ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully read and consider the following risk factors, together with the information included under the caption “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and the other information included in this Annual Report. Our business, financial condition, cash flows and/or results of operations could be adversely affected by any of these risks, as well as additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial.
Risks Related to Our Business
We depend on a manager to run our business, and if the Manager is unable to conduct our investment activities properly, there could be a material adverse effect on our business.
All of our investment activities are conducted by the Manager. The Manager has great latitude in determining the types of assets that are appropriate investments for us, as well as the individual investment decisions. Thus, our success will depend on our relationship with, and the performance of, the Manager. Should the Manager fail to allocate sufficient resources or select appropriate investments, we may be unable to achieve our objectives. Further, if the Manager or Rithm are unable to retain its key personnel, it may be difficult for the Manager to manage our business. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows.
We expect to continue to incur consolidated net losses from our mortgage asset holdings.
For the year ended December 31, 2025 , we incurred a net loss attributable to common stockholders of $2.7 million . In addition, the market value of our RPLs, NPLs and small balance commercial loans have significantly deteriorated, and we have incurred substantial operating losses on loans we have sold or intend to sell. We expect to continue to incur operating losses for the foreseeable future given the current market conditions for our mortgage asset holdings.
In particular, higher historical interest rates are expected to continue to have significant negative effects on our loan assets. Increases in interest rates, the interrelationships between various rates and interest rate volatility have had, and are expected to continue to have, negative effects on our earnings because it has extended duration. This has resulted in, and is expected to continue to result in, significant decreases in the fair market value of performing loans. It also may impact adversely our ability to securitize, re-securitize or sell our assets on attractive terms. Higher interest rates may reduce the ability or desire of borrowers to refinance their loans. Mortgage related assets may become more illiquid during periods of interest rate volatility. As a result, we also may encounter difficulties refinancing our securitizations and it increases the costs of our repurchase facility financings. Higher interest rates also generally increase our financing costs as we seek to renew or replace borrowing facilities.
Many of our investments may be illiquid, and this lack of liquidity has in the past and could continue to significantly impede our ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions or to realize the value at which such investments are carried if we are required to dispose of them.
We previously acquired, and may in the future acquire, assets, securities or other instruments that are not liquid or publicly traded. Illiquidity may result from the absence of an established market for the investments, as well as legal or contractual restrictions on their resale, refinancing or other disposition. Dispositions of investments may be subject to contractual and other limitations on transfer or other restrictions that would interfere with subsequent sales of such investments or adversely affect the terms that could be obtained upon any disposition thereof. Liquidity can also be impacted by current market conditions.
In addition, some of the assets we may acquire may be securities and may not be registered under the relevant securities laws, resulting in a prohibition against their transfer, sale, pledge or other disposition unless such securities are registered or are sold in a transaction that is exempt from the registration requirements of, or is otherwise in accordance with, those laws. As a result, it is possible we may be forced to sell such investments at a loss, fail to realize any profits from such investments or be required to hold such investments for a considerable time.
Mortgage-related assets generally experience periods of illiquidity, as well as periods of delinquencies and defaults with respect to residential and commercial mortgage loans. Further, validating third-party pricing for illiquid assets may be more subjective than for liquid assets. Any illiquidity of our assets may make it difficult for us to sell such assets if the need or desire arises. For example, during periods of market volatility or reduced demand, we have in the past and may continue to seek to sell mortgage loans or other investments that are carried at fair value, including in connection with portfolio repositioning, risk management or financing considerations. In such circumstances, the prices available in the market may be materially lower than the values at which such assets are carried, and we could realize losses upon any such sale. In addition, any delay in, or inability to consummate, any such sale on attractive terms or at all could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and/or our stock price. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we previously recorded our assets. We may also face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate any assets for which we have or could be attributed with material non-public information. If we are unable to sell our assets at favorable prices or at all, it could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Assets that are illiquid are more difficult to finance, and to the extent that we use leverage to finance assets that become illiquid, we may lose that leverage or have it reduced. Assets tend to become less liquid during times of financial stress, which is often the time that liquidity is most needed. As a result, our ability to sell assets or vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions may be limited by liquidity constraints, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
CRE-related investments that are secured by commercial real property are subject to delinquency, foreclosure and loss, which could result in losses and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows.
Under RCM GA’s management, we have shifted our strategic direction to focus on the origination and acquisition of CRE-related assets, including senior and subordinated commercial mortgages, mezzanine loans, preferred equity, commercial properties, commercial mortgage servicing rights, CMBS and other investments in CRE. CRE debt instruments (e.g., mortgages and mezzanine loans) that are secured by commercial property are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss that are arguably greater than similar risks associated with a pool of loans secured by single-family residential properties. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by an income-producing property is typically primarily dependent upon the successful operation of the property, rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired.
Net operating income of an income producing property can be affected by, among other things: customer mix, success of customer businesses, property management decisions, property location and condition, competition from comparable types of properties, changes in laws that increase operating expenses or limit rents that may be charged, any need to address environmental contamination at the property, the occurrence of any uninsured casualty at the property, changes in national, regional or local economic conditions and/or specific industry segments, current and potential future capital markets uncertainty, declines in regional or local real estate values, declines in regional or local rental or occupancy rates, increases in interest rates, real estate tax rates and other operating expenses, changes in governmental rules, regulations and fiscal policies, including environmental legislation, natural disasters, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances.
In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan borrower, the mortgage loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court) and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process, which could have a substantial adverse effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan. In addition, if we foreclose on a particular property, we could become, as owner of the property, subject to liabilities associated with such property, including liabilities related to taxes and environmental matters. Moreover, in the event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we will bear a risk of loss of principal to the extent of any realized deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and limit amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.
In addition, we may be exposed to the risk of judicial proceedings with borrowers and other entities we invest in, including bankruptcy or other litigation, as a strategy to avoid foreclosure or enforcement of other rights by us as a lender or investor. In the event that any of the properties or entities underlying or collateralizing our loans or investments experiences any of the foregoing events or occurrences, the value of, and return on, such investments could be reduced, which would adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We invest in commercial mortgage loans which are non-recourse in nature and include limited options for financial recovery in the event of default; an event of default may adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Under RCM GA’s management, we invest in commercial mortgage loans, including mezzanine loans and B-notes, which are secured by commercial or other properties and are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. CRE loans are not fully amortizing, meaning that they may have a significant principal balance or balloon payment due on maturity. Full satisfaction of the balloon payment by a commercial borrower is heavily dependent on the availability of subsequent financing or a functioning sales market, as well as other factors such as the value of the property, the level of prevailing mortgage rates, the borrower’s equity in the property and the financial condition and operating history of the property and the borrower. In a period of rising interest rates or tightening credit markets, it may be more difficult for borrowers to obtain long-term financing, which increases the risk of non-payment. In addition, in the absence of any such takeout financing, the ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by an income-producing property will depend upon the successful operation of such property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Furthermore, we may not have the same access to information in connection with investments in commercial mortgage loans, either when investigating a potential investment or after making an investment, as compared to publicly traded securities.
Commercial mortgage loans are usually non-recourse in nature. Therefore, if a commercial borrower defaults on the commercial mortgage loan, then the options for financial recovery are limited in nature. To the extent the underlying default rates with respect to the pool or tranche of CRE loans in which we directly or indirectly invest increase, the performance of our investments related thereto may be adversely affected. Default rates and losses on commercial mortgage loans will be affected by a number of factors, including global, regional and local economic conditions in the area where the mortgage properties are located, the borrower’s equity in the mortgage property and the financial circumstances of the borrower. A continued decline in specific CRE markets and property valuations may result in higher delinquencies and defaults and potentially foreclosures. In the event of default, the lender will have no right to assets beyond collateral attached to the commercial mortgage loan. The overall level of commercial mortgage loan defaults remains significant and market values of the underlying CRE remain distressed in many cases. It has also become increasingly difficult for lenders to dispose of foreclosed CRE without incurring substantial investment losses, ultimately leading to a decline in the value of such investments.
Investments in CRE companies are subject to the specific risks relating to the particular company and to the general risks of investing in real estate-related loans and securities, which may result in significant losses.
We made the PGRE Investment in December 2025 and expect to continue to make investments in CRE companies in the future. We may invest a portion of our assets in preferred and/or debt securities of CRE operating or finance companies. These investments involve special risks relating to the particular company, and if we invest in debt securities, such debt securities are often non-collateralized and may also be subordinated to such company’s other obligations. These investments also subject us to the risks inherent with real estate-related investments, including:
• risks of delinquency and foreclosure, and risks of loss in the event thereof;
• risks related to increases in property taxes;
• the dependence upon the successful operation of, and net income from, real property;
• risks generally incident to interests in real property; and
• risks specific to the type and use of a particular property.
These risks may adversely affect the value of our investments in CRE operating and finance companies and the ability of the issuers thereof to make principal and interest payments in a timely manner, or at all, and could result in significant losses.
The PGRE Investment exposes us to additional risks related to the office real estate industry.
The PGRE Investment exposes us to risks and uncertainties related to the office and CRE industries, which include, but are not limited to, the following:
• declines in the financial condition of Paramount’s tenants, many of which are financial, legal and other professional firms, which may result in tenant defaults under leases due to bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failures or other reasons;
• the inability or unwillingness of Paramount’s tenants to pay rent increases;
• significant job losses in the financial services, professional services and technology and media industries, which may decrease demand for Paramount’s office space, causing market rental rates and property values to be negatively impacted;
• an oversupply of, or a reduced demand for, Class A office space;
• changes in market rental rates and changes in space utilization by tenants due to technology, economic conditions and business cultures;
• the concentration of Paramount’s assets in New York City and San Francisco, including adverse economic or regulatory developments in those cities;
• redevelopment and repositioning risk; and
• risks related to joint venture structures in ownership of CRE.
In addition, telecommuting, flexible work schedules, open workplaces, teleconferencing and video-conferencing have become commonplace. These practices enable businesses to reduce their space requirements. There is also an increasing trend among some businesses to utilize shared office spaces and co-working spaces. These practices have eroded the overall demand for office space and, to the extent they continue, could in turn, place additional downward pressure on occupancy, rental rates and property valuations.
These risks may adversely affect the value of our investment and could result in significant losses.
We will have little control over the PGRE Investment and will be dependent on third parties to manage our investment, and our investment will be illiquid.
The PGRE Investment represents a minority investment in PGOP. Minority investments inherently involve a lesser degree of control over business operations, thereby potentially increasing the financial, legal, operational, regulatory and/or compliance risks associated with the minority investment. In addition, we will be dependent on controlling equity holders, management or other persons or entities who control them and who may have business interests, strategies or goals that are inconsistent with ours, or who may make business, financial or management decisions with which we do not agree, or otherwise act in a manner that does not serve our interests. Business decisions or other actions or omissions of the controlling equity holders, management or other persons or entities who control them may adversely affect the value of our investment, result in litigation or regulatory action against us and may otherwise damage our reputation and brand, and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
In addition, the PGRE Investment will be illiquid, and the absence of a market may inhibit our ability to dispose of it. If the book value of an investment were to exceed its fair value, we would be required to recognize an impairment charge related to the investment. See “—Many of our investments may be illiquid, and this lack of liquidity has in the past and could continue to significantly impede our ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions or to realize the value at which such investments are carried if we are required to dispose of them.”
There are certain risks associated with the servicers of CRE loans.
The exercise of remedies and successful realization of liquidation proceeds relating to CRE loans may be highly dependent on the performance of the servicer or special servicer. The servicer may not be appropriately staffed or compensated to immediately address issues or concerns with the underlying loans. Such servicers may exit the business and need to be replaced, which could have a negative impact on the portfolio due to lack of focus during a transition. Special servicers frequently are affiliated with investors who have purchased the most subordinate bond classes, and certain servicing actions, such as a loan extension instead of forcing a borrower pay off, may benefit the subordinate bond classes more so than the senior bonds. There may be a limited number of special servicers available, particularly those which do not have conflicts of interest. In addition, to the extent any such servicers fail to effectively perform their obligations pursuant to the applicable servicing agreements, such failure may adversely affect our investments.
There are certain risks associated with an investment in CMBS.
CMBS investments may be subject to interest shortfalls due to interest collected from the underlying loans not being sufficient to pay accrued interest to all of the mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) interest holders. Interest shortfalls to the CMBS trust will occur when the servicer does not advance full interest payments on defaulted loans. The servicer in a CMBS trust is required to advance monthly principal and interest payments due on a delinquent loan. Once a loan is delinquent for a period of time (generally 60 days), the servicer is required to obtain a new appraisal to determine the value of the property securing the loan. The servicer is only required to advance interest based on the lesser of the loan amount or 90%, generally, of the appraised value. Interest shortfalls occur when 90%, generally, of the appraised value is less than the loan amount and the servicer does not advance interest on the full loan amount. The resulting interest shortfalls impact interest payments on the most junior class in the trust first. As interest shortfalls increase, more senior classes may be impacted. Over time, senior classes may be reimbursed for accumulated shortfalls if the delinquent loans are resolved, but there is no guarantee that shortfalls will be collected. Interest shortfalls to the CMBS trust may also occur as a result of accumulated advances and expenses on defaulted loans. When a defaulted loan or foreclosed property is liquidated, the servicer will be reimbursed for accumulated advances and expenses prior to payments to CMBS bond holders. If proceeds are insufficient to reimburse the servicer or if a defaulted loan is modified and not foreclosed, the servicer is able to make a claim on interest payments that is senior to the bond holders to cover accumulated advances and expenses. If the claim is greater than interest collected on the loans, interest shortfalls could impact one or more bond classes in a CMBS trust until the servicer’s claim is satisfied.
Additionally, the real estate loans backing the CMBS and other investments may be subject to various laws enacted in the jurisdiction or state of the borrower for the protection of creditors. If an unpaid creditor files a lawsuit seeking payment, the court may invalidate all or part of the borrower’s debt as a fraudulent conveyance, subordinate such indebtedness to existing or future creditors of the borrower or recover amounts previously paid by the borrower in satisfaction of such indebtedness, based on certain tests for borrower insolvency and other facts and circumstances, which may vary by jurisdiction. There can be no assurance as to what standard a court would apply in order to determine whether the borrower was “insolvent” after giving effect to the incurrence of the indebtedness constituting the mortgage backing the CMBS and other investments, or that regardless of the method of valuation, a court would not determine that the borrower was “insolvent” after giving effect to such incurrence. In addition, in the event of the insolvency of a borrower, payments made on such mortgage loans could be subject to avoidance as a “preference” if made within a certain period of time (which may be as long as one year and one day) before insolvency.
Difficult conditions in the mortgage, CRE and residential real estate markets, as well as general market concerns, have adversely affected the value of the assets in which we invest and these conditions continue to persist for the foreseeable future.
Our business has historically been, and may in the future be, materially affected by conditions in the residential mortgage and real estate markets, the commercial mortgage and real estate markets, including the smaller CRE market, the financial markets and the economy in general. Concerns about inflation, energy costs, geopolitical issues, the stability of the global banking system, unemployment levels and the availability and cost of credit have contributed to volatility in the economy and markets. In particular, the residential mortgage market in the U.S. has in the past experienced a variety of difficulties and changed economic conditions, including defaults, credit losses and liquidity concerns and this may occur in the future. The smaller CRE mortgage market also may face increased defaults, losses or liquidity concerns due to economic conditions.
Certain commercial banks, investment banks and insurance companies continue to announce losses from exposure to the residential mortgage market. These factors have affected investor perception of the risk associated with MBS securities, other real estate-related securities and various other asset classes in which we may invest. As a result, values of certain of our assets and the asset classes in which we intend to invest have experienced volatility. Further deterioration of the mortgage market and investor perception of the risks associated with MBS we may retain as part of our securitizations, as well as other assets that we acquire could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
If we fail to develop, enhance and implement strategies to adapt to changing conditions in the CRE industry and capital markets, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected by our acquisition of CRE loans.
The manner in which we compete and the types of CRE loans we are able to acquire will be affected by changing conditions resulting from sudden changes in the CRE industry, regulatory environment, the role of credit rating agencies or their rating criteria or process, or the U.S. and global economies generally. If we do not effectively respond to these changes, or if our strategies to respond to these changes are not successful, our financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected. In addition, we can provide no assurances that we will be successful in executing our business strategy in successfully acquiring CRE loans.
A significant portion of our residential mortgage loans may become NPLs, which could further increase the significant losses we have incurred to date.
We previously acquired residential mortgage loans where the borrower has failed to make timely payments of principal and/or interest currently or in the past. Under current market conditions, many of these loans may have current loan-to-value ratios in excess of 100%, meaning the amount owed on the loan exceeds the value of the underlying real estate. Although we purchased loans at significant discounts to unpaid principal balance (“UPB”) and underlying property value, if actual results are different from our assumptions in determining the prices for such loans, particularly if the market value of the underlying property decreases significantly, we have previously and may continue to incur significant losses.
We own higher risk loans, which are more expensive to service than conventional mortgage loans, and a change in delinquencies for the loans we own could adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
A percentage of the mortgage loans we own are higher risk loans, meaning that the loans are made to less creditworthy borrowers or for properties the value of which has decreased and that the loans tend to have higher delinquency and default rates than GSE (as defined below) and government agency-insured mortgage loans. These loans are more expensive to service because they require more frequent interaction with customers and greater monitoring and oversight. Additionally, in connection with mortgage market reforms and recent and possible future regulatory developments, servicers of higher risk loans may be subject to increased scrutiny by U.S. state and federal regulators or may experience higher compliance costs, which could result in a further increase in servicing costs. Through the Newrez Servicing Agreement, the Servicer currently passes along to us many of the additional third-party expenses incurred by it in servicing these higher risk loans. The greater cost of servicing higher risk loans, which may be further increased through regulatory changes, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
Additionally, these higher risk loans, combined with decreases in property values, have caused increases in loan-to-value ratios, resulting in borrowers having little or negative equity in their property, which may provide an incentive to borrowers to strategically default on their loans. Recent laws delay the initiation or completion of foreclosure proceedings on specified types of residential mortgage loans or otherwise limit the ability of mortgage servicers to take actions that may be essential to preserve the value of the mortgage loans. Any such limitations are likely to cause delayed or reduced collections from mortgagors.
The principal and interest payments on our MBS are not guaranteed by any entity and, therefore, are subject to increased risks, including credit risk.
We historically created and retained residential and commercial MBS that are backed by residential and commercial mortgage loans that do not conform to Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac” and, together with Fannie Mae, “GSEs” and each, a “GSE”) underwriting guidelines. Consequently, the principal and interest on those MBS are not guaranteed by GSEs, or securitized through Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”). Our MBS are and will be subject to many of the risks of the respective underlying mortgage loans. Mortgage loans are typically secured by a single-family residential or commercial property and are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by a property depends upon the income or assets of the borrower. A number of factors, including the impact of a prolonged economic downturn, unemployment, acts of God, climate disasters, such as wildfire and flooding events, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, may impair borrowers’ abilities to repay their mortgage loans. In periods following home price declines, “strategic defaults” (decisions by borrowers to default on their mortgage loans despite having the ability to pay) also may become more prevalent.
In the event of defaults under mortgage loans backing any of our MBS, we will bear a risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan. Additionally, in the event of the bankruptcy of a borrower, the mortgage loan to such borrower may be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process which could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan. If borrowers default on the mortgage loans backing our MBS and we are unable to recover any resulting loss through the foreclosure process, our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be adversely affected.
Our CRE loans will be subject to the ability of the commercial property owner to generate net income from operating the property as well as the increased risks of delinquency and foreclosure.
The ability of a commercial mortgage borrower to repay a CRE loan secured by an income-producing property typically is dependent primarily upon the successful operation of such property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the CRE may be impaired. Net operating income of an income producing property can be affected by, among other things, tenant mix, success of tenant businesses, property management decisions, property location and condition, competition from comparable types of properties, changes in laws that increase operating expense, limit rents that may be charged, or that restrict eviction and replacement of nonpaying tenants, any need to address environmental contamination at the property, the occurrence of any uninsured casualty at the property, changes in national, regional or local economic conditions or specific industry segments, declines in regional or local real estate values, declines in regional or local rental or occupancy rates, increases in interest rates, real estate tax rates and other operating expenses, changes in governmental rules, regulations and fiscal policies, including environmental legislation, acts of God, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances. In particular, the number of commercial property delinquencies and foreclosures has increased. In the event of the bankruptcy of a commercial mortgage loan borrower, the CRE loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the such loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a CRE loan can be an expensive and lengthy process, which could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed CRE loan.
Our CRE loans in respect of smaller multi-family residential properties or smaller mixed use retail/residential properties may be subject to defaults, foreclosure timeline extension, fraud, commercial price depreciation and unfavorable modification of loan principal amount, interest rate and amortization of principal.
Our CRE loans secured by multi-family, mixed-use or commercial property may be subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure, and risk of loss that may be greater than similar risks associated with loans made on the security of single-family residential property. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by an income-producing property typically depends primarily upon the successful operation of such property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Net operating income of an income-producing property can be affected by, among other things:
• tenant mix;
• success of tenant businesses;
• property management decisions;
• property location and condition;
• competition from comparable types of properties;
• changes in laws that increase operating expenses or limit rents that may be charged;
• any need to address environmental contamination at the property or the occurrence of any uninsured casualty at the property;
• changes in national, regional or local economic conditions and/or specific industry segments;
• declines in regional or local real estate values;
• declines in regional or local rental or occupancy rates;
• increases in interest rates;
• real estate tax rates and other operating expenses;
• changes in governmental rules, regulations and fiscal policies, including environmental legislation; and
• acts of God, terrorist attacks, social unrest and civil disturbances.
We may be materially and adversely affected by risks affecting borrowers in which our investments may be concentrated at any given time, as well as from unfavorable changes in the related geographic regions.
Our assets are not subject to any geographic, diversification or concentration limitations. Accordingly, our investment portfolio may be concentrated by geography and/or borrower demographics, increasing the risk of loss to us if the particular concentration in our portfolio is subject to greater risks or undergoing adverse developments. In addition, adverse conditions in the areas where the properties securing or otherwise underlying our investments are located (including business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics and other factors) and local real estate conditions (such as oversupply or reduced demand) may have an adverse effect on the value of our investments. A material decline in the demand for single-family housing or rentals in these or other areas where we own assets may materially and adversely affect us. Lack of diversification can increase the correlation of non-performance and foreclosure risks among our investments. Historically, our mortgage and real estate assets have been concentrated in Florida and the western and southwestern U.S.
Changes in the underwriting standards by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae or the Federal Housing Administration (the “FHA”) could make it more difficult to refinance our purchased mortgage loans.
Stricter underwriting standards by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae or the FHA could affect our ability to refinance mortgage loans and the terms on which mortgage loans may be refinanced, which may adversely affect our business and results of operations. For example, in 2010, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae announced tighter underwriting guidelines, particularly for adjustable rate mortgages (“ARMs”), and hybrid interest-only ARMs (“Hybrid ARMs”). Specifically, Freddie Mac announced that it would no longer purchase interest-only mortgages and Fannie Mae changed its eligibility criteria for purchasing and securitizing ARMs to protect consumers from potentially dramatic payment increases. If Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae or the FHA were to adopt other restrictive underwriting standards, that could affect our ability to refinance loans and the terms of those loans.
The whole residential mortgage loans and other residential mortgage assets in which we have invested are subject to risk of default, among other risks.
We historically acquired mortgage loans and other mortgage-related assets which may be subject to defaults (including re-default for RPLs), foreclosure moratoria or timeline extensions, fraud, residential price depreciation and unfavorable modification of loan principal amount, interest rate and amortization of principal, or government-mandated payment forbearances, among other factors, which could result in losses to us. Residential mortgage loans are secured by single-family residential property and are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. The payment of the principal and interest on the mortgage loans we acquire would not typically be guaranteed by any GSE or securitized through Ginnie Mae or any other governmental agency. Additionally, by directly acquiring whole mortgage loans, we do not receive the structural credit enhancements that can benefit senior tranches of MBS. A whole mortgage loan is directly exposed to losses resulting from nonpayment or other default. Therefore, the value of the underlying property, the creditworthiness and financial position of the borrower and the priority and enforceability of the lien will significantly affect the value of such mortgage. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by a residential property typically depends upon the income or assets of the borrower. A number of factors, including a general economic downturn, acts of nature, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a mortgage loan. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process, which could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on a foreclosed mortgage loan. In the event of a foreclosure, we may assume direct ownership of the underlying real estate. The liquidation proceeds upon sale of such real estate may not be sufficient to recover our cost basis in the loan, and any costs or delays involved in the foreclosure or liquidation process may increase losses.
Whole mortgage loans are also subject to “special hazard” risk such as property damage caused by hazards, such as earthquakes, wildfires or floods or other environmental hazards, not covered by standard property insurance policies. See “—We are subject to risks of loss from weather conditions, man-made or natural disasters and climate change.” In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan borrower, the mortgage loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor in possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. In addition, claims may be assessed against us on account of our position as a mortgage holder or property owner, including assignee liability, responsibility for tax payments, environmental hazards and other liabilities. In some cases, these liabilities may be “recourse liabilities” or may otherwise lead to losses in excess of the purchase price of the related mortgage or property. In the event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we bear a risk of loss of the principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow from operations and results of operations. The MBS we retained from our own securitizations evidence interests in, or are secured by, pools of residential mortgage loans. Accordingly, the MBS that we hold is subject to all of the risks of the respective underlying mortgage loans.
For certain residential mortgage loans, the Dodd-Frank Act established, through amendment to the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), life-of-loan liability on any holder of a residential mortgage loan that takes action on the loan following default (including foreclosure). This liability is premised upon violation of the Ability-to-Repay/Qualified Mortgage Rule (as promulgated under the Dodd-Frank Act), as well as violation of the loan originator compensation rule. Borrower remedies, available by way of recoupment or set-off, include statutory damages and attorneys’ fees.
If we acquire and subsequently re-sell any whole mortgage loans, we may be required to repurchase such loans or indemnify investors if we breach representations and warranties.
If we acquire and subsequently re-sell any whole mortgage loans, we would generally be required to make customary representations and warranties about such loans to the loan purchaser. Our mortgage loan sale agreements and terms of any securitizations into which we have previously sold loans and may in the future sell loans will generally require us to repurchase or substitute loans in the event we breach a representation or warranty given to the loan purchaser. In addition, we may be required to repurchase loans as a result of borrower fraud or in the event of early payment default on a mortgage loan. Repurchased loans are typically worth only a fraction of the original price. Significant repurchase activity could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders. Further, depending on the level of repurchase and resale activities, we may determine to conduct any such activities through a taxable REIT subsidiary (“TRS”).
We are subject to counterparty risk and may be unable to seek indemnity or require our counterparties to repurchase mortgage loans if they breach representations and warranties, which could cause us to suffer losses.
When selling mortgage loans, sellers typically make customary representations and warranties about such loans. Our mortgage loan purchase agreements may entitle us to seek indemnity or demand repurchase or substitution of the loans in the event our counterparty breaches a representation or warranty given to us. However, there can be no assurance that our mortgage loan purchase agreements will contain appropriate representations and warranties, that we will be able to enforce our contractual right to repurchase or substitution, or that our counterparty will remain solvent or otherwise be able to honor its obligations under its mortgage loan purchase agreements. Our inability to obtain indemnity or require repurchase of a significant number of loans could harm our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations and/or our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Certain investments in portfolios of whole mortgage loans and other mortgage assets may require us to purchase less desirable mortgage assets as part of an otherwise desirable pool of mortgage assets, which could subject us to additional risks relating to the less desirable mortgage assets.
If we acquire portfolios of whole mortgage loans, including commercial or mixed-use property loans, and other mortgage assets, the portfolio may contain some assets that we would not otherwise seek to acquire on their own. These other assets may subject us to additional risks, including impaired performance and reduce the return on our investments.
To the extent that due diligence is conducted on potential assets, such due diligence may not reveal all of the risks associated with such assets and may not reveal other weaknesses in such assets, which could lead to losses.
Before making an investment, we 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 or that any purchase will be successful, which could result in losses on these assets, which, in turn, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
The failure of a seller of mortgage loans to provide all the necessary documentation to us could adversely affect our ability to leverage our assets or otherwise service the mortgage loans that we will own.
Pursuant to customary provisions in the purchase agreements governing our loan acquisitions, we also generally have the right to cause the sellers to repurchase certain loans if they do not provide proper documentation to evidence ownership or first lien status with respect to such loans within a specified time period. Any delay or inability to obtain such documentation could adversely affect our ability to leverage such loans, and could adversely affect the Servicer’s ability to service those mortgage loans and any such repurchases by the sellers would decrease the size of our portfolio.
Market conditions may affect our ability to securitize assets, which could increase our financing costs and adversely affect our results of operations and ability to make distributions.
Our ability to obtain permanent non-recourse financing through securitizations is affected by a number of factors, including:
• conditions in the securities markets, generally;
• conditions in the asset-backed securities (“ABS”) markets, specifically;
• yields on our portfolio of mortgage loans;
• the credit quality of our portfolio of mortgage loans; and
• our ability to obtain any necessary credit enhancement.
At times, the asset-backed securitization markets have experienced disruptions, and securitization volumes have decreased sharply due to, among other reasons, heightened inflation. These conditions in the securitization markets include reduced liquidity, increased risk premiums for issuers, reduced investor demand, financial distress among financial guaranty insurance providers, a general tightening of credit and substantial regulatory uncertainty. When these conditions exist, our cost of funding increases and our access to the securitization market could diminish or even be eliminated. As a result, these conditions could preclude us from securitizing assets acquired for such purpose.
Our ability to sell mortgage loans into securitizations could also be delayed, limited or precluded by legislative and regulatory reforms applicable to ABS and the institutions that sponsor, service, rate or otherwise participate in, or contribute to, the successful execution of a securitization transaction. Other factors could also limit, delay or preclude our ability to sell assets into securitizations. Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act have required significant revisions to the legal and regulatory framework that apply to the ABS markets and securitizations. For example, Section 15G of the Exchange Act, as modified by the Dodd-Frank Act, generally requires the issuer of ABS to retain not less than five percent of the credit risk of the assets collateralizing the ABS. While Section 15G includes an exemption for ABS that are collateralized exclusively by residential mortgages that qualify as “qualified residential mortgages” (as defined in the accompanying regulations), RPLs of the type that we purchased and securitized generally do not qualify for this exemption. We therefore are required to retain five percent or more of the credit risk associated with the assets we securitize.
In addition to these laws and rules, other U.S. federal or state laws and regulations that could affect our ability to sell assets into securitization programs may be proposed, enacted or implemented. These laws and regulations could effectively preclude us from financing our assets through securitizations or could delay our execution of these types of transactions. Other matters, such as (i) accounting standards applicable to securitization transactions and (ii) capital and leverage requirements applicable to banks and other regulated financial institutions that traditionally purchase and hold ABS, could also result in less investor demand for securities issued through securitization transactions.
Prepayment rates can change, adversely affecting the performance of our assets and our ability to reinvest the proceeds thereof.
The frequency at which prepayments (including voluntary prepayments by borrowers, loan buyouts and liquidations due to defaults and foreclosures) occur on residential mortgage loans, including those underlying MBS, is affected by a variety of factors, including, home price appreciation, prevailing level of interest rates as well as economic, demographic, tax, social, legal and other factors. Generally, borrowers tend to prepay their mortgages when prevailing mortgage rates fall below the interest rates on their mortgage loans. When borrowers prepay their mortgage loans at rates that are faster or slower than expected, it results in prepayments that are faster or slower than expected on the mortgage loans and any related MBS. These faster or slower than expected payments may adversely affect our profitability, although the effects vary, because upon prepayment we can receive 100% of the remaining UPB that we had purchased at a significant discount.
We have in the past purchased loans that have a higher interest rate than the prevailing market interest rate. In exchange for this higher interest rate, we would pay a premium to par value to acquire the loan. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, we amortize this premium over the expected term of the security or loan based on our prepayment assumptions or its contractual terms, depending on the type of loan or security purchased. If a loan is prepaid in whole or in part at a rate faster than expected or its contractual term (as applicable), we must expense all or a part of the remaining unamortized portion of the premium that was paid at the time of the purchase, which will adversely affect our profitability.
We have in the past also purchased securities or loans that have a lower interest rate than the prevailing market interest rate. In exchange for this lower interest rate, we may pay a discount to par value to acquire the loan. We accrete this discount over the expected term of the loan based on our prepayment assumptions or its contractual terms, depending on the type of loan or security purchased. If a loan is prepaid at a slower than expected rate, however, we must accrete the remaining portion of the discount at a slower than expected rate. This will extend the expected life of investment portfolio and result in a lower than expected yield on loans purchased at a discount to par.
Prepayment rates generally increase when interest rates fall and decrease when interest rates rise, but changes in prepayment rates are difficult to predict. Prepayments can also occur when borrowers sell the property and use the sale proceeds to prepay the mortgage as part of a physical relocation or when borrowers default on their mortgages and the mortgages are prepaid from the proceeds of a foreclosure sale of the property. The GSE guidelines for repurchasing delinquent loans from MBS trusts and changes in such guidelines also affect prepayment rates. Consequently, prepayment rates also may be affected by conditions in the housing and financial markets, which may result in increased delinquencies on mortgage loans, cost of capital, general economic conditions and the relative interest rates on fixed and adjustable rate loans, which could lead to an acceleration of the payment of the related principal.
The adverse effects of prepayments may affect us in various ways. Particular investments may underperform relative to any hedges that we may have constructed for these assets, resulting in a loss to us. Furthermore, to the extent that faster prepayment rates are due to lower interest rates, the principal payments received from prepayments will tend to be reinvested in lower-yielding assets, which may reduce our income in the long run. Therefore, if actual prepayment rates differ from anticipated prepayment rates, our business, financial condition and results of operations and ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be materially adversely affected.
Slower prepayments may result in lower yields, current period income and cash collections as payments of interest and principal may be collected over a longer time period. While total cash collection may be higher than anticipated over the life of the loan, current period operating results could be adversely impacted.
The real estate assets and real estate-related assets we invest in are subject to the risks associated with real property.
We own real estate directly, as well as assets that are secured by real estate. Real estate assets are subject to various risks, including:
• declines in the value of real estate;
• acts of nature, including earthquakes, floods, wildfires and other natural disasters, which may result in uninsured losses;
• acts of war or terrorism, including the consequences of terrorist attacks;
• adverse changes in national and local economic and market conditions;
• changes in governmental laws and regulations, fiscal policies and zoning ordinances and the related costs of compliance with laws and regulations, fiscal policies and ordinances;
• costs of remediation and liabilities associated with environmental conditions such as indoor mold; and
• the potential for uninsured or under-insured property losses.
The occurrence of any of the foregoing or similar events may reduce our return from an affected property or asset and, consequently, materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
The allocation of capital among our mortgage loans may vary, which may adversely affect our financial performance.
In executing our business plan, we regularly consider the allocation of capital CMBS and various other CRE assets and investment opportunities. The allocation of capital may vary due to market conditions, the expected relative return on equity of each, the judgment of our Manager, the demand in the marketplace for certain mortgage loans and the availability of specific investment opportunities. We also consider the availability and cost of our likely sources of capital. If we fail to appropriately allocate capital and resources across our portfolio or fail to optimize our acquisition and capital raising opportunities, our financial performance may be adversely affected.
Our use of models in connection with the valuation of our assets and determination of the timing and amount of cash flows expected to be collected subjects us to potential risks in the event that such models are incorrect, misleading or based on incomplete information.
As part of the risk management process, we use our Manager’s detailed proprietary models to evaluate, depending on the asset class, house price appreciation and depreciation by county, region, prepayment speeds and foreclosure frequency, cost and timing. Models and data are used to value assets or potential assets, assess the timing and amount of cash flows expected to be collected, and may also be used in connection with any hedging of our acquisitions. Many of the models are 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 models to also be incorrect. 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, especially valuation or cash flow models, we may be induced to buy certain assets at prices that are too high, to sell certain other assets at prices that are too low, overestimate the timing or amount of cash flows expected to be collected, underestimate the timing or amount of cash flows expected to be collected, or to miss favorable opportunities altogether. Similarly, any hedging based on faulty models and data may prove to be unsuccessful.
Valuations of some of our assets will be inherently uncertain, 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 in some cases our determination of the fair value of our assets will be based on valuations provided by third-party dealers and pricing services, we will value most of our assets using unobservable inputs based upon our judgment, and such valuations may differ from those provided by third-party dealers and pricing services. Valuations of certain assets are often difficult to obtain or unreliable. In general, dealers and pricing services heavily disclaim their valuations. Additionally, dealers may claim to furnish valuations only as an accommodation and without special compensation, and so they may disclaim any and all liability for any direct, incidental or consequential damages arising out of any inaccuracy or incompleteness in valuations, including any act of negligence or breach of any warranty. 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. The valuation process has been particularly difficult recently because market events have made valuations of certain assets unpredictable, and the disparity of valuations provided by third-party dealers has widened.
Our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders could be materially adversely affected if our fair value measurements of these assets were materially higher than the values that would exist if a ready market existed for these assets.
An increase in interest rates may cause a decrease in the amount of certain of our target assets that are available for acquisition, which could adversely affect our ability to acquire target assets that satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income and pay dividends.
Rising interest rates generally reduce the demand for mortgage loans due to the higher cost of borrowing. A reduction in the volume of mortgage loans originated may affect the amount of target assets available to us for acquisition, which could adversely affect our ability to acquire assets that satisfy our investment objectives. Rising interest rates may also cause our target assets that were issued prior to an interest rate increase to provide yields that are below prevailing market interest rates. If rising interest rates cause us to be unable to acquire a sufficient volume of our target assets with a yield that is above our borrowing cost, our ability to satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income and pay dividends may be materially and adversely affected.
An increase in interest rates may cause a decrease in the ability of our borrowers to refinance their existing mortgages and may cause additional economic distress for borrowers with mortgages subject to changes in interest rates, causing our cash collections to decrease, and our anticipated resolution timelines to increase.
Rising interest rates may reduce the desirability of refinancing existing mortgages by increasing a borrower’s monthly payments. Rising interest rates may also cause economic distress to borrowers with mortgage terms that subject them to market-based increases in interest rates. Consequently borrowers who might otherwise have refinanced their mortgages may not be able to do so on favorable terms, and borrowers with interest-rate sensitive mortgages may experience payment increases that preclude their ability to makes such payments in a timely manner, if at all. As a result, the duration of our resolution timelines may be extended, with an associated negative impact in our cash collections and/or our earnings.
The failure of our Servicer to service our assets effectively would materially and adversely affect us.
We rely on our Servicer to service and manage our assets, including managing collections on our whole mortgage loans and the mortgage loans underlying our retained MBS. If our Servicer is not vigilant in encouraging borrowers to make their monthly payments, the borrowers may be far less likely to make these payments, which could result in a higher frequency of default. If our Servicer takes longer than we expect to liquidate non-performing assets, our losses may be higher than originally anticipated. We also rely on our Servicer to provide all of our property management, lease management and renovation management services associated with the real properties we acquire upon conversion of residential mortgage loans that we own or that we acquire directly. The failure of our Servicer to effectively service our mortgage loan assets, including the mortgage loans underlying any MBS we may own, real estate owned (“REO”) and other real estate-related assets could negatively impact the value of our investments and our performance.
The Servicer’s operations are heavily regulated at the U.S. federal, state and local levels, and its failure to comply with applicable regulations could materially adversely affect our expenses and/or results of operations. There is no assurance that we could replace the Servicer with servicers that satisfy our requirements or with whom we could enter into agreements on satisfactory terms.
The Servicer must comply with a wide array of U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations, including certain licensing requirements, that regulate, among other things, the manner in which it services our mortgage loans and manages our real property in accordance with the Newrez Servicing Agreement, including Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) mortgage servicing regulations promulgated pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, as well as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (the “RESPA”), the TILA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, the Homeowners Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, as well as individual state licensing, privacy, foreclosure laws and federal and local bankruptcy rules. These requirements can and will change as statutes and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended, interpreted and enforced. These laws and regulations cover a wide range of topics such as licensing; allowable fees and loan terms; permissible servicing and debt collection practices; limitations on forced-placed insurance; special consumer protections in connection with default and foreclosure; and protection of confidential, nonpublic consumer information (privacy). The volume of new or modified laws and regulations has increased in recent years, and states and individual cities and counties continue to enact laws that either restrict or impose additional obligations in connection with certain loan origination, acquisition and servicing activities in those cities and counties.
In general, the laws and regulations relating to mortgage servicing are complex and vary greatly among the states and localities, and in some cases, these laws are in direct conflict with each other or with U.S. federal law. In addition, these laws and regulations often contain vague standards or requirements, which make compliance efforts challenging. The current federal administration has notably reduced federal regulatory oversight, which has resulted in increased state oversight of mortgage servicers. This has led to, and may continue to lead to, inefficiencies for servicers, confusion in the market and other impacts, which could materially adversely affect our Servicer. Individual states have also been increasingly active in supervising non-bank mortgage servicers such as our Servicer, and certain regulators have communicated recommendations, expectations or demands with respect to areas such as corporate governance, safety and soundness, risk and compliance management, and cybersecurity, in addition to their focus on traditional licensing and examination matters.
Uncertainty continues to exist with respect to the future of regulation of mortgage servicing, including the future of the Dodd-Frank Act and the CFPB. We cannot predict the specific legislative or executive actions that may result or what actions federal or state regulators might take in response to potential changes to the Dodd-Frank Act or to the federal regulatory environment generally. Such actions could impact the mortgage industry generally and could adversely impact our business. Additionally, such changes could later be reverted by future administrations, creating uncertainty and inefficiencies. Material changes in, as well as uncertainties in, these rules and regulations could increase our expenses under the Servicing Agreement.
Additionally, from time to time, the Servicer may be party to certain regulatory inquiries and proceedings, which, even if unrelated to the residential mortgage servicing operation, may result in adverse findings, fines, penalties or other assessments and may affect adversely its reputation. The Servicer’s failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could adversely affect our expenses and results of operations. If we were to determine to change servicers, there is no assurance that we could find servicers that satisfy our requirements or with whom we could enter into agreements on satisfactory terms. The Servicer’s failure to comply with these laws and regulations could also indirectly result in damage to our reputation in the industry and adversely affect our ability to effect our business plan.
We rely on the Servicer for our loss mitigation efforts relating to mortgage loan assets, which loss mitigation efforts may be unsuccessful or not cost-effective.
We depend on a variety of services provided by the Servicer, including, among other things, to collect principal and interest payments on our whole mortgage loans, as well as the mortgage loans underlying our retained MBS, and to perform loss mitigation services. In addition, legislation and regulation that have been enacted or that may be enacted in order to reduce or prevent foreclosures through, among other things, loan modifications, may reduce the value of mortgage loans. Mortgage servicers may be required or incentivized by the U.S. federal government or other jurisdictions 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 owners of the mortgage loans. In addition to legislation and regulation that establish requirements or create financial incentives for mortgage loan servicers to modify loans and take other actions that are intended to prevent foreclosures, federal legislation has also been adopted that creates a safe harbor from liability to creditors for servicers that undertake loan modifications and other actions that are intended to prevent foreclosures. Finally, recent laws and regulations, including CFPB regulations, delay the initiation or completion of foreclosure proceedings on specified types of residential mortgage loans or otherwise limit the ability of mortgage servicers to take actions that may be essential to preserve the value of the mortgage loans underlying the MBS. Any such limitations are likely to cause delayed or reduced collections from mortgagors and generally increase servicing costs. As a result of these legislative and regulatory actions, the Servicer may not perform in our best interests or up to our expectations, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Contingent or unknown liabilities could materially and adversely affect us.
Our investment acquisition activities are subject to many risks. We may acquire properties that are subject to unknown or contingent liabilities, including liabilities for or with respect to liens attached to properties, unpaid real estate taxes, utilities or other charges for which a prior owner remains liable, clean-up or remediation of environmental conditions or code violations, claims of vendors or other persons dealing with the acquired properties and tax liabilities, among other things. In each case, our acquisition may be without any, or with only limited, recourse with respect to unknown or contingent liabilities or conditions. As a result, if any such liability were to arise relating to our properties, or if any adverse condition exists with respect to our properties that is in excess of our insurance coverage, we might have to pay substantial sums to settle or cure it, which could materially and adversely affect us. The properties we may acquire may also be subject to covenants, conditions or restrictions that restrict the use or ownership of such properties, including zoning laws and regulations and prohibitions on leasing or on tenant evictions, or requirements to obtain the approval of home owner associations prior to leasing. We may not discover such restrictions during the acquisition process and such restrictions may adversely affect our ability to operate such properties as we intend.
We may be required to make determinations of a borrower’s creditworthiness based on incomplete information or information that we cannot verify, which may cause us to purchase or originate loans that we otherwise would not have purchased or originated and, as a result, may negatively impact our business or reputation.
The CRE lending business depends on the creditworthiness of borrowers, which we must judge. In making such judgment, we may depend on information obtained from non-public sources and the borrowers in making acquisition decisions and such information may be difficult to obtain or may be inaccurate. As a result, we may be required to make decisions based on incomplete information or information that is impossible or impracticable to verify. A determination as to the creditworthiness of a prospective borrower is based on a wide range of information including, without limitation, information relating to the form of entity of the prospective borrower, which may indicate whether the borrower can limit the impact that its other activities have on its ability to pay obligations related to the CRE loan.
Our inability to compete effectively in a highly competitive market could adversely affect our ability to implement our business strategy, which could materially and adversely affect us.
Our profitability depends, in large part, on our ability to acquire targeted assets at favorable prices. We face significant competition when acquiring mortgage loans and our other targeted assets. Our competitors include other mortgage REITs, financial companies, public and private funds, hedge funds, commercial and investment banks and residential and commercial finance companies. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater access to capital and other resources than we do. Furthermore, new companies with significant amounts of capital have recently been formed or have raised additional capital, and may continue to be formed and raise additional capital in the future, and these companies may have objectives that overlap with ours, which may create competition for assets we wish to acquire. Some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that are not available to us. 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 assets to acquire and establish more relationships than us. We also may have different operating constraints from those of our competitors including, among others, tax-driven constraints such as those arising from our intention to qualify and maintain our qualification as a REIT and restraints imposed on us by our attempt to comply with certain exclusions from the definition of an “investment company” or other exemptions under the Investment Company Act. Furthermore, competition for assets in our targeted asset classes may lead to the price of such assets increasing, may reduce the number of attractive CRE investment opportunities available to us or increase the bargaining power of asset owners seeking to sell, which would increase the prices for these assets. If such events occur, our ability to implement our business strategy could be adversely affected, which could materially and adversely affect us. 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.
We are highly dependent on communications and information systems operated by third parties, and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business and negatively impact our operating results.
Our business is highly dependent on communications and information systems that allow us to monitor, value, buy, sell, finance and hedge our investments. These systems are operated by third parties, including our affiliates, and, as a result, we have limited ability to ensure continued operation. In the event of systems failure or interruption, we will have limited ability to affect the timing and success of systems restoration. Any failure or interruption of our systems could cause delays or other problems in our securities trading activities which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.
Security breaches and other disruptions could compromise our information and expose us to liability, which would cause our business and reputation to suffer.
In the ordinary course of our business, we, through the Servicer, may acquire and store sensitive data on our network, such as our proprietary business information and personally identifiable information of borrowers obligated on loans and our prospective and current mortgages and tenants. The secure processing and maintenance of this information is critical to our business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, regulatory penalties, disruption to our operations and the services we provide to customers or damage our reputation, which could materially and adversely affect us.
Interest rate fluctuations and shifts in the yield curve may cause losses.
Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary and tax policies, domestic and international economic and political considerations and other factors beyond our control. Our primary interest rate exposures relate our mortgage loans and our CMBS, and may relate to additional CRE assets we acquire in the future. Changes in interest rates, including changes in expected interest rates or “yield curves,” affect our business in a number of ways. Changes in the general level of interest rates can affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income earned on our interest-earning assets and the interest expense incurred in connection with our interest-bearing liabilities and hedges. Changes in the level of interest rates also can affect, among other things, our ability to acquire real estate and other securities and loans at attractive prices, the value of our real estate and other securities, loans and derivatives and our ability to realize gains from the sale of such assets. We may wish to use hedging transactions to protect certain positions from interest rate fluctuations, but we may not be able to do so as a result of market conditions, regulations and other legal rules applicable to REITs or other reasons. In such event, interest rate fluctuations could adversely affect our financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.
Until recently, the Federal Reserve Board (the “Federal Reserve”) maintained interest rates close to zero. In 2022, however, in response to the inflationary pressures—driven by ongoing supply chain disruptions, the lingering effect of fiscal stimulus, and the war in Ukraine—the Federal Reserve rapidly raised interest rates. The Federal Reserve continued to steadily increase interest rates through July 2023, holding interest rates steady through the remainder of 2023. In 2024, the Federal Reserve made three rate cuts, reducing the benchmark rate by a full percentage point, and, in 2025, the Federal Reserve made an additional three rate cuts, reducing the benchmark rate by 75 basis points. Higher interest rates have resulted, and may in the future result, in increased interest expense on our outstanding variable rate and future variable and fixed-rate debt, thereby adversely affecting cash flow and our ability to service our indebtedness and pay distributions. In addition, in the event of a significant rising interest rate environment and/or economic downturn, loan origination volume may decrease and negatively impact our operating results. Additionally, loan and collateral defaults may increase and result in credit losses that would adversely affect our liquidity and operating results.
Our ability to execute our business strategy, particularly the growth of our investment portfolio, depends to a significant degree on our ability to obtain additional capital. Our financing strategy is mainly dependent on our ability to place the debt we use to finance our investments at rates that provide a positive net spread. If spreads for such liabilities widen or if demand for such liabilities ceases to exist, then our ability to execute future financings will be severely restricted.
Interest rate changes may also impact our net book value as most of our investments are marked to market each quarter. Debt obligations are not marked to market. Generally, as interest rates increase, the value of our fixed-rate securities decreases, which will decrease the book value of our equity.
Furthermore, shifts in the U.S. Treasury yield curve reflecting an increase in interest rates would also affect the yield required on our investments and therefore their value. For example, increasing interest rates would reduce the value of the fixed-rate assets we hold at the time because the higher yields required by increased interest rates result in lower market prices on existing fixed-rate assets in order to adjust the yield upward to meet the market and vice versa. This would have similar effects on our real estate and other securities and loan portfolio and our financial position and operations to a change in interest rates generally.
Security breaches and other cybersecurity incidents could result in a loss of data, business interruptions, regulatory actions and increased costs, each of which could materially adversely effect on our business and results of operations.
Our Manager, through Rithm, oversees our cybersecurity. Like all companies, we have information technology that may be vulnerable to security breaches, interruptions or failures due to events that may be beyond our control, including, but not limited to, theft, terrorist attacks, malicious ransomware cyber-attacks, computer viruses, hackers and general technology failures. Security breaches and other cybersecurity incidents could result in a loss of data, interruptions in our business, subject us to regulatory actions and increased costs, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and/or results of operations.
Cybersecurity may subject us to increased costs as we, through Rithm, (i) continue to update our cybersecurity defenses in order to reflect the evolving risks, (ii) monitor our systems for cyber-attacks and security threats and (iii) seek to determine the extent of our losses in the event of a cybersecurity breach. Additionally, the costs and losses associated with preventing cybersecurity breaches are difficult to predict and quantify and could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
In addition, we are subject to various privacy and data protection laws and regulations, and any changes to laws or regulations, including new restrictions or requirements applicable to our business, could impose additional costs and liability on us and could limit our use and disclosure of such information. For example, the New York State Department of Financial Services requires certain financial services companies, such as our Servicer, to establish a detailed cybersecurity program and comply with other requirements, and the California Consumer Protection Act, which went into effect in January 2020, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act, which went into effect in January 2023, created new compliance regulations on businesses that collect information from California residents. Non-compliance by us, our Servicer or potentially by third parties with which we share information with any applicable privacy and cybersecurity law or regulation, including accidental loss, inadvertent disclosure, unauthorized access or dissemination or breach of security, may result in damage to our reputation and could subject us to fines, penalties, required corrective actions, lawsuits, payment of damages or restrictions on our use or transfer of data.
Furthermore, we have no control over the cybersecurity systems used by our third-party service providers, and such third-party service providers may have limited indemnification obligations to us. Any such breach could compromise these systems and networks and the data stored therein could be accessed, modified, publicly disclosed and/or lost or stolen. Any such incident could result in substantial remediation costs, legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, disruption to our operations, damage to our reputation and/or loss of competitive position. Further, we could be exposed to the risks of machine learning technology if such third parties, whether or not known to us, use this in their business activities, exposing us to risks pertaining to data privacy, data protection and intellectual property considerations.
Any of the foregoing events could result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws, financial loss to us or to our customers, loss of confidence in our security measures, customer dissatisfaction, additional regulatory scrutiny, significant litigation exposure and harm to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. In addition, insurance and other safeguards might only partially reimburse us for losses, if at all.
We are subject to risks of loss from weather conditions, man-made or natural disasters and climate change.
Weather conditions and man-made or natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, droughts, fires and other environmental conditions, can damage properties that we own or that collateralize our loans. If properties collateralizing our mortgage loans incur damages that reduce the value of the collateral to an amount below the UPB of our loan, borrowers may cease making payments to us on those loans, and any foreclosure efforts may recover substantially less value than the amount we are due or no value at all. Because we seek to build concentrations of mortgage loans and real properties in certain markets, we may be particularly vulnerable to the impact of a localized weather condition, man-made or natural disaster, including wildfire and flooding events, or effects of climate change. Any of these events could adversely impact the demand for, and value of, our assets and could also directly impact the value of our assets through damage, destruction or loss, and could thereafter materially impact the availability or cost of insurance to protect against these events. We cannot predict if we or our borrowers will be able to obtain appropriate coverage at a reasonable cost in the future, or if we will be able to continue to pass along all of the costs of insurance to our tenants. Any weather conditions, man-made or natural disasters, including wildfire and flooding events, or effects of climate change, whether or not insured, could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance, the market price of our Common Stock and preferred stock and our ability to pay dividends. In addition, there is a risk that one or more of our property insurers may not be able to fulfill their obligations with respect to claims payments due to deterioration in their financial condition driven by such events.
Risks Related to Financing and Hedging
We may not be able to access financing sources on favorable terms, or at all, which could adversely affect our ability to execute our business strategy.
Our primary sources of funds are cash provided by net interest income, sales and repayments of our investments, debt financing sources, including secured bonds payable and repurchase financing agreements, and the issuance of equity securities when feasible and appropriate. Our ability to obtain borrowings and to raise future equity capital is dependent on our ability to access borrowings and the capital markets on attractive terms. We may have difficulty accessing the capital markets on favorable terms or at all. For example, in February 2026, we considered a common equity raise to finance the acquisition of commercial mortgage assets, but due to market conditions, we determined not to raise equity capital or effect this acquisition of assets at this time. An inability to successfully access the capital markets could limit our ability to grow our business and fully execute our business strategy and could decrease our earnings and liquidity. In addition, our financing sources may be adversely impacted by any dislocation or weakness in the capital and credit markets, which could result in one or more of our financing sources to be unwilling or unable to provide us with financing or increase the costs of that financing. Furthermore, other factors, including changes to regulatory capital requirements imposed on our financing sources, could limit our access to, or increase the cost of, our capital or increase the cost of our financings they provide to us. Our inability to access financing on favorable terms, or at all, may have a material adverse effect on us and our operations and financial condition.
We use leverage in executing our business strategy, which may adversely affect the return on our assets and may reduce cash available for distribution to our stockholders and increase losses when economic conditions are unfavorable.
We use leverage to finance our investment operations and to enhance our financial returns and potentially to pay dividends. Sources of leverage may include bank credit facilities, warehouse lines of credit, structured financing arrangements (including securitizations) and repurchase agreements, among others. We may also seek to raise additional capital through public or private offerings of debt or equity securities, depending upon market conditions. We may use repurchase agreements to acquire certain assets. Because repurchase agreements are short-term borrowings, typically with 30- to 90-day terms (although some may have terms up to 364 days), they are more subject to volatility in interest rates and lenders willingness to extend such borrowings. We currently do not expect a majority of our borrowings to be repurchase agreements or other short-term borrowings. Through the use of leverage, we may acquire positions with market exposure significantly greater than the amount of capital committed to the transaction. We intend to use leverage for the primary purpose of financing acquisitions for our portfolio and not for the purpose of speculating on changes in interest rates. We do not have a targeted debt-to-equity ratio generally or for specific asset classes. We may, however, be limited or restricted in the amount of leverage we may employ by the terms and provisions of any financing or other agreements that we may enter into in the future, and we may be subject to margin calls as a result of our financing activity. Our ability to achieve our investment and leverage objectives depends on our ability to borrow money in sufficient amounts and on favorable terms and, as necessary, to renew or replace borrowings as they mature.
Leverage magnifies both the gains and the losses of our positions. Leverage increases our returns as long as we earn a greater return on investments purchased with borrowed funds than our cost of borrowing such funds. However, if we use leverage to acquire an asset and the value of the asset decreases, the leverage increases our losses. Even if the asset increases in value, if the asset fails to earn a return that equals or exceeds our cost of borrowing, the leverage decreases our returns.
We may be required to post large amounts of cash as collateral or margin to secure our repurchase commitments. In the event of a sudden, precipitous drop in value of our financed assets, we might not be able to liquidate assets quickly enough to repay our borrowings, further magnifying losses. Even a small decrease in the value of a leveraged asset may require us to post additional margin or cash collateral. This may decrease the cash available to us for distributions to stockholders, which could adversely affect the price of our common stock. In addition, our debt service payments reduce cash flow available for distribution to stockholders. We may not be able to meet our debt service obligations. To the extent that we cannot meet our debt service obligations, we risk the loss of some or all of our assets to sale to satisfy our debt obligations.
To the extent we are compelled to liquidate qualifying real estate assets to repay debts, our compliance with the REIT rules regarding our assets and our sources of income could be negatively affected, which could jeopardize our ability to qualify and maintain our qualification as a REIT. Failing to qualify as a REIT would cause us to be subject to U.S. federal income tax (and any applicable state and local taxes) on all of our income and decrease profitability and cash available for distributions to stockholders.
We may not be able to achieve our optimal leverage or target leverage ratios.
We use leverage as a strategy to increase the return to our investors. However, we may not be able to achieve our desired leverage for any of the following reasons:
• we determine that the leverage would expose us to excessive risk;
• our lenders do not make funding available to us at acceptable rates or on acceptable terms; and
• our lenders require that we provide additional collateral to cover our borrowings which may be the case in volatile markets.
In addition, if we exceed our target leverage ratios, the potential adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operation described above may be amplified.
Non-recourse long-term financing structures, such as securitizations, expose us to risks that could result in losses to us.
We have used and may continue to use securitization and other non-recourse long-term financing for our investments if, and to the extent, available. In such structures, lenders typically have only a claim against the assets included in the securitizations rather than a general claim against the owner-entity. Prior to each such financing, we may seek to finance our investments with relatively short-term facilities until a sufficient portfolio is accumulated. As a result, we would be subject to the risk that we would not be able to acquire, during the period that any short-term facilities are available, sufficient eligible assets or securities to maximize the efficiency of a securitization.
We also bear the risk that we may not be able to obtain new short-term facilities or may not be able to renew any short-term facilities 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 retain and expect to retain the unrated equity component of 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. Additionally, the securitization of our portfolio could magnify our exposure to losses because any equity interest we retain in the issuing entity would be subordinate to the notes issued to investors and we would, therefore, absorb all of the losses sustained with respect to a securitized pool of assets before the owners of the notes experience any losses. An inability to securitize our portfolio may adversely affect our performance and our ability to grow our business.
Our inability to refinance any short-term facilities would also increase our risk because borrowings thereunder would likely be recourse to us as an entity. If we are unable to obtain and renew short-term facilities or to consummate securitizations to finance our 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.
Additionally, our secured debt is structured with multiple interest rate step-ups generally beginning after an initial three-year borrowing term. While we fully intend to refinance these borrowings at lower interest rates before the step-up date is reached, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to refinance these borrowings on favorable terms, or at all, potentially exposing us to higher amounts of interest expense.
Our failure to comply with covenants contained in any debt agreement, including as a result of events beyond our control, could result in an event of default that could materially and adversely affect our operating results and our financial condition.
We have in the past, and may in the future, enter into debt facilities that will require us to comply with various operational, reporting and other covenants that limit us from engaging in certain types of transactions. For example, the indenture governing the Operating Partnership’s $110.0 million aggregate principal amount of 8.875% Senior Notes due 2027 (the “2027 Notes”) contains covenants that place restrictions on us, the Operating Partnership and its affiliates. The indenture governing the 2027 Notes restricts, among other things, our and certain of our subsidiaries’ ability to incur certain additional debt, make certain investments or acquisitions, sell certain assets, and merge, consolidate or transfer all or substantially all of our assets. Additionally, the indenture governing the 2027 Notes requires us to comply with certain maintenance requirements, including certain levels of cash and liquidity. If there were an event of default under our debt facilities that was not cured or waived, the holders of the defaulted debt could cause all amounts outstanding with respect to that debt to be immediately due and payable. We cannot assure you that our assets or cash flow would be sufficient to fully repay borrowings under our outstanding debt instruments, either upon maturity or if accelerated, upon an event of default, or that we would be able to refinance or restructure the payments on those debt instruments.
Hedging against interest rate changes and other risks may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Subject to qualifying and maintaining our qualification as a REIT and exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act, we may pursue various hedging strategies to seek to reduce our exposure to adverse changes in interest rates. Our hedging activity would vary in scope based on the level and volatility of interest rates, the types of liabilities and assets held and other changing market conditions. 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 assets or liabilities being hedged;
• to the extent hedging transactions do not satisfy certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code or are not made through a TRS, the amount of income that a REIT may earn from hedging transactions to offset interest rate losses is limited by the Internal Revenue Code provisions governing REITs;
• the value of derivatives used for hedging is adjusted from time to time in accordance with accounting rules to reflect changes in fair value; and downward adjustments, or “mark-to-market losses,” would reduce our stockholders’ equity;
• the credit quality of the hedging counterparty 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 hedging counterparty owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay.
Our hedging transactions, which would be intended to limit losses, may actually adversely affect our earnings, which could reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.
Risks Related to Regulatory and Legislative Actions
RCM GA is subject to regulation under the Investment Advisers Act as a registered investment adviser.
RCM GA is subject to various requirements under the Investment Advisers Act, such as fiduciary duties to clients, anti-fraud provisions, substantive prohibitions and requirements, contractual and record-keeping requirements and administrative oversight by the SEC (primarily by inspection). In addition, as a registered investment adviser, it must continually address potential conflicts between its interests and those of its clients. Although Rithm and its subsidiaries that are registered as registered investment advisers has established certain policies and procedures designed to mitigate conflicts of interest, there can be no assurance that these policies and procedures will be effective in doing so. It is possible that actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest could give rise to investor dissatisfaction, litigation or regulatory enforcement actions. If RCM GA or its applicable affiliates are deemed to be out of compliance with any such rules and regulations, they may be subject to civil liability, criminal liability and/or regulatory sanctions.
We operate in a highly regulated industry and continually changing U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulation could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The residential and commercial mortgage industries are highly regulated. We and our Manager are required to comply with a wide array of U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations that regulate, among other things, the manner in which each of us conducts our businesses. These regulations directly impact our business and require constant compliance, monitoring and internal and external audits. A material failure to comply with any of these laws or regulations could subject us and our Manager to lawsuits or governmental actions and damage our reputation, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
U.S. federal, state and local governments frequently propose or enact new laws, regulations and rules related to mortgage loans, including servicing and collection of mortgage loans. Laws, regulations, rules and judicial and administrative decisions relating to mortgage loans include those pertaining to RESPA, equal credit opportunity, fair lending, fair credit reporting, TILA, fair debt collection practices, service members protections, compliance with net worth and financial statement delivery requirements, compliance with U.S. federal and state disclosure and licensing requirements, the establishment of maximum interest rates, finance charges and other charges, qualified mortgages, secured transactions, payment processing, escrow, loss mitigation, collection, foreclosure, repossession and claims-handling procedures, and other trade practices and privacy regulations providing for the use and safeguarding of non-public personal financial information of borrowers. Our service providers, including the Servicer, must also comply with many of these legal requirements.
In particular, the Dodd-Frank Act resulted in a comprehensive overhaul of the financial services industry in the U.S. and includes, among other things (i) the creation of a Financial Stability Oversight Council to identify emerging systemic risks posed by financial firms, activities and practices, and to improve cooperation among U.S. federal agencies, (ii) the creation of the CFPB, authorized to promulgate and enforce consumer protection regulations relating to financial products and services, including mortgage lending and servicing, and to exercise supervisory authority over participants in mortgage lending and mortgage servicing, (iii) the establishment of strengthened capital and prudential standards for banks and bank holding companies, (iv) enhanced regulation of financial markets, including the derivatives and securitization markets, and (v) amendments to the TILA and the RESPA, aimed at improving consumer protections with respect to mortgage originations and mortgage servicing, including disclosures, originator compensation, minimum repayment standards, prepayment considerations, appraisals and loss mitigation and other servicing requirements. Unpredictable events, such as the current ongoing military conflicts, may create economic shocks, to which federal, state and local governments respond with new borrower and tenant rights and protections. Certain state regulators continue to consider proposals to apply regulatory prudential standards to non-bank servicers, which may impact how our service providers, including the Servicer, are regulated. On the other hand, the current federal administration has notably reduced federal regulatory oversight, which has resulted in increased state oversight of mortgage servicers. This has led to, and may continue to lead to, inefficiencies for servicers, confusion in the market and other impacts. Individual states have also been increasingly active in supervising non-bank mortgage servicers. See also “—Risks Related to Our Business—The Servicer’s operations are heavily regulated at the U.S. federal, state and local levels, and its failure to comply with applicable regulations could materially adversely affect our expenses and/or results of operations. There is no assurance that we could replace the Servicer with servicers that satisfy our requirements or with whom we could enter into agreements on satisfactory terms.”
Uncertainty continues to exist with respect to the future of regulation of mortgage servicing, including the future of the Dodd-Frank Act and the CFPB. We cannot predict the specific legislative or executive actions that may result or what actions federal or state regulators might take in response to potential changes to the Dodd-Frank Act or to the federal regulatory environment generally. Such actions could impact the mortgage industry generally and could adversely impact our business. Additionally, such changes could later be reverted by future administrations, creating uncertainty and inefficiencies.
In addition, although we do not intend to acquire MBS in which the underlying mortgage loans are guaranteed or insured by any GSE or U.S. governmental agency, actions taken by or proposed to be taken by, among others, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the U.S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve or other U.S. governmental agencies that are intended to regulate the origination, underwriting guidelines, servicing guidelines, servicing compensation and other aspects of mortgage loans guaranteed by the GSEs or U.S. governmental agencies (known as “Agency RMBS”) can have indirect and sometimes direct effects on our business and business model, results of operations and liquidity. For example, loan originators and servicers, investors and other participants in the mortgage securities markets may use regulatory guidelines intended for Agency RMBS as guidelines or operating procedures in respect of non-Agency RMBS. In addition, changes in underwriting guidelines for Agency RMBS generally affect the supply of similar or complementary non-Agency RMBS.
Our Manager’s or our Servicer’s failure to comply with these laws, regulations and rules may result in reduced payments by borrowers, modification of the original terms of mortgage loans, permanent forgiveness of debt, restrictions on tenant evictions, delays in the foreclosure process, increased servicing advances, litigation, enforcement actions, and repurchase and indemnification obligations.
We expect that legislative and regulatory changes, as well as uncertainties, will continue in the foreseeable future, which may increase our operating expenses, either to comply with applicable law, to deal with regulatory examinations or investigations, or to satisfy our lenders and investors that we are in compliance with those laws, regulations and rules that are applicable to our business. Any of these changes or new laws, regulations or rules could adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
We may be unable to operate within the parameters that allow us to be excluded from regulation as a CPO, which would subject us to additional regulation and compliance requirements, and could materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The Dodd-Frank Act established a comprehensive new regulatory framework for derivative contracts commonly referred to as “swaps.” Under the Dodd-Frank Act, any investment fund that trades in swaps may be considered a “commodity pool,” which would cause its operators to be regulated as a CPO. In December 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued the No-Action Letter, giving relief to operators of mortgage REITs from the requirement to register as a CPO. In order to qualify, we must, among other non-operation requirements: (i) limit our initial margin and premiums required to establish our swap or futures positions to no more than 5% of the fair market value of our total assets; and (ii) limit our net income derived annually from our swaps and futures positions that are not “qualifying hedging transactions” to less than 5% of our gross income. The need to operate within these parameters could limit the use of swaps by us below the level that we would otherwise consider optimal or may lead to the registration of our company or our directors as CPOs, which will subject us to additional regulatory oversight, compliance and costs.
Certain jurisdictions require licenses to purchase, hold, enforce or sell residential mortgage loans. In the event that any such licensing requirement is applicable, and we are not able to obtain such licenses in a timely manner or at all, our ability to implement our business strategy could be adversely affected, which could materially and adversely affect us.
Certain jurisdictions require a license to purchase, hold, enforce or sell residential mortgage loans. We currently do not hold any such licenses, and there is no assurance that we will be able to obtain them or, if obtained, that we will be able to maintain them. In connection with these licenses, we would be required to comply with various information reporting and other regulatory requirements to maintain those licenses, and there is no assurance that we would be able to satisfy those requirements on an ongoing basis. Our failure to obtain or maintain such licenses or our inability to enter into another regulatory-compliant structure could restrict our ability to sell loans in these jurisdictions if such licensing requirements are applicable. In lieu of obtaining such licenses, we may contribute our acquired RPLs to one or more wholly owned trusts whose trustee is a national bank, which may be exempt from state licensing requirements, or the seller of such loans may continue to hold the loans on our behalf or sell such loans until we obtain the applicable state license. If required, we will form one or more subsidiaries that will apply for necessary state licenses. If these subsidiaries obtain the required licenses, any trust holding loans in the applicable jurisdictions may transfer such loans to such subsidiaries, resulting in these loans being held by a state-licensed entity. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain the requisite licenses in a timely manner or at all or in all necessary jurisdictions, or that the use of the trusts will reduce the requirement for licensing, any of which could limit our ability to invest in residential mortgage loans. Our failure to obtain and maintain required licenses may expose us to penalties or other claims and may affect our ability to sell our remaining residential mortgage loans and, as a result, could harm our business.
We could be subject to liability for potential violations of predatory lending laws, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Residential mortgage loan originators and servicers are required to comply with various U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations, including anti-predatory lending laws and laws and regulations imposing certain restrictions on requirements on “high cost” loans. Failure of our Manager, our Servicer or our other service providers to comply with these laws could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of the related residential mortgage loans, to monetary penalties and could result in impairment in the ability to foreclose such loans or the borrowers rescinding the affected residential mortgage loans. Lawsuits have been brought in various states making claims against assignees or purchasers of high cost loans for violations of state law. Named defendants in these cases have included numerous participants within the secondary mortgage market. If the loans are found to have been originated in violation of predatory or abusive lending laws, we could incur losses, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Changes to U.S. federal income tax laws could materially and adversely affect us and our stockholders.
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 our shares. The U.S. federal income tax rules, including those dealing with REITs, are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department, which results in statutory changes as well as frequent revisions to regulations and interpretations.
Changes in applicable laws or noncompliance with applicable law could materially and adversely affect us.
As an owner of real estate, we are required to comply with numerous U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations, some of which may conflict with one another or be subject to limited judicial or regulatory interpretations. These laws and regulations may include zoning laws, building codes, landlord-tenant laws and other laws generally applicable to business operations. Noncompliance with laws or regulations could expose us to liability.
Lower revenue growth or significant unanticipated expenditures may result from our need to comply with changes in (i) laws imposing remediation requirements and potential liability for environmental conditions existing on properties or the restrictions on discharges or other conditions, (ii) rent control or rent stabilization laws or other residential landlord-tenant laws or (iii) other governmental rules and regulations or enforcement policies affecting the rehabilitation, use and operation of any single-family rental properties we may own, including changes to building codes and fire and life-safety codes.
Risks Related to Our Management and Our Relationship with Our Manager and the Servicer
We have conflicts of interest with the Manager and the Servicer, and certain members of our Board of Directors, as well as our management team, and have, or could have in the future, conflicts of interest due to their respective relationships with these entities, and such conflicts could be resolved in a manner adverse to us.
The Manager currently manages our business, investment activities and affairs pursuant to the Management Agreement. In evaluating investments and other management strategies, the opportunity to earn incentive compensation may lead the Manager to place undue emphasis on EAD at the expense of other criteria, such as preservation of capital, in order to achieve higher incentive compensation. Investments with higher yield potential are generally riskier or more speculative. This could result in increased risk to the value of our investment portfolio.
As an externally managed REIT, we are entirely managed by the Manager, which negotiates all of our agreements and deals with all of our contractual counterparties on our behalf. For example, the Manager acts for us in connection with the Newrez Servicing Agreement, including monitoring the performance of the Servicer under the Newrez Servicing Agreement and exercising any available rights or remedies on our behalf. Both of our Manager and our Servicer are affiliates.
The Newrez Servicing Agreement was also not negotiated at arm’s length and could contain terms that are less favorable to us than similar agreements negotiated with unaffiliated third parties. In addition, the Servicer is generally not prohibited from providing similar services to other owners of mortgage loans and real estate assets, including other affiliates of Rithm, and currently does so.
In addition, we have acquired, and in the future expect to continue to acquire or sell, assets in which the Manager or its affiliates have an interest or otherwise engage in transactions directly with the Manager or its affiliates. Although such acquisitions, dispositions or other transactions may present conflicts of interest, we nonetheless may pursue and consummate such transactions, subject to any requirements in our organizational documents, including any required approvals by our Board of Directors and independent Audit Committee. When we acquire an asset from the Manager or one of its affiliates, or sell an asset to the Manager or one of its affiliates, the purchase price we pay to the Manager or its affiliate or the purchase price paid to us by the Manager or is affiliate may be higher or lower, respectively, than the purchase price that would have been paid to or by us if the transaction were the result of arm’s length negotiations with an unaffiliated third party. The Manager will face conflicts of interest in determining the purchase price and there is no assurance any conflict will be resolved in our favor.
Our Chief Executive Officer is an executive officer of our Manager and of Rithm and has interests in our relationship with them that may be different from the interests of our stockholders, which may encourage the support of strategies in furtherance of their financial success that adversely affect us. Such ownership creates conflicts of interest when such directors or members of our management team are faced with decisions that involve us and Manager, our Servicer or any of their respective subsidiaries. See “Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters” and “Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.”
Rithm’s failure to appropriately manage or address conflicts of interest could damage its and our reputation and adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.
Rithm confronts actual or potential conflicts of interest relating to its investment activities and the investment activities of investment funds or accounts managed by Rithm and its affiliates, including the Company (collectively, “Client Accounts”). Rithm operates as a REIT with a broad investment mandate covering real estate related securities and other investments. Accordingly, Rithm and certain of its Client Accounts, including the Company, have overlapping investment objectives. Actual or potential conflicts may arise with respect to Rithm’s decisions regarding how to allocate investment opportunities among Rithm, its Client Accounts, including the Company, and other operating companies. For example, Rithm may allocate an investment opportunity that is appropriate for Rithm or its Client Account, in a manner that excludes one or more Client Accounts, including the Company, or results in a disproportionate allocation based on factors or criteria that Rithm determines, such as sourcing of the transaction, the specific nature of the investment or size and type of the investment, among other factors. Additionally, a decision by Rithm to acquire material non-public information about a company while pursuing an investment opportunity for itself, an operating company, or a particular Client Account gives rise to a potential conflict of interest when it results in Rithm having to restrict the ability of other Client Accounts, including the Company, or various operating companies and affiliates to buy or sell securities in the public markets. There may be perceived conflicts of interest regarding investment decisions.
In addition, the challenge of allocating investment opportunities to certain Client Accounts, including the Company, may be exacerbated as Rithm expands its business to include more lines of business, including the asset management business. Allocating investment opportunities appropriately frequently involves significant and subjective judgments. In addition, the perception of non-compliance with such requirements or policies could harm Rithm’s and our reputation with fund investors and our respective stockholders.
To the extent that the Company co-invests in the same investment opportunity with Rithm, Client Accounts or operating companies, Rithm confronts actual or potential conflicts of interest in relation to investment decisions in respect of such co-investment opportunity. A co-investment will be made on the basis of multiple factors, including, without limitation, an assessment of the appropriate amount of risk for the Company and other participating affiliated co-investors to bear. Risk assessment is an inherently subjective determination and Rithm and RCM GA will not follow a pre-established formula to determine appropriate risk for each affiliated investor, including the Company, in a co-investment. Additional conflicts of interest may exist in relation to when to exit or liquidate a particular co-investment (which may be inherently illiquid), and RCM GA may not cause the Company to exit or liquidate the co-investment at the time which best aligns with the Company’s risk or liquidity profile. In addition, in a particular co-investment opportunity, there may be additional fees and expenses charged by parties originating or servicing the investment opportunity, including operating companies.
Rithm’s affiliates or portfolio companies may be service providers or counterparties to its funds or portfolio companies or the Company and receive fees or other compensation for services that are not shared with or rebated to the Company, including in relation to asset servicing and deal origination fees. In such instances, Rithm may be incentivized to cause its funds or portfolio companies to purchase such services from its affiliates or portfolio companies rather than an unaffiliated service provider despite the fact that a third-party service provider could potentially provide higher quality services or offer them at a lower cost.
It is possible that actual, potential or perceived conflicts could give rise to investor dissatisfaction or litigation or regulatory enforcement actions. This process is complex and difficult and our reputation could be damaged if Rithm fails, or appears to fail, to deal appropriately with one or more potential or actual conflicts of interest. Regulatory scrutiny of, or litigation in connection with, conflicts of interest would have a material adverse effect on our reputation, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations in a number of ways, including an inability to raise additional funds and a reluctance of counterparties to do business with us.
Our Board of Directors has approved a very broad investment policy and guidelines for our Manager and will not review or approve each investment decision. Our Board of Directors may change our investment policy and guidelines without stockholder consent, which may materially and adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock and and preferred stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
Our Manager is authorized to follow a very broad investment policy and guidelines and, therefore, has great latitude in determining the types of assets that are proper investments for us, as well as the individual investment decisions. In the future, our Manager may make investments with lower rates of return than those anticipated under current market conditions and/or may make investments with greater risks to achieve those anticipated returns. Our Board of Directors will periodically review our investment policy and guidelines and our investment portfolio but will not review or approve each proposed investment by our Manager unless it falls outside the scope of our previously approved investment policy and guidelines or constitutes a related party transaction.
In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, our Board of Directors relies primarily on information provided to it by our Manager. Furthermore, our Manager may use complex strategies, and transactions entered into by our Manager may be costly, difficult or impossible to unwind by the time they are reviewed by our Board of Directors. In addition, our Board of Directors may change our investment policy and guidelines and targeted asset classes at any time without the consent of our stockholders, and this could result in our making investments that are different in type from, and possibly riskier than, our current investments or the investments currently contemplated. Changes in our investment policy and guidelines and targeted asset classes may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, counterparty risk, default risk and real estate market fluctuations, which could materially and adversely affect us.
The Newrez Servicing Agreement was not negotiated at arm’s length.
Under the Newrez Servicing Agreement, the Servicer provides us with critically important services, including, among many others, the servicing of our whole mortgage loans, including the mortgage loans underlying our MBS, loan modification services, assisted deed-in-lieu of foreclosure services, assisted deed-for-lease services and other loss mitigation services with respect to our mortgage loans and property management, leasing management and renovation management services with respect to our real property assets and assistance in finding third party financing for such properties. The Servicer is subject to the same terms as the Former Servicer, as the Servicer adopted the Servicing Agreements pursuant to the Servicing Transfer Agreement. The Newrez Servicing Agreement expires July 8, 2029. We may not terminate the Newrez Servicing Agreement except for cause, or, if we terminate the Management Agreement for cause, the Servicer may terminate the Newrez Servicing Agreement without cause by providing written notice to us no later than 180 days prior to December 31 of any year. In such instance, the Servicing Agreements will terminate effective on the December 31 next following the delivery of such notice. The Newrez Servicing Agreement also provides that the Servicer may terminate the agreement within 180 days after receiving notice that the Management Agreement has terminated, without any termination payment by us if the Management Agreement has been terminated for cause. If the Management Agreement has been terminated other than for cause and the Servicer terminates the Newrez Servicing Agreement, we will be required to pay a significant termination fee. The Management Agreement will automatically terminate at the same time as the Newrez Servicing Agreement if the Newrez Servicing Agreement is terminated for any reason. Upon any termination of the Newrez Servicing Agreement, it may be difficult for us to secure suitable replacements or we may secure alternative servicers with less effective servicing platforms or at greater expense. In addition, the Servicer has no liability to us for its negligence in performing services for us under the Newrez Servicing Agreement, unless that negligence rises to the level of gross negligence or willful misconduct. The material terms of the Newrez Servicing Agreement is further described in “Item 1. Business—The Servicer.” The Newrez Servicing Agreement was not negotiated at arm’s length; accordingly, it may contain terms that are less favorable to us than agreements negotiated with one or more unaffiliated third parties might contain.
Risks Related to Our Organizational Structure
Maintenance of our exclusion from regulation as an investment company under the Investment Company Act imposes significant limitations on our operations.
We intend to continue to conduct our operations so that neither we nor any of our subsidiaries is required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act. We are organized as a holding company and we conduct our business primarily through wholly owned subsidiaries of our Operating Partnership. Neither we nor our Operating Partnership nor Great Ajax Funding is an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C). The securities issued by our subsidiaries that are excluded from the definition of “investment company” under Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with other investment securities we may own, cannot exceed 40% of the value of all our assets (excluding U.S. government securities and cash) on an unconsolidated basis. This requirement limits the types of businesses in which we may engage and the assets we may hold. Our 19.8% equity interest in our Former Manager and our 9.5% equity interest in the parent company of our Servicer are held by GA-TRS, which is a special purpose subsidiary of our Operating Partnership, and GA-TRS may rely on Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) for its Investment Company Act exclusion and, therefore, our interest in such subsidiary would constitute an “investment security” for purposes of determining whether we pass the 40% test (see “Item 1. Business — Operating and Regulatory Structure — Investment Company Act Exclusion” for additional information regarding the 40% test).
Certain of our subsidiaries may rely on the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6)under the Investment Company Act. Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act is designed for entities “primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” This exclusion generally requires that at least 55% of the entity’s assets on an unconsolidated basis consist of qualifying real estate assets and at least 80% of the entity’s assets consist of qualifying real estate assets or real estate-related assets. Section 3(c)(6) is designed for entities that are directly or through subsidiaries primarily engaged in Section 3(c)(5)(C) real estate and/or other banking/finance businesses excepted from the definition of “investment company” pursuant to Sections 3(c)(3), 3(c)(4) or 3(c)(5) of the Investment Company Act. These requirements limit the assets those subsidiaries can own and the timing of sales and purchases of those assets.
To classify the assets held by our subsidiaries as qualifying real estate assets or real estate-related assets, we will rely on no-action letters and other guidance published by the SEC staff regarding those kinds of assets, as well as upon our analyses (in consultation with outside counsel) of guidance published with respect to other types of assets. There can be no assurance that the laws and regulations governing the Investment Company Act status of companies similar to ours, or the guidance from the SEC or its staff regarding the treatment of assets as qualifying real estate assets or real estate-related assets, will not change in a manner that adversely affects our operations. In fact, in August 2011, the SEC published a concept release in which it asked for comments on this exclusion from regulation. To the extent that the SEC staff provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon our exemption from the need to register under the Investment Company Act, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. Any additional guidance from the SEC staff could further inhibit our ability to pursue the strategies that we have chosen. Furthermore, although we intend to monitor the assets of our subsidiaries regularly, there can be no assurance that our subsidiaries will be able to maintain their exclusion from registration. Any of the foregoing could require us to adjust our strategy, which could limit our ability to make certain investments or require us to sell assets in a manner, at a price or at a time that we otherwise would not have chosen. This could negatively affect the value of our common stock, the sustainability of our business model and our ability to make distributions.
Registration under the Investment Company Act would require us to comply with a variety of substantive requirements that impose, among other things:
• limitations on capital structure;
• restrictions on specified investments;
• restrictions on leverage or senior securities;
• restrictions on unsecured borrowings;
• prohibitions on transactions with affiliates; and
• compliance with reporting, record keeping, voting, proxy disclosure and other rules and regulations that would significantly increase our operating expenses.
If we were required to register as an investment company but failed to do so, we could be prohibited from engaging in our business, and criminal and civil actions could be brought against us.
Registration with the SEC as an investment company would be costly, would subject us to a host of complex regulations and would divert attention from the conduct of our business, which could materially and adversely affect us. In addition, if we purchase or sell any real estate assets to avoid becoming an investment company under the Investment Company Act, our net asset value, the amount of funds available for investment and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders could be materially adversely affected.
The ownership limit in our charter may discourage a takeover or business combination that may have benefited our stockholders.
To assist us in qualifying as a REIT, among other purposes, our charter generally limits the beneficial or constructive ownership of our (a) Common Stock by any person to no more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock and (b) capital stock by any person to no more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our capital stock. We have waived these ownership limits, to a certain extent, for Rithm (an affiliate of our Manager), Flexpoint Great Ajax Holdings LLC (“Flexpoint REIT Investor”), the Wellington Management Company LLP and certain related advisory clients of Wellington Management Company LLP (collectively, the “Wellington Investors”), Magnetar Financial LLC and certain funds managed by the advisor (collectively, the “Magnetar Investors”), and certain other investors. This and other restrictions on ownership and transfer of our shares of stock contained in our charter may discourage a change of control of us and may deter individuals or entities from making tender offers for our Common Stock on terms that might be financially attractive to you or which may cause a change in our management. In addition to deterring potential transactions that may be favorable to our stockholders, these provisions may also decrease your ability to sell our common stock.
We may change our investment strategy, investment guidelines and asset allocation without notice or stockholder consent which may result in riskier investments. In addition, our charter provides that our Board of Directors may authorize us to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election without the approval of our stockholders.
Our Board of Directors has the authority to change our investment strategy or asset allocation at any time without notice to or consent from our stockholders. To the extent that our investment strategy changes in the future, we may make investments that are different from, and possibly riskier than, the investments described in this Annual Report. A change in our investment or leverage strategy may increase our exposure to interest rate and real estate market fluctuations or require us to sell a portion of our existing investments, which could result in gains or losses and therefore increase our earnings volatility. Decisions to employ additional leverage in executing our investment strategies could increase the risk inherent in our asset acquisition strategy. Furthermore, a change in our asset allocation could result in our allocating assets in a different manner than as described in this Annual Report.
In addition, our charter provides that our Board of Directors may authorize us to revoke or otherwise terminate our REIT election, without the approval of our stockholders, if it determines that it is no longer in our best interests to qualify as a REIT. These changes could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, the market value of our common stock, and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.`
Our stockholders’ ability to control our operations is limited.
Our Board of Directors approves our major strategies, including our strategies regarding investments, financing, growth, debt capitalization, REIT qualification and distributions. Our Board of Directors may amend or revise these and other strategies without a vote of our stockholders. Further, Flexpoint REIT Investor, the Wellington Investors, Magnetar, as well as Rithm, own significant portions of our common stock, will continue to have significant influence over us, and may have conflicts of interest with us or you now or in the future.
Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit a change in our control.
Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (“MGCL”) may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or impeding a change of control under circumstances that otherwise could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our Common Stock and preferred stock, 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 became an interested stockholder, and thereafter require two supermajority stockholder votes to approve any such combination; and
• “control share” provisions that provide that a holder of our “control shares” (defined as voting shares of stock which, when aggregated with all other shares of stock owned by the acquiror or in respect of which the acquiror is able to exercise or direct the exercise of voting power (except solely by virtue of a revocable proxy), entitle the acquiror 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 issued and outstanding “control shares,” subject to certain exceptions) generally has no voting rights with respect to the control shares except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares.
We elected to opt out of these provisions of the MGCL, in the case of the business combination provisions, by resolution of our Board of Directors exempting any business combination between us and any other person (provided that such business combination is first approved by our Board of Directors, including a majority of our directors who are not affiliates or associates of such person), and in the case of the control share provisions, pursuant to a provision in our bylaws. We may not opt back in to either of these provisions without the approval of the holders of a majority of our shares of common stock.
Our authorized but unissued Common Stock and preferred stock may prevent a change in control of the Company.
Our charter authorizes us to issue additional authorized but unissued Common Stock and preferred stock without stockholder approval. In addition, our Board of Directors may, without stockholder approval, (i) amend our charter to increase or decrease the aggregate number of our shares of stock or the number of shares of any class or series of stock that we have authority to issue and (ii) classify or reclassify any unissued Common Stock or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. As a result, among other things, our board may establish a class or series of Common Stock or preferred stock that could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in control of the company that might involve a premium price for our Common Stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.
Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions not in your best interest.
Our charter limits the liability of our present and former directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law, our present and former directors and officers will not have any liability to us or our stockholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:
• actual receipt of an improper benefit or profit in money, property or services; or
• active and deliberate dishonesty by the director or officer that was established by a final judgment and is material to the cause of action.
In addition, our charter authorizes us to indemnify our present and former directors and officers for actions taken by them in those and other capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, and our bylaws require us to indemnify our present and former directors and officers, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, in the defense of any proceeding to which he or she is made, or threatened to be made, a party by reason of his or her service to us as a director or officer in these and other capacities. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former directors and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our present and former directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent the current provisions in our charter and bylaws or that might exist with other companies, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions not in your best interests.
Our charter contains provisions that make removal of our directors difficult, which could make it difficult for our stockholders to effect changes to our management.
Our charter provides that, subject to the rights of holders of one or more classes or series of preferred stock to elect or remove one or more directors, a director may be removed only for “cause” (as defined in our charter), and then only by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast generally in the election of directors. Vacancies may be filled only by a majority of the remaining directors in office, even if less than a quorum, and directors elected to fill such vacancies shall serve for the full term of the directorship in which the vacancy occurred (other than vacancies among any directors elected by the holder or holders of any class or series of preferred stock, if such right exists) and until a successor is elected and qualified. These requirements make it more difficult to change our management by removing and replacing directors and may prevent a change in our control that is in the best interests of our stockholders.
Our charter generally does not permit ownership in excess of 9.8% of our Common Stock or of our stock of all classes and series based on value or number of shares, and attempts to acquire our stock in excess of the stock ownership limit will be ineffective unless an exemption is granted by our Board of Directors. These provisions may restrict change of control or business combination opportunities in which our stockholders might receive a premium for their shares of common stock.
We elected to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes beginning with our taxable year ended December 31, 2014. In order for us to continue to qualify as a REIT, no more than 50% of the value of our outstanding shares of capital stock (after taking into account options to acquire shares of stock) may be owned, directly or constructively, by five or fewer individuals during the last half of any calendar year. “Individuals” for this purpose include natural persons, private foundations, some employee benefit plans and trusts, and some charitable trusts. In order for us to continue to qualify as a REIT, 100 or more persons must beneficially own our shares during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months, or during a proportionate part of a taxable year of less than 12 months. In order to help us qualify as a REIT, among other purposes, our charter generally limits the beneficial or constructive ownership of our (a) Common Stock by any person to no more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock or (b) capital stock by any person to no more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of our capital stock. Our Board of Directors, in its sole and absolute discretion, may grant an exemption to certain of these prohibitions, subject to certain conditions and receipt by our Board of Directors of certain representations, covenants and undertakings. Our Board of Directors waived such limit in connection with the ownership by Flexpoint REIT Investor, the Wellington Investors and certain other investors. Our Board of Directors may also from time to time increase this ownership limit for one or more persons and may decrease such limit for all other persons. Any decrease in the ownership limit generally applicable to all stockholders will not be effective for any person whose percentage ownership of our stock is in excess of such decreased ownership limit until such time as such person’s percentage ownership of our stock equals or falls below such decreased ownership limit, but any further acquisition of our stock in excess of such decreased ownership limit will be in violation of the decreased ownership limit. Our Board of Directors may not increase the decreased ownership limit (whether for one person or all stockholders) if such increase would allow five or fewer individuals (including certain entities) to beneficially own more than 49.9% in value of our outstanding capital stock.
Our charter’s constructive ownership rules are complex and may cause the outstanding shares of our stock owned by a group of related individuals or entities to be deemed to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of less than 9.8% of the outstanding shares of any class or series of our stock by an individual or entity could cause that individual or entity to own constructively in excess of 9.8% of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock or of our stock of all classes and series and thus violate the ownership limits or other restrictions on ownership and transfer of our stock. Any attempt by a stockholder to own or transfer our stock in excess of the ownership limit without the consent of our Board of Directors or in a manner that would cause us to be “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Internal Revenue Code (without regard to whether the stock is held during the last half of a taxable year) or would otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT will result in the stock being automatically transferred to a trustee for a charitable trust or, if the transfer to the charitable trust is not automatically effective to prevent a violation of the stock ownership limit or the restrictions on ownership and transfer of our stock, any such transfer of our shares will be void ab initio. Further, any transfer of our stock that would result in our shares being beneficially owned by fewer than 100 persons will be void ab initio.
These ownership limitations could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of our shares of Common Stock might receive a premium for their shares of Common Stock over the then-prevailing market price or which holders might believe to be otherwise in their best interests.
Conflicts of interest could arise in the future as a result of our structure.
Conflicts of interest could arise in the future as a result of the relationships between us and our affiliates, on the one hand, and our Operating Partnership or any partner thereof, on the other. Our directors and officers have duties to our company under applicable Maryland law in connection with their oversight of the management of our company. At the same time, we, through our wholly owned subsidiary, will have fiduciary duties, as a general partner, to our Operating Partnership and to any partners thereof under Delaware law in connection with the management of our Operating Partnership. Our duties as a general partner to our Operating Partnership and any of its affiliates may come into conflict with the duties of our directors and officers. In the event of a conflict between the interests of our stockholders and the interests of the affiliates of our Operating Partnership, we will endeavor in good faith to resolve the conflict in a manner not adverse to either our stockholders or the affiliates; provided, that for so long as we own a controlling interest in our Operating Partnership, any such conflict that we, in our sole and absolute discretion, determine cannot be resolved in a manner not adverse to either our stockholders or the affiliates of our Operating Partnership will be resolved in favor of our stockholders.
Risks Related to Our Stock
The market price of our Common Stock and preferred stock may fluctuate, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
The stock market in general has been, and the market price of our Common Stock in particular will likely be, subject to fluctuation, whether due to, or irrespective of, our operating results and financial condition. Our financial performance, government regulatory action, tax laws, interest rates and market conditions in general could have a significant impact on the future market price of our Common Stock and preferred stock. Some of the other factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in our share price include:
• weakening of the mortgage loan market or the CRE market;
• actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly operating results;
• increases in market interest rates that lead purchasers of our Common Stock to demand a higher yield;
• changes in our cumulative core earnings or earnings estimates;
• changes in market valuations of similar companies;
• political and social unrest or instability and military conflicts;
• actions or announcements by our competitors;
• actual or perceived conflicts of interest, or the discontinuance of our strategic relationships, with our Manager or the Servicer;
• adverse market reaction to any increased indebtedness we incur in the future;
• additions or departures of key personnel;
• actions by stockholders;
• speculation in the press or investment community;
• our ability to maintain the listing of our Common Stock on a national securities exchange;
• failure to qualify or maintain our qualification as a REIT; and
• failure to maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act.
Our Common Stock share price has been and may continue to be volatile.
The market price of our shares has been extremely volatile. From January 1, 2025 throug h February 12, 2026 , th e trading price of our Common Stock has been as low as $14.34 per share and as high as $19.80 per share (adjusted, in each case, for the Reverse Stock Split). The market price variation of our Common Stock may not necessarily bear any relationship to our book value, asset values, operating results, financial condition or any other established criteria of value, and may not be indicative of the market price for our shares in the future. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources.
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements involves the use of estimates, judgments and assumptions, and our consolidated financial statements may be materially affected if such estimates, judgments and assumptions prove to be inaccurate.
Consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP require the use of estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts. Different estimates, judgments and assumptions reasonably could be used that would have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements, and changes in these estimates, judgments and assumptions are likely to occur from period to period in the future. Significant areas of accounting requiring the application of management’s judgment include, but are not limited to, determining the fair value of our assets and the timing and amount of cash flows from our assets. These estimates, judgments and assumptions are inherently uncertain and, if they prove to be wrong, we face the risk that charges to income will be required. Any such charges could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and the price of our securities. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for a discussion of the accounting estimates, judgments and assumptions that we believe are the most critical to an understanding of our future plan of operations.
If we fail to establish and maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately determine our financial results or prevent fraud.
Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. We may in the future discover areas of internal control that need further improvement, and we cannot be certain that we will be successful in maintaining adequate control over our financial reporting and financial processes. Furthermore, as we grow our business, our internal controls will become more complex, and we will require significantly more resources to ensure that our internal controls remain effective. If we or our independent auditors discover a material weakness, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could reduce the market value of our common stock. Additionally, the existence of any material weakness or significant deficiency would require management to devote significant time and incur significant expense to remediate any such material weakness or significant deficiency and management may not be able to remediate any such material weakness or significant deficiency in a timely manner, or at all.
We have not established a minimum distribution payment level on our Common Stock, and we cannot assure you of our ability to make distributions in the future, or that our Board of Directors will not reduce distributions in the future regardless of such ability.
We generally need to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income each year (subject to certain adjustments) to our shareholders to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, which enables us to avoid being subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income that we distribute to our stockholders. However, the declaration of dividends to our stockholders and the amount of such dividends are at the discretion of our Board of Directors, and our ability to make distributions depends on, among other things, our results of operations, which may experience uneven cash flow because we hold RPLs and NPLs, our earnings, our financial condition, our working capital needs, new opportunities and distribution requirements imposed on REITs by applicable law, the other risk factors described in this Annual Report, and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. While we intend to distribute to our stockholders an amount equal to at least 90% of our REIT taxable income determined before applying the deduction for dividends paid and by excluding net capital gains consistent with our intention to maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, we have not established a minimum distribution payment level on our Common Stock and there can be no assurance regarding the amounts and timing of the approval and declaration of cash dividends, our ability to declare dividends, or that our Board of Directors will not determine to reduce such distributions, in the future. In addition, some of our distributions to our common stockholders may continue to include a return of capital.
We may pay distributions from offering proceeds, borrowings or the sale of assets to the extent that distributions exceed earnings or cash flow from our investment activities.
We may pay distributions from offering proceeds, borrowings or the sale of assets to the extent that distributions exceed earnings or cash flow from our investment activities. Because our assets may not receive payments on a regular basis, we may experience uneven cash flow, making it more difficult to maintain the necessary cash to pay distributions. Such distributions would reduce the amount of cash we have available for investing and other purposes and could be dilutive to our financial results. In addition, funding our distributions from our net proceeds may constitute a return of capital to our investors, which would have the effect of reducing each stockholder’s basis in its common stock.
Future sales of our Common Stock or other securities convertible into our Common Stock could cause the market value of our Common Stock to decline and could result in dilution of your shares.
Sales of substantial amounts of shares of our Common Stock could cause the market price of our Common Stock to decrease significantly. We cannot predict the effect, if any, of future sales of our common stock, or the availability of shares of our Common Stock for future sales, on the value of our common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of shares of our common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market values for our common stock.
