Item 1. Business.
GENERAL
We are an internally-managed real estate investment trust (or REIT) primarily engaged in the business of investing, on a leveraged basis, in residential mortgage assets. Our targeted investments include principally the following:
•Residential whole loans, including Purchased Performing Loans, Purchased Credit Deteriorated and non-performing loans. We also own residential real estate (or REO), which is typically acquired as a result of the foreclosure or other liquidation of delinquent whole loans in connection with our loan investment activities;
•Residential mortgage securities, including Non-Agency MBS and CRT securities; and
•MSR-related assets, which include term notes backed directly or indirectly by MSRs and loans to provide financing to entities that originate residential mortgage loans and own the related MSRs.
Our principal business objective is to deliver shareholder value through the generation of distributable income and through asset performance linked to residential mortgage credit fundamentals. We selectively invest in residential mortgage assets with a focus on credit analysis, projected prepayment rates, interest rate sensitivity and expected return.
2020 was marked by unprecedented conditions caused by the COVID-19 global pandemic, causing significant volatility and disruption in the United States economy and financial markets. In addition, conditions for residential mortgage assets were negatively impacted during 2020, particularly during the initial months of the pandemic in the first and second quarters of the year. As a result of and in response to these conditions, we significantly reduced the size and composition of our investment portfolio during 2020. We discuss the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business, including our investment and financing strategies, throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We were incorporated in Maryland on July 24, 1997 and began operations on April 10, 1998. We have elected to be treated as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must comply with a number of requirements under federal tax law, including that we must distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income to our stockholders. We have elected to treat certain of our subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries (or TRS). In general, a TRS may hold assets and engage in activities that a REIT or qualified REIT subsidiary (or QRS) cannot hold or engage in directly and generally may engage in any real estate or non-real estate related business.
We are a holding company and conduct our real estate finance businesses primarily through wholly-owned subsidiaries, so as to maintain an exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (or the Investment Company Act) by ensuring that less than 40% of the value of our total assets, exclusive of U.S. Government securities and cash items (which we refer to as our adjusted total assets for Investment Company Act purposes), on an unconsolidated basis, consist of “investment securities” as defined by the Investment Company Act. We refer to this test as the “40% Test.”
INVESTMENT STRATEGY
We primarily invest, through our various subsidiaries, in residential mortgage assets. As a result of the market disruptions related to the unprecedented conditions arising in connection with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, during the first and second quarters of 2020 we engaged in asset sales and took other actions that significantly changed our asset composition. In particular, we sold all of our Agency and Legacy Non-Agency MBS investments and substantially reduced our investments in MSR-related assets and CRT securities. As a result of these actions, our primary investment assets as of December 31, 2020 are comprised of residential whole loans. Consequently, at the end of 2020, residential whole loan investments comprised approximately 77% of our assets and more than 60% of our allocated net equity. The impact of the COVID-19 related market disruptions on loan origination volumes for Non-QM and business purpose loans as well as on our own financial condition resulted in significantly reduced loan acquisition activity by us in 2020 as compared to the prior year. During 2021, assuming economic conditions continue to stabilize and loan origination volumes for Non-QM and business purpose loans increase, we expect to seek investment opportunities primarily focused on residential whole loans as market opportunities arise. We expect that our investment activities will continue to be financed through a combination of term loan warehouse financing, repurchase agreement financing and, increasingly, through securitization transactions.
At December 31, 2020, our total investment-related assets were comprised of the following: $5.3 billion, or 77%, of residential whole loans (compared to $7.4 billion, or 55%, at December 31, 2019); $161.0 million, or 2%, of residential
mortgage securities (compared to $4.0 billion, or 29%, at December 31, 2019); $239.0 million, or 3%, of MSR-related assets (compared to $1.2 billion, or 9%, at December 31, 2019); and $352.4 million, or 5%, of remaining investment-related assets, comprised primarily of REO, capital contributions made to loan origination partners and MBS loan-related receivables (compared to 5% at December 31, 2019).
Residential Whole Loans
Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic during the first quarter of 2020, we continued to increase our residential whole loan portfolio primarily through acquisitions of Purchased Performing Loans. Such loans include: (i) loans to finance (or refinance) one-to four-family residential properties that are not considered to meet the definition of a “Qualified Mortgage” in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (or Non-QM loans), (ii) short-term business purpose loans collateralized by residential properties made to non-occupant borrowers who intend to rehabilitate and sell the property for a profit (or Rehabilitation loans or Fix and Flip loans), (iii) loans to finance (or refinance) non-owner occupied one-to four-family residential properties that are rented to one or more tenants (or Single-family rental loans), and (iv) previously originated loans secured by residential real estate that is generally owner occupied (or Seasoned performing loans). The majority of our Purchased Performing Loans are Hybrids or, in the case of Rehabilitation loans, are expected to have relatively short duration. Consequently, we believe that our Purchased Performing Loans acquired to date will exhibit relatively lower interest rate sensitivity than conventional fixed-rate residential whole loans. Approximately 84% of our Purchased Performing Loans at December 31, 2020 were acquired on a servicing-retained basis (i.e., the sellers of such loans retained the right to service the loans sold).
In addition, during 2020, we continued to maintain our non-performing residential whole loan and Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loan portfolios. Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans are typically characterized by borrowers who have previously experienced payment delinquencies and the amount owed may exceed the value of the property pledged as collateral. The majority of these loans are acquired at purchase prices that are discounted (often substantially so) to their contractual loan balance to reflect the impaired credit history of the borrower, the loan-to-value ratio (or LTV) of the loan and the coupon rate. Non-performing loans are typically characterized by borrowers who have defaulted on their obligations and/or have payment delinquencies of 60 days or more at the time we acquire the loan. The majority of these loans are also acquired at purchase prices that are discounted (often substantially so) to the contractual loan balance that reflects primarily the non-performing nature of the loan. Typically, this purchase price is a discount to the expected value of the collateral securing the loan, such value to be realized after foreclosure and liquidation of the property. In addition, as we generally own the mortgage-servicing rights associated with these loans, our process is also focused on selecting a sub-servicer with the appropriate expertise to mitigate losses and maximize our overall return. This involves, among other things, performing due diligence on the sub-servicer prior to their engagement as well as ongoing oversight and surveillance. As indicated above, the majority of our non-performing and Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans were purchased on a servicing-released basis (i.e., the sellers of such loans transferred the right to service the loans as part of the sale). We do not directly service any of these loans and have contracted with loan servicing companies to perform this function on our behalf. These companies were selected to leverage their expertise in working with delinquent borrowers in an effort to cure delinquencies through, among other things, loan modification and third-party refinancing. To the extent these efforts are successful, we believe our investments in Purchased Credit Deteriorated and non-performing loans will yield attractive returns. In addition, to the extent that it is not possible to achieve a successful outcome for a particular borrower and the real property collateral must be foreclosed on and liquidated, we believe that the discounted purchase price at which the loan was acquired provides us with a level of protection against financial loss. Primarily as a result of foreclosure moratoriums put in place in response to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also due to the efforts of our asset management team, our balances of REO property decreased substantially during 2020, and this may continue going forward as we continue to manage non-performing loans in our portfolio.
Residential Mortgage Securities
Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we owned significantly higher balances of residential mortgage securities (primarily investments in Agency MBS, Non-Agency MBS and CRT securities). As discussed above, we sold our Agency and Legacy Non-Agency MBS portfolios and significantly reduced our CRT securities, RPL/NPL MBS and MSR-related assets during 2020. Going forward, we may invest selectively in residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets as market opportunities arise, and we discuss the general features of our currently held portfolio below.
Our RPL/NPL MBS were purchased primarily at prices around par and represent the senior and mezzanine tranches of the related securitizations. The majority of these securities are generally structured with significant credit enhancement (typically approximately 50%) and the subordinate tranches absorb all credit losses (until those tranches are extinguished) and typically receive no cash flow (interest or principal) until the senior tranches are paid off. Prior to purchase, we analyze the deal structure in order to assess the associated credit risk. Subsequent to purchase, the ongoing credit risk associated with the deal is evaluated by analyzing the extent to which actual credit losses occur that result in a reduction in the amount of subordination supporting our bond. Based on the recent performance of the collateral underlying our RPL/NPL MBS and current subordination levels, we do not believe that we are currently exposed to significant risk of credit loss on these investments. In addition, the structures of these investments generally contain a contractual coupon step-up feature where the coupon increases from 300 - 400 basis points at 36 - 48 months or sooner. We expect that the combination of the priority cash flow and the step-up feature associated with these investments will result in their exhibiting short average lives and, accordingly, reduced interest rate sensitivity.
CRT securities are debt obligations issued by or sponsored by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The coupon payments on CRT securities are paid by the issuer and the principal payments received are dependent on the performance of loans in either a reference pool or an actual pool of loans. As an investor in a CRT security, we may incur a principal loss if the performance of the actual or reference pool loans results in either an actual or calculated loss that exceeds the credit enhancement on the security owned by us. We assess the credit risk associated with our investments in CRT securities by assessing the current and expected future performance of the associated loan pool.
MSR-Related Assets
Although we do not own or otherwise invest directly in MSRs, we have made investments in term notes backed directly or indirectly by MSRs and loans to finance entities that originate residential mortgage loans and own the related MSRs. In the case of term notes backed by MSR-related collateral, we believe the credit risk on these investments is mitigated by structural credit support in the form of over-collateralization as well as a corporate guarantee from the ultimate parent or sponsor of the related special purpose vehicle issuing the note, that is intended to provide for payment of interest and principal to the holders of the term notes should cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs be insufficient. Credit risk on MSR-related corporate loans is mitigated as the loans are secured by MSRs as well as certain other unencumbered assets owned by the borrower.
FINANCING STRATEGY
Our financing strategy is designed to increase the size of our investment portfolio by borrowing against a substantial portion of the market value of the assets in our portfolio. We use shorter term repurchase agreements, term warehouse facilities and loan securitizations to finance our holdings of residential mortgage assets. Our financing strategy shifted significantly during 2020 and into 2021. In particular, in response to the turmoil in the financial markets resulting from the conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic, we sought to implement more durable forms of borrowing. This shift was driven, in part, by the need to temporarily enter into forbearance agreements with certain of our financing counterparties (as margin calls reached unprecedented highs in March 2020). For example, in June 2020, we entered into a $500 million corporate level credit facility (which was fully repaid by the end of October 2020) and a non-mark-to-market term loan facility with an initial borrowing capacity of $1.65 billion and under which $886.1 million was outstanding as of December 31, 2020. While providing more durable financing that is not subject to margin calls, the cost of these types of facilities is higher than the repurchase agreement financing upon which we had historically relied. In addition, we executed three securitization transactions during the second half of 2020 for our residential whole loans. The securitization transactions lowered the funding costs and lengthened the term of funding for these assets (in each case as compared to the repurchase arrangements under which these assets were financed prior to their being securitized) and generated additional liquidity. Going forward, in connection with our current and any future investment in residential whole loans, we expect that our financing strategy will be more heavily reliant on loan securitization and other forms of structured financing, subject to market conditions.
COMPETITION
We believe that our principal competitors in the business of acquiring and holding residential mortgage assets of the types in which we invest are financial institutions, such as banks, specialty finance companies, insurance companies, institutional investors, including mutual funds and pension funds, hedge funds and other mortgage REITs, as well as the U.S. Federal Reserve (or Federal Reserve) as part of its monetary policy activities. Some of these entities may not be subject to the same regulatory constraints (i.e., REIT compliance or maintaining an exemption under the Investment Company Act) as we are. In addition, many of these entities have greater financial resources and access to capital than we have. The existence of these entities, as well as the possibility of additional entities forming in the future, may increase the competition for the acquisition of residential mortgage assets, resulting in higher prices and lower yields on such assets.
EMPLOYEES
At December 31, 2020, we had 57 full-time and one part-time employee.
We believe that investing in and fostering a diverse and inclusive workforce is a key pillar in operating our business. By supporting, recognizing, and investing in the employees, we believe that we are able to attract and retain the highest quality talent.
REGULATORY MATTERS
The U.S. Congress, Federal Reserve, U.S. Treasury, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (or FDIC), the Securities and Exchange Commission (or SEC) and other governmental and regulatory bodies have taken actions in response to the 2007-2008 financial crisis. In particular, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (or the Dodd-Frank Act) created a new regulator, an independent bureau housed within the Federal Reserve System known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (or the CFPB). The CFPB has broad authority over a wide range of consumer financial products and services, including mortgage lending and servicing. One portion of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (or Mortgage Reform Act), contains underwriting and servicing standards for the mortgage industry, restrictions on compensation for mortgage loan originators, and various other requirements related to mortgage origination and servicing. In addition, 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 residential 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. 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, the securitization industry, Swaps and other derivatives. 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 and securitization industries, including us.
In addition to the regulatory actions being implemented under the Dodd-Frank Act, on August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release under which it is reviewing interpretive issues related to Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act. Section 3(c)(5)(C) excludes from the definition of “investment company” entities that are primarily engaged in, among other things, “purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” Many companies that engage in the business of acquiring mortgages and mortgage-related instruments seek to rely on existing interpretations of the SEC Staff with respect to Section 3(c)(5)(C) so as not to be deemed an investment company for the purpose of regulation under the Investment Company Act. In connection with the concept release, the SEC requested comments on, among other things, whether it should reconsider its existing interpretation of Section 3(c)(5)(C). To date the SEC has not taken or otherwise announced any further action in connection with the concept release. (For additional discussion of the SEC’s concept release and its potential impact on us, please see Part I, Item 1A.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
This section highlights specific risks that could affect our Company and its business. Readers should carefully consider each of the following risks and all of the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Based on the information currently known to us, we believe the following information identifies the most significant risk factors affecting our Company. However, the risks and uncertainties we face are not limited to those described below. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business.
If any of the following risks and uncertainties develops into actual events or if the circumstances described in the risks and uncertainties occur or continue to occur, these events or circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity. These events could also have a negative effect on the trading price of our securities.
Summary Risk Factors
General
•We may change our investment strategy, operating policies and/or asset allocations without stockholder consent, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
•The recent global COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected, and will likely continue to adversely affect, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
•We cannot predict the effect that government policies, laws and plans adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and global recessionary economic conditions will have on us.
Credit and Other Risks Related to Our Investments
•Our investments in residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets involve credit risk, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
•Our investments are subject to changes in credit spreads and other risks.
•A significant portion of our residential whole loans and residential mortgage securities are secured by properties in a small number of geographic areas and may be disproportionately affected by economic or housing downturns, our competition, natural disasters, terrorist events, pandemics, regulatory changes, adverse climate changes or other adverse events specific to those markets.
•We are subject to counterparty risk and may be unable to seek indemnity or require counterparties to repurchase residential whole loans if they breach representations and warranties, which could cause us to suffer losses.
•The due diligence we undertake on potential investments may be limited and/or not reveal all of the risks associated with such investments and may not reveal other weaknesses in such assets, which could lead to losses.
•We have experienced and may experience in the future increased volatility in our U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (or GAAP) results of operations due in part to the increasing contribution to financial results of assets and liabilities accounted for under the fair value option.
•We have experienced, and may in the future experience, declines in the market value of certain of our investment securities resulting in our recording impairments, which have had, and may in the future have, an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
•The use of models in connection with the valuation of our assets subjects us to potential risks in the event that such models are incorrect, misleading or based on incomplete information.
•Valuations of some of our assets are subject to inherent uncertainty, may be based on estimates, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may differ from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these assets existed.
•Our investments in residential whole loans are difficult to value and are dependent upon the borrower’s ability to service or refinance their debt. The inability of the borrower to do so could materially and adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations.
•Mortgage loan modification and refinancing programs and future legislative action may materially adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, our MBS and residential whole loan investments.
•We may be adversely affected by risks affecting borrowers or the asset or property types in which certain of our investments may be concentrated at any given time, as well as from unfavorable changes in the related geographic regions.
•Our investments in residential whole loans subject us to servicing-related risks, including those associated with foreclosure and liquidation.
•The expanding body of federal, state and local regulations and investigations of originators and servicers may increase costs of compliance and the risks of noncompliance, and may adversely affect servicers’ ability to perform their servicing obligations.
•Our ability to sell REO on terms acceptable to us or at all may be limited.
•Our investments in MSR-related assets expose us to additional risks.
•Our investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.
Prepayment and Reinvestment Risk
•Prepayment rates on the mortgage loans underlying certain of our residential mortgage assets may materially adversely affect our profitability or result in liquidity shortfalls that could require us to sell assets in unfavorable market conditions.
Risks Related to Our Use of Leverage
•Our business strategy involves the use of leverage, and we may not achieve what we believe to be optimal levels of leverage or we may become overleveraged, which may materially adversely affect our liquidity, results of operations or financial condition.
•An increase in our borrowing costs relative to the interest we receive on our investments may materially adversely affect our profitability.
•Changes in inter-bank lending rate reporting practices, the method pursuant to which the London Interbank Offered Rate (or LIBOR) is determined or the establishment of alternative reference rates may adversely affect our profitability.
•Certain of our current lenders require, and future lenders may require, that we enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations.
•The use of non-recourse long-term financing structures expose us to risks, which could result in losses to us.
Risks Associated with Adverse Developments in the Mortgage Finance and Credit Markets and Financial Markets Generally
•Market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets may materially adversely affect the value of the assets in which we invest.
•A lack of liquidity in our investments may materially adversely affect our business.
•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.
Risks Related to Our Use of Hedging Strategies
•Our use of hedging strategies to mitigate our interest rate exposure may not be effective.
•We may enter into hedging instruments that could expose us to contingent liabilities in the future, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
•The characteristics of hedging instruments present various concerns, including illiquidity, enforceability, and counterparty risks, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
•Clearing facilities or exchanges upon which our hedging instruments are traded may increase margin requirements on our hedging instruments in the event of adverse economic developments.
•We may fail to qualify for hedge accounting treatment, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Taxation as a REIT and the Taxation of Our Assets
•If we fail to remain qualified as a REIT, we will be subject to tax as a regular corporation and could face a substantial tax liability, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
•Our failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT would cause our stock to be delisted from the New York Stock Exchange (or NYSE).
•If our foreign TRS is subject to U.S. federal income tax at the entity level, it would greatly reduce the amounts those entities would have available to pay its creditors and distribute to us.
•Our use of TRSs may cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT
•We may generate taxable income that differs from our GAAP income on our Non-Agency MBS and residential whole loan investments purchased at a discount to par value, which may result in significant timing variances in the recognition of income and losses.
•The tax on prohibited transactions may limit our ability to engage in transactions, including certain methods of securitizing mortgage loans, that would be treated as sales for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
•We have not established a minimum dividend payment level, and there is no guarantee that we will maintain current dividend payment levels or pay dividends in the future.
•Our reported GAAP net income may differ from the amount of REIT taxable income and dividend distribution requirements and, therefore, our GAAP results may not be an accurate indicator of future taxable income and dividend distributions.
•The failure of assets subject to repurchase agreements to qualify as real estate assets could adversely affect our ability to remain qualified as a REIT.
•Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.
•We may be required to report taxable income for certain investments in excess of the economic income we ultimately realize from them.
•The interest apportionment rules may affect our ability to comply with the REIT asset and gross income tests.
•Dividends paid by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for “qualified dividend income.”
Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure
•Our ownership limitations may restrict business combination opportunities.
•Provisions of Maryland law and other provisions of our organizational documents may limit the ability of a third-party to acquire control of the Company.
•Future offerings of debt securities, which would rank senior to our common stock upon liquidation, and future offerings of equity securities, which would dilute our existing stockholders and may be senior to our common stock for the purposes of dividend and liquidating distributions, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Other Business Risks
•We are dependent on information systems and their failure (including in connection with cyber-attacks) could significantly disrupt our business.
General
The results of our business operations are affected by a number of factors, many 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, competition and other factors, none of which can be predicted with any certainty. Our operating results also depend upon 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.
The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected, and will likely continue to adversely affect, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected our business, and we believe it is likely to continue to do so. The outbreak has caused significant volatility and disruption in the financial markets both in the United States and globally. If COVID-19, or another highly infectious or contagious disease, continues to spread or the response (including any vaccines) to contain it is unsuccessful, we could continue to experience material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations. The extent of such effects will depend on future developments which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the geographic spread of the novel coronavirus, the overall severity of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, the effectiveness of any vaccine, the measures that may be taken by various governmental authorities in response to the outbreak (such as quarantines and travel restrictions) and the possible further impacts on the global economy.
The continued spread of COVID-19 and health related concerns could also negatively impact the availability of key personnel who are necessary to conduct our business.
The U.S. federal government, as well as many state and local governments, have adopted a number of emergency measures and recommendations in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including imposing travel bans, “shelter in place” restrictions, curfews, cancelling events, banning large gatherings, closing non-essential businesses, and generally promoting social distancing (including in the workplace, which has resulted in a significant increase in employees working remotely). Across the country, moratoriums are in place in certain states to stop evictions and foreclosures in an effort to lessen the financial burden created by the COVID-19 pandemic and various states have even promulgated guidance to regulated servicers requiring them to formulate policies to assist mortgagors in need as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. A number of states have enacted laws which impose significant limits on the default remedies of lenders secured by real property. While some states have begun a phased relaxation of certain of these measures, substantial restrictions on economic activity remain in place. Although it cannot be predicted, additional policy action at the federal, state and local level is possible in the near future. The COVID-19 pandemic (and any future COVID-19 outbreaks) and resulting emergency measures have led (and may continue to lead) to significant disruptions in the global supply chain, global capital markets, the economy of the United States and the economies of other nations. Concern about the potential effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effectiveness of measures being put in place by governmental bodies and reserve banks at various levels as well as by private enterprises to contain or mitigate its spread has adversely affected economic conditions and capital markets globally, and has led to significant volatility in global financial markets. There can be no assurance that the containment measures or other measures implemented from time to time will be successful in limiting the spread of the virus and what effect those measures will have on the economy. While non-essential activity is to some extent returning in certain jurisdictions, the timing of such return remains uncertain, and may vary substantially depending on the location and the type of activity. The disruption and volatility in the credit markets and the reduction of economic activity in severely affected sectors may continue for an extended period or indefinitely, and may worsen the recession in the United States and/or globally.
Any significant decrease in economic activity or resulting decline in the housing market could have an adverse effect on our investments in mortgage real estate assets. In particular, the COVID-19 pandemic and related economic impacts have adversely affected the housing and related markets, including as related to availability of mortgage financing and the ability of buyers and sellers and other industry participants to conduct sales, and could result in the overall decline in home values if economic conditions do not improve. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has created an uncertain and volatile interest rate environment and general fixed income patterns have deviated widely from historical trends, all of which could adversely affect our business. With respect to prepayments, given the combination of low interest rates, government stimulus and high unemployment, and other disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become more difficult to predict prepayment levels for the securities in our portfolio. As a result, actual prepayment results may be materially different from our estimates . With respect to our hedging activities, given recent market uncertainty, the spread between MBS, hedges and benchmark rates widened significantly. It is uncertain when normal market correlations will resume in the fixed income markets.
Further, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on the overall economy, such as rising unemployment levels or changes in consumer behavior related to loans as well as government policies and pronouncements, borrowers may experience difficulties meeting their obligations or seek to forbear payment on or refinance their mortgage loans to avail themselves of lower rates, which may adversely affect our result of operations (particularly as related to assets we own that expose us to credit risk, as discussed below). Thus, the credit risk profile on our assets may be more pronounced in the mortgage, housing and related sectors, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
We cannot predict the effect that government policies, laws and plans adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and global recessionary economic conditions will have on us.
Governments have adopted, and we expect will continue to adopt, policies, laws and plans intended to address the COVID-19 pandemic and adverse developments in the credit, financial and mortgage markets. While the Federal Reserve, the U.S. government and other governments have implemented unprecedented financial support or relief measures in response to concerns surrounding the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the likelihood of such measures calming the volatility in the financial markets or addressing a long term national or global economic downturn cannot be predicted and we cannot assure you that these programs will be effective, sufficient or otherwise have a positive impact on our business.
Moreover, certain actions taken by U.S. or other governmental authorities, including the Federal Reserve, that are intended to ameliorate the social and macroeconomic effects of COVID-19 may harm our business. For example, decreases in short-term interest rates, such as those announced by the Federal Reserve during 2020, including in response to COVID-19, may have a negative impact on our results, as we have certain assets and liabilities which are sensitive to changes in interest
rates. We expect interest rates to remain low for the foreseeable future. These market interest rate declines may negatively affect our results of operations.
We may change our investment strategy, operating policies and/or asset allocations without stockholder consent, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
We may change our investment strategy, operating policies and/or asset allocation with respect to investments, acquisitions, leverage, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions at any time without the consent of our stockholders which would result in an investment portfolio with a different risk profile (including an investment portfolio that may be more concentrated in a particular class of asset). For example, related to the impact of the unprecedented conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic, during 2020 we sold all of our MBS and substantially reduced our investments in MSR-related assets and CRT securities, resulting in our residential whole loans becoming by far our largest asset. A change in our investment strategy may increase our exposure to various risks, including but not limited to: interest rate risk, credit risk, default risk, liquidity risk, financing risk, legal or regulatory risk, and/or real estate market fluctuations. Furthermore, a change in our asset allocation could result in our making investments in asset categories different from those of our historical investments. These changes could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, the market price of our common stock or our ability to pay dividends or make distributions.
Credit and Other Risks Related to Our Investments
Our investments in residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets involve credit risk, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
Investors in residential mortgage assets assume the risk that the related borrowers may default on their obligations to make full and timely payments of principal and interest. Under our investment policy, we may invest in residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities, MSR-related assets and other investment assets of that may be considered to be lower credit quality. In general, these investments are less exposed to credit risk than Agency MBS because the former are not guaranteed as to principal or interest by the U.S. Government, any federal agency or any federally chartered corporation. Higher-than-expected rates of default and/or higher-than-expected loss severities on the mortgages underlying these investments could adversely affect the value of these assets. Accordingly, defaults in the payment of principal and/or interest on our residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities, MSR-related assets and other investment assets of less-than-high credit quality could result in our incurring losses of income from, and/or losses in market value relating to, these assets, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations. This risk may be more pronounced during times of market volatility and negative economic conditions, such as those being experienced in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Our portfolio of residential whole loans is by far our largest asset class as of the end of 2020, and represented approximately 77% of our total assets as of December 31, 2020. We expect that our investment portfolio in residential whole loans will continue to increase during 2021. As a holder of residential whole loans, we are subject to the risk that the related 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. For example, upon the onset of the volatility created by the COVID-19 pandemic, we were unable to efficiently liquidate residential whole loans to raise liquidity . 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.
Our investments are subject to changes in credit spreads and other risks.
Credit spreads, which at times can be very volatile and react to various macro-economic events or conditions, measure the additional yield demanded on securities by the market based on their perceived credit relative to a specific benchmark. Fixed rate securities are valued based on a market credit spread over the rate payable on fixed rate U.S. Treasuries of like maturity. Floating rate securities are generally valued based on a market credit spread over LIBOR (which is under reform and may be replaced, as discussed below). Excessive supply of these securities combined with reduced demand will generally cause the market to require a higher yield on these securities, resulting in the use of a higher, or “wider,” spread over the benchmark rate to value such securities. Under such conditions, the value of our MBS portfolio would tend to decline. Conversely, if the spread used to value such securities were to decrease, or “tighten,” the value of MBS would tend to increase. In addition, MBS valuations are subject to other financial risks, including mortgage basis spread risk. In periods of market volatility, changes in
credit spreads and mortgage basis may result in changes in the value of MBS not being equally offset by changes in the value of derivative contracts used to manage portfolio valuation risks arising due to changes in interest rates. Such changes in the market value of our investments may affect our net equity, net income or cash flow directly through their impact on portfolio unrealized gains or losses, and therefore our ability to realize gains on such investments, or indirectly through their impact on our ability to borrow and access capital. This risk may be more pronounced during times of market volatility and negative economic conditions, such as those being experienced in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.
A significant portion of our residential whole loans and residential mortgage securities are secured by properties in a small number of geographic areas and may be disproportionately affected by economic or housing downturns, our competition, natural disasters, terrorist events, pandemics, regulatory changes, adverse climate changes or other adverse events specific to those markets.
A significant number of the mortgages underlying our residential whole loans and residential mortgage securities are concentrated in certain geographic areas. For example, we have significant exposure in California, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Texas. (For a discussion of the percentage of these assets in these states, see “Credit Risk” included under Part II, Item 7A “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K) Certain markets within these states (particularly in California and Florida) have experienced significant decreases in residential home values from time to time. Any event that adversely affects the economy or real estate market in any of these states could have a disproportionately adverse effect on our residential whole loan and residential mortgage securities. In general, any material decline in the economy or significant problems in a particular real estate market would likely cause a decline in the value of residential properties securing the mortgages in that market, thereby increasing the risk of delinquency, default and foreclosure of residential whole loans and the loans underlying our residential mortgage securities and the risk of loss upon liquidation of these assets. This could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our credit loss experience on residential mortgage investments in the affected market if higher-than-expected rates of default and/or higher-than-expected loss severities on our investments in residential whole loans and residential mortgage securities were to occur.
In addition, the occurrence of a natural disaster (such as an earthquake, tornado, hurricane, flood, mudslide or wildfires), pandemic, terrorist attack or a significant adverse climate change, including potential rises in sea-levels, may cause a sudden decrease in the value of real estate in the area or areas affected and would likely reduce the value of the properties securing the mortgages collateralizing our residential whole loans or residential mortgage securities. Because certain natural disasters are not typically covered by the standard hazard insurance policies maintained by borrowers (such as hurricanes, earthquakes or certain flooding), or the proceeds payable for losses covered by any such policy are not sufficient to make the related repairs, the affected borrowers may have to pay for any repairs themselves. Under these circumstances, borrowers may decide not to repair the damaged property or may stop paying the mortgage, either of which could cause defaults and credit loss severities to increase.
The risks discussed above may be more pronounced during times of market volatility and negative economic conditions, such as those being experienced in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Changes in governmental laws and regulations, fiscal policies, property taxes and zoning ordinances can also have a negative impact on property values, which could result in borrowers’ deciding to stop paying their mortgages. This circumstance could cause defaults and loss severities to increase, thereby adversely impacting our results of operations.
We are subject to counterparty risk and may be unable to seek indemnity or require counterparties to repurchase residential whole loans if they breach representations and warranties, which could cause us to suffer losses.
In connection with our residential whole loan investments, we typically enter into a loan purchase agreement, as buyer, of the loans from a seller. When we invest in certain mortgage loans, sellers may make representations and warranties about such loans that are very limited both in scope and duration. Residential mortgage loan purchase agreements may entitle the purchaser of the loans to seek indemnity or demand repurchase or substitution of the loans in the event the seller of the loans breaches a representation or warranty given to the purchaser. However, there can be no assurance that a mortgage loan purchase agreement will contain appropriate representations and warranties, that we or the trust that purchases the mortgage loans would be able to enforce a contractual right to repurchase or substitution, or that the seller of the loans will remain solvent or otherwise be able to honor its obligations under its mortgage loan purchase agreements. The inability to obtain or enforce an indemnity or require repurchase of a significant number of loans could require us to absorb the associated losses, and adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and business.
The due diligence we undertake on potential investments may be limited and/or not reveal all of the risks associated with such investments and may not reveal other weaknesses in such assets, which could lead to losses.
Before making an investment, we typically conduct (either directly or using third-parties) certain due diligence. There can be no assurance that we will conduct any specific level of due diligence, or that, among other things, our due diligence processes will uncover all relevant facts, which could result in losses on these assets to the extent we ultimately acquire them, which, in turn, could adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and business.
We have experienced and may experience in the future increased volatility in our GAAP results of operations due in part to the increasing contribution to financial results of assets and liabilities accounted for under the fair value option.
We have elected the fair value option accounting model for certain of our investments and financing agreements. Changes in the fair value of assets, and a portion of the changes in the fair value of liabilities, accounted for using the fair value option are recorded in our consolidated statements of operations each period, which may result in volatility in our financial results.(For example, we experienced such volatility particularly during the first and second quarters of 2020, at the height of the COVID-19-related market dislocations). There can be no assurance that such volatility in periodic financial results will not occur during 2021 or in future periods.
We have experienced, and may in the future experience, declines in the market value of certain of our investment securities resulting in our recording impairments, which have had, and may in the future have, an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
A decline in the market value of our residential mortgage securities that are accounted for as available-for-sale (or AFS) may require us to recognize impairment against such assets under GAAP. When the fair value of an AFS security is less than its amortized cost at the balance sheet date, the security is considered impaired. If we intend to sell an impaired security, or it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the impaired security before any anticipated recovery, then we must recognize charges to earnings equal to the entire difference between the investment’s amortized cost and its fair value at the balance sheet date. If we do not expect to sell an impaired security, only the portion of the impairment related to credit losses is recognized through charges to earnings with the remainder recognized through accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss) (or AOCI) on our consolidated balance sheets. Impairments recognized through other comprehensive income/(loss) (or OCI) do not impact earnings. Following the recognition of an impairment through earnings, a valuation allowance will be established for the security. The determination as to the amount of credit impairment recognized in earnings is subjective, as such determination is based on factual information available at the time of assessment as well as on our estimates of the future performance and cash flow projections. As a result, the timing and amount of impairments recognized in earnings constitute material estimates that are susceptible to significant change.
The use of models in connection with the valuation and credit losses of our assets subjects us to potential risks in the event that such models are incorrect, misleading or based on incomplete information.
As part of our risk management process, models may be used to evaluate, depending on the asset class, house price appreciation and depreciation by county or region, prepayment speeds and frequency, cost and timing of foreclosures, as well as other factors. Certain assumptions used as inputs to the models may be based on historical trends. These trends may not be indicative of future results. Furthermore, the assumptions underlying the models may prove to be inaccurate, causing the model output also to be incorrect. In particular, the economic, financial and related impacts of events like the COVID-19 pandemic are and will be very difficult to model (including as related to the housing and mortgage markets), as the catalyst for these conditions (i.e., a global pandemic) is an event that is unparalleled in modern history and therefore is subject to unique variables, assumptions and inputs, making historical data used in models less reliable. In the event models and data prove to be incorrect, misleading or incomplete, any decisions made in reliance thereon expose us to potential risks. For example, by relying on incorrect models and data, we may overestimate or underestimate credit losses, buy certain assets at prices that are too high, sell certain assets at prices that are too low or miss favorable opportunities altogether, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial results, business and growth prospects.
Valuations of some of our assets are subject to inherent uncertainty, may be based on estimates, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may differ from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these assets existed.
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 illiquidity 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, as was experienced in the early stage of the COVID-19 related market volatility.
Our results of operations, financial condition and business could be materially adversely affected if our fair value determinations of these assets are materially higher than could actually be realized in the market.
Our investments in residential whole loans are difficult to value and are dependent upon the borrower’s ability to service or refinance their debt. The inability of the borrower to do so could materially and adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations.
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 engage in workout negotiations, restructuring 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 “Our ability to sell REO on terms acceptable to us or at all may be limited.”
We may work with our third-party servicers and seek to help a borrower to refinance an NPL or RPL to realize greater value from such loan. However, there may be impediments to executing a refinancing strategy for NPLs and RPLs. For example, many mortgage lenders have adjusted their loan programs and underwriting standards, which has reduced the availability of mortgage credit to prospective borrowers. This has resulted in reduced availability of financing alternatives for borrowers seeking to refinance their mortgage loans. In addition, the value of some borrowers’ homes may have declined below the amount of the mortgage loans on such homes resulting in higher loan-to-value ratios, which has left the borrowers with insufficient equity in their homes to permit them to refinance. To the extent prevailing mortgage interest rates rise from their current low levels, these risks would be exacerbated. The effect of the above would likely serve to make the refinancing of NPLs and RPLs potentially more difficult and less profitable for us.
Mortgage loan modification and refinancing programs and future legislative action may materially adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, our MBS and residential whole loan investments.
The U.S. Government, through the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury Department, the FHA, the CFPB, and other agencies have in the past implemented, and may in the future implement, a number of federal programs designed to assist homeowners and help them 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 proprietary 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 our Non-Agency MBS and 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 titled “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” in this Form 10-K.
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.
We may be adversely affected by risks affecting borrowers or the asset or property types in which certain of our investments may be concentrated at any given time, as well as from unfavorable changes in the related geographic regions.
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 the Risk Factor titled “A significant portion of our residential whole loans and residential mortgage securities are secured by properties in a small number of geographic areas and may be disproportionately affected by economic or housing downturns, our competition, natural disasters, terrorist events, pandemics, regulatory changes, adverse climate changes or other adverse events specific to those markets” in this Form 10-K), 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, such as those experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 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.
Our investments in residential whole loans subject us to servicing-related risks, including those associated with foreclosure and liquidation.
We rely on third-party servicers to service and manage the mortgages underlying our residential whole loans. The ultimate returns generated by these investments may depend on the quality of the servicer. If a 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 purchase 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.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting economic disruption it has caused may result in liquidity pressures on servicers and other third-party vendors that we rely upon. For instance, as a result of an increase in mortgagors requesting relief in the form of forbearance plans and/or other loss mitigation, servicers and other parties responsible in capital markets securitization transactions for funding advances with respect to delinquent mortgagor payments of principal and interest may begin to experience financial difficulties if mortgagors do not make monthly payments as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The negative impact on the business and operations of such servicers or other parties responsible for funding such advances could be significant. Sources of liquidity typically available to servicers and other relevant parties for the purpose of funding advances of monthly mortgage payments, especially entities that are not depository institutions, may not be sufficient to meet the increased need that could result from significantly higher delinquency and/or forbearance rates. The extent of such liquidity pressures in the future is not known at this time and is subject to continual change.
The foreclosure process, especially in judicial foreclosure states such as New York, Florida and New Jersey (in which states we have significant exposure), can be lengthy and expensive, and the delays and costs involved in completing a foreclosure, and then subsequently liquidating the REO property through sale, may materially increase any related loss. In addition, at such time as title is taken to a foreclosed property, it may require more extensive rehabilitation than we estimated at acquisition. Thus, a material amount of foreclosed residential mortgage loans, particularly in the states mentioned above, could result in significant losses in our residential whole loan portfolio and could materially adversely affect our results of operations. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there is currently a federal moratorium against eviction which is expected to remain in place, in accordance with President Biden’s day one executive order, until at least March 31, 2021.
The expanding body of federal, state and local regulations and investigations of originators and servicers may increase costs of compliance and the risks of noncompliance, and may adversely affect servicers’ ability to perform their servicing obligations.
We work with and rely on third-party servicers to service the residential mortgage loans that we acquire through consolidated trusts. The mortgages underlying the MBS that we acquire are also serviced by third-party servicers that have been hired by the bond issuers. The mortgage servicing business is subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local
governmental authorities and is subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions and increased compliance costs on a substantial portion of their operations. The volume of new or modified laws and regulations has increased in recent years. Some jurisdictions and municipalities have enacted laws that restrict loan servicing activities, including delaying or preventing foreclosures or forcing the modification of certain mortgages.
Federal laws and regulations have also been proposed or adopted which, among other things, could hinder the ability of a servicer to foreclose promptly on defaulted residential loans, and which could result in assignees being held responsible for violations in the residential loan origination process. For example, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there is currently a federal moratorium against evictions which is expected to remain in place until at least March 31, 2021. In addition, certain mortgage lenders and third-party servicers have voluntarily, or as part of settlements with law enforcement authorities, established loan modification programs relating to loans they hold or service. These federal, state and local legislative or regulatory actions that result in modifications of our outstanding mortgages, or interests in mortgages acquired by us either directly through consolidated trusts or through our investments in residential MBS, may adversely affect the value of, and returns on, such investments. Mortgage servicers may be incented by the federal government to pursue such loan modifications, as well as forbearance plans and other actions intended to prevent foreclosure, even if such loan modifications and other actions are not in the best interests of the beneficial owners of the mortgages. As a consequence of the foregoing matters, our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay dividends, if any, to our stockholders may be adversely affected.
Our ability to sell REO on terms acceptable to us or at all may be limited.
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.
Our investments in MSR-related assets expose us to additional risks.
As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately $239.0 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 directly 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.
Our investments in mortgage loan originators expose us to additional risks.
As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately $47.1 million of 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.
Prepayment and Reinvestment Risk
Prepayment rates on the mortgage loans underlying certain of our residential mortgage assets may materially adversely affect our profitability or result in liquidity shortfalls that could require us to sell assets in unfavorable market conditions.
In general, the mortgages collateralizing certain of our residential mortgage assets may be prepaid at any time without penalty. Prepayments result when borrowers satisfy (i.e., pay off) the mortgage upon selling or refinancing their mortgaged property. When we acquire assets collateralized by residential mortgage loans, we anticipate that the underlying mortgage loans will prepay at a projected rate which, together with expected coupon income, provides us with an expected yield on that asset. If we purchase an asset at a premium to par value, and borrowers then prepay the underlying mortgage loans at a faster rate than we expected, the increased prepayments would result in a yield lower than expected on such assets because we would be required to amortize the related premium on an accelerated basis. Conversely, if we purchase residential mortgage assets at a discount to par value, and borrowers then prepay the underlying mortgage loans at a slower rate than we expected, the decreased prepayments would result in a lower yield than expected on the asset and/or may result in a decline in the fair value of the asset, which would result in losses if the asset is accounted for at fair value or impairment for an AFS security if the fair value of the security is less than its amortized cost.
Prepayment rates on mortgage loans are influenced by changes in mortgage and market interest rates and a variety of economic, geographic, governmental and other factors beyond our control. Consequently, prepayment rates cannot be predicted with certainty and no strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment risks. In periods of declining interest rates, prepayment rates on mortgage loans generally increase. Because of prepayment risk, the market value of certain of our assets may benefit less than other fixed income securities from a decline in interest rates. If general interest rates decline at the same time, we would likely not be able to reinvest the proceeds of the prepayments that we receive in assets yielding as much as those yields on the assets that were prepaid.
With respect to certain residential mortgage assets, we have, at times, purchased assets that have a higher coupon rate than the prevailing market interest rates. In exchange for a higher coupon rate, we typically pay a premium over par value to acquire such assets. In accordance with GAAP, we amortize premiums over the life of the related asset. If the underlying mortgage loans securing these assets prepay at a more rapid rate than anticipated, we will be required to amortize the related premiums on an accelerated basis, which could adversely affect our profitability.
Risks Related to Our Use of Leverage
Our business strategy involves the use of leverage, and we may not achieve what we believe to be optimal levels of leverage or we may become overleveraged, which may materially adversely affect our liquidity, results of operations or financial condition.
Our business strategy involves the use of borrowing or “leverage.” We use the borrowed funds to finance our investment portfolio and the acquisition of additional investment assets. Although we are not required to maintain any particular debt-to-equity ratio, certain of our borrowing agreements contain provisions requiring us not to have a debt-to-equity ratio exceeding specified levels. Future increases in the amount by which the collateral value is required to contractually exceed the repurchase transaction loan amount, decreases in the market value of our residential mortgage investments, increases in interest rate volatility and changes in the availability of acceptable financing could cause us to be unable to achieve the amount of leverage we believe to be optimal. The return on our assets and cash available for distribution to our stockholders may be reduced to the extent that changes in market conditions prevent us from achieving the desired amount of leverage on our investments or cause the cost of our financing to increase relative to the income earned on our leveraged assets. If the interest income on the residential mortgage investments that we have purchased with borrowed funds fails to cover the interest expense of the related borrowings, we will experience net interest losses and may experience net losses from operations. Such losses could be significant as a result of our leveraged structure. The risks associated with leverage are more acute during periods of economic slowdown or recession, which the U.S. economy has experienced in connection with the conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of leverage to finance our residential mortgage investments involves a number of other risks, including, among other things, the following:
•If we are unable to renew our borrowings at acceptable interest rates, it may force us to sell assets under adverse market conditions, which may materially adversely affect our liquidity and profitability. Since we rely primarily on borrowings under short-term repurchase agreements to finance our generally longer-term residential mortgage investments, our ability to achieve our investment objectives depends on our ability to borrow funds in sufficient amounts and on acceptable terms, and on our ability to renew or replace maturing borrowings on a continuous basis.
Our repurchase agreement credit lines are renewable at the discretion of our lenders and, as such, do not contain guaranteed roll-over terms. Our ability to enter into repurchase transactions in the future will depend on the market value of our residential mortgage investments pledged to secure the specific borrowings, the availability of acceptable financing and market liquidity and other conditions existing in the lending market at that time. If we are not able to renew or replace maturing borrowings, we could be forced to sell assets, including assets in an unrealized loss position, in order to maintain liquidity. Forced sales, particularly under adverse market conditions, as frequently occurred during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, could result in lower sales prices than ordinary market sales made in the normal course of business. If our residential mortgage investments were liquidated at prices below our amortized cost (i.e., the cost basis) of such assets, we would incur losses, which could materially adversely affect our earnings.
•A decline in the market value of our assets may result in margin calls that may force us to sell assets under adverse market conditions, which may materially adversely affect our liquidity and profitability. In general, the market value of our residential mortgage investments is impacted by changes in interest rates, prevailing market yields and other market conditions, including general economic conditions, home prices and the real estate market generally. A decline in the market value of our residential mortgage investments may limit our ability to borrow against such assets or result in lenders initiating margin calls, which require a pledge of additional collateral or cash to re-establish the required ratio of borrowing to collateral value, under our repurchase agreements. For example, during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and related market dislocations, we experienced significantly higher margin calls and haircuts with respect to our repurchase agreements. See the Risk Factor directly below. Posting additional collateral or cash to support our credit will reduce our liquidity and limit our ability to leverage our assets, which could materially adversely affect our business. As a result, we could be forced to sell a portion of our assets, including MBS in an unrealized loss position, in order to maintain liquidity.
•Adverse developments involving major financial institutions or involving one of our lenders could result in a rapid reduction in our ability to borrow and materially adversely affect our business, profitability and liquidity. A material adverse development involving one or more major financial institutions or the financial markets in general could result in our lenders reducing our access to funds available under our repurchase agreements or terminating such repurchase agreements altogether. Because all of our repurchase agreements are uncommitted and renewable at the discretion of our lenders, our lenders could determine to reduce or terminate our access to future borrowings at virtually any time, which could materially adversely affect our business and profitability. Furthermore, if a number of our lenders became unwilling or unable to continue to provide us with financing, we could be forced to sell assets, including MBS in an unrealized loss position, in order to maintain liquidity. Forced sales, particularly under adverse market conditions, may result in lower sales prices than ordinary market sales made in the normal course of business. If our residential mortgage investments were liquidated at prices below our amortized cost (i.e., the cost basis) of such assets, we would incur losses, which could adversely affect our earnings. We and many other mortgage REITs experienced these conditions in 2020 in connection with the conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, any uncertainty in the global finance market or weak economic conditions in Europe could cause the conditions described above to have a more pronounced effect on our European counterparties.
•Our profitability may be materially adversely affected by a reduction in our leverage. As long as we earn a positive spread between interest and other income we earn on our leveraged assets and our borrowing costs, we believe that we can generally increase our profitability by using greater amounts of leverage. There can be no assurance, however, that repurchase financing will remain an efficient source of long-term financing for our assets. The amount of leverage that we use may be limited because our lenders might not make funding available to us at acceptable rates or they may require that we provide additional collateral to secure our borrowings. If our financing strategy is not viable, we will have to find alternative forms of financing for our assets which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at acceptable rates. In addition, in response to certain interest rate and investment environments or to changes in market liquidity, we could adopt a strategy of reducing our leverage by selling assets or not reinvesting principal payments as assets amortize and/or prepay, thereby decreasing the outstanding amount of our related borrowings. Such an action could reduce interest income, interest expense and net income, the extent of which would be dependent on the level of reduction in assets and liabilities as well as the sale prices for which the assets were sold.
•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, 2020, we had greater than 5% stockholders’ equity at risk to the following financing agreement counterparties: Barclay’s Bank (approximately 20.0%), Credit Suisse (approximately 17.4%), Wells Fargo (approximately 13.4%), Goldman Sachs (approximately 7.4%) and Athene (approximately 5.3%).
In addition, generally, if we default on one of our obligations under a repurchase transaction with a particular lender, that lender can elect to terminate the transaction and cease entering into additional repurchase transactions with us. In addition, some of our repurchase agreements contain cross-default provisions, so that if a default occurs under any one agreement, the lenders under our other repurchase agreements could also declare a default. Any losses we incur on our repurchase transactions could materially adversely affect our earnings and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
•Our use of repurchase agreements to borrow money may give our lenders greater rights in the event of bankruptcy. Borrowings made under repurchase agreements may qualify for special treatment under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. If a lender under one of our repurchase agreements defaults on its obligations, it may be difficult for us to recover our assets pledged as collateral to such lender. In the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of a lender during the term of a repurchase agreement, the lender may be permitted, under applicable insolvency laws, to repudiate the contract, and our claim against the lender for damages may be treated simply as an unsecured creditor. In addition, if the lender is a broker or dealer subject to the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, or an insured depository institution subject to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, our ability to exercise our rights to recover our securities under a repurchase agreement or to be compensated for any damages resulting from the lender’s insolvency may be further limited by those statutes. These claims would be subject to significant delay and, if and when received, may be substantially less than the damages we actually incur. In addition, in the event of our insolvency or bankruptcy, certain repurchase agreements may qualify for special treatment under the Bankruptcy Code, the effect of which, among other things, would be to allow the creditor under the agreement to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and take possession of, and liquidate, our collateral under our repurchase agreements without delay. Our risks associated with the insolvency or bankruptcy of a lender maybe more pronounced during periods of significant volatility in the market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets.
An increase in our borrowing costs relative to the interest we receive on our investments may materially adversely affect our profitability.
Our earnings are primarily generated from the difference between the interest income we earn on our investment portfolio, less net amortization of purchase premiums and discounts, and the interest expense we pay on our borrowings. We rely primarily on borrowings under repurchase agreements and other financing arrangements to finance the acquisition of residential mortgage investments. Our financing arrangements typically have shorter-term contractual maturities than the maturities of our mortgage investments. Even though the majority of our investments have interest rates that adjust over time based on changes in corresponding interest rate indexes, the interest we pay on our borrowings may increase at a faster pace than the interest we earn on our investments. In general, if the interest expense on our borrowings increases relative to the interest income we earn on our investments, our profitability may be materially adversely affected, including due to the following reasons:
•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 earnings 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. If any of these events happen, we could experience a decrease in net income or incur a net loss during these periods, which may negatively impact our distributions to stockholders.
Changes in inter-bank lending rate reporting practices, the method pursuant to which LIBOR is determined, or the establishment of alternative reference rates may adversely affect our profitability.
As discussed above, the interest rates on certain of our investments, our repurchase transactions and our interest rate swap agreements (or Swaps) are generally based on LIBOR. LIBOR and other indices which are deemed “benchmarks” have been the subject of recent national, international and other regulatory guidance and proposals for reform. Some of these reforms are already effective while others are still to be implemented. These reforms may cause such benchmarks to perform differently than in the past, or have other consequences which cannot be predicted. In particular, regulators and law enforcement agencies in the United Kingdom and elsewhere are conducting criminal and civil investigations into whether the banks that contribute information to the British Bankers’ Association (or BBA) in connection with the daily calculation of LIBOR may have been under-reporting or otherwise manipulating or attempting to manipulate LIBOR. A number of BBA member banks have reached settlements with their regulators and law enforcement agencies with respect to this alleged manipulation of LIBOR. Actions by the regulators or law enforcement agencies, as well as ICE Benchmark Administration (the current administrator of LIBOR), may result in changes to the manner in which LIBOR is determined or the establishment of alternative reference rates. For example, on July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority (or FCA) announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021.
Currently, it is not possible to predict the effect of any such changes, any establishment of alternative reference rates or any other reforms to LIBOR that may be implemented in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. While we expect LIBOR to be available in substantially its current form until the end of 2021, and likely based on IBA’s announced consultation through June 2023, if sufficient banks decline to make submissions to IBA, it is possible that LIBOR will become unavailable prior to that point. Uncertainty as to the nature of such potential changes, alternative reference rates or other reforms may adversely affect the rates on our repurchase facilities, securitizations or residential loans held for longer-term investment. If LIBOR is discontinued or is no longer quoted, the applicable base rate used to calculate interest on our repurchase agreements will be determined using alternative methods. In the U.S., efforts to identify a set of U.S. dollar reference interest rates include proposals by the Alternative Reference Rates Committee of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The U.S. Federal Reserve, in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, is considering replacing U.S. dollar LIBOR with the Secured Overnight Funding Rate (or SOFR). The Federal Reserve Bank of New York began publishing SOFR rates in April 2018. The market transition away from LIBOR and towards SOFR is expected to be gradual and complicated. There are significant differences between LIBOR and SOFR, such as LIBOR being an unsecured lending rate and SOFR a secured lending rate, SOFR being an overnight rate and LIBOR reflecting term rates at different maturities. These and other differences create the potential for basis risk between the two rates. The impact of any basis risk difference between LIBOR and SOFR may negatively impact our interest margin. Any of these alternative methods may result in interest rates that are higher than if the LIBOR rate was available in its current form, which could have a material adverse effect on our net interest margin. In addition, the manner and timing of this shift are currently unknown. Market participants are still considering how various types of financial instruments and securitization vehicles should react to a discontinuation of LIBOR. It is possible that not all of our assets and liabilities will transition away from LIBOR at the same time, and it is possible that not all of our assets and liabilities will transition to the same alternative reference rate, in each case increasing the difficulty of hedging. We and other market participants have less experience understanding and modeling SOFR-based assets and liabilities than LIBOR-based assets and liabilities, increasing the difficulty of investing, hedging, and risk management. The process of transition involves operational risks. It is also possible that no transition will occur for many financial instruments.
Any additional changes announced by the FCA, other regulators, or any other successor governance or oversight body, or future changes adopted by such body, in the method pursuant to which reference rates are determined may result in a sudden or prolonged increase or decrease in the reported reference rates. If that were to occur, the level of interest payments we incur may change. In addition, although certain of our LIBOR based obligations provide for alternative methods of calculating the interest payable on certain of our obligations if LIBOR is not reported, which include requesting certain rates from major reference banks in London or New York, or alternatively using LIBOR for the immediately preceding interest period or using the initial interest rate, as applicable, uncertainty as to the extent and manner of future changes may result.
At this time, it is not possible to predict the effect of any such changes, any establishment of alternative reference rates or any other reforms to LIBOR that may be implemented in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. Uncertainty as to the nature of such potential changes, alternative reference rates or other reforms may adversely affect our profitability, which may negatively impact our distributions to stockholders.
Certain of our current lenders require, and future lenders may require, that we enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations.
The various agreements pursuant to which we borrow money to finance our residential mortgage investments generally include customary representations, warranties and covenants, but may also contain more restrictive supplemental terms and
conditions. Although specific to each master repurchase or loan agreement, typical supplemental terms include requirements of minimum equity, leverage ratios and performance triggers relating to a decline in equity or net income over a period of time. If we fail to meet or satisfy any covenants, supplemental terms or representations and warranties, we could be in default under the affected agreements and those lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their respective interests against collateral pledged under such agreements and restrict our ability to make additional borrowings. Certain of our financing agreements contain cross-default or cross-acceleration provisions, so that if a default or acceleration of indebtedness occurs under any one agreement, the lenders under our other agreements could also declare a default. Further, under our repurchase agreements, we are typically required to pledge additional assets to our lenders in the event the estimated fair value of the existing pledged collateral under such agreements declines and such lenders demand additional collateral, which may take the form of additional securities, loans or cash.
Future lenders may impose similar or additional restrictions and other covenants on us. If we fail to meet or satisfy any of these covenants, we could be in default under these agreements, and our lenders could elect to declare outstanding amounts due and payable, require the posting of additional collateral and enforce their interests against then-existing collateral. We could also be subject to cross-default and acceleration rights and, with respect to collateralized debt, the posting of additional collateral and foreclosure rights upon default. Further, this could also make it difficult for us to satisfy the qualification requirements necessary to maintain our status as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
The use of non-recourse long-term financing structures expose us to risks, which could result in losses to us.
We use securitization financing for certain of our residential whole loan investments. In such structures, our financing sources typically have only a claim against the special purpose vehicle which we sponsor rather than a general claim against us. Prior to any such financing, we generally seek to finance our investments with relatively short-term repurchase agreements until a sufficient portfolio of assets is accumulated. As a result, we are subject to the risk that we would not be able to acquire, during the period that any short-term repurchase agreements are available, sufficient eligible assets or securities to maximize the efficiency of a securitization. We also bear the risk that we would not be able to obtain new short-term repurchase agreements or would not be able to renew any short-term repurchase agreements after they expire should we need more time to seek and acquire sufficient eligible assets or securities for a securitization. In addition, conditions in the capital markets may make the issuance of any such securitization less attractive to us even when we do have sufficient eligible assets or securities. While we would generally intend to retain a portion of the interests issued under such securitizations and, therefore, still have exposure to any investments included in such securitizations, our inability to enter into such securitizations may increase our overall exposure to risks associated with direct ownership of such investments, including the risk of default. If we are unable to obtain and renew short-term repurchase agreements or to consummate securitizations to finance the selected investments on a long-term basis, we may be required to seek other forms of potentially less attractive financing or to liquidate assets at an inopportune time or price.
These financing arrangements require us to make certain representations and warranties regarding the assets that collateralize the borrowings. Although we perform due diligence on the assets that we acquire, certain representations and warranties that we make in respect of such assets may ultimately be determined to be inaccurate. Such representations and warranties may include, but are not limited to, issues such as the validity of the lien; the absence of delinquent taxes or other liens; the loans’ compliance with all local, state and federal laws and the delivery of all documents required to perfect title to the lien. In the event of a breach of a representation or warranty, we may be required to repurchase affected loans, make indemnification payments to certain indemnified parties or address any claims associated with such breach. Further, we may have limited or no recourse against the seller from whom we purchased the loans. Such recourse may be limited due to a variety of factors, including the absence of a representation or warranty from the seller corresponding to the representation provided by us or the contractual expiration thereof. A breach of a representation or warranty could adversely affect our results of operations and liquidity.
Certain of our financing arrangements are rated by one or more rating agencies and we may sponsor financing facilities in the future that are rated by credit agencies. The related agency or rating agencies may suspend rating notes at any time. Rating agency delays may result in our inability to obtain timely ratings on new notes, which could adversely impact the availability of borrowings or the interest rates, advance rates or other financing terms and adversely affect our results of operations and liquidity. Further, if we are unable to secure ratings from other agencies, limited investor demand for unrated notes could result in further adverse changes to our liquidity and profitability.
Risks Associated with Adverse Developments in the Mortgage Finance and Credit Markets and Financial Markets Generally
Market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets may materially adversely affect the value of the assets in which we invest.
Our results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the markets for mortgages and mortgage-related assets, including MBS, as well as the broader financial markets and the economy generally. Significant adverse changes in financial market conditions, such as those experienced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to the forced sale of large quantities of mortgage-related and other financial assets would result in significant volatility in the market for mortgages and mortgage-related assets and potentially significant losses for ourselves and certain other market participants. In addition, concerns over actual or anticipated low economic growth rates, higher levels of unemployment or uncertainty regarding future U.S. monetary policy (particularly in light of the uncertainties related to the new U.S presidential administration and Congress) may contribute to increased interest rate volatility. Declines in the value of our investments, or perceived market uncertainty about their value, may make it difficult for us to obtain financing on favorable terms or at all, or maintain our compliance with terms of any financing arrangements already in place. Additionally, increased volatility and/or deterioration in the broader residential mortgage and MBS markets could materially adversely affect the performance and market value of our investments.
A lack of liquidity in our investments may materially adversely affect our business.
The assets that comprise our investment portfolio and that we acquire are not traded on an exchange. A portion of our investments are subject to legal and other restrictions on resale and are otherwise generally less liquid than exchange-traded securities. Any illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need or desire arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, as frequently occurred during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. Further, we may face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a business entity to the extent that we have or could be attributed with material, non-public information regarding such business entity. As a result, our ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions may be relatively limited, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
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.
In July 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Act, in part to impose significant investment restrictions and capital requirements on banking entities and other organizations that are significant to U.S. financial markets. For instance, the Dodd-Frank Act imposes significant restrictions on the proprietary trading activities of certain banking entities and subjects other systemically significant entities and activities regulated by the Federal Reserve to increased capital requirements and quantitative limits for engaging in such activities. The Dodd-Frank Act also seeks to reform the asset-backed securitization market (including the MBS market) by requiring the retention of a portion of the credit risk inherent in the pool of securitized assets and by imposing additional registration and disclosure requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act also imposes significant regulatory restrictions on the origination and servicing of residential mortgage loans. The Dodd-Frank Act’s extensive requirements, and implementation by regulatory agencies such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (or CFTC), CFPB, FDIC, Federal Reserve, and the SEC may have a significant effect on the financial markets, and may affect the availability or terms of financing, derivatives or MBS, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
In addition, the U.S. Government, the Federal Reserve, U.S. Treasury and other governmental and regulatory bodies have increased focus and scrutiny on our industry. New proposals for legislation continue to be introduced in the U.S. Congress that could further substantially increase regulation of our industry, impose restrictions on the operations and general ability of firms within the industry to conduct business consistent with historical practices, including in the areas of compensation, interest rates, financial product offerings and disclosures, and have an effect on bankruptcy proceedings with respect to consumer residential real estate mortgages, among other things. International financial regulators are examining standard setting for systemically significant entities, such as those considered by the Third Basel Accords (Basel III) to be incorporated by domestic entities. We cannot predict whether or when such actions may occur or what effect, if any, such actions could have on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
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.
On March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was signed into law. Among the provisions in this wide-ranging law are protections for homeowners experiencing financial difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including forbearance provisions and procedures. Borrowers with federally backed mortgage loans, regardless of delinquency status, may request loan forbearance for a six-month period, which could be extended for another six-month period if necessary. Federally backed mortgage loans are loans secured by first- or subordinate-liens on 1-4 family residential real property, including individual units of condominiums and cooperatives, which are insured or guaranteed pursuant to certain government housing programs, such as by the FHA or U.S. Department of Agriculture, or are purchased or securitized by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The CARES Act also includes a temporary 60 day foreclosure moratorium that applies to federally backed mortgage loans, which lasted until July 24, 2020 and was extended, in accordance with President Biden’s day one executive order, to at least March 31, 2021 by Fannie Mae, FHA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Some states and local jurisdictions have also implemented moratoriums on foreclosures.
In December 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 was signed into law, which is an Omnibus spending bill that included a second COVID-19 stimulus bill (the “Second Stimulus”). In addition to providing stimulus checks for individuals and families, the Second Stimulus provides for, among other things, (i) an extension of federal unemployment insurance benefits, (ii) funding to help individuals connect remotely during the pandemic, (iii) tax credits for companies offering paid sick leave and (iv) funding for vaccine distribution and development. As further described below, the Second Stimulus provided an additional $25 billion in tax-free rental assistance and an executive order by President Biden extended the temporary eviction moratorium promulgated by the CDC (described below) through March 31, 2021.
On September 1, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the “CDC”) issued an order effective September 4, 2020 through December 31, 2020 temporarily halting residential evictions to prevent the further spread of COVID-19. The Second Stimulus extended the order to January 31, 2021 and on January 20, 2021, Present Joseph Biden signed an executive order that, among other things, further extended the temporary eviction moratorium promulgated by the CDC through March 31, 2021. The CDC order will likely prevent some mortgagors from evicting certain tenants who are not current on their monthly payments of rent and who qualify for relief under the CDC order, which may present a greater risk that the mortgagor will stop making monthly mortgage loan payments. The CDC order by its terms does not preempt or preclude state and local jurisdictions from more expansive orders currently in place or from imposing additional or more restrictive requirements than the CDC order to provide greater public health protection and, across the country, similar moratoriums are in place in certain states to stop evictions and foreclosures in an effort to lessen the financial burden created by COVID-19. The CDC’s moratorium and any other similar state moratoriums or bans could adversely impact the cash flow on mortgage loans.
Regulatory Risk and Risks Related to the Investment Company Act of 1940
Our business is subject to extensive regulation.
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. The laws, rules and regulations comprising this regulatory framework change frequently, as can the interpretation and enforcement of existing laws, rules and regulations. Some of the laws, rules and regulations to which we are subject are intended primarily to safeguard and protect consumers, rather than stockholders or creditors. From time to time, we may receive requests from federal and state agencies for records, documents and information regarding our policies, procedures and practices regarding our business activities. We incur significant ongoing costs to comply with these government regulations.
Although we do not originate or directly service residential mortgage loans, we must comply with various federal and state laws, rules and regulations as a result of owning MBS and residential whole loans. These rules generally focus on consumer protection and include, among others, rules promulgated under the Dodd-Frank Act, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act of 1999 (or Gramm-Leach-Bliley). These requirements can and do change as statutes and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended and interpreted, and the recent trend among federal and state lawmakers and regulators has been toward increasing laws, regulations and investigative proceedings in relation to the mortgage industry generally. For example, on December 10, 2020, the CFPB issued a final rule that adopts a set of “bright-line” loan pricing thresholds to replace the previous General Qualified Mortgage 43% debt-to-income threshold calculated in accordance with “Appendix Q” and removes Appendix Q (or General QM Final Rule). The effective date of the General QM Final Rule is March 1, 2021, but the mandatory compliance date is July 1, 2021. On December 10, 2020, the CFPB also issued a final rule that creates a new category of a qualified mortgage, referred to as a “Seasoned QM” (or Seasoned QM Final Rule). A loan is eligible to become a Seasoned QM if it is a first-lien, fixed rate loans that meets certain performance requirements over a seasoning period of 36 months, is held in portfolio until the end of the seasoning period by the originating creditor or first purchaser, complies with general restrictions on product features and points and fees, and meets certain underwriting requirements. The effective date for the Seasoned QM Final Rule is March 1, 2021. At this time, however, there can be no
assurance what impact these final rules will have on the mortgage market and the “ability-to-repay” rules. Furthermore, the temporary qualified mortgage provision applicable to certain mortgage loans eligible for purchase or guarantee by the GSEs under the ability-to-repay, commonly referred to as the “GSE Patch,” will expire on the earlier of (i) July 1, 2021 or (ii) the date that the GSEs exit conservatorship. We cannot predict the impact of its expiration on the mortgage market.
Although we believe that we have structured our operations and investments to comply with existing legal and regulatory requirements and interpretations, changes in regulatory and legal requirements, including changes in their interpretation and enforcement by lawmakers and regulators, could materially and adversely affect our business and our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Maintaining our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act imposes significant limits on our operations.
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” are, among other things, 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.
We are a holding company and conduct our real estate business primarily through wholly-owned subsidiaries. We conduct our real estate business so that we do not come within the definition of an investment company because less than 40% of the value of our adjusted total assets on an unconsolidated basis will consist of “investment securities.” The securities issued by any wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that we may form in the future that are excepted from the definition of “investment company” based on Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with any other investment securities we may own, may not have a value in excess of 40% of the value of our adjusted total assets on an unconsolidated basis. We monitor our holdings to ensure continuing and ongoing compliance with the 40% Test. In addition, we believe we will not be considered an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act because we will not engage primarily or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, through our wholly-owned subsidiaries, we will be primarily engaged in the non-investment company businesses of these subsidiaries.
If the value of securities issued by our subsidiaries that are excepted from the definition of “investment company” by Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with any other investment securities we own, exceeds 40% of our adjusted total assets on an unconsolidated basis, or if one or more of such subsidiaries fail to maintain an exception or exemption from the Investment Company Act, we could, among other things, be required either (a) to substantially change the manner in which we conduct our operations to avoid being required to register as an investment company, (b) to effect sales of our assets in a manner that, or at a time when, we would not otherwise choose to do so or (c) to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, any of which could have an adverse effect on us and the market price of our securities. If we were required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the Investment Company Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration, and other matters.
We expect that our subsidiaries that invest in residential mortgage loans (whether through a consolidated trust or otherwise) will rely upon the exemption from registration as an investment company under the Investment Company Act pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act, which is available for entities “primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” This exemption generally requires that at least 55% of each of these subsidiaries’ assets be comprised of qualifying real estate assets and at least 80% of each of their portfolios be comprised of qualifying real estate assets and real estate-related assets under the Investment Company Act. Mortgage loans that were fully and exclusively secured by real property are generally qualifying real estate assets for purposes of the exemption. All or substantially all of our residential mortgage loans are fully and exclusively secured by real property with a loan-to-value ratio of less than 100%. As a result, we believe our residential mortgage loans that are fully and exclusively secured by real property meet the definition of qualifying real estate assets. To the extent we own any residential mortgage loans with a loan-to-value ratio of greater than 100%, we intend to classify, depending on guidance from
the SEC staff, only the portion of the value of such loans that does not exceed the value of the real estate collateral as qualifying real estate assets and the excess as real estate-related assets.
In August 2011, the SEC issued a “concept release” pursuant to which they solicited public comments on a wide range of issues relating to companies engaged in the business of acquiring mortgages and mortgage-related instruments and that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act. The concept release and the public comments thereto have not yet resulted in SEC rulemaking or interpretative guidance and we cannot predict what form any such rulemaking or interpretive guidance may take. There can be no assurance, however, that the laws and regulations governing the Investment Company Act status of REITs, or guidance from the SEC or its staff regarding the exemption from registration as an investment company on which we rely, will not change in a manner that adversely affects our operations. We expect each of our subsidiaries relying on Section 3(c)(5)(C) to rely on guidance published by the SEC staff or on our analyses of guidance published with respect to other types of assets, if any, to determine which assets are qualifying real estate assets and real estate-related assets. To the extent that the SEC staff publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. In addition, we may be limited in our ability to make certain investments and these limitations could result in us holding assets we might wish to sell or selling assets we might wish to hold.
Certain of our subsidiaries may rely on the exemption provided by Section 3(c)(6) to the extent that they hold residential mortgage loans through majority owned subsidiaries that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(C). The SEC staff has issued little interpretive guidance with respect to Section 3(c)(6) and any guidance published by the staff could require us to adjust our strategy accordingly.
To the extent that the SEC staff provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon the exemptions or exceptions from registration under the Investment Company Act that we and our subsidiaries rely on, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. Any additional guidance from the SEC staff could provide additional flexibility to us, or it could further inhibit our ability to pursue the strategies we have chosen.
There can be no assurance that the laws and regulations governing the Investment Company Act status of REITs, including guidance regarding these exemptions from the Division of Investment Management of the SEC, will not change in a manner that adversely affects our operations.
Risks Related to Our Use of Hedging Strategies
Our use of hedging strategies to mitigate our interest rate exposure may not be effective.
In accordance with our operating policies, we may pursue various types of hedging strategies, including Swaps, to seek to mitigate or reduce our exposure to losses from adverse changes in interest rates. Our hedging activity will vary in scope based on the level and volatility of interest rates, the type of assets held and financing sources used and other changing market conditions. No hedging strategy, however, can completely insulate us from the interest rate risks to which we are exposed and there is no guarantee that the implementation of any hedging strategy would have the desired impact on our results of operations or financial condition. Certain of the U.S. federal income tax requirements that we must satisfy in order to qualify as a REIT may limit our ability to hedge against such risks. We will not enter into derivative transactions if we believe that they will jeopardize our qualification as a REIT.
Interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things:
•interest rate hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of rising and volatile interest rates;
•available interest rate hedges may not correspond directly with the interest rate risk for which protection is sought;
•the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related hedged instrument;
•the credit quality of the party owing money on the hedge may be downgraded to such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell or assign our side of the hedging transaction; and
•the party owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay.
We primarily use Swaps to hedge against future increases in interest rates on our repurchase agreements. Should a Swap counterparty be unable to make required payments pursuant to such Swap, the hedged liability would cease to be hedged for the remaining term of the Swap. In addition, we may be at risk for any collateral held by a hedging counterparty to a Swap, should
such counterparty become insolvent or file for bankruptcy. Our hedging transactions, which are intended to limit losses, may actually adversely affect our earnings, which could reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
We may enter into hedging instruments that could expose us to contingent liabilities in the future, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, part of our financing strategy involves entering into hedging instruments that could require us to fund cash payments in certain circumstances (e.g., the early termination of a hedging instrument caused by an event of default or other voluntary or involuntary termination event or the decision by a hedging counterparty to request the posting of collateral that it is contractually owed under the terms of a hedging instrument). With respect to the termination of an existing Swap, the amount due would generally be equal to the unrealized loss of the open Swap position with the hedging counterparty and could also include other fees and charges. These economic losses will be reflected in our financial results of operations and our ability to fund these obligations will depend on the liquidity of our assets and access to capital at the time. Any losses we incur on our hedging instruments could materially adversely affect our earnings and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
The characteristics of hedging instruments present various concerns, including illiquidity, enforceability, and counterparty risks, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
As indicated above, from time to time we enter into Swaps. Entities entering into Swaps are exposed to credit losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to these transactions. Rules issued by the CFTC that became effective in October 2012 require the clearing of all Swap transactions through registered derivatives clearing organizations, or swap execution facilities, through standardized documents under which each Swap counterparty transfers its position to another entity whereby the centralized clearinghouse effectively becomes the counterparty to each side of the Swap. It is the intent of the Dodd-Frank Act that the clearing of Swaps in this manner is designed to avoid concentration of swap risk in any single entity by spreading and centralizing the risk in the clearinghouse and its members. In addition to greater initial and periodic margin (collateral) requirements and additional transaction fees both by the swap execution facility and the clearinghouse, the Swap transactions are now subjected to greater regulation by both the CFTC and the SEC. These additional fees, costs, margin requirements, documentation requirements, and regulations could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Clearing facilities or exchanges upon which our hedging instruments are traded may increase margin requirements on our hedging instruments in the event of adverse economic developments.
In response to events having or expected to have adverse economic consequences or which create market uncertainty, clearing facilities or exchanges upon which some of our hedging instruments (i.e., interest rate swaps) are traded may require us to post additional collateral against our hedging instruments. For example, in response to the U.S. approaching its debt ceiling without resolution and the federal government shutdown, in October 2013, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange announced that it would increase margin requirements by 12% for all over-the-counter interest rate swap portfolios that its clearinghouse guaranteed. This increase was subsequently rolled back shortly thereafter upon the news that Congress passed legislation to temporarily suspend the national debt ceiling and reopen the federal government, and provide a time period for broader negotiations concerning federal budgetary issues. In the event that future adverse economic developments or market uncertainty (including those due to governmental, regulatory, or legislative action or inaction) result in increased margin requirements for our hedging instruments, it could materially adversely affect our liquidity position, business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may fail to qualify for hedge accounting treatment, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
We record derivative and hedge transactions in accordance with GAAP, specifically according to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (or FASB) Accounting Standards Codification Topic on Derivatives. Under these standards, we may fail to qualify for hedge accounting treatment for a number of reasons, including if we use instruments that do not meet the definition of a derivative, we fail to satisfy hedge documentation and hedge effectiveness assessment requirements or our instruments are not highly effective. If we fail to qualify for hedge accounting treatment, though the fundamental economic performance of our business would be unaffected, our operating results for financial reporting purposes may be materially adversely affected because losses on the derivatives we enter into would be recorded in net income, rather than AOCI, a component of stockholders’ equity.
Risks Related to Our Taxation as a REIT and the Taxation of Our Assets
If we fail to remain qualified as a REIT, we will be subject to tax as a regular corporation and could face a substantial tax liability, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
We have elected to qualify as a REIT and intend to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (or the Code), related to REIT qualification. Accordingly, we will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax to the extent we distribute 100% of our REIT taxable income (which is generally our taxable income, computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction, any net income from prohibited transactions, and any net income from foreclosure property) to stockholders within the timeframe permitted under the Code and provided that we comply with certain income, asset ownership and other tests applicable to REITs. We believe that we currently meet all of the REIT requirements and intend to continue to qualify as a REIT under the provisions of the Code. Many of the REIT requirements, however, are highly technical and complex. The determination of whether we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances, some of which may not be totally within our control and some of which involve interpretation. For example, if we are to qualify as a REIT, annually at least 75% of our gross income must come from, among other sources, interest on obligations secured by mortgages on real property or interests in real property, gain from the disposition of real property, including mortgages or interests in real property (other than sales or dispositions of real property, including mortgages on real property, or securities that are treated as mortgages on real property, that we hold primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of a trade or business (i.e., prohibited transactions)), dividends or other distributions on, and gains from the disposition of shares in other REITs, commitment fees received for agreements to make real estate loans and certain temporary investment income. In addition, the composition of our assets must meet certain requirements at the close of each quarter. We are also required to distribute to stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and by excluding net capital gain). There can be no assurance that we will be able to satisfy these or other requirements or that the Internal Revenue Service (or IRS) or a court would agree with any conclusions or positions we have taken in interpreting the REIT requirements.
Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT qualification unless we meet certain statutory relief provisions. If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year for any reason, we would be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income, and dividends paid to our stockholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Any resulting corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the value of our common stock. Unless we were entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, we also would be disqualified from taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which we failed to qualify as a REIT.
Our failure to maintain our qualification as a REIT would cause our stock to be delisted from the NYSE.
The NYSE requires, as a condition to the listing of our shares, that we maintain our REIT status. Consequently, if we fail to maintain our REIT status, our shares would promptly be delisted from the NYSE, which would decrease the trading activity of such shares. This could make it difficult to sell shares and would likely cause the market volume of the shares trading to decline.
If we were delisted as a result of losing our REIT status and desired to relist our shares on the NYSE, we would have to reapply to the NYSE to be listed as a domestic corporation. As the NYSE’s listing standards for REITs are less onerous than its standards for domestic corporations, it would be more difficult for us to become a listed company under these heightened standards. We might not be able to satisfy the NYSE’s listing standards for a domestic corporation. As a result, if we were delisted from the NYSE, we might not be able to relist as a domestic corporation, in which case our shares could not trade on the NYSE.
REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.
To maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding any net capital gain) to our stockholders within the timeframe permitted under the Code. We generally must make these distributions in the taxable year to which they relate, or in the following taxable year if declared before we timely (including extensions) file our tax return for the year and if paid with or before the first regular dividend payment after such declaration. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our undistributed taxable income at regular corporate income tax rates. In addition, if we should fail to distribute during each calendar year at least the sum of (a) 85% of our REIT ordinary income for such year, (b) 95% of our REIT capital gain net income for such year, and (c) any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we would be subject to a non-deductible 4% excise tax on the excess of such required distribution over the sum of (x) the amounts actually distributed, plus (y) the amounts of income we retained and on which we have paid corporate income tax.
The dividend distribution requirement limits the amount of cash we have available for other business purposes, including amounts to fund our growth. Additionally, our taxable income may substantially exceed our net income as determined by GAAP. As an example, realized capital losses may be included in our GAAP net income, but may not be deductible in computing our taxable income. In addition, we may invest in assets that generate taxable income in excess of economic income or in advance of the corresponding cash flow from the assets. Also, our ability, or the ability of our subsidiaries, to deduct interest may be limited under Section 163(j) of the Code. To the extent that we generate such non-cash taxable income or have limitations on our deductions in a taxable year, we may have to borrow funds on unfavorable terms, sell investments at disadvantageous prices, distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions or make a taxable distribution of our stock to make distributions sufficient to maintain our qualification as a REIT or avoid corporate income tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our stockholders’ equity. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our common stock.
Even if we remain qualified as a REIT, we may face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.
Even if we qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we may be required to pay certain U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from some activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, excise taxes, state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes, and other taxes. In addition, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements, to prevent the recognition of certain types of non-cash income, or to avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to certain gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory (i.e., prohibited transactions tax) we may hold some of our assets through TRSs or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to corporate level income tax at regular rates. In addition, if we lend money to a TRS, the TRS may be unable to deduct all or a portion of the interest paid to us, which could result in an even higher corporate level tax liability. Furthermore, the Code imposes a 100% excise tax on certain transactions between a TRS and a REIT that are not conducted at an arm’s-length basis. We intend to structure any transaction with a TRS on terms that we believe are arm’s-length to avoid incurring this 100% excise tax. There can be no assurances, however, that we will be able to avoid application of the 100% excise tax. Any of these taxes would reduce our operating cash flow and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
If our foreign TRS is subject to U.S. federal income tax at the entity level, it would greatly reduce the amounts those entities would have available to pay its creditors and distribute to us.
There is a specific exemption from regular U.S. federal income tax for non-U.S. corporations that restrict their activities in the United States to trading stock and securities (or any activity closely related thereto) for their own account, whether such trading (or such other activity) is conducted by the corporation or its employees through a resident broker, commission agent, custodian or other agent. We intend that our foreign TRS will rely on that exemption or otherwise operate in a manner so that it will not be subject to regular U.S. federal income tax on its net income at the entity level. If the IRS succeeded in challenging that tax treatment, it would greatly reduce the amount that the foreign TRS would have available to pay to its creditors and to distribute to us. In addition, even if our foreign TRS qualifies for that exemption, it may nevertheless be subject to U.S. federal withholding tax on certain types of income.
Complying with REIT requirements may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.
To remain qualified as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts that we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may be required to make distributions to stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution, and may be unable to pursue investments that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT. In addition, in certain cases, the modification of a debt instrument could result in the conversion of the instrument from a qualifying real estate asset to a wholly or partially non-qualifying asset that must be contributed to a TRS or disposed of in order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to make and, in certain cases, to maintain ownership of, certain attractive investments.
Our use of TRSs may cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT
The net income of our TRSs is not required to be distributed to us, and such undistributed TRS income is generally not subject to our REIT distribution requirements. However, if the accumulation of cash or reinvestment of significant earnings in our TRSs causes the fair market value of our securities in those entities, taken together with other non-qualifying assets, to exceed 25% of the fair market value of our assets, in each case as determined for REIT asset testing purposes, we would, absent
timely responsive action, fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT. Additionally, if the accumulation of cash or reinvestment of significant earnings in our TRSs causes the fair market value of our securities in those entities to exceed 20% of the fair market value of our assets, in each case as determined for REIT asset testing purposes, we would, absent timely responsive action, similarly fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT.
We may generate taxable income that differs from our GAAP income on our Non-Agency MBS and residential whole loan investments purchased at a discount to par value, which may result in significant timing variances in the recognition of income and losses.
We have acquired and intend to continue to acquire Non-Agency MBS and residential whole loans at prices that reflect significant market discounts on their unpaid principal balances. For financial statement reporting purposes, we generally establish a portion of the purchase discount on Non-Agency MBS as a Credit Reserve. This Credit Reserve is generally not accreted into income for financial statement reporting purposes. For tax purposes, however, we are not permitted to anticipate, or establish a reserve for, credit losses prior to their occurrence. As a result, discount on securities acquired in the primary or secondary market is included in the determination of taxable income and is not impacted by losses until such losses are incurred. Such differences in accounting for tax and GAAP can lead to significant timing variances in the recognition of income and losses. Taxable income on Non-Agency MBS purchased at a discount to their par value may be higher than GAAP earnings in early periods (before losses are actually incurred) and lower than GAAP earnings in periods during and subsequent to when realized credit losses are incurred. Dividends will be declared and paid at the discretion of our Board and will depend on REIT taxable earnings, our financial results and overall financial condition, maintenance of our REIT qualification and such other factors as our Board may deem relevant from time to time.
The tax on prohibited transactions may limit our ability to engage in transactions, including certain methods of securitizing mortgage loans, that would be treated as sales for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, but including mortgage loans, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. We might be subject to this tax if we were to dispose of or securitize loans or MBS securities in a manner that was treated as a sale of the loans or MBS for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Therefore, to avoid the prohibited transactions tax, we may choose to engage in certain sales of loans through a TRS and not at the REIT level, and we may be limited as to the structures we are able to utilize for our securitization transactions, even though the sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial to us. We do not believe that our securitizations to date have been subject to this tax, but there can be no assurances that the IRS would agree with such treatment. If the IRS successfully challenged such treatment, our results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
The “taxable mortgage pool” rules may increase the taxes that we or our stockholders may incur and may limit the manner in which we effect future securitizations.
Securitizations by us or our subsidiaries could result in the creation of taxable mortgage pools for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The real estate mortgage investment conduit (or REMIC) provisions of the Code generally provide that REMICs are the only form of pass-through entity permitted to issue debt obligations with two or more maturities if the payments on those obligations bear a relationship to the mortgage obligations held by such entity. If we engage in a non-REMIC securitization transaction, directly or indirectly through a QRS, in which the assets held by the securitization vehicle consist largely of mortgage loans or MBS, in which the securitization vehicle issues to investors two or more classes of debt instruments that have different maturities, and in which the timing and amount of payments on the debt instruments is determined in large part by the amounts received on the mortgage loans or MBS held by the securitization vehicle, the securitization vehicle will be a taxable mortgage pool. As long as we or another REIT holds a 100% interest in the equity interests in a taxable mortgage pool, either directly or through a QRS, the taxable mortgage pool will not be subject to tax. A portion of the income that we realize with respect to the equity interest we hold in a taxable mortgage pool will, however, be considered to be excess inclusion income and, as a result, a portion of the dividends that we pay to our stockholders will be considered to consist of excess inclusion income. Such excess inclusion income is treated as unrelated business taxable income (or UBTI) for tax-exempt stockholders, is subject to withholding for foreign stockholders (without the benefit of any treaty reduction), and is not subject to reduction by net operating loss carryovers. In addition to the extent that our stock is owned by tax-exempt “disqualified organizations,” such as certain government-related entities and charitable remainder trusts that are not subject to tax on unrelated business income, we may incur a corporate level tax on a portion of our income from the taxable mortgage pool. In that case, we may reduce the amount of our distributions to any disqualified organization whose stock ownership gave rise to the tax. Historically, we have not generated excess inclusion income; however, despite our efforts, we may not be able to avoid creating or distributing excess inclusion income to our stockholders in the future. In addition, we could face limitations in selling equity interests to outside investors in securitization transactions that are taxable mortgage pools or selling any debt
securities issued in connection with these securitizations that might be considered to be equity interests for tax purposes. These limitations may prevent us from using certain techniques to maximize our returns from securitization transactions.
We have not established a minimum dividend payment level, and there is no guarantee that we will maintain current dividend payment levels or pay dividends in the future.
In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must comply with a number of requirements under U.S. federal tax law, including that we distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income within the timeframe permitted under the Code, which is calculated generally before the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gain. Dividends will be declared and paid at the discretion of our Board and will depend on our REIT taxable earnings, our financial results and overall condition, maintenance of our REIT qualification and such other factors as our Board may deem relevant from time to time. We have not established a minimum dividend payment level for our common stock and our ability to pay dividends may be negatively impacted by adverse changes in our operating results. Therefore, our dividend payment level may fluctuate significantly, and, under some circumstances, we may not pay dividends at all.
Our reported GAAP net income may differ from the amount of REIT taxable income and dividend distribution requirements and, therefore, our GAAP results may not be an accurate indicator of future taxable income and dividend distributions.
Generally, the cumulative net income we report over the life of an asset will be the same for GAAP and tax purposes, although the timing of this income recognition over the life of the asset could be materially different. Differences exist in the accounting for GAAP net income and REIT taxable income which can lead to significant variances in the amount and timing of when income and losses are recognized under these two measures. Due to these differences, our reported GAAP financial results could materially differ from our determination of REIT taxable income and our dividend distribution requirements, and, therefore, our GAAP results may not be an accurate indicator of future taxable income and dividend distributions.
Over time, accounting principles, conventions, rules, and interpretations may change, which could affect our reported GAAP and taxable earnings, and stockholders’ equity.
Accounting rules for the various aspects of our business change from time to time. Changes in GAAP, or the accepted interpretation of these accounting principles, can affect our reported income, earnings, and stockholders’ equity. In addition, changes in tax accounting rules or the interpretations thereof could affect our REIT taxable income and our dividend distribution requirements. These changes may materially adversely affect our results of operations.
The failure of assets subject to repurchase agreements to qualify as real estate assets could adversely affect our ability to remain qualified as a REIT.
We enter into certain financing arrangements that are structured as sale and repurchase agreements pursuant to which we nominally sell certain of our assets to a counterparty and simultaneously enter into an agreement to repurchase these assets at a later date in exchange for a purchase price. Economically, these agreements are financings that are secured by the assets sold pursuant thereto. We generally believe that we would be treated for REIT asset and income test purposes as the owner of the assets that are the subject of any such sale and repurchase agreement notwithstanding that such agreement may transfer record ownership of the assets to the counterparty during the term of the agreement. It is possible, however, that the IRS could assert that we did not own the assets during the term of the sale and repurchase agreement, in which case we could fail to remain qualified as a REIT.
Complying with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.
The REIT provisions of the Code could substantially limit our ability to hedge our business. Any income from a properly designated hedging transaction we enter into to manage the risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made, or ordinary obligations incurred or to be incurred, to acquire or carry real estate assets, or from certain other limited types of hedging transactions, generally does not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the 75% or 95% gross income tests. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of both of the gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may have to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of our hedging activities because a TRS would be subject to tax on gains or expose us to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in a TRS will generally not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward against future taxable income in the TRS.
We may be required to report taxable income for certain investments in excess of the economic income we ultimately realize from them.
We may acquire debt instruments in the secondary market for less than their face amount. The discount at which such debt instruments are acquired may reflect doubts about their ultimate collectability rather than current market interest rates. The amount of such discount will nevertheless generally be treated as “market discount” for U.S. federal income tax purposes, which we are required to include in our taxable income either over time or as principal payments are received, as applicable. If we collect less on the debt instrument than our purchase price plus the market discount we had previously reported as income, we may not be able to benefit from any offsetting loss deductions.
Some of the debt instruments that we acquire may have been issued with original issue discount. We will be required to report such original issue discount based on a constant yield method and will be taxed based on the assumption that all future projected payments due on such debt instruments will be made. If such debt instruments turn out not to be fully collectible, an offsetting loss deduction will become available only in the later year that uncollectability is provable.
In addition, we may acquire debt instruments that are subsequently modified by agreement with the borrower. If the amendments to the outstanding instrument are “significant modifications” under the applicable U.S. Treasury regulations, the modified instrument will be considered to have been reissued to us in a debt-for-debt exchange with the borrower. In that event, we may be required to recognize taxable gain to the extent the principal amount of the modified instrument exceeds our adjusted tax basis in the unmodified instrument, even if the value of the instrument or the payment expectations have not changed. Following such a taxable modification, we would hold the modified loan with a cost basis equal to its principal amount for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
Finally, in the event that any debt instruments acquired by us are delinquent as to mandatory principal and interest payments, or in the event payments with respect to a particular instrument are not made when due, we may nonetheless be required to continue to recognize the unpaid interest as taxable income as it accrues, despite doubt as to its ultimate collectability. Similarly, we may be required to accrue interest income with respect to debt instruments at its stated rate regardless of whether corresponding cash payments are received or are ultimately collectible. In each case, while we would in general ultimately have an offsetting loss deduction available to us when such interest was determined to be uncollectible, the utility of that deduction could depend on our having taxable income in that later year or thereafter.
For these and other reasons, we may have difficulty making distributions sufficient to maintain our qualification as a REIT or avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year.
The interest apportionment rules may affect our ability to comply with the REIT asset and gross income tests.
Most of the purchased credit deteriorated and non-performing loans that we have acquired were acquired by us at a discount from their outstanding principal amount, because our pricing was generally based on the value of the underlying real estate that secures those mortgage loans. Treasury Regulation Section 1.856-5(c) (the “interest apportionment regulation”) provides that if a mortgage is secured by both real property and other property, a REIT is required to apportion its annual interest income to the real property security based on a fraction, the numerator of which is the value of the real property securing the loan, determined when the REIT commits to acquire the loan, and the denominator of which is the highest “principal amount” of the loan during the year. If a mortgage is secured by both real property and personal property and the value of the personal property does not exceed 15% of the aggregate value of the property securing the mortgage, the mortgage is treated as secured solely by real property for this purpose. Revenue Procedure 2014-51 interprets the “principal amount” of the loan to be the face amount of the loan, despite the Code requiring taxpayers to treat any market discount, that is the difference between the purchase price of the loan and its face amount, for all purposes (other than certain withholding and information reporting purposes) as interest rather than principal.
The interest apportionment regulation applies only if the debt in question is secured both by real property and personal property. We believe that all of the mortgage loans that we acquire at a discount under the circumstances contemplated by Revenue Procedure 2014-51 are secured only by real property, and no other property value is taken into account in our underwriting and pricing. Accordingly, we believe that the interest apportionment regulation does not apply to our portfolio.
Nevertheless, if the IRS were to assert successfully that our mortgage loans were secured by property other than real estate, that the interest apportionment regulation applied for purposes of our REIT testing, and that the position taken in Revenue Procedure 2014-51 should be applied to our portfolio, then depending upon the value of the real property securing our loans and their face amount, and the sources of our gross income generally, we might not be able to meet the REIT 75% gross income test, and possibly the asset tests applicable to REITs. If we did not meet these tests, we could potentially either lose our
REIT status or be required to pay a tax penalty to the IRS. With respect to the REIT 75% asset test, Revenue Procedure 2014-51 provides a safe harbor under which the IRS will not challenge a REIT’s treatment of a loan as being a real estate asset in an amount equal to the lesser of (1) the greater of (a) the current value of the real property securing the loan or (b) the fair market value of the real property securing the loan determined as of the date the REIT committed to acquire the loan or (2) the fair market value of the loan on the date of the relevant quarterly REIT asset testing date. This safe harbor, if it applied to us, would help us comply with the REIT asset tests following the acquisition of distressed debt if the value of the real property securing the loan were to subsequently decline. If we did not meet one or more of the REIT asset tests, then we could potentially either lose our REIT status or be required to pay a tax penalty to the IRS.
Dividends paid by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for “qualified dividend income.”
The maximum regular U.S. federal income tax rate for qualified dividend income paid to domestic stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is currently 20%. Dividends paid by REITs, however, are generally not eligible for the reduced qualified dividend rates. For taxable years beginning before January 1, 2026, non-corporate taxpayers may deduct up to 20% of certain pass-through business income, including “qualified REIT dividends” (generally, dividends received by a REIT stockholder that are not designated as capital gain dividends or qualified dividend income), subject to certain limitations, resulting in an effective maximum U.S. federal income tax rate of 29.6% on such income. Although the reduced U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to qualified dividend income does not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate qualified dividends and the reduced corporate tax rate could cause certain non-corporate investors to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including our common stock.
We may in the future choose to make distributions in our own stock, in which case you could be required to pay income taxes in excess of any cash distributions you receive.
We may in the future make taxable distributions that are payable in cash and shares of our common stock at the election of each stockholder. Taxable stockholders receiving such distributions will be required to include the full amount of the distribution as ordinary income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes. As a result, stockholders may be required to pay income taxes with respect to such distributions in excess of the cash distributions received. If a U.S. stockholder sells the stock that it receives as a distribution in order to pay this tax, the sale proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the distribution, depending on the market price of our stock at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to certain non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold U.S. tax with respect to such distributions, including in respect of all or a portion of such distribution that is payable in stock. In addition, if a significant number of our stockholders determine to sell shares of our common stock in order to pay taxes owed on distributions, it may put downward pressure on the market price of our common stock.
The IRS has issued guidance authorizing elective cash/stock dividends to be made by public REITs where there is a minimum amount of cash that must be paid as part of the dividend, provided that certain requirements are met. It is unclear whether and to what extent we would be able to or choose to pay taxable distributions in cash and stock. In addition, no assurance can be given that the IRS will not impose additional requirements in the future with respect to taxable cash/stock distributions, including on a retroactive basis, or assert that the requirements for such taxable cash/stock distributions have not been met.
New legislation or administrative or judicial action, in each instance potentially with retroactive effect, could make it more difficult or impossible for us to remain qualified as a REIT.
The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of REITs and their shareholders may be modified, possibly with retroactive effect, by legislative, judicial or administrative action at any time, which could affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in us. Revisions in U.S. federal income tax laws and interpretations thereof, including those dealing with REITs, are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department, which results in statutory changes as well as frequent revisions to regulations. Such changes could affect or cause us to change our investments and commitments and affect the tax considerations of an investment in us. We cannot predict the long-term effect of any future law changes on REITs and their stockholders. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our stock or on the market value or the resale potential of our assets.
Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure
Our ownership limitations may restrict business combination opportunities.
To qualify as a REIT under the Code, no more than 50% of the value of our outstanding shares of capital stock may be owned, directly or under applicable attribution rules, by five or fewer individuals (as defined by the Code to include certain entities) during the last half of each taxable year. To preserve our REIT qualification, among other things, our charter generally prohibits direct or indirect ownership by any person of more than 9.8% of the number or value of the outstanding shares of our capital stock. Generally, shares owned by affiliated owners will be aggregated for purposes of the ownership limit. Any transfer of shares of our capital stock or other event that, if effective, would violate the ownership limit will be void as to that number of shares of capital stock in excess of the ownership limit and the intended transferee will acquire no rights in such shares. Shares issued or transferred that would cause any stockholder to own more than the ownership limit or cause us to become “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code will automatically be converted into an equal number of shares of excess stock. All excess stock will be automatically transferred, without action by the prohibited owner, to a trust for the exclusive benefit of one or more charitable beneficiaries that we select, and the prohibited owner will not acquire any rights in the shares of excess stock. The restrictions on ownership and transfer contained in our charter could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control or other transaction in which holders of shares of common stock might receive a premium for their shares of common stock over the then current market price or that such holders might believe to be otherwise in their best interests. The ownership limit provisions also may make our shares of common stock an unsuitable investment vehicle for any person seeking to obtain, either alone or with others as a group, ownership of more than 9.8% of the number or value of our outstanding shares of capital stock.
Provisions of Maryland law and other provisions of our organizational documents may limit the ability of a third-party to acquire control of the Company.
Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (or MGCL) may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change in control of our company that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in their best interests, including:
•“business combination” provisions that, subject to limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between us and an “interested stockholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our outstanding voting stock or an affiliate or associate of ours who, at any time within the two-year period immediately prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of our then outstanding stock) or an affiliate of an interested stockholder for five years after the most recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, and thereafter impose two supermajority stockholder voting requirements to approve these combinations (unless our common stockholders receive a minimum price, as defined under Maryland law, for their shares in the form of cash or other consideration in the same form as previously paid by the interested stockholder for its shares); and
•“control share” provisions that provide that holders of “control shares” of our company (defined as voting shares of stock which, when aggregated with all other shares controlled by the acquiring stockholder, entitle the stockholder to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of ownership or control of “control shares”) have no voting rights except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares.
Our bylaws provide that we are not subject to the “control share” provisions of the MGCL. However, our Board may elect to make the “control share” statute applicable to us at any time, and may do so without stockholder approval.
Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL permits our Board, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in our charter or bylaws, to elect on behalf of our company to be subject to statutory provisions that may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change in control of our company that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or otherwise be in their best interest. Our Board may elect to opt in to any or all of the provisions of Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL without stockholder approval at any time. In addition, without our having elected to be subject to Subtitle 8, our charter and bylaws already (1) provide for a classified board, (2) require the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 80% of the votes entitled to be cast in the election of directors for the removal of any director from our Board, which removal will be allowed only for cause and (3) vest in our Board the exclusive power to fix the number of directorships. These provisions may delay or prevent a change of control of our company.
Future offerings of debt securities, which would rank senior to our common stock upon liquidation, and future offerings of equity securities, which would dilute our existing stockholders and may be senior to our common stock for the purposes of dividend and liquidating distributions, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making offerings of debt or additional offerings of equity securities, including commercial paper, senior or subordinated notes and series or classes of preferred stock or common stock. Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock, if any, and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive a distribution of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock, or both. Preferred stock could have a preference on liquidating distributions or a preference on dividend payments or both that could limit our ability to make a dividend distribution to the holders of our common stock. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, holders of our common stock bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of our common stock and diluting their stock holdings in us.
Our Board may approve the issuance of capital stock with terms that may discourage a third-party from acquiring the Company.
Our charter permits our Board to issue shares of preferred stock, issuable in one or more classes or series. We may issue a class of preferred stock to individual investors in order to comply with the various REIT requirements or to finance our operations. Our charter further permits our Board to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of preferred or common stock and establish the preferences and rights (including, among others, voting, dividend and conversion rights) of any such shares of stock, which rights may be superior to those of shares of our common stock. Thus, our Board could authorize the issuance of shares of preferred or common stock with terms and conditions that could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of the outstanding shares of our common stock might receive a premium for their shares over the then current market price of our common stock.
Future issuances or sales of shares could cause our share price to decline.
Sales of substantial numbers of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that such sales might occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. In addition, the sale of these shares could impair our ability to raise capital through a sale of additional equity securities. Other issuances of our common stock, such as through equity awards to our employees, could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. In addition, future issuances of our common stock may be dilutive to existing stockholders.
The declaration, amount and payment of future cash dividends on shares of our common stock are subject to uncertainty due to disruption in the mortgage, housing or related sectors, such as market conditions related to COVID-19.
The declaration, amount and payment of any future dividends on shares of our common stock will be at the sole discretion of our Board. From time to time, our Board may adjust our quarterly cash dividend on our shares of our common stock from prior quarters. The payment of dividends may be more uncertain during severe market disruption in the mortgage, housing or related sectors, such as those experienced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, during the first quarter of 2020, we revoked and suspended quarterly cash dividends on each of our common stock and 7.50% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (or the Series B Preferred Stock) and, in connection with the now-terminated forbearance agreements that we entered into subsequent to the end of the first quarter, we were prohibited from paying dividends on our common stock and Series B Preferred Stock during the term of such forbearance agreements.
Other Business Risks
We are dependent on our executive officers and other key personnel for our success, the loss of any of whom may materially adversely affect our business.
Our success is dependent upon the efforts, experience, diligence, skill and network of business contacts of our executive officers and other key personnel. The departure of any of our executive officers and/or key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our operations and performance.
We are dependent on information systems and their failure (including in connection with cyber-attacks) could significantly disrupt our business.
Our business is highly dependent on our information and communications systems. Any failure or interruption of our systems or cyber-attacks or security breaches of our networks or systems could cause delays or other problems in our securities
trading activities, which could have a material adverse effect on operating results, the market price of our common stock and other securities and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders. In addition, we also face the risk of operational failure, termination or capacity constraints of any of the third-parties with which we do business or that facilitate our business activities, including clearing agents or other financial intermediaries we use to facilitate our securities transactions as well as the servicers of our loans.
Computer malware, viruses, and computer hacking and phishing and cyber-attacks have become more prevalent in our industry and may occur on our systems in the future. Additionally, due to the transition to remote working environments as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is an elevated risk of such events occurring. Although we have not detected a material cybersecurity breach to date, there can be no assurance that we are or will be fully protected against cyber risks and security breaches and not be vulnerable to new and evolving threats to our information technology systems. We rely heavily on financial, accounting and other data processing systems. It is difficult to determine what, if any, negative impact may directly result from any specific interruption or cyber-attacks or security breaches of our networks or systems (or networks or systems of, among other third-parties, our lenders and servicers) or any failure to maintain performance, reliability and security of our technical infrastructure. As a result, any such computer malware, viruses, and computer hacking and phishing attacks may negatively affect our operations.
We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities and competition may limit our ability to acquire desirable investments, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations.
We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities. Our profitability depends, in large part, on our ability to acquire residential mortgage assets or other investments at favorable prices. In acquiring our investments, we compete with a variety of institutional investors, including other REITs, public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial finance and insurance companies and other financial institutions. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources than we do. Some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that are not available to us. Many of our competitors are not subject to the operating constraints associated with REIT compliance or maintenance of an exemption from the Investment Company Act similar to ours. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments, establish business relationships that we would not be willing to enter into, or compete aggressively against us to acquire residential mortgage assets from our existing asset sellers or financing counterparties. Furthermore, government or regulatory action and competition for investment securities of the types and classes which we acquire may lead to the price of such assets increasing, which may further limit our ability to generate desired returns. We cannot assure you that the competitive pressures we face will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Also, as a result of this competition, desirable investments may be limited in the future and we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, as we can provide no assurance that we will be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objectives.
Deterioration in the condition of European banks and financial institutions could have a material adverse effect on our business.
In the years following the financial and credit crisis of 2007-2008, certain of our repurchase agreement counterparties in the United States and Europe experienced financial difficulty and were either rescued by government assistance or otherwise benefited from accommodative monetary policy of central banks. Several European governments implemented measures to attempt to shore up their financial sectors through loans, credit guarantees, capital infusions, promises of continued liquidity funding and interest rate cuts. Additionally, other governments of the world’s largest economic countries also implemented interest rate cuts. Although economic and credit conditions have stabilized in the past few years, there is no assurance that these and other plans and programs will be successful in the longer term, and, in particular, when governments and central banks begin to significantly unwind or otherwise reverse these programs and policies. If unsuccessful, this could materially adversely affect our financing and operations as well as those of the entire mortgage sector in general.
Several of our financing counterparties are European banks (or their U.S. based subsidiaries) that have provided financing to us, particularly repurchase agreement financing for the acquisition of residential mortgage assets. If European banks and financial institutions experience a deterioration in financial condition, there is the possibility that this would also negatively affect the operations of their U.S. banking subsidiaries. This risk could be more pronounced in light of Brexit. This could adversely affect our financing and operations as well as those of the entire mortgage sector in general.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties.
Office Leases
We currently pay monthly rent pursuant to three office leases. In November 2018, we amended the lease for our corporate headquarters in New York, New York, under the same terms and conditions, to extend the expiration date for the lease by up to one year, through June 30, 2021, with a mutual option to terminate on or after February 15, 2021. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded an expense of approximately $2.9 million in connection with the lease for our current corporate headquarters.
In addition, in November 2018, we executed a lease agreement on new office space in New York, New York. We plan to relocate our corporate headquarters to this new office space upon the substantial completion of the building. The lease term specified in the agreement is fifteen years with an option to renew for an additional five years. Our current estimate of annual lease rental expense under the new lease, excluding escalation charges which at this point are unknown, is approximately $4.6 million. We currently expect to relocate to the space in the first fiscal quarter of 2021, but this timing as well as when we are required to begin making payments and recognize rental and other expenses under the new lease, is dependent on when the space is actually available for use.
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
There are no material legal proceedings to which we are a party or to which any of our assets are subject.
Item 4.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Market Information
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, under the symbol “MFA”. Our preferred stock Series B and C issuances are also listed on the NYSE, under the symbols “MFA/PB” and “MFA/PC”, respectively.
Holders
As of February 17, 2021, we had 515 registered holders of our common stock. Such information was obtained through our registrar and transfer agent, based on the results of a broker search.
Dividends
No dividends may be paid on our common stock unless full cumulative dividends have been paid on our preferred stock. We have paid full cumulative dividends on our preferred stock on a quarterly basis through December 31, 2020. We have historically declared cash dividends on our common stock on a quarterly basis. During 2020 and 2019, we declared total cash dividends to holders of our common stock of $56.5 million ($0.125 per share) and $361.0 million ($0.80 per share), respectively. In general, our common stock dividends have been characterized as ordinary income to our stockholders for income tax purposes. However, a portion of our common stock dividends may, from time to time, be characterized as capital gains or return of capital. For the year ended December 31, 2020, the portion of our common stock dividends that was deemed to be a return of capital was $0.05 per share of common stock. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, the portions of our common stock dividends that were deemed to be capital gains were $0.1672 and $0.1290 per share of common stock, respectively. (For additional dividend information, see Notes 11(a) and 11(b) to the consolidated financial statements, included under Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.)
We elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 1998 and, as such, anticipate distributing at least 90% of our REIT taxable income within the timeframe permitted by the Code. Although we may borrow funds to make distributions, cash for such distributions has generally been, and is expected to continue to be, largely generated from our results of our operations.
The table below provides details of dividends on our common stock declared during the years 2020 and 2019:
(1)At December 31, 2020, we had accrued dividends and dividend equivalents payable of $34.0 million related to the common stock dividend declared on December 17, 2020. This dividend is considered taxable income to the recipient in 2021. For more information see our 2020 Dividend Tax Information on our website.
We have not established a minimum payout level for our common stock. Dividends are declared and paid at the discretion of our Board and depend on our cash available for distribution, financial condition, ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT, and such other factors that our Board may deem relevant. (See Part I, Item 1A., “Risk Factors” and Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, for information regarding the sources of funds used for dividends and for a discussion of factors, if any, which may adversely affect our ability to pay dividends.)
Purchases of Equity Securities
On November 2, 2020, our Board authorized a share repurchase program under which we may repurchase up to $250 million of our common stock through the end of 2022. The Board’s authorization replaces the authorization under our existing stock repurchase program that was adopted in December 2013, which authorized us to repurchase up to 10 million shares of common stock and under which approximately 6.6 million shares remained available for repurchase.
The stock repurchase program does not require the purchase of any minimum number of shares. The timing and extent to which we repurchase our shares will depend upon, among other things, market conditions, share price, liquidity, regulatory requirements and other factors, and repurchases may be commenced or suspended at any time without prior notice. Acquisitions under the share repurchase program may be made in the open market, through privately negotiated transactions or block trades or other means, in accordance with applicable securities laws.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, we repurchased 14,085,678 shares of our common stock through the stock repurchase program at an average cost of $3.61 per share and a total cost of approximately $50.8 million, net of fees and commissions paid to the sales agent of approximately $141,000. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2020 the Company repurchased 17,593,576 warrants for $33.7 million that were included in the stock repurchase program. At December 31, 2020, approximately $165.7 million remained outstanding for future repurchases under the repurchase program. We did not repurchase any shares of our common stock during the year ended December 31, 2019.
The following table presents information with respect to (i) shares of common stock repurchased by us under the stock repurchase program and (ii) restricted shares withheld (under the terms of grants under our Equity Compensation Plan (or Equity Plan)) to offset tax withholding obligations that occur upon the vesting and release of restricted stock awards and/or restricted stock units (or RSUs) and (iii) eligible shares remaining/approximate dollar value for repurchase under the stock repurchase program, in each case during the fourth quarter of 2020:
(1)Includes brokerage commissions.
(2)As of October 31, 2020, we had repurchased an aggregate of 3,383,645 shares under the repurchase program adopted in December 2013. This plan terminated on November 2, 2020, as it was replaced by a new plan on that date.
(3)Amount presented in shares.
(4)As of December 31, 2020, we had repurchased an aggregate of 14,085,678 shares under the repurchase program adopted on November 2, 2020. We are authorized to purchase $250 million worth of shares through to December 31, 2022. In addition, in December 2020, we repurchased warrants issued to Apollo and Athene for approximately $33.7 million, reflecting the market value of the warrants at the time of the repurchase. These warrant repurchases are also included in the repurchase program adopted on November 2, 2020.
(5)Amount presented in dollar value.
(6)Our Equity Plan provides that the value of the shares delivered or withheld be based on the price of our common stock on the date the relevant transaction occurs. These shares were withheld in November 2020.
Discount Waiver, Direct Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan
In September 2003, we initiated a Discount Waiver, Direct Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan (or the DRSPP) to provide existing stockholders and new investors with a convenient and economical way to purchase shares of our common stock. Under the DRSPP, existing stockholders may elect to automatically reinvest all or a portion of their cash dividends in additional shares of our common stock and existing stockholders and new investors may make optional cash purchases of shares of our common stock in amounts ranging from $50 (or $1,000 for new investors) to $10,000 on a monthly basis and, with our prior approval, in excess of $10,000. At our discretion, we may issue shares of our common stock under the DRSPP at discounts of up to 5% from the prevailing market price at the time of purchase. Computershare Shareowner Services LLC is the administrator of the DRSPP (or the Plan Agent). Stockholders who own common stock that is registered in their own name and who want to participate in the DRSPP must deliver a completed enrollment form to the Plan Agent. Stockholders who own common stock that is registered in a name other than their own (e.g., broker, bank or other nominee) and who want to participate in the DRSPP must either request such nominee holder to participate on their behalf or request that such nominee holder re-register our common stock in the stockholder’s name and deliver a completed enrollment form to the Plan Agent. During the years ended 2020 and 2019, we issued 235,635 and 322,888 shares of common stock through the DRSPP generating net proceeds of approximately $1.0 million and $2.4 million, respectively.
At-the-Market Offering Program
On August 16, 2019 we entered into a distribution agreement under the terms of which we may offer and sell shares of our common stock having an aggregate gross sales price of up to $400.0 million (or the ATM Shares), from time to time, through various sales agents, pursuant to an at-the-market equity offering program (or the ATM Program). Sales of the ATM Shares, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or by transactions that are deemed to be “at-the-market” offerings, as defined in Rule 415 under the 1933 Act, including sales made directly on the NYSE or sales made to or through a market maker other than an exchange. The sales agents are entitled to compensation of up to two percent of the gross sales price per share for any shares of common stock sold under the distribution agreement.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not sell any shares of common stock through the ATM Program. At December 31, 2020, approximately $390.0 million remained outstanding for future offerings under this program. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we sold 1,357,526 shares of common stock through the ATM Program at a weighted average price of $7.40, raising proceeds of approximately $9.9 million, net of fees and commissions paid to sales agents of approximately $100,000.
Item 6.
Item 6. Reserved.
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and accompanying notes included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
GENERAL
We are an internally-managed REIT primarily engaged in the business of investing, on a leveraged basis, in residential mortgage assets, including residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets. Our principal business objective is to deliver shareholder value through the generation of distributable income and through asset performance linked to residential mortgage credit fundamentals. We selectively invest in residential mortgage assets with a focus on credit analysis, projected prepayment rates, interest rate sensitivity and expected return.
As previously disclosed, as a result of the market disruptions experienced related to the unprecedented conditions arising in connection with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, during the first and second quarters of 2020 we engaged in asset sales and took other actions that significantly changed our asset composition. In particular, we sold all of our Agency and Legacy Non-Agency MBS investments, and substantially reduced our investments in MSR-related assets, RPL/NPL MBS and CRT securities. As a result of these actions, our primary investment assets as of December 31, 2020, are comprised of our residential whole loans. During the second quarter, to further help stabilize our financial position and liquidity, we entered into a $500 million senior secured credit agreement. In addition, during the second quarter, in conjunction with our previously disclosed exit from forbearance arrangements with lenders, we entered into several new asset-backed financing arrangements and renegotiated financing arrangements for certain assets with existing lenders, which together resulted in us essentially refinancing the majority of our investment portfolio.
During the third and fourth quarters of 2020, we continued to make significant progress on initiatives to lower the cost of financing our investments with more durable forms of borrowing. For example, we completed a $390 million securitization transaction of Non-QM assets in early September, which generated $92.7 million of additional liquidity and lowered the funding rate for the associated assets by approximately 165 basis points. In addition, during the fourth quarter we completed two Non-QM securitizations totaling $951.6 million, which generated $214.6 million of additional liquidity and lowered the funding rate for the associated assets by approximately 193 basis points. Additionally, during the fourth quarter we undertook steps to reduce our exposure to higher cost forms of financing that we had obtained in connection with our exit from forbearance in the second quarter. On October 9, 2020, we repaid $400 million of the principal outstanding on the senior secured loan, and the remaining balance of this facility of $81.25 million was repaid on October 30, 2020. The repayments were made without penalty or yield maintenance. Subsequent to the end of the fourth quarter, we completed a securitization solely consisting of $217.5 million of Business Purpose Rental Loans, generating approximately $48.4 million of additional liquidity. As the weighted average coupon of the bonds sold was approximately 1.06%, this transaction is expected to lower the funding rate of the underlying assets by more than 150 basis points. In addition, on January 6, 2021, we redeemed all of our outstanding $100 million aggregate principal amount of 8.00% Senior Notes Due 2042. In connection with this redemption, we recorded in our fourth quarter interest expense a non-cash charge of approximately $3.1 million representing remaining unamortized deferred expenses incurred when the Senior Notes were originally issued in 2012.
At December 31, 2020, we had total assets of approximately $6.9 billion, of which $5.3 billion, or 77%, represented residential whole loans acquired through interests in certain trusts established to acquire the loans. Our Purchased Performing Loans, which as of December 31, 2020 comprised approximately 65% of our residential whole loans, include: (i) loans to finance (or refinance) one-to four-family residential properties that are not considered to meet the definition of a “Qualified Mortgage” in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (or Non-QM loans), (ii) short-term business purpose loans collateralized by residential properties made to non-occupant borrowers who intend to rehabilitate and sell the property for a profit (or Rehabilitation loans or Fix and Flip loans), (iii) loans to finance (or refinance) non-owner occupied one-to four-family residential properties that are rented to one or more tenants (or Single-family rental loans), and (iv) previously originated loans secured by residential real estate that is generally owner occupied (or Seasoned performing loans). In addition, at December 31, 2020, we had approximately $161.0 million in investments in residential mortgage securities, which represented approximately 2% of our total assets. At such date, our portfolio included $104.2 million of CRT securities and $56.8 million of Non-Agency MBS which were primarily comprised of RPL/NPL MBS. At December 31, 2020, our investments in MSR-related assets were $239.0 million, or 3% of our total assets. Our MSR-related assets include term notes whose cash flows are considered to be largely dependent on MSR collateral and loan participations to provide financing to mortgage originators that own MSRs. Our remaining investment-related assets, which represent approximately 5% of our total assets at December 31, 2020, were primarily comprised of REO, capital contributions made to loan origination partners and MBS and loan-related receivables.
The results of our business operations are affected by a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control, and primarily depend on, among other things, the level of our net interest income and the market value of our assets, which is driven by numerous factors, including the supply and demand for residential mortgage assets in the marketplace, 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 in the real estate and mortgage sector, and the credit performance of our credit sensitive residential mortgage assets. Changes in these factors, or uncertainty in the market regarding the potential for changes in these factors, can result in significant changes in the value and/or performance of our investment portfolio. Further, our GAAP results may be impacted by market volatility, resulting in changes in market values of certain financial instruments for which changes in fair value are recorded in net income each period, such as CRT securities, and certain residential whole loans. 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), borrowing costs (i.e., our interest expense) and prepayment speeds, the behavior of which involves various risks and uncertainties. Interest rates and conditional prepayment rates (or CPRs) (which measure the amount of unscheduled principal prepayment on an asset as a percentage of the asset balance), vary according to the type of investment, conditions in the financial markets, competition and other factors, none of which can be predicted with any certainty. With the adoption in January 2020 of new accounting standards for the measurement and recognition of credit losses, and given the extent of current and anticipated future investments in residential whole loans, our financial results are impacted by estimates of credit losses that are required to be recorded when loans that are not accounted for at fair value through net income are acquired or originated, as well as changes in these credit loss estimates that will be required to be made periodically.
With respect to our business operations, increases in interest rates, in general, may over time cause: (i) the interest expense associated with our borrowings to increase; (ii) the value of certain of our residential mortgage assets and, correspondingly, our stockholders’ equity to decline; (iii) coupons on our adjustable-rate assets to reset, on a delayed basis, to higher interest rates; (iv) prepayments on our assets to decline, thereby slowing the amortization of purchase premiums and the accretion of our purchase discounts, and slowing our ability to redeploy capital to generally higher yielding investments; and (v) the value of our derivative hedging instruments, if any, and, correspondingly, our stockholders’ equity to increase. Conversely, decreases in interest rates, in general, may over time cause: (i) the interest expense associated with our borrowings to decrease; (ii) the value of certain of our residential mortgage assets and, correspondingly, our stockholders’ equity to increase; (iii) coupons on our adjustable-rate assets, on a delayed basis, to lower interest rates; (iv) prepayments on our assets to increase, thereby accelerating the amortization of purchase premiums and the accretion of our purchase discounts, and accelerating the redeployment of our capital to generally lower yielding investments; and (v) the value of our derivative hedging instruments, if any, and, correspondingly, our stockholders’ equity to decrease. In addition, our borrowing costs and credit lines are further affected by the type of collateral we pledge and general conditions in the credit market.
Our investments in residential mortgage assets expose us to credit risk, meaning that we are generally subject to credit losses due to the risk of delinquency, default and foreclosure on the underlying real estate collateral. Our investment process for credit sensitive assets focuses primarily on quantifying and pricing credit risk. With respect to investments in Purchased Performing Loans, we believe that sound underwriting standards, including low LTVs at origination, significantly mitigate our risk of loss. Further, we believe the discounted purchase prices paid on certain non-performing and Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans mitigate our risk of loss in the event that, as we expect on most such investments, we receive less than 100% of the par value of these investments. (see Part I, Item 1A., “Risk Factors - Credit and Other Risks Related to our Investments” and Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
We seek to manage our risks related to interest rates, liquidity, prepayment speeds, market value and the credit quality of our assets while, at the same time, seeking to provide an opportunity to stockholders to realize attractive total returns through ownership of our capital stock. While we do not seek to avoid risk, we seek, consistent with our investment policies, to: assume risk that can be quantified based on management’s judgment and experience and actively manage such risk; earn sufficient returns to justify the taking of such risks; and maintain capital levels consistent with the risks that we undertake.
INTEREST RATE RISK
We generally acquire interest-rate sensitive assets and fund them with interest-rate sensitive liabilities, a portion of which are typically hedged with Swaps. We are exposed to interest rate risk on our residential mortgage assets, as well as on our liabilities. Changes in interest rates can affect our net interest income and the fair value of our assets and liabilities.
In general, when interest rates change, borrowing costs on our financing agreements will change more quickly than the yield on our assets. In a rising interest rate environment, the borrowing costs of our repurchase agreements may increase faster than the interest income on our assets, thereby reducing our net income. In order to mitigate compression in net income based on such interest rate movements, we may use Swaps to lock in a portion of the net interest spread between assets and liabilities.
When interest rates change, the fair value of our residential mortgage assets could change at a different rate than the fair value of our liabilities. We measure the sensitivity of our portfolio to changes in interest rates by estimating the duration of our assets and liabilities. Duration is the approximate percentage change in fair value for a 100 basis point parallel shift in the yield curve. In general, our assets have higher duration than our liabilities and in order to reduce this exposure we use Swaps to reduce the gap in duration between our assets and liabilities.
The fair value of our re-performing residential whole loans is dependent on the value of the underlying real estate collateral, past and expected delinquency status of the borrower as well as the level of interest rates. For certain residential whole loans that were purchased as re-performing loans, because the borrower is not delinquent on their mortgage payments but is less likely to prepay the loan due to weak credit history and/or high LTV, we believe these loans exhibit positive duration. We estimate the duration of our re-performing residential whole loans using management’s assumptions.
The fair value of our Non-QM loans and Single-family rental loans are typically dependent on the value of the underlying real estate collateral, as well as the level of interest rates. Because these loans are primarily newly or recently originated performing loans, we believe these investments exhibit positive duration. Given the short duration of our Rehabilitation loans, we believe the fair value of these loans exhibits little sensitivity to changes in interest rates. We estimate the duration of these Purchased Performing Loans held at carrying value using management’s assumptions.
The fair value of our non-performing residential whole loans is typically primarily dependent on the value of the underlying real estate collateral and the time required for collateral liquidation. Since neither the value of the collateral nor the liquidation timeline is generally sensitive to interest rates, we believe their fair value exhibits little sensitivity to interest rates. We estimate the duration of our non-performing residential whole loans using management’s assumptions.
The interest rates for the vast majority of our investments, financings and hedging transactions are either explicitly or indirectly based on LIBOR. At present, it is not possible to predict the effect of such change, including the establishment of potential alternative reference rates, on the economy or markets we are active in either currently or in the future, or on any of our assets or liabilities whose interest rates are based on LIBOR. We are in the process of evaluating the potential impact of a discontinuation of LIBOR on our portfolio, as well as the related accounting impact. However, we expect that in the near term, we will work closely with the Trustee companies and/or other entities that are involved in calculating the interest rates for our residential mortgage securities and securitized debt, our loan servicers for our hybrid and floating rate loans, and with the various counterparties to our financing and hedging transactions in order to determine what changes, if any, are required to be made to existing agreements for these transactions.
Shock Table
The information presented in the following “Shock Tables” projects the potential impact of sudden parallel changes in interest rates on our net interest income and portfolio value, including the impact of Swaps (if any), over the next 12 months based on the assets in our investment portfolio at December 31, 2020 and 2019. All changes in income and value are measured as the percentage change from the projected net interest income and portfolio value under the base interest rate scenario at December 31, 2020 and 2019.
December 31, 2020
December 31, 2019
(1)Such assets include residential whole loans and REO, MBS and CRT securities, MSR-related assets, cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash.
Certain assumptions have been made in connection with the calculation of the information set forth in the Shock Table and, as such, there can be no assurance that assumed events will occur or that other events will not occur that would affect the outcomes. The base interest rate scenario assumes interest rates at December 31, 2020 and 2019. The analysis presented utilizes assumptions and estimates based on management’s judgment and experience. Furthermore, while we generally expect to retain the majority of our assets and the associated interest rate risk to maturity, future purchases and sales of assets could materially change our interest rate risk profile. It should be specifically noted that the information set forth in the above table and all related disclosure constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the 1933 Act and Section 21E of the 1934 Act. Actual results could differ significantly from those estimated in the Shock Table above.
The Shock Table quantifies the potential changes in net interest income and portfolio value, which includes the value of our Swaps (if any) and securitized and other fixed rate date (which are carried at fair value), should interest rates immediately change (i.e., are shocked). The Shock Table presents the estimated impact of interest rates instantaneously rising 50 and 100 basis points, and falling 50 and 100 basis points. The cash flows associated with our portfolio for each rate shock are calculated based on assumptions, including, but not limited to, prepayment speeds, yield on replacement assets, the slope of the yield curve and composition of our portfolio. Assumptions made with respect to the interest rate sensitive liabilities include anticipated interest rates, collateral requirements as a percent of repurchase agreement financings, and the amounts and terms of borrowing. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, we applied a floor of 0% for all anticipated interest rates included in our assumptions. Due to this floor, it is anticipated that any hypothetical interest rate shock decrease would have a limited positive impact on our funding costs; however, because prepayments speeds are unaffected by this floor, it is expected that any increase in our prepayment speeds (occurring as a result of any interest rate shock decrease or otherwise) could result in an acceleration of premium amortization on our Agency MBS and discount accretion on our Non-Agency MBS and in the reinvestment of principal repayments in lower yielding assets. As a result, because the presence of this floor limits the positive impact of
interest rate decrease on our funding costs, hypothetical interest rate shock decreases could cause a decline in the fair value of our financial instruments and our net interest income.
At December 31, 2020, the impact on portfolio value was approximated using estimated net effective duration (i.e., the price sensitivity to changes in interest rates), including the effect of securitized and other fixed rate debt, of 1.43, which is the weighted average of 2.42 for our Residential whole loans, 0.75 for our Non-Agency investments, (2.11) for our securitized debt and other fixed rate debt, and 0.06 for our Other assets and cash and cash equivalents. Estimated convexity (i.e., the approximate change in duration relative to the change in interest rates) of the portfolio was (0.67), which is the weighted average of (0.85) for our Residential whole loans, zero for our securitized and other fixed rate debt, zero for our Non-Agency MBS, and zero for our Other assets and cash and cash equivalents. At December 31, 2019, the impact on portfolio value was an approximated using estimated net effective duration (i.e., the price sensitivity to changes in interest rates), including the effect of Swaps and securitized debt and other fixed rate debt, of 1.36, which is the weighted average of 1.50 for our Agency MBS, 0.94 for our Non-Agency investments, 2.35 for our Residential whole loans, (1.32) for our Swaps and securitized debt and other fixed rate debt, and 0.18 for our Other assets and cash and cash equivalents. Estimated convexity (i.e., the approximate change in duration relative to the change in interest rates) of the portfolio was (0.61), which is the weighted average of (0.61) for our Agency MBS, zero for our Swaps and securitized debt and other fixed rate debt, (0.12) for our Non-Agency MBS, (0.89) for our Residential whole loans, and zero for our Other assets and cash and cash equivalents. The impact on our net interest income is driven mainly by the difference between portfolio yield and cost of funding of our repurchase agreements. Our asset/liability structure is generally such that an increase in interest rates would be expected to result in a decrease in net interest income, as our borrowings are generally shorter in term than our interest-earning assets. When interest rates are shocked, prepayment assumptions are adjusted based on management’s expectations along with the results from the prepayment model.
CREDIT RISK
We are exposed to credit risk through our credit sensitive residential mortgage investments, in particular residential whole loans and CRT securities and to a lesser extent our investments in RPL/NPL MBS and MSR-related assets. As discussed above, during 2020 we engaged in asset sales and took other actions that significantly changed our asset composition. As a result, our primary credit risk currently relates to our residential whole loans.
Our exposure to credit risk from our credit sensitive investments is discussed in more detail below:
Residential Whole Loans
We are exposed to credit risk from our investments in residential whole loans. (See Part I, Item 1A., “Risk Factors - Credit and Other Risks Related to our Investments” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K). Our investment process for non-performing and Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans is focused on quantifying and pricing credit risk. Non-Performing and Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans are acquired at purchase prices that are generally discounted to the contractual loan balances based on a number of factors, including the impaired credit history of the borrower and the value of the collateral securing the loan. In addition, as we generally own the mortgage-servicing rights associated with these loans, our process is also focused on selecting a sub-servicer with the appropriate expertise to mitigate losses and maximize our overall return. This involves, among other things, performing due diligence on the sub-servicer prior to their engagement as well as ongoing oversight and surveillance. To the extent that delinquencies and defaults on these loans are higher than our expectation at the time the loans were purchased, the discounted purchase price at which the asset is acquired is intended to provide a level of protection against financial loss.
Credit risk on Purchased Performing Loans is mitigated through our process to underwrite the loan before it is purchased and includes an assessment of the borrower’s financial condition and ability to repay the loan, nature of the collateral and relatively low LTV, including after-repair LTV for the majority of our Rehabilitation loans.
The following table presents certain information about our Residential whole loans, at carrying value at December 31, 2020:
(1)Weighted average is calculated based on the interest bearing principal balance of each loan within the related category. For loans acquired with servicing rights released by the seller, interest rates included in the calculation do not reflect loan servicing fees. For loans acquired with servicing rights retained by the seller, interest rates included in the calculation are net of servicing fees.
(2)LTV represents the ratio of the total unpaid principal balance of the loan to the estimated value of the collateral securing the related loan as of the most recent date available, which may be the origination date. For Rehabilitation loans, the LTV presented is the ratio of the maximum unpaid principal balance of the loan, including unfunded commitments, to the estimated “after repaired” value of the collateral securing the related loan, where available. For certain Rehabilitation loans, totaling $189.9 million, an after repaired valuation was not obtained and the loan was underwritten based on an “as is” valuation. The LTV of these loans based on the current unpaid principal balance and the valuation obtained during underwriting, is 68%. Excluded from the calculation of weighted average LTV are certain low value loans secured by vacant lots, for which the LTV ratio is not meaningful.
The following table presents the five largest geographic concentrations by state of our residential whole loan portfolio at December 31, 2020:
RPL/NPL MBS
These securities are backed by re-performing and non-performing loans, were purchased primarily at prices around par and represent the senior and mezzanine tranches of the related securitizations. The majority of these securities are structured with significant credit enhancement (typically approximately 50%) and the subordinate tranches absorb all credit losses (until those tranches are extinguished) and typically receive no cash flow (interest or principal) until the senior tranche is paid off. Prior to purchase, we analyze the deal structure in order to assess the associated credit risk. Subsequent to purchase, the ongoing credit risk associated with the deal is evaluated by analyzing the extent to which actual credit losses occur that result in a reduction in the amount of subordination enjoyed by our bond.
CRT Securities
We are exposed to potential credit losses from our investments in CRT securities issued by or sponsored by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While CRT securities are issued by or sponsored by these GSEs, payment of principal on these securities is not guaranteed. As an investor in a CRT security, we may incur a loss if losses on the mortgage loans in the reference pool exceed the credit enhancement on the underlying CRT security owned by us or if an actual pool of loans experience losses. We assess the credit risk associated with our investments in CRT securities by assessing the current and expected future performance of the associated loan pool.
MSR-Related Assets
Term Notes
We have invested in certain term notes that are issued by special purpose vehicles (or SPVs) that have acquired rights to receive cash flows representing the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with certain MSRs. Payment of principal and interest on these term notes is considered by us to be largely dependent on the cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs as this impacts the cash flows available to the SPV that issued the term notes. Credit risk borne by the holders of the term notes is also mitigated by structural credit support in the form of over-collateralization. In addition, credit support is also provided by a corporate guarantee from the ultimate parent or sponsor of the SPV that is intended to provide for payment of interest and principal to the holders of the term notes should cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs be insufficient.
Credit Spread Risk
Credit spreads measure the additional yield demanded by investors in financial instruments based on the credit risk associated with an instrument relative to benchmark interest rates. They are impacted by the available supply and demand for instruments with various levels of credit risk. Widening credit spreads would result in higher yields being required by investors in financial instruments. Credit spread widening generally results in lower values of the financial instruments we hold at that time, but will generally result in a higher yield on future investments with similar credit risk. It is possible that the credit spreads on our assets and liabilities, including hedges, will not always move in tandem. Consequently, changes in credit spreads can result in volatility in our financial results and reported book value.
LIQUIDITY RISK
The primary liquidity risk we face arises from financing long-maturity assets with shorter-term borrowings primarily in the form of repurchase agreement financings. This risk was particularly pronounced during the first quarter of 2020, as conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in us receiving an unusually high number of margin calls, negatively impacting our overall liquidity and ultimately leading us to enter into the forbearance agreements. During the period that our lenders granted us forbearance, we renegotiated several of our repurchase financing facilities and entered into new financing agreements that either did not have mark-to-market collateral maintenance provisions or included collateral maintenance provisions that would only require to post additional collateral in the event of very large changes in the value of the underlying collateral. In addition, subsequent to our exit from forbearance, we have increased our use of non-recourse financing in the form of loan securitization. As a result, at December 31, 2020, only 30.9% of our financing agreements are shorter term repurchase agreements that contain mark-to-mark collateral provisions.
We pledge residential mortgage assets and cash to secure our financing agreements. Our financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions require us to pledge additional collateral in the event the market value of the assets pledged decreases, in order maintain the lenders contractually specified collateral cushion, which is measured as the difference between the loan amount and the market value of the asset pledged as collateral. Should the value of our residential mortgage assets pledged as collateral suddenly decrease, margin calls under our repurchase agreements would likely increase, causing an adverse change in our liquidity position. Additionally, if one or more of our financing counterparties chose not to provide ongoing funding, our ability to finance our long-maturity assets would decline or be available on possibly less advantageous terms. Further, when liquidity tightens, our repurchase agreement counterparties may increase our collateral cushion (or margin) requirements on new financings, including repurchase agreement borrowings that we roll with the same counterparty, reducing our ability to use leverage.
At December 31, 2020, we had access to various sources of liquidity including $814.4 million of cash and cash equivalents. Our sources of liquidity do not include restricted cash. In addition, at December 31, 2020 we had $61.9 million of unencumbered residential whole loans. Further, we believe that we have unused capacity in certain borrowing lines, given that the amount currently borrowed is less than the maximum advance rate permitted by the facility. This unused capacity serves to act as a buffer against potential margin calls on certain pledged assets in the events that asset prices do not decline by more than a specified amount.
PREPAYMENT RISK
Premiums arise when we acquire an MBS or loan at a price in excess of the aggregate principal balance of the mortgages securing the MBS (i.e., par value) or when we acquire residential whole loans at a price in excess of their aggregate principal balance. Conversely, discounts arise when we acquire an MBS or loan at a price below the aggregate principal balance of the mortgages securing the MBS or when we acquire residential whole loans at a price below their aggregate principal balance. Premiums paid are amortized against interest income and accretable purchase discounts on these investments are accreted to interest income. Purchase premiums, which are primarily carried on our Non-QM loans and certain CRT securities, are amortized against interest income over the life of the investment using the effective yield method, adjusted for actual prepayment activity. An increase in the prepayment rate, as measured by the CPR, will typically accelerate the amortization of purchase premiums, thereby reducing the interest income earned on these assets. Generally, if prepayments on Non-Agency MBS and residential whole loans purchased at significant discounts and not accounted for at fair value are less than anticipated, we expect that the income recognized on these assets will be reduced and impairments and/or credit loss reserves may result.
In addition, increased prepayments are generally associated with decreasing market interest rates as borrowers are able to refinance their mortgages at lower rates. Therefore, increased prepayments on our investments may accelerate the redeployment of our capital to generally lower yielding investments. Similarly, decreased prepayments are generally associated with increasing market interest rates and may slow our ability to redeploy capital to generally higher yielding investments.
Item 8.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Index to Financial Statements and Schedule
All other financial statement schedules are omitted because the required information is not applicable or deemed not material, or the required information is included in the consolidated financial statements and/or notes thereto.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Stockholders and Board of Directors
MFA Financial, Inc.:
Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of MFA Financial, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income/(loss), changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes and Schedule IV - Mortgage Loans on Real Estate (collectively, the consolidated financial statements). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2020, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission”, and our report dated February 23, 2021 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Change in Accounting Principle
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has changed its method of accounting for the recognition and measurement of credit losses as of January 1, 2020 due to the adoption of ASC Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses.
Basis for Opinion
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Critical Audit Matters
The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.
Assessment of the allowance for credit losses on residential whole loans held at carrying value
As discussed in Notes 2 and 3 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company adopted ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (ASC Topic 326), as of January 1, 2020, and the Company’s total allowance for credit losses on residential whole loans held at carrying value as of December 31, 2020 was $86.8 million (the December 31, 2020 ACL). The Company estimated the December 31, 2020 ACL using a current expected credit losses methodology for each of its loan portfolio segments which is based on relevant information about historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and
supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the loan balances, specific to the Company’s loan portfolio segments grouped by shared risk characteristics which include Non-Qualified Mortgages (non-QM loans), Rehabilitation loans, Single-Family Rental loans, Seasoned Performing loans, and Purchased Credit Deteriorated loans. These expected credit losses are generally calculated based on the estimated probability of default and loss severity of loans in the portfolio, which involves projecting each loan’s expected cash flows based on their contractual terms, expected prepayments, and estimated default and loss severity rates. These results were not discounted. The default and loss severity rates were estimated based on the following steps: (i) obtaining historical experience through an entire economic cycle for each loan type or, to the extent the sufficient historical loss experience for a given loan type was not available, publicly available data derived from the historical loss experience of certain banks deemed generally representative of the portfolio, (ii) obtaining historical economic data (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) over the same period, and (iii) estimating default and loss severity rates during three distinct future periods based on historical default and loss severity rates during periods when economic conditions similar to those forecasted were experienced. The default and severity rates were applied to the estimated amount of loans outstanding during each future period, based on contractual terms and expected prepayments. Expected prepayments are estimated based on historical experience and current and expected future economic conditions, including market interest rates. The three future periods included: (i) a one-year forecast of economic conditions based on U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation, followed by (ii) a two-year reversion period during which economic conditions (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) are projected to revert to historical averages on a straight line basis, followed by (iii) the remaining life of each loan, during which period economic conditions (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) are projected to equal historical averages. The Company forecasts future economic conditions based on forecasts provided by an external preparer of economic forecasts, as well as its own knowledge of the market and its portfolio. The Company generally considers multiple scenarios and selects the one that it believes results in the most reasonable estimate of expected losses. The Company may apply qualitative adjustments to these expected loss estimates, which are determined based on a variety of factors, including differences between the Company’s loan portfolio and the loan portfolios represented by available proxy data, and differences between current (and expected future) market conditions in comparison to market conditions that occurred in historical periods.
We identified the assessment of the December 31, 2020 ACL associated with the Company’s non-QM loans, Rehabilitation loans, and Purchased Credit Deteriorated loans as a critical audit matter. A high degree of audit effort, including specialized skills and knowledge, and subjective and complex auditor judgment was involved in the assessment of the December 31, 2020 ACL for these loans due to significant measurement uncertainty. Specifically, the assessment encompassed the evaluation of the December 31, 2020 ACL methodology, including the methods and models used to estimate the expected prepayments and default and loss severity rates and their significant assumptions. Such significant assumptions included the economic forecast scenario and macroeconomic assumptions, the reasonable and supportable forecast periods, the composition of the publicly available data derived from the historical loss experience of certain banks, and the historical experience period. The assessment also included the evaluation of the qualitative factors and their significant assumptions. Such significant assumptions were sensitive to variation, such that minor changes in the assumption can cause significant changes in the estimates. The assessment also included an evaluation of the conceptual soundness and performance of the prepayment, default and loss severity models. In addition, auditor judgment was required to evaluate the sufficiency of audit evidence obtained.
The following are the primary procedures we performed to address this critical audit matter. We evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of certain internal controls related to the Company’s measurement of the December 31, 2020 ACL estimate, including controls over the:
•development of the ACL methodology
•development of the prepayment, default and loss severity models
•identification and determination of the significant assumptions used in the prepayment, default and loss severity models
•development of the qualitative factors, including the significant assumptions used in the measurement of the qualitative factors
•analysis of the ACL results, trends, and ratios.
We evaluated the Company’s process to develop the December 31, 2020 ACL estimate by testing certain sources of data, factors, and assumptions that the Company used, and considered the relevance and reliability of such data, factors, and assumptions. In addition, we involved credit risk professionals with specialized skills and knowledge, who assisted in:
•evaluating the Company’s ACL methodology for compliance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
•evaluating judgments made by the Company relative to the development and performance testing of the prepayment, default and loss severity models by comparing them to relevant Company-specific metrics and trends and the applicable industry and regulatory practices
•assessing the conceptual soundness and performance testing of the prepayment, default and loss severity models by inspecting the model documentation to determine whether the models are suitable for their intended use
•evaluating the methodology used to develop the economic forecast scenarios and underlying macroeconomic assumptions by comparing it to the Company’s business environment and relevant industry practices
•evaluating the economic forecast scenario selected through comparison to publicly available forecasts
•evaluating the length of the historical experience period and reasonable and supportable forecast periods by comparing them to specific portfolio risk characteristics and trends
•assessing the composition of the publicly available data derived from the historical loss experience of certain banks by comparing to specific portfolio risk characteristics
•evaluating the methodology used to develop the qualitative factors and the effect of those factors on the ACL compared with relevant credit risk factors and consistency with credit trends and identified limitations of the underlying quantitative models.
We also assessed the sufficiency of the audit evidence obtained related to the December 31, 2020 ACL by evaluating the:
•cumulative results of the audit procedures
•qualitative aspects of the Company’s accounting practices
•potential bias in the accounting estimates.
Assessment of the valuation of residential whole loans, at fair value
As discussed in Notes 2, 3 and 14 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company records certain residential whole loans at fair value on its consolidated balance sheet as a result of a fair value election made at the time of acquisition. As of December 31, 2020, the recorded balance of the Company’s residential whole loans, at fair value was $1.2 billion. The Company determines the fair value of its residential whole loans held at fair value after considering valuations obtained from a third-party that specializes in providing valuations on residential mortgage loans. The valuation approach depends on whether the loan is considered performing or non-performing at the valuation date. For performing loans, estimates of fair value are derived using a discounted cash flow approach, where estimates of cash flows are determined from the scheduled payments, adjusted using third party derived assumptions for forecasted prepayment, default and loss given default rates. For non-performing loans, asset liquidation cash flows are derived based on third party derived assumptions, including the property’s appraised value, estimated time to liquidate the loan, expected liquidation costs, and home price index. Estimated cash flows for both performing and non-performing loans are discounted using yields to arrive at an exit price for the asset.
We identified the assessment of the valuation of residential whole loans, at fair value as a critical audit matter. A high degree of audit effort, including specialized skills and knowledge, was involved in determining the estimate assumptions, including the forecasted prepayment, default and loss given default rates, property appraised value, estimated time to liquidate the loan, expected liquidation costs, and home price index, which are not readily observable in the market and subject to significant measurement uncertainty. The evaluation of the assumptions to determine the valuation of residential whole loans, at fair value, required subjective and complex auditor judgement as the assumptions used were sensitive to variation, such that minor changes in home prices and/or credit quality of the borrower can cause significant changes in the estimate.
The following are the primary procedures we performed to address this critical audit matter. We evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of certain internal controls related to the Company’s measurement of residential whole loans, at fair value. We involved valuation professionals with specialized skills and knowledge who assisted in evaluating the Company’s internal controls specific to the (1) assessment of whether the third-party aforementioned derived assumptions used to determine the fair value reflect those which a market participant would use to determine an exit price in the current market environment and (2) assessment of the third-party developed valuation techniques and models.
We involved valuation professionals with specialized skills and knowledge, who assisted in:
•evaluating the methodology and assumptions used to determine the property appraised value used by the Company for a sample of residential whole loans at fair value
•evaluating that the methodology used by the Company in determining the property appraised value is in accordance with U.S. GAAP
•developing a fair value estimate for a sample of residential whole loans at fair value using the evaluated property appraised value, estimated time to liquidate the loan, expected liquidation costs, and home price index assumptions used by the Company and publicly available external market data collectively with independently developed valuation models and/or inputs and comparing the results of our estimate of fair value to the Company’s fair value estimate.
/s/ KPMG LLP
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2011.
New York, New York
February 23, 2021
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(1)Includes approximately $1.4 billion and $186.4 million of Residential whole loans, at carrying value and $382.3 million and $567.4 million of Residential whole loans, at fair value transferred to consolidated variable interest entities (“VIEs”) at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Such assets can be used only to settle the obligations of each respective VIE.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/(LOSS)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
(1) For the year ended December 31, 2020, includes approximately $2.7 million (360,534 shares) surrendered for tax purposes related to equity-based compensation awards. For the year ended December 31, 2019, includes approximately $4.1 million (562,815 shares) surrendered for tax purposes related to equity-based compensation awards. For the year ended December 31, 2018, includes approximately $3.4 million (464,429 shares) surrendered for tax purposes related to equity-based compensation awards.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
1. Organization
MFA Financial, Inc. (the “Company”) was incorporated in Maryland on July 24, 1997 and began operations on April 10, 1998. The Company has elected to be treated as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In order to maintain its qualification as a REIT, the Company must comply with a number of requirements under federal tax law, including that it must distribute at least 90% of its annual REIT taxable income to its stockholders. The Company has elected to treat certain of its subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”). In general, a TRS may hold assets and engage in activities that the Company cannot hold or engage in directly and generally may engage in any real estate or non-real estate related business. (See Note 2(n))
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
(a) Basis of Presentation and Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Although the Company’s estimates contemplate current conditions and how it expects them to change in the future, it is reasonably possible that actual conditions could differ from those estimates, which could materially impact the Company’s results of operations and its financial condition. Management has made significant estimates in several areas, impairment, valuation allowances and loss allowances on residential whole loans (see Note 3), mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) (see Note 4) and Other assets (see Note 5), valuation of MBS, CRT securities and MSR-related assets (see Notes 4 and 14), income recognition and valuation of residential whole loans (see Notes 3 and 14), valuation of derivative instruments (see Notes 5(c) and 14) and income recognition on certain Non-Agency MBS (defined below) purchased at a discount (see Note 4). In addition, estimates are used in the determination of taxable income used in the assessment of REIT compliance and contingent liabilities for related taxes, penalties and interest (see Note 2(n)). Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The Company has one reportable segment since it manages its business and analyzes and reports its results of operations on the basis of one operating segment: investing, on a leveraged basis, in residential mortgage assets.
The consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of all subsidiaries. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated. In addition, the Company consolidates entities established to facilitate transactions related to the acquisition and securitization of residential whole loans completed in prior years. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.
(b) Residential Whole Loans (including Residential Whole Loans transferred to consolidated VIEs)
Residential whole loans included in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets are primarily comprised of pools of fixed- and adjustable-rate residential mortgage loans acquired through consolidated trusts in secondary market transactions. The accounting model utilized by the Company is determined at the time each loan package is initially acquired and is generally based on the delinquency status of the majority of the underlying borrowers in the package at acquisition. The accounting model described below for Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans that are held at carrying value is typically utilized by the Company for Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans where the underlying borrower has a delinquency status of less than 60 days at the acquisition date. The Company also acquires Purchased Performing Loans that are typically held at carrying value, but the accounting methods for income recognition and determination and measurement of any required credit loss reserves (as discussed below) differ from those used for Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans held at carrying value. The accounting model described below for residential whole loans held at fair value is typically utilized by the Company for loans where the underlying borrower has a delinquency status of 60 days or more at the acquisition date. The accounting model initially applied is not subsequently changed.
The Company’s residential whole loans pledged as collateral against financing agreements are included in the consolidated balance sheets with amounts pledged disclosed parenthetically. Purchases and sales of residential whole loans that are subject to an extended period of due diligence that crosses a reporting date are recorded in our balance sheet at amounts
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
reflecting management’s current estimate of assets that will be acquired or disposed at the closing of the transaction. This estimate is subject to revision at the closing of the transaction, pending the outcome of due diligence performed prior to closing. Residential whole loans purchased under flow arrangements with loan origination partners are generally recorded at the transaction settlement date. Recorded amounts of residential whole loans for which the closing of the purchase transaction is yet to occur are not eligible to be pledged as collateral against any financing agreement until the closing of the purchase transaction. Interest income, credit related losses and changes in the fair value of loans held at fair value are recorded post settlement for acquired loans and until transaction settlement for sold loans (see Notes 3, 6, 7, 14 and 15).
Residential Whole Loans at Carrying Value
Purchased Performing Loans
Acquisitions of Purchased Performing Loans to date have been primarily comprised of: (i) loans to finance (or refinance) one-to-four family residential properties that are not considered to meet the definition of a “Qualified Mortgage” in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Non-QM loans”), (ii) short-term business purpose loans collateralized by residential properties made to non-occupant borrowers who intend to rehabilitate and sell the property for a profit (“Rehabilitation loans” or “Fix and Flip loans”), (iii) loans to finance (or refinance) non-owner occupied one-to four-family residential properties that are rented to one or more tenants (“Single-family rental loans”), and (iv) previously originated loans secured by residential real estate that is generally owner occupied (“Seasoned performing loans”). Purchased Performing Loans are initially recorded at their purchase price. Interest income on Purchased Performing Loans acquired at par is accrued based on each loan’s current interest bearing balance and current interest rate, net of related servicing costs. Interest income on such loans purchased at a premium/discount to par is recorded each period based on the contractual coupon net of any amortization of premium or accretion of discount, adjusted for actual prepayment activity. For loans acquired with related servicing rights retained by the seller, interest income is reported net of related serving costs.
An allowance for credit losses is recorded at acquisition, and maintained on an ongoing basis, for all losses expected over the life of the respective loan. Any required credit loss allowance would reduce the net carrying value of the loan with a corresponding charge to earnings, and may increase or decrease over time. Significant judgments are required in determining any allowance for credit loss, including assumptions regarding the loan cash flows expected to be collected, the value of the underlying collateral and the ability of the Company to collect on any other forms of security, such as a personal guaranty provided either by the borrower or an affiliate of the borrower. Income recognition is suspended, and interest accruals are reversed against income, for loans at the earlier of the date at which payments become 90 days past due or when, in the opinion of management, a full recovery of income and principal becomes doubtful (i.e., such loans are placed on nonaccrual status). For nonaccrual loans other than Fix and Flip loans, all payments are applied to principal under the cost recovery method. For nonaccrual Fix and Flip loans, interest income is recorded under the cash basis method as interest payments are received. Interest accruals are resumed when the loan becomes contractually current and performance is demonstrated to be resumed. A loan is written off when it is no longer realizable and/or it is legally discharged. Modified loans are considered “troubled debt restructurings” if the Company grants a concession to a borrower who is experiencing financial difficulty (including the interpretation of this definition set forth in OCC Bulletin 2020-35).
Charge-offs to the allowance for loan losses occur when losses are confirmed through the receipt of cash or other consideration from the completion of a sale; when a modification or restructuring takes place in which we grant a concession to a borrower or agree to a discount in full or partial satisfaction of the loan; when we take ownership and control of the underlying collateral in full satisfaction of the loan; when loans are reclassified as other investments; or when significant collection efforts have ceased and it is highly likely that a loss has been realized.
The aggregate allowance for credit losses is equal to the sum of the losses expected over the life of each respective loan. Expected losses are generally calculated based on the estimated probability of default and loss severity of loans in the portfolio, which involves projecting each loan’s expected cash flows based on their contractual terms, expected prepayments, and estimated default and loss severity rates. The results were not discounted. The default and severity rates were estimated based on the following steps: (i) obtained the Company’s historical experience through an entire economic cycle for each loan type or, to the extent the Company did not have sufficient historical loss experience for a given loan type, publicly available data derived from the historical loss experience of certain banks, which data the Company believes is generally representative of its portfolio, (ii) obtained historical economic data (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) over the same period, and (iii) estimated default and severity rates during three distinct future periods based on historical default and severity rates during periods when economic conditions similar to those forecasted were experienced. The default and severity rates were
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
applied to the estimated amount of loans outstanding during each future period, based on contractual terms and expected prepayments. Expected prepayments are estimated based on historical experience and current and expected future economic conditions, including market interest rates. The three future periods were as follows: (i) a one-year forecast of economic conditions based on U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation, followed by (ii) a two-year “reversion” period during which economic conditions (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) are projected to revert to historical averages on a straight line basis, followed by (iii) the remaining life of each loan, during which period economic conditions (U.S. unemployment rates and home price appreciation) are projected to equal historical averages. In addition, a liability is established (and recorded in Other Liabilities) each period using a similar methodology for committed but undrawn loan amounts. The Company forecasts future economic conditions based on forecasts provided by an external preparer of economic forecasts, as well as its own knowledge of the market and its portfolio. The Company generally considers multiple scenarios and selects the one that it believes results in the most reasonable estimate of expected losses. The Company may apply qualitative adjustments to these results as further described in Note 3. For certain loans where foreclosure has been deemed to be probable, loss estimates are based on whether the value of the underlying collateral is sufficient to recover the carrying value of the loan. This methodology has not changed from the calculation of the allowance for credit losses on January 1, 2020 pursuant to the transition to Accounting Standards Update 2016-13 as described below under “New Accounting Standards and Interpretations,” other than a change in the reversion period from one year to two years to reflect the expected ongoing impact of current conditions (see Note 3).
Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans
The Company has elected to account for these loans as credit deteriorated as they have experienced a more-than-insignificant deterioration in credit quality since origination and were acquired at discounted prices that reflect, in part, the impaired credit history of the borrower. Substantially all of these loans have previously experienced payment delinquencies and the amount owed may exceed the value of the property pledged as collateral. Consequently, these loans generally have a higher likelihood of default than newly originated mortgage loans with loan-to-value ratios (“LTVs”) of 80% or less to creditworthy borrowers. The Company believes that amounts paid to acquire these loans represent fair market value at the date of acquisition. Loans considered credit deteriorated are initially recorded at the purchase price on a net basis, after establishing an initial allowance for credit losses (their initial cost basis is equal to their purchase price plus the initial allowance for credit losses). Subsequent to acquisition, the gross recorded amount for these loans reflects the initial cost basis, plus accretion of interest income, less principal and interest cash flows received. These loans are presented on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets at carrying value, which reflects the recorded cost basis reduced by any allowance for credit losses. Interest income on such loans purchased is recorded each period based on the contractual coupon net of amortization of the difference between their cost basis and unpaid principal balance (“UPB”), subject to the Company’s nonaccrual policy.
Residential Whole Loans at Fair Value
Certain of the Company’s residential whole loans are presented at fair value on its consolidated balance sheets as a result of a fair value election made at the time of acquisition. For the majority of these loans, there is significant uncertainty associated with estimating the timing of and amount of cash flows that will be collected. Further, the cash flows ultimately collected may be dependent on the value of the property securing the loan. Consequently, the Company considers that accounting for these loans at fair value should result in a better reflection over time of the economic returns for the majority of these loans. The Company determines the fair value of its residential whole loans held at fair value after considering portfolio valuations obtained from a third-party that specializes in providing valuations of residential mortgage loans and trading activity observed in the market place. Subsequent changes in fair value are reported in current period earnings and presented in Net (loss)/gain on residential whole loans measured at fair value through earnings on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
Cash received (or accrued) representing coupon interest payments on residential whole loans held at fair value is not included in Interest Income, but rather is included in Net (loss)/gain on residential whole loans measured at fair value through earnings on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. Cash outflows associated with loan-related advances made by the Company on behalf of the borrower are included in the basis of the loan and are reflected in unrealized gains or losses reported each period.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(c) Residential Mortgage Securities
Prior to the quarter ended June 30, 2020, the Company had invested in residential MBS that are issued or guaranteed as to principal and/or interest by a federally chartered corporation, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), or an agency of the U.S. Government, such as the Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”) (collectively, “Agency MBS”), and residential MBS that are not guaranteed by any agency of the U.S. Government or any federally chartered corporation (“Non-Agency MBS”). The Company disposed of its investments in Agency MBS during 2020 and has substantially reduced its investments in Non-Agency MBS. In addition, the Company has investments in CRT securities that are issued by or sponsored by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The coupon payments on CRT securities are paid by the issuer and the principal payments received are dependent on the performance of loans in either a reference pool or an actual pool of loans. As the loans in the underlying pool are paid, the principal balance of the CRT securities is paid. As an investor in a CRT security, the Company may incur a principal loss if the performance of the actual or reference pool loans results in either an actual or calculated loss that exceeds the credit enhancement of the security owned by the Company.
Designation
MBS that the Company generally intends to hold until maturity, but that it may sell from time to time as part of the overall management of its business, are designated as “available-for-sale” (“AFS”). Such MBS are carried at their fair value with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings (except when an allowance for loan losses is recognized, as discussed below) and reported in Accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss) (“AOCI”), a component of Stockholders’ Equity.
Upon the sale of an AFS security, any unrealized gain or loss is reclassified out of AOCI to earnings as a realized gain or loss using the specific identification method.
The Company had elected the fair value option for certain of its previously held Agency MBS that it did not intend to hold to maturity. These securities were carried at their fair value with changes in fair value included in earnings for the period and reported in Other Income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
The Company has elected the fair value option for certain of its CRT securities as it considers this method of accounting to more appropriately reflect the risk-sharing structure of these securities. Such securities are carried at their fair value with changes in fair value included in earnings for the period and reported in Other Income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
Revenue Recognition, Premium Amortization and Discount Accretion
Interest income on securities is accrued based on their outstanding principal balance and their contractual terms. Premiums and discounts associated with Agency MBS and Non-Agency MBS assessed as high credit quality at the time of purchase are amortized into interest income over the life of such securities using the effective yield method. Adjustments to premium amortization are made for actual prepayment activity.
Determination of Fair Value for Residential Mortgage Securities
In determining the fair value of the Company’s residential mortgage securities, management considers a number of observable market data points, including prices obtained from pricing services, brokers and repurchase agreement counterparties, dialogue with market participants, as well as management’s observations of market activity (see Note 14).
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Allowance for credit losses
When the fair value of an AFS security is less than its amortized cost at the balance sheet date, the security is considered impaired. The Company assesses its impaired securities, as well as securities for which a credit loss allowance had been previously recorded, on at least a quarterly basis and determines whether any changes to the allowance for credit losses are required. If the Company intends to sell an impaired security, or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the impaired security before its anticipated recovery, then the Company must recognize a write-down through charges to earnings equal to the entire difference between the investment’s amortized cost and its fair value at the balance sheet date. If the Company does not expect to sell an impaired security, only the portion of the impairment related to credit losses is recognized through a loss allowance charged to earnings with the remainder recognized through AOCI on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Impairments recognized through other comprehensive income/(loss) (“OCI”) do not impact earnings. Credit loss allowances are subject to reversal through earnings resulting from improvements in expected cash flows. The determination as to whether to record (or reverse) a credit loss allowance is subjective, as such determinations are based on factual information available at the time of assessment as well as the Company’s estimates of future performance and cash flow projections. As a result, the timing and amount of losses constitute material estimates that are susceptible to significant change (see Note 4).
Balance Sheet Presentation
The Company’s residential mortgage securities pledged as collateral against financing agreements and interest rate swap agreements (“Swaps”) are included on the consolidated balance sheets with the fair value of the securities pledged disclosed parenthetically. Purchases and sales of securities are recorded on the trade date.
(d) MSR-Related Assets
The Company has 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. These financial instruments, which are referred to as MSR-related assets, are discussed in more detail below. The Company’s MSR-related assets pledged as collateral against repurchase agreements are included in the consolidated balance sheets with the amounts pledged disclosed parenthetically. Purchases and sales of MSR-related assets are recorded on the trade date (see Notes 4, 6, 7 and 14).
Term Notes Backed by MSR-Related Collateral
The Company has invested in term notes that are issued by special purpose vehicles (“SPV”) that have acquired rights to receive cash flows representing the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with certain MSRs. The Company considers payment of principal and interest on these term notes to be largely dependent on the cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs as this impacts the cash flows available to the SPV that issued the term notes. Credit risk borne by the holders of the term notes is also mitigated by structural credit support in the form of over-collateralization. Credit support is also provided by a corporate guarantee from the ultimate parent or sponsor of the SPV that is intended to provide for payment of interest and principal to the holders of the term notes should cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs be insufficient.
The Company’s term notes backed by MSR-related collateral are treated as AFS securities and reported at fair value on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings and reported in AOCI, subject to impairment and loss allowances. Interest income is recognized on an accrual basis on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The Company’s valuation process for such notes is similar to that used for residential mortgage securities and considers a number of observable market data points, including prices obtained from pricing services, brokers and repurchase agreement counterparties, dialogue with market participants, as well as management’s observations of market activity. Other factors taken into consideration include estimated changes in fair value of the related underlying MSR collateral, as applicable, and the financial performance of the ultimate parent or sponsoring entity of the issuer, which has provided a guarantee that is intended to provide for payment of interest and principal to the holders of the term notes should cash flows generated by the related underlying MSR collateral be insufficient.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Corporate Loans
The Company has made or participated in loans to provide financing to entities that originate residential mortgage loans and own the related MSRs. These corporate loans are generally secured by certain MSRs, as well as certain other unencumbered assets owned by the borrower.
Corporate loans are recorded on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets at the drawn amount, on which interest income is recognized on an accrual basis on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, subject to loss allowances. Commitment fees received on the undrawn amount are deferred and recognized as interest income over the remaining loan term at the time of draw. At the end of the commitment period, any remaining deferred commitment fees are recorded as Other Income on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The Company evaluates the recoverability of its corporate loans on a quarterly basis considering various factors, including the current status of the loan, changes in the fair value of the MSRs that secure the loan and the recent financial performance of the borrower.
(e) Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on deposit with financial institutions and investments in money market funds, all of which have original maturities of three months or less. Cash and cash equivalents may also include cash pledged as collateral to the Company by its financing counterparties as a result of reverse margin calls (i.e., margin calls made by the Company). The Company did not hold any cash pledged by its counterparties at December 31, 2020 and 2019. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $814.4 million and $70.6 million, respectively. At December 31, 2020, the Company had $752.4 million of investments in overnight money market funds, which are not bank deposits and are not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or any other government agency. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $39.6 million worth of investments in overnight money market funds. In addition, deposits in FDIC insured accounts generally exceed insured limits (see Notes 7 and 14).
(f) Restricted Cash
Restricted cash represents the Company’s cash held by its counterparties in connection with certain of the Company’s Swaps and/or financing agreements that is not available to the Company for general corporate purposes. Restricted cash may be applied against amounts due to financing agreement and/or Swap counterparties, or may be returned to the Company when the related collateral requirements are exceeded or at the maturity of the Swap and/or financing agreements. The Company had aggregate restricted cash held as collateral or otherwise in connection with its financing agreements and/or Swaps of $7.2 million and $64.0 million at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively (see Notes 5(c), 6, 7 and 14).
(g) Real Estate Owned (“REO”)
REO represents real estate acquired by the Company, including through foreclosure, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or purchased in connection with the acquisition of residential whole loans. REO acquired through foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure is initially recorded at fair value less estimated selling costs. REO acquired in connection with the acquisition of residential whole loans is initially recorded at its purchase price. Subsequent to acquisition, REO is reported, at each reporting date, at the lower of the current carrying amount or fair value less estimated selling costs and for presentation purposes is included in Other assets on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Changes in fair value that result in an adjustment to the reported amount of an REO property that has a fair value at or below its carrying amount are reported in Other Income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The Company has acquired certain properties that it holds for investment purposes, including rentals to third parties. These properties are held at their historical basis less depreciation, and are subject to impairment. Related rental income and expenses are recorded in Other Income, net (see Note 5).
(h) Depreciation
Leasehold Improvements, Real estate and Other Depreciable Assets
Depreciation is computed on the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the related assets or, in the case of leasehold improvements, over the shorter of the useful life or the lease term. Furniture, fixtures, computers and related hardware have estimated useful lives ranging from five to eight years at the time of purchase. The building component of real estate held-for-investment is depreciated over 27.5 years.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(i) Loan Securitization and Other Debt Issuance Costs
Loan securitization related costs are costs associated with the issuance of beneficial interests by consolidated VIEs and incurred by the Company in connection with various financing transactions completed by the Company. These costs may include underwriting, rating agency, legal, accounting and other fees. Such costs, which reflect deferred charges (unless the debt is recorded at fair value, as discussed below), are included on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets as a direct deduction from the corresponding debt liability. These deferred charges are amortized as an adjustment to interest expense using the effective interest method. For certain financing agreements, such costs are amortized over the shorter of the period to the expected or stated legal maturity of the debt instruments. The Company periodically reviews the recoverability of these deferred costs and, in the event an impairment charge is required, such amount will be included in Operating and Other Expense on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
(j) Financing Agreements
The Company finances the majority of its residential mortgage assets with financing agreements that include repurchase agreements and other forms of collateralized financing. Under repurchase agreements, the Company sells assets to a lender and agrees to repurchase the same assets in the future for a price that is higher than the original sale price. The difference between the sale price that the Company receives and the repurchase price that the Company pays represents interest paid to the lender. Although legally structured as sale and repurchase transactions, the Company accounts for repurchase agreements as secured borrowings. Under its repurchase agreements and other forms of collateralized financing, the Company pledges its assets as collateral to secure the borrowing, in an amount which is equal to a specified percentage of the fair value of the pledged collateral, while the Company retains beneficial ownership of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of a repurchase financing, unless the repurchase financing is renewed with the same counterparty, the Company is required to repay the loan including any accrued interest and concurrently receives back its pledged collateral from the lender. With the consent of the lender, the Company may renew a repurchase financing at the then prevailing financing terms. Margin calls, whereby a lender requires that the Company pledge additional assets or cash as collateral to secure borrowings under its repurchase financing with such lender, are routinely experienced by the Company when the value of the assets pledged as collateral declines as a result of principal amortization and prepayments or due to changes in market interest rates, spreads or other market conditions. The Company also may make margin calls on counterparties when collateral values increase.
The Company’s repurchase financings collateralized by residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets typically have terms ranging from one month to six months at inception, while the majority of our financing arrangements collateralized by residential whole loans have terms of twelve months or longer. Should a counterparty decide not to renew a financing arrangement at maturity, the Company must either refinance elsewhere or be in a position to satisfy the obligation. If, during the term of a financing, a lender should default on its obligation, the Company might experience difficulty recovering its pledged assets which could result in an unsecured claim against the lender for the difference between the amount loaned to the Company plus interest due to the counterparty and the fair value of the collateral pledged by the Company to such lender, including accrued interest receivable on such collateral (see Notes 6, 7 and 14).
The Company has elected the fair value option on certain of its financing agreements. These agreements are reported at their fair value, with changes in fair value being recorded in earnings each period (or other comprehensive income, to the extent the change results from a change in instrument specific credit risk), as further detailed in Note 6. Financing costs, including “up front” fees paid at inception related to financing agreements at fair value are expensed as incurred. Interest expense is recorded based on the current interest rate in effect for the related agreement.
(k) Equity-Based Compensation
Compensation expense for equity-based awards that are subject to vesting conditions, is recognized ratably over the vesting period of such awards, based upon the fair value of such awards at the grant date.
The Company has made annual grants of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) certain of which cliff vest after a three-year period, subject only to continued employment, and others of which cliff vest after a three-year period, subject to both continued employment and the achievement of certain performance criteria based on a formula tied to the Company’s achievement of average total shareholder return during that three-year period, as well as the total shareholder return (“TSR”) of the Company relative to the TSR of a group of peer companies (over the three-year period) selected by the Compensation Committee of the
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Company’s Board of Directors (the “Compensation Committee”) at the date of grant. The features in these awards related to the attainment of total shareholder return over a specified period constitute a “market condition”, which impacts the amount of compensation expense recognized for these awards. Specifically, the uncertainty regarding the achievement of the market condition was reflected in the grant date fair valuation of the RSUs, which is recognized as compensation expense over the relevant vesting period. The amount of compensation expense recognized is not dependent on whether the market condition was or will be achieved.
The Company makes dividend equivalent payments in connection with certain of its equity-based awards. A dividend equivalent is a right to receive a distribution equal to the dividend distributions that would be paid on a share of the Company’s common stock. Dividend equivalents may be granted as a separate instrument or may be a right associated with the grant of another award (e.g., an RSU) under the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (the “Equity Plan”), and they are paid in cash or other consideration at such times and in accordance with such rules, terms and conditions, as the Compensation Committee may determine in its discretion. Payments pursuant to dividend equivalents are generally charged to Stockholders’ Equity to the extent that the attached equity awards are expected to vest. Compensation expense is recognized for payments made for dividend equivalents to the extent that the attached equity awards (i) do not or are not expected to vest and (ii) grantees are not required to return payments of dividends or dividend equivalents to the Company (see Notes 2(l) and 13).
(l) Earnings per Common Share (“EPS”)
Basic EPS is computed using the two-class method, which includes the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period and an estimate of other securities that participate in dividends, such as the Company’s dividend equivalents attached to/associated with RSUs, to arrive at total common equivalent shares. In applying the two-class method, earnings are allocated to both shares of common stock and estimated securities that participate in dividends based on their respective weighted-average shares outstanding for the period. For the diluted EPS calculation, common equivalent shares are further adjusted for the effect of RSUs outstanding that are unvested and have dividends that are subject to forfeiture, and for the effect of outstanding warrants, using the treasury stock method. Under the treasury stock method, common equivalent shares are calculated assuming that all dilutive common stock equivalents are exercised and the proceeds, along with future compensation expenses associated with such instruments (if any), are used to repurchase shares of the Company’s outstanding common stock at the average market price during the reported period. In addition, the Company’s Convertible Senior Notes are included in the calculation of diluted EPS if the assumed conversion into common shares is dilutive, using the “if-converted” method. This involves adding back the periodic interest expense associated with the Convertible Senior Notes to the numerator and by adding the shares that would be issued in an assumed conversion (regardless of whether the conversion option is in or out of the money) to the denominator for the purposes of calculating diluted EPS (see Note 12).
(m) Comprehensive Income/(Loss)
The Company’s comprehensive income/(loss) available to common stock and participating securities includes net income, the change in net unrealized gains/(losses) on its AFS securities and derivative hedging instruments (to the extent that such changes are not recorded in earnings), adjusted by realized net gains/(losses) reclassified out of AOCI for sold AFS securities and terminated hedging relationships, as well as the portion of unrealized gains/(losses) on its financing agreements held at fair value related to instrument-specific credit risk, and is reduced by dividends declared on the Company’s preferred stock and issuance costs of redeemed preferred stock.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(n) U.S. Federal Income Taxes
The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the “Code”), and the corresponding provisions of state law. The Company expects to operate in a manner that will enable it to satisfy the various requirements to maintain its status as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. In order to maintain its status as a REIT, the Company must, among other things, distribute at least 90% of its REIT taxable income (excluding net long-term capital gains) to stockholders in the timeframe permitted by the Code. As long as the Company maintains its status as a REIT, the Company will not be subject to regular federal income tax to the extent that it distributes 100% of its REIT taxable income (including net long-term capital gains) to its stockholders within the permitted timeframe. Should this not occur, the Company would be subject to federal taxes at prevailing corporate tax rates on the difference between its REIT taxable income and the amounts deemed to be distributed for that tax year. As the Company’s objective is to distribute 100% of its REIT taxable income to its stockholders within the permitted timeframe, no provision for current or deferred income taxes has been made in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Should the Company incur a liability for corporate income tax, such amounts would be recorded as REIT income tax expense on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. Furthermore, if the Company fails to distribute during each calendar year, or by the end of January following the calendar year in the case of distributions with declaration and record dates falling in the last three months of the calendar year, at least the sum of (i) 85% of its REIT ordinary income for such year, (ii) 95% of its REIT capital gain income for such year, and (iii) any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, the Company would be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the excess of the required distribution over the amounts actually distributed. To the extent that the Company incurs interest, penalties or related excise taxes in connection with its tax obligations, including as a result of its assessment of uncertain tax positions, such amounts will be included in Operating and Other Expense on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
In addition, the Company has elected to treat certain of its subsidiaries as TRS. In general, a TRS may hold assets and engage in activities that the Company cannot hold or engage in directly and generally may engage in any real estate or non-real estate-related business. Generally, a domestic TRS is subject to U.S. federal, state and local corporate income taxes. Since a portion of the Company’s business is conducted through one or more TRS, the net taxable income earned by its domestic TRS, if any, is subject to corporate income taxation. To maintain the Company’s REIT election, no more than 20% of the value of the Company’s assets at the end of each calendar quarter may consist of stock or securities in TRS. For purposes of the determination of U. S. federal and state income taxes, the Company’s subsidiaries that elected to be treated as TRS record current or deferred income taxes based on differences (both permanent and timing) between the determination of their taxable income and net income under GAAP. No net deferred tax benefit was recorded by the Company in 2020 or 2019, related to the net taxable losses in the TRS, since a valuation allowance for the full amount of the associated deferred tax asset of approximately $74.1 million was recognized as its recovery is not considered more likely than not. The related net operating loss carryforwards generated prior to 2018 will begin to expire in 2034; those generated in 2020, 2019, and 2018 can be carried back to each of the five taxable years preceding the taxable year of such loss and thereafter can be carried forward and do not expire.
Based on its analysis of any potentially uncertain tax positions, the Company concluded that it does not have any material uncertain tax positions that meet the relevant recognition or measurement criteria as of December 31, 2020, 2019 or 2018. As of the date of this filing, the Company’s tax returns for tax years 2017 through 2019 are open to examination.
(o) Derivative Financial Instruments
The Company may use a variety of derivative instruments to economically hedge a portion of its exposure to market risks, including interest rate risk and prepayment risk. The objective of the Company’s risk management strategy is to reduce fluctuations in net book value over a range of interest rate scenarios. In particular, the Company attempts to mitigate the risk of the cost of its variable rate liabilities increasing during a period of rising interest rates. The Company’s derivative instruments have generally been comprised of Swaps, the majority of which were designated as cash flow hedges against the interest rate risk associated with its borrowings.
Swaps
The Company documents its risk-management policies, including objectives and strategies, as they relate to its hedging activities and the relationship between the hedging instrument and the hedged liability for all Swaps designated as hedging transactions. The Company assesses, both at the inception of a hedge and on a quarterly basis thereafter, whether or not the hedge is “highly effective.”
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
During the first quarter of 2020, the Company terminated all of its Swaps. Prior to their termination, Swaps were carried on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets at fair value, in Other assets, if their fair value was positive, or in Other liabilities, if their fair value was negative. Changes in the fair value of the Company’s Swaps previously designated in hedging transactions are recorded in OCI provided that the hedge remains effective. Periodic payments accrued in connection with Swaps designated as hedges are included in interest expense and are treated as an operating cash flow.
The Company discontinues hedge accounting on a prospective basis and recognizes changes in fair value through earnings when: (i) it is determined that the derivative is no longer effective in offsetting cash flows of a hedged item (including forecasted transactions); (ii) it is no longer probable that the forecasted transaction will occur; or (iii) it is determined that designating the derivative as a hedge is no longer appropriate (see Notes 5(c), 7 and 14).
Changes in the fair value of the Company’s Swaps not designated in hedging transactions are recorded in Other income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
(p) Fair Value Measurements and the Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
The Company’s presentation of fair value for its financial assets and liabilities is determined within a framework that stipulates that the fair value of a financial asset or liability is an exchange price in an orderly transaction between market participants to sell the asset or transfer the liability in the market in which the reporting entity would transact for the asset or liability, that is, the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability. The transaction to sell the asset or transfer the liability is a hypothetical transaction at the measurement date, considered from the perspective of a market participant that holds the asset or owes the liability. This definition of fair value focuses on exit price and prioritizes the use of market-based inputs over entity-specific inputs when determining fair value. In addition, the framework for measuring fair value establishes a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the observability of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability as of the measurement date.
In addition to the financial instruments that it is required to report at fair value, the Company has elected the fair value option for certain of its financial assets and liabilities at the time of acquisition or issuance. Subsequent changes in the fair value of these financial instruments are generally reported in Other income, net, in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. A decision to elect the fair value option for an eligible financial instrument, which may be made on an instrument by instrument basis, is irrevocable (see Notes 2(b), 2(c), 3, 4, and 14).
(q) Variable Interest Entities
An entity is referred to as a VIE if it meets at least one of the following criteria: (i) the entity has equity that is insufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without the additional subordinated financial support of other parties; or (ii) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (a) the power to direct the activities of an entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; (b) the obligation to absorb the expected losses; or (c) the right to receive the expected residual returns; or (iii) the holders of the equity investment at risk have disproportional voting rights and the entity’s activities are conducted on behalf of the investor that has disproportionately few voting rights.
The Company consolidates a VIE when it has both the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the VIE and a right to receive benefits or absorb losses of the entity that could be potentially significant to the VIE. The Company is required to reconsider its evaluation of whether to consolidate a VIE each reporting period, based upon changes in the facts and circumstances pertaining to the VIE.
The Company has entered into several financing transactions which resulted in the Company forming entities to facilitate these transactions. In determining the accounting treatment to be applied to these transactions, the Company concluded that the entities used to facilitate these transactions are VIEs and that they should be consolidated. If the Company had determined that consolidation was not required, it would have then assessed whether the transfers of the underlying assets would qualify as sales or should be accounted for as secured financings under GAAP (see Note 15).
The Company also includes on its consolidated balance sheets certain financial assets and liabilities that are acquired/issued by trusts and/or other special purpose entities that have been evaluated as being required to be consolidated by the Company under the applicable accounting guidance.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(r) Offering Costs Related to Issuance and Redemption of Preferred Stock
Offering costs related to the issuance of preferred stock are recorded as a reduction in Additional paid-in capital, a component of Stockholders’ Equity, at the time such preferred stock is issued. On redemption of preferred stock, any excess of the fair value of the consideration transferred to the holders of the preferred stock over the carrying amount of the preferred stock in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets is included in the determination of Net Income Available to Common Stock and Participating Securities in the calculation of EPS.
(s) New Accounting Standards and Interpretations
Accounting Standards Adopted in 2020
Financial Instruments - Credit Losses - Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments
In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-13, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”), which has subsequently been amended by ASUs 2019-11, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, 2019-05, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Targeted Transition Relief, 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, 2018-19, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, 2020-02 Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326)-Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 119 and Update to SEC Section on Effective Date (SEC Update), and 2020-03 Codification Improvements to Financial Instruments. The amendments in ASU 2016-13 require entities to measure all expected credit losses (rather than incurred losses) for financial assets held at the reporting date, based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. ASU 2016-13 also requires enhanced financial statement disclosures to help financial statement users better understand significant estimates and judgments used in estimating credit losses, as well as the credit quality and underwriting standards of an entity’s portfolio. The amendments in this ASU were required to be applied by recording a cumulative-effect adjustment to equity as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective. A prospective transition approach is required for debt securities for which an other than temporary impairment had been recognized before the effective date. The Company adopted the new ASU on January 1, 2020. The impact of adoption was that the allowance for credit losses on Purchased Performing Loans increased by approximately $8.3 million. This transition adjustment was recorded as an increase in the Company’s allowance for credit losses and an adjustment to decrease retained earnings as of the adoption date. In addition, for Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans, the carrying value of the portfolio was adjusted on transition by $62.6 million to include an estimate of the allowance for credit losses as required by the new standard. For financial statement reporting purposes, this adjusted carrying value is presented net of the estimated allowance for credit losses. Consequently, the adjustments recorded on transition for Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans do not result in any adjustment to retained earnings as of the adoption date. The Company does not consider these transition adjustments to be material to its financial position or previously reported GAAP or economic book value.
Under ASU 2016-13, credit losses for available-for-sale debt securities are measured in a manner similar to prior GAAP. However, the amendments in this ASU require that credit losses be recorded through an allowance for credit losses, which will allow subsequent reversals in credit loss estimates to be recognized in current income. In addition, the allowance on available-for-sale debt securities will be limited to the extent that the fair value is less than the amortized cost. Under prior GAAP, credit impairment losses were generally required to be recorded as “other than temporary” impairment, which directly reduced the carrying amount of impaired securities, and was recorded in earnings and was not reversed if expected cash flows subsequently recovered. Under the new guidance, credit impairments on such securities (other than those related to expected sales) are recorded as an allowance for credit losses that is also recorded in earnings, but the allowance can be reversed through earnings in a subsequent period if expected cash flows subsequently recover. Transition to the new available-for-sale debt securities guidance did not result in a change to our retained earnings.
Reference Rate Reform - Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting
In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-04, Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting (“ASU 2020-04”), which has subsequently been amended by ASU 2021-01, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848): Scope. The amendments in this ASU provide temporary optional expedients to ease the financial reporting burden of the expected transition from the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) to an alternative reference rate such as the Secured
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”). The amendments in the ASU are elective and apply to all entities, subject to meeting certain criteria, that have contracts, hedging relationships, and other transactions that reference LIBOR or another reference rate expected to be discontinued because of reference rate reform. The amendments in ASU 2020-04 were effective for all entities as of March 12, 2020 and will generally no longer be available to apply after December 31, 2022. The Company adopted this ASU as of the effective date and will utilize the optional expedients to the extent that they apply to the Company.
3. Residential Whole Loans
Included on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are approximately $5.3 billion and $7.4 billion, respectively, of residential whole loans arising from the Company’s interests in certain trusts established to acquire the loans and certain entities established in connection with its loan securitization transactions. The Company has assessed that these entities are required to be consolidated for financial reporting purposes.
Residential Whole Loans, at Carrying Value
The following table presents the components of the Company’s Residential whole loans, at carrying value at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1) The amortized cost basis of Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans was increased by $62.6 million on January 1, 2020 in connection with the adoption of ASU 2016-13.
The following table presents the components of interest income on the Company’s Residential whole loans, at carrying value for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents additional information regarding the Company’s Residential whole loans, at carrying value at December 31, 2020:
December 31, 2020
December 31, 2019
(1)Weighted average is calculated based on the interest bearing principal balance of each loan within the related category. For loans acquired with servicing rights released by the seller, interest rates included in the calculation do not reflect loan servicing fees. For loans acquired with servicing rights retained by the seller, interest rates included in the calculation are net of servicing fees.
(2)LTV represents the ratio of the total unpaid principal balance of the loan to the estimated value of the collateral securing the related loan as of the most recent date available, which may be the origination date. For Rehabilitation loans, the LTV presented is the ratio of the maximum unpaid principal balance of the loan, including unfunded commitments, to the estimated “after repaired” value of the collateral securing the related loan, where available. For certain Rehabilitation loans, totaling $189.9 million and $269.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively, an after repaired valuation was not obtained and the loan was underwritten based on an “as is” valuation. The weighted average LTV of these loans based on the current unpaid principal balance and the valuation obtained during underwriting, is 68% and 69% at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. Excluded from the calculation of weighted average LTV are certain low value loans secured by vacant lots, for which the LTV ratio is not meaningful.
(3)Excludes loans for which no Fair Isaac Corporation (“FICO”) score is available.
(4)At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 the difference between the Carrying Value and Amortized Cost Basis represents the related allowance for credit losses.
(5)Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans tend to be characterized by varying performance of the underlying borrowers over time, including loans where multiple months of payments are received in a period to bring the loan to current status, followed by months where no payments are received. Accordingly, delinquency information is presented for loans that are more than 90 days past due that are considered to be seriously delinquent.
During the year-ended December 31, 2020, $1.8 billion of Non-QM loans were sold, realizing losses of $273.0 million.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Allowance for Credit Losses
The following table presents a roll-forward of the allowance for credit losses on the Company’s Residential Whole Loans, at Carrying Value:
(1)In connection with purchased Rehabilitation loans, the Company had unfunded commitments of $60.6 million, with an allowance for credit losses of $1.2 million at December 31, 2020. Such allowance is included in “Other liabilities” in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets (see Note 9).
(2)Includes $161.8 million of loans that were assessed for credit losses based on a collateral dependent methodology.
(3)Includes $70.3 million of loans that were assessed for credit losses based on a collateral dependent methodology.
(4)Of the $70.6 million of reserves recorded on adoption of ASU 2016-13, $8.3 million was recorded as an adjustment to stockholders’ equity and $62.4 million was recorded as a “gross up” of the amortized cost basis of Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The Company adopted ASU 2016-13 (“CECL”) on January 1, 2020 (see Note 2). The anticipated impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on expected economic conditions, including forecasted unemployment, home price appreciation, and prepayment rates, for the short to medium term resulted in significantly increased estimates of credit losses recorded under CECL for the first quarter of 2020 for residential whole loans held at carrying value. Since the end of the first quarter, primarily as a result of generally more stable markets and an ongoing economic recovery, the Company has made subsequent revisions to certain macro-economic assumptions, including its estimates related to future rates of unemployment, and has made adjustments to the quantitative model outputs for relevant qualitative factors. The net impact of these assumption revisions and qualitative adjustments has resulted in a reversal of a portion of the allowance for loan loss since the end of the first quarter. The qualitative adjustments, which have the effect of increasing expected loss estimates, were determined based on a variety of factors, including differences between the Company’s loan portfolio and the loan portfolios represented by available proxy data, and differences between current (and expected future) market conditions in comparison to market conditions that occurred in historical periods. Such differences include uncertainty with respect to the ongoing impact of the pandemic, the speed of vaccine deployment and time taken for a significant portion of society to be vaccinated, the extent and timing of government stimulus efforts and heightened political uncertainty. The Company’s estimates of credit losses reflect the Company’s expectation that full recovery to pre-pandemic economic conditions will take an extended period, resulting in increased delinquencies and defaults during this period compared to historical periods. Estimates of credit losses under CECL are highly sensitive to changes in assumptions and current economic conditions have increased the difficulty of accurately forecasting future conditions.
The amortized cost basis of Purchased Performing Loans on nonaccrual status as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 was $373.3 million and $99.9 million, respectively. The amortized cost basis of Purchased Credit Deteriorated Loans on nonaccrual status as of December 31, 2020 was $151.4 million. Because Purchase Credit Deteriorated Loans were previously accounted for in pools, there were no such loans on nonaccrual status as of December 31, 2019. No interest income was recognized from loans on nonaccrual status during the year ended December 31, 2020. At December 31, 2020, there were approximately $130.7 million of loans on nonaccrual status that did not have an associated allowance for credit losses, because they were determined to be collateral dependent and the estimated fair value of the related collateral exceeded the carrying value of each loan.
In periods prior to the adoption of CECL, an allowance for loan losses was recorded when, based on current information and events, it was probable that the Company would be unable to collect all amounts due under the existing contractual terms of the loan agreement. Any required loan loss allowance would reduce the carrying value of the loan with a corresponding charge to earnings. Significant judgments were required in determining any allowance for loan loss, including assumptions regarding the loan cash flows expected to be collected, the value of the underlying collateral and the ability of the Company to collect on any other forms of security, such as a personal guaranty provided either by the borrower or an affiliate of the borrower.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following tables present certain additional credit-related information regarding our residential whole loans:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(1)LTV represents the ratio of the total unpaid principal balance of the loan to the estimated value of the collateral securing the related loan as of the most recent date available, which may be the origination date. For Rehabilitation loans, the LTV presented is the ratio of the maximum unpaid principal balance of the loan, including unfunded commitments, to the estimated “after repaired” value of the collateral securing the related loan, where available. For certain Rehabilitation loans, totaling $189.9 million at December 31, 2020, an after repaired valuation was not obtained and the loan was underwritten based on an “as is” valuation. The weighted average LTV of these loans based on the current unpaid principal balance and the valuation obtained during underwriting, is 68% at December 31, 2020. Certain low value loans secured by vacant lots are categorized as LTV >= 80%.
The following table presents certain information regarding the LTVs of the Company’s Residential whole loans that are 90 days or more delinquent:
(1)LTV represents the ratio of the total unpaid principal balance of the loan to the estimated value of the collateral securing the related loan as of the most recent date available, which may be the origination date. For Rehabilitation loans, the LTV presented is the ratio of the maximum unpaid principal balance of the loan, including unfunded commitments, to the estimated “after repaired” value of the collateral securing the related loan, where available. For certain Rehabilitation loans, an after repaired valuation was not obtained and the loan was underwritten based on an “as is” valuation. Excluded from the calculation of weighted average LTV are certain low value loans secured by vacant lots, for which the LTV ratio is not meaningful.
Residential Whole Loans at Fair Value
Certain of the Company’s residential whole loans are presented at fair value on its consolidated balance sheets as a result of a fair value election made at the time of acquisition. Subsequent changes in fair value are reported in current period earnings and presented in Net gain on residential whole loans measured at fair value through earnings on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents information regarding the Company’s residential whole loans held at fair value at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)LTV represents the ratio of the total unpaid principal balance of the loan, to the estimated value of the collateral securing the related loan. Excluded from the calculation of weighted average LTV are certain low value loans secured by vacant lots, for which the LTV ratio is not meaningful.
The following table presents the components of Net gain on residential whole loans measured at fair value through earnings for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1)Primarily includes gains on liquidation of non-performing loans, including the recovery of delinquent interest payments, recurring coupon interest payments received on mortgage loans that are contractually current, and cash payments received from private mortgage insurance on liquidated loans.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, loans at fair value with an aggregate unpaid principal balance of $24.1 million were sold, realizing net losses of $0.8 million.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
4. Residential Mortgage Securities and MSR-Related Assets
Agency and Non-Agency MBS
MBS investments held during the year ended December 31, 2020 or in prior periods included Agency MBS and Non-Agency MBS which include MBS issued prior to 2008 (“Legacy Non-Agency MBS”). These MBS are secured by: (i) hybrid mortgages (“Hybrids”), which have interest rates that are fixed for a specified period of time and, thereafter, generally adjust annually to an increment over a specified interest rate index; (ii) adjustable-rate mortgages (“ARMs”), which have interest rates that reset annually or more frequently (collectively, “ARM-MBS”); and (iii) 15 and 30 year fixed-rate mortgages for Agency MBS and, for Non-Agency MBS, 30-year and longer-term fixed-rate mortgages. In addition, the Company’s MBS are also comprised of MBS backed by securitized re-performing/non-performing loans (“RPL/NPL MBS”), where the cash flows of the bond may not reflect the contractual cash flows of the underlying collateral. The Company’s RPL/NPL MBS are generally structured with a contractual coupon step-up feature where the coupon increases from 300 - 400 basis points at 36 - 48 months from issuance or sooner. The Company pledges a significant portion of its MBS as collateral against its borrowings under repurchase agreements (see Note 7).
Agency MBS: Agency MBS are guaranteed as to principal and/or interest by a federally chartered corporation, such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, or an agency of the U.S. Government, such as Ginnie Mae. The payment of principal and/or interest on Ginnie Mae MBS is explicitly backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Since the third quarter of 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been under the conservatorship of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which significantly strengthened the backing for these government-sponsored entities. The Company sold its remaining holdings of Agency MBS during the quarter ended June 30, 2020.
Non-Agency MBS: The Company’s Non-Agency MBS are primarily secured by pools of residential mortgages, which are not guaranteed by an agency of the U.S. Government or any federally chartered corporation. Credit risk associated with Non-Agency MBS is regularly assessed as new information regarding the underlying collateral becomes available and based on updated estimates of cash flows generated by the underlying collateral. During the quarter ended June 30, 2020, the Company had sold substantially all of its holdings of Legacy Non-Agency MBS and substantially reduced its holdings of other Non-Agency MBS. The Company sold its remaining Legacy Non-Agency MBS during the quarter ended September 30, 2020.
CRT Securities
CRT securities are debt obligations issued by or sponsored by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The coupon payments on CRT securities are paid by the issuer and the principal payments received are dependent on the performance of loans in either a reference pool or an actual pool of loans. As an investor in a CRT security, the Company may incur a principal loss if the performance of the actual or reference pool loans results in either an actual or calculated loss that exceeds the credit enhancement of the security owned by the Company. The Company assesses the credit risk associated with its investments in CRT securities by assessing the current and expected future performance of the associated loan pool. The Company pledges a portion of its CRT securities as collateral against its borrowings under repurchase agreements (see Note 7).
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following tables present certain information about the Company’s residential mortgage securities at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
December 31, 2020
December 31, 2019
(1)Discount designated as Credit Reserve is generally not expected to be accreted into interest income.
(2)Based on management’s current estimates of future principal cash flows expected to be received.
(3)Includes RPL/NPL MBS, which at December 31, 2020 had a $55.0 million Principal/Current face, $46.9 million amortized cost and $53.9 million fair value. At December 31, 2019, RPL/NPL MBS had a $632.3 million Principal/Current face, $631.8 million amortized cost and $635.0 million fair value.
(4)At December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company expected to recover approximately 99% and 80% of the then-current face amount of Non-Agency MBS, respectively.
(5)Amounts disclosed at December 31, 2020 includes CRT securities with a fair value of $66.2 million for which the fair value option has been elected. Such securities had $551,000 gross unrealized gains and gross unrealized losses of approximately $322,000 at December 31, 2020. Amounts disclosed at December 31, 2019 includes CRT securities with a fair value of $255.4 million for which the fair value option had been elected. Such securities had gross unrealized gains of approximately $6.3 million and gross unrealized losses of approximately $91,000 at December 31, 2019.
(6)Includes principal payments receivable of $614,000 at December 31, 2019, which is not included in the Principal/Current Face.
(7)Amounts disclosed at December 31, 2019 include Agency MBS with a fair value of $280.3 million, for which the fair value option has been elected. Such securities had $4.5 million unrealized gains and no gross unrealized losses at December 31, 2019, respectively.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Sales of Residential Mortgage Securities
The following table presents information about the Company’s sales of its residential mortgage securities for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018. The Company has no continuing involvement with any of the sold securities.
Unrealized Losses on Residential Mortgage Securities
The following table presents information about the Company’s residential mortgage securities that were in an unrealized loss position at December 31, 2020, with respect to which no allowance for credit losses has been recorded:
(1) Based on management’s current estimates of future principal cash flows expected to be received.
(2) Amounts disclosed at December 31, 2020 include CRT securities with a fair value of $62.2 million for which the fair value option has been elected. Such securities had unrealized losses of $322,000 at December 31, 2020.
Gross unrealized losses on the Company’s Non-Agency MBS were $861,000 at December 31, 2020. Based upon the most recent evaluation, the Company does not consider these unrealized losses to require an allowance for credit losses and does not believe that these unrealized losses are credit related, but are rather a reflection of current market yields and/or marketplace bid-ask spreads. The Company has reviewed its Non-Agency MBS that are in an unrealized loss position to identify those securities that require an allowance for credit losses based on an assessment of changes in expected cash flows for such securities, which considers recent bond performance and, where possible, expected future performance of the underlying collateral.
The Company did not recognize an allowance for credit losses (or other than temporary impairment in prior year periods) through earnings related to its MBS for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. However, during the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company recognized an aggregate impairment loss related to its MBS of $63.5 million based on its intent to sell, or the likelihood it will be required to sell, certain securities at such time.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
MSR-Related Assets
(a) Term Notes Backed by MSR-Related Collateral
At December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company had $239.0 million and $1.2 billion, respectively, of term notes issued by SPVs that have acquired rights to receive cash flows representing the servicing fees and/or excess servicing spread associated with certain MSRs. Payment of principal and interest on these term notes is considered to be largely dependent on cash flows generated by the underlying MSRs, as this impacts the cash flows available to the SPV that issued the term notes.
At December 31, 2020, these term notes had an amortized cost of $184.9 million, gross unrealized gains of approximately $54.0 million, a weighted average yield of 12.3% and a weighted average term to maturity of 9.2 years. During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company sold certain term notes for $711.7 million, realizing gains of $28.7 million, respectively. During the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company recognized an impairment loss related to its term notes of $280.8 million based on its intent to sell, or the likelihood it will be required to sell, such notes. At December 31, 2019, these term notes had an amortized cost of $1.2 billion, gross unrealized gains of $5.2 million, a weighted average yield of 4.75% and a weighted average term to maturity of 5.3 years.
(b) Corporate Loans
The Company has made or participated in loans to provide financing to entities that originate residential mortgage loans and own the related MSRs. These corporate loans are secured by MSRs, as well as certain other unencumbered assets owned by the borrower.
The Company has participated in a loan where it committed to lend $32.6 million of which no amount was drawn at December 31, 2020. The facility expires in August 2021. During the remaining commitment period, the Company receives a commitment fee between 0.25% and 1.0% based on the undrawn amount of the loan.
The following table presents a roll-forward of the allowance for credit losses on the Company’s Residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Impact of AFS Securities on AOCI
The following table presents the impact of the Company’s AFS securities on its AOCI for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Interest Income on Residential Mortgage Securities and MSR-Related Assets
The following table presents the components of interest income on the Company’s residential mortgage securities and MSR-related assets for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1)Includes amortization of premium paid net of accretion of purchase discount. For Agency MBS, RPL/NPL MBS and the corporate loan secured by MSRs, interest income is recorded at an effective yield, which reflects net premium amortization/accretion based on actual prepayment activity.
(2)The effective yield adjustment is the difference between the net income calculated using the net yield less the current coupon yield. The net yield may be based on management’s estimates of the amount and timing of future cash flows or in the instrument’s contractual cash flows, depending on the relevant accounting standards.
(3)Includes accretion income recognized due to the impact of redemptions of certain securities that had been previously been purchased at a discount of $14.5 million and $2.7 million during the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.
(4)Includes accretion income recognized due to the impact of redemptions of certain securities that had been previously been purchased at a discount of $329,000 and $1.4 million during the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
5. Other Assets
The following table presents the components of the Company’s Other assets at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1) Includes $61.8 million and $27.3 million of REO that is held-for-investment at December 31, 2020 and 2019.
(a) Real Estate Owned
At December 31, 2020, the Company had 946 REO properties with an aggregate carrying value of $249.7 million. At December 31, 2019, the Company had 1,652 REO properties with an aggregate carrying value of $411.7 million.
At December 31, 2020, $247.2 million of residential real estate property was held by the Company that was acquired either through a completed foreclosure proceeding or from completion of a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure or similar legal agreement. In addition, formal foreclosure proceedings were in process with respect to $116.3 million of residential whole loans held at carrying value and $448.5 million of residential whole loans held at fair value at December 31, 2020.
The following table presents the activity in the Company’s REO for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)Includes net gain recorded on transfer of approximately $5.1 million and $19.8 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019.
(2)During the year ended December 31, 2020, the company sold 1,086 REO properties for consideration of $271.4 million, realizing net gains of approximately $15.1 million. During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company sold 571 REO properties for consideration of $109.2 million, realizing net gains of approximately $7.4 million. These amounts are included in Other Income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(b) Capital Contributions Made to Loan Origination Partners
The Company has made investments in several loan originators as part of its strategy to be a reliable source of capital to select partners from whom it sources residential mortgage loans through both flow arrangements and bulk purchases. To date, such contributions of capital include the following investments (based on their carrying value prior to any impairments): $30.4 million of common equity and $82.1 million of preferred equity. In addition, for certain partners, options or warrants may have also been acquired that provide the Company the ability to increase the level of its investment if certain conditions are met. At the end of each reporting period, or earlier if circumstances warrant, the Company evaluates whether the nature of its interests and other involvement with the investee entity requires the Company to apply equity method accounting or consolidate the results of the investee entity with the Company’s financial results. To date, the nature of the Company’s interests and/or involvement with investee companies has not resulted in consolidation. Further, to the extent that the nature of the Company’s interests has resulted in the need for the Company to apply equity method accounting, the impact of such accounting on the Company’s results for periods subsequent to that in which the Company was determined to have significant influence over the investee company was not material for any period. As the interests acquired to date by the Company generally do not have a readily determinable fair value, the Company accounts for its non-equity method interests (including any acquired options and warrants) in loan originators initially at cost. The carrying value of these investments will be adjusted if it is determined that an impairment has occurred or if there has been a subsequent observable transaction in either the investee company’s equity securities or a similar security that provides evidence to support an adjustment to the carrying value. Following an evaluation of the anticipated impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on economic conditions for the short to medium term, the Company recorded impairment charges of $65.3 million on investments in certain loan origination partners during the year ended December 31, 2020, which was included in “Impairment and other losses on securities available-for-sale and other assets” on the consolidated statements of operations. At December 31, 2020, approximately $738.4 million of the Company’s Residential whole loans, at carrying value were serviced by entities in which the Company has an investment.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(c) Derivative Instruments
The Company’s derivative instruments have been generally comprised of Swaps, the majority of which were designated as cash flow hedges against the interest rate risk associated with certain borrowings. In addition, in connection with managing risks associated with purchases of longer duration Agency MBS, the Company has also entered into Swaps that are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.
In response to the turmoil in the financial markets resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic experienced during the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company unwound all of its approximately $4.1 billion of Swap hedging transactions late in the first quarter in order to recover previously posted margin. Gains or losses associated with these Swap hedging transactions are required to be transferred from AOCI to earnings over the original term of the Swap, if the underlying hedged item or transactions are assessed as probable of occurring. After the closing of several new financing transactions late in the quarter ended June 30, 2020, the Company evaluated its anticipated future financing requirements. The Company concluded that it was no longer probable that certain previously used financing strategies, including those that primarily utilized repurchase agreements with funding costs that reset on a monthly basis, would be used by the Company on an ongoing basis, as this financing strategy had been essentially replaced by the new financing transactions. Consequently, during the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company concluded that it was appropriate to transfer from AOCI to earnings approximately $57.0 million of losses on Swaps that had previously been designated as hedges for accounting purposes, because the hedged transactions were no longer considered probable to occur. This amount is included in Other income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. At December 31, 2020, there are no remaining losses included in AOCI on Swaps previously designated as hedges for accounting purposes.
The following table presents the fair value of the Company’s derivative instruments at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1) Represents Swaps executed bilaterally with a counterparty in the over-the-counter market but then novated to a central clearing house, whereby the central clearing house becomes the counterparty to both of the original counterparties.
Swaps
The following table presents the assets pledged as collateral against the Company’s Swap contracts at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents information about the Company’s Swaps at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1) Each maturity category reflects contractual amortization and/or maturity of notional amounts.
(2) Reflects the benchmark variable rate due from the counterparty at the date presented, which rate adjusts monthly or quarterly based on one-month or three-month LIBOR, respectively.
The following table presents the net impact of the Company’s derivative hedging instruments on its net interest expense and the weighted average interest rate paid and received for such Swaps for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company recorded net losses on Swaps not designated in hedging relationships of approximately $4.3 million, which included $9.4 million of losses realized on the unwind of certain Swaps. During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company recorded net losses on Swaps not designated in hedging relationships of $16.5 million, which included $17.7 million of losses realized on the unwind of certain Swaps. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company recorded net losses on Swaps not designated in hedging relationships of $9.6 million. These amounts are included in Other income, net on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.
Impact of Derivative Hedging Instruments on AOCI
The following table presents the impact of the Company’s derivative hedging instruments on its AOCI for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
6. Financing Agreements
The following tables present the components of the Company’s Financing agreements at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019:
(1) Financing agreements at fair value are reported at estimated fair value each period as a result of the Company’s fair value option election. Other financing arrangements are reported at their carrying value (amortized cost basis) as the fair value option was not elected on these liabilities. Consequently, Total Financing agreements as presented reflects a summation of balances reported at fair value and carrying value.
Set out below is information about the Company’s Financing agreements that existed as of December 31, 2019. During the second quarter of 2020, outstanding repurchase agreement transactions at that time were renegotiated as part of a reinstatement agreement that was entered into by the Company. The Company elected to account for these reinstated transactions under the fair value option from the time these repurchase agreements were reinstated. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2020, such liabilities are reported as Financing agreements at fair value.
(a) Financing Agreements, at Fair Value
During the second quarter of 2020, the Company entered into a $500 million senior secured credit agreement. In addition, in conjunction with its exit from forbearance arrangements, the Company entered into several new asset backed financing arrangements and renegotiated financing arrangements for certain assets with existing lenders, which together resulted in the Company essentially refinancing the majority of its investment portfolio. The Company elected the fair value option on these financing arrangements, primarily to simplify the accounting associated with costs incurred to establish the new facilities or renegotiate existing facilities.
The Company considers that the most relevant feature that distinguishes between the various asset backed financing arrangements is how the financing arrangement is collateralized, including the ability of the lender to make margin calls on the
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Company based on changes in value of the underlying collateral securing the financing. Accordingly, further details are provided below regarding assets that are financed with agreements that have non-mark-to-market collateral provisions and assets that are financed with agreements that have mark-to-market collateral provisions.
Agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions
The Company and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a non-mark-to-market term loan facility with certain lenders with an initial borrowing capacity of $1.65 billion. The Company’s borrowing subsidiaries have pledged, as collateral security for the facility, certain of their residential whole loans (excluding Rehabilitation loans), as well as the equity in subsidiaries that own the loans. The facility has an initial term of two years, which may be extended for up to an additional three years, subject to certain conditions, including the payment of an extension fee and provided that no events of default have occurred. For the initial two year term, the financing cost for the facility will be calculated at a spread over the lender’s financing cost, which, depending on the lender, is expected to be based either on three-month LIBOR, or an index that it expected over time to be closely correlated to changes in three-month LIBOR. At December 31, 2020, the amount financed under this facility was approximately $886.1 million.
In addition, the Company also entered into non-mark-to-market financing facilities on Rehabilitation loans. Under these facilities, Rehabilitation loans, as well as the equity in subsidiaries that own the loans, are pledged as collateral. The facilities have a two year term and the financing cost is calculated at a spread over three-month LIBOR. At December 31, 2020, the amount financed under these facilities was approximately $273.1 million.
The following table presents information with respect to the Company’s financing agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions and associated assets pledged as collateral at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019:
Agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions
In addition to entering into the financing arrangements discussed above, the Company also entered into a reinstatement agreement with certain lending counterparties that facilitated its exit from the forbearance arrangements that the Company had previously entered into. In connection with the reinstatement agreement, terms of its prior financing arrangements on certain residential whole loans, residential mortgage securities, and MSR-related assets were renegotiated and those arrangements were reinstated on a go-forward basis. These financing arrangements continue to contain mark-to-market provisions that permit the lending counterparties to make margin calls on the Company should the value of the pledged collateral decline. The Company is also permitted to recover previously posted margin payments, should values of the pledged collateral subsequently increase. These facilities generally have a maturity ranging from one to three months and can be renewed at the discretion of the lending counterparty at financing costs reflecting prevailing market pricing. At December 31, 2020, the amount financed under these agreements was approximately $1.3 billion.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents information with respect to the Company’s financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions and associated assets pledged as collateral at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019:
(1)Excludes $0 and $1.1 million of unamortized debt issuance costs at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.
(2)At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, includes RPL/NPL MBS with an aggregate fair value of $141.9 million and $238.8 million, respectively, obtained in connection with the Company’s loan securitization transactions that are eliminated in consolidation.
(3) Haircut represents the percentage amount by which the collateral value is contractually required to exceed the loan amount.
In addition, the Company had cash pledged as collateral in connection with its financing agreements of $7.2 million and $25.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents repricing information (excluding the impact of associated derivative hedging instruments, if any) about the Company’s financing agreements that have non-mark-to-market collateral provisions as well as those that have mark-to-market collateral provisions, at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019:
The Company had financing agreements, including repurchase agreements and other forms of secured financing with 7 and 28 counterparties at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. The following table presents information with respect to each counterparty under financing agreements for which the Company had greater than 5% of stockholders’ equity at risk in the aggregate at December 31, 2020:
(1)As rated at December 31, 2020 by S&P, Moody’s and Fitch, Inc., respectively. The counterparty rating presented is the lowest published for these entities.
(2)The amount at risk reflects the difference between (a) the amount loaned to the Company through financing agreements, including interest payable, and (b) the cash and the fair value of the securities pledged by the Company as collateral, including accrued interest receivable on such securities.
(3)Includes $25.4 million at risk with Goldman Sachs and $161.7 million at risk with Goldman Sachs Bank USA.
(4)Includes amounts at risk with various Athene affiliates that collectively exceed 5% of stockholders’ equity.
Senior Secured Term Loan Facility
On June 26,2020, the Company entered into a $500 million senior secured term loan facility (the “Term Loan Facility”) with certain funds, accounts and/or clients managed by affiliates of Apollo Global Management, Inc. and affiliates of Athene Holding Ltd. The outstanding balance of the Term Loan Facility was repaid and the Term Loan Facility was terminated prior to December 31, 2020.
(b) Other Financing Agreements
These arrangements were either entered into prior to the Company experiencing financial difficulties related to the COVID-19 pandemic, or, in the case of the Company’s recent securitizations, after the Company’s exit from forbearance, and
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
were not subject to the forbearance arrangements that were entered into by the Company or any negotiations related to the Company’s exit from those arrangements.
Additional information regarding the Company’s Other financing arrangements as of December 31, 2020, is included below:
Securitized Debt
Securitized debt represents third-party liabilities of consolidated VIEs and excludes liabilities of the VIEs acquired by the Company that are eliminated in consolidation. The third-party beneficial interest holders in the VIEs have no recourse to the general credit of the Company. The weighted average fixed rate on the securitized debt was 2.11% at December 31, 2020 (see Notes 10 and 15 for further discussion).
Convertible Senior Notes
On June 3, 2019, the Company issued $230.0 million in aggregate principal amount of its Convertible Senior Notes in an underwritten public offering, including an additional $30.0 million issued pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional Convertible Senior Notes. The total net proceeds the Company received from the offering were approximately $223.3 million, after deducting offering expenses and the underwriting discount. The Convertible Senior Notes bear interest at a fixed rate of 6.25% per year, paid semiannually on June 15 and December 15 of each year commencing December 15, 2019 and will mature on June 15, 2024, unless earlier converted, redeemed or repurchased in accordance with their terms. The Convertible Senior Notes are convertible at the option of the holders at any time until the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date into shares of the Company’s common stock based on an initial conversion rate of 125.7387 shares of the Company’s common stock for each $1,000 principal amount of the Convertible Senior Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $7.95 per share of common stock. The Convertible Senior Notes have an effective interest rate, including the impact of amortization to interest expense of debt issuance costs, of 6.94%. The Company does not have the right to redeem the Convertible Senior Notes prior to maturity, except to the extent necessary to preserve its status as a REIT, in which case the Company may redeem the Convertible Senior Notes, in whole or in part, at a redemption price equal to the principal amount redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest.
The Convertible Senior Notes are the Company’s senior unsecured obligations and are effectively junior to all of the Company’s secured indebtedness, which includes the Company’s repurchase agreements and other financing arrangements, to the extent of the value of the collateral securing such indebtedness and equal in right of payment to the Company’s existing and future senior unsecured obligations, including the Senior Notes.
Senior Notes
On April 11, 2012, the Company issued $100.0 million in aggregate principal amount of its Senior Notes in an underwritten public offering. The Senior Notes bear interest at a fixed rate of 8.00% per year. The Senior Notes have an effective interest rate, including the impact of amortization to interest expense of debt issuance costs, of 8.31%. On January 6, 2021, the Company redeemed all of its outstanding Senior Notes (see Note 17).
7. Collateral Positions
The Company pledges securities or cash as collateral to its counterparties in relation to certain of its financing arrangements. In addition, the Company receives securities or cash as collateral pursuant to financing provided under reverse repurchase agreements. The Company exchanges collateral with its counterparties based on changes in the fair value, notional amount and term of the associated financing arrangements and Swap contracts, as applicable. In connection with these margining practices, either the Company or its counterparty may be required to pledge cash or securities as collateral. When the Company’s pledged collateral exceeds the required margin, the Company may initiate a reverse margin call, at which time the counterparty may either return the excess collateral or provide collateral to the Company in the form of cash or equivalent securities.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The Company’s assets pledged as collateral are described in Notes 2(f) - Restricted Cash, 5(c) - Derivative Instruments and 6 - Financing Agreements. The total fair value of assets pledged as collateral with respect to the Company’s borrowings under its financing arrangements and/or derivative hedging instruments was $4.1 billion and $11.3 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. An aggregate of $24.6 million and $57.2 million of accrued interest on those assets had also been pledged as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.
8. Offsetting Assets and Liabilities
Certain of the Company’s financing arrangements and derivative transactions are governed by underlying agreements that generally provide for a right of setoff in the event of default or in the event of a bankruptcy of either party to the transaction. In the Company’s consolidated balance sheets, all balances associated with repurchase agreements are presented on a gross basis.
The fair value of financial instruments pledged against the Company’s financing arrangements was $4.1 billion and $11.2 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. The fair value of financial instruments pledged against the Company’s Swaps was $0 and $2.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. In addition, cash that has been pledged as collateral against financing arrangements and Swaps is reported as Restricted cash on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets (see Notes 2(f), 5(c) and 6).
9. Other Liabilities
The following table presents the components of the Company’s Other liabilities at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
10. Commitments and Contingencies
(a) Lease Commitments
The Company pays monthly rent pursuant to three office leases. In November 2018, the Company amended the lease for its corporate headquarters in New York, New York, under the same terms and conditions, to extend the expiration date for the lease by up to one year, through June 30, 2021, with a mutual option to terminate on or after February 15, 2021. For the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company recorded an expense of approximately $2.9 million in connection with the lease for its current corporate headquarters.
In addition, in November 2018, the Company executed a lease agreement on new office space in New York, New York. The Company plans to relocate its corporate headquarters to this new office space upon the substantial completion of the building. The lease term specified in the agreement is fifteen years with an option to renew for an additional five years. The Company’s current estimate of annual lease rental expense under the new lease, excluding escalation charges which at this point are unknown, is approximately $4.6 million. The Company currently expects to relocate to the space in the first fiscal quarter of 2021, but this timing, as well as when it is required to begin making payments and recognize rental and other expenses under the new lease, is dependent on when the space is actually available for use.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The Company recognized lease expense of $3.0 million, $2.7 million and $2.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively, which is included in Other general and administrative expense within the consolidated statements of operations. At December 31, 2020, the contractual minimum rental payments (exclusive of possible rent escalation charges and normal recurring charges for maintenance, insurance and taxes) were as follows:
(1) Table excludes amounts related to the lease agreement for new office space discussed above as the Company is not contractually obligated to make rental payments until fourteen months after a temporary certificate of occupancy is delivered to the landlord, which is currently expected to occur on or before March 2021.
(b) Representations and Warranties in Connection with Loan Securitization Transactions
In connection with the loan securitization transactions entered into by the Company, the Company has the obligation under certain circumstances to repurchase assets previously transferred to securitization vehicles upon breach of certain representations and warranties. As of December 31, 2020, the Company had no reserve established for repurchases of loans and was not aware of any material unsettled repurchase claims that would require the establishment of such a reserve (see Note 15).
(c) Corporate Loans
The Company has participated in loans to provide financing to entities that originate loans and own MSRs, as well as certain other unencumbered assets owned by the borrower. At December 31, 2020, the Company’s commitment to lend is $32.6 million of which no amount was drawn at December 31, 2020 (see Note 4).
(d) Rehabilitation Loan Commitments
At December 31, 2020, the Company had unfunded commitments of $60.6 million in connection with its purchased Rehabilitation loans (see Note 3).
11. Stockholders’ Equity
(a) Preferred Stock
7.50% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (“Series B Preferred Stock”)
On April 15, 2013, the Company completed the issuance of 8.0 million shares of its Series B Preferred Stock with a par value of $0.01 per share, and a liquidation preference of $25.00 per share plus accrued and unpaid dividends, in an underwritten public offering. The Company’s Series B Preferred Stock is entitled to receive a dividend at a rate of 7.50% per year on the $25.00 liquidation preference before the Company’s common stock is paid any dividends and is senior to the Company’s common stock with respect to distributions upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up. Dividends on the Series B Preferred Stock are payable quarterly in arrears on or about March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31 of each year. The Series B Preferred Stock is redeemable at $25.00 per share plus accrued and unpaid dividends (whether or not authorized or declared) exclusively at the Company’s option.
The Series B Preferred Stock generally does not have any voting rights, subject to an exception in the event the Company
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
fails to pay dividends on such stock for six or more quarterly periods (whether or not consecutive). Under such circumstances, the Series B Preferred Stock will be entitled to vote to elect two additional directors to the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”), until all unpaid dividends have been paid or declared and set apart for payment. In addition, certain material and adverse changes to the terms of the Series B Preferred Stock cannot be made without the affirmative vote of holders of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock.
As a result of the turmoil in the financial markets resulting from the global COVID-19 pandemic, and in order to preserve liquidity, on March 25, 2020, the Company revoked the previously announced first quarter 2020 quarterly cash dividends on each of the Company's common stock and Series B Preferred Stock. On July 1, 2020, the Company announced that it had reinstated the payment of dividends on its Series B Preferred Stock and declared a preferred stock dividend of $0.9375 per share, payable on July 31, 2020 to Series B Preferred stockholders of record as of July 15, 2020.
The following table presents cash dividends declared by the Company on its Series B Preferred Stock from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020:
Issuance of 6.50% Series C Fixed-to-Floating Rate Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (“Series C Preferred Stock”)
On February 28, 2020, the Company amended its charter through the filing of articles supplementary to reclassify 12,650,000 shares of the Company’s authorized but unissued common stock as shares of the Company’s Series C Preferred Stock. On March 2, 2020, the Company completed the issuance of 11.0 million shares of its Series C Preferred Stock with a par value of $0.01 per share, and a liquidation preference of $25.00 per share plus accrued and unpaid dividends, in an underwritten public offering. The total net proceeds the Company received from the offering were approximately $266.0 million, after deducting offering expenses and the underwriting discount.
The Company’s Series C Preferred Stock is entitled to receive dividends (i) from and including the original issue date to, but excluding, March 31, 2025, at a fixed rate of 6.50% per year on the $25.00 liquidation preference and (ii) from and including March 31, 2025, at a floating rate equal to three-month LIBOR plus a spread of 5.345% per year of the $25.00 per share liquidation preference before the Company’s common stock is paid any dividends, and is senior to the Company’s common stock with respect to distributions upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up. Dividends on the Series C Preferred Stock are payable quarterly in arrears on or about March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31 of each year. The Series C Preferred Stock is not redeemable by the Company prior to March 31, 2025, except under circumstances where it is necessary to preserve the Company’s qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and upon the occurrence of certain specified change in control transactions. On or after March 31, 2025, the Company may, at its option, subject to certain procedural requirements, redeem any or all of the shares of the Series C Preferred Stock for cash at a redemption price of $25.00 per share, plus any accrued and unpaid dividends thereon (whether or not authorized or declared) to, but excluding, the redemption date.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The Series C Preferred Stock generally does not have any voting rights, subject to an exception in the event the Company fails to pay dividends on such stock for six or more quarterly periods (whether or not consecutive). Under such circumstances, the Series C Preferred Stock will be entitled to vote to elect two additional directors to the Company’s Board, until all unpaid dividends have been paid or declared and set apart for payment. In addition, certain material and adverse changes to the terms of the Series C Preferred Stock cannot be made without the affirmative vote of holders of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding shares of Series C Preferred Stock.
Pursuant to the now-terminated forbearance agreements that the Company had previously entered into, the Company was prohibited from paying dividends on its Series C Preferred Stock during the forbearance period. On July 1, 2020, the Company announced that it had reinstated the payment of dividends on its Series C Preferred Stock and declared a preferred stock dividend of $0.53264 per share, payable on July 31, 2020 to the Series C Preferred stockholders of record as of July 15, 2020. Upon payment of this dividend, the Company paid in full all accumulated but previously unpaid dividends on its Series C Preferred Stock.
The following table presents cash dividends declared by the Company on its Series C Preferred Stock from January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020:
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(b) Dividends on Common Stock
As discussed above, on March 25, 2020, the Company revoked its previously announced first quarter 2020 quarterly cash dividends on each of the Company's common stock and Series B Preferred Stock. The quarterly cash dividend of $0.20 per share on the Company's common stock had been declared on March 11, 2020, and was to be paid on April 30, 2020, to all stockholders of record as of the close of business March 31, 2020.
On August 6, 2020, the Company declared a regular cash dividend of $0.05 per share of common stock. This dividend was paid on October 30, 2020, to stockholders of record on September 30, 2020.
On December 17, 2020, the Company declared a regular cash dividend of $0.075 per share of common stock. This dividend was paid on January 29, 2021, to stockholders of record on December 30, 2020. At December 31, 2020, the Company had accrued dividends and dividend equivalents payable of $34.0 million related to the common stock dividend declared on December 17, 2020.
The following table presents cash dividends declared by the Company on its common stock from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020:
(1) At December 31, 2020, we had accrued dividends and dividend equivalents payable of $34.0 million related to the common stock dividend declared on December 17, 2020. This dividend will be considered taxable income to the recipient in 2021. For more information see the Company’s 2020 Dividend Tax Information on its website.
In general, the Company’s common stock dividends have been characterized as ordinary income to its stockholders for income tax purposes. However, a portion of the Company’s common stock dividends may, from time to time, be characterized as capital gains or return of capital. For the year ended December 31, 2020, the portion of the Company’s common stock dividends that was deemed to be a return of capital was $0.05 per share of common stock. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, the portions of the Company’s common stock dividends that were deemed to be capital gains were $0.1672 and $0.1290 per share of common stock, respectively.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(c) Public Offering of Common Stock
The Company did not issue any common stock through public offerings during the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. The table below presents information with respect to shares of the Company’s common stock issued through public offerings during the year ended December 31, 2018.
(1)Includes approximately 875,000 shares issued on September 5, 2018 pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares. The Company incurred approximately $6.4 million of underwriting discounts and related expenses in connection with this equity offering.
(d) Discount Waiver, Direct Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan (“DRSPP”)
On October 15, 2019, the Company filed a shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), for the purpose of registering additional common stock for sale through its DRSPP. Pursuant to Rule 462(e) under the 1933 Act, this shelf registration statement became effective automatically upon filing with the SEC and, when combined with the unused portion of the Company’s previous DRSPP shelf registration statements, registered an aggregate of 9.0 million shares of common stock. The Company’s DRSPP is designed to provide existing stockholders and new investors with a convenient and economical way to purchase shares of common stock through the automatic reinvestment of dividends and/or optional cash investments. At December 31, 2020, approximately 8.7 million shares of common stock remained available for issuance pursuant to the DRSPP shelf registration statement.
During the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, the Company issued 235,635, 322,888 and 379,903 shares of common stock through the DRSPP, raising net proceeds of approximately $1.0 million, $2.4 million and $2.8 million, respectively. From the inception of the DRSPP in September 2003 through December 31, 2020, the Company issued 34,614,403 shares pursuant to the DRSPP, raising net proceeds of $287.6 million.
(e) At-the-Market Offering Program
On August 16, 2019 the Company entered into a distribution agreement under the terms of which the Company may offer and sell shares of its common stock having an aggregate gross sales price of up to $400.0 million (the “ATM Shares”), from time to time, through various sales agents, pursuant to an at-the-market equity offering program (the “ATM Program”). Sales of the ATM Shares, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or by transactions that are deemed to be “at-the-market” offerings, as defined in Rule 415 under the 1933 Act, including sales made directly on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) or sales made to or through a market maker other than an exchange. The sales agents are entitled to compensation of up to two percent of the gross sales price per share for any shares of common stock sold under the distribution agreement.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company did not sell any shares of common stock through the ATM Program. At December 31, 2020, approximately $390.0 million remained outstanding for future offerings under this program. During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company sold 1,357,526 shares of common stock through the ATM Program at a weighted average price of $7.40, raising proceeds of approximately $9.9 million, net of fees and commissions paid to sales agents of approximately $100,000.
(f) Stock Repurchase Program
On November 2, 2020, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program under which the Company may repurchase up to $250 million of its common stock through the end of 2022. The Board’s authorization replaces the authorization under the Company’s existing stock repurchase program that was adopted in December 2013, which authorized the Company to repurchase up to 10 million shares of common stock and under which approximately 6.6 million shares remained available for repurchase.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The stock repurchase program does not require the purchase of any minimum number of shares. The timing and extent to which the Company repurchases its shares will depend upon, among other things, market conditions, share price, liquidity, regulatory requirements and other factors, and repurchases may be commenced or suspended at any time without prior notice. Acquisitions under the share repurchase program may be made in the open market, through privately negotiated transactions or block trades or other means, in accordance with applicable securities laws.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company repurchased 14,085,678 shares of its common stock through the stock repurchase program at an average cost of $3.61 per share and a total cost of approximately $50.8 million, net of fees and commissions paid to the sales agent of approximately $141,000. In addition, as discussed further below, during the year ended December 31, 2020 the Company repurchased 17,593,576, warrants for $33.7 million that were included in the stock repurchase program. At December 31, 2020, approximately $165.7 million remained outstanding for future repurchases under the repurchase program. The Company did not repurchase any shares of its common stock during the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018.
(g) Warrants
On June 15, 2020, the Company entered into an Investment Agreement with Apollo and Athene (together the “Purchasers”), under which the Company agreed to issue to the Purchasers warrants (the “Warrants”) to purchase, in the aggregate, 37,039,106 shares (subject to adjustment in accordance with their terms) of the Company’s common stock. One half of the Warrants had an exercise price of $1.66 per share and the other half had an exercise price of $2.08 per share. The Investment Agreement and the Term Loan Facility (see Note 6) were entered into simultaneously, and the $495.0 million of proceeds received were allocated between the debt ($481.0 million) and the warrants ($14.0 million). The amount allocated to the warrants was recorded in Additional paid-in capital on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets.
During the fourth quarter, the Company repurchased, for $33.7 million, approximately 48% of the Warrants that were issued to the Purchasers. The remaining Warrants were exercised by the Purchasers later in the fourth quarter, resulting in the Company issuing approximately 12.3 million shares of common stock and receiving $6.5 million in cash.
(h) Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss)
The following table presents changes in the balances of each component of the Company’s AOCI for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1) See separate table below for details about these reclassifications.
(2) For further information regarding changes in OCI, see the Company’s consolidated statements of comprehensive income/(loss).
(3) Net Unrealized Gain/(Loss) on Financing Agreements at Fair Value due to changes in instrument-specific credit risk.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents information about the significant amounts reclassified out of the Company’s AOCI for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018:
12. EPS Calculation
The following table presents a reconciliation of the (loss)/earnings and shares used in calculating basic and diluted (loss)/EPS for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1) At December 31, 2020, the Company had approximately 2.3 million equity instruments outstanding that were not included in the calculation of diluted EPS for the year ended December 31, 2020, as their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. These equity instruments reflect RSUs (based on current estimate of expected share settlement amount) with a weighted average grant date fair value of $6.56 and may have a dilutive impact on future EPS.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Convertible Senior Notes were determined to be anti-dilutive and were not included in the calculation of diluted EPS under the “if-converted” method. Under this method, the periodic interest expense for dilutive notes is added back to the numerator and the weighted average number of shares that the notes are entitled to (if converted, regardless of whether the conversion option is in or out of the money) is included in the denominator for the purpose of calculating diluted EPS. The Convertible Senior Notes may have a dilutive impact on future EPS.
13. Equity Compensation and Other Benefit Plans
(a) Equity Compensation Plan
In accordance with the terms of the Company’s Equity Plan, which was adopted by the Company’s stockholders on June 10, 2020 (and which amended and restated the Company’s 2010 Equity Compensation Plan), directors, officers and employees of the Company and any of its subsidiaries and other persons expected to provide significant services for the Company and any of its subsidiaries are eligible to receive grants of stock options (“Options”), restricted stock, RSUs, dividend equivalent rights and other stock-based awards under the Equity Plan.
Subject to certain exceptions, stock-based awards relating to a maximum of 18.0 million shares of common stock may be granted under the Equity Plan; forfeitures and/or awards that expire unexercised do not count toward this limit. At December 31, 2020, approximately 14.3 million shares of common stock remained available for grant in connection with stock-based awards under the Equity Plan. A participant may generally not receive stock-based awards in excess of 2.0 million shares of common stock in any one year and no award may be granted to any person who, assuming exercise of all Options and payment of all awards held by such person, would own or be deemed to own more than 9.8% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock. Unless previously terminated by the Board, awards may be granted under the Equity Plan until June 10, 2030.
Restricted Stock Units
Under the terms of the Equity Plan, RSUs are instruments that provide the holder with the right to receive, subject to the satisfaction of conditions set by the Compensation Committee at the time of grant, a payment of a specified value, which may be a share of the Company’s common stock, the fair market value of a share of the Company’s common stock, or such fair market value to the extent in excess of an established base value, on the applicable settlement date. Although the Equity Plan permits the Company to issue RSUs that can settle in cash, all of the Company’s outstanding RSUs as of December 31, 2020 are designated to be settled in shares of the Company’s common stock. All RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2020 may be entitled to receive dividend equivalent payments depending on the terms and conditions of the award either in cash at the time dividends are paid by the Company, or for certain performance-based RSU awards, as a grant of stock at the time such awards are settled. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company had unrecognized compensation expense of $6.8 million and $5.5 million, respectively, related to RSUs. The unrecognized compensation expense at December 31, 2020 is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.7 years.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents information with respect to the Company’s RSUs during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1)The weighted average grant date fair value of these awards require the Company to estimate certain valuation inputs. In determining the fair value for 1,204,713 of these awards granted in 2020, the Company applied: (i) a weighted average volatility estimate of approximately 14%, which was determined considering historic volatility in the price of the Company’s and its peer group companies’ common stock over the three-year period prior to the grant date and the implied volatility of certain exchange-traded options on the Company’s and peer group companies’ common stock at the grant date; and (ii) a weighted average risk-free rate of 1.36% based on the continuously compounded constant maturity treasury rate corresponding to a maturity commensurate with the expected vesting term of the awards. The weighted average grant date fair value for the remaining 452,585 and 44,922 awards with a service condition only was estimated based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock at the grant date of $2.32 and $2.56, respectively. There are no post vesting conditions on these awards.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
(2)The weighted average grant date fair value of these awards require the Company to estimate certain valuation inputs. In determining the fair value for 752,500 of these awards granted in 2019, the Company applied: (i) a weighted average volatility estimate of approximately 15%, which was determined considering historic volatility in the price of the Company’s and its peer group companies’ common stock over the three-year period prior to the grant date and the implied volatility of certain exchange-traded options on the Company’s and peer group companies’ common stock at the grant date; and (ii) a weighted average risk-free rate of 2.47% based on the continuously compounded constant maturity treasury rate corresponding to a maturity commensurate with the expected vesting term of the awards. The weighted average grant date fair value for the remaining 160,025 awards with a service condition only was estimated based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock at the grant date of $7.28. There are no post vesting conditions on these awards.
(3)The weighted average grant date fair value of these awards require the Company to estimate certain valuation inputs. In determining the fair value for 692,500 of these awards granted in 2018, the Company applied: (i) a weighted average volatility estimate of approximately 17%, which was determined considering historic volatility in the price of the Company’s and its peer group companies’ common stock over the three-year period prior to the grant date and the implied volatility of certain exchange-traded options on the Company’s and peer group companies’ common stock at the grant date; and (ii) a weighted average risk-free rate of 2.36% based on the continuously compounded constant maturity treasury rate corresponding to a maturity commensurate with the expected vesting term of the awards. The weighted average grant date fair value for the remaining 151,302 awards with a service condition only was estimated based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock at the grant date of $7.70. There are no post vesting conditions on these awards.
Restricted Stock
At December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company did not have any unvested shares of restricted common stock outstanding. The total fair value of restricted shares vested during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018 was approximately $131,000, $3.2 million and $3.0 million, respectively.
The following table presents information with respect to the Company’s restricted stock for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(1) The grant date fair value of restricted stock awards is based on the closing market price of the Company’s common stock at the grant date.
(2) All restrictions associated with restricted stock are removed on vesting.
Dividend Equivalents
A dividend equivalent is a right to receive a distribution equal to the dividend distributions that would be paid on a share of the Company’s common stock. Dividend equivalents may be granted as a separate instrument or may be a right associated with the grant of another award (e.g., an RSU) under the Equity Plan, and they are paid in cash or other consideration at such times and in accordance with such rules, as the Compensation Committee of the Board shall determine in its discretion. Payments made on the Company’s outstanding dividend equivalent rights are generally charged to Stockholders’ Equity when common stock dividends are declared to the extent that such equivalents are expected to vest. The Company made dividend equivalent payments associated with RSU awards of approximately $367,000, $1,049,000, and $907,000 during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. In addition, no dividend equivalents rights awarded as separate instruments were granted during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Expense Recognized for Equity-Based Compensation Instruments
The following table presents the Company’s expenses related to its equity-based compensation instruments for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
(b) Deferred Compensation Plans
The Company administers deferred compensation plans for its senior officers and non-employee directors (collectively, the “Deferred Plans”), pursuant to which participants may elect to defer up to 100% of certain cash compensation. The Deferred Plans are designed to align participants’ interests with those of the Company’s stockholders.
Amounts deferred under the Deferred Plans are considered to be converted into “stock units” of the Company. Stock units do not represent stock of the Company, but rather are a liability of the Company that changes in value as would equivalent shares of the Company’s common stock. Deferred compensation liabilities are settled in cash at the termination of the deferral period, based on the value of the stock units at that time. The Deferred Plans are non-qualified plans under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and, as such, are not funded. Prior to the time that the deferred accounts are settled, participants are unsecured creditors of the Company.
The Company’s liability for stock units in the Deferred Plans is based on the market price of the Company’s common stock at the measurement date. The following table presents the Company’s expenses related to its Deferred Plans for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:
The Company distributed cash of $769,400, $568,900, and $123,700 to the participants of the Deferred Plans during the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. The following table presents the aggregate amount of income deferred by participants of the Deferred Plans through December 31, 2020 and 2019 that had not been distributed and the Company’s associated liability for such deferrals at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)Represents the cumulative amounts that were deferred by participants through December 31, 2020 and 2019, which had not been distributed through such respective date.
(c) Savings Plan
The Company sponsors a tax-qualified employee savings plan (the “Savings Plan”) in accordance with Section 401(k) of the Code. Subject to certain restrictions, all of the Company’s employees are eligible to make tax-deferred contributions to the
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Savings Plan subject to limitations under applicable law. Participant’s accounts are self-directed and the Company bears the costs of administering the Savings Plan. The Company matches 100% of the first 3% of eligible compensation deferred by employees and 50% of the next 2%, subject to a maximum as provided by the Code. The Company has elected to operate the Savings Plan under the applicable safe harbor provisions of the Code, whereby among other things, the Company must make contributions for all participating employees and all matches contributed by the Company immediately vest 100%. For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, the Company recognized expenses for matching contributions of $480,000, $503,500 and $371,000, respectively.
14. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
GAAP requires the categorization of fair value measurements into three broad levels that form a hierarchy. A financial instrument’s categorization within the valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The three levels of valuation hierarchy are defined as follows:
Level 1 - Inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.
Level 2 - Inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.
Level 3 - Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.
The following describes the valuation methodologies used for the Company’s financial instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy.
Residential Whole Loans, at Fair Value
The Company determines the fair value of its residential whole loans held at fair value after considering valuations obtained from a third-party that specializes in providing valuations of residential mortgage loans. The valuation approach applied generally depends on whether the loan is considered performing or non-performing at the date the valuation is performed. For performing loans, estimates of fair value are derived using a discounted cash flow approach, where estimates of cash flows are determined from the scheduled payments, adjusted using forecasted prepayment, default and loss given default rates. For non-performing loans, asset liquidation cash flows are derived based on the estimated time to liquidate the loan, the estimated value of the collateral, expected costs and estimated home price appreciation. Estimated cash flows for both performing and non-performing loans are discounted at yields considered appropriate to arrive at a reasonable exit price for the asset. Indications of loan value such as actual trades, bids, offers and generic market color may be used in determining the appropriate discount yield. The Company’s residential whole loans held at fair value are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Residential Mortgage Securities
The Company determined the fair value of its Agency MBS based upon prices obtained from third-party pricing services, which are indicative of market activity, and repurchase agreement counterparties.
For Agency MBS, the valuation methodology of the Company’s third-party pricing services incorporate commonly used market pricing methods, trading activity observed in the marketplace and other data inputs. The methodology also considers the underlying characteristics of each security, which are also observable inputs, including: collateral vintage, coupon, maturity date, loan age, reset date, collateral type, periodic and life cap, geography, and prepayment speeds. Management analyzes pricing data received from third-party pricing services and compares it to other indications of fair value including data received from repurchase agreement counterparties and its own observations of trading activity observed in the marketplace. The Company’s Agency MBS were classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. During the quarter ended June 30, 2020, the Company sold its remaining holdings of Agency MBS.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
In determining the fair value of the Company’s Non-Agency MBS and CRT securities, management considers a number of observable market data points, including prices obtained from pricing services and brokers as well as dialogue with market participants. In valuing Non-Agency MBS, the Company understands that pricing services use observable inputs that include, in addition to trading activity observed in the marketplace, loan delinquency data, credit enhancement levels and vintage, which are taken into account to assign pricing factors such as spread and prepayment assumptions. For tranches of Legacy Non-Agency MBS that are cross-collateralized, performance of all collateral groups involved in the tranche are considered. The Company collects and considers current market intelligence on all major markets, including benchmark security evaluations and bid-lists from various sources, when available.
The Company’s Legacy Non-Agency MBS, RPL/NPL MBS and CRT securities are valued using various market data points as described above, which management considers directly or indirectly observable parameters. Accordingly, these securities are classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. As of December 31, 2020, the Company has sold substantially all of its holdings of Legacy Non-Agency MBS and substantially reduced its holdings of other Non-Agency MBS and CRT securities.
Term Notes Backed by MSR-Related Collateral
The Company’s valuation process for term notes backed by MSR-related collateral is similar to that used for residential mortgage securities and considers a number of observable market data points, including prices obtained from pricing services, brokers and repurchase agreement counterparties, dialogue with market participants, as well as management’s observations of market activity. Other factors taken into consideration include estimated changes in fair value of the related underlying MSR collateral and, as applicable, the financial performance of the ultimate parent or sponsoring entity of the issuer, which has provided a guarantee that is intended to provide for payment of interest and principal to the holders of the term notes should cash flows generated by the related underlying MSR collateral be insufficient. Based on its evaluation of the observability of the data used in its fair value estimation process, these assets are classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Swaps
As previously disclosed, in response to the turmoil in the financial markets resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic experienced during the three months ended March 31, 2020, the Company unwound all of its Swap hedging transactions late in the first quarter in order to recover previously posted margin. Prior to their termination, valuations provided by the central clearing house were used for purposes of determining the fair value of the Company’s Swaps. Such valuations obtained were tested with internally developed models that applied readily observable market parameters. Swaps were classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Financing Agreements, at Fair Value
Agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions
These agreements are secured and subject to margin calls and their base interest rates reset frequently to market based rates. As a result, no credit valuation adjustment is required, and the primary factor in determining their fair value is the credit spread paid over the base rate, which is a non observable input as it is determined based on negotiations with the counterparty. The Company’s financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions held at fair value are classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy if the credit spreads used to price the instrument reset frequently, which is typically the case with shorter term repurchase agreement contracts collateralized by securities. Financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions that are typically longer term and are collateralized by residential whole loans where the credit spread paid over the base rate on the instrument is not reset frequently are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions
These agreements are secured, but not subject to margin calls, and their base interest rates reset frequently to market based rates. As a result, a credit valuation adjustment would only be required if there were a significant decrease in collateral value, and the primary factor in determining their fair value is the credit spread paid over the base rate, which is a non observable input as it is determined based on negotiations with the counterparty. The Company’s financing agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions held at fair value are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Securitized Debt
In determining the fair value of securitized debt, management considers a number of observable market data points, including prices obtained from pricing services and brokers as well as dialogue with market participants. Accordingly, the Company’s securitized debt is classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Changes to the valuation methodologies used with respect to the Company’s financial instruments are reviewed by management to ensure any such changes result in appropriate exit price valuations. The Company will refine its valuation methodologies as markets and products develop and pricing methodologies evolve. The methods described above may produce fair value estimates that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. Furthermore, while the Company believes its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with those used by market participants, the use of different methodologies, or assumptions, to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. The Company uses inputs that are current as of the measurement date, which may include periods of market dislocation, during which price transparency may be reduced. The Company reviews the classification of its financial instruments within the fair value hierarchy on a quarterly basis, and management may conclude that its financial instruments should be reclassified to a different level in the future.
The following tables present the Company’s financial instruments carried at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, on the consolidated balance sheets by the valuation hierarchy, as previously described:
Fair Value at December 31, 2020
Fair Value at December 31, 2019
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Changes in Level 3 Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
The following table presents additional information for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 about the Company’s Residential whole loans, at fair value, which are classified as Level 3 and measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
(1)Included in the activity presented for the year ended December 31, 2019 is an adjustment of $70.6 million for loans the Company committed to purchase during the year ended December 31, 2018, but for which the closing of the purchase transaction occurred during the three months ended March 31, 2019. The adjustment was required following the finalization of due diligence performed prior to the closing of the purchase transaction and resulted in a downward revision to the prior estimate of the loan purchase amount.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
The following table presents additional information for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 about the Company’s investments in term notes backed by MSR-related collateral, which were classified as Level 3 prior to September 30, 2019 and measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
The following table presents additional information for the year ended December 31, 2020 about the Company’s financing agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions, which are classified as Level 3 and measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
The following table presents additional information for the year ended December 31, 2020 about the Company’s financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions, which are classified as Level 3 and measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
At June 30, 2020, the Company’s financing agreements with non-mark-to-market collateral provisions and the Company’s financing agreements with mark-to-market collateral provisions had just been issued and were therefore classified as Level 2 since their values were based on market transactions. However, market information for similar financings was not available at December 31, 2020 and the Company valued these financing instruments based on unobservable inputs.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Fair Value Methodology for Level 3 Financial Instruments
Residential Whole Loans, at Fair Value
The following tables present a summary of quantitative information about the significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the Company’s residential whole loans held at fair value for which it has utilized Level 3 inputs to determine fair value as of December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)Excludes approximately $265,000 and $470,000 of loans for which management considers the purchase price continues to reflect the fair value of such loans at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
(2)Amounts are weighted based on the fair value of the underlying loan.
(3)The simple average value of the properties underlying residential whole loans held at fair value valued via a liquidation model was approximately $380,000 and $365,000 as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Changes in market conditions, as well as changes in the assumptions or methodology used to determine fair value, could result in a significant increase or decrease in the fair value of residential whole loans. Loans valued using a discounted cash flow model are most sensitive to changes in the discount rate assumption, while loans valued using the liquidation model technique are most sensitive to changes in the current value of the underlying properties and the liquidation timeline. Increases in discount rates, default rates, loss severities, or liquidation timelines, either in isolation or collectively, would generally result in a lower fair value measurement, whereas increases in the current or expected value of the underlying properties, in isolation, would result in a higher fair value measurement. In practice, changes in valuation assumptions may not occur in isolation and the changes in any particular assumption may result in changes in other assumptions, which could offset or amplify the impact on the overall valuation.
The following table presents the carrying values and estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments at December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)Includes $59.5 million of MSR-related assets that are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis that were classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy at December 31, 2019.
(2)Carrying value of securitized debt, Convertible Senior Notes, Senior Notes and certain repurchase agreements is net of associated debt issuance costs.
(3)Includes Securitized debt that is carried at amortized cost basis and fair value.
(4)On January 6, 2021, the Company redeemed all of its outstanding Senior Notes (see Note 17).
Other Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
The Company holds REO at the lower of the current carrying amount or fair value less estimated selling costs. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company recorded REO with an aggregate estimated fair value, less estimated cost to sell, of $96.8 million and $257.7 million, respectively, at the time of foreclosure. The Company classifies fair value measurements of REO as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
15. Use of Special Purpose Entities and Variable Interest Entities
A Special Purpose Entity (“SPE”) is an entity designed to fulfill a specific limited need of the company that organized it. SPEs are often used to facilitate transactions that involve securitizing financial assets or resecuritizing previously securitized financial assets. The objective of such transactions may include obtaining non-recourse financing, obtaining liquidity or refinancing the underlying financial assets on improved terms. Securitization involves transferring assets to a SPE to convert all or a portion of those assets into cash before they would have been realized in the normal course of business, through the SPE’s issuance of debt or equity instruments. Investors in a SPE usually have recourse only to the assets in the SPE and, depending on the overall structure of the transaction, may benefit from various forms of credit enhancement such as over-collateralization in the form of excess assets in the SPE, priority with respect to receipt of cash flows relative to holders of other debt or equity instruments issued by the SPE, or a line of credit or other form of liquidity agreement that is designed with the objective of ensuring that investors receive principal and/or interest cash flow on the investment in accordance with the terms of their investment agreement.
The Company has entered into several financing transactions that resulted in the Company consolidating as VIEs the SPEs that were created to facilitate these transactions. See Note 2(q) for a discussion of the accounting policies applied to the consolidation of VIEs and transfers of financial assets in connection with financing transactions.
The Company has engaged in loan securitizations primarily for the purpose of obtaining improved overall financing terms as well as non-recourse financing on a portion of its residential whole loan portfolio. Notwithstanding the Company’s participation in these transactions, the risks facing the Company are largely unchanged as the Company remains economically exposed to the first loss position on the underlying assets transferred to the VIEs.
Loan Securitization Transactions
The following table summarizes the key details of the Company’s loan securitization transactions currently outstanding as of December 31, 2020 and 2019:
(1)Net of $3.2 million and $2.9 million of deferred financing costs at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.
(2)At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, $568.7 million and $493.2 million, respectively, of Senior Bonds sold in securitization transactions contained a contractual coupon step-up feature whereby the coupon increases by either 100 or 300 basis points or more at 36 months from issuance if the bond is not redeemed before such date.
(3)Provides credit support to the Senior Bonds sold to third-party investors in the securitization transactions.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company issued Senior Bonds with a current face of $1.3 billion to third-party investors for proceeds of $1.3 billion before offering costs and accrued interest. A portion of the Senior Bonds issued by the Company during the year ended December 31, 2020 are presented at fair value on its consolidated balance sheets as a result of a fair value election made at the time of issuance.
As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, as a result of the transactions described above, securitized loans with a carrying value of approximately $1.4 billion and $186.4 million are included in “Residential whole loans, at carrying value,” securitized loans with a fair value of approximately $382.3 million and $567.4 million are included in “Residential whole loans, at fair value,” and REO with a carrying value of approximately $49.5 million and $137.8 million are included in “Other assets” on the
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
Company’s consolidated balance sheets, respectively. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the aggregate carrying value of Senior Bonds issued by consolidated VIEs was $1.5 billion and $571.0 million, respectively. These Senior Bonds are disclosed as “Securitized debt” and are included in Other liabilities on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The holders of the securitized debt have no recourse to the general credit of the Company, but the Company does have the obligation, under certain circumstances to repurchase assets from the VIE upon the breach of certain representations and warranties with respect to the residential whole loans sold to the VIE. In the absence of such a breach, the Company has no obligation to provide any other explicit or implicit support to any VIE.
The Company concluded that the entities created to facilitate the loan securitization transactions are VIEs. The Company then completed an analysis of whether each VIE created to facilitate the securitization transactions should be consolidated by the Company, based on consideration of its involvement in each VIE, including the design and purpose of the SPE, and whether its involvement reflected a controlling financial interest that resulted in the Company being deemed the primary beneficiary of each VIE. In determining whether the Company would be considered the primary beneficiary, the following factors were assessed:
•whether the Company has both the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the VIE; and
•whether the Company has a right to receive benefits or absorb losses of the entity that could be potentially significant to the VIE.
Based on its evaluation of the factors discussed above, including its involvement in the purpose and design of the entity, the Company determined that it was required to consolidate each VIE created to facilitate the loan securitization transactions.
Residential Whole Loans and REO (including Residential Whole Loans and REO transferred to consolidated VIEs)
Included on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 are a total of $5.3 billion and $7.4 billion, respectively, of residential whole loans, of which approximately $4.1 billion and $6.1 billion, respectively, are reported at carrying value and $1.2 billion and $1.4 billion, respectively, are reported at fair value. These assets, and certain of the Company’s REO assets, are directly owned by certain trusts established by the Company to acquire the loans and entities established in connection with the Company’s loan securitization transactions. The Company has assessed that these entities are required to be consolidated (see Notes 3 and 5(a)).
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
16. Summary of Quarterly Results of Operations (Unaudited)
MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2020
17. Subsequent Events
Redemption of Senior Notes
On January 6, 2021, the Company redeemed all of the outstanding $100 million aggregate principal amount of 8.00% Senior Notes Due 2042. The Senior Notes were redeemed at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Senior Notes, or $25 per $25 principal amount of Senior Notes, plus unpaid interest, if any, accrued thereon to, but excluding, the redemption date. In connection with this redemption, the Company recorded in its fourth quarter interest expense a non-cash charge of approximately $3.1 million representing remaining unamortized deferred expenses incurred when the Senior Notes were originally issued in 2012.
Securitization of Business Purpose Rental Loans
Subsequent to the end of the fourth quarter, the Company completed a securitization solely consisting of $217.5 million of Business Purpose Rental Loans, generating approximately $48.4 million of additional liquidity. As the weighted average coupon of the bonds sold was approximately 1.06%, this transaction is expected to lower the funding rate of the underlying assets by more than 150 basis points.
Schedule IV - Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
December 31, 2020
(1)Excludes an allowance for loan losses of $86.8 million at December 31, 2020.
(2)The federal income tax basis is approximately $3.9 billion.
Reconciliation of Balance Sheet Reported Amounts of Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
The following table summarizes the changes in the carrying amounts of residential whole loans during the year ended December 31, 2020:
Item 9.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
None.
Item 9A.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Management, under the direction of its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, is responsible for maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the 1934 Act) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in reports filed or submitted under the 1934 Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
In connection with the preparation of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, management reviewed and evaluated the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. The evaluation was performed under the direction of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer to determine the effectiveness, as of December 31, 2020, of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on that review and evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the Company’s current disclosure controls and procedures, as designed and implemented, were effective as of December 31, 2020. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a control system, no matter how well designed, implemented and operated can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that it will detect or uncover failures within the Company to disclose material information otherwise required to be set forth in the Company’s periodic reports.
(b) Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting for the Company. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) promulgated under the 1934 Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by the Company’s board of directors, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and includes those policies and procedures that:
•pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
•provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
•provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The Company’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020. In making this assessment, the Company’s management used criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control-Integrated Framework 2013 (the “2013 COSO Framework”). As a result of this assessment, management concluded that, as of December 31, 2020, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective in providing reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with GAAP.
The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, KPMG LLP, has issued an attestation report on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. This report appears on page 137 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
(c) Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fourth quarter of 2020 that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal control over financial reporting.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Stockholders and Board of Directors
MFA Financial, Inc.:
Opinion on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
We have audited MFA Financial, Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the Company) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income/(loss), changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2020, and the related notes and Schedule IV - Mortgage Loans on Real Estate (collectively, the consolidated financial statements), and our report dated February 23, 2021 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
Basis for Opinion
The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ KPMG LLP
New York, New York
February 23, 2021
Item 9B.
Item 9B. Other Information.
Amended and Restated Employment Agreements with Craig L Knutson, Gudmundur Kristjansson and Bryan Wulfsohn
On February 22, 2021, the Company entered into amended and restated employment agreements (each, an “Amended Employment Agreement”), effective as of January 1, 2021, with Craig L. Knutson, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, and each of Gudmundur Kristjansson and Bryan Wulfsohn, each a Co-Chief Investment Officer and Senior Vice President of the Company. (Mr. Knutson, Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn are sometimes hereinafter referred to individually as the “Executive” or together, the “Executives.”) The Amended Employment Agreements amend and restate the existing employment agreements that each Executive had entered into with the Company on November 26, 2019 (and which became effective January 1, 2020) (each, a “Prior Employment Agreement”). Set forth below is a summary of the material terms and conditions of the Amended Employment Agreements.
Term
Each Executive’s Amended Employment Agreement has a fixed term running through December 31, 2021, which term automatically renews for an additional one-year period at the end of the initial term and each year thereafter, unless either MFA or the Executive gives the other party written notice of its or his intent not to renew the term of the Amended Employment Agreement at least 90 days prior to the end of the then current-term.
Base Salary
Mr. Knutson’s Amended Employment Agreement provides for a base salary of $800,000 per annum. Each of Mr. Kristjansson’s and Mr. Wulfsohn’s Amended Employment Agreement provides for a base salary of $400,000 per annum. Generally, the Executive’s base salary may not be decreased unless in connection with an overall reduction in base salaries for the Company’s senior executives.
Annual Performance-Based Bonus
Similar to the Prior Employment Agreements, the Amended Employment Agreements provide that, during the term of employment, each Executive is eligible to receive an annual performance-based bonus (the “Annual Bonus”) based on the Company’s and each Executive’s individual performance during the 12-month period beginning each December 1 during the term and ending on November 30 of the next succeeding year (each 12-month period being a “Performance Period”). Pursuant to the terms of each Amended Employment Agreement, the target annual bonus (the “Overall Target Bonus”) for each Performance Period is $2,000,000 for Mr. Knutson, and is $950,000 for each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn. Generally, the Executive’s Overall Target Bonus may not be decreased unless in connection with an overall reduction in target bonuses for the Company’s senior executives.
The Amended Employment Agreements provide that each Executive’s Annual Bonus is comprised of two performance components. Similar to the terms of the Prior Employment Agreements, (i) a portion of each Executive’s Annual Bonus will be payable based on MFA’s adjusted return on average equity (“ROAE”) during the applicable Performance Period (such portion of the Annual Bonus hereinafter referred to as the “ROAE Bonus”) and (ii) a portion of each Executive’s Annual Bonus will be based on the Executive’s individual performance and the Company’s performance and risk management (such portion of the Annual Bonus hereinafter referred to as the “IRM Bonus”).
ROAE Bonus. With respect to the ROAE Bonus, for each Performance Period the target amount of the ROAE Bonus (the “Target ROAE Bonus”) for each Executive will be equal to 75% of such Executive’s Overall Target Bonus. Based on each Executive’s Overall Target Bonus, Mr. Knutson’s Target ROAE Bonus will be $1,500,000 and each of Mr. Kristjansson’s and Mr. Wulfsohn’s Target ROAE Bonus will be $712,500. The Amended Employment Agreements provide that each Executive will be eligible to receive from zero to 200% of his respective Target ROAE Bonus (i.e., up to $3,000,000 in the case of Mr. Knutson and up to $1,425,000 in the case of each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn).
The actual amount of the ROAE Bonus to be paid to each Executive will be based on the Company’s adjusted ROAE for the applicable Performance Period relative to threshold, target, and maximum ROAE performance goals established by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Compensation Committee”) for each Performance Period, which will be established within 90 days following commencement of the applicable Performance Period. If performance is between threshold and target goals or between target and maximum goals, the amount of the ROAE Bonus will be determined by straight line interpolation.
For purposes of determining the ROAE Bonus, adjusted ROAE will be calculated by dividing (i) MFA’s net income as determined in accordance with GAAP (but excluding non-cash expense items such as depreciation and amortization expense,
life-of-loan loss reserves at acquisition under the Current Expected Credit Loss accounting standard, the write off of offering expenses incurred in connection with the redemption of equity and/or debt and, in certain circumstances, any gains or losses from hedging instruments) by (ii) MFA’s average stockholders’ equity (based on stockholders’ equity as of the last day of each month during the Performance Period) as determined in accordance with GAAP (but excluding accumulated other comprehensive income or loss, stockholders equity attributable to preferred stock and such other items as may be determined by the Compensation Committee).
IRM Bonus. With respect to the IRM Bonus, for each Performance Period the target amount of the IRM Bonus (the “Target IRM Bonus”) for each Executive will be equal to 25% of such Executive’s Overall Target Bonus. Based on his Overall Target Bonus, Mr. Knutson’s Target IRM Bonus will be $500,000 and each of Mr. Kristjansson’s and Mr. Wulfsohn’s Target IRM Bonus will be $237,500. The Amended Employment Agreements provide that each Executive will be eligible to receive from zero to 200% of his respective Target IRM Bonus (i.e., up to $1,000,000 in the case of Mr. Knutson and up to $475,000 in the case of each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn).
The actual amount of the IRM Bonus to be paid to each Executive will be determined by the Compensation Committee in its discretion based upon any factors it deems relevant and appropriate, including, without limitation, MFA’s leverage strategy relative to other similarly situated companies as well as relative to its own business plan, MFA’s total stockholder return (both on an absolute basis, as well as relative to relevant indices and other similarly situated companies) and the Executive’s individual performance.
The terms of each Executive’s Prior Employment Agreement have been modified in the Amended Employment Agreement to provide that payment of the Executive’s Annual Bonus will be made in solely in cash rather than as a combination cash and shares of the Company’s common stock.
Equity Awards
As was the case under each Executive’s Prior Employment Agreement, under the Amended Employment Agreements, each Executive receives annual grants of restricted stock units (“RSUs”), which consist of time-based RSUs (“TRSUs”) and performance-based RSUs (“PRSUs”), if the Executive is still employed by the Company on the applicable grant date. The TRSUs and PRSUs are subject to the terms of the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan, as may be amended, or any successor plan, and an award agreement entered into between the Executive and the Company.
TRSUs. Under the terms of Mr. Knutson’s Amended Employment Agreement, he is entitled to an annual grant of TRSUs with an aggregate grant date value of $1,040,000, with the number of TRSUs granted determined by the quotient of 1,040,000 divided by the closing price of MFA common stock on the date of grant (the “Grant Date Share Price”). Under the terms of Mr. Kristjansson’s and Mr. Wulfsohn’s respective Amended Employment Agreement, each Executive is entitled to an annual grant of TRSUs with an aggregate grant date value of $320,000, with the number of TRSUs granted determined by the quotient of 320,000 divided by the Grant Date Share Price. Under the terms of the Amended Employment Agreements, the Committee may increase or decrease the aggregate grant date value for any annual grant of TRSUs made in future years.
Except in certain circumstances described below in “Payments and Other Benefits upon Termination of Employment,” each TRSU award will vest on the third December 31st to occur following the date of grant, subject to the Executive’s continued employment with the Company. In addition, subject to exceptions in certain circumstances described below, unvested TRSUs will be forfeited as of the date of the Executive’s termination of employment with the Company. Upon vesting, each Executive will receive one share of MFA common stock for each vested TRSU.
If dividends are paid on MFA common stock during the period in which TRSUs are outstanding, each Executive will be credited with an amount, per TRSU, equal to the amount of dividends declared and paid in respect of one share of MFA common stock. Such credited amount will be credited in the form of additional TRSUs (such TRSUs, “DER TRSUs”), based on the fair market value of a share of MFA common stock on the payment date of the cash dividend. The DER TRSUs will include the right to receive additional DER TRSUs with respect to any additional dividends declared and will be paid in cash subject to the same terms and conditions (including with respect to vesting and payment timing) applicable to the grant of TRSUs with respect to which the DER TRSUs were credited.
PRSUs. Under the terms of the Amended Employment Agreements, Mr. Knutson is entitled to an annual grant of PRSUs with an aggregate grant date value of $1,810,000, and each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn is entitled to an annual grant of PRSUs with an aggregate grant date value of $480,000 (for each Executive, the “PRSU Grant Date Value”). Under the terms of the Amended Employment Agreements, the Committee may increase or decrease the PRSU Grant Date Value for any annual grant of PRSUs made to an Executive in future years.
A portion of each annual PRSU award will vest based on the Company’s level of absolute total stockholder return (“TSR”) during the applicable three-year performance period and a portion will vest based on the Company’s level of TSR during the applicable three-year performance period relative to the TSR during such period of a peer group of companies designated by the Compensation Committee at the time of each grant. (The PRSUs that vest based on the Company’s level of absolute TSR are hereinafter referred to as the “Absolute TSR PRSUs,” and the PRSUs that vest based on the Company’s level of relative TSR are hereinafter referred to as the “Relative TSR PRSUs.”) Except in certain circumstances described below in “Payments and Other Benefits upon Termination of Employment,” PRSUs will vest on the last day of the applicable performance period, subject to the level of performance achieved and the Executive’s continued employment with the Company.
Each annual grant of PRSUs provides for a target grant of Absolute TSR PRSUs (the “Absolute TSR Target Award”) and a target grant of Relative TSR PRSUs (the “Relative TSR Target Award”). For each Executive, the Absolute TSR Target Award is a number of PRSUs equal to the quotient of (a) 50% of the Executive’s PRSU Grant Date Value divided by (b) the grant date fair value per unit of one Absolute TSR PRSU. Similarly, the Relative TSR Target Award for each Executive is a number of PRSUs equal to (a) 50% of the Executive’s PRSU Grant Date Value divided by (b) the grant date fair value per unit of one Relative TSR PRSU.
With respect to the Absolute TSR PRSUs, the actual number of Absolute TSR PRSUs that will vest will be based on the level of the Company’s cumulative total stockholder return (i.e., share price appreciation or depreciation, as the case may be, plus dividends divided by initial share price) relative to an 8% per annum simple TSR for the three-year performance period beginning on January 1 of the year of grant (e.g., the performance period for the PRSUs granted in 2021 is January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2023). To determine the actual number of Absolute TSR PRSUs that will vest, the target number of each grant of Absolute TSR PRSUs will be adjusted up or down at the end of the applicable three-year performance period based on the Company’s cumulative TSR relative to an 8% per annum simple TSR objective from 0% of the target number (reflecting 0% per annum TSR during the performance period) to 200% of the target number (reflecting 16% per annum (or higher) TSR during the performance period), with 100% of the target number vesting if TSR of 8% per annum is achieved during the performance period.
With respect to the Relative TSR PRSUs, the actual number of Relative TSR PRSUs that will vest will be based on the Company’s cumulative TSR during the applicable three-year performance period (beginning on January 1 of the year of grant) as compared to the cumulative TSR of designated peer group companies for such performance period. To the extent that the Company’s TSR rank is less than or equal to the 25th percentile when compared to the TSR of the members of the peer group, the Executive will vest in 0% of the target number of Relative TSR PRSUs awarded to him in respect of the applicable performance period. To the extent that the Company’s TSR rank is in the 50th percentile, the Executive will vest in 100% of the target number of Relative TSR PRSUs awarded to him in respect of the applicable performance period. To the extent that the Company’s TSR rank is greater than or equal to the 80th percentile, the Executive will vest in 200% of the target number of Relative TSR PRSUs awarded to him in respect of the applicable performance period. (To the extent that the Company’s TSR ranking falls in between the percentiles identified in the preceding sentences, the number of Relative TSR PRSUs that vest will be interpolated.) The terms of the Relative TSR PRSUs also provide that, regardless of the Company’s TSR rank, in the event the Company has negative TSR for a performance period, the Executive will not vest in more than 100% of the target number of Relative TSR PRSUs awarded to him in respect of the applicable performance period.
Absolute TSR PRSUs and Relative TSR PRSUs that do not vest at the end of the performance period will be forfeited. The Executive will receive one share of the Company’s common stock for each Absolute TSR PRSU and Relative TSR PRSU that vests, provided that the fair market value of the shares of MFA common stock delivered upon settlement may not exceed 400% of the PRSU Grant Date Value of the PRSUs granted in respect of the completed performance period. Any PRSUs that vest are subject to an additional one year deferral prior to settlement, subject to accelerated payout under certain circumstances.
Dividend equivalents will not be paid in respect of the PRSUs during the performance period. Rather, dividend equivalents will accrue with respect to the PRSUs during the performance period, and to the extent that the underlying PRSUs vest, an amount equal to the accrued dividend equivalents related to the vested PRSUs will be paid to the Executive in the form of additional shares of MFA common stock based on the closing price of MFA common stock on the vesting date. Any dividend equivalents applicable to dividends declared and paid during the deferral period following vesting will generally be paid in cash as and when dividends are declared.
Payments and Other Benefits upon Termination of Employment
The Amended Employment Agreements provide for the payment of severance and other benefits to each Executive under various circumstances in which his employment with MFA is terminated.
Death or Disability. In circumstances where termination of the Executive’s employment is due to his death or disability (as such term is defined in each Amended Employment Agreement), the Executive or his legal representative or estate, as the case may be, will be entitled to the following:
(i) aggregate cash (generally payable in lump sum in the case of death and installments in the case of disability) equal to the sum of (A) his annual base salary and (B) the median annual bonus received by such Executive over the three preceding years (the “Median Bonus”);
(ii) any unpaid Annual Bonus for the Performance Period that ended immediately preceding the Executive’s termination;
(iii) in the case of disability only, reimbursement of health insurance premiums for the Executive and his eligible dependents for a period of 18 months following such termination; and
(iv) immediate vesting of all outstanding unvested equity-based awards; provided, however, that performance-based equity awards will continue to vest in accordance with their respective terms and conditions determined as though the Executive remained actively employed through the end of the applicable performance period (or if termination occurs within 12 months following a change in control, vesting will be based on the target number of shares subject to such awards).
Termination without Cause or Resignation for Good Reason. In circumstances where termination of the Executive’s employment is without cause (as such term is defined in the Amended Employment Agreement) or he resigns for good reason (as such term is defined in the Amended Employment Agreement), except as described below with respect to a change in control, the Executive will be entitled to the following:
(i) aggregate cash equal to two times (in the case of Mr. Knutson) and 1.5 times (in the case of each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn) the sum of (A) his annual base salary and (B) the Median Bonus, which will be payable over the twenty-four month period following termination (in the case of Mr. Knutson) and the eighteen-month period following termination (in the case of each of Mr. Kristjansson and Mr. Wulfsohn);
(ii) any unpaid Annual Bonus for the Performance Period that ended immediately preceding the Executive’s termination; and
(iii) immediate vesting of all outstanding unvested equity-based awards that would otherwise vest within the 12 months following such termination; provided, however, that performance-based equity awards will continue to vest in accordance with their respective terms and conditions, and the Executive will be entitled to receive a pro rata share of the amount, if any, ultimately payable in respect of such award based on the Executive’s length of service during the applicable performance period through the next anniversary of the grant date of such award relative to the length of the applicable performance period.
Termination Related to Change in Control. Each Amended Employment Agreement provides that in the event the Executive’s employment is terminated by the Company other than for cause (including upon expiration of his Amended Employment Agreement) or the Executive resigns for good reason, in either case, during the 12-month period following a change in control of the Company (or, in certain limited instances, within the three-month period preceding a change in control of the Company), he will be entitled to the following (in lieu of the amounts described above): (i) a lump sum payment equal to two times (in the case of Mr. Knutson) or 1.5 times (in the case of either Mr. Kristjansson or Mr. Wulfsohn) the sum of (A) his annual base salary and (B) the Median Bonus; (ii) immediate vesting of all outstanding unvested equity-based awards (which, for performance-based equity awards, will be based on the target number of shares subject to such awards); (iii) reimbursement of health insurance premiums for the Executive and his eligible dependents for a period of 18 months following such termination; (iv) a lump sum payment equal to a pro rata target Annual Bonus for the year in which the date of termination occurs; and (v) any unpaid Annual Bonus for the Performance Period that ended immediately preceding the Executive’s termination.
Retirement Provisions (Mr. Knutson). In circumstances where Mr. Knutson’s termination of employment is voluntary and constitutes an eligible retirement (as such term is defined in his Amended Employment Agreement), he will be entitled to the following:
(i) any unpaid Annual Bonus for the Performance Period that ended immediately preceding the Executive’s termination;
(ii) a pro rata Annual Bonus for any partial Performance Period in which the date of termination occurs; and
(iii) immediate vesting of all outstanding unvested equity-based awards; provided, however, that performance-based equity awards will continue to vest in accordance with their respective terms and conditions determined as though the Executive remained actively employed through the end of the applicable performance period (or if termination occurs within 12 months following a change in control, vesting will be based on the target number of shares subject to such awards).
Notice of Termination
Each Executive must provide 90 days’ notice prior to his resignation, and the Company generally must provide 90 days’ notice prior to its terminating the Executive, except, in certain limited circumstances. During this 90-day period after any such notice has been given, the Executive will continue to receive base salary and benefits, but will be ineligible to receive an Annual Bonus for any Performance Period that was not completed as of the beginning of the 90-day period.
Other Terms and Provisions
In addition, each Amended Employment Agreement provides that if any payments or benefits provided to the Executive would constitute excess parachute payments within the meaning of Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and would be subject to the excise tax imposed under Section 4999 of the Code, the payments or benefits will be reduced by the amount required to avoid the excise tax, if such reduction would give the Executive a better after-tax result than if he received the full payments and benefits and paid the excise tax.
The Amended Employment Agreements also contain customary confidentiality, non-disparagement, non-solicitation and non-competition covenants, as well as other terms customary for agreements applicable to senior executives.
PART III
Item 10.
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
We expect to file with the SEC, in April 2021 (and, in any event, not later than 120 days after the close of our last fiscal year), a definitive proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”), pursuant to SEC Regulation 14A in connection with our Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on or about June 2, 2021. The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding the Company’s directors, executive officers, and certain other matters required by Item 401 of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding compliance with Section 16(a) of the 1934 Act required by Item 405 of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding the Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics required by Item 406 of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding certain matters pertaining to the Company’s corporate governance required by Item 407(c)(3), (d)(4) and (d)(5) of Regulation S-K is incorporated by reference.
We have adopted a set of Corporate Governance Guidelines, which together with the charters of the three standing committees of our Board of Directors (Audit, Compensation, and Nominating and Corporate Governance), and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (which constitutes the Company’s code of ethics), provide the framework for the governance of the Company. A complete copy of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters of each of the Board committees and the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (which applies not only to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer, but also to all other employees of the Company) may be found by clicking on the “Overview” link found at the top of our homepage at www.mfafinancial.com and then clicking on the “Corporate Governance” link (information from such site is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K). You may also obtain free copies of these materials by writing to our General Counsel at the Company’s headquarters.
Item 11.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding executive compensation and other compensation related matters required by Items 402 and 407(e)(4) and (e)(5) of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 12.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
The tables to be included in the Proxy Statement, which will contain information relating to the Company’s equity compensation and beneficial ownership of the Company required by Items 201(d) and 403 of Regulation S-K, are incorporated herein by reference.
Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
During 2020, we adopted the Equity Plan, as approved by our stockholders. The Equity Plan amended and restated our 2010 Equity Compensation Plan. (For a description of the Equity Plan, see Note 13(a) to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.)
The following table presents certain information with respect to our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2020:
(1) All equity based compensation is granted pursuant to plans that have been approved by our stockholders.
(2) A weighted average exercise price is not applicable for our RSUs, as such equity awards result in the issuance of shares of our common stock provided that such awards vest and, as such, do not have an exercise price. At December 31, 2020, 1,569,416 RSUs were vested, 669,039 RSUs were subject to time based vesting and 1,214,174 RSUs will vest subject to achieving a market condition.
(3) Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans excludes RSUs presented in the table which were issued and outstanding at December 31, 2020.
Item 13.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement regarding transactions with related persons, promoters and certain control persons and director independence required by Items 404 and 407(a) of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
The information to be included in the Proxy Statement concerning principal accounting fees and services and the Audit Committee’s pre-approval policies and procedures required by Item 14 is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
Item 15.
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a) Documents filed as part of the report
The following documents are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
(1) Financial Statements. The consolidated financial statements of the Company, together with the independent registered public accounting firm’s report thereon, are set forth on pages 66 through 133 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and are incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K
EXHIBIT INDEX
The following exhibits are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The exhibit numbers followed by an asterisk (*) indicate exhibits electronically filed herewith. All other exhibit numbers indicate exhibits previously filed and are hereby incorporated herein by reference. Exhibits numbered 10.1 through 10.22 are management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements.
3.1 Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated April 8, 1998 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 24, 1998 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.2 Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated August 5, 2002 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated August 13, 2002 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.3 Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated August 13, 2002 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.4 Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated December 29, 2008 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated December 29, 2008 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.5 Articles of Amendment (Articles Supplementary) to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated January 1, 2010 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated January 5, 2010 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.6 Articles Supplementary of the Company, dated March 8, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated March 11, 2011 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.7 Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, dated May 24, 2011 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated May 26, 2011 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.8 Articles Supplementary of the Company, dated April 22, 2004, designating the Company’s 8.50% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to the Company’s Form 8-A, dated April 23, 2004 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.9 Articles Supplementary of the Company, dated April 12, 2013, designating the Company’s 7.50% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 15, 2013 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.10 Articles Supplementary to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Company, as amended and supplemented, designating the Company’s 6.50% Series C Fixed-to-Floating Rate Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.10 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed on February 28, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
3.11 Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Company (as amended and restated through April 10, 2017) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 12, 2017 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.1* Description of the Company’s securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
4.2 Specimen of Common Stock Certificate of the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-4, dated February 12, 1998 (Commission File No. 333-46179)).
4.3 Specimen of certificate representing the 7.50% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 15, 2013 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.4 Specimen of certificate representing the 6.50% Series C Fixed-to-Floating Rate Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed on February 28, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.5 Indenture, dated as of April 11, 2012, between the Company and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 11, 2012 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.6 First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of April 11, 2012, between the Company and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 11, 2012 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.7 Indenture, dated June 3, 2019, between the Company and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 3, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.8 First Supplemental Indenture, dated June 3, 2019, between the Company and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 3, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.9 Form of 8.00% Senior Notes due 2042 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated April 11, 2012 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
4.10 Form of 6.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2024 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 3, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.1 Employment Agreement, entered into as of November 26, 2019, by and between the Company and Craig L. Knutson (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated November 26, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.2* Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, entered into as of February 22, 2021, by and between the Company and Craig L. Knutson.
10.3 Employment Agreement, entered into as of November 26, 2019, by and between the Company and Gudmundur Kristjansson (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated November 26, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.4* Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, entered into as of February 22, 2021, by and between the Company and Gudmundur Kristjansson.
10.5 Employment Agreement, entered into as of November 26, 2019, by and between the Company and Bryan Wulfsohn (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated November 26, 2019 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.6* Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, entered into as of February 22, 2021, by and between the Company and Bryan Wulfsohn.
10.7 Agreement, entered into as of May 6, 2020, by and between the Company and Stephen D. Yarad (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated May 8, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)
10.8* Agreement, entered into as of May 6, 2020, by and between the Company and Harold E. Schwartz.
10.9 MFA Financial, Inc. Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K dated May 22, 2015 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.10 MFA Financial, Inc. Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K dated June 12, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991))
10.11 Senior Officers Deferred Bonus Plan, dated December 10, 2008 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated December 12, 2008 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.12 Fourth Amended and Restated 2003 Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated through December 15, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.13 Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Time-Based Vesting) (Knutson) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated January 24, 2014 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.14 Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Performance-Based Vesting) (Knutson) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated January 11, 2017 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.15 Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Vested Award) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated January 24, 2014 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.16 Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Time-Based Vesting) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated December 27, 2018 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.17 Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Performance-Based Vesting) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated December 27, 2018 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.18* Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Time-Based Vesting) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan.
10.19* Form of Phantom Share Award Agreement (Performance-Based Vesting) relating to the Company’s Equity Compensation Plan.
10.20 Summary Description of Compensation Payable to Non-Employee Directors (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2014 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.21 Modification to Compensation Payable to the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2016 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.22 Modification to Compensation Payable to Non-Employee Directors (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2017 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.23 Form of Director and Officer Indemnification Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated May 19, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.24 Credit Agreement, dated June 15, 2020, among MFResidential Assets Holding Corp., the Company, the lenders party thereto and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as administrative agent and collateral agent (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 30, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.25 Investment Agreement, dated June 15, 2020, by and among the Company, Omaha Equity Aggregator, L.P. and Athene USA Corporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 30, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.26 Registration Rights Agreement, dated June 26, 2020, by and among the Company, the Purchasers and the Assignees (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 30, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.27 Form of Warrant, dated June 26, 2020 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 30, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
10.28 Reinstatement Agreement, dated as of June 26, 2020, by and among the Company and the several Participating Counterparties thereto (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 8-K, dated June 30, 2020 (Commission File No. 1-13991)).
21* Subsidiaries of the Company.
23.1* Consent of KPMG LLP.
31.1* Certification of the Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2* Certification of the Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1* Certification of the Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2* Certification of the Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101 Interactive Data Files pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T formatted in iXBRL (Inline Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2020 and 2019; (ii) our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018; (iii) our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income / (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018; (iv) Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018; (v) our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018; and (vi) the notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
104 Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL and contained in Exhibit 101).
* Filed herewith.
(c) Financial Statement Schedules required by Regulation S-X
Schedule IV - Mortgage Loans on Real Estate as of December 31, 2020.
All other financial statement schedules have been omitted because the required information is not applicable or deemed not material, or the required information is presented in the consolidated financial statements and/or in the notes to consolidated financial statements filed in response to Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING EXHIBITS
In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, please remember they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about the Company or the other parties to the agreements. The agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and:
•should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements proved to be inaccurate;
•have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement;
•may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to you or other investors; and
•were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments.
Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about the Company may be found elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the Company’s other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.
The Company acknowledges that, notwithstanding the inclusion of the foregoing cautionary statements, it is responsible for considering whether additional specific disclosures of material information regarding material contractual provisions are required to make the statements in this report not misleading.
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary.
None.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: February 23, 2021MFA FINANCIAL, INC.
(Registrant)
By/s/ Stephen D. Yarad
Stephen D. Yarad
Chief Financial Officer
and Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.