinsurance will be available in the marketplace in the future. In the current environment, our ability to renew our current reinsurance or retrocessional reinsurance arrangements or obtain desired amounts of new or replacement coverage on favorable terms may be substantially reduced as a result of the impact of inflation, industry catastrophic losses to reinsurer capital and the appetite for certain lines of business. Even if there is some level of reinsurance capacity, the remaining capacity may not be on terms we deem appropriate or acceptable, including from counterparties with which we are comfortable.

If we are unable to obtain sufficient reinsurance on acceptable terms or to collect amounts due from our reinsurers, or, in the case of Radian Guaranty, if we receive less PMIERs capital relief for our reinsurance transactions, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If the length of time that our mortgage insurance policies remain in force declines it could result in a decrease in our future revenues.

Most of our primary IIF consists of policies for which we expect to receive premiums in the future, typically through Monthly Premium Policies, and as a result, a significant portion of our earned premiums are derived from insurance that was written in prior years. The percentage of our insurance certificates that remain in force for a specified period of time, which we refer to as the Persistency Rate, is a significant driver of future revenues from our Mortgage Insurance business, with a lower overall Persistency Rate generally reducing future revenues. As a result, the ultimate profitability of our Mortgage Insurance business is affected by mortgage prepayment speeds for the loans that we insure.

Factors affecting the length of time that our insurance remains in force include:

▪

prevailing mortgage interest rates compared to the mortgage rates on our IIF, which affects the incentive for borrowers to refinance (i.e., lower current interest rates make it more attractive for borrowers to refinance and receive a lower interest rate);

▪

the current amount of equity that borrowers have in the homes underlying our IIF:

▪

borrowers with significant equity in their homes may refinance their loans without the need for mortgage insurance;

▪

the HPA requires servicers to cancel mortgage insurance when a borrower’s LTV ratio meets or is scheduled to meet certain levels, generally based on the original value of the home and subject to various conditions; and

▪

the GSEs’ mortgage insurance cancellation guidelines, which apply more broadly than the HPA, allow for cancellation of mortgage insurance, at the borrowers’ request, based on the home’s current value if certain LTV and seasoning requirements are met and the borrowers have an acceptable payment history. Higher home price appreciation increases the likelihood of borrowers reaching the cancellation thresholds, which could negatively impact Persistency. For more information about the GSEs’ guidelines and business practices and how they may change, see “Changes in the charters, business practices or role of the GSEs in the U.S. housing finance market generally, could significantly impact our Mortgage Insurance business.”

▪

the credit policies of certain lenders, which impact the ability of homeowners to refinance loans; and

▪

economic conditions that can affect a borrower’s decision to pay off a mortgage earlier than required, including prevailing interest rates compared to their existing mortgage rate and the strength of the housing market, which impacts a borrower’s prospects for selling their existing home and finding a suitable and affordable new home.

If these or other factors cause a decrease in the length of time that our Recurring Premium Policies, for which we expect to receive premiums in the future, remain in force, our future revenues could be negatively impacted, which could negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Delegated underwriting may subject us to unanticipated claims.

In our Mortgage Insurance business, we approve lenders to underwrite mortgage insurance applications based on our mortgage insurance underwriting guidelines. Each lender participating in the delegated underwriting program must be approved by our risk management group, and once we accept a lender into our delegated underwriting program, we allow the lenders to underwrite mortgage insurance applications based on our underwriting guidelines. While we have systems and processes to monitor whether certain aspects of our guidelines are being followed, under this program, a lender could commit us to insure a material number of loans with unacceptable risk profiles before we discover the problem and are able to terminate that lender’s delegated underwriting authority or pursue other rights that may be available to us, such as our rights to rescind coverage or deny claims.

Although we generally do not delegate underwriting authority in most aspects of our Specialty Insurance business, in the partnerships channel of this business, we have entered into arrangements pursuant to which we authorize managing general agents, general agents and other producers to underwrite business within the underwriting authorities provided by us. We generally maintain contractual protections over these arrangements and closely monitor the delegated business on an ongoing basis. However, we rely on the underwriting controls of those delegated agents and, despite our monitoring efforts and other controls, the delegated agents may exceed the authorities or otherwise breach their obligations to us. If we grow our partnerships business in the future using similar underwriting structures, risks related to delegated underwriting would likely increase.

Our Mortgage Insurance business faces competition and changes in the competitive environment that could negatively impact our franchise value.

The U.S. mortgage insurance industry is highly competitive. Our competitors primarily include other private mortgage insurers and governmental agencies, principally the FHA and VA.

Our Mortgage Insurance business competes with other private mortgage insurers that are eligible to insure loans that are purchased by the GSEs primarily on the basis of price, underwriting guidelines, overall service, customer relationships, perceived financial strength (including comparative credit ratings) and reputation. For more information about our competitive environment, including pricing competition, see “Item 1. Business—Mortgage Insurance—Competition.”

Pricing strategies have evolved in the mortgage insurance industry from a predominantly standard rate card-based pricing model to the use of proprietary, “black box” pricing frameworks that may be quickly adjusted within certain parameters. See “Item 1. Business—Mortgage Insurance—Pricing.” As a result of the prevalence of “black box” pricing and the greater uniformity of master policy terms throughout the industry, pricing has become the predominant competitive market factor for private mortgage insurance, and an increasing number of customers are making their choice of mortgage insurance providers primarily based on the lowest price available for any particular loan. Our approach to pricing is customer-centric and flexible, as we offer a spectrum of risk-based pricing solutions for our customers that are designed to be balanced with our objectives for managing our volume of NIW and the risk/return profile of our insured portfolio. Although we believe we are well-positioned to compete effectively, our pricing strategy may not be successful and we may lose business to our competitors.

Further, the use of “black box” pricing methodologies and customized rate plans has contributed to a pricing environment that is more dynamic, with more frequent pricing changes that can be implemented quickly, as well as an overall reduction in pricing transparency. As a result, we may not be aware of rate changes in the industry until we observe that our volume of NIW has changed. The evolution of pricing strategies throughout the industry has resulted in greater volatility in our NIW and a reduction in industry pricing, including our pricing, due to the heightened competition. This has in turn lowered the premium yield of our insured portfolio over time as older vintage insured loans with higher premium rates run-off and have been replaced with insured loans with premium rates that generally have been lower. It is possible that in the future price competition could result in lower premium rates and reduced NIW and could decrease our projected returns.

We also compete with governmental entities, such as the FHA and VA, primarily on the basis of loan limits, pricing, credit guidelines, loss mitigation practices and terms of our insurance policies such as our ability to terminate private mortgage insurance, subject to conditions, in contrast to FHA policies that currently include a life-of-loan requirement. These governmental entities typically do not have the same capital requirements or business objectives that we and other private mortgage insurance companies have, and therefore, may have greater financial flexibility or different motivations with respect to pricing that could put us at a competitive disadvantage. Potential changes in pricing by these governmental entities, or to the terms and conditions of their mortgage insurance or other credit enhancement products, including potential elimination of the FHA life-of-loan requirement, could negatively impact our ability to compete in that market effectively, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results. See “Item 1. Business—Regulation—Federal Regulation—Housing Finance Reform and the GSEs’ Business Practices” for further discussion of factors that could impact the FHA’s competitive position relative to private mortgage insurance.

In addition, Anza Mortgage Insurance Corporation is a potential new entrant into the mortgage insurance industry and, as market conditions change, there may be other new entrants, which could further increase competition in our business. Further, alternatives to private mortgage insurance may become more prevalent, which could reduce the demand for private mortgage insurance in its traditional form. See “Changes in the charters, business practices or role of the GSEs in the U.S. housing finance market generally, could significantly impact our mortgage insurance business” for risks related to changes in the GSEs’ business practices that could impact our competitive position, including the use of alternatives to traditional mortgage insurance to satisfy their charter requirements related to credit risk.

Changes in the competitive environment and factors discussed above could negatively impact our franchise value, business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

A decrease in the volume of mortgage originations could result in fewer opportunities for us to write new mortgage insurance business.

The amount of new mortgage insurance business we write depends, among other things, on a steady flow of low down payment mortgages that require private mortgage insurance. The volume of mortgage originations is impacted by macroeconomic conditions and specific events that impact the housing finance and real estate markets, most of which are beyond our control, including housing prices, inflationary pressures, unemployment levels, interest rate changes, the availability of credit, other national and regional economic conditions and geopolitical events. In “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” see “Overview” and “Key Factors Affecting Our Results.”

Factors affecting the volume of low down payment mortgages include:

▪

the health and stability of the financial services industry;

▪

restrictions on mortgage credit due to changes in lender underwriting standards, capital requirements affecting lenders, regulatory requirements and the health of the private securitization market;

▪

mortgage interest rates;

▪

the health of the U.S. economy generally, including in particular unemployment levels and the degree of consumer confidence, as well as specific conditions in regional and local economies;

▪

housing supply and affordability;

▪

tax laws and policies and their impact on, among other things, deductions for mortgage insurance premiums, mortgage interest payments and real estate taxes;

▪

demographic trends, including the rate of household formation;

▪

the rate of home price appreciation;

▪

government housing policy, in particular policies that encourage affordability and accessibility of mortgage loans to first-time homebuyers; and

▪

the practices of the GSEs, including the extent to which the guaranty fees, loan level price adjustments, credit underwriting guidelines and other business terms provided by the GSEs affect the cost of mortgages and lenders’ willingness to extend credit for low down payment mortgages.

As the overall volume of new mortgage originations declines, we are subject to increased competition and we could experience a reduced opportunity to write new mortgage insurance business, which could negatively affect our business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

Our Specialty Insurance business faces competition and that competition could increase due to merger and acquisition activity in the industry.

The specialty insurance/reinsurance industry is highly competitive. Our Specialty Insurance business competes on the basis of product offerings, pricing, terms and conditions, claims servicing and customer relationships. The business competes on an international and regional basis with major U.S., Bermuda, European and other international insurers and reinsurers, including other Lloyd’s syndicates, some of which have greater financial, marketing and management resources. We also compete with new companies that enter the specialty insurance/reinsurance markets. In addition, capital market participants have created alternative products that are intended to compete with specialty insurance and reinsurance products. There has been extensive merger and acquisition activity in the specialty insurance/reinsurance sector in recent years, which may continue. We have experienced increased competition as a result of such consolidation. Increased competition could result in a reduction of the business we write, lower premium rates, less favorable policy terms and conditions and greater costs of customer acquisition and retention. Further, in periods following benign loss experience, competitive market conditions may result in declining premium rates or reduced pricing adequacy and a combination of rate pressure and elevated inflation could negatively impact underwriting margins, adequacy of pricing and reserving outcomes. These factors could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

Our Mortgage Insurance NIW and franchise value could decline if we lose business from significant customers.

Our Mortgage Insurance business depends on our relationships with our customers. Lending customers may decide to write business only with a limited number of mortgage insurers or only with certain mortgage insurers, based on their views with respect to an insurer’s pricing levels and pricing delivery methods, service levels, underwriting guidelines, loss mitigation practices, information security and other compliance programs, financial strength or other factors. Our customers place insurance with us directly on mortgage loans they originate, and they also do business with us indirectly through purchases of mortgage loans that already have our mortgage insurance coverage. Our relationships with our customers may influence both the amount of business they conduct with us directly and their willingness to continue to consider us as an approved mortgage insurance provider for loans that they purchase. For risk management purposes, our lending customers may choose to diversify the mortgage insurers with which they do business, which could have a negative impact on our NIW if it results in a market share loss that we are unable to mitigate through volume from new customers or through increases in volume with existing customers.

Further, in recent years industry pricing practices in the mortgage insurance industry have resulted in greater volatility in the volume we may write with any particular customer as we may retain, gain or lose customers’ loan volume based solely on the competitiveness of our pricing levels, regardless of other factors such as service levels, underwriting guidelines, loss mitigation practices or financial strength. See “Our Mortgage Insurance business faces competition and changes in the competitive environment that could negatively impact our franchise value.”

Loss of a significant customer could result in a loss of market share and negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Potential downgrades by rating agencies to the current financial strength ratings assigned to Radian Guaranty and/or the credit ratings assigned to Radian Group could adversely affect the Company.

Radian Guaranty has been assigned financial strength ratings of A3 by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”), A- by S&P Global Ratings (“S&P”) and A by Fitch Ratings, Inc. (“Fitch”). Radian Group has been assigned credit ratings of Baa3 by Moody’s, BBB- by S&P and BBB by Fitch.

We do not believe our ratings have a material effect on our relationships with existing customers currently. However, if Radian Guaranty’s financial strength ratings are downgraded, we may be competitively disadvantaged by customers choosing to do business with private mortgage insurers that have higher financial strength ratings. In addition, while the current PMIERs do not include a specific ratings requirement with respect to eligibility, failure to maintain a rating for Radian Guaranty that is acceptable to the GSEs could impact Radian Guaranty’s eligibility status under the PMIERs. Further, if legislative or regulatory changes were to alter the current state of the housing finance industry such that the GSEs no longer operate in their current capacity, we may be forced to compete in a new marketplace in which financial strength ratings may play a greater role.

The rating agencies continually review the credit and financial strength ratings assigned to Radian Group and Radian Guaranty, respectively, and the ratings are subject to change. Credit and financial strength ratings are important to maintaining confidence in our mortgage insurance and in our competitive position. Downgrades to the ratings of our mortgage insurance subsidiaries and/or Radian Group could adversely affect our cost of funds, liquidity, access to capital markets and competitive position. A downgrade in Radian Guaranty’s financial strength rating could result in increased scrutiny by the GSEs and our customers, potentially impacting our NIW. If we are unable to compete effectively in the current or any future markets as a result of the financial strength ratings assigned to our mortgage insurance subsidiaries, the franchise value and future prospects for our Mortgage Insurance business could be negatively affected.

Also, see below “We may face difficulties, unforeseen liabilities, or rating actions from our acquisition or the integration of Inigo and may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of such acquisition.”

Our Mortgage Insurance business depends, in part, on effective and reliable loan servicing.

We depend on third-party servicing of the loans that we insure. Dependable servicing is necessary for timely billing and premium payments to us and effective loss mitigation opportunities for delinquent or near-delinquent mortgage loans. Servicers are required to comply with a multitude of legal and regulatory requirements, procedures and standards for servicing residential mortgages, such as the CFPB’s mortgage servicing rules. While these requirements are intended to ensure a high level of servicing performance, they also impose a high cost of compliance on servicers that may impact their financial condition and their operating effectiveness.

While servicing standards and processes have significantly improved since the great financial crisis in 2008, challenging economic and market conditions or periods of economic stress and high mortgage defaults make it more difficult for servicers to effectively service the mortgage loans that we insure, which could reduce their loss mitigation efforts that could help limit our losses. Further, an increase in delinquent loans may result in liquidity issues for servicers. When a mortgage loan that is collateral for a RMBS becomes delinquent, the servicer is usually required to continue to pay principal and interest to the RMBS investors, generally for four months, even though the servicer is not receiving payments from borrowers. This may cause liquidity issues, especially for non-bank servicers because they do not have the same sources of liquidity that bank servicers have. A transfer of servicing resulting from liquidity issues, may increase the operational burden on servicers, cause a disruption in the servicing of delinquent loans and reduce servicers’ abilities to undertake loss mitigation efforts that could help limit our losses.

Information with respect to the mortgage loans we insure is based in large part on information reported to us by third parties, including the servicers and originators of the mortgage loans, and information provided may be subject to lapses or inaccuracies in reporting from such third parties. In many cases, we may not be aware that information reported to us is incorrect until a claim is made against us under the relevant insurance policy. We may not receive monthly information from servicers for single premium policies, and we may not be aware that the mortgage loans insured by such policies have been repaid. We periodically attempt to determine if coverage is still in force on such policies by asking the last servicer of record or through the periodic reconciliation of loan information with certain servicers. It may be possible that our reports continue to reflect, as active, policies on mortgage loans that have been repaid. If we experience a disruption in the servicing of mortgage loans covered by our insurance policies or a failure by servicers to appropriately report the status of a loan, this could impact the amount of assets Radian Guaranty is required to hold under the PMIERs or ultimately contribute to a rise in claims among those loans, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and operating results.

Under the terms of our Master Policies in place since 2014, mortgage insurance premiums are not required to be paid following an event of default. However, if a defaulted loan then cures and becomes current, all mortgage insurance premiums must also be brought current for our insurance coverage to continue, including all premiums that were not paid during the period following the event of default and through the date of cure. Because premiums must be brought current upon a cure, mortgage servicers typically continue to pay mortgage insurance premiums while loans remain in default, understanding that Radian Guaranty will refund these premiums if the loans fail to cure and ultimately go to claim. If we fail to receive mortgage insurance premiums following mortgage defaults, Radian Guaranty’s cash flow could be materially reduced, potentially requiring Radian Guaranty to liquidate investments at a loss to pay future claims or otherwise requiring us to alter our investment strategy.

The effects of inflation, trade and tariff disputes and global economic conditions impact the specialty insurance and reinsurance industry in ways which may negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our Specialty Insurance business is susceptible to the effects of economic and social inflation because premiums are established before actual losses and LAE are known. Inflationary pressures may have a material effect on the adequacy of pricing and our reserves for losses and LAE, especially in longer-tailed lines of business. While we incorporate the anticipated effects of inflation in our pricing models, reserving processes and exposure management across all lines of business and types of loss, including natural catastrophe events, the actual effects of inflation on ultimate losses and reserves cannot be known with certainty until claims are fully developed and settled.

The impact of inflationary pressures on our Specialty Insurance business may be exacerbated during certain property and casualty insurance underwriting pricing cycles driven by loss activity and supply and demand across the market.

While our business has not been materially impacted by the evolving tariffs landscape to date, there may be a ripple effect on how existing and future tariffs and trade policies impact certain industries where we provide insurance or reinsurance. It is too early to determine the long-term effect, if any, of recent or future trade policy actions, but sustained escalation of tariffs and trade disputes may lead to an economic slowdown that impacts our Specialty Insurance clients. In addition, future Administration actions, including executive orders or legislations, could impact the insurance and reinsurance markets in ways that are difficult to predict, and we cannot predict with certainty the effect of these actions on our business and results of operations.

We rely upon proprietary technology and information, and if we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights, it could have a material adverse effect on us.

Our success depends, in part, upon our intellectual property rights. We rely primarily on a combination of copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks, patents and nondisclosure and other contractual restrictions on copying, distributing and creating derivative products to protect our proprietary technology and information. This protection may be limited, and our intellectual property could be used by others without our consent. In addition, although we may file patent applications, patents may not be issued and, if issued may not prevent the development of competitive products. Any infringement, disclosure, loss, invalidity of or failure to protect our intellectual property could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, litigation may be necessary to enforce or protect our intellectual property rights, to protect our trade secrets or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Such litigation could be time-consuming, result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face risks associated with our Mortgage Conduit business.

Our Mortgage Conduit business is conducted through Radian Mortgage Capital, which acquires and aggregates residential mortgage loans intending to then sell the loans directly to mortgage investors or distribute them into the capital markets through private label securitizations. Radian Mortgage Capital finances its acquisition of residential mortgage loans primarily by utilizing short-term uncommitted debt under the Master Repurchase Agreements. Radian Mortgage Capital is the master servicer for the mortgage loans held for sale in its portfolio and loans it has sold to the GSEs, and has engaged a subservicer to manage the day-to-day servicing operations for these loans. As a result of our Mortgage Conduit business, we are exposed to certain risks that may negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition, including, among others, the following:

▪

Potential breaches of the financial and other covenants under the Master Repurchase Agreements could result in Radian Mortgage Capital being required to immediately repay all outstanding amounts borrowed under these facilities and these facilities being unavailable to use for future financing needs, as well as potentially triggering cross-defaults under other debt agreements. If Radian Mortgage Capital is unable to satisfy its obligations, Radian Group could be required to satisfy these obligations directly pursuant to its guarantee of Radian Mortgage Capital’s obligations under the Master Repurchase Agreements or indirectly through capital contributions to Radian Mortgage Capital, which could impact Radian Group’s available liquidity. See “Our sources of liquidity may be insufficient to fund our obligations.”

▪

We are exposed to credit risk through our direct investment in residential real estate mortgage loans. During the aggregation period and before sale or securitization, we assume the risk that the related borrowers may default on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest.

▪

Interest rate fluctuations can negatively impact our Mortgage Conduit business. During the aggregation period following loan acquisition and before the loan is either sold or securitized, the carrying value of our residential mortgage loans held for sale is based on fair value, and the estimated fair value is subject to, among other things, changes in mortgage interest rates from the date we agree to purchase the mortgage loan through the date we agree to sell the mortgage loan.

▪

If the secondary markets for mortgages or for residential mortgage-backed securities experience any significant disruption or illiquidity, we might be unable to sell our mortgage assets in a timely manner or at anticipated prices, and we may be forced to hold and finance a larger inventory of mortgage assets than we anticipate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

▪

When we purchase mortgage loans, representations and warranties are made to us by sellers regarding, among other things, certain characteristics of those mortgage loans, which we seek to verify through underwriting and due diligence. When we sell mortgage loans, we make similar representations and warranties to purchasers. Losses could result if representations or warranties we make to purchasers are inaccurate, including representations or warranties made in reliance on inaccurate representations or warranties that are made to us.

▪

We rely on a third-party service provider to service the mortgage loans for which we hold the right to service and serve as the master servicer. Our reliance on this third-party servicer exposes us to certain risks, including the risk that the subservicer may not properly service the loan in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or the contractual provisions governing their subservicing role, in which case we may be held liable for the subservicer’s improper acts or omissions. Failure to take steps to ensure that third-party servicers are servicing the loans we acquire appropriately could expose us to penalties or other claims or enforcement actions that could negatively impact our business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

Actual or perceived instability in the financial services industry or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties could materially impact our business.

We routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks, reinsurers and our customers. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk and losses in the event of a default by a counterparty or customer. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry with which we do business, or concerns or rumors about the possibility of such events, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. Such conditions may negatively impact our results and/or financial condition. While we are unable to predict the full impact of these conditions, they may lead to, among other things: disruption to the mortgage market, delayed access to deposits or other financial assets; losses of deposits in excess of federally-insured levels; reduced access to, or increased costs associated with, funding sources and other credit arrangements adequate to finance our current or future operations; increased regulatory pressure; the inability of our counterparties and/or customers to meet their obligations to us; economic downturn; and rising unemployment levels.