ASSURED GUARANTY LTD

Exposure Limits

The Company establishes exposure limits and underwriting criteria for obligors, sectors and countries, and for individual insurance transactions. Risk exposure limits for single obligors are based on the Company’s capital resources and its assessment of potential frequency and severity of loss as well as other factors, such as historical and stressed collateral performance. Moreover, these limits may also be constrained by both regulatory limits or rating agency requirements. Sector limits are based on the Company’s view of stress losses for the sector and on its assessment of correlation. Country limits are based on the size and stability of the relevant economy, and the Company’s view of the political environment and legal system. All of the foregoing limits are established in relation to the Company’s capital base. In certain cases, however, the Company’s ultimate exposure may exceed its underwriting guidelines (caused by, for example, bond accretion exceeding the risk limitation, acquisitions, reassumptions or other strategic exceptions). See Item 1A. Risk Factors, Risks Related to Economic, Market and Political Conditions and Natural Phenomena captioned “The Company may be subjected to significant risks from large individual or correlated insurance exposures.”

Underwriting Process

The underwriting process for each insurance transaction involves underwriters, credit personnel and lawyers who analyze the structure of a potential transaction and the credit and legal issues pertinent to the particular line of business or asset class. Some transactions also involve accounting personnel who review the transactions to determine the appropriate accounting treatment. Formal credit reports for each proposed insurance transaction are assessed and approved by a credit committee composed of senior officers of the Company.

The Company maintains underwriting manuals that articulate the application of the principles in its risk appetite statement to its insurance business. For new business, generally a risk must be viewed by the Company as investment grade at the time of underwriting to be eligible for insurance. The underwriting manuals also articulate the Company’s exposure limits and credit policies applicable to specific products.

U.S. Public Finance. For U.S. public finance transactions, the Company’s underwriters generally analyze the issuer’s historical financial statements and, where warranted, develop stress case projections to test the issuer’s ability to make timely debt service payments under stressful economic conditions.

The Company focuses principally on the credit quality of the obligor based on population size and trends, wealth factors, and strength of the economy. The Company evaluates the obligor’s liquidity position; its fiscal management policies and track record; its ability to raise revenues and control expenses; and its exposure to derivative contracts and to debt subject to acceleration. The Company assesses the obligor’s pension and other post-employment benefits obligations, if applicable, and funding policies and evaluates the obligor’s ability to adequately fund such obligations in the future. The Company analyzes other critical risk factors including the type of issue; the repayment source; pledged security, if any; the presence of restrictive covenants and the tenor of the risk. The Company also considers the ability of obligors to file for bankruptcy or receivership under applicable statutes (and on related statutes that provide for state oversight or fiscal control over financially troubled obligors). The Company evaluates the impact of environmental and climate change risks, including natural perils, on the ability of the obligor to meet its financial obligations over the life of the insured transaction. Such risks may include rising sea levels, hurricanes, wildfires and earthquakes.

In cases of not-for-profit institutions, such as healthcare issuers and private higher education issuers, the Company focuses on the financial stability of the institution, its competitive position and its management experience as well as restrictive covenants imposed on the obligor for the benefit of debt holders.

The Company’s credit policy for U.S. infrastructure transactions is substantially similar to that of non-U.S. infrastructure transactions described below.

Non-U.S. Public Finance Transactions. For non-U.S. transactions, the Company undertakes an analysis of the country or countries in which the risk resides, which includes political risk as well as economic and demographic characteristics. For each transaction, the Company also performs an assessment of the legal framework governing the transaction and the laws affecting the underlying assets supporting the obligations to be insured.

The underwriting of regulated utilities outside of the U.S. primarily focuses on financial strength of the utility, financial covenants made by the utility, and regulations relevant to the specific jurisdiction. The Company also assesses each transaction for material environmental and climate change risks, and incorporates its assessment into its underwriting decisions.

For non-U.S. infrastructure transactions, the Company reviews the type of project (e.g., utility, hospital, road, social housing, transportation or student accommodation) and the source of repayment of the debt. For certain transactions, debt service and operational expenses are covered by availability payments made by either a governmental or not-for-profit entity. The availability payments are due if the project is available for use, regardless of whether the project actually is in use. The principal risks for such transactions are construction risk and operational risk.

For other transactions, notably transactions secured by toll-roads, student accommodation and stadiums, revenues derived from the project must be sufficient to make debt service payments as well as cover the upfront operating expenses it experiences during the build phase before revenues are generated.

For infrastructure transactions, underwriters generally use financial models to evaluate the ability of the transaction to generate adequate cash flow to service the debt under a variety of scenarios. The models include economically stressed scenarios that the underwriters use for their assessment of the potential credit risk inherent in a particular transaction. Stress models developed internally by the Company’s underwriters reflect both empirical research and information gathered from third parties, such as rating agencies or investment banks. The Company may also engage advisers such as consultants and external counsel to assist in analyzing a transaction’s financial or legal risks.

The Company’s due diligence for infrastructure projects also includes: a financial review of the entity seeking the development of the project (usually a governmental entity or university); a financial and operational review of the developer, the construction companies, and the project operator; and a financial review of the various providers of operational financial protection for the bondholders (and therefore the insurer), including construction surety providers, letter-of-credit providers, and banks. The Company uses outside consultants to review the construction program and to assess whether the project can be completed on time and on budget. The Company projects the cost of replacing the construction company, including delays in construction, in the event that a construction company is unable to complete the construction for any reason. Construction security packages are sized appropriately to cover these risks and the Company requires such coverage from credit-worthy institutions.

U.S. Structured Finance. Structured finance obligations generally present three distinct forms of risk: asset risk, pertaining to the amount and quality of assets underlying an issue; structural risk, pertaining to the extent to which an issuer's legal structure provides protection from loss; and execution risk, which is the risk that poor performance by a servicer or collateral manager contributes to a decline in the cash flow available to the transaction. Each of these risks is addressed through the Company’s underwriting process. The underwriter is also required to assess the presence of any environmental or climate change risk and, to the extent there are notable environmental or climate change risks, analyze the potential impact, if any, of these risks on the transaction over its expected life, and present this assessment to the credit committee.

For structured finance transactions, underwriters generally use financial models to evaluate the ability of the transaction to generate adequate cash flow to service the debt under a variety of hypothetical scenarios. The models include economically stressed scenarios that the underwriters use for their assessment of the potential credit risk inherent in a particular transaction. Stress models developed internally by the Company’s underwriters reflect both empirical research and information gathered from third parties, such as rating agencies or investment banks. Generally, the amount and quality of asset coverage required with respect to a structured finance exposure is dependent upon both the historic performance of the asset class, as well as the Company’s view of the future performance of the subject assets.

The Company may also engage advisers such as consultants and external counsel to assist in analyzing a transaction's financial or legal risks. The Company may also conduct a due diligence review that includes, among other things, a site visit to the project or facility, meetings with issuer management, review of underwriting and operational procedures, file reviews, and review of financial procedures and computer systems.

In addition, structured securities usually are designed to protect investors (and therefore the insurer or reinsurer) from the bankruptcy or insolvency of the entity that originated the underlying assets, as well as the bankruptcy or insolvency of the servicer or manager of those assets.

The Company conducts due diligence on the collateral that supports its insured transactions. The principal focus of the due diligence is to confirm the underlying collateral was originated in accordance with the stated underwriting criteria of the asset originator. The Company also conducts audits of servicing or other management procedures, reviewing critical aspects of these procedures such as cash management and collections. The Company may, for certain transactions, obtain background checks on key managers of the originator, servicer or manager of the obligations underlying that transaction.

Non-U.S. Structured Finance. The underwriting process for Non-U.S. Structured Finance transactions is substantially similar to the procedures described above for U.S. Structured Finance transactions, with additional consideration for the risks relating to the relevant jurisdiction for each transaction.