This is our initial public offering. The selling stockholders identified in this prospectus are offering 12,500,000 shares of our common stock. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of the shares being sold by the selling stockholders. No public market currently exists for our common stock.

We anticipate that the initial public offering price will be between $19.00 and $21.00 per share of common stock. We have applied to list our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market, or NASDAQ, under the symbol “HMPT.”

We are an “emerging growth company” as that term is used in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and under applicable Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, rules and have elected to take advantage of certain reduced public company reporting requirements for this prospectus and future filings.

Following the completion of this offering, investment entities directly or indirectly managed by Stone Point Capital, which we refer to as the Trident Stockholders, will beneficially own approximately 88.4% of the voting power of our common stock (or 87.0% if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full). As long as the Trident Stockholders continue to own a majority of the voting power of our outstanding common stock, they will be able to control any action requiring the general approval of our stockholders, including the election and removal of directors, any amendments to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and the approval of any merger or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. Accordingly, we will be a “controlled company” within the meaning of the corporate governance rules of NASDAQ. See “Management—Controlled Company” and “Principal and Selling Stockholders.”

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 32 of this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed on the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The selling stockholders have granted the underwriters an option to purchase up to an additional 1,875,000 shares of common stock from the selling stockholders at the initial price to the public less the underwriting discounts and commissions, to cover over-allotments, if any, within 30 days from the date of this prospectus. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of our common stock by the selling stockholders pursuant to any exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares.

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares of common stock on or about    , 2021.

None of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters have authorized anyone to provide any information or to make any representations other than those contained in this prospectus or in any free writing prospectuses we have prepared. None of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters take responsibility for, or can provide assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give to you. This prospectus is an offer to sell only the shares offered hereby, and only under circumstances and in jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. The information contained in this prospectus is current only as of the date hereof, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of the shares of common stock. Our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may have changed since that date.

For investors outside the United States: the selling stockholders are offering to sell, and seeking offers to buy, shares of our common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are permitted. None of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters have done anything that would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. Persons outside the United States who come into possession of this prospectus must inform themselves about, and observe any restrictions relating to, the offering of the shares of common stock and the distribution of this prospectus outside the United States.

As used in this prospectus, unless the context otherwise requires:

The data included elsewhere in this prospectus regarding the markets and industry in which we operate, including the size of certain markets and our position and the position of our competitors within these markets, are based on reports of government agencies, published industry sources and estimates based on our management’s knowledge and experience in the markets in which we operate. Data regarding the industries in which we compete and our market position and market share within these industries are inherently imprecise and are subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties beyond our control, but we believe that they generally indicate size, position and market share within these industries. Our own estimates have been based on information obtained from our trade and business organizations and other contacts in the markets in which we operate.

We believe these estimates to be accurate as of the date of this prospectus. However, this information may prove to be inaccurate because of the method by which we obtained some of the data for the estimates or because this information cannot always be verified with complete certainty due to the limits on the availability and reliability of raw data, the voluntary nature of the data gathering process and other limitations and uncertainties. Third-party industry and general publications, research, surveys and studies generally state that the information contained therein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, although they do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of such information. While we believe that each of these studies and publications is reliable, none of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters have independently verified any of the data from third-party sources. As a result, you should be aware that market, ranking and other similar industry data included elsewhere in this prospectus, and estimates and beliefs based on that data, may not be reliable and are subject to change based on various factors, including those discussed under “Risk Factors” and “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Except as otherwise specified, such data is derived from Inside Mortgage Finance as of or for the period ended September 30, 2020. We believe that presentation of business metrics that are measured over the same length of time are meaningful in properly assessing the growth rates in such metrics. Because the full year 2020 results are not yet available, we have included data covering the latest twelve months as a point of comparison against the full years 2018 and 2019. Business metrics and data for the twelve months ended September 30, 2020 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year 2020.

We own or have rights to trademarks or trade names that we use in conjunction with the operation of our business. Our name, logo and registered domain names are our proprietary service marks or trademarks. Each trademark, trade name or service mark by any other company appearing in this prospectus, to our knowledge, belongs to its holder. Solely for convenience, the trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights referred to in this prospectus are listed without the ®, TM and ©, symbols, respectively, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights to these trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights. We do not intend our use or display of other parties’ trademarks, trade names or service marks to imply, and such use or display should not be construed to imply, a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other parties.

Except as otherwise disclosed in this prospectus, the consolidated historical financial statements and summary and selected historical consolidated financial data and other financial information included elsewhere in this prospectus are those of Home Point Capital Inc., together with its consolidated subsidiaries, and have been prepared in U.S. dollars in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, or GAAP, except for the presentation of Adjusted net income (loss), Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted revenue, each a non-GAAP financial measure. For definitions of, and more information about, these non-GAAP financial measures, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” This historical financial information does not give effect to this offering.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below and the other information set forth in this prospectus before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment.

In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus (“COVID-19”) was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China. COVID-19 has since spread to over 100 countries, including every state in the United States. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, and on March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national emergency with respect to COVID-19.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has severely impacted global economic activity and caused significant volatility and negative pressure in financial markets. The global impact of the outbreak has been rapidly evolving and many countries, including the United States, have reacted by instituting quarantines, mandating business and school closures and restricting travel. The outbreak has triggered a period of global economic slowdown and many experts predict that it may trigger a global recession. COVID-19 or another pandemic could have material and adverse effects on our ability to successfully operate due to, among other factors:

The rapid development and fluidity of this situation precludes any prediction as to the ultimate adverse impact of COVID-19. Nevertheless, COVID-19 presents material uncertainty and may also exacerbate the other risks described herein, which may negatively impact our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

We currently fund substantially all of the MSRs and mortgage loans we close through borrowings under our financing arrangements and warehouse lines of credit along with funds generated by our operations. As of September 30, 2020, we held mortgage funding arrangements with seven separate financial institutions with a total maximum borrowing capacity of $3.1 billion. We entered into an additional mortgage funding arrangement in October 2020, which was amended in December 2020, with a total maximum borrowing capacity of $700 million. Furthermore, in January 2021, we entered into an additional mortgage funding arrangement with a total maximum borrowing capacity of $500 million. Each mortgage funding arrangement is collateralized by the underlying mortgage loans.

Of the seven existing funding facilities as of September 30, 2020, six of the facilities are 364-day facilities and the other funding facility is an evergreen agreement. The facilities entered into in October 2020 and January 2021 are also 364-day facilities. As of September 30, 2020, approximately $350 million of borrowing capacity under our mortgage loan funding facilities was committed, while the remaining borrowing capacity under our mortgage loan funding facilities was uncommitted and can be terminated by the applicable lender at any time. Three of the facilities require that we establish a cash reserve of $11.0 million which is reflected within Restricted cash on the unaudited consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2020.

Our borrowings are generally repaid with the proceeds we receive from mortgage loan sales. We are currently, and may in the future continue to be, dependent upon our lenders to provide the primary funding facilities for our loans. While we currently expect to be able to renew our existing warehouse facilities prior to their expiration, there is no guarantee that our current uncommitted facilities will be available for future financing needs, nor that we will be able to secure alternative funding facilities to replace any current facilities that we are unable to renew upon their scheduled expiration. In the event that any of our loan funding facilities is terminated or is not renewed, or if the principal amount that may be drawn under our funding agreements that provide for immediate funding at closing were to significantly decrease, we may be unable to find replacement financing on commercially favorable terms, or at all, which could be detrimental to our business.

Our ability to refinance existing debt and borrow additional funds is affected by a variety of factors, including:

If we are unable to refinance our existing debt or borrow additional funds due to any of the foregoing or other factors, our ability to maintain or grow our business could be limited. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Our success depends largely on the health of the U.S. residential real estate industry, which is seasonal, cyclical and affected by changes in general economic conditions beyond our control. We also have significant dependence on some states such as California and are subject to conditions in those states. Economic factors such as increased interest rates, slow economic growth or recessionary conditions, the pace of home price appreciation or lack thereof, changes in household debt levels and increased unemployment or stagnant or declining wages affect our customers’ income and thus their ability and willingness to make loan payments. National or global events including, but not

limited to, the COVID-19 pandemic, affect all such macroeconomic conditions. Weak or a significant deterioration in economic conditions reduces the amount of disposable income consumers have, which in turn reduces consumer spending and the willingness of qualified potential borrowers to take out loans. As a result, such economic factors affect loan origination volume.

Additional macroeconomic factors including, but not limited to, rising government debt levels, the withdrawal or augmentation of government interventions into the financial markets, changing U.S. consumer spending patterns, changing expectations for inflation and deflation, and weak credit markets may create low consumer confidence in the U.S. economy or the U.S. residential real estate industry or result in increased volatility in the United States and worldwide financial markets and economy. Excessive home building or historically high foreclosure rates resulting in an oversupply of housing in a particular area may also increase the amount of losses incurred on defaulted mortgage loans, or may limit our ability to make additional loans in those affected areas. The economic impact of these events could also adversely affect the credit quality of some of our loans and investments and the properties underlying our interests.

Recently, financial markets have experienced significant volatility as a result of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many state and local jurisdictions have enacted measures requiring closure of businesses and other economically restrictive efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment levels have increased significantly and may remain at elevated levels or continue to rise. There may be a significant increase in the rate and number of mortgage payment delinquencies, and house sales, home prices and multifamily fundamentals may be adversely affected, which could lead to a material adverse decrease of our mortgage origination activities. For more information, see the risk factor entitled, “The current outbreak of the novel coronavirus, or COVID-19, has caused, and will continue to cause, disruption to our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations. Further, the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak has caused severe disruptions in the U.S. and global economy and financial markets and could potentially create widespread business continuity issues of an as yet unknown magnitude and duration.”

Furthermore, several state and local governments in the United States are experiencing, and may continue to experience, budgetary strain, which will be exacerbated by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. One or more states or significant local governments could default on their debt or seek relief from their debt under the U.S. bankruptcy code or by agreement with their creditors. Any or all of the circumstances described above may lead to further volatility in or disruption of the credit markets at any time and adversely affect our financial condition.

Any uncertainty or deterioration in market conditions or prolonged economic slowdown or recession that leads to a decrease in loan originations will result in lower revenue on loans sold into the secondary market. Lower loan origination volumes generally place downward pressure on margins, thus compounding the effect of the deteriorating market conditions. Such events could be detrimental to our business. Moreover, any deterioration in market conditions that leads to an increase in loan delinquencies will result in lower revenue for loans we service for the GSEs and Ginnie Mae because we collect servicing fees from them only for performing loans. While increased delinquencies generate higher ancillary revenues, including late fees, these fees are likely unrecoverable when the related loan is liquidated.

Increased delinquencies may also increase the cost of servicing loans. The decreased cash flow from lower servicing fees could decrease the estimated value of our MSRs, resulting in recognition of losses when we write down those values. In addition, an increase in delinquencies lowers the interest income we receive on cash held in collection and other accounts and increases our obligation to advance certain principal, interest, tax and insurance obligations owed by the delinquent mortgage loan borrower. An increase in delinquencies could therefore be detrimental to our business. See the risk factor entitled, “A significant increase in delinquencies for the loans we service could have a material impact on our revenues, expenses and liquidity and on the valuation of our MSRs.”

Additionally, origination of loans can be seasonal. Historically, our loan origination has increased activity in the second and third quarters and reduced activity in the first and fourth quarters as home buyers tend to purchase their homes during the spring and summer in order to move to a new home before the start of the school year. As a result, our loan origination revenues vary from quarter to quarter. However, this historical pattern may be disrupted for the foreseeable future as a result of the shelter-in-place and similar protective orders that have been issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Any of the circumstances described above, alone or in combination, may lead to volatility in or disruption of the credit markets at any time and have a detrimental effect on our business.

When we sell loans, we are required to make customary representations and warranties about such loans to the loan purchaser. If a mortgage loan does not comply with the representations and warranties that we made with respect to it at the time of its sale, we could be required to repurchase the loan, replace it with a substitute loan and/or indemnify secondary market purchasers for losses.

As part of our correspondent production activities, we re-underwrite a percentage of the loans that we acquire, to ensure quality underwriting by our Correspondent Partners, accurate third-party appraisals and strict compliance with the representations and warranties that we require from our Correspondent Partners and that are required from us by our investors. No assurance can be given that the re-underwriting of a sample population of loans will identify any and all underwriting and regulatory compliance issues related to such loans or to any of the other loans we acquire from Correspondent Partners. In our Direct and Wholesale channels, we underwrite each loan prior to funding and attempt to comply with applicable investor guidelines. However, no assurance can be given that such underwriting will result in all cases with loans that fully comply with such guidelines, and state or federal law.

In the event of a breach of any representations or warranties we make to purchasers, insurers or investors, we believe, based on our experience, that in a majority of cases, for correspondent originated loans acquired using the “delegated underwriting” option, we will have recourse to the Correspondent Partner that sold the mortgage loans to us and breached similar or other representations and warranties. Although we believe we will have the right to seek a recovery of related repurchase losses from that Correspondent Partner, we cannot assure you that this will always be the case. For Correspondent loans where we do the underwriting, referred to as the “non-delegated underwriting” option, our ability to seek a recovery of repurchase and other losses from Correspondent Partners is more limited.

In addition to the customary representations and warranties we make, the documents governing our securitized pools of loans and our contracts with certain purchasers of our whole loans contain additional provisions that require us to indemnify or repurchase the related loans under certain circumstances. While our contracts vary, they contain provisions that require us to repurchase loans if the borrower fails to make loan payments due to the purchaser on a timely basis in the first few months after we sell the loan. We have been and continue to be subject to repurchase claims from investors for various reasons, and we will continue to be subject to such claims in the future. If we are required to indemnify or repurchase loans that we have sold or securitized, or will sell or securitize in the future, and this results in losses that exceed our reserve, such occurrence could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, the repurchased loan typically can only be financed at a steep discount to its repurchase price, if at all, and can generally be sold only at a discount to the unpaid principal balance, which in some cases can be significant. Significant repurchase activity on Direct or Wholesale loans or on Correspondent loans without offsetting recourse to a counterparty that we purchased the loan from could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

When we purchase mortgage assets, our correspondent counterparty or seller typically makes customary representations and warranties to us about such assets. Our residential mortgage loan purchase agreements may entitle us to seek indemnity or demand repurchase or substitution of the loans in the event our counterparty breaches such a representation or warranty. 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 demand repurchase or substitution, or that our counterparty will remain solvent or otherwise be willing and able to honor its obligations under our mortgage loan purchase agreements. Our inability to obtain indemnity or enforce repurchase obligations of counterparties and sellers for a significant number of loans could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

During any period in which a borrower is not making payments, we are required under most of our servicing agreements in respect of our loans to advance our own funds to pass through scheduled principal and interest

payments to security holders of the MBS or whole loans into which the loans are sold, and pay property taxes and insurance premiums, legal expenses and other protective advances. We also advance funds under these agreements to maintain, repair and market real estate properties on behalf of investors. In certain situations, our contractual obligations may require us to make advances for which we may not be reimbursed. If a mortgage loan serviced by us is in default or becomes delinquent, the repayment to us of the advance may be delayed until the mortgage loan is repaid or refinanced or a liquidation occurs. When a relatively young MSR portfolio such as ours ages, it is expected that the percentage of delinquent loans will typically increase and the amount of advances that are required and become outstanding in connection with such loans will increase in the aggregate. This increase in advances could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was signed into law, allowing borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic to request temporary loan forbearance for federally backed mortgage loans. Nevertheless, servicers of mortgage loans are contractually bound to advance monthly payments to investors, insurers and taxing authorities regardless of whether the borrower actually makes those payments. We expect that such payments may continue to increase throughout the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the GSEs recently issued guidance limiting the number of payments a servicer must advance in the case of a forbearance, we expect that a borrower who has experienced a loss of employment or a reduction of income may not repay the forborne payments at the end of the forbearance period. Additionally, we are prohibited by the CARES Act from collecting certain servicing related fees, such as late fees, during the forbearance plan period. We are further prohibited from initiating foreclosure and/or eviction proceedings under applicable investor and/or state law requirements. As of December 31, 2020, approximately 36,000 loans, or 10.0% of the loans in our MSR Servicing Portfolio had elected the forbearance option. We have so far successfully utilized other prepayments and mortgage payoffs to fund principal and interest advances relating to forborne loans, and have not advanced material amounts of principal or interest associated with forbearances. But, there is no assurance that we will be successful in doing so in the coming months and we will ultimately have to replace such funds to make payments in respect of such prepayments and mortgage payoffs. As a result, we may have to use our cash, including borrowings under our debt agreements, to make the payments required under our servicing operation.

In addition, multiple forbearance programs, moratoria of foreclosure and eviction and other requirements to assist borrowers enduring financial hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic are being issued by states, agencies and regulators. These measures could stay in place for an extended period of time. If we are unable to comply with, or face allegations that we are in breach of, applicable laws, regulations or other requirements, we may face regulatory action, including fines, penalties and restrictions on our business. In addition, we could face litigation and reputational damage.

We face substantial competition in originating and acquiring attractive assets, both in our loan origination activities and our correspondent production activities. The competition for mortgage loan assets may compress margins and reduce yields, making it difficult for us to acquire assets with attractive risk-adjusted returns. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully maintain returns, transition from assets producing lower returns into investments that produce better returns, or that we will not seek investments with greater risk to obtain the same level of returns. Any or all of these factors could cause the profitability of our operations to decline substantially and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In addition, the financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial and lending institutions to better serve customers and reduce costs. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services as quickly as competitors or be successful in marketing these products and services to our Correspondent Partners and consumers. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could harm our ability to attract customers and adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

Our profitability depends, in part, on our ability to continue to acquire our targeted mortgage assets at favorable prices. We compete with mortgage REITs, specialty finance companies, private funds, banks, mortgage bankers, insurance companies, mutual funds, institutional investors, investment banking firms, depository institutions, governmental bodies and other entities, many of which focus on acquiring mortgage assets. Many of our competitors

also have competitive advantages over us, including size, financial strength, access to capital, cost of funds, federal pre-emption and higher risk tolerance. Competition may result in fewer acquisitions, higher prices, acceptance of greater risk, lower yields and a narrower spread of yields over our financing costs.

Our mortgage loan origination business consists of providing purchase money loans to homebuyers and refinancing existing loans. The origination of purchase money mortgage loans is greatly influenced by traditional business customers in the home buying process such as realtors and builders. As a result, our or our partners’ ability to secure relationships with such traditional business customers will influence our ability to grow our loan origination business. Our loan origination business also operates through third-party mortgage professionals who do business with us on a best efforts basis (i.e., they are not contractually obligated to do business with us). Further, our competitors also have relationships with these brokers and actively compete with us in our efforts to expand our broker networks. Accordingly, we may not be successful in maintaining our existing relationships or expanding our broker networks. Our business is also subject to overall market factors that can impact our ability to grow our loan production volume. For example, increased competition from new and existing market participants, reductions in the overall level of refinancing activity or slow growth in the level of new home purchase activity can impact our ability to continue to grow our loan production volumes, and we may be forced to accept lower margins in our respective businesses in order to continue to compete and keep our volume of activity consistent with past or projected levels. If we are unable to continue to grow our loan origination business, this could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

On the other hand, we may experience material growth in our mortgage loan volume and MSRs. If we do not effectively manage our growth, the quality of our services could suffer. For example, in connection with our increased loan origination volume in 2020, we identified a higher rate of errors in our post-closing loan quality control review of our originations function, and we implemented certain remedial measures to address these errors, including additional training programs for our associates. If these remedial measures are not effective or if these or other errors arise in connection with future growth in our loan volume, the quality of our loans could be impacted, which could in turn negatively affect our reputation and business, financial condition and results of operations.

Most of the Agency-eligible mortgage loans that we originate or acquire are delivered to the GSEs or Ginnie Mae to be pooled into an Agency MBS or sold directly to the Agencies through the cash window or other third parties. Any significant disruption or period of illiquidity in the general MBS market would directly affect our liquidity because no existing alternative secondary market would likely be able to accommodate on a timely basis the volume of loans that we typically acquire and sell in any given period. Accordingly, if the MBS market experiences a period of illiquidity, we might be prevented from selling the loans that we acquire into the secondary market in a timely manner or at favorable prices or we may be required to repay a portion of the debt securing these assets, which could impact the availability and cost of financing arrangements and would likely result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The success of our business strategies and our results of operations are also materially affected by current conditions in the broader mortgage markets, the financial markets and the economy generally. Continuing concerns over factors including inflation, deflation, unemployment, personal and business income taxes, healthcare, energy costs, geopolitical issues, the availability and cost of credit, the mortgage markets and the real estate markets have contributed to increased volatility and unclear expectations for the economy and markets going forward. The mortgage markets have been and continue to be affected by changes in the lending landscape, defaults, credit losses and significant liquidity concerns. A destabilization of the real estate and mortgage markets or deterioration in these markets may adversely affect the performance and fair value of our assets, reduce our loan production volume, reduce the profitability of servicing mortgages or adversely affect our ability to sell mortgage loans that we acquire, either at a profit or at all. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We operate in a highly competitive industry that could become even more competitive as a result of economic, legislative, regulatory and technological changes. Non-banks of various sizes and types are becoming increasingly competitive in the acquisition of newly originated mortgage loans and servicing rights. Many banks and large savings institutions have significantly greater resources or access to capital than we do, as well as a lower cost of funds. Additionally, some of our existing and potential competitors may decide to modify their business models to compete more directly with our wholesale and correspondent production business. For example, non-bank loan servicers may try to leverage their servicing operations to develop or expand a wholesale and correspondent production business. Since the withdrawal of a number of large participants from the mortgage markets following the financial crisis in 2007, non-bank participants have become more active in these markets. As more non-bank entities enter these markets, or if more of the large commercial banks decide to become aggressive in the mortgage space once again, our production activities may generate lower volumes and/or margins. Accordingly, our inability to compete successfully or a material decrease in profit margins resulting from increased competition could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In our production activities, we acquire and originate new loans, including non-Agency loans, from our Broker Partners and Correspondent Partners and sell or securitize those loans to or through the Agencies or other third-party investors. We also may sell the resulting securities into the MBS markets. However, there can be no assurance that we will continue to be successful in operating this business or that we will continue to be able to capitalize on these opportunities on favorable terms or at all. In particular, we have committed, and expect to continue to commit, capital and other resources to this operation. However, we may not be able to continue to source sufficient loan acquisition opportunities to justify the expenditure of such capital and other resources. In the event that we are unable to continue to source sufficient opportunities for this operation, there can be no assurance that we would be able to acquire such assets on favorable terms or at all, or that such loans, if acquired, would be profitable to us. In addition, we may be unable to finance the acquisition of these loans or may be unable to sell the resulting loans or MBS in the secondary mortgage market on favorable terms or at all. We are also subject to the risk that the fair value of the acquired loans may decrease prior to their disposition either due to changes in market conditions, the delinquencies of our mortgage loans or a change in the condition of the underlying mortgage property. The occurrence of any one or more of these risks could adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

The gain recognized from sales in the secondary market represents a significant portion of our revenues and net earnings. Further, we are dependent on the cash generated from such sales to fund our future loan closings and repay borrowings under our loan funding facilities. A decrease in the prices paid to us upon sale of our loans could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The prices we receive for our loans vary from time to time and may be materially adversely affected by several factors, including, without limitation:

Further, to the extent we become subject to delays in our ability to sell future mortgage loans which we originate, we would need to reduce our origination volume to the amount that we can sell plus any excess capacity under our

loan funding facilities. Delays in the sale of mortgage loans also increase our exposure to increases in interest rates, which could adversely affect our profitability on sales of loans.

The production process and our servicing platform are becoming more dependent upon technological advancement and depends, in part, upon our ability to effectively interface with our Broker Partners, Correspondent Partners and other third parties. Maintaining, improving and becoming proficient with new technology may require us to make significant capital expenditures. To the extent we are dependent on any particular technology or technological solution, we may be harmed if such technology or technological solution becomes non-compliant with existing industry standards, fails to meet or exceed the capabilities of our competitors’ equivalent technologies or technological solutions, becomes increasingly expensive to service, retain and update, becomes subject to third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violation or malfunctions or functions in a way we did not anticipate that results in loan defects potentially requiring repurchase.

We also rely on third-party software products and services to operate our business. If we lose our rights to such products or services, or our current software vendors become unable to continue providing services to us on acceptable terms, we may not be able to procure alternatives in a timely and efficient manner and on acceptable terms, or at all.

Additionally, new technologies and technological solutions are continually being released. We need to continue to develop and invest in our technological capabilities to remain competitive and our failure to do so could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

There is no assurance that we will be able to successfully adopt new technology as critical systems and applications become obsolete and better ones become available. Additionally, if we fail to respond to technological developments in a cost-effective manner, or fail to acquire, integrate or interface with third-party technologies effectively, we may experience disruptions in our operations, lose market share or incur substantial costs.

We could incur substantial losses and our business operations could be disrupted if we are unable to effectively identify, manage, monitor and mitigate financial risks, such as credit risk, interest rate risk, prepayment risk, liquidity risk and other market-related risks, as well as operational, tax and legal risks related to our business, assets and liabilities. We also are subject to various federal, state, local and foreign laws, regulations and rules that are not industry specific, including health and safety laws, environmental laws, privacy laws and other federal, state, local and foreign laws and other regulations and rules in the jurisdictions in which we operate. Our risk management policies, procedures and techniques may not be sufficient to identify all of the risks to which we are exposed, mitigate the risks we have identified or identify additional risks to which we may become subject in the future. Expansion of our business activities may also result in our being exposed to risks to which we have not previously been exposed or may increase our exposure to certain types of risks including risks related to our hedging transactions and strategy, as well as access to cash reserves, and we may not effectively identify, manage, monitor and mitigate these risks as our business activity changes or increases.

We are exposed to risks relating to fraud and misconduct by our associates, contractors, custodians, brokers and Correspondent Partners and other third parties with whom we have relationships. For example, associates could execute unauthorized transactions, use our assets improperly or without authorization, use confidential information for improper purposes or misreport or otherwise try to hide improper activities from us. This type of misconduct can be difficult to detect and if not prevented or detected could result in claims or enforcement actions against us or losses. In addition, such persons or entities may misrepresent facts about a mortgage loan, including the information contained in the loan application, property appraisal, title information and employment and income stated on the loan application. If any of this information was intentionally or negligently misrepresented and such misrepresentation was not detected prior to the acquisition or funding of the loan, the value of the loan could be significantly lower than expected. A mortgage loan subject to a material misrepresentation is typically unsalable or subject to repurchase if it is sold before detection of the misrepresentation. In addition, the persons and entities making a misrepresentation

are often difficult to locate and it is often difficult to collect from them any monetary losses we have suffered. Our controls may not be completely effective in detecting this type of activity. Accordingly, such undetected instances of fraud may subject us to regulatory sanctions, litigation and losses, including those under our indemnification arrangements, and may seriously harm our reputation.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. We may in the future discover areas of our internal controls that need improvement. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in maintaining adequate control over our financial reporting and financial processes. Furthermore, as we continue to grow our business, our internal controls will become more complex, and we will require significantly more resources to ensure 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 result in a default and cross-defaults under our financing arrangements.

There is the risk that material weaknesses could be identified in the future and a risk exists that we may not successfully remediate future material weaknesses. Accordingly, our failure to maintain effective internal control over our business could result in financial risk and losses that would be reflected in our financial statements or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Our future success will depend on our ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain highly qualified personnel for all areas of our organization, in particular skilled managers, loan servicers, debt default specialists, loan officers and underwriters. Trained and experienced personnel are in high demand and may be in short supply in some areas. Many of the companies with which we compete for experienced associates have greater resources than we have and may be able to offer more attractive terms of employment. In addition, we invest significant time and expense in training our associates, which increases their value to competitors who may seek to recruit them. We may not be able to attract, develop and maintain an adequate skilled workforce necessary to operate our businesses, and labor expenses may increase as a result of a shortage in the supply of qualified personnel. If we are unable to attract and retain such personnel, we may not be able to take advantage of acquisitions and other growth opportunities that may be presented to us, and this could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The experience of our senior executives is a valuable asset to us. Our management team has significant experience in the residential mortgage origination and servicing industry. Changes to our senior executive team may occur, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We do not maintain and do not currently plan to obtain key life insurance policies on any of our senior managers.

We rely on a combination of strategies to protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights, including the use of trademarks, service marks, domain names, trade secrets and unregistered copyrights, as well as confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions. Nevertheless, these measures may not prevent misappropriation, infringement, reverse engineering or other violation of these rights by third parties. Any intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to us may be challenged, invalidated, held unenforceable or circumvented in litigation or other proceedings, and such intellectual property rights may be lost or no longer provide us meaningful competitive advantages. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to conduct our operations in such a way as to avoid all alleged infringements, misappropriations or other violations of such intellectual property rights. Third parties may raise claims against us alleging an infringement, misappropriation or other violation of their intellectual property or proprietary rights.

Whether it is to defend against such claims or to protect and enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights, we may be required to spend significant resources including bringing litigation, which could be costly, time consuming and could divert the time and attention of our management team and result in the impairment or loss of portions of our rights, and we may not prevail. Our failure to secure, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights, or defend against claims related to same, could adversely affect our brands and adversely impact our business.

The financial services industry as a whole is characterized by rapidly changing technologies. As our reliance on rapidly changing technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems and the information therein, both internal and those of third-party service providers.

A cyber incident refers to any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information technology resources, or those of our third-party providers, that result in the unauthorized access to, or disclosure, use, loss or destruction of, personally identifiable information or other sensitive, non-public, confidential or regulated data and information (including our borrowers’ personal information and transaction data), the misappropriation of assets, or a significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction or interruption of any part of such information technology resources and the data therein. System disruptions and failures caused by fire, power loss, telecommunications outages, unauthorized intrusion, computer viruses and disabling devices, employee and contractor error, negligence or malfeasance, failures during the process of upgrading or replacing software and databases, hardware failures, natural disasters and other similar events may interrupt or delay our ability to provide services to our customers.

We have undertaken measures intended to protect the safety and security of our information systems and the information systems of our third-party providers and the data therein, including physical and technological security measures, employee training, contractual precautions and business continuity plans, and implementation of policies and procedures designed to help mitigate the risk of system disruptions and failures and the occurrence of cyber incidents. Despite our efforts, there can be no assurance that any such risks will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed in a timely manner. It is possible that advances in computer capabilities, undetected fraud, inadvertent violations of our policies or procedures or other developments could result in a cyber incident or system disruption or failure. We may not be able to anticipate or implement effective preventive measures against all such risks, especially with respect to cyber incidents, as the methods of attack change frequently or are not recognized until launched, and because cyber incidents can originate from a wide variety of sources, including persons involved with organized crime or associated with external service providers. Those parties may also attempt to fraudulently induce associates, customers or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data or that of our Broker Partners and Correspondent Partners or borrowers. These risks have increased in recent years and may increase in the future as we continue to increase our reliance on the internet and use of web-based product offerings and on the use of cybersecurity. In addition, our current work-from-home policy may increase the risk for the unauthorized disclosure or use of personal information or other data.

We may also be held accountable for the actions and inactions of third-party vendors regarding cybersecurity and other consumer-related matters, which may not be covered by indemnification arrangements with our third-party vendors.

Additionally, cyberattacks on local and state government databases and offices, including the rising trend of ransomware attacks, expose us to the risk of losing access to critical data and the ability to provide services to our customers.

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, regulatory action or investigation, fines or penalties, 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. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against and remedy any potential or existing security breaches and their consequences. In addition, our remediation efforts may not be successful and we may not have adequate insurance to cover these losses.

We own a 49.7% equity interest in Longbridge Financial, LLC, which participates in the reverse mortgage business. The reverse mortgage industry is largely dependent upon the Federal Housing Administration, or the FHA, and HUD, and there can be no guarantee that these entities will continue to participate in the reverse mortgage industry or that they will not make material changes to the laws, regulations, rules or practices applicable to reverse mortgage programs. The reverse mortgage loan products originated by Longbridge Financial, LLC are Home Equity

Conversion Mortgages, or HECM, an FHA-insured loan that must comply with the FHA’s and other regulatory requirements. Longbridge Financial, LLC also originates non-HECM reverse mortgage products, for which there is a limited secondary market. The FHA regulations governing the HECM product have changed from time to time. For example, on September 3, 2013, the FHA announced changes to the HECM program, pursuant to authority under the Reverse Mortgage Stabilization Act. The changes impact initial mortgage insurance premiums and principal limit factors, impose restrictions on the amount of funds that senior borrowers may draw down at closing and during the first 12 months after closing and require a financial assessment for all HECM borrowers to ensure they have the capacity and willingness to meet their financial obligations and the terms of the reverse mortgage. In addition, the changes require borrowers to set aside a portion of the loan proceeds they receive at closing (or withhold a portion of monthly loan disbursements) for the payment of property taxes and homeowners insurance based on the results of the financial assessment. The FHA also amended or clarified requirements related to HECMs through a series of issuances in 2014, including three Mortgagee Letters issued in June of 2014. The new requirements relate to advertising, restrictions on loan provisions, limitations on payment methods, new underwriting requirements, revised principal limits, revised financial assessment and property charge requirements and the treatment of non-borrowing spouses. The FHA has continued to issue additional guidance aimed at strengthening the HECM program. Most recently, the FHA issued a Mortgagee Letter changing initial and annual mortgage insurance premium rates and the principal limit factors for all HECMs. The reverse mortgage business of Longbridge Financial, LLC is also subject to state statutory and regulatory requirements including, but not limited to, licensing requirements, required disclosures and permissible fees. It is unclear how the various new requirements, including the financial assessment requirement, will impact the reverse mortgage business and ultimately, our investment in Longbridge Financial, LLC. In addition, because many of these guidance and regulations relate to protection of customers who faced foreclosures and evictions which led to adverse publicity in the reverse mortgage industry, negative publicity due to actions by other reverse mortgage lenders could cause regulatory focus on the business of Longbridge Financial, LLC.

We have significant vendors that, among other things, provide us with financial, technology and other services to support our mortgage loan servicing and origination businesses. If our current vendors were to stop providing services to us on acceptable terms, including as a result of one or more vendor bankruptcies due to poor economic conditions or other events, we may be unable to procure alternatives from other vendors in a timely and efficient manner and on acceptable terms, or at all. Further, we may incur significant costs to resolve any such disruptions in service and this could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, in April 2012, the CFPB issued Bulletin 2012-03, as amended in 2016 by bulletin 2016-02, which states that supervised banks and non-banks could be held liable for actions of their service providers. As a result, we could be exposed to liability, CFPB enforcement actions or other administrative actions and/or penalties if the vendors with whom we do business violate consumer protection laws.

Maintaining our reputation is critical to attracting and retaining customers, trading and financing counterparties, investors and associates. If we fail to deal with, or appear to fail to deal with, various issues that may give rise to reputational risk, we could significantly harm our business. Reputational risk could negatively affect our financial condition and business, strain our working relationships with regulators and government agencies, expose us to litigation and regulatory action, impact our ability to attract and retain customers, trading counterparties, investors and associates and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Reputational risk from negative public opinion is inherent in our business and can result from a number of factors. Negative public opinion can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending and debt collection practices, corporate governance and actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. Negative public opinion can also result from social media and media coverage, whether accurate or not. Like other consumer-facing companies, we have received some amount of negative comment. These factors could tarnish or otherwise strain our working relationships with regulators and government agencies, expose us to litigation and regulatory action, negatively affect our ability to attract and retain customers, trading and financing counterparties and associates and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Large-scale natural or man-made disasters may lead to further reputational risk in the servicing area. Our mortgage properties are generally required to be covered by hazard insurance in an amount sufficient to cover repairs to or replacement of the residence. However, when a large scale disaster occurs, the demand for inspectors, appraisers, contractors and building supplies may exceed availability, insurers and mortgage servicers may be overwhelmed with inquiries, mail service and other communications channels may be disrupted, borrowers may suffer loss of employment and unexpected expenses which cause them to default on payments and/or renders them unable to pay deductibles required under the insurance policies, and widespread casualties may also affect the ability of borrowers or others who are needed to effect the process of repair or reconstruction or to execute documents. Loan originations may also be disrupted, as lenders are required to re-inspect properties which may have been affected by the disaster prior to funding. In these situations, borrowers and others in the community may believe that servicers and originators are penalizing them for being the victims of the initial disaster and making it harder for them to recover, potentially causing reputational damage to the us.

Moreover, the proliferation of social media websites as well as the personal use of social media by our associates and others, including personal blogs and social network profiles, also may increase the risk that negative, inappropriate or unauthorized information may be posted or released publicly that could harm our reputation or have other negative consequences, including as a result of our associates interacting with our customers in an unauthorized manner in various social media outlets.

In addition, our ability to attract and retain customers is highly dependent upon the external perceptions of our level of service, trustworthiness, business practices, financial condition and other subjective qualities. Negative perceptions or publicity regarding these matters—even if related to seemingly isolated incidents, or even if related to practices not specific to the origination or servicing of loans, such as debt collection—could erode trust and confidence and damage our reputation among existing and potential customers. In turn, this could decrease the demand for our products, increase regulatory scrutiny and detrimentally effect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Team members and former team members may, from time to time, bring lawsuits against us regarding injury, creation of a hostile workplace, discrimination, wage and hour, employee benefits, sexual harassment and other employment issues. In recent years there has been an increase in the number employment-related actions in states with favorable employment laws, such as California, as well as an increase in the number of discrimination and harassment claims against employers generally. Coupled with the expansion of social media platforms and similar devices that allow individuals access to a broad audience, these claims have had a significant negative impact on some businesses. Companies that have faced employment or harassment related lawsuits have had to terminate management or other key personnel and have suffered reputational harm that has negatively impacted their businesses. If we experience significant incidents involving employment or harassment related claims, we could face substantial out-of-pocket losses and fines if claims are not covered by our liability insurance, as well as negative publicity. In addition, such claims may give rise to litigation, which may be time-consuming, costly and distracting to our management team.

Initiating new business activities or strategies or significantly expanding existing business activities or strategies may expose us to new or increased financial, regulatory, reputational and other risks. Such innovations are important and necessary ways to grow our businesses and respond to changing circumstances in our industry; however, we cannot be certain that we will be able to manage the associated risks and compliance requirements effectively. Such risks include a lack of experienced management-level personnel, increased administrative burden, increased logistical problems common to large, expansive operations, increased credit and liquidity risk and increased regulatory scrutiny.

Furthermore, our efforts may not succeed and any revenues we earn from any new or expanded business initiative or strategy may not be sufficient to offset the initial and ongoing costs of that initiative, which would result in a loss with respect to that initiative, strategy or acquisition.

Certain of our material vendors currently have operations located in India, which is subject to relatively higher political and social instability than the United States and may lack the infrastructure to withstand political unrest, natural disasters or global pandemics. The political or regulatory climate in the United States, or elsewhere, also could change so that it would not be lawful or practical for us to use vendors with international operations in the manner in which we currently use them. If we could no longer utilize vendors operating in India or if those vendors were required to transfer some or all of their operations to another geographic area, we would incur significant transition costs as well as higher future overhead costs that could materially and adversely affect our results of operations. In some foreign countries with developing economies, it may be common to engage in business practices that are prohibited by laws and regulations applicable to us, such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, or the FCPA. Any violations of the FCPA or local anti-corruption laws by us, our subsidiaries or our local vendors could have an adverse effect on our business and reputation and result in substantial financial penalties or other sanctions.

As of September 30, 2020, we had $34.1 million of NOL carryforwards for federal income tax purposes, which begin to expire in 2035. Our ability to utilize NOLs and other tax carryforwards to reduce taxable income in future years could be limited due to various factors, including (i) our projected future taxable income, which could be insufficient to recognize the full benefit of such NOL carryforwards prior to their expiration; (ii) limitations imposed as a result of one or more ownership changes under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, (which subject NOLs to an annual limitation on usage); and/or (iii) challenges by the Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, that a transaction or transactions were concluded with the principal purpose of evasion or avoidance of federal income tax. As of September 30, 2020, $24.9 million of our NOL carryforwards for federal income tax purposes are subject to limitations under Section 382 of the Code, which we anticipate being able to fully utilize in the normal course. However, it is possible that this offering, together with other ownership changes, could further limit our ability to use these NOLs.

The amount of our NOL carryforwards has not been audited or otherwise validated by the IRS after the tax year ended December 31, 2016. Among other things, the IRS could challenge the amount, timing and/or our use of our NOLs. Any such challenge, if successful, could significantly limit our ability to utilize a portion or all of our NOL carry forwards. In addition, calculating whether an ownership change has occurred within the meaning of Section 382 is subject to inherent uncertainty, both because of the complexity of applying Section 382 and because of limitations on a publicly traded company’s knowledge as to the ownership of, and transactions in, its securities. Therefore, the calculation of the amount of our utilizable NOL carryforwards could be changed as a result of a successful challenge by the IRS or as a result of new information about the ownership of, and transactions in, our securities.

The rules relating to U.S. federal income taxation are periodically under review by persons involved in the legislative and administrative rulemaking processes, by the IRS and by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, resulting in revisions of regulations and revised interpretations of established concepts as well as statutory changes, including decreases in the tax rate. Future revisions in U.S. federal tax laws and interpretations thereof could adversely impact our ability to use some or all of the tax benefits associated with our NOL carryforwards.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or the TCJA, enacted on December 22, 2017, significantly affected U.S. federal tax law, including by changing how the U.S. imposes tax on certain types of income of corporations and by reducing the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate to 21%. It also imposed new limitations on a number of tax benefits, including deductions for business interest, use of net operating loss carryforwards, taxation of foreign income, and the foreign tax credit, among others.

It also imposed new limitations on deductions for mortgage interest, which may affect the demand for loans which we acquire and service. The CARES Act, enacted on March 27, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, further altered U.S. federal tax law, including in respect of certain changes that were made by the TCJA, generally on a temporary basis. There can be no assurance that future tax law changes will not increase the rate of the corporate income tax significantly, impose new limitations on deductions, credits or other tax benefits, or make other changes that may adversely affect our business, cash flows or financial performance. In addition, the IRS has yet to issue guidance on a number of important issues regarding the changes made by the TCJA and the CARES Act.

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. Due to the unprecedented events surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic along with the associated severe market dislocation, there is an increased degree of uncertainty and unpredictability concerning current interest rates, future interest rates and potential negative interest rates. Interest rate fluctuations present a variety of risks to our operations. Our primary interest rate exposures relate to the yield on our assets, their fair values and the financing cost of our debt, as well as to any derivative financial instruments that we utilize for hedging purposes. Decreasing interest rates may cause a large number of borrowers to refinance, which could result in the loss of future net servicing revenues with an associated write-down of the related MSRs. In addition, significant savings in interest rate movement may impact our gains and losses from interest rate hedging arrangements and result in our need to change our hedging strategy. Any such scenario could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Changes in the level of interest rates also may affect our ability to acquire assets (including the purchase or origination of mortgage loans), the value of our assets (including our pipeline of mortgage loan commitments and our portfolio of MSRs) and any related hedging instruments, the value of newly originated or purchased loans, and our ability to realize gains from the disposition of assets. Changes in interest rates may also affect borrower default rates and may impact our ability to refinance or modify loans and/or to sell real estate owned, or REO, assets.

Borrowings under some of our financing agreements are at variable rates of interest, which also expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on certain of our variable-rate indebtedness will increase even though the amount borrowed remains the same, and our net income and cash flows, including cash available for servicing our indebtedness, will correspondingly decrease. We currently have entered into, and in the future we may continue to enter into, interest rate swaps or interest rate swap futures that involve the exchange of floating for fixed-rate interest payments to reduce interest rate volatility. However, we may not maintain interest rate swaps or interest rate swap futures with respect to all of our variable-rate indebtedness, and any such swaps may not fully mitigate our interest rate risk, may prove disadvantageous, or may create additional risks.

In addition, our business is materially affected by the monetary policies of the U.S. government and its agencies. We are particularly affected by the policies of the U.S. Federal Reserve, which influence interest rates and impact the size of the loan origination market. In 2017, the U.S. Federal Reserve ended its quantitative easing program and started its balance sheet reduction plan. The U.S. Federal Reserve’s balance sheet consists of U.S. Treasuries and MBS issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. To shrink its balance sheet prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Federal Reserve had slowed the pace of MBS purchases to a point at which natural runoff exceeded new purchases, resulting in a net reduction. Recently, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, state and federal authorities have taken several actions to provide relief to those negatively affected by COVID-19, such as the CARES Act and the Federal Reserve’s support of the financial markets. In particular, the U.S. Federal Reserve announced programs to increase its purchase of certain MBS products in response to the COVID-19 pandemic’s effect on the U.S. economy, and the market for MBS in particular. The U.S. Federal Reserve also reduced the target range for the federal funds rate to 0 to 0.25% and announced a policy change in August 2020 to the way it sets interest rates that will likely keep interest rates in the U.S. relatively low for an extended period of time. The results of this recent policy change by the U.S. Federal Reserve are unknown at this time, as is its duration, but could affect the liquidity of MBS in the future.

We pursue hedging strategies to reduce our exposure to changes in interest rates. However, while we enter into such transactions seeking to reduce interest rate risk, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in poorer overall performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions, in addition to directly affecting the percentage of loan applications in the underwriting process that ultimately close. Interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things, it may not fully eliminate interest rate risk, it could expose us to counterparty and default and cross-default risk that may result in greater losses or the loss of unrealized profits, and it will create additional expense. Generally, hedging activity requires the investment of capital and the amount of capital required often varies as interest rates and asset valuations change. Thus, hedging activity, while intended to limit losses, may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Our business and earnings are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the U.S. A downturn in economic conditions resulting in adverse changes in interest rates, inflation, the debt capital markets, unemployment rates, consumer and commercial bankruptcy filings, the general strength of national and local economies and other factors that negatively impact household incomes could decrease demand for our mortgage loan products as a result of a lower volume of housing purchases and reduced refinancings of mortgages and could lead to higher mortgage defaults and lower prices for our loans upon sale.

In addition, a weakening economy, high unemployment and declining real estate values may increase the likelihood that borrowers will become delinquent and ultimately default on their debt service obligations. Our cost to service increases when borrowers become delinquent. In the event of a default, we may incur additional costs, the size of which depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the instruction of the loan investor, location and condition of the underlying property, the terms of the guarantee or insurance on the loan, the level of interest rates and the time it takes to liquidate the property.

We currently leverage and, to the extent available, we intend to continue to leverage our assets through borrowings, the level of which may vary based on the particular characteristics of our asset portfolio and on market conditions. We have financed certain of our assets through repurchase agreements, pursuant to which we sell mortgage loans to lenders (i.e., repurchase agreement counterparties) and receive cash from the lenders. The lenders are obligated to resell the same assets back to us at the end of the term of the transaction. Because the cash we receive from the lender when we initially sell the assets to the lender is less than our cost to acquire the assets as well as the fair value of those assets (this difference is referred to as the haircut), if the lender defaults on its obligation to resell the same assets back to us we could incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the difference in asset value sold back to us reduced further by interest accrued on the financing (assuming there was no change in the fair value of the assets).

We originate or acquire certain assets, including MSRs, for which financing has historically been difficult to obtain. We currently leverage certain of our MSRs under secured financing arrangements. Our MSRs are pledged to secure borrowings under a loan and security agreement. Our Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae MSRs are financed on a $500 million line of credit with a three year revolving period ending on January 31, 2022, followed by a one year amortization period which ends on January 31, 2023. Our secured financing arrangements pursuant to which we finance MSRs are further subject to the terms of an acknowledgement agreement with the related GSE and Ginnie Mae, pursuant to which our and the secured parties’ rights are subordinate in all respects to the rights of the applicable GSE or Ginnie Mae and subject to financial covenants similar to our financing arrangements. Accordingly, the exercise by any GSE or Ginnie Mae of its rights under the applicable acknowledgment agreement, including at the direction of the secured parties and whether or not we are in breach of our financing arrangement, could result in the extinguishment of our and the secured parties’ rights in the related collateral and result in significant losses to us.

We may in the future utilize other sources of borrowings, including term loans, bank credit facilities and structured financing arrangements, among others. The amount of leverage we employ varies depending on the asset class being financed, our available capital, our ability to obtain and access financing arrangements with lenders and the lenders’ and rating agencies’ estimate of, among other things, the stability of our asset portfolio’s cash flow.

We depend on short-term debt financing in the form of secured borrowings under various financing arrangements with financial institutions. These facilities are primarily uncommitted, which means that any request we make to borrow funds under these facilities may be declined for any reason, even if at the time of the borrowing request we have then-outstanding borrowings that are less than the borrowing limits under these facilities. We may not be able to obtain additional financing under our financing arrangements when necessary, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and exposing us to, among other things, liquidity risks which could adversely affect our profitability and operations.

The lenders under our financing agreements require us and/or our subsidiaries to comply with various financial covenants, including those relating to tangible net worth, profitability and our ratio of total liabilities to tangible net worth. Our lenders also require us to maintain minimum amounts of cash or cash equivalents sufficient to maintain a specified liquidity position and maintain collateral having a market value sufficient to support the related borrowings. If we are unable to meet these financial covenants, our financial condition could deteriorate rapidly and could also result in a default or cross-defaults under our financing arrangements.

Our existing financing agreements also impose other financial and non-financial covenants and restrictions on us that impact our flexibility to determine our operating policies by limiting our ability to, among other things: incur certain types of indebtedness; grant liens; engage in consolidations and mergers and asset sales; make restricted payments and investments; and enter into transactions with affiliates. In our financing agreements, we agree to certain covenants and restrictions and we make representations about the assets sold or pledged under these agreements. We also agree to certain events of default (subject to certain materiality thresholds and grace periods), including payment defaults, breaches of financial and other covenants and/or certain representations and warranties, cross-defaults, servicer termination events, ratings downgrades, bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, legal judgments against us, loss of licenses, loss of Agency, FHA, VA and/or USDA approvals and other events of default and remedies customary for these types of agreements. If we default on our obligations under our financing arrangements, fail to comply with certain covenants and restrictions or breach our representations and are unable to cure, the lender may be able to terminate the transaction or its commitments, accelerate any amounts outstanding, repurchase the assets, and/or cease entering into any other financing arrangements with us, which could also result in defaults or cross-defaults in our financing arrangements.

Because our financing agreements typically contain cross-default provisions, a default that occurs under any one agreement could allow the lenders under our other agreements to also declare a default, thereby exposing us to a variety of lender remedies, such as those described above, and potential losses arising therefrom. In addition, defaults and cross-defaults under our financing arrangements could trigger a cross-defaults under our trading agreements, which could have a negative impact on our ability to enter into hedging transactions. Any losses that we incur on our financing agreements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

LIBOR is the basic rate of interest used in lending between banks on the London interbank market and is widely used as a reference for setting the interest rate on loans globally. In July 2017, the head of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority announced the desire to phase out the use of LIBOR by the end of 2021. On November 30, 2020, ICE Benchmark Administration (“IBA”), the administrator of LIBOR, with the support of the United States Federal Reserve and the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority, announced plans to consult on

ceasing publication of USD LIBOR on December 31, 2021 for only the one week and two month USD LIBOR tenors, and on June 30, 2023 for all other USD LIBOR tenors. While this announcement extends the transition period to June 2023, the United States Federal Reserve concurrently issued a statement advising banks to stop new USD LIBOR issuances by the end of 2021. At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, and it is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR, whether LIBOR rates will cease to be published or supported before or after 2021 or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted.

The possible withdrawal and replacement of LIBOR with alternative benchmarks introduces a number of risks for us, our customers and our industry more widely. These risks include legal implementation risks, as extensive changes to documentation for new and existing customers, including lenders and real estate investors/owners, may be required. There are also financial risks arising from any changes in the valuation of financial instruments, which may impact our loan production and servicing businesses. There are also operational risks due to the potential requirement to adapt information technology systems and operational processes to address the withdrawal and replacement of LIBOR. In addition, the withdrawal or replacement of LIBOR may temporarily reduce or delay transaction volume and could lead to various complexities and uncertainties related to our industry.

Additionally, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have announced that they will stop purchasing adjustable-rate mortgages (“ARMs”) based on LIBOR by the end of 2020 and plan to begin accepting ARMs based on the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) in late 2020. Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s switch to SOFR may result in a disruption of business flow for our business due to changes in loan pricing as a result of spread differential between LIBOR and SOFR and hedging issues, both from a differential in cost and uncertainty with timing for the transition to the new index. Additionally, our business may face operational risks associated with documentation for existing loans that may not adequately address the LIBOR transition and implementing SOFR into our systems and processes properly to ensure interest is accurately calculated.

While it is not currently possible to determine precisely whether, or to what extent, the possible withdrawal and replacement of LIBOR would affect us, the implementation of alternative benchmark rates to LIBOR could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The growth of our businesses requires continued access to debt and equity capital that may or may not be available on favorable terms, at the desired times or at all. In addition, we own certain assets, including MSRs, for which financing has historically been difficult to obtain. Our inability to continue to maintain debt financing for MSRs could require us to seek equity capital that may be more costly or unavailable to us.

We are also dependent on a limited number of banking institutions that extend us credit on terms that we have determined to be commercially reasonable. These banking institutions are subject to their own regulatory supervision, liquidity and capital requirements, risk management frameworks and risk thresholds and tolerances, any of which may materially and negatively impact their willingness to extend credit to us specifically or mortgage lenders and servicers generally. Such actions may increase our cost of capital and limit or otherwise eliminate our access to capital.

Our access to any debt or equity capital on favorable terms or at all is uncertain. Our inability to raise such capital or obtain such debt or equity financing on favorable terms or at all could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We enter into a variety of hedging arrangements such as derivative contracts, to hedge the fair value of the MSR portfolio and minimize market rate risk although we cannot assure you that these hedging arrangements will protect the value of our MSR assets. We utilize derivative financial instruments for hedging purposes, which may include swap futures, options, “to be announced” contracts and futures. However, the prices of derivative financial instruments, including futures and options, are highly volatile. As a result, the cost of utilizing derivatives may reduce our income and liquidity, and the derivative instruments that we utilize may fail to effectively hedge our positions. We are also subject to credit risk with regard to the counterparties involved in the derivative transactions.

The use of derivative instruments is also subject to an increasing number of laws and regulations, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, and its implementing

regulations. These laws and regulations are complex, compliance with them may be costly and time consuming, and our failure to comply with any of these laws and regulations could subject us to lawsuits or government actions and damage our reputation, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

The mortgage industry is highly regulated, and we are required to comply with a wide array of federal, state and local laws and regulations that restrict, among other things, the manner in which we conduct our loan production and servicing businesses, including the fees that we may charge and the collection, use, retention, protection, disclosure and other processing of personal information. These regulations directly impact our business and require constant compliance, monitoring and internal and external audits. Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which our business is subject have increased over time in response to the financial crisis, as well as other factors, such as technological and market changes.

The laws and regulations and judicial and administrative decisions relating to mortgage loans and consumer protection to which we are subject include, for example, those pertaining to real estate settlement procedures, equal credit opportunity, fair lending, fair credit reporting, truth in lending, fair debt collection practices, service members protections, unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices, federal and state advertising requirements, high-cost loans and predatory lending, compliance with net worth and financial statement delivery requirements, compliance with federal and state disclosure and licensing requirements, the establishment of maximum interest rates, finance charges and other charges, ability-to-repay and qualified mortgages, licensing of loan originators and other personnel, loan originator compensation, secured transactions, property valuations, insurance, servicing transfers, payment processing, escrow, communications with consumers, loss mitigation, debt collection, prompt payment crediting, periodic statements, foreclosure, bankruptcies, repossession and claims-handling procedures, disclosures related to and cancellation of private mortgage insurance, flood insurance, the reporting of loan application and origination data, and other trade practices. For a more detailed description of the regulations to which we are subject, see “Business—Regulation.”

We also must comply with federal, state and local laws related to data privacy and the handling of personally identifiable information, or PII, and other sensitive, regulated or non-public data. These include the recently enacted California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, and we expect other states to enact legislation similar to the CCPA, which limit how companies can use customer data and impose obligations on companies in their management of such data, and require us to modify our data processing practices and policies and to incur substantial costs and expenses in an effort to comply. The CCPA, among other things, requires new disclosures to California consumers and affords such consumers new abilities to opt out of certain sales of personal information, in addition to limiting our ability to use their information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches that result from a failure to implement reasonable safeguards. This private right of action may increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. The service providers we use, including outside counsel retained to process foreclosures and bankruptcies, must also comply with some of these legal requirements. Changes to laws, regulations or regulatory policies or their interpretation or implementation and the continued heightening of regulatory requirements could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways.

The influx of new laws, regulations, and other directives adopted by federal, state and local governments in response to the recent COVID-19 pandemic exemplifies the ever-changing and increasingly complex regulatory landscape in which we operate. While some regulatory reactions to COVID-19 relaxed certain compliance obligations, the forbearance requirements imposed on mortgage servicers in the recently passed CARES Act added new regulatory responsibilities. The GSEs and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or the FHFA, Ginnie Mae, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, state and local governments, various investors and others have also issued guidance relating to COVID-19. Future regulatory scrutiny and enforcement resulting from COVID-19 is unknown.

Our failure to comply with applicable federal, state and local consumer protection and data privacy laws could lead to:

Furthermore, situations involving a potential violation of law or regulation, even if limited in scope, may give rise to numerous and overlapping investigations and proceedings, either by multiple federal and state agencies and officials in the United States. In addition, our failure, or the failure of our Broker Partners and Correspondent Partners to comply with these laws and regulations may result in increased costs of doing business, reduced payments by borrowers, modification of the original terms of mortgage loans, rescission of mortgages and return of interest payments, permanent forgiveness of debt, delays in the foreclosure process, litigation, reputational damage, enforcement actions, and repurchase and indemnification obligations, which could affect our investor approval status and our ability to sell or service loans. Our failure to adequately supervise vendors and service providers may lead to significant liabilities, inclusive of assignee liabilities, as a result of the errors and omissions of those vendors and service providers.

As regulatory guidance and enforcement and the views of the CFPB, state attorneys general, the GSEs and other market participants evolve, we may need to modify further our loan origination processes and systems in order to adjust to evolution in the regulatory landscape and successfully operate our lending business. In such circumstances, if we are unable to make the necessary adjustments, our business and operations could be adversely affected.

Our failure to comply with the laws and regulations to which we are subject, whether actual or alleged, would expose us to fines, penalties or potential litigation liabilities, including costs, settlements and judgments, and also trigger defaults under our financing arrangements, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

Various federal, state and local laws have been enacted that are designed to discourage predatory lending and servicing practices. The Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994, or HOEPA, prohibits inclusion of certain provisions in residential loans that have mortgage rates or origination costs in excess of prescribed levels and requires that borrowers be given certain disclosures prior to origination. Some states have enacted, or may enact, similar laws or regulations, which in some cases impose restrictions and requirements greater than those in HOEPA. In addition, under the anti-predatory lending laws of some states, the origination of certain residential loans, including loans that are not classified as “high cost” loans under applicable law, must satisfy a net tangible benefits test with respect to the related borrower. This test may be highly subjective and open to interpretation. As a result, a court may determine that a residential loan, for example, does not meet the test even if the related originator reasonably believed that the test was satisfied. The VA has also adopted rules to protect veterans from predatory lending in connection with certain home loans.

Failure of residential loan originators or servicers to comply with these laws, to the extent any of their residential loans are or become part of our mortgage-related assets, could subject us, as a servicer or, in the case of acquired loans, as an assignee or purchaser, to monetary penalties and could result in the borrowers rescinding the affected loans. Lawsuits have been brought in various states making claims against originators, servicers, assignees and 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 our loans are found to have been originated in violation of predatory or abusive lending laws, we could be subject to lawsuits or governmental actions, or we could be fined or incur losses.

The CFPB has oversight of non-depository mortgage lending and servicing institutions and is empowered with broad supervision, rulemaking and examination authority to enforce laws involving consumer financial products and services and to ensure, among other things, that consumers receive clear and accurate disclosures regarding financial products and are protected from hidden fees and unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices. The CFPB has adopted a number of regulations under long-standing consumer financial protection laws and the Dodd-Frank Act, including rules regarding truth in lending, assessments of a borrower’s ability to repay, home mortgage loan disclosure, home mortgage loan origination, fair credit reporting, fair debt collection practices, foreclosure protections and mortgage servicing rules, including provisions regarding loss mitigation, prompt crediting of borrowers’ accounts for payments received, delinquency and early intervention, prompt investigation of complaints by borrowers, periodic statement requirements, lender-placed insurance, requests for information and successors-in-interest to borrowers. The CFPB also periodically issues guidance documents, such as bulletins, setting forth informal guidance regarding compliance with these and other laws under its jurisdiction, and issues public enforcement actions, which provide additional guidance on its interpretation of these legal requirements.

The CFPB also has enforcement authority and can order, among other things, rescission or reformation of contracts, the refund of moneys or the return of real property, restitution, disgorgement or compensation for unjust enrichment, the payment of damages or other monetary relief, public notifications regarding violations, limits on activities or functions, remediation of practices, external compliance monitoring and civil money penalties. The CFPB has made it clear that it expects non-bank entities to maintain an effective process for managing risks associated with third-party vendor relationships, including compliance-related risks. In connection with this vendor risk management process, we are expected to perform due diligence reviews of potential vendors, review vendors’ policies and procedures and internal training materials to confirm compliance-related focus, include enforceable consequences in contracts with vendors regarding failure to comply with consumer protection requirements, and take prompt action, including terminating the relationship, in the event that vendors fail to meet our expectations. Through enforcement actions and guidance, the CFPB is also applying scrutiny to compensation payments to third-party providers for marketing services and may issue guidance that narrows the range of acceptable payments to third-party providers as part of marketing services agreements, lead generation agreements and other third-party marketer relationships.

In addition to its supervision and examination authority, the CFPB is authorized to conduct investigations to determine whether any person is engaging in, or has engaged in, conduct that violates federal consumer financial protection laws, and to initiate enforcement actions for such violations, regardless of its direct supervisory authority. Investigations may be conducted jointly with other regulators. The CFPB has the authority to impose monetary penalties for violations of applicable federal consumer financial laws, require remediation of practices and pursue administrative proceedings or litigation for violations of applicable federal consumer financial laws. The CFPB also has the authority to obtain cease and desist orders, orders for restitution or rescission of contracts and other kinds of affirmative relief and monetary penalties ranging from up to approximately $5,000 per day for ordinary violations of federal consumer financial laws to $25,000 per day for reckless violations and $1,000,000 per day for knowing violations.

The mortgage lending sector is currently relying for a significant portion of the mortgages originated on a temporary CFPB regulation, commonly called the “QM Patch,” which permits mortgage lenders to comply with the CFPB’s ability to repay requirements by relying on the fact that the mortgage is eligible for sale to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Reliance on the QM Patch has become widespread due to the operational complexity and practical inability for many mortgage lenders to rely on other ways to show compliance with the ability to repay regulations. On June 22, 2020, the CFPB issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to, among other things, revise the definition of a qualified mortgage. On October 20, 2020, the CFPB finalized a rule extending the temporary “GSE patch,” which grants QM status to loans eligible to be purchased or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, until the QM rule changes are finalized and take effect. Meanwhile, the CFPB will continue developing final rules on the general QM loan definition and its proposal for a new category of “seasoned” QMs. We cannot predict what final actions the CFPB will take and how it might affect us as well as other mortgage lenders.

Consistent with its active monitoring of residential mortgage origination and servicing, the CFPB may impose new regulations under existing statutes or revise its existing regulations to more stringently limit our business activities. In addition, uncertainty regarding changes in leadership or authority levels within the CFPB and changes in supervisory and enforcement priorities, including potentially more stringent enforcement actions, could result in heightened regulation and oversight of our business activities, materially and adversely affect the manner in which we conduct our business, and increase costs and potential litigation associated with our business activities. Our failure to comply with the laws and regulations to which we are subject, whether actual or alleged, would expose us to fines, penalties or potential litigation liabilities, including costs, settlements and judgments, and also trigger defaults under our financing arrangements, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

We are also supervised by regulatory agencies under state law. State attorneys general, state licensing regulators, and state and local consumer protection offices have authority to investigate consumer complaints and to commence investigations and other formal and informal proceedings regarding our operations and activities. In addition, the GSEs and the FHFA, Ginnie Mae, the FTC, HUD, various investors, non-agency securitization trustees and others subject us to periodic reviews and audits.

State regulatory agencies have been and continue to be active in their supervision of loan origination and servicing companies, including us. If a state regulatory agency imposes new rules or revises its rules or otherwise engages in more stringent supervisory and enforcement activities with respect to existing or new rules, we could be subject to enforcement actions, fines or penalties, as well as reputational harm as a result of these actions. We also may face increased compliance costs as a direct result of new or revised rules or in response to any such stringent enforcement or supervisory activities. A determination of our failure to comply with applicable law could lead to enforcement action, administrative fines and penalties, or other administrative action.

Due to the unprecedented impact on major sectors of the U.S. economy from COVID-19, numerous states and the federal government have adopted measures requiring mortgage servicers to work with consumers negatively impacted by COVID-19. The CARES Act imposes several new compliance obligations on our mortgage servicing activities, including, but not limited to mandatory forbearance offerings, altered credit reporting obligations, and moratoriums on foreclosure actions and late fee assessments. Many states have taken similar measures to provide mortgage payment and other relief to consumers, which create additional complexity around our mortgage servicing compliance activities. We cannot predict when or on what terms and conditions these measures will be lifted, which will depend on future legislative and regulatory developments in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The swift passage of the CARES Act increases the likelihood of unintended consequences from the legislation. An example of such unintended consequences is the liquidity pressure placed on mortgage servicers given our contractual obligation to continue to advance payments to investors on loans in forbearance where consumers are not making their typical monthly mortgage payments. Moreover, certain provisions of the CARES Act are subject to interpretation given the existing ambiguities in the legislation, which creates class action and other litigation risk.

Although much of the executive, legislative and regulatory action stemming from COVID-19 is focused on mortgage servicing, regulators are adjusting compliance obligations impacting our mortgage origination activities. Many states have adopted temporary measures allowing for otherwise prohibited remote mortgage loan origination activities. While these temporary measures allow us to continue to do business remotely, they impose notice, procedural, and other compliance obligations on our origination activity.

Federal, state and local executive, legislative and regulatory responses to COVID-19 are rapidly evolving, not consistent in scope or application, and subject to change without advance notice. Such efforts may impose additional compliance obligations, which may negatively impact our mortgage origination and servicing business. Any

additional legal or regulatory responses to COVID-19 may unfavorably restrict our business operations, alter our established business practices, and otherwise raise our compliance costs.

We are required to follow specific guidelines and eligibility standards that impact the way we service and originate GSE and U.S. government agency loans, including guidelines and standards with respect to:

These guidelines provide the GSEs and other government agencies with the ability to provide monetary incentives for loan servicers that perform well and to assess penalties for those that do not. In addition, these guidelines directly limit the types of loan products that we may offer in general and the mortgage loans that we may underwrite for specific borrowers to the extent that we those products to be supported by the GSEs and other government agencies. As a result, failure to comply with these guidelines could adversely impact our ability to benefit from GSE and other government agency support and could therefore impact our business.

At the direction of the FHFA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have aligned their guidelines for servicing delinquent mortgages, which could result in monetary incentives for servicers that perform well and to assess compensatory penalties against servicers in connection with the failure to meet specified timelines relating to delinquent loans and foreclosure proceedings, and other breaches of servicing obligations. We generally cannot negotiate these terms with the Agencies and they are subject to change at any time without our specific consent. A significant change in these guidelines, that decreases the fees we charge or requires us to expend additional resources to provide mortgage services, could decrease our revenues or increase our costs.

In addition, changes in the nature or extent of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the USDA or the VA, or the insurance provided by the FHA, or coverage provided by private mortgage insurers, could also have broad adverse market implications. Any future increases in guarantee fees or changes to their structure or increases in the premiums we are required to pay to the FHA or private mortgage insurers for insurance or to the VA or the USDA for guarantees could increase mortgage origination costs and insurance premiums for our customers. These industry changes could negatively affect demand for our mortgage services and consequently our origination volume, which could be detrimental to our business. We cannot predict whether the impact of any proposals to move Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac out of conservatorship would require them to increase their fees. For further discussion, see “Risk Factors—We are highly dependent on the GSEs and Ginnie Mae and the FHFA, as the conservator of the GSEs, and any changes in these entities or their current roles could materially and adversely affect our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.”

Our ability to generate revenues through mortgage loan sales depends to a significant degree on programs administered by the GSEs and Ginnie Mae and others that facilitate the issuance of MBS in the secondary market. The GSEs, Ginnie Mae and FHFA play a critical role in the mortgage industry and we have significant business relationships with them. Presently, almost all of the newly originated conventional conforming loans that we acquire from mortgage lenders through our correspondent production activities or our Direct channel activities qualify under existing standards for inclusion in mortgage securities backed by the GSEs and Ginnie Mae or for purchase by a GSE directly through its cash window. We also derive other material financial benefits from these relationships, including the assumption of credit risk by the GSEs and Ginnie Mae on loans included in such mortgage securities in exchange for our payment of guarantee fees, our retention of such credit risk through structured transactions that lower our

guarantee fees, and the ability to avoid certain loan inventory finance costs through streamlined loan funding and sale procedures to the Agencies and other third-party purchasers.

The disposition of the FHFA conservatorship of the GSEs continues to be debated between the U.S. Congress and the executive branch of the U.S. federal government and could also be impacted by a forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court case regarding whether FHFA’s structure is constitutional. In June 2018, the Trump Administration brought forth a new proposal to end government conservatorship, which would result in full privatization of the GSEs. In September 2019, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or the U.S. Treasury, the FHFA and HUD released plans to reform the housing finance system. These Agencies developed these plans in conjunction with one another and other government agencies, and include legislative and administrative reforms to achieve the following reform goals: (i) ending the conservatorships of the GSEs upon the completion of specified reforms; (ii) facilitating competition in the housing finance market; (iii) establishing regulation of the GSEs that safeguards their safety and soundness and minimizes the risks they pose to the financial stability of the United States; and (iv) providing that the federal government is properly compensated for any explicit or implicit support it provides to the GSEs or the secondary housing finance market. At this point, it remains unclear whether any of these legislative or regulatory reforms will be enacted or implemented. Any changes in laws and regulations affecting the relationship between the GSEs and the U.S. federal government could adversely affect our business and prospects. Although the U.S. Treasury has committed capital to the GSEs, these actions may not be adequate for their needs. If the GSEs are adversely affected by events such as ratings downgrades, inability to obtain necessary government funding, lack of success in resolving repurchase demands to lenders, foreclosure problems and delays and problems with mortgage insurers, they could suffer losses and fail to honor their guarantees and other obligations. Any discontinuation of, or significant reduction in, the operation of the GSEs or any significant adverse change in their capital structure, financial condition, activity levels in the primary or secondary mortgage markets or underwriting criteria could materially and adversely affect our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations. The roles of the GSEs could be significantly restructured, reduced or eliminated and the nature of the guarantees could be considerably limited relative to historical measurements. Elimination of the traditional roles of the GSEs, or any changes to the nature or extent of the guarantees provided by the GSEs or the fees, terms and guidelines that govern our selling and servicing relationships with them, such as increases in the guarantee fees we are required to pay, initiatives that increase the number of repurchase demands and/or the manner in which they are pursued, or possible limits on delivery volumes imposed upon us and other sellers/servicers, could also materially and adversely affect our business, including our ability to sell and securitize loans that we acquire through our correspondent production activities or our Direct channel activities, and the performance, liquidity and market value of our assets. Moreover, any changes to the nature of the GSEs or their guarantee obligations could redefine what constitutes an Agency MBS and could have broad adverse implications for the market and our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Our ability to generate revenues from newly originated loans that we acquire through our correspondent production activities and originated by our Direct channel is also dependent on the fact that the Agencies have not historically focused on acquiring such loans directly from the smaller mortgage lenders with whom we have relationships, but have instead relied on banks and non-bank aggregators such as us to acquire, aggregate and securitize or otherwise sell loans from such lenders to investors in the secondary market. Certain of the Agencies have approved more of the smaller lenders that traditionally might not have qualified for such approvals, and more importantly are discussing programs where they would facilitate new or expanded options for a broad range of lenders to sell their servicing through executions other than whole loan sales to correspondent aggregators. In the future, the Agencies may continue to create initiatives, programs and technology that serve to discourage correspondent aggregators. To the extent that lenders choose to sell directly to the Agencies rather than through correspondent aggregators like us, this reduces the number of loans available for purchase in the correspondent business channel and could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We are subject to state mortgage lending, purchase and sale, loan servicing or debt collection licensing and regulatory requirements. Our failure to obtain any necessary licenses, comply with applicable licensing laws or satisfy the various requirements to maintain them over time could restrict our Direct channel activities or loan

purchase and sale or servicing activities, result in litigation, or civil and other monetary penalties, or criminal penalties, or cause us to default under certain of our lending arrangements, any of which could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We are required to hold Agency approvals in order to sell mortgage loans to a particular Agency and/or service such mortgage loans on their behalf. Our failure to satisfy the various requirements necessary to maintain such Agency approvals over time would also substantially restrict our business activities and could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition including defaults under our financing agreements.

We are also required to follow specific guidelines that impact the way that we originate and service Agency loans. A significant change in these guidelines that has the effect of decreasing the fees we charge or requires us to expend additional resources in providing mortgage services could decrease our revenues or increase our costs, which could also adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, we are subject to periodic examinations by federal and state regulators, our lenders and the Agencies, which can result in increases in our administrative costs, the requirement to pay substantial penalties due to compliance errors or the loss of our licenses. Negative publicity or fines and penalties incurred in one jurisdiction may cause investigations or other actions by regulators in other jurisdictions and could adversely impact our business.

In addition, because we are not a state or federally chartered depository institution, we do not benefit from exemptions from state mortgage lending, loan servicing or debt collection licensing and regulatory requirements. We must comply with state licensing requirements and varying compliance requirements in all states in which we operate and the District of Columbia, and regulatory changes may increase our costs through stricter licensing laws, disclosure laws or increased fees or may impose conditions to licensing that we or our personnel are unable to meet.

In most states in which we operate, a regulatory agency or agencies regulate and enforce laws relating to mortgage servicers and mortgage originators. Future state legislation and changes in existing regulation may significantly increase our compliance costs or reduce the amount of ancillary income we are entitled to collect from borrowers or otherwise. This could make our business cost-prohibitive in the affected state or states and could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The consummation of this offering requires certain state regulatory and Agency approvals or non-objections. We anticipate that Fannie Mae will provide us with a notice of non-objection to this offering, but as of the date of this prospectus, we have not yet obtained such notice from Fannie Mae. We cannot be certain that it will provide the notice of non-objection or that it will not take other actions to restrict our business involving Fannie Mae that may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In this regard, Fannie Mae could impose a number of remedies or certain other requirements, including but not limited to compensatory fees, restricting our ability to sell originated loans to Fannie Mae, service Fannie Mae loans or hold Fannie Mae related servicing rights, or impose other requirements that may have the effect of limiting our business. While we believe it to be unlikely, it is also possible that Fannie Mae could suspend or terminate our Fannie Mae seller/servicer approval. Any such business restrictions or suspension or termination of our Fannie Mae seller/servicer approval may need to be reported to regulators, Agencies, or other counterparties and could adversely impact our business. In addition, as of the date of this prospectus, we have not yet received a limited number of approvals from certain state regulators and Ginnie Mae. While we expect to obtain all such approvals that are required to be obtained prior to consummation of this offering, we cannot be certain that such approvals will be obtained prior to consummation of this offering or at all.

We anticipate registering Home Point Asset Management LLC, our wholly owned subsidiary, as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, or the Investment Advisers Act. Such investment management subsidiary would be subject to significant regulation in the United States, primarily at the federal level, including regulation by the SEC under the Investment Advisers Act. The requirements imposed by our regulators are designed primarily to ensure the integrity of the financial markets and to protect investors whose assets are being managed and are not designed to protect our stockholders. Consequently, these regulations often serve to limit our activities.

These requirements relate to, among other things, fiduciary duties to customers, maintaining an effective compliance program, solicitation agreements, conflicts of interest, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, disclosure requirements, limitations on agency cross and principal transactions between an adviser and advisory clients and general anti-fraud prohibitions. Registered investment advisers are also subject to routine periodic examinations by the staff of the SEC.

We also regularly rely on exemptions from various requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, the Investment Company Act of 1940 and ERISA. These exemptions are sometimes highly complex and may in certain circumstances depend on compliance by third parties and service providers whom we do not control. If for any reason these exemptions were to be revoked or challenged or otherwise become unavailable to us, we could be subject to regulatory action or third-party claims, and our business could be materially and adversely affected. Regulations that would become applicable to our investment management subsidiary that are easily applied to traditional investments, such as stocks and bonds, may be more difficult to apply to a portfolio of loans, and can require procedures that are uncommon, impractical or difficult in our loan production and servicing business.

The failure by us to comply with applicable laws or regulations could result in fines, suspensions of individual associates or other sanctions, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if an investigation or proceeding did not result in a fine or sanction or the fine or sanction imposed against us or our associates by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to an investigation, proceeding or imposition of these fines or sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing customers.

The CFPB’s TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure, or TRID, rules impose requirements on consumer facing disclosure rules and impose certain waiting periods to allow consumers time to shop for and consider the loan terms after receiving the required disclosures. If we fail to comply with the TRID rules, we may be unable to sell loans that we originate or purchase, or we may be required to sell such loans at a discount compared to other loans. We could also be subject to repurchase or indemnification claims from purchasers of such loans, including the GSEs.

The failure to comply with any applicable laws, regulations and rules by the mortgage lenders from whom loans were acquired through our wholesale and correspondent production activities may subject us to lawsuits, regulatory actions, fines or penalties. We have in place a due diligence program designed to assess areas of risk with respect to these acquired loans, including, without limitation, compliance with underwriting guidelines and applicable law. However, we may not detect every violation of law by these mortgage lenders. Further, to the extent any other third-party originators with whom we do business fail to comply with applicable law, and subsequently any of their mortgage loans become part of our assets, or prior servicers from whom we acquire MSR fail to comply with applicable law, it could subject us, as an assignee or purchaser of the related mortgage loans or MSR, respectively, to monetary penalties or other losses. In general, if any of our loans are found to have been originated, serviced or owned by us or a third party in violation of applicable law, we could be subject to lawsuits or governmental actions, or we could be fined or incur losses.

The independent third-party mortgage brokers through whom we produce wholesale mortgage loans have parallel and separate legal obligations to which they are subject. These independent mortgage brokers are not considered our employees and are treated as independent third parties. While the applicable laws may not explicitly hold the originating lenders responsible for the legal violations of mortgage brokers, federal and state agencies increasingly have sought to impose such liability. The U.S. Department of Justice, through its use of a disparate impact theory under the Fair Housing Act, is actively holding home loan lenders responsible for the pricing practices of brokers, alleging that the lender is directly responsible for the total fees and charges paid by the borrower even if the lender neither dictated what the broker could charge nor kept the money for its own account. In addition, under the TRID rule, we may be held responsible for improper disclosures made to customers by brokers. We may be subject to claims for fines or other penalties based upon the conduct of the independent home loan brokers with which we do business.

The U.S. government, primarily through the Agencies, has established loan modification and refinance programs designed to provide homeowners with assistance in avoiding residential mortgage loan foreclosures. We can provide no assurance that we will be eligible to use any government programs or, if eligible, that we will be able to utilize them successfully. These programs, future U.S. federal, state or local legislative or regulatory actions that result in the modification of outstanding mortgage loans, as well as changes in the requirements necessary to qualify for modifications or refinancing mortgage loans with the GSEs or Ginnie Mae, may adversely affect the value of, and the returns on MSRs, residential mortgage loans, residential MBS, real estate-related securities and various other asset classes in which we invest, all of which could require us to repurchase loans, generally, and specifically from Ginnie Mae and the GSEs, which may result in a material adverse effect on our business and liquidity.

We are subject to various pending private legal proceedings challenging, among other things, whether certain of our loan origination and servicing practices and other aspects of our business comply with applicable laws and regulatory requirements. The outcome of any legal matter is never certain. In the future, we are likely to become subject to other private legal proceedings alleging failures to comply with applicable laws and regulations, including putative class actions, in the ordinary course of our business.

With respect to legal actions for impending or expected foreclosures, we may incur costs if we are required to, or if we elect to, execute or re-file documents or take other actions in our capacity as a servicer. We may incur increased litigation costs if the validity of a foreclosure action is challenged by a borrower or a class of borrowers. In addition, if a court rules that the lien of a homeowners association takes priority over the lien we service, we may incur legal liabilities and costs to defend such actions. If a court dismisses or overturns a foreclosure because of errors or deficiencies in the foreclosure process, we may have liability in our capacity as seller, servicer or otherwise to the loan owner, a borrower, title insurer or the purchaser of the property sold in foreclosure. These costs and liabilities may not be legally or otherwise reimbursable to us, particularly to the extent they relate to securitized mortgage loans or loans that we sell to the GSEs or other third parties. A significant increase in litigation costs and losses occurring from lawsuits could trigger a default or cross-defaults under our financing arrangements, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Several states, including California and Nevada, have enacted Homeowner’s Bill of Rights legislation to establish mandatory loss mitigation practices for homeowners which cause delays in foreclosure proceedings. It is possible that additional states could enact similar laws in the future. Delays in foreclosure proceedings could require us to delay the recovery of advances, which could materially affect our business, results of operations and liquidity and increase our need for capital.

When a mortgage loan we service is in foreclosure, we are generally required to continue to advance delinquent principal and interest to the securitization trust and to make advances for delinquent taxes and insurance and foreclosure costs and the upkeep of vacant property in foreclosure to the extent that we determine that such amounts are recoverable. These servicing advances are generally recovered when the delinquency is resolved. Regulatory actions that lengthen the foreclosure process will increase the amount of servicing advances that we are required to make, lengthen the time it takes for us to be reimbursed for such advances and increase the costs incurred during the foreclosure process.

The CARES Act temporarily paused all foreclosures, and the Agencies have further extended the pause on foreclosures. Many state governors also issued orders, directives, guidance or recommendations halting foreclosure activity including evictions. These measures will increase our operating costs, extend the time we advance for delinquent taxes and insurance and could delay our ability to seek reimbursement from the investor to recoup some or all of the advances. We cannot predict when or on what terms and conditions these measures will be lifted, which will depend on future legislative and regulatory developments in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Increased regulatory scrutiny and new laws and procedures could cause us to adopt additional compliance measures and incur additional compliance costs in connection with our foreclosure processes. We may incur legal and

other costs responding to regulatory inquiries or any allegation that we improperly foreclosed on a borrower. We could also suffer reputational damage and could be fined or otherwise penalized if we are found to have breached regulatory requirements.

We may incur costs if we are required to, or if we elect to, execute or re-file documents or take other action in our capacity as a servicer in connection with pending or completed foreclosures. In addition, if certain documents required for a foreclosure action are missing or defective or if a court overturns a foreclosure because of errors or deficiencies in the foreclosure process, we may have liability to a title insurer or the purchaser of the property sold in foreclosure or could be obligated to cure the defect or repurchase the loan. We may also incur litigation costs, timeline delays and other protective advance expenses if the validity of a foreclosure action is challenged by a customer. These costs and liabilities may not be legally or otherwise reimbursable to us, particularly to the extent they relate to securitized mortgage loans. A significant increase in such costs and liabilities could adversely affect our liquidity and our inability to be reimbursed for advances could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Antidiscrimination statutes, such as the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, prohibit creditors from discriminating against loan applicants and borrowers based on certain characteristics, such as race, sex, religion and national origin. The Fair Housing Act also expressly prohibits discrimination with respect to the purchase of mortgage loans. Various federal regulatory agencies and departments, including the U.S. Department of Justice and CFPB, take the position that these laws apply not only to intentional discrimination, but also to neutral practices that have a disparate impact on a group that shares a characteristic that a creditor may not consider in making credit decisions (i.e., creditor or servicing practices that have a disproportionate negative affect on a protected class of individuals).

These regulatory agencies, as well as consumer advocacy groups and plaintiffs’ attorneys, are focusing greater attention on “disparate impact” claims. The U.S. Supreme Court recently confirmed that the “disparate impact” theory applies to cases brought under the FHA, while emphasizing that a causal relationship must be shown between a specific policy of the defendant and a discriminatory result that is not justified by a legitimate objective of the defendant. Although it is still unclear whether the theory applies under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, regulatory agencies and private plaintiffs can be expected to continue to apply it to both the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act in the context of home loan lending and servicing. To extent that the “disparate impact” theory continues to apply, we may be faced with significant administrative burdens in attempting to comply and potential liability for failures to comply.

Furthermore, many industry observers believe that the “ability to repay” rule issued by the CFPB, discussed above may have the unintended consequence of having a disparate impact on protected classes. Specifically, it is possible that lenders that make only qualified mortgages may be exposed to discrimination claims under a disparate impact theory.

In addition to reputational harm, violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act can result in actual damages, punitive damages, injunctive or equitable relief, attorneys’ fees and civil money penalties.

MSRs arise from contractual agreements between us and the investors (or their agents) in mortgage securities and mortgage loans that we service on their behalf. We generally create MSRs in connection with our sale of mortgage loans to the Agencies or others where we assume the obligation to service such loans on their behalf. We may also purchase MSRs from third-party sellers. All MSR capitalizations are recorded at fair value on our balance sheet. The determination of the fair value of MSRs requires our management to make numerous estimates and assumptions. Such estimates and assumptions include, without limitation, estimates of future cash flows associated with MSRs based upon assumptions involving interest rates as well as the prepayment rates, delinquencies and

foreclosure rates of the underlying serviced mortgage loans. The ultimate realization of future cash flows from the MSRs may be materially different than the values of such MSRs as may be reflected in our consolidated balance sheet as of any particular date. The use of different estimates or assumptions in connection with the valuation of these assets could produce materially different fair values for such assets, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Accordingly, there may be material uncertainty about the fair value of any MSRs we acquire or hold.

Prepayment speeds significantly affect MSRs. Prepayment speed is the measurement of how quickly borrowers pay down the unpaid principal balance of their loans or how quickly loans are otherwise brought current, modified, liquidated or charged off. We base the value of MSRs on, among other things, our projection of the cash flows from the related mortgage loans. Our expectation of prepayment speeds is a significant assumption underlying those cash flow projections. If prepayment speed expectations increase significantly, the fair value of the MSRs could decline and we may be required to record a non-cash charge, which would have a negative impact on our financial results. Furthermore, a significant increase in prepayment speeds could materially reduce the ultimate cash flows we receive from MSRs, and we could ultimately receive substantially less than what we estimated when initially capitalizing such assets.

Moreover, delinquency rates also have a significant impact on the valuation of any MSRs. An increase in delinquencies generally results in lower revenue because typically we only collect servicing fees from Agencies or mortgage owners for performing loans. Our expectation of delinquencies is also a significant assumption underlying our cash flow projections. If delinquencies are significantly greater than we expect, the estimated fair value of the MSRs could be diminished. Increased delinquencies also typically translate into increased defaults and liquidations, and as an MSR owner we are also responsible for certain expenses and losses associated with the loans we service, particularly on loans sold to Ginnie Mae. A reduction in the fair value of the MSR or an increase in defaults and liquidations would adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Changes in interest rates are a key driver of the performance of MSRs. Historically, in periods of rising interest rates, the fair value of the MSRs generally increases as prepayments decrease, and therefore the estimated life of the MSRs and related expected cash flows increase. In a declining interest rate environment, the fair value of MSRs generally decreases as prepayments increase and therefore the estimated life of the MSRs, and related cash flows, decrease.

There has been a long-term trend of falling interest rates, with intermittent periods of rate increases. More recently, there was a rising interest rate environment for the majority of 2018 and a falling interest rate environment in 2019 and during the first three quarters of 2020. Because origination volumes tend to increase in declining interest rate environments and decrease in increasing rate environments, we believe that our two principal sources of revenue, mortgage origination and mortgage loan servicing, contribute to a stable business profile by creating a natural hedge against changes in the interest rate environment.

In addition, we may pursue various hedging strategies to seek to further reduce our exposure to adverse changes in fair value resulting from changes in interest rates. Our hedging activity will vary in scope based on the level and volatility of interest rates, the type of assets held and other changing market conditions. Interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us. To the extent we do not utilize derivative financial instruments to fully hedge against changes in fair value of MSRs or the derivatives we use in our hedging activities do not perform as expected, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations would be more susceptible to volatility due to changes in the fair value of, or cash flows from, MSRs as interest rates change.

Furthermore, MSRs and the related servicing activities are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations and may be subject to various judicial and administrative decisions imposing various requirements and restrictions on our business. Our failure to comply with the laws, rules or regulations to which we or they are subject by virtue of ownership of MSRs, whether actual or alleged, could expose us to fines, penalties or potential litigation liabilities, including costs, settlements and judgments, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

The majority of the mortgage loans we service are serviced on behalf of the GSEs and Ginnie Mae. These entities establish the base service fee to compensate us for servicing loans as well as the assessment of fines and penalties that may be imposed upon us for failing to meet servicing standards.

As is standard in the industry, under the terms of our master servicing agreements with the GSEs, the GSEs have the right to terminate us as servicer of the loans we service on their behalf at any time and also have the right to cause us to sell the MSRs to a third party. In addition, failure to comply with servicing standards could result in termination of our agreements with the GSEs with little or no notice and without any compensation. If any of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae were to terminate us as a servicer, or increase our costs related to such servicing by way of additional fees, fines or penalties, such changes could have a material adverse effect on the revenue we derive from servicing activity, as well as the value of the related MSRs. These agreements, and other servicing agreements under which we service mortgage loans for non-GSE loan purchasers, also require that we service in accordance with GSE servicing guidelines and contain financial covenants. If we were to have our servicing rights terminated on a material portion of our servicing portfolio, this could adversely affect our business.

An increase in delinquencies will result in lower revenue for loans we service for the GSEs and Ginnie Mae because we only collect servicing fees from the GSEs and Ginnie Mae from payments made on the mortgage loans. Additionally, while increased delinquencies generate higher ancillary revenues, including late fees, these fees may not be collected until the related loan reinstates or in the event that the related loan is liquidated. In addition, an increase in delinquencies may result in certain other advances being made on behalf of delinquent loans, which may not be entirely reversible and would decrease the interest income we receive on cash held in collection and other accounts to the extent permitted under applicable requirements.

We base the price we pay for MSRs on, among other things, our projections of the cash flows from the related mortgage loans. Our expectation of delinquencies is a significant assumption underlying those cash flow projections. If delinquencies were significantly greater than expected, the estimated fair value of our MSRs could be diminished. If the estimated fair value of MSRs is reduced, we may not be able to satisfy minimum net worth covenants and borrowing conditions in our debt agreements and we could suffer a loss, which could trigger a default and cross-defaults under our other financing arrangements and trading agreements (impacting our ability to enter into hedging transactions) and the possible loss of our eligibility to sell loans to the Agencies or issue an Agency MBS, all of which would likely have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are also subject to risks of borrower defaults and bankruptcies in cases where we might be required to repurchase loans sold with recourse or under representations and warranties. A borrower filing for bankruptcy during foreclosure would have the effect of staying the foreclosure and thereby delaying the foreclosure process, which may potentially result in a reduction or discharge of a borrower’s mortgage debt. Even if we are successful in foreclosing on a loan, the liquidation proceeds upon sale of the underlying real estate may not be sufficient to recover our cost basis in the loan, resulting in a loss to us. For example, foreclosure may create a negative public perception of the related mortgaged property, resulting in a diminution of its value. Furthermore, any costs or delays involved in the foreclosure of the loan or a liquidation of the underlying property will further reduce the net proceeds and, thus, increase the loss. If these risks materialize, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, in the event of a default under any mortgage loan we have not sold, we will bear the risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and of the mortgage loan.

Our ability to promptly foreclose upon defaulted mortgage loans and liquidate the underlying real property plays a critical role in our valuation of the assets which we acquire and our expected cash flows on such assets. There are a variety of factors that may inhibit our ability to foreclose upon a mortgage loan and liquidate the real property within the time frames we model as part of our valuation process or within the statutes of limitation under applicable state law. These factors include, without limitation: extended foreclosure timelines in states that require judicial foreclosure, including states where we hold high concentrations of mortgage loans, significant collateral documentation deficiencies, federal, state or local laws that are borrower friendly, including legislative action or initiatives designed to provide homeowners with assistance in avoiding residential mortgage loan foreclosures and that serve to delay the foreclosure process and programs that may require specific procedures to be followed to explore the refinancing of a mortgage loan prior to the commencement of a foreclosure proceeding and declines in real estate values and sustained high levels of unemployment that increase the number of foreclosures and place additional pressure on the judicial and administrative systems.

A substantial portion of our assets are measured at fair value. The fair value of the real estate that we own or that underlies mortgage loans that we own or service is subject to market conditions and requires the use of assumptions and complex analyses. Changes in the real estate market may adversely affect the fair value of the collateral and thereby lower the cash to be received from its liquidation. Depending on the investor and/or insurer or guarantor, we may suffer financial losses that increase when we or they receive less cash upon liquidation of the collateral for defaulted loans that we service. The same would apply to loans that we own. In addition, adverse changes in the real estate market increase the probability of default of the loans we own or service.

Our mortgage and MSR assets are not subject to any geographic, diversification or concentration limitations except that we will be concentrated in mortgage-related assets. Accordingly, our mortgage and MSR assets may be concentrated by geography, investor, originator, insurer, loan program, property type and/or borrower, increasing the risk of loss to us if the particular concentration in our portfolio is subject to greater risk