Chimera Investment (CIM) Risk Factors

Generally, the cumulative net income we report over the life of an asset will be the same for GAAP and tax purposes, although the timing of this income recognition over the life of the asset could be materially different. Differences exist in the accounting for GAAP net income and REIT taxable income, which can lead to significant variances in the amount and timing of when income and losses are recognized under these two measures. Due to these differences, our reported GAAP financial results could materially differ from our determination of taxable income, which impacts our dividend distribution requirements, and, therefore, our GAAP results may not be an accurate indicator of future taxable income and dividend distributions.

The declaration, amount and payment of any future dividends on shares of common stock will be at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors, and may depend upon our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our REIT qualification and other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. In light of these factors, our Board of Directors may adjust our quarterly cash dividend on our shares of common stock from prior quarters. The payment of dividends may be more uncertain during disruptions in the mortgage, housing or related sectors, such as the current rising interest rate environment.

Under Maryland law, no distributions on stock may be made if, after giving effect to the distribution, (i) the corporation would not be able to pay the indebtedness of the corporation as such indebtedness becomes due in the usual course of business or (ii) except in certain limited circumstances when distributions are made from net earnings, the corporation's total assets would be less than the sum of the corporation's total liabilities plus, unless the charter provides otherwise (which our charter does, with respect to any outstanding series of preferred stock), the amount that would be needed, if the corporation were to be dissolved at the time of the distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of stockholders whose preferential rights on dissolution are superior to those receiving the distribution. There can be no guarantee that we will have sufficient cash to pay dividends on any series of our capital stock. Our ability to pay dividends may be impaired if any of the risks described in this Item 1A "Risk Factors" section were to occur. In addition, payment of our dividends depends upon our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our REIT qualification and other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. We cannot assure you that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future borrowings will be available to us in an amount sufficient to enable us to make distributions on our common stock or any series of our preferred stock.

Our dividend distributions are driven by a variety of factors, including our minimum dividend distribution requirements under the REIT tax laws and our REIT taxable income as calculated for tax purposes pursuant to the Code. We generally intend to distribute to our common shareholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, although our reported financial results for GAAP purposes may differ materially from our REIT taxable income. Our ability to pay a dividend per common share per quarter and the dividend on each series of our preferred stock at the stated dividend rate may be adversely affected by many factors, including the risk factors described herein. These same factors may affect our ability to pay other future dividends. In addition, to the extent we determine that future dividends would represent a return of capital to investors, rather than the distribution of income, we may determine to discontinue dividend payments until such time that dividends would again represent a distribution of income. Any reduction or elimination of our payment of dividend distributions would not only reduce the number of dividends you would receive as a holder of our common stock but could also have the effect of reducing the market price of our common stock.

We report the fair values of securities, loans, derivatives, and certain other assets on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. In computing the fair values for these assets, we may make several market-based assumptions, including assumptions regarding future interest rates, prepayment rates, discount rates, credit loss rates, and the timing of credit losses. These assumptions are inherently subjective and involve a high degree of management judgment, particularly for illiquid securities and other assets for which market prices are not readily determinable. These assumptions may be more difficult to calculate during times of severe market disruption in the mortgage, housing or related sectors. For further information regarding our assets recorded at fair value see Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements within this 2023 Form 10-K. Use of different assumptions could materially affect our fair value calculations and our financial results and our actual experience may cause us to substantially revise our assumptions. Further discussion of the risk of our ownership and valuation of illiquid securities is set forth in the Risk Factors above and in this 2023 Form 10-K.

Fair values for our assets and liabilities, including derivatives, can be volatile and our revenue and income can be impacted by changes in fair values. The fair values can change rapidly and significantly, and changes can result from changes in interest rates, perceived risk, supply, demand, and actual and projected cash flows, prepayments, and credit performance. A decrease in fair value may not necessarily be the result of deterioration in future cash flows. Fair values for illiquid assets can be difficult to estimate, which may lead to volatility and uncertainty of earnings and book value. For GAAP purposes, we may mark-to-market most, but not all, of the assets and liabilities on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. In addition, valuation adjustments on certain consolidated assets and our derivatives are reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Assets that are funded with certain liabilities and hedges may have different mark-to-market treatment than the liability or hedge. If we sell an asset that has not been marked to market through our Consolidated Statements of Operations at a reduced market price relative to its cost basis, our reported earnings will be reduced. Our loan sale profit margins are generally reflective of gains (or losses) over the period from when we identify a loan for purchase until we subsequently sell or securitize the loan. These profit margins may encompass elements of positive or negative market valuation adjustments on loans, hedging gains or losses associated with related risk management activities, and any other related transaction expenses; however, under GAAP, the different elements may be realized unevenly over the course of one or more quarters for financial reporting purposes, with the result that our financial results may be more volatile and less reflective of the underlying economics of our business activity.

In response to events having or expected to have adverse economic consequences or which create market uncertainty, clearing facilities or exchanges upon which some of our hedging instruments (i.e., interest rate swaps) are traded may require us to post additional collateral against our hedging instruments. In the event that future adverse economic developments or market uncertainty (including those due to governmental, regulatory, or legislative action or inaction) result in increased margin requirements for our hedging instruments, it could materially adversely affect our liquidity position, business, financial condition and results of operations.

As indicated above, from time to time we enter into swaps. Entities entering into swaps are exposed to credit losses in the event of non-performance by counterparties to these transactions. Rules issued by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission or, CFTC, that became effective in October 2012 require the clearing of all swap transactions through registered derivatives clearing organizations, or swap execution facilities, through standardized documents under which each swap counterparty transfers its position to another entity whereby the centralized clearinghouse effectively becomes the counterparty to each side of the swap. It is the intent of the Dodd-Frank Act that the clearing of swaps in this manner is designed to avoid concentration of swap risk in any single entity by spreading and centralizing the risk in the clearinghouse and its members. In addition to greater initial and periodic margin (collateral) requirements and additional transaction fees both by the swap execution facility and the clearinghouse, the swap transactions are now subjected to greater regulation by both the CFTC and the SEC. These additional fees, costs, margin requirements, documentation requirements, and regulations could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, part of our financing strategy involves entering into hedging instruments that could require us to fund cash payments in certain circumstances (e.g., the early termination of a hedging instrument caused by an event of default or other voluntary or involuntary termination event or the decision by a hedging counterparty to request the posting of collateral that it is contractually owed under the terms of a hedging instrument). With respect to the termination of an existing swap, the amount due would generally be equal to the unrealized loss of the open swap position with the hedging counterparty and could also include other fees and charges. These economic losses will be reflected in our financial results of operations and our ability to fund these obligations will depend on the liquidity of our assets and access to capital at the time. Any losses we incur on our hedging instruments could materially adversely affect our earnings and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, we use various hedging strategies to reduce our exposure to losses from rising interest rates in the current market. Hedging activity varies in scope based on the level and volatility of interest rates, the type of assets held, financing used, and other changing market conditions. There are no perfect hedging strategies, and interest rate hedging may fail to protect us from loss. Alternatively, we may fail to properly assess a risk to our investment portfolio or may fail to recognize a risk entirely, leaving us exposed to losses without the benefit of any offsetting hedging activities. The derivative financial instruments we could select may not have the effect of reducing our interest rate risk. The nature and timing of hedging transactions may influence the effectiveness of these strategies. Poorly designed strategies or improperly executed transactions could increase our risk and losses. In addition, hedging activities could result in losses if the event against which we hedge does not occur. For example, interest rate hedging could fail to protect us or 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 correlate directly with the interest rate risk for which protection is sought;- the duration of the hedge may not match the duration of the related liability;- the amount of income that a REIT may earn from hedging transactions to offset interest rate losses may be limited by U.S. federal tax provisions governing REITs;- the credit quality of the party owing money on the hedge may be downgraded to such an extent that it impairs our ability to sell or assign our side of the hedging transaction;- the party owing money in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay; and - the value of derivatives used for hedging may be adjusted from time to time in accordance with accounting rules to reflect changes in fair value with downward adjustments, or "mark-to-market losses," reducing our stockholders' equity;- during periods of high volatility we may need to post significant cash collateral, which may limit our ability to invest and deteriorate liquidity. The hedging transactions we undertake, which are intended to limit losses, may limit gains and increase our exposure to losses. Thus, our hedging activity may adversely affect our earnings, which could reduce our cash available for distribution to our stockholders. In addition, some hedging instruments involve risk since they are not currently traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities.

Our ability to meet cash needs depends on many factors, several of which are beyond our control. Ineffective management of liquidity levels could cause us to be unable to meet certain financial obligations. Potential conditions that could impair our liquidity include: unwillingness or inability of any of our potential lenders to provide us with or renew financing, margin calls, additional capital requirements applicable to our lenders, a disruption in the financial markets or declining confidence in our creditworthiness or in financial markets in general. These conditions could force us to sell our assets at inopportune times or otherwise cause us to potentially revise our strategic business initiatives.

Our earnings are primarily generated from the difference between the interest income we earn on our investment portfolio, less net amortization of purchase premiums and discounts, and the interest expense we pay on our borrowings. Historically, we relied primarily on borrowings under repurchase agreements to finance our investments, which have short-term contractual maturities. In an effort to be less impacted by market dislocations, we have moved some of our financing to longer-term mark-to-market financing and longer-term non-market-to-market and limited mark-to-market financing which is more expensive than traditional short-term mark-to-market financing. In general, if the interest expense on our borrowings increases relative to the interest income we earn on our investments, our profitability may be materially adversely affected. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including fiscal and monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions, as well as other factors beyond our control. Starting in 2022, the Federal Reserve adopted monetary policies designed to address a rapid acceleration of inflation, raising the federal funds rates multiple times starting in 2022 and through a portion of 2023, and may do so again in the future, which could impact our borrowing costs and our ability to invest generally. During a period of rising interest rates and flattening or inverted yield curves such as the current market, our borrowing costs generally will increase at a faster pace than our interest earnings on the leveraged portion of our investment portfolio, which could result in a decline in our net interest spread and net interest margin. The severity of any such decline would depend on our asset/liability composition, including the impact of hedging transactions, at the time as well as the magnitude and period over which interest rates increase. Further, an increase in short-term interest rates could also have a negative impact on the market value of our investments. As these events occurred in 2023 and 2022, and are continuing, we have and may continue to experience an increase in our interest expense.

Our ability to fund our operations, meet financial obligations and finance target asset acquisitions may be impacted by our ability to secure and maintain our master repurchase agreements, warehouse facilities and repurchase agreement facilities with our counterparties. Because repurchase agreements and warehouse facilities are short-term commitments of capital, lenders may respond to market conditions making it more difficult for us to renew or replace on a continuous basis our maturing short-term borrowings and have and may continue to impose more onerous conditions when rolling such financings. If we are not able to renew our existing facilities or arrange for new financing on terms acceptable to us, or if we default on our covenants or are otherwise unable to access funds under our financing facilities or if we are required to post more collateral or face larger haircuts, we may have to curtail our asset acquisition activities and/or dispose of assets at a loss. Issues related to financing are exacerbated in times of significant dislocation in the financial markets, such as current conditions. It is possible our lenders will become unwilling or unable to provide us with financing and we could be forced to sell our assets at an inopportune time when prices are depressed. In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us. Our lenders also have and may continue to revise their eligibility requirements for the types of assets they are willing to finance or the terms of such financings, including haircuts and requiring additional collateral in the form of cash, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of actual and perceived risk, particularly with respect to assignee liability. Moreover, the amount of financing we receive under our repurchase agreements will be directly related to our lenders' valuation of our target assets that cover the outstanding borrowings. Typically, repurchase agreements grant the lender the absolute right to reevaluate the fair market value of the assets that cover outstanding borrowings at any time. If a lender determines in its sole discretion that the value of the assets has decreased, it has the right to initiate a margin call. These valuations may be different than the values that we ascribe to these assets and may be influenced by recent asset sales and distressed levels by forced sellers. A margin call requires us to transfer additional assets or cash to a lender without any advance of funds from the lender for such transfer or to repay a portion of the outstanding borrowings.

A significant number of the mortgages underlying our Non-Agency MBS and Loans held for investments are concentrated in certain geographic areas. For example, we have significant exposure in California, New York and Florida. For further information on the geographic concentration of our investments see Note 3 and Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements within this 2023 Form 10-K. Certain markets within these states (particularly in California and Florida) have experienced significant decreases in residential home values from time to time. Any event that adversely affects the economy or real estate market in any of these states could have a disproportionately adverse effect on our Non-Agency MBS and Loans held for investments. In general, any material decline in the economy or significant problems in a particular real estate market would likely cause a decline in the value of residential properties securing the mortgages in that market, thereby increasing the risk of delinquency, default, and foreclosure of mortgage loans underlying our Non-Agency MBS and residential loan investments and the risk of loss upon liquidation of these assets. This could have a material adverse effect on our Non-Agency MBS credit loss experience and residential loan investments in the affected market if higher-than-expected rates of default or higher-than-expected loss severities on such loans were to occur. In addition, the occurrence of a natural disaster or a terrorist attack may cause a sudden decrease in the value of real estate in the area or areas affected and would likely reduce the value of the properties securing the mortgages collateralizing our Non-Agency MBS or Loans held for investments. Recent years have seen frequent and severe natural disasters in the U.S., including wildfires, hurricanes, high winds, severe flooding and mudslides, the frequency and intensity of which may be indicative of the impact of climate change. The impacts of climate change, which are expected to persist and worsen in the future, could have a more significant localized effect in the areas where our borrowers are concentrated, resulting in a disproportionate impact on us. Because certain natural disasters such as hurricanes or certain flooding are not typically covered by the standard hazard insurance policies maintained by borrowers, or the proceeds payable under any such policy are not sufficient to cover the related repairs, the affected borrowers may have to pay for any repairs themselves. Under these circumstances, borrowers may decide not to repair their property or may stop paying their mortgages. This would cause defaults and credit loss severities to increase. Changes in local laws and regulations, fiscal policies, property taxes and zoning ordinances in such states can also have a negative impact on property values, which could result in borrowers' deciding to stop paying their mortgages. This circumstance could cause defaults and loss severities to increase, thereby adversely impacting our results of operations.

We assume credit risk primarily through the ownership of securities backed by residential, multi-family, and commercial real estate loans and through direct investments in residential real estate loans. The substantial majority of our investment assets are subject to various credit risks, as discussed below. No U.S. Government Guarantee. We acquire residential loans including reperforming loans, nonperforming loans (the borrower is severely delinquent), and Non-QMs, which are subject to increased risk of loss. Unlike Agency RMBS, residential mortgage loans generally are not guaranteed by the U.S. Government or any government-sponsored enterprise such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Additionally, by directly acquiring residential loans, we do not receive the structural credit enhancements that benefit senior tranches of RMBS. A residential loan is directly exposed to losses resulting from the 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 impact the value of such 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. The value of residential loans is also subject to property damage caused by hazards, such as earthquakes or environmental hazards, not covered by standard property insurance policies and to a reduction in a borrower's mortgage debt by a bankruptcy court. In addition, claims may be assessed against us because of our position as a mortgage holder or property owner, including assignee liability, environmental hazards, and other liabilities. We could also be responsible for property taxes. In some cases, these claims may lead to losses exceeding the purchase price of the related mortgage or property. The occurrence of any of these risks could materially adversely impact our results of operations, financial condition, and business. Enhanced Non-QM Loan Risks. In addition, we acquire Non-QMs that will not have the benefit of enhanced legal protections otherwise available to residential mortgage loans originated to a more restrictive credit standard than just determining a borrower's ability to repay. The ownership of Non-QMs subjects us to legal, regulatory and other risks, including those arising under federal consumer protection laws and regulations designed to regulate residential mortgage loan underwriting and originators' lending processes, standards, and disclosures to borrowers. Failure of residential mortgage loan originators or servicers to comply with the ability-to-repay laws and regulations could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of these loans (or as an investor in securities backed by these loans), to monetary penalties assessed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, through its administrative enforcement authority and by mortgagors through a private right of action against lenders or as a defense to foreclosure, including by recoupment or setoff of finance charges and fees collected, and could result in rescission of the affected residential mortgage loans, which could adversely impact our business and financial results. Greater General Credit Risks. In addition, credit losses on residential real estate loans can occur for many reasons (many of which are beyond our control), including: fraud; poor underwriting; poor servicing practices; weak economic conditions; increases in payments required to be made by borrowers; declines in the value of homes; earthquakes, the effects of climate change (including flooding, drought, wildfire and severe weather), and other natural disaster events; uninsured property loss; borrower over-leveraging; costs of remediation of environmental conditions, such as indoor mold; changes in zoning or building codes and the related costs of compliance; acts of war or terrorism; pandemics; changes in legal protections for borrowers and other changes in law or regulation; and personal events affecting borrowers, such as reduction in income and job loss. Additionally, the amount and timing of credit losses could be affected by loan modifications, delays in the liquidation process, documentation errors, and other actions by servicers. Weakness in the U.S. economy or the housing market could cause our credit losses to increase beyond levels that we currently anticipate.

A majority of the Non-Agency MBS we have acquired on the secondary market or retained in our securitizations are backed by collateral pools containing mortgage loans that were originated using underwriting standards that were less strict than those used in underwriting "prime mortgage loans." These lower standards permitted mortgage loans, often with LTV ratios exceeding 80%, to be made to borrowers having impaired credit histories, lower credit scores, higher debt-to-income ratios or unverified income. Such mortgage loans are likely to experience delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy, and other losses at rates that are higher, may be substantially higher, than those experienced by prime mortgage loans. Thus, the performance of our Non-Agency MBS that are backed by these types of loans could be correspondingly lower than those backed by prime mortgage loans especially during times of economic stress, which could materially adversely impact our results of operations, financial condition, and business.

A significant part of our business and growth strategy is to engage in securitization transactions to finance the acquisition of residential mortgage loans. Pursuant to the Risk Retention Rules, when we sponsor a residential mortgage loan securitization, we are required to retain at least 5% of the fair value of the mortgage-backed securities issued in the securitization. We can retain either an "eligible vertical interest" (which consists of at least 5% of each class of securities issued in the securitization), an "eligible horizontal residual interest" (which is the most subordinate class of securities with a fair market value of at least 5% of the aggregate credit risk) or a combination of both totaling 5%, or the Required Credit Risk. We typically own the eligible horizontal residual interest. We are required to hold the Required Credit Risk until the later of (i) the fifth anniversary of the securitization closing date and (ii) the date on which the aggregate unpaid principal balance of the mortgage loans in such securitization has been reduced to 25% of the aggregate unpaid principal balance of the mortgage loans as of the securitization closing date, but no longer than the seventh anniversary of the closing date (such date, the Sunset Date). In addition, before the Sunset Date, we may not engage in any hedging transactions if payments on the hedge instrument are materially related to the Required Credit Risk and the hedge position would limit our financial exposure to the Required Credit Risk. Also, we may not pledge our interest in any Required Credit Risk as collateral for any financing unless such financing is full recourse to us. We have financed our Required Credit Risk in full recourse transactions. Our Required Credit Risk subjects us to the first losses on our securitizations and is illiquid, which may make it more difficult to meet our liquidity needs, each of which may materially and adversely affect our business and financing condition. Thus, the Risk Retention Rules materially limit our ability to sell and hedge a portion of our RMBS that we acquire through our securitizations and subjects us to the credit risk related to the retained RMBS that we otherwise may have sold.

A significant portion of our Non-Agency RMBS are subordinate classes we have acquired through securitization of mortgage loans. The mortgage loans we have securitized are generally recorded on our balance sheet as "securitized mortgage loans" for GAAP purposes, but in effect we own these assets in the form of securities. A substantial portion of the mortgage loans that we securitize and the subordinate securities that we retain are not newly originated "prime mortgage loans" but rather seasoned reperforming mortgage loans and Non-QM loans that have less strict underwriting standards and are therefore subject to greater risk of loss, as discussed below. When we securitize mortgage loans, we sell the most senior securities backed by those loans and retain the most subordinate classes of securities, which means we are the first-loss security holder and the securities we own represent a portion of the "securitized mortgage loans" on our balance sheet. Losses on any residential mortgage loan securing our RMBS will be borne first by the owner of the property (i.e., the owner will first lose any equity invested in the property) and, thereafter, by us as the first-loss security holder, and then by holders of more senior securities. If the losses incurred upon loan default exceed any reserve fund, letter of credit, and classes of securities junior to those we own (if any), we may not be able to recover our investment in such securities. Also, if the underlying properties have been overvalued by the originating appraiser or if the values subsequently decline resulting in less collateral available to satisfy interest and principal payments due on the related security, as the first-loss security holder, we may suffer a total loss of principal, followed by losses on the more senior securities (or other RMBS that we may own). Losses with respect to these investments, which are subject to significant credit risk, could increase or otherwise be higher than anticipated. For a description of the credit risk we are exposed to, see the Risk Factor below captioned "The nature of the mortgage loans we acquire and that underlie the MBS we acquire, exposes us to credit risk that could negatively affect the value of those assets and investments." In addition, many of our Non-Agency RMBS securities are first loss and subject to the Risk Retention Rules (see the Risk Factor below captioned "A significant portion of the RMBS we acquire through securitization is subject to the U.S. credit risk retention rules which materially limit our ability to sell or hedge such investments as needed, which may require us to hold investments that we may otherwise desire to sell during times of severe market disruption in the financial, mortgage, housing or related sectors.") and are therefore illiquid for a period of time. The fair value of securities, especially our first loss credit risk retention securities, reperforming mortgage loans (loans that typically were significantly delinquent and subsequently modified), and other investments we make that are not frequently traded may not be readily determinable and it may be difficult to obtain third party pricing on such investments. Also, validating third party pricing for illiquid investments may be more subjective than more liquid investments and may not be reliable. Illiquid investments may also experience greater price volatility because an active market does not exist. We value our investments quarterly based on our judgment and valuation models and in accordance with our valuation policy. Because such valuations are inherently uncertain, our fair value determination may differ materially from the values obtained from third parties or the values that would have been used, if an active trading market existed for these investments. Our results of operations, financial condition and business could be materially adversely affected if our fair value determinations of the investments were materially different than the values that would exist if a ready market existed for these assets. The illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult, or impossible for certain assets subject to the Risk Retention Rules, for us to sell and these assets may be more difficult to finance. Also, if we quickly liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio (for example, to meet a margin call), we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. Thus, our ability to adjust our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions may be relatively limited, which could adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and the value of our capital stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making offerings of debt or additional offerings of equity or equity-linked securities, including commercial paper, warrants, senior or subordinated notes and series or classes of preferred stock or common stock. Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock, if any, and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive a distribution of our available assets before the holders of our common stock. Additional offerings of equity securities, including securities that may be converted into or exchanged for equity securities, may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our capital stock, or both. Preferred stock, including our Series A, Series B, Series C, and Series D Preferred Stock, will have a preference on liquidating distributions or a preference on dividend payments or both that could limit our ability to make a dividend distribution to the holders of our capital stock, including our common stock. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, holders of our capital stock bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of our capital stock and diluting their stock holdings in us.

The mortgage loans we acquire may be subject to the interest apportionment rules under Treasury Regulations Section 1.856-5(c), or the Interest Apportionment Regulation, which generally provides that if a mortgage is secured by both real property and other property, a REIT is required to apportion its annual interest income for purposes of the REIT 75% gross income test. If a mortgage is secured by both real property and personal property and the value of the personal property does not exceed 15% of the aggregate value of the property securing the mortgage, the mortgage is treated as secured solely by real property for this purpose. For purposes of the asset tests applicable to REITs, Revenue Procedure 2014-51 provides a safe harbor under which the IRS will generally not challenge a REIT's treatment of a loan as being in part a real estate asset in an amount equal to the lesser of the fair market value of the loan or the fair market value of the real property securing the loan at certain relevant testing dates. We believe that all of the mortgage loans that we acquire are secured only by real property. Therefore, we believe that the Interest Apportionment Regulation does not apply to our portfolio. Nevertheless, if the IRS were to assert successfully that our mortgage loans were secured by property other than real estate, that the Interest Apportionment Regulation applied for purposes of our REIT testing, and that the position taken in Revenue Procedure 2014-51 should be applied to our portfolio, then we might not be able to meet the REIT 75% gross income test, and possibly the asset tests applicable to REITs. If we did not meet these tests, we could lose our REIT status or be required to pay a tax penalty to the IRS.

A significant part of our business and growth strategy is to engage in various securitization transactions related to residential mortgage loans. There are many factors that can have a significant impact on whether a securitization transaction is profitable to us or result in a loss. One of these factors is the price we pay for the mortgage loans that we securitize, which, in the case of residential mortgage loans, is impacted by the level of competition in the marketplace for acquiring residential mortgage loans and the relative desirability to originators or other financial institutions of retaining residential mortgage loans as investments or selling them to third parties such as us. The cost and availability of the short-term debt we use to finance our mortgage loan before securitization impacts the profitability of our securitization transactions. This short-term debt cost is affected by several factors including its availability to us, its interest rate, its duration, and the percentage of our mortgage loans for which third parties are willing to provide short-term financing. After we acquire mortgage loans that we intend to securitize, we can also suffer losses if the value of those loans declines before securitization. Declines in the value of a residential mortgage loan, for example, can be due to, among other things, changes in interest rates, changes in the credit quality of the loan, changes in the projected yields required by investors to invest in securitization transactions, and increased delinquencies. Hedging against a decline in loan value due to changes in interest rates may impact the profitability of a securitization. The price that investors in mortgage-backed securities will pay for securities issued in our securitization transactions also has a significant impact on the profitability of the transactions to us, and these prices are impacted by numerous market forces and factors including the uncertainty, potential delinquencies, and lack of liquidity. In addition, the underwriter(s) or placement agent(s) we select for securitization transactions, the terms of their engagement and the transaction costs incurred in such securitizations can also impact the profitability of our securitizations. Also, any liability that we may incur, or may be required to reserve for when executing a transaction can cause a loss to us. To the extent that we are not able to profitably execute future securitizations of residential mortgage loans or other assets, including for the reasons described above or for other reasons, it could have a material adverse impact on our business and financial results.

Our business strategy involves the use of borrowing, or leverage. Pursuant to our leverage strategy, we borrow against a substantial portion of the market value of our assets and use the borrowed funds to finance our investment portfolio and the acquisition of additional investment assets. Future increases in the amount by which the collateral value is required to contractually exceed the amount borrowed in such leverage financing transactions, decreases in the market value of our residential mortgage investments, increases in interest rate volatility and changes in the availability of acceptable financing could cause us to be unable to achieve the amount of leverage we believe to be optimal. The return on our assets and cash available for distribution to our stockholders may be reduced to the extent that changes in market conditions prevent us from achieving the desired amount of leverage on our investments or cause the cost of our financing to increase relative to the income earned on our leveraged assets. For example, in response to the changes in rates and margins calls we received during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, in 2020, we entered into several non-mark-to-market and mark-to-market holiday financing facilities. Similarly, in 2023 and 2022, as the Federal Reserve increased interest rates we added more non-MTM facilities. These facilities typically have higher interest rates and cash trapping provisions which reduce the net cash we receive from these levered assets. If the interest income on the investments that we have purchased with borrowed funds fails to cover the interest expense of the related borrowings, we will experience net interest losses and may experience net losses from operations. Such losses could be significant because of our leveraged structure. The risks associated with leverage are more acute during periods of economic slowdown or recession. The use of leverage to finance our investments involves many other risks, including, among other things, the following: - Our profitability may be materially adversely affected by a reduction in our leverage. As long as we earn a positive spread between interest and other income we earn on our leveraged assets and our borrowing costs, we believe that we can generally increase our profitability by using greater amounts of leverage. There can be no assurance, however, that repurchase financing will remain an efficient source of financing for our assets. The amount of leverage that we use may be limited because our lenders might not make funding available to us at acceptable rates or they may require that we provide additional collateral to secure our borrowings. If our financing strategy is not viable, we will have to find alternative forms of financing for our assets which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. In addition, in response to certain interest rate and investment environments or to changes in market liquidity, we could adopt a strategy of reducing our leverage by selling assets or not reinvesting principal payments as MBS amortize or prepay, thereby decreasing the outstanding amount of our related borrowings. Such an action could reduce interest income, interest expense and net income, the extent of which would depend on the level of reduction in assets and liabilities as well as the sale prices for which the assets were sold. - If a counterparty to our repurchase transactions defaults on its obligation to resell the underlying security back to us at the end of the transaction term or if we default on our obligations under the repurchase agreement, we could incur losses. When we engage in repurchase transactions, we generally sell assets to the counterparty to the agreement for cash. Because the cash we receive from the counterparty is less than the value of those securities (this difference is referred to as the "haircut"), if the lender defaults on its obligation to transfer the same securities back to us, we would incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming there was no change in the value of the securities). (See Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" of this 2023 Form 10-K, for further discussion regarding risks related to exposure to financial institution counterparties in light of recent market conditions.) Our exposure to defaults by counterparties may be more pronounced during periods of significant volatility in the market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets. At December 31, 2023, we had amounts at risk with Nomura Securities International, Inc., or Nomura, of 17% of our equity related to the collateral posted on secured financing agreements. In addition, generally, if we default on a repurchase transaction the counterparty could liquidate the assets and use the proceeds to repay the amounts it is owed. If the amount received from the sale is equal to or less than the amount owed, we will incur a loss equal to the haircut and the counterparty has recourse to us to repay any remaining deficiency. In addition, if we default on a transaction under any one agreement and fail to honor the related guarantee, the counterparties on our other repurchase agreements could also declare a default under their respective repurchase agreements. Any losses we incur on our repurchase transactions could materially adversely affect our earnings and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders. - Our financing facilities may contain covenants that restrict our operations. Certain financing facilities we may enter into contain restrictions, covenants, and representations and warranties that, among other things, require us to satisfy specified financial, asset quality, loan eligibility, and loan performance tests. If we fail to meet or satisfy any of these covenants or representations and warranties, we would be in default under these agreements and our lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their respective rights against collateral pledged under such agreements, and restrict our ability to make additional borrowings. Certain financing agreements may contain cross-default provisions by a guarantor so that if a default occurs under any guaranty agreement, the lenders under our other financing agreements could also declare a default under their respective agreements. Further, under our mark-to-market agreements, we are typically required to pledge additional assets to our lenders in the event the estimated fair value of the existing pledged collateral under such agreements declines and such lenders demand additional collateral, which may take the form of additional securities, loans or cash. These restrictions may interfere with our ability to obtain financing or to engage in other business activities, which may have a significant negative impact on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. A default and resulting repayment acceleration could significantly reduce our liquidity, which could require us to sell our assets to repay amounts due and outstanding whether or not the prices and terms of such sales are favorable to us. This could also significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and our ability to make distributions, which could cause the value of our stock to decline. A default will also significantly limit our financing alternatives such that we will be unable to pursue our leverage strategy, which could lower our investment returns. - Adverse developments involving major financial institutions or involving one of our lenders could result in a rapid reduction in our ability to borrow and materially adversely affect our business, profitability, and liquidity. As of December 31, 2023, we had amounts outstanding under repurchase agreements with 12 separate lenders. A material adverse development involving one or more major financial institutions or the financial markets, in general, could result in us reducing exposure to certain lenders to mitigate credit risk or our lenders reducing our access to funds available under our repurchase agreements or terminating such repurchase agreements altogether. Because substantially all our repurchase agreements are uncommitted and renewable at our lenders' discretion, our lenders could determine to reduce or terminate our access to future borrowings at virtually any time, which could materially adversely affect our business and profitability. Furthermore, if a few of our lenders became unwilling or unable to continue to provide us with financing, we could be forced to sell assets, including assets in unrealized loss positions, to maintain liquidity. Forced sales, particularly under adverse market conditions, may result in lower sale prices than ordinary market sales made in normal market conditions. If our investments were liquidated at prices below our amortized cost of such assets, we would incur losses, which would adversely affect our earnings. - Our use of repurchase agreements to borrow money may give our lenders greater rights in the event of bankruptcy. In the event of our insolvency or bankruptcy, certain repurchase agreements may qualify for special treatment under the Bankruptcy Code, the effect of which, among other things, would be to allow the creditor under the agreement to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and take possession of, and liquidate, the collateral under such repurchase agreements without delay. - A re-characterization of the repurchase agreements as sales for tax purposes rather than as secured lending transactions would adversely affect our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT and to maintain our 1940 Act exemption. When we enter a repurchase agreement, we generally sell assets to our counterparty to the agreement for cash. The counterparty is obligated to resell the assets back to us at the end of the transaction term. We believe that for U.S. federal income tax purposes we will be treated as the owner of the assets that are the subject of repurchase agreements and that the repurchase agreements will be treated as secured lending transactions notwithstanding that such agreement may transfer record ownership of the assets to the counterparty during the term of the agreement. It is possible, however, that the IRS or the SEC could successfully assert that we did not own these assets during the term of the repurchase agreements, in which case we could fail to qualify as a REIT or fail to maintain our 1940 Act exemption, respectively.