AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. - Annual Report: 2012 (Form 10-K)

 UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the annual period ended December 31, 2012

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission file number 001-35151

AG MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(212) 692-2000

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 and Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x    No   ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No   x

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates was $338,890,294 based on the closing sales price on the New York Stock Exchange on June 29, 2012.

As of February 28, 2013, there were 27,459,346 outstanding shares of common stock of AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement with respect to its 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed not later than 120 days after the end of the registrant’s fiscal year are incorporated by reference into Part II, Item 5 and Part III, Items 10,11,12,13 and 14 hereof as noted therein. 

AG MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Forward-Looking Statements

We make forward-looking statements in this report that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations, plans and objectives. When we use the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “plan,” “continue,” “intend,” “should,” “may” or similar expressions, we intend to identify forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements are based upon information presently available to our management and are inherently subjective, uncertain and subject to change. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ materially from our expectations. Some of these factors are described under the caption “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and any subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may vary materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made. New risks and uncertainties arise from time to time, and it is impossible for us to predict those events or how they may affect us. Except as required by law, we are not obligated to, and do not intend to, update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

All written or oral forward-looking statements that we make, or that are attributable to us, are expressly qualified by this cautionary notice. We expressly disclaim any obligation to update the information in any public disclosure if any forward-looking statement later turns out to be inaccurate, except as may otherwise be required by law.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

In this annual report on Form 10-K, or this “report,” we refer to AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. as “we,” “us,” “the Company,” or “our,” unless we specifically state otherwise or the context indicates otherwise. We refer to our external manager, AG REIT Management, LLC as our “Manager,” and we refer to the indirect parent company of our Manager, Angelo, Gordon & Co., L.P. as “Angelo, Gordon.”

Our company

We are a Maryland real estate investment trust focused on investing in, acquiring and managing a diversified portfolio of residential mortgage assets, other real estate-related securities and financial assets, which we refer to as our target assets.

We are currently invested substantially in residential mortgage-backed securities, or RMBS, for which a U.S. government agency such as the Government National Mortgage Association, or Ginnie Mae, or a federally-chartered corporation such as the Federal National Mortgage Association, or Fannie Mae, or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, or Freddie Mac, guarantees payments of principal and interest on the securities. We refer to these securities as Agency RMBS. Our Agency RMBS investments include mortgage pass-through securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, or CMOs. We expect our portfolio, over time, will include a more significant portion of RMBS that are not issued or guaranteed by a U.S. government agency or a U.S. government-sponsored entity, or Non-Agency RMBS. Our Non-Agency RMBS investments may include fixed-and floating-rate securities, including investment grade and non-investment grade. We have invested in other target assets, including commercial mortgage-backed securities, or CMBS, and asset backed securities, or ABS, which, together with Agency RMBS and Non-Agency RMBS, we collectively refer to as real estate securities. We have also invested in commercial mortgage loans and indirect interests in real estate. We have the discretion to invest in other target assets such as residential mortgage loans, other real estate structured finance products, other real estate-related loans and securities and direct or indirect interests in real estate. Non-Agency RMBS, ABS, CMBS and residential and commercial loans are referred to as our credit portfolio, and residential and commercial mortgage loans are collectively referred to as loans.

We were incorporated in Maryland on March 1, 2011, and commenced operations in July 2011. In July 2011, we successfully completed our initial public offering, or IPO, pursuant to which we sold 6,300,000 shares of our common stock to the public at a price of $20.00 per share for gross proceeds of $126.0 million. Concurrently with the consummation of our IPO, we completed a private placement in which we sold 3,205,000 units, with each unit consisting of one share of our common stock and one warrant to purchase 0.5 shares of our common stock, at a price of $20.00 per unit. Each warrant has an exercise price of $20.50 per share. In addition, we sold 500,000 private placement shares of our common stock to AG Funds, an affiliate of Angelo, Gordon, and two of our officers, at a price of $20.00 per share. The gross proceeds to us from the private placement were $74.1 million. Collectively, we received net proceeds from our IPO, the private placement and the exercise of the underwriters’ over-allotment option of approximately $198.1 million after subtracting expenses incurred in connection with formation of $2.0 million.

In 2012 we raised approximately $353.5 million in net proceeds from sales of common stock and approximately $161.2 million in net proceeds from two preferred stock offerings.

As of December 31, 2012 and per our GAAP consolidated balance sheet, we have a $4.5 billion investment portfolio, which consists of $3.8 billion, or 83.4%, of Agency RMBS and $753.7 million, or 16.6% of assets in our credit portfolio. Our investment portfolio gross of linked transactions is $4.9 billion, which consists of $3.8 billion, or 77.8%, of Agency RMBS and $1.1 billion, or 22.2% of assets in our credit portfolio. Refer to Item 7 for a discussion on linked transactions. We have also entered into $2.2 billion notional amount of pay-fixed receive-LIBOR swaps as of December 31, 2012. This compares with $1.3 billion, or 94.3% of Agency RMBS and $76.9 million, or 5.7% of assets in our credit portfolio per our December 31, 2011 GAAP consolidated balance sheet. Our investment portfolio gross of linked transactions was $1.4 billion, which consisted of $1.3 billion, or 91.0% of Agency RMBS and $124.8 million, or 9.0% of assets in our credit portfolio as of December 31, 2011. We had entered into $793.0 million notional amount of pay-fixed receive-LIBOR swaps as of December 31, 2011.

Our stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange, (“NYSE”), under the symbol MITT. Our 8.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock and our 8.00% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock trade on the NYSE under the symbols MITT PrA and MITT PrB, respectively. 

We conduct our operations to qualify and be taxed as a real estate investment trust, or REIT, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxes on our taxable income that we distribute currently to our stockholders as long as we maintain our intended qualification as a REIT. We operate our business in a manner that permits us to maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, or the Investment Company Act.

Our manager

We are externally managed and advised by AG REIT Management, LLC, a subsidiary of Angelo, Gordon. Angelo, Gordon is an SEC-registered investment adviser with approximately $25 billion under management as of December 31, 2012. Angelo, Gordon’s platform is composed of a broad range of alternative investment strategies, including RMBS, CMBS, ABS, commercial real estate, net lease real estate, distressed credit, leveraged loans and private equity. Our Manager also is an SEC-registered investment advisor.

Pursuant to the terms of our management agreement with AG REIT Management LLC, our Manager provides us with our management team, including our officers, along with appropriate support personnel. Each of our officers is an employee of our Manager. We do not have any employees. Our Manager is at all times subject to the supervision and oversight of our board of directors and has only such functions and authority as our board of directors delegates to it. Our Manager, pursuant to a delegation agreement dated as of June 29, 2011, has delegated to Angelo, Gordon the overall responsibility with respect to our Manager’s day-to-day duties and obligations arising under our management agreement.

Current market opportunities

Residential market opportunities

According to the most recent Corelogic data, approximately one out of every four mortgages currently exceeds the value of the related home, however this number has been decreasing due in large part to an improvement in price levels on housing. Inclusive of distressed sales, home prices nationwide increased by 8.3 percent on a year-over-year basis in December 2012 as compared with December 2011. This change represents the 10^th consecutive monthly increase in home prices nationally. The housing market continues to show further signs of stabilization and recovery and REO to rental programs continue to provide a floor to housing prices. The expectation of low interest rates for a longer period of time and the low level of mortgage rates are further providing a floor to housing prices.

While we anticipate mortgage loan delinquencies and credit losses will remain relevant, housing conditions are showing continued improvement and we believe that current prices for certain Non-Agency RMBS offer attractive risk-adjusted returns. U.S. government and central bank actions, such as government sponsored enterprise mortgage-backed securities purchases, the Home Affordable Refinance Program, Home Affordable Modification Program and Public-Private Investment Program, all of which were designed to lower mortgage rates, stabilize home values and restore credit flows in the financial sector and to the broader economy have provided more attractive investments to our credit portfolio. As the U.S. economy continues to heal and consumers de-lever their household balance sheets, we expect credit defaults to decrease.

Involuntary prepayments, also known as borrower defaults, continue to play a significant role in Agency RMBS performance as do loan modifications and government modification initiatives. We believe Angelo, Gordon’s granular credit-centric approach and deep understanding of government public policy initiatives will provide our Manager strong insight into Agency RMBS performance drivers.

In September 2012, the Federal Reserve announced a program known as QE3 to purchase additional Agency RMBS at a pace of $40 billion per month, and in December 2012, monthly Treasury purchases of $45 billion were added to the program. The Federal Reserve also announced it would maintain its policy of reinvesting principal payments from its existing holdings of Agency RMBS into new such purchases until the labor market improves. The Federal Reserve’s target range for the Federal Funds Rate will also be maintained between zero and 0.25% as long as inflation is not forecast to rise more than 2.5% and unemployment remains above 6.5%, a policy updated from September 2012, when calendar-based guidance of mid-2015 was provided to the markets.

This open ended program was meant to put downward pressure on long term interest rates. Immediately following the announcement of QE3, prices on Agency RMBS reached record highs and although performance has been mixed since that time, yields and spreads on such assets have narrowed. This short term effect has reduced the correlation between mortgage rates and rates on U.S. Treasuries and interest rate swaps. During the year ended December 31, 2012 the 10 Year U.S. Treasury rate decreased 11.9 basis points to 1.76%. This compares with a decrease of 65 basis points in the yield on par-priced Fannie Mae Agency RMBS backed by 30 year fixed rate mortgage loans to 2.23% at December 31, 2012. This demand has come primarily from the Federal Reserve.

Our strategies

Our investment strategy

We invest in a diversified pool of mortgage assets that generate attractive risk-adjusted returns to our investors over the long-term through a combination of dividends and capital appreciation. Our target assets include Agency RMBS, Non-Agency RMBS, CMBS and other real estate-related assets. Following our IPO, the risk-reward profile of investment opportunities supported the deployment of a majority of our capital in Agency RMBS. We believe that yields and net interest spreads on securities that are currently available for investment are generally lower than what we have historically realized in our portfolio. Our goal for much of 2012, and looking forward to 2013, centers around deploying an increasing portion of our capital into attractive credit investments. While this shift had always been our strategy, the presence of QE3 and other factors limiting the supply of high quality assets strengthened our focus especially in the second half of 2012.

As of December 31, 2012, the fair value of our investment portfolio consisted of 83.4% Agency RMBS, 12.5% Non-Agency RMBS, 0.7% ABS, 3.3% CMBS, and 0.1% commercial mortgage loans. This compares with 2011, when the fair value of our investment portfolio consisted of 94.3% Agency RMBS, 4.4% non-Agency RMBS, 0.3% ABS and 1.0% CMBS. 

Our financing and hedging strategy

We generate income principally from the yields earned on our investments and, to the extent that leverage is deployed, on the difference between the yields earned on our investments and our cost of borrowing and any hedging activities. Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our Investment Company Act exemption, to the extent leverage is deployed, we may use a number of sources to finance our investments.

We use leverage to increase potential returns to our stockholders and to fund the acquisition of our assets. Generally, we intend to use, on a debt-to-equity basis, up to 6 to 9 times leverage on our Agency RMBS assets. With respect to our Non-Agency RMBS and other credit securities, we intend to use 2 to 4 times leverage, except in conjunction with securitizations which provide term financings that may be available to us depending upon market conditions. For these asset classes based upon the equity allocation as of December 31, 2012 and on an aggregate debt-to-equity basis, we do not generally expect to exceed, on a debt-to-equity basis, a 9-to-1 leverage ratio. As of December 31, 2012 our non-GAAP and GAAP debt-to-equity leverage ratios were 5.26 to-1 and 4.91-to-1, respectively which reflects our current mix of Agency RMBS, Non-Agency RMBS, and other real estate related assets.

We finance our investments in real estate securities primarily through short-term borrowings structured as repurchase agreements.

As of December 31, 2012, we had entered into master repurchase agreements, or MRAs, with 30 counterparties, under which we had borrowed an aggregate $3.9 billion from 29 counterparties. As of December 31, 2012, the borrowings under repurchase agreements had maturities between January 2, 2013 and June 17, 2013.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our Investment Company Act exemption, to the extent leverage is deployed, we utilize derivative financial instruments (or hedging instruments), including interest rate swap agreements and interest rate cap agreements, in an effort to hedge the interest rate risk associated with the financing of our portfolio. Specifically, we may seek to hedge our exposure to potential interest rate mismatches between the interest we earn on our investments and our borrowing costs caused by fluctuations in short-term interest rates. In utilizing leverage and interest rate hedges, our objectives are to improve risk-adjusted returns and, where possible, to lock in, on a long-term basis, a spread between the yield on our assets and the cost of our financing. As of December 31, 2012, we had entered into $2.2 billion notional of pay-fixed receive-LIBOR swaps that have variable maturities between July 14, 2014 and September 6, 2022.

Risk management strategy

Our overall portfolio strategy is designed to generate attractive returns through various phases of the economic cycle. We believe that our broad approach within the real estate market, which considers all major categories of real estate assets, allows us to invest in a variety of attractive investment opportunities and help insulate our portfolio from some of the risks that arise in a single collateral type or single risk strategy. We believe that Angelo, Gordon has a strong reputation for risk management and compliance. Angelo, Gordon’s investment philosophy combines in-depth research, a conservative valuation approach and diversification to achieve investment returns.

The components of our risk management strategy are:

Our investments

Our target asset classes

As noted above, as of December 31, 2012, the fair value of our investment portfolio comprised 83.4% of Agency RMBS, 12.5% of Non-Agency RMBS, 0.7% of ABS, 3.3% in CMBS, and 0.1% of commercial mortgage loans. We expect our portfolio, over time, will include a more significant portion of credit assets. We have the discretion to invest in these and other target assets (as described below).

Our target asset classes and the principal investments in which we invest are as follows:

Our board of directors has adopted a set of investment guidelines that outline our target assets and other criteria which are used by our Manager to evaluate specific investment opportunities as well as our overall portfolio composition. Our Manager makes day-to-day determinations as to the timing and percentage of our assets that will be invested in each of the approved asset classes. Our decisions depend upon prevailing market conditions and may change over time in response to opportunities available in different interest rate, economic and credit environments. As a result, we cannot predict the percentage of our assets that will be invested in any one of our approved asset classes at any given time. We may change our strategy and policies without a vote of our stockholders. We believe that the diversification of our portfolio of assets and the flexibility of our strategy combined with our Manager’s and its affiliates’ experience will enable us to achieve attractive risk-adjusted returns under a variety of market conditions and economic cycles.  

Investment policies

Investment guidelines

We comply with investment policies and procedures and investment guidelines that are approved by our board of directors and implemented by our Manager. We review our investment portfolio and our compliance with our investment policies, procedures and guidelines at each regularly scheduled meeting of our board of directors. Our independent directors do not review or approve individual investment, leverage or hedging decisions made by our Manager.

Our board of directors has adopted the following guidelines, among others, for our investments and borrowings:

These investment guidelines may be changed by our board of directors without the approval of our stockholders.

Distribution policy

We have paid the following common dividends:

We intend to continue to make regular quarterly distributions to holders of our common stock. We generally need to distribute at least 90% of our ordinary taxable income each year (subject to certain adjustments) to our stockholders in order to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. Our ability to make distributions to our stockholders depends, in part, upon the performance of our investment portfolio. Distributions to our stockholders will be generally taxable to our stockholders as ordinary income, although a portion of our distributions may be designated by us as capital gain or qualified dividend income or may constitute a return of capital. For the year ended December 31, 2012, we elected to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements in part with a dividend to be paid in 2013. In conjunction with this, we accrued an excise tax of $1.7 million, which is included in the excise tax line item on the accompanying consolidated statements of operations in Item 8. We have paid the following preferred dividends:

Our competitive advantages

We believe that our competitive advantages include the following:

Investment team with extensive RMBS experience

The experience of Angelo, Gordon investment professionals provides competitive advantages to us. Angelo, Gordon has over 100 investment professionals across its lines of investment disciplines. Of those, over 60 are involved in one of Angelo, Gordon’s real estate investment disciplines—RMBS, CMBS, commercial real estate and net lease real estate. The insights, experience, and contacts of these professionals are available to us as a resource. Our Manager’s dedicated RMBS investment team is led by Jonathan Lieberman and has twelve investment professionals, including portfolio managers, traders, analysts, and statisticians. The senior investment professionals have broad experience in managing residential mortgage-related assets through a variety of market cycles and credit and interest rate environments. The RMBS team has oversight from Michael Gordon, John Angelo and David Roberts who have an average of over 38 years of investment experience. Angelo, Gordon is an established leader in the alternative investment field and its overall investment philosophy is credit and value-centric in that its investment process is based on a highly analytical framework and, with respect to RMBS, takes into account factors such as loan-level cash flows, historical and current borrower performance and collateral valuation.

 Breadth of Angelo, Gordon’s experience

Although our core investment strategy is focused on RMBS, Angelo, Gordon’s expertise in related investment disciplines such as CMBS, ABS, commercial real estate, net lease real estate, distressed credit, leveraged loans and private equity provides our Manager with both (i) valuable investment insights to our RMBS investment selection and strategy and (ii) flexibility to invest in target assets other than RMBS opportunistically as market conditions warrant. As market conditions change and new opportunities are created that are consistent with our strategy and are structurally appropriate for us, we believe Angelo, Gordon’s extensive experience can assist our Manager in moving quickly to take advantage of those opportunities on our behalf.

Access to our Manager’s relationships

Angelo, Gordon has created a broad network of deal sources, including relationships with major issuers of residential debt securities and the broker-dealers that trade these securities, augmented by ongoing dialogue with a substantial number of smaller, regional firms that tend to find investment opportunities that are often priced and sold on an off-market basis. Our Manager’s investment team has extensive industry contacts and client relationships which have generated proprietary deal flow.

Disciplined investment approach and granular credit analysis

We seek to maximize our risk-adjusted returns through our Manager’s disciplined investment approach, which relies on rigorous quantitative and qualitative analysis. Our investment thesis is predicated upon in-depth loan-level analysis and our proprietary analytics, which allow us to underwrite loans individually based on updated borrower credit information and property attributes. Our focus on fundamental granular analysis remains the cornerstone of our investment philosophy, and we believe that through this approach we can identify attractive investment opportunities.

Access to Angelo, Gordon’s well developed infrastructure and asset management systems

Angelo, Gordon has invested and continues to invest in the technology, analytics and systems that we believe are required to effectively and comprehensively evaluate potential RMBS investments. Our Manager’s investment team and Angelo, Gordon’s technology group have developed proprietary databases, portfolio systems and quantitative models to enhance valuation analytics (pipeline modeling, roll rates and severity of loss). Our Manager’s RMBS investment team has developed proprietary prepayment, default, delinquency roll rate and loss severity models to analyze current mark-to-market home values on a loan-by-loan basis using borrower monthly performance statistics, credit characteristics and home price appreciation (or depreciation) by metropolitan statistical area for most of the RMBS market.

Access to Angelo, Gordon’s accounting, tax and internal risk control management systems

Our Manager utilizes Angelo, Gordon’s well developed accounting, tax and internal control departments, comprising over 40 certified public accountants. Additionally, our Manager has access to Angelo, Gordon’s technology, client service, disaster recovery and operational infrastructure to support our operations. We believe that Angelo, Gordon has a strong reputation for risk management and compliance.

Operating and regulatory structure

REIT qualification

We have elected to be treated as a REIT under Sections 856 through 859 of the Code. Our qualification as a REIT depends upon our ability to meet on a continuing basis, through actual investment and operating results, various complex requirements under the Code relating to, among other things, the sources of our gross income, the composition and values of our assets, our distribution levels and the diversity of ownership of our shares. We believe that we are organized in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the Code, and that our manner of operation enables us to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT.

As a REIT, we generally are not subject to U.S. federal income tax on our REIT taxable income we distribute currently to our stockholders. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year and do not qualify for certain statutory relief provisions, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates and may be precluded from qualifying as a REIT for the subsequent four taxable years following the year during which we lost our REIT qualification. Accordingly, our failure to qualify as a REIT could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders. Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to some U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income or property. In addition, any income earned by a taxable REIT subsidiary, or TRS, such as AG MIT II, LLC, AG MITT RMAT 2013, LLC and AG MITT RMAT 2013 II, LLC will be subject to corporate income taxation.

Investment Company Act exemption

We conduct our operations so that we and each of our subsidiaries maintain an exemption from the Investment Company Act. Under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act, a company is an investment company if it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act, a company is deemed to be an investment company if it is engaged, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire “investment securities” having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis (the “40% test”). “Investment securities” do not include, among other things, U.S. government securities, and securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that (i) are not investment companies and (ii) are not relying on the exceptions from the definition of investment company provided by Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act (the so called “private investment company” exemptions).

We are not engaged, except to a minor extent, in actively investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, we are primarily engaged in the business of owning or holding the securities of our wholly owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that are in real estate-related businesses. Therefore, we believe that we are not an investment company as defined in Section 3 (a)(1)(A).

We also believe we are not considered an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act. We generally conduct our wholly owned or majority-owned subsidiaries’ (including AG MIT, LLC’s) operations so that they are exempted from investment company status in reliance upon Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6) of the Investment Company Act. We describe Sections 3(c)(5)(C) and 3(c)(6) further below. Because entities relying on Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Section 3(c)(6) are not investment companies, our interests in those subsidiaries do not constitute “investment securities.” To the extent that our subsidiaries qualify only for either the Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) exemptions from the Investment Company Act, we limit our holdings in those kinds of entities so that, together with other investment securities, we satisfy the 40% test. We continuously monitor our holdings on an ongoing basis to determine our compliance with that test.

As discussed, we generally conduct our wholly owned or majority-owned subsidiaries’ (including AG MIT, LLC’s) operations so that they are exempted from investment company status in reliance upon Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act. Section 3(c)(5)(C) exempts from the definition of “investment company” entities primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate. The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, generally requires an entity relying on Section 3(c)(5)(C) to invest at least 55% of its portfolio in “qualifying assets” and at least another 25% in additional qualifying assets or in “real estate-related” assets (with no more than 20% comprised of miscellaneous assets). We take the position that qualifying assets for this purpose include mortgage loans and other assets, such as the entire ownership in whole pool RMBS, that the SEC staff in various no-action letters or other pronouncements has determined are the functional equivalent of whole mortgage loans for purposes of the Investment Company Act. While the SEC staff has issued a no-action letter that permits the treatment of such interests in Agency whole pool RMBS as qualifying assets, no such SEC staff guidance is available with respect to Non-Agency whole pool RMBS. Accordingly, we rely on our own judgment and analysis in treating Non-Agency whole pool RMBS as qualifying assets by analogy to Agency whole pool RMBS.

We treat as real estate-related assets CMBS, debt and equity securities of companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses, Agency RMBS partial pool certificates and Non-Agency partial pool RMBS.

As noted above, certain of our subsidiaries may rely on the exemption provided by Section 3(c)(6) to the extent that they hold mortgage assets through wholly owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that rely on Section 3(c)(5)(C). Section 3(c)(6) exempts entities (among others) that primarily engage, directly or through majority-owned subsidiaries, in the businesses described in Section 3(c)(5)(C). We refer to a subsidiary that relies on Section 3(c)(6) as a 3(c)(6) subsidiary. The SEC staff has issued little interpretive guidance with respect to Section 3(c)(6), and any guidance published by the staff could require us to adjust our strategy to reflect that advice. Although the SEC staff has issued little Section 3(c)(6) interpretive guidance, we believe that our 3(c)(6) subsidiaries may rely on Section 3(c)(6) if, among other things, at least 55% of a 3(c)(6) subsidiary’s assets consist of, and at least 55% of a 3(c)(6) subsidiary’s income are derived from, qualifying assets owned by a 3(c)(6) subsidiary’s wholly owned or majority-owned subsidiaries. We note that if we inadvertently fall within one of the definitions of “investment company” in Section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act, we also may ourselves rely on the exclusion provided by Section 3(c)(6) of the Investment Company Act.

The method we use to classify our and our subsidiaries’ assets for purposes of the Investment Company Act is based in large measure upon no-action positions taken by the SEC staff. These no-action positions were issued in accordance with factual situations that may be substantially different from the factual situations we may face, and a number of these no-action positions were issued decades ago. No assurance can be given that the SEC or its staff will concur with our classification of our or our subsidiaries’ assets or that the SEC or its staff will not, in the future, issue further guidance that may require us to reclassify those assets for purposes of qualifying for an exclusion from regulation under the Investment Company Act. For example, in August 2011 the SEC issued a concept release seeking, among other things, comments on the SEC’s staff’s historical interpretive positions concerning the application of Section 3(c)(5)(C). In that release the SEC requested comments about how Section 3(c)(5)(C) is interpreted by, and affects investors in, REITs, whether the SEC should take action to provide greater clarity, consistency or regulatory certainty regarding the application of Section 3(c)(5)(C) and whether it would be advisable for the SEC to engage in rulemaking with regard to Section 3(c)(5)(C) (such as by defining terms or establishing a safe harbor), to issue an interpretive release concerning the application of Section 3(c)(5)(C) to REITs, to provide exemptive relief or to engage in no further action at this time. To the extent that the SEC or its staff provides more specific guidance regarding Section 3(c)(5)(C) or any of the other matters bearing upon the definition of investment company and the exceptions to that definition, we may be required to adjust our investment strategy accordingly. Additional guidance from the SEC or its staff could provide additional flexibility to us, or it could further inhibit our ability to pursue the investment strategy we have chosen.

Qualification for exemption from the definition of investment company under the Investment Company Act limits our ability to make certain investments. For example, these restrictions limit our and our subsidiaries’ ability to invest directly in mortgage-related securities that represent less than the entire ownership in a pool of mortgage loans, debt and equity tranches of securitizations, certain real estate companies or assets not related to real estate. Although we monitor our and our subsidiaries’ portfolios, there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain the exemptions from registration for us and each of our subsidiaries.

Restrictions on ownership and transfer of shares

Our charter, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits any person from directly or indirectly owning (i) more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of our outstanding common stock, or (ii) more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of our outstanding capital stock. We refer to those limitations in this report collectively as the share ownership limits. Our articles of incorporation also prohibit any person from directly or indirectly owning shares of any class of our stock if such ownership would result in our being “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code or otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

Our charter generally provides that any capital stock owned or transferred in violation of the foregoing restrictions will be deemed to be transferred to a charitable trust for the benefit of a charitable beneficiary, and the purported owner or transferee will acquire no rights in such shares. If the foregoing is ineffective for any reason to prevent a violation of these restrictions, then the transfer of such shares will be void ab initio.

Competition

Our net income depends, in large part, on our ability to acquire assets at favorable spreads over our borrowing costs. In acquiring our investments, we compete with other REITs, specialty finance companies, mortgage bankers, insurance companies, mutual funds, institutional investors, investment banking firms, financial institutions, governmental bodies and other entities. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Market conditions.” In addition, there are numerous REITs with similar asset acquisition objectives. These other REITs increase competition for the available supply of mortgage assets suitable for purchase. Many of our competitors are significantly larger than we are, have access to greater capital and other resources and may have other advantages over us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than we can. Current market conditions may attract more competitors, which may increase the competition for sources of financing. An increase in the competition for sources of financing could adversely affect the availability and cost of financing.

We have access to our Manager’s professionals and their industry expertise, which we believe provides us with a competitive advantage. These professionals help us assess investment risks and determine appropriate pricing for certain potential investments. These relationships enable us to compete more effectively for attractive investment opportunities. Despite certain competitive advantages, we may not be able to achieve our business goals or expectations due to the competitive risks that we face.

Staffing

We are managed by our Manager pursuant to a management agreement. Our Manager, pursuant to a delegation agreement dated as of June 29, 2011, has delegated to Angelo, Gordon the overall responsibility with respect to our Manager’s day-to-day duties and obligations arising under our management agreement. In addition, all of our officers are employees of Angelo, Gordon or its affiliates. We have no employees. Angelo, Gordon has over 280 employees.

Available Information

Our principal executive offices are located at 245 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, New York 10167. Our telephone number is (212) 692-2000. Our website can be found at www.agmit.com. We make available free of charge on, or through the SEC filings section of our website, access to our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to those reports, as are filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as well as our proxy statements with respect to our annual meetings of stockholders, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Our Exchange Act reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC are also available at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The content of any website referred to in this Form 10-K is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K unless expressly noted.

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors

If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and stockholders may lose some or all of their investment.

Risks associated with our management and relationship with our Manager and its affiliates

We are dependent upon our Manager, its affiliates and their key personnel and may not find a suitable replacement if the management agreement with our Manager is terminated or such key personnel are no longer available to us, which would materially and adversely affect us.

In accordance with our management agreement, we are externally advised by our Manager, and all of our officers are employees of our Manager or its affiliates. We have no separate facilities and we have no employees. Pursuant to our management agreement, our Manager is obligated to supply us with our senior management team, and the members of that team may have conflicts in allocating their time and services between us and other entities or accounts managed by our Manager, now or in the future, including other Angelo, Gordon funds. Substantially all of our investment, financing and risk management decisions are made by our Manager and not by us, and our Manager also has significant discretion as to the implementation of our operating policies and strategies. Furthermore, our Manager has the sole discretion to hire and fire its employees, and our board of directors and stockholders have no authority over the individual employees of our Manager, although our board of directors does have authority over our officers who are supplied by our Manager. Accordingly, we are completely reliant upon, and our success depends exclusively on, our Manager’s personnel, services, resources, facilities, relationships and contacts. No assurance can be given that our Manager will act in our best interests with respect to the allocation of personnel, services and resources to our business. In addition, the management agreement does not require our Manager to dedicate specific personnel to us or to require personnel servicing our business to allocate a specific amount of time to us. The failure of any of our Manager’s key personnel to service our business with the requisite time and dedication, or the departure of such personnel from our Manager, or the failure of our Manager to attract and retain key personnel, would materially and adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan. Further, when there are turbulent conditions in the real estate industry, distress in the credit markets or other times when we will need focused support and assistance from our Manager, the attention of our Manager’s personnel and executive officers and the resources of Angelo, Gordon will also be required by the other funds and accounts managed by our Manager and its affiliates, placing our Manager’s resources in high demand. In such situations, we may not receive the level of support and assistance that we may receive if we were internally managed or if our Manager did not act as a manager for other entities. If the management agreement is terminated and a suitable replacement for our Manager is not secured in a timely manner or at all, we would likely be unable to execute our business plan, which would materially and adversely affect us.

The management agreement was not negotiated on an arm’s length basis and the terms, including the fees payable to our Manager, may not be as favorable to us as if the agreement was negotiated with unaffiliated third parties.

All of our officers and our non-independent directors are employees of our Manager, Angelo, Gordon or its affiliates. The management agreement was negotiated between related parties, and we did not have the benefit of arm’s length negotiations of the type normally conducted with an unaffiliated third party and the terms, including the fees payable to our Manager, may not be as favorable to us. We may choose not to enforce, or to enforce less vigorously, our rights under the management agreement because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationship with our Manager.

We expect that our Manager will source all of our investments, and existing or future entities or accounts managed by our Manager may compete with us for, or may participate in, some of those investments, which could result in conflicts of interest.

Although we are subject to Angelo, Gordon’s allocation policy which specifically addresses some of the conflicts relating to our investment opportunities, there is no assurance that this policy will be adequate to address all of the conflicts that may arise or will address such conflicts in a manner that results in the allocation of a particular investment opportunity to us or is otherwise favorable to us. Our Manager may be precluded from transacting in particular investments in certain situations, including but not limited to situations where Angelo, Gordon or its affiliates may have a prior contractual commitment with other accounts or clients or as to which Angelo, Gordon or any of its affiliates possess material, non-public information. Consistent with Angelo, Gordon’s fiduciary duty to all of its clients, it may give priority in the allocation of investment opportunities to certain clients to the extent necessary to apply regulatory requirements, client guidelines and/or contractual obligations. Angelo, Gordon or our Manager may determine that an investment opportunity is appropriate for a particular account, but not for another. In addition, Angelo, Gordon or its employees may invest in opportunities declined by our Manager for us. The investment allocation policy may be amended by Angelo, Gordon at any time without our consent. As the investment programs of the various entities and accounts managed by Angelo, Gordon change and develop over time, additional issues and considerations may affect Angelo, Gordon’s allocation policy and its expectations with respect to the allocation of investment opportunities.

Our Manager and Angelo, Gordon and their employees also may have ongoing relationships with the obligors of investments or the clients’ counterparties and they or their clients may own equity or other securities or obligations issued by such parties. In addition, Angelo, Gordon, either for its own accounts or for the accounts of other clients, may hold securities or obligations that are senior to, or have interests different from or adverse to, the securities or obligations that are acquired for us. Employees may also invest in other entities managed by other managers which are eligible to purchase target assets. Angelo, Gordon or our Manager and their respective employees may make investment decisions for us that may be different from those undertaken for their personal accounts or on behalf of other clients (including the timing and nature of the action taken). Angelo, Gordon and its affiliates may at certain times be simultaneously seeking to purchase or sell the same or similar investments for clients or for themselves. Likewise, our Manager may on our behalf purchase or sell an investment in which another Angelo, Gordon client or affiliate is already invested or has co-invested. We have not adopted any policy which would allow us to, or prohibit us from, buying or otherwise obtaining assets from any Angelo, Gordon client or selling or transferring any assets to such clients. We are limited in our ability to acquire assets that are not “qualifying real estate assets” and/or real estate-related assets, as described under “Business—Operating and Regulatory Structure—Investment Company Act Exemption,” whereas other Angelo, Gordon funds and other entities or accounts that Angelo, Gordon currently manages and may manage in the future are not so limited.

Our board of directors has approved very broad investment policies for our Manager and does not review or approve each investment decision made by our Manager.

Our Manager is authorized to follow very broad investment policies and, therefore, has great latitude in determining the types of assets that are proper investments for us, allocations among asset classes and individual investment decisions. In the future, our Manager may make investments with lower rates of return than those anticipated under current market conditions and/or may make investments with greater risks to achieve those anticipated returns. Our board of directors periodically reviews our investment policies and our investment portfolio but does not review or approve each proposed investment by our Manager. In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, our board of directors relies primarily on information provided to it by our Manager. Furthermore, our Manager may use complex strategies, and transactions entered into by our Manager may be costly, difficult or impossible to unwind by the time they are reviewed by our board of directors.

The manner of determining the management fee may not provide sufficient incentive to our Manager to maximize risk-adjusted returns on our investment portfolio because it is based on our Stockholders’ Equity and not on our performance.

Our Manager is entitled to receive a management fee that is based on our Stockholders’ Equity at the end of each quarter. Accordingly, the possibility exists that significant management fees could be payable to our Manager for a given quarter despite the fact that we could experience a net loss during that quarter. Our Manager’s entitlement to such significant non-performance-based compensation may not provide sufficient incentive to our Manager to devote its time and effort to source and maximize risk-adjusted returns on our investment portfolio, which could, in turn, adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and the market price of our common stock. The compensation payable to our Manager will increase as a result of any future issuances of our equity securities, even if the issuance are dilutive to existing stockholders.  

Termination of our management agreement would be costly and, in certain cases, not permitted.

It is difficult and costly to terminate the management agreement we have entered into with our Manager without cause. Our independent directors review our Manager’s performance and the management fees annually, and following the initial term ending June 30, 2014, the management agreement provides that it may be terminated annually by us without cause upon the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of our independent directors or by a vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of our outstanding common stock, in each case based upon (i) our Manager’s unsatisfactory performance that is materially detrimental to us or (ii) our determination that the management fees payable to our Manager are not fair, subject to our Manager’s right to prevent termination based on unfair fees by accepting a reduction of management fees agreed to by at least two-thirds of our independent directors. Our Manager must be provided 180-days’ prior notice of any such termination. We may not terminate or elect not to renew the management agreement, even in the event of our Manager’s poor performance, without having to pay substantial termination fees. Upon any such termination without cause, the management agreement provides that we will pay our Manager a termination fee equal to three times the average annual management fee earned by our Manager during the prior 24-month period before termination, calculated as of the end of the most recently completed fiscal quarter. While under certain circumstances the obligation to make such a payment might not be enforceable, this provision may increase the cost to us of terminating the management agreement and adversely affect our ability to terminate our Manager without cause. These provisions may increase the cost to us of terminating the management agreement and adversely affect our ability to terminate our Manager without cause.

Our Manager may terminate the management agreement if we become required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act with termination deemed to occur immediately before such event, in which case we would not be required to pay a termination fee to our Manager. Furthermore, our Manager may decline to renew the management agreement by providing us with 180 days’ written notice, in which case we would not be required to pay a termination fee to our Manager. Our Manager may also terminate the management agreement upon at least 60 days’ prior written notice if we default in the performance of any material term of the management agreement and the default continues for a period of 30 days after written notice to us, whereupon we would be required to pay to our Manager the termination fee described above. If the management agreement is terminated and no suitable replacement is found to manage us, we may not be able to execute our business plan.

Depository institutions that finance our investments may require that AG REIT Management, LLC remain as our Manager under the management agreement and that certain key personnel of our Manager continue to service our business. If AG REIT Management, LLC ceases to be our Manager or one or more of our Manager’s key personnel are no longer servicing our business, it may constitute an event of default and the depository institution providing the arrangement may have acceleration rights with respect to outstanding borrowings and termination rights with respect to our ability to finance our future investments with that institution. If we are unable to obtain financing for our accelerated borrowings and for our future investments under such circumstances, we may be required to curtail our asset acquisitions and/or dispose of assets at an inopportune time.

Our Manager has waived its right to certain reimbursements pursuant to the management agreement. If our Manager decides in the future not to grant such waiver, our operating expenses would increase.

We are required to reimburse our Manager for operating expenses related to the Company that are incurred by our Manager, including expenses relating to legal, accounting, due diligence and other services. For the year ended December 31, 2012 and the period ended December 31, 2011, the Manager had incurred approximately $4.4 million and $1.9 million, respectively, of reimbursable expenses. The Company has expensed into Other operating expenses $2.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2012 and $0.0 million for the period ended December 31, 2011 and the Manager waived its right to receive the expense reimbursements of $2.2 million and $1.9 million, respectively. As such, our Other operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the period ended December 31, 2011 are lower than they otherwise would be, had our Manager not waived its right to certain reimbursements. If our Manager decides in the future not to grant such waiver, our operating expenses would increase and such increase may be substantial.

Risks related to our business

Increases in interest rates could adversely affect the value of our investments and cause our interest expense to increase, which could result in reduced earnings or losses and negatively affect our profitability as well as the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

We invest primarily in RMBS, as well as other assets such as CMBS, ABS and mortgage loans. In a normal yield curve environment, an investment in such assets will generally decline in value if long-term interest rates increase. Declines in market value may ultimately reduce earnings or result in losses to us, which may negatively affect cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

A significant risk associated with our target assets is the risk that both long-term and short-term interest rates will increase significantly. If long-term rates increase significantly, the market value of these investments will decline, and the duration and weighted average life of the investments will increase. We could realize a loss if the securities were sold. At the same time, an increase in short-term interest rates will increase the amount of interest owed on the repurchase agreements we enter into to finance the purchase of RMBS.

Market values of our investments may decline without any general increase in interest rates for a number of reasons, such as increases or expected increases in defaults, or increases or expected increases in voluntary prepayments for those investments that are subject to prepayment risk or widening of credit spreads.

In addition, in a period of rising interest rates, our operating results will depend in large part on the difference between the income from our assets and financing costs. We anticipate that, in most cases, the income from such assets will respond more slowly to interest rate fluctuations than the cost of our borrowings. Consequently, changes in interest rates, particularly short-term interest rates, may significantly influence our net income. Increases in these rates will tend to decrease our net income and market value of our assets.

As a result of difficult conditions in the financial markets and the economy generally, the risks to our business strategies are high and there are no assurances that we will be successful in implementing our business strategies.

The implementation of our business strategies may be materially affected by conditions in the mortgage market, the financial markets and the economy generally. Continuing concerns over inflation, energy costs, geopolitical issues, the availability and cost of credit, the mortgage market and a declining real estate market have contributed to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the economy and markets. The residential and commercial mortgage markets have been severely affected by changes in the lending landscape and there is no assurance that these conditions have stabilized or that they will not worsen. The severity of the liquidity limitation was largely unanticipated by the markets, and access to mortgages was and continues to be substantially limited. This has an impact on new demand for homes, which will compress the home ownership rates and weigh heavily on future home price performance. There is a strong correlation between home price growth rates and mortgage loan delinquencies.

A continuation or increase in the volatility and deterioration in the RMBS, CMBS and residential or commercial mortgage markets, or the broader ABS market may adversely affect our ability to acquire assets and implement our business strategy and our results of operation may be negatively impacted.  

Competition may limit the availability of desirable investments and result in reduced risk-adjusted returns.

Our profitability depends, in part, on our ability to acquire our targeted investments at favorable prices. We compete with other mortgage REITs, specialty finance companies, private funds, savings and loan associations, banks, mortgage bankers, insurance companies, mutual funds, institutional investors, investment banking firms, depository institutions, governmental bodies and other entities. These other entities increase competition for the available supply of mortgage assets suitable for purchase. Many of our anticipated competitors are significantly larger than we are and have stronger balance sheets and access to greater capital and other resources than we have and may have other advantages over us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments and may not be subject to the operating restraints associated with REIT tax compliance or maintenance of an exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than we can. Competition may result in fewer investments, higher prices, acceptance of greater risk, lower yields and a narrower spread of yields over our financing costs. In addition, competition for desirable investments could delay the investment of our capital, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. As a result, there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify and finance investments that are consistent with our investment objective or to achieve positive investment results or investment results that allow any or a specified level of distributions to our stockholders, and our failure to accomplish any of the foregoing would materially and adversely affect us.

We may change our investment and operational policies without stockholder consent, which may adversely affect the market value of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our board of directors determines our operational policies and may amend or revise such policies, including our policies with respect to our REIT qualification, acquisitions, dispositions, operations, indebtedness and distributions, or approve transactions that deviate from these policies, without a vote of, or notice to, our stockholders. Operational policy changes could adversely affect the market value of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We may also change our investment strategies and policies and target asset classes at any time without the consent of our stockholders, which could result in our making investments that are different in type from, and possibly riskier than, its current assets or the investments contemplated in this report. A change in our investment strategies and policies and target asset classes may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, default risk and real estate market fluctuations, which could adversely affect the market value of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.  

We are highly dependent on information systems and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.

Our business is highly dependent on the communications and information systems of our Manager. Any failure or interruption of these systems could cause delays or other problems in our securities trading activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows and negatively affect the market price of our common stock and ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

We may be affected by deficiencies in foreclosure practices of third parties, as well as related delays in the foreclosure process.

Recent announcements of deficiencies in foreclosure documentation by, among others, several large mortgage servicers have raised various concerns relating to foreclosure practices. A number of mortgage servicers have temporarily suspended foreclosure proceedings in some or all states in which they do business while they review and correct their foreclosure practices. In addition, a group consisting of state attorneys general and state bank and mortgage regulators in all 50 states and the District of Columbia has announced it is reviewing foreclosure practices in their various jurisdictions. The extension of foreclosure timelines increases the inventory backlog of distressed homes on the market and creates greater uncertainty about housing prices. Prior to making investments in RMBS, our Manager carefully considers many factors, including housing prices and foreclosure timelines, and estimate loss assumptions. The concerns about deficiencies in foreclosure practices of servicers and related delays in the foreclosure process may impact our loss assumptions and affect the values of, and our returns on, our investments in RMBS. The Manager is actively reviewing and monitoring the deficiencies and delays in the foreclosure process and assessing its potential impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Risks related to U.S. government programs

Although the immediate effect of “QE3” was an increase of Agency RMBS prices, there is no certainty as to what effect QE3 and other recently announced governmental actions might have in the future on the price and liquidity of the securities in which we invest. However, the confluence of such factors as QE3 and further governmental efforts to increase home loan refinancing opportunities could simultaneously raise Agency RMBS prices and increase prepayment activity, which could place downward pressure on our net interest margin.

On September 13, 2012, the U.S. Federal Reserve, or the Federal Reserve, announced a third round of quantitative easing, or QE3, which is an open-ended program designed to expand the Federal Reserve's holdings of long-term securities by purchasing an additional $40 billion of Agency RMBS per month until key economic indicators, such as the unemployment rate, show signs of improvement. When combined with programs to extend the average maturity of the Federal Reserve's holdings of securities, which is known as “Operation Twist” and described below, and reinvest principal and interest payments from the Federal Reserve's holdings of agency debt and Agency RMBS into Agency RMBS, QE3 was expected to increase the Federal Reserve's holdings of long-term securities by $85 billion each month through the end of 2012. The Federal Reserve also announced that it would keep the target range for the Federal Funds Rate between zero and 0.25% through at least mid-2015, which is six months longer than previously expected.

The Federal Reserve provided further guidance to the market in December 2012 by stating that it intended to keep the Federal Funds Rate close to zero while the unemployment rate is above 6.5% and as long as inflation does not rise above 2.5%. In December 2012, the Federal Reserve also announced that it would initially begin buying $45 billion of long-term Treasury bonds each month and noted that such amount may increase in the future. This bond purchase program replaced the program known as “Operation Twist,” in which the Federal Reserve repurchased approximately $45 billion of long-term Treasury bonds each month and sold approximately the same amount of short-term Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve expects these measures to put downward pressure on long-term interest rates.

The immediate impact of the announcement of QE3 was an increase in Agency RMBS prices. This effect was especially pronounced on Agency RMBS that the Federal Reserve was expected to target for acquisition under QE3. Since the initial price spike, prices for all but the target securities have receded below the price levels that existed before the announcement of QE3. We do not anticipate targeting for acquisition the same securities the Federal Reserve has targeted to date, although the securities targeted by the Federal Reserve could change. To the extent that the scope and effectiveness of government-sponsored refinancing programs increases, prepayments on our target securities could increase accordingly. The combination of higher prices and higher refinancing activity on our target securities could decrease our net interest margin. To the extent QE3 decreases the liquidity in the market of our target securities, which has yet to be the case, we might not be able to acquire the securities we target or acquire them in the quantities we desire.

The downgrade of the U.S.'s and certain European countries' credit ratings, any future downgrades of the U.S.'s and certain European countries' credit ratings and the failure to resolve issues related to the “fiscal cliff” and the U.S. debt ceiling may materially adversely affect our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

Recent U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns and the possibility that U.S. lawmakers may be unable to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” together with signs of deteriorating sovereign debt conditions in Europe, have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the U.S. Although U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling in 2011, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the U.S. from “AAA” to “AA+” in August 2011. The impact of any further downgrades to the U.S. Government's sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. In addition, some economists predict the U.S. economy could fall into recession if the U.S. Government fails to achieve a plan to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” which generally refers to certain tax increases and automatic spending cuts that were scheduled to become effective at the end of 2012. The U.S. Government adopted legislation in December 2012 to address the planned tax increases, but deferred many of the automatic spending cuts for two months. In January 2013 the U.S. Government adopted legislation to suspend the debt ceiling for three months. Further, Moody's and Fitch have each warned that they may downgrade the U.S. Government's rating if the federal debt is not stabilized. If the U.S.'s credit rating were downgraded it would likely impact the credit risk associated with Agency RMBS in our portfolio. A downgrade of the U.S. Government's credit rating or a default by the U.S. Government to satisfy its debt obligations likely would create broader financial turmoil and uncertainty, which would weigh heavily on the global banking system. Absent further quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve, these developments, along with the European sovereign debt crisis, could cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise and a reduction in the availability of credit, which may negatively impact the value of the assets in our portfolio, our net income, liquidity and our ability to finance our assets on favorable terms.

The federal conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and related efforts, along with any changes in laws and regulations affecting the relationship between these agencies and the U.S. government, may adversely affect our business.

The payments we receive on the Agency RMBS in which we invest depend upon a steady stream of payments on the mortgages underlying the securities and are guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Ginnie Mae is part of a U.S. Government agency and its guarantees are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are U.S. Government-sponsored entities, or GSEs, but their guarantees are not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.

Since 2007, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have reported substantial losses and a need for substantial amounts of additional capital. In response to the deteriorating financial condition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the recent credit market disruption, Congress and the U.S. Treasury undertook a series of actions to stabilize these GSEs and the financial markets, generally. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 was signed into law on July 30, 2008, and established the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or the FHFA, with enhanced regulatory authority over, among other things, the business activities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the size of their portfolio holdings. On September 7, 2008, in response to the deterioration in the financial condition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the FHFA placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship, which is a statutory process pursuant to which the FHFA will operate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as conservator in an effort to stabilize the entities. Together with the U.S. Treasury and the U.S. Federal Reserve, the FHA has undertaken actions designed to boost investor confidence in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, support the availability of mortgage financing and protect taxpayers. The appointment of the FHFA as conservator of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac allows the FHFA to control the actions of the two GSEs without forcing them to liquidate, which would be the case under receivership. In addition, the U.S. Treasury has taken steps to capitalize and provide financing to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and agreed to purchase direct obligations and Agency RMBS issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Shortly after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed in federal conservatorship, the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, in announcing the actions, noted that the guarantee structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac required examination and that changes in the structures of the entities were necessary to reduce risk to the financial system. The future roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be significantly reduced and the nature of their guarantees could be eliminated or considerably limited relative to historical measurements. Any changes to the nature of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could redefine what constitutes Agency RMBS and could have broad adverse market implications as well as negatively impact us.

The problems faced by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac resulting in their being placed into federal conservatorship have stirred debate among some federal policy makers regarding the continued role of the U.S. Government in providing liquidity for the residential mortgage market. If federal policy makers decide that the U.S. Government’s role in providing liquidity for the residential mortgage market should be reduced or eliminated, each of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be dissolved and the U.S. Government could decide to stop providing liquidity support of any kind to the mortgage market. If Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac were eliminated, or their structures were to change radically, we would not be able to acquire Agency RMBS from these companies, which would drastically reduce the amount and type of Agency RMBS available for investment.

Our income could be negatively affected in a number of ways depending on the manner in which related events unfold. For example, the current credit support provided by the U.S. Treasury to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and any additional credit support it may provide in the future, could have the effect of lowering the interest rate we receive from Agency RMBS, thereby tightening the spread between the interest we earn on our portfolio of targeted investments and our cost of financing that portfolio. A reduction in the supply of Agency RMBS could also increase the prices of Agency RMBS we seek to acquire thereby reducing the spread between the interest we earn on our portfolio of targeted assets and our cost of financing that portfolio.

As indicated above, recent legislation has changed the relationship between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the U.S. Government and requires Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce the amount of mortgage loans they own or for which they provide guarantees on Agency RMBS. The effect of the actions taken by the U.S. Government remains uncertain. Furthermore, the scope and nature of the actions that the U.S. Government will ultimately undertake are unknown and will continue to evolve. Future legislation could further change the relationship between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the U.S. Government, and could also nationalize or eliminate these GSEs entirely. Any law affecting these GSEs may create market uncertainty and have the effect of reducing the actual or perceived credit quality of securities issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. As a result, such laws could increase the risk of loss on investments in Fannie Mae and/or Freddie Mac Agency RMBS. It is also possible that such laws could adversely impact the market for such securities and the spreads at which they trade. All of the foregoing could materially adversely affect the pricing, supply, liquidity and value of our target assets and otherwise materially adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition.

Mortgage loan modification and refinancing programs and future legislative action may adversely affect the value of, and our returns on, mortgage-backed securities.

The U.S. government, through the Federal Reserve, the Federal Housing Administration (or the FHA) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, has implemented a number of federal programs designed to assist homeowners, including the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, which provides homeowners with assistance in avoiding residential mortgage loan foreclosures, the Hope for Homeowners Program (or H4H Program), which allows certain distressed borrowers to refinance their mortgages into FHA-insured loans in order to avoid residential mortgage loan foreclosures, and the Home Affordable Refinance Program, which allows borrowers who are current on their mortgage payments to refinance and reduce their monthly mortgage payments at loan-to-value ratios up to 125% without new mortgage insurance.

As recently as the State of the Union Address in January 2013, President Obama urged Congress to adopt additional legislation to further assist homeowners, including those whose mortgages exceed the value of their homes, to refinance their mortgages and reduce the principal and interest payments on their mortgages. HAMP, the H4H Program and other loss mitigation programs may involve, among other things, the modification of mortgage loans to reduce the principal amount of the loans (through forbearance and/or forgiveness) and/or the rate of interest payable on the loans, or to extend the payment terms of the loans. Especially with Non-Agency RMBS, a significant number of loan modifications with respect to a given security, including, but not limited to, those related to principal forgiveness and coupon reduction, could negatively impact the realized yields and cash flows on such security. These loan modification programs, future legislative or regulatory actions, including possible amendments to the bankruptcy laws, which result in the modification of outstanding residential mortgage loans, as well as changes in the requirements necessary to qualify for refinancing mortgage loans with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, may adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, mortgage-backed securities that we may purchase.

We are subject to the risk that agencies of and entities sponsored by the U.S. government may not be able to fully satisfy their guarantees of Agency RMBS or that these guarantee obligations may be repudiated, which may adversely affect the value of our investment portfolio and our ability to sell or finance these securities.

The interest and principal payments we receive on the Agency RMBS are guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae. Unlike the Ginnie Mae certificates in which we may invest, the principal and interest on securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not guaranteed by the U.S. government. All the Agency RMBS in which we invest depend on a steady stream of payments on the mortgages underlying the securities.

As conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, FHFA may disaffirm or repudiate contracts (subject to certain limitations for qualified financial contracts) that Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae entered into prior to FHFA’s appointment as conservator if it determines, in its sole discretion, that performance of the contract is burdensome and that disaffirmation or repudiation of the contract promotes the orderly administration of its affairs. The HERA requires FHFA to exercise its right to disaffirm or repudiate most contracts within a reasonable period of time after its appointment as conservator. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have disclosed that the FHFA has disaffirmed certain consulting and other contracts that these entities entered into prior to FHFA’s appointment as conservator. Freddie Mae and Fannie Mae have also disclosed that the FHFA has advised that it does not intend to repudiate any guarantee obligation relating to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s mortgage-related securities, because FHFA views repudiation as incompatible with the goals of the conservatorship. In addition, the HERA provides that mortgage loans and mortgage-related assets that have been transferred to a Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae securitization trust must be held for the beneficial owners of the related mortgage-related securities, and cannot be used to satisfy the general creditors of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae.

If the guarantee obligations of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae were repudiated by FHFA, payments of principal and/or interest to holders of Agency RMBS issued by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae would be reduced in the event of any borrowers’ late payments or failure to pay or a servicer’s failure to remit borrower payments to the trust. In that case, trust administration and servicing fees could be paid from mortgage payments prior to distributions to holders of Agency RMBS. Any actual direct compensatory damages owed due to the repudiation of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae’s guarantee obligations may not be sufficient to offset any shortfalls experienced by holders of Agency RMBS. FHFA also has the right to transfer or sell any asset or liability of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, including its guarantee obligation, without any approval, assignment or consent. If FHFA were to transfer Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae’s guarantee obligations to another party, holders of Agency RMBS would have to rely on that party for satisfaction of the guarantee obligation and would be exposed to the credit risk of that party.

We cannot predict the impact, if any, on our earnings or cash available for distribution to our stockholders of the FHFA's proposed revisions to Fannie Mae's, Freddie Mac's and Ginnie Mae's existing infrastructures to align the standards and practices of the three entities.

On February 21, 2012, the FHFA released its Strategic Plan for Enterprise Conservatorships , which set forth three goals for the next phase of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac conservatorships. These three goals are to (i) build a new infrastructure for the secondary mortgage market, (ii) gradually contract Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's presence in the marketplace while simplifying and shrinking their operations, and (iii) maintain foreclosure prevention activities and credit availability for new and refinanced mortgages. On October 4, 2012, the FHFA released its white paper entitled Building a New Infrastructure for the Secondary Mortgage Market , which proposes a new infrastructure for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that has two basic goals.

The first such goal is to replace the current, outdated infrastructures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with a common, more efficient infrastructure that aligns the standards and practices of the two entities, beginning with core functions performed by both entities such as issuance, master servicing, bond administration, collateral management and data integration. The second goal is to establish an operating framework for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that is consistent with the progress of housing finance reform and encourages and accommodates the increased participation of private capital in assuming credit risk associated with the secondary mortgage market.

The FHFA recognizes that there are a number of impediments to their goals which may or may not be surmountable, such as the absence of any significant secondary mortgage market mechanisms beyond Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, and that their proposals are in the formative stages. As a result, it is unclear if the proposals will be enacted. If such proposals are enacted, it is unclear how closely what is enacted will resemble the proposals from the FHFA White Paper or what the effects of the enactment will be in terms of our net asset value, earnings or cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Risks related to financing and hedging

We may incur significant debt in the future, which will subject us to increased risk of loss and may reduce cash available for distributions to our stockholders.

Subject to market conditions and availability, we may further increase our debt in the future. We use leverage to finance our assets through borrowings from repurchase agreements and other secured and unsecured forms of borrowing. Although we are not required to maintain any particular assets-to-equity leverage ratio, the amount of leverage we deploy for particular assets depends upon our Manager’s assessment of the credit and other risks of those assets. Our board of directors may establish and change our leverage policy at any time without stockholder approval. In addition, we may leverage individual assets at substantially higher levels. Incurring debt could subject us to many risks that, if realized, would materially and adversely affect us, including the risk that:

Interest rate fluctuations could significantly decrease our results of operations and cash flows and the market value of our investments.

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. Interest rate fluctuations present a variety of risks to our operations. Our primary interest rate exposures relate to the yield on our investments and the financing cost of our debt, as well as any interest rate swaps that we utilize for hedging purposes. Changes in interest rates will affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest-earning investments and the interest expense we incur in financing these investments. Interest rate fluctuations resulting in our interest expense exceeding interest income will result in operating losses for us. Changes in the level of interest rates also may affect our ability to invest in investments, the value of our investments and our ability to realize gains from the disposition of assets. Changes in interest rates may also affect borrower default rates and may impact the ability to refinance or modify loans and/or to sell real estate assets owned.

Most of our financing costs are determined by reference to floating rates, such as LIBOR or a Treasury index, plus a margin, the amount of which will depend on a number of factors, including, without limitation, (i) for collateralized debt, the value and liquidity of the collateral, and for non-collateralized debt, our credit, (ii) the level and movement of interest rates and (iii) general market conditions and liquidity. In a period of rising interest rates, our interest expense on floating-rate debt would increase, while any additional interest income we earn on our floating-rate investments may not compensate for such increase in interest expense, the interest income we earn on our fixed-rate investments would not change, the duration and weighted average life of our fixed-rate investments would increase and the market value of our fixed-rate investments would decrease. Similarly, in a period of declining interest rates, our interest income on floating-rate investments would decrease, while any decrease in the interest we are charged on our floating-rate debt may not compensate for such decrease in interest income and interest we are charged on our fixed-rate debt would not change. Any such scenario could materially and adversely affect us.

Our operating results depend, in large part, on differences between the income earned on our investments, net of credit losses, and our financing costs. We anticipate that, in most cases, for any period during which our investments are not match-funded, the income earned on such investments will respond more slowly to interest rate fluctuations than the cost of our borrowings. Consequently, changes in interest rates, particularly short-term interest rates, may immediately and significantly decrease our results of operations and cash flows and the market value of our investments.

We depend, and may in the future depend, on repurchase agreement financing to acquire RMBS and other ABS, and our inability to access this funding could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and business.

We use repurchase agreement financing as a strategy to increase the return on our assets. However, we may not be able to achieve our desired leverage ratio for a number of reasons, including if the following events occur:

Our ability to fund our purchases of RMBS and other ABS may be impacted by our ability to secure repurchase agreement financing on acceptable terms. We can provide no assurance that lenders will be willing or able to provide us with sufficient financing. In addition, because repurchase agreements represent commitments of capital, lenders may respond to market conditions by making it more difficult for us to secure continued financing. During certain periods of the credit cycle, lenders may curtail their willingness to provide duel financing.

If major market participants exit the repurchase agreement financing business, the value of our RMBS and other ABS could be negatively impacted, thus reducing net stockholder equity, or book value. Furthermore, if many of our lenders or potential lenders are unwilling or unable to provide us with repurchase agreement financing, we could be forced to sell our RMBS and other ABS assets at an inopportune time when prices are depressed.

In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us. Our lenders also may revise their eligibility requirements for the types of assets they are willing to finance or the terms of such financings, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of perceived risk, particularly with respect to assignee liability.

Moreover, the amount of financing we receive, or may in the future receive, under our repurchase agreements is directly related to the lenders’ valuation of the RMBS and other ABS that secure the outstanding borrowings. If we are unable to access or maintain financing for our RMBS and other assets, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, business and liquidity.

Our current lenders require, and future lenders may require, us to enter into restrictive covenants relating to our operations.

As of December 31, 2012, we have entered into MRAs with 30 counterparties, under which we have borrowed an aggregate $3.9 billion from 29 counterparties. As of December 31, 2012, the borrowings under repurchase agreements have maturities between January 2, 2013 and June 17, 2013. These agreements generally include customary representations, warranties and covenants, but may also contain more restrictive supplemental terms and conditions. Although specific to each master repurchase agreement, typical supplemental terms include requirements of minimum equity, leverage ratios, performance triggers or other financial ratios. If we fail to meet or satisfy any covenants, supplemental terms or representations and warranties, we would be in default under these agreements and our lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their respective interests against collateral pledged under such agreements and restrict our ability to make additional borrowings. Certain financing agreements may contain cross-default provisions, so that if a default occurs under any one agreement, the lenders under our other agreements could also declare a default. Further, under our repurchase agreements, we may be required to pledge additional assets to our lenders in the event the estimated fair value of the existing pledged collateral under such agreements declines and such lenders demand additional collateral, which may take the form of additional securities or cash.

Future lenders may impose similar restrictions on us that would affect our ability to incur additional debt, make certain investments or acquisitions, reduce liquidity below certain levels, make distributions to our stockholders, redeem debt or equity securities and impact our flexibility to determine our operating policies and investment strategies. For example, our loan documents may contain negative covenants that limit, among other things, our ability to repurchase our common stock, distribute more than a certain amount of our net income or funds from operations to our stockholders, employ leverage beyond certain amounts, sell assets, engage in mergers or consolidations, grant liens and enter into transactions with affiliates. If we fail to meet or satisfy any of these covenants, we would be in default under these agreements, and our lenders could elect to declare outstanding amounts due and payable, terminate their commitments, require the posting of additional collateral and enforce their interests against existing collateral. We may also be subject to cross-default and acceleration rights and, with respect to collateralized debt, the posting of additional collateral and foreclosure rights upon default. Further, this could also make it difficult for us to satisfy the qualification requirements necessary to maintain our status as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

In the event non-recourse long-term financing structures become available to us in the future, such structures may expose us to risks which could result in losses to us.

In such structures, our lenders typically would not have a general claim against us as an entity, as opposed to the assets themselves. We also may finance our investments on a long-term basis through issuances of equity and non-collateralized debt in the capital markets or otherwise, to the extent such financing is available. We may utilize these financing structures if and when they become available. Generally, we seek to finance our investments with relatively short-term facilities until a sufficient portfolio is accumulated. We also bear the risk that we will not be able to obtain new short-term facilities or will not be able to renew any short-term facilities after they expire should we need more time to seek and acquire sufficient eligible assets or securities for a securitization. In addition, conditions in the capital markets may not permit a non-recourse securitization at any particular time or may make the issuance of any such securitization less attractive to us even when we do have sufficient eligible assets or securities. Our inability to refinance any short-term facilities would also increase our risk because borrowings thereunder would likely be recourse to us as an entity. If we are unable to obtain and renew short-term facilities or to consummate securitizations to finance our investments on a long-term basis, we may be required to seek other forms of potentially less attractive financing or to liquidate assets at an inopportune time or price.

If a counterparty to our repurchase transactions defaults on its obligation to resell the underlying security back to us at the end of the transaction term, or if the value of the underlying security has declined as of the end of that term, or if we default on our obligations under the repurchase agreement, we will lose money on our repurchase transactions.

When we engage in repurchase transactions, we generally sell securities to lenders (i.e., repurchase agreement counterparties) and receive cash from the lenders. The lenders are obligated to resell the same securities back to us at the end of the term of the transaction. Because the cash we receive from lenders when we initially sell the securities to the lender is less than the value of those securities (this difference is the haircut), if the lender defaults on its obligation to resell the same securities back to us we may incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming there was no change in the value of the securities). We will also lose money on a repurchase transaction if the value of the underlying securities has declined as of the end of the transaction term, as we will have to repurchase the securities for their initial value but will receive securities worth less than that amount. Further, if we default on one of our obligations under a repurchase transaction, the lender will be able to terminate the transaction and cease entering into any other repurchase transactions with us. If a default occurs under any of our repurchase agreements and the lenders terminate one or more of our repurchase agreements, we may need to enter into replacement repurchase agreements with different lenders. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in entering into such replacement repurchase agreements on the same terms as the repurchase agreements that were terminated or at all. Any losses we incur on our repurchase transactions could adversely affect our earnings and thus our cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Our use or future use of repurchase agreements to finance our RMBS, ABS and CMBS may give our lenders greater rights in the event that either we or a lender files for bankruptcy.

Our borrowings or future borrowings under repurchase agreements for our RMBS and other ABS may qualify for special treatment under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, giving our lenders the ability to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and to take possession of and liquidate the assets that we have pledged under their repurchase agreements without delay in the event that we file for bankruptcy. Furthermore, the special treatment of repurchase agreements under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code may make it difficult for us to recover our pledged assets in the event that a lender party to such agreement files for bankruptcy. Therefore, our use of repurchase agreements to finance our investments exposes our pledged assets to risk in the event of a bankruptcy filing by either a lender or us.

 The repurchase agreements that we use to finance our investments may require us to provide additional collateral and may restrict us from leveraging our assets as fully as desired.

We use repurchase agreements to finance our acquisition of RMBS and other ABS. If the market value of the RMBS and other ABS pledged or sold by us to a financing institution declines, we may be required by the financing institution to provide additional collateral or pay down a portion of the funds advanced, but we may not have the funds available to do so, which could result in defaults. Posting additional collateral to support our credit will reduce our liquidity and limit our ability to leverage our assets, which could adversely affect our business. In the event we do not have sufficient liquidity to meet such requirements, financing institutions can accelerate repayment of our indebtedness, increase interest rates, liquidate our collateral or terminate our ability to borrow. Additionally, in order to obtain cash to satisfy a margin call, we may be required to liquidate assets at a disadvantageous time, which could cause us to incur further losses and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Such a situation would likely result in a rapid deterioration of our financial condition and possibly necessitate a filing for bankruptcy protection.

Further, financial institutions providing the repurchase facilities may require us to maintain a certain amount of cash uninvested or to set aside non-levered assets sufficient to maintain a specified liquidity position which would allow us to satisfy our collateral obligations. As a result, we may not be able to leverage our assets as fully as we would choose, which could reduce our return on equity. If we are unable to meet these collateral obligations, our financial condition could deteriorate rapidly.

Hedging against interest rate exposure may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our exemption under the Investment Company Act, we pursue hedging strategies to reduce our exposure to adverse changes in interest rates. Our hedging activity will vary in scope based on the level of interest rates, the type of investments held, and other changing market conditions. Interest rate hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things:

In addition, we may fail to recalculate, re-adjust and execute hedges in an efficient manner.

Our hedging activities, which are intended to limit losses, may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions seeking to reduce interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in hedging strategies and price movements in the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged may vary materially. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss.

We may enter into hedging transactions that could expose us to contingent liabilities in the future.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, part of our investment strategy involves entering into hedging transactions that could require us to fund cash payments in certain circumstances (such as the early termination of the hedging instrument caused by an event of default or other early termination event, or the decision by a counterparty to request margin securities it is contractually owed under the terms of the hedging instrument). The amount due would be equal to the unrealized loss of the open swap positions with the respective counterparty and could also include other fees and charges. These economic losses will be reflected in our results of operations, and our ability to fund these obligations will depend on the liquidity of our assets and access to capital at the time, and the need to fund these obligations could adversely impact our financial condition.

Hedging instruments often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities and involve risks and costs that could result in material losses.

The cost of using hedging instruments increases as the period covered by the instrument increases and during periods of rising and volatile interest rates. We may increase our hedging activity and thus increase our hedging costs during periods when interest rates are volatile or rising and hedging costs have increased. In addition, hedging instruments involve risk since they often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities. Consequently, there are no requirements with respect to record keeping, financial responsibility or segregation of customer funds and positions. Furthermore, the enforceability of agreements underlying derivative transactions may depend on compliance with applicable statutory, commodity and other regulatory requirements and, depending on the identity of the counterparty, applicable international requirements. The business failure of a hedging counterparty with whom we enter into a hedging transaction will most likely result in a default. Default by a party with whom we enter into a hedging transaction may result in the loss of unrealized profits and force us to cover our resale commitments, if any, at the then current market price. Although generally we seek to reserve the right to terminate our hedging positions, it may not always be possible to dispose of or close out a hedging position without the consent of the hedging counterparty, and we may not be able to enter into an offsetting contract in order to cover our risk. No assurance can be given that a liquid secondary market will exist for derivative instruments purchased or sold, and we may be required to maintain a position until exercise or expiration, which could result in significant losses.

Risks related to our investments

Difficult conditions in the residential real estate market may cause us to experience market losses related to our holdings.

Our results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the mortgage market, the residential and commercial real estate markets, the financial markets and the economy generally. Recently, concerns about the mortgage market and a declining real estate market, as well as inflation, energy costs, geopolitical issues and the availability and cost of credit, have contributed to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the economy and markets going forward. The mortgage market has been severely affected by changes in the lending landscape and there is no assurance that these conditions have stabilized or that they will not worsen. The disruption in the mortgage market has an impact on new demand for homes, which will compress home ownership rates and weigh heavily on future home price performance. There is a strong correlation between home price growth rates and mortgage loan delinquencies. The further deterioration of the Non-Agency or Agency RMBS market may cause us to experience losses related to our assets and to sell assets at a loss. Declines in the market values of our investments may adversely affect our results of operations and credit availability, which may reduce earnings and, in turn, cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

A substantial portion of our assets are reported for accounting purposes at fair value. Changes in the market values of those assets are directly charged or credited to earnings for the period. As a result, a decline in values will reduce the book value of our Company.

A decline in the market value of our assets may adversely affect us, particularly in instances where we have borrowed money based on the market value of those assets. If the market value of those assets declines, the lender may require us to post additional collateral to support the loan. If we were unable to post the additional collateral, we would have to sell the assets at a time when we might not otherwise choose to do so. A reduction in credit available may reduce our earnings and, in turn, cash available for distribution to stockholders.

We may not realize gains or income from our investments and we may experience a decline in the market value of our assets.

We seek to generate both current income and capital appreciation from our investments. In some cases, our investments are not rated by any rating agency. Therefore, our Manager’s assessment of the value, and therefore pricing, of our investments is very difficult and their accuracy is inherently uncertain. Furthermore, our investments may not appreciate in value and, in fact, may decline in value. In addition, the obligors on our investments may default on, or be delayed in making, interest and/or principal payments. Accordingly, we are subject to an increased risk of loss and may not be able to realize gains or income from our investments. Any gains that we do realize may not be sufficient to offset our losses and expenses.

We may acquire Non-Agency RMBS collateralized by subprime and Alt-A mortgage loans, which are subject to increased risks.

The mortgage and other loans underlying the Non-Agency RMBS that we acquire are subject to defaults, foreclosure timeline extension, fraud, residential price depreciation and unfavorable modification of loan principal amount, interest rate and amortization of principal, which could result in losses to us. Residential mortgage loans are secured by single family residential property and, when not guaranteed by an agency, are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by a residential property typically is dependent upon the income or assets of the borrower. A number of factors, including a general economic downturn, acts of nature, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, may impair borrowers’ abilities to repay their loans. In the event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we bear a risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow from operations. In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan borrower, the mortgage loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor in possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process, which could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan.

The mortgage loans that we acquire, the mortgages underlying the RMBS that we acquire, the commercial mortgage loans underlying the CMBS that we acquire and the assets underlying the ABS are all subject to defaults, foreclosure timeline extension, fraud, price depreciation and unfavorable modification of loan principal amount, interest rate and premium, any of which could result in losses to us.

In the event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we bear a risk of loss of principal to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal and accrued interest of the mortgage loan, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow from operations. In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan borrower, the mortgage loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor in possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process which could have a substantial negative effect on our anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan.

Residential mortgage loans are secured by single family residential property and are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by a residential property typically is dependent upon the income or assets of the borrower. A number of factors, including a general economic downturn, acts of God, terrorism, social unrest and civil disturbances, may impair borrowers’ abilities to repay their loans. In addition, we acquire Non-Agency RMBS, which are backed by residential real property but, in contrast to Agency RMBS, their principal and interest are not guaranteed by federally-chartered entities such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and, in the case of Ginnie Mae, the U.S. government. The ability of a borrower to repay these loans or other financial assets is dependent upon the income or assets of these borrowers.

Our investments in RMBS are subject to the risks of defaults, foreclosure timeline extension, fraud and home price depreciation and unfavorable modification of loan principal amount, interest rate and amortization of principal, accompanying the underlying residential mortgage loans. The ability of a borrower to repay a mortgage loan secured by a residential property is dependent upon the income or assets of the borrower. A number of factors may impair borrowers’ abilities to repay their loans, including:

In the event of defaults on the residential mortgage loans that underlie our investments in RMBS and the exhaustion of any underlying or any additional credit support, we may not realize our anticipated return on our investments and we may incur a loss on these investments.

CMBS are secured by a single commercial mortgage loan or a pool of commercial mortgage loans. Accordingly, the CMBS we invest in are subject to all of the risks of the respective underlying commercial mortgage loans. Commercial mortgage loans are secured by multifamily or commercial property and are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure, and risks of loss that are greater than similar risks associated with loans made on the security of single-family residential property. The ability of a borrower to repay a loan secured by an income-producing property typically is dependent primarily upon the successful operation of such property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Net operating income of an income-producing property can be affected by, among other things,

The failure of servicers to effectively service the mortgage loans underlying the RMBS in our portfolio or any mortgage loans we own would materially and adversely affect us.

Most residential mortgage loans and securitizations of residential mortgage loans require a servicer to manage collections on each of the underlying loans. Both default frequency and default severity of loans may depend upon the quality of the servicer. If servicers are not vigilant in encouraging borrowers to make their monthly payments, the borrowers may be far less likely to make these payments, which could result in a higher frequency of default. If servicers take longer to liquidate non-performing assets, loss severities may tend to be higher than originally anticipated. Higher loss severity may also be caused by less competent dispositions of REO properties. The failure of servicers to effectively service the mortgage loans underlying the RMBS in our portfolio or any mortgage loans we own could negatively impact the value of our investments and our performance. Servicer quality is of prime importance in the default performance of residential mortgage loans and RMBS. Many servicers have gone out of business in recent years, requiring a transfer of servicing to another servicer. This transfer takes time and loans may become delinquent because of confusion or lack of attention. When servicing is transferred, servicing fees may increase which may have an adverse effect on the credit support of RMBS held by us. In the case of pools of securitized loans, servicers may be required to advance interest on delinquent loans to the extent the servicer deems those advances recoverable. In the event the servicer does not advance, interest may be interrupted even on more senior securities. Servicers may also advance more than is in fact recoverable once a defaulted loan is disposed, and the loss to the trust may be greater than the outstanding principal balance of that loan (greater than 100% loss severity).

We may not control the special servicing of the mortgage loans included in the CMBS in which we invest and, in such cases, the special servicer may take actions that could adversely affect our interests.

With respect to each series of CMBS in which we invest, overall control over the special servicing of the related underlying mortgage loans is held by a “directing certificateholder” or a “controlling class representative,” which is appointed by the holders of the most subordinate class of CMBS in such series. Depending on the class of CMBS we have acquired or may acquire, we may not have the right to appoint the directing certificateholder. In connection with the servicing of the specially serviced mortgage loans, the related special servicer may, at the direction of the directing certificateholder, take actions with respect to the specially serviced mortgage loans that could adversely affect our interests.

If our Manager overestimates the loss-adjusted yields of our CMBS investments, we may experience losses.

Our Manager values our potential CMBS investments based on loss-adjusted yields, taking into account estimated future losses on the mortgage loans included in the securitization’s pool of loans, and the estimated impact of these losses on expected future cash flows. Our Manager’s loss estimates may not prove accurate, as actual results may vary from estimates. In the event that our Manager underestimates the pool level losses relative to the price we pay for a particular CMBS investment, we may experience losses with respect to such investment.

Our mezzanine loan assets involve greater risks of loss than senior loans secured by income-producing properties.

We may acquire mezzanine loans, which take the form of subordinated loans secured by second mortgages on the underlying property or loans secured by a pledge of the ownership interests of either the entity owning the property or a pledge of the ownership interests of the entity that owns the interest in the entity owning the property. These types of assets involve a higher degree of risk than long-term senior mortgage lending secured by income-producing real property, because the loan may become unsecured as a result of foreclosure by the senior lender. In the event of a bankruptcy of the entity providing the pledge of its ownership interests as security, we may not have full recourse to the assets of such entity, or the assets of the entity may not be sufficient to satisfy our mezzanine loan. If a borrower defaults on our mezzanine loan or debt senior to our loan, or in the event of a borrower bankruptcy, our mezzanine loan will be satisfied only after the senior debt. As a result, we may not recover some or all of our initial expenditure. In addition, mezzanine loans may have higher loan-to-value ratios than conventional mortgage loans, resulting in less equity in the property and increasing the risk of loss of principal. Significant losses related to our mezzanine loans would result in operating losses for us and may limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Bridge loans involve a greater risk of loss than traditional investment grade mortgage loans with fully insured borrowers.

We may acquire bridge loans secured by first lien mortgages on a property to borrowers who are typically seeking short-term capital to be used in an acquisition, construction or redevelopment of a property. The borrower has usually identified an undervalued asset that has been under-managed and/or is located in a recovering market. If the market in which the asset is located fails to recover according to the borrower’s projections, or if the borrower fails to improve the quality of the asset’s management and/or the value of the asset, the borrower may not receive a sufficient return on the asset to satisfy the bridge loan, and we bear the risk that we may not recover some or all of our initial expenditure.

In addition, borrowers usually use the proceeds of a conventional mortgage to repay a bridge loan. Bridge loans therefore are subject to risks of a borrower’s inability to obtain permanent financing to repay the bridge loan. Bridge loans are also subject to risks of borrower defaults, bankruptcies, fraud, losses and special hazard losses that are not covered by standard hazard insurance. In the event of any default under bridge loans held by us, we bear the risk of loss of principal and non-payment of interest and fees to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the mortgage collateral and the principal amount of the bridge loan. To the extent we suffer such losses with respect to our bridge loans, the value of our Company and the price of our shares of common stock may be adversely affected.

An increase in interest rates may cause a decrease in the volume of certain of our target assets which could adversely affect our ability to acquire target assets that satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income and pay dividends.

Rising interest rates generally reduce the demand for mortgage loans due to the higher cost of borrowing. A reduction in the volume of mortgage loans originated may affect the volume of our target assets available to us, which could adversely affect our ability to acquire assets that satisfy our investment objectives. Rising interest rates may also cause our target assets that were issued prior to an interest rate increase to provide yields that are below prevailing market interest rates. If rising interest rates cause us to be unable to acquire a sufficient volume of our target assets with a yield that is above our borrowing cost, our ability to satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income and pay dividends may be materially and adversely affected.

The relationship between short-term and longer-term interest rates is often referred to as the “yield curve.” Ordinarily, short-term interest rates are lower than longer-term interest rates. If short-term interest rates rise disproportionately relative to longer-term interest rates (a flattening of the yield curve), our borrowing costs may increase more rapidly than the interest income earned on our assets. Because we expect our investments, on average, generally will bear interest based on longer-term rates than our borrowings, a flattening of the yield curve would tend to decrease our net income and the market value of our net assets. Additionally, to the extent cash flows from investments that return scheduled and unscheduled principal are reinvested, the spread between the yields on the new investments and available borrowing rates may decline, which would likely decrease our net income. It is also possible that short-term interest rates may exceed longer-term interest rates (a yield curve inversion), in which event our borrowing costs may exceed our interest income and we could incur operating losses.

Recent market conditions may upset the historical relationship between interest rate changes and prepayment trends, which would make it more difficult for us to analyze our investment portfolio.

Our success depends on our ability to analyze the relationship of changing interest rates on prepayments of the mortgage loans that underlie our Non-Agency RMBS and mortgage loans we acquire. Changes in interest rates and prepayments affect the market price of our target assets. As part of our overall portfolio risk management, we analyze interest rate changes and prepayment trends separately and collectively to assess their effects on our investment portfolio. In conducting our analysis, we depend on certain assumptions based upon historical trends with respect to the relationship between interest rates and prepayments under normal market conditions. If the recent dislocations in the mortgage market or other developments change the way that prepayment trends have historically responded to interest rate changes, our ability to (1) assess the market value of our investment portfolio, (2) implement our hedging strategies and (3) implement techniques to reduce our prepayment rate volatility will be significantly affected, which could materially adversely affect our financial position and results of operations.

Interest rate mismatches between our RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs and our borrowings used to fund our purchases of these assets may reduce our net interest income and cause us to suffer a loss during periods of rising interest rates.

We fund most of our investments in long term RMBS with short term borrowings that have interest rates that adjust more frequently than the interest rate indices and repricing terms of RMBS backed by adjustable-rate mortgages, or ARMs or hybrid ARMs. Accordingly, if short-term interest rates increase, our borrowing costs may increase faster than the interest rates on RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs adjust. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, we could experience a decrease in net income or a net loss.

In most cases, the interest rate indices and repricing terms of RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs and our borrowings are not identical, thereby potentially creating an interest rate mismatch between our investments and our borrowings. While the historical spread between relevant short-term interest rate indices has been relatively stable, there have been periods when the spread between these indices was volatile. During periods of changing interest rates, these interest rate index mismatches could reduce our net income or produce a net loss, and adversely affect the level of our dividends and the market price of our common stock.

In addition, RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs are typically subject to lifetime interest rate caps which limit the amount an interest rate can increase through the maturity of the RMBS. However, our borrowings under repurchase agreements typically are not subject to similar restrictions. Accordingly, in a period of rapidly increasing interest rates, the interest rates paid on our borrowings could increase without limitation while caps could limit the interest rates on these types of RMBS. This problem is magnified for RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs that are not fully indexed. Further, some RMBS backed by ARMs or hybrid ARMs may be subject to periodic payment caps that result in a portion of the interest being deferred and added to the principal outstanding. As a result, we may receive less cash income on these types of RMBS than we need to pay interest on our related borrowings. These factors could reduce our net interest income and cause us to suffer a loss during periods of rising interest rates.

Because we acquire fixed-rate securities, an increase in interest rates on our borrowings may adversely affect our book value.

Increases in interest rates may negatively affect the market value of our assets. Any fixed-rate securities we invest in generally will be more negatively affected by these increases than adjustable-rate securities. In accordance with accounting rules, we are required to reduce our book value by the amount of any decrease in the market value of our assets that are classified for accounting purposes as available-for-sale. We are required to evaluate our assets on a quarterly basis to determine their fair value by using third-party bid price indications provided by dealers who make markets in these securities or by third-party pricing services. If the fair value of a security is not available from a dealer or third-party pricing service, we estimate the fair value of the security using a variety of methods including, but not limited to, discounted cash flow analysis, matrix pricing, option-adjusted spread models and fundamental analysis. Aggregate characteristics taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, type of collateral, index, margin, periodic cap, lifetime cap, underwriting standards, age and delinquency experience. However, the fair value reflects estimates and may not be indicative of the amounts we would receive in a current market exchange. If we determine that a security on which we have not made a mark to market election is other-than-temporarily impaired, and we do not intend to sell and it is not more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security, we would reduce the value of such security on our balance sheet by recording an impairment charge in our statement of operations.

Rapid changes in the values of our residential mortgage loans and other real estate-related assets may make it more difficult for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT or exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act.

If the market value or income potential of our residential mortgage loans and other real estate-related assets declines as a result of increased interest rates, prepayment rates or other factors, we may need to increase certain real estate investments and income and/or liquidate our non-qualifying assets in order to maintain our REIT qualification or exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act. If the decline in real estate asset values and/or income occurs quickly, this may be especially difficult to accomplish. This difficulty may be exacerbated by the illiquid nature of our investments. We may have to make investment decisions that we otherwise would not make absent our REIT and Investment Company Act considerations.

Changes in prepayment rates could negatively affect the value of our investment portfolio, which could result in reduced earnings or losses and negatively affect the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

The value of our investment portfolio may be affected by prepayment rates on mortgage loans. Many loans do not contain any restrictions on borrowers’ abilities to prepay their residential mortgage loans and therefore actual maturities of Agency RMBS are generally shorter than their stated contractual maturities. Prepayment rates on loans are influenced by changes in market interest rates and a variety of economic, geographic and other factors beyond our control. Consequently, we cannot predict with certainty such prepayment rates, and no strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment or other such risks. Homeowners tend to prepay mortgage loans faster when interest rates decline. Consequently, owners of the loans have to reinvest the money received from the prepayments at the lower prevailing interest rates. Conversely, homeowners tend not to prepay mortgage loans when interest rates increase. Consequently, owners of the loans are unable to reinvest money that would have otherwise been received from prepayments at the higher prevailing interest rates. This volatility in prepayment rates may affect our ability to maintain targeted amounts of leverage on our portfolio and may result in reduced earnings or losses for us and negatively affect the cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Many residential mortgage loans do not contain any restrictions on borrowers’ abilities to prepay their loans and therefore actual maturities of Agency RMBS are generally shorter than their stated contractual maturities. Interest only Agency RMBS only entitle the holder to interest payments. Therefore, the yield to maturity of interest only Agency RMBS is extremely sensitive to the rate of principal payments (particularly prepayments) on the underlying pool of mortgages.

Many of our investments may be illiquid and we may not be able to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions.

We expect generally that any securities we purchase will be in connection with privately-negotiated transactions that will not be registered under the relevant securities laws, resulting in a prohibition against their transfer, sale, pledge or other disposition except in a transaction that is exempt from the registration requirements of, or is otherwise in accordance with, those laws. Generally, we will not be able to sell these securities publicly without the expense and time required to register the securities under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, if the obligors agree to do so, or will be able to sell the securities only under Rule 144 or other rules under the Securities Act which permit only limited sales under specified conditions. Moreover, turbulent market conditions, such as those currently in effect, could significantly and negatively impact the liquidity of our assets. It may be difficult or impossible to obtain or validate third-party pricing on the investments we purchase. Illiquid investments typically experience greater price volatility, as a ready market does not exist, and can be more difficult to value. The illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need or desire arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value maintained for it in our records. Furthermore, we may face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in an entity to the extent that we have or could be attributed with material non-public information regarding such entity.

Investments in subordinated loans and subordinated mortgage-backed securities could subject us to increased risk of losses.

We invest in subordinated loans and subordinated Non-Agency RMBS. In the event a borrower defaults on a loan and lacks sufficient assets to satisfy such loan, we may lose all or a significant part of our investment. In the event a borrower becomes subject to bankruptcy proceedings, we will not have any recourse to the assets, if any, of the borrower that are not pledged to secure our loan, and the unpledged assets of the borrower may not be sufficient to satisfy our loan. If a borrower defaults on our loan or on its senior debt (i.e., a first-lien loan, in the case of a residential mortgage loan, or a contractually or structurally senior loan, in the case of a commercial mortgage loan), or in the event of a borrower bankruptcy, our loan will be satisfied only after all senior debt is paid in full. In the case of commercial mortgage loans, where senior debt exists, the presence of intercreditor arrangements may limit our ability to amend our loan documents, assign our loan, accept prepayments, exercise our remedies and control decisions made in bankruptcy proceedings relating to borrowers.

In general, losses on mortgage loans included in a securitization will be borne first by holders of the “first loss” subordinated security and then, in turn, by the holders of more senior securities, beginning with the most subordinated. In addition, losses on the property securing a commercial mortgage loan included in a securitization will be borne first by the equity holder of the property, then by a cash reserve fund or letter of credit provided by the borrower, if any, and then by subordinated security holders, as described in the preceding sentence. In the event of default of a mortgage loan we own (and, if the loan is a commercial mortgage loan, the exhaustion of any equity support, reserve fund or letter of credit) and, in the case of Non-Agency RMBS and CMBS in which we invest, the exhaustion of any credit support provided by any classes of securities junior to such Non-Agency RMBS and CMBS, we may not recover all or even a significant part of our investment, which could result in repayment losses. In addition, if the underlying mortgage portfolio has been overvalued by the originator, or if the values subsequently decline and, as a result, less collateral is available to satisfy interest and principal payments due on the related mortgage-backed securities, the securities in which we invest may suffer significant losses.

The prices of lower credit quality investments are generally more sensitive to adverse actual or perceived economic downturns or individual issuer developments than more highly rated investments. An economic downturn or a projection of an economic downturn, for example, could cause a decline in the price of lower credit quality investments because the ability of obligors to make principal and interest payments or to refinance may be impaired. In such event, existing credit support in the securitization structure may be insufficient to protect us against loss.

Any credit ratings assigned to our investments will be subject to ongoing evaluations and revisions and we cannot assure you that those ratings will not be downgraded.

Some of our investments are rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Fitch Ratings or Standard & Poor’s. Any credit ratings on our investments are subject to ongoing evaluation by credit rating agencies, and we cannot assure you that any such ratings will not be changed or withdrawn by a rating agency in the future if, in its judgment, circumstances warrant. If rating agencies assign a lower-than-expected rating or reduce or withdraw, or indicate that they may reduce or withdraw, their ratings of our investments in the future, the value of these investments could significantly decline, which will adversely affect the value of our investment portfolio and could result in losses upon disposition or the failure of borrowers to satisfy their debt service obligations to us.

Insurance on real estate securities collateral may not cover all losses.

There are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, terrorism or acts of war that may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors, including terrorism or acts of war, also might make the insurance proceeds insufficient to repair or replace a property if it is damaged or destroyed. Under these circumstances, the insurance proceeds received might not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to the affected real property. Any uninsured loss could result in the loss of cash flow from, and the asset value of, the affected property.

Our Manager’s due diligence of potential investments may not reveal all of the liabilities associated with such investments and may not reveal other weaknesses in such investments, which could lead to investment losses.

Before making an investment, our Manager assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the originators, borrowers, and the underlying property values, as well as other factors and characteristics that are material to the performance of the investment. In making the assessment and otherwise conducting customary due diligence, our Manager relies on resources available to it and, in some cases, an investigation by third parties. There can be no assurance that our Manager’s due diligence process will uncover all relevant facts or that any investment will be successful.

We may be adversely affected by risks affecting borrowers or the asset or property types in which our investments may be concentrated at any given time, as well as from unfavorable changes in the related geographic regions.

Our assets are not subject to any geographic, diversification or concentration limitations except that we concentrate in residential mortgage-related investments. Accordingly, our investment portfolio may be concentrated by geography, asset, property type and/or borrower, increasing the risk of loss to us if the particular concentration in our portfolio is subject to greater risks or undergoing adverse developments. In addition, adverse conditions in the areas where the properties securing or otherwise underlying our investments are located (including business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics and other factors) and local real estate conditions (such as oversupply or reduced demand) may have an adverse effect on the value of our investments. A material decline in the demand for real estate in these areas may materially and adversely affect us. Lack of diversification can increase the correlation of non-performance and foreclosure risks among our investments.

A prolonged economic slowdown, recession or declining real estate values could materially and adversely affect us.

We believe the risks associated with our investments will be more acute during periods of economic slowdown or recession (such as the current period marked by dislocation and weakness in the capital and credit markets), especially if these periods are accompanied by declining real estate values. Declining real estate values will likely reduce our level of new investments since borrowers often use increases in the value of their existing properties to support the purchase of or investment in additional properties. Furthermore, a weakening economy and declining real estate values significantly increase the likelihood that borrowers will default on their debt service obligations to us and that we will incur losses on our investments with them in the event of a default on a particular investment because the value of any collateral may be insufficient to cover the full amount of such investment or may require a significant amount of time to realize. A weakening economy and declining real estate values may increase the likelihood of re-default rates even after we have completed loan modifications. Our exposure will increase to the extent of the subordination, if applicable, of our investment. In addition, under such conditions, our access to capital will generally be more limited, if available at all, and more expensive. Any period of increased payment delinquencies, foreclosures or losses could adversely affect the net interest income generated from our portfolio and our ability to make and finance future investments, which would materially and adversely affect our revenues, results of operations, financial condition, business prospects and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our investments are generally recorded at fair value, and quoted prices or observable inputs may not be available to determine such value, resulting in the use of significant unobservable inputs to determine value.

The values of some of our investments may not be readily determinable. We measure the fair value of these investments quarterly, in accordance with guidance set forth in Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC 820-10, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.” The fair value at which our assets are recorded may not be an indication of their realizable value. Ultimate realization of the value of an asset depends to a great extent on economic and other conditions that are beyond the control of our Manager, our company or our board of directors. Further, fair value is only an estimate based on good faith judgment of the price at which an investment can be sold since market prices of investments can only be determined by negotiation between a willing buyer and seller. If we were to liquidate a particular asset, the realized value may be more than or less than the amount at which such asset is valued. Accordingly, the value of our common stock could be adversely affected by our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments, whether in the applicable period or in the future. Additionally, such valuations may fluctuate over short periods of time.

In certain cases, our Manager’s determination of the fair value of our investments includes inputs provided by third-party dealers and pricing services. Valuations of certain securities in which we invest are often difficult to obtain or are unreliable. In general, dealers and pricing services heavily disclaim their valuations. Dealers may claim to furnish valuations only as an accommodation and without special compensation, and so they may disclaim any and all liability for any direct, incidental, or consequential damages arising out of any inaccuracy or incompleteness in valuations, including any act of negligence or breach of any warranty. Depending on the complexity and illiquidity of a security, valuations of the same security can vary substantially from one dealer or pricing service to another. Therefore, our results of operations for a given period could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair market value of these investments are materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon their disposal. The valuation process has been particularly challenging recently as market events have made valuations of certain assets more difficult, unpredictable and volatile.

Risks related to accounting

Accounting rules for certain of our transactions are highly complex and involve significant judgment and assumptions. Changes in accounting interpretations or assumptions could impact our financial statements.

Accounting rules for mortgage loan sales and securitizations, valuations of financial instruments, investment consolidations and other aspects of our anticipated operations are highly complex and involve significant judgment and assumptions. These complexities could lead to a delay in preparation of financial information and the delivery of this information to our stockholders and also increase the risk of errors and restatements, as well as the cost of compliance. Changes in accounting interpretations or assumptions could impact our financial statements and our ability to timely prepare our financial statements. Our inability to timely prepare our financial statements in the future would likely adversely affect our share price significantly.

Our Manager utilizes analytical models and data in connection with the valuation of our investments, and any incorrect, misleading or incomplete information used in connection therewith will subject us to potential risks.

Given the complexity of certain of our investments and strategies, our Manager must rely heavily on analytical models (both proprietary models developed by our Manager and those supplied by third parties) and information and data supplied by third parties, or Models and Data. Models and Data are used to value investments or potential investments and also in connection with hedging our investments. When Models and Data prove to be incorrect, misleading or incomplete, any decisions made in reliance thereon expose us to potential risks. For example, by relying on Models and Data, especially valuation models, our Manager may be induced to buy certain investments at prices that are too high, to sell certain other investments at prices that are too low or to miss favorable opportunities altogether. Similarly, any hedging based on faulty Models and Data may prove to be unsuccessful. Furthermore, any valuations of our investments that are based on valuation models may prove to be incorrect.

Some of the risks of relying on analytical models and third-party data are particular to analyzing tranches from securitizations, such as mortgage-backed securities. These risks include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) collateral cash flows and/or liability structures may be incorrectly modeled in all or only certain scenarios, or may be modeled based on simplifying assumptions that lead to errors; (ii) information about collateral may be incorrect, incomplete, or misleading; (iii) collateral or bond historical performance (such as historical prepayments, defaults, cash flows, etc.) may be incorrectly reported, or subject to interpretation (e.g., different issuers may report delinquency statistics based on different definitions of what constitutes a delinquent loan); or (iv) collateral or bond information may be outdated, in which case the models may contain incorrect assumptions as to what has occurred since the date information was last updated.

Some of the analytical models used by our Manager, such as mortgage prepayment models or mortgage default models, are predictive in nature. The use of predictive models has inherent risks. For example, such models may incorrectly forecast future behavior, leading to potential losses on a cash flow and/or a mark-to-market basis. In addition, the predictive models used by Angelo, Gordon may differ substantially from those models used by other market participants, with the result that valuations based on these predictive models may be substantially higher or lower for certain investments than actual market prices. Furthermore, since predictive models are usually constructed based on historical data supplied by third parties, the success of relying on such models may depend heavily on the accuracy and reliability of the supplied historical data and the ability of these historical models to accurately reflect future periods.

All valuation models rely on correct market data inputs. If incorrect market data is entered into even a well-founded valuation model, the resulting valuations will be incorrect. However, even if market data is inputted correctly, “model prices” often differ substantially from market prices, especially for securities with complex characteristics, such as derivative securities.

The receivables underlying the ABS we acquire are subject to credit exposure, which could result in losses to us.

ABS are securities backed by various asset classes including, but not limited to, small balance commercial mortgages, aircraft, automobiles, credit cards, equipment, manufactured housing, franchises, recreational vehicles and student loans. ABS remain subject to the credit exposure of the underlying receivables. In the event of increased rates of delinquency with respect to any receivables underlying our ABS, we may not realize our anticipated return on these investments.

Risks related to our organization and structure

Loss of our exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act would negatively affect the value of shares of our common stock and our ability to distribute cash to our stockholders.

We have operated and intend to continue to operate our business so as to be exempt from registration under the Investment Company Act because we are “primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” Specifically, we invest and intend to continue to invest so that at least 55% of the assets that we own on an unconsolidated basis consist of qualifying mortgages and other liens and interests in real estate, which are collectively referred to as “qualifying real estate assets,” and so that at least 80% of the assets we own on an unconsolidated basis consist of real estate related assets (including our qualifying real estate assets). We treat CMBS, debt and equity securities of companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses, Agency partial pool certificates, Non-Agency partial pool RMBS and mezzanine loans secured by an interest in commercial real estate as real estate related assets. Although CMOs are real estate related assets, they are not “qualifying real estate assets” for purposes of the Investment Company Act.

On August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release (No. IC-29778; File No. SW7-34-11, Companies Engaged in the Business of Acquiring Mortgages and Mortgage-Related Instruments) pursuant to which it is reviewing whether certain companies that invest in RMBS and rely on the exemption from registration under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act (such as us) should be allowed to continue relying on such exemption from registration.

If we fail to qualify for this exemption, or the SEC determines that companies that invest in RMBS are no longer able to rely on this exemption, we could be required to restructure our activities in a manner that, or at a time when, we would not otherwise choose to do so, or we may be required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, either of which could negatively affect the value of shares of our common stock and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Failure to obtain and maintain an exemption from being regulated as a commodity pool operator could subject us to additional regulation and compliance requirements and may result in fines and other penalties which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, established a comprehensive new regulatory framework for derivative contracts commonly referred to as “swaps.” As a result, any investment fund that trades in swaps may be considered a “commodity pool,” which would cause its operators (and in some cases the fund's directors) to be regulated as “commodity pool operators,” or CPOs. Under new rules adopted by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or the CFTC, those funds that become commodity pools solely because of their use of swaps must register with the National Futures Association , or NFA. Registration requires compliance with the CFTC's regulations and the NFA's rules with respect to capital raising, disclosure, reporting, recordkeeping and other business conduct. However, the CFTC's Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight recently issued a no-action letter saying, although it believes that mortgage REITs are properly considered commodity pools, it would not recommend that the CFTC take enforcement action against the operator of a mortgage REIT who does not register as a CPO if, among other things, the mortgage REIT limits the initial margin and premiums required to establish its swaps, futures and other commodity interest positions to not more than five percent of its total assets, the mortgage REIT limits the net income derived annually from those commodity interest positions that are not qualifying hedging transactions to less than five percent of its gross income and interests in the mortgage REIT are not marketed to the public as or in a commodity pool or otherwise as or in a vehicle for trading in the commodity futures, commodity options or swaps markets.

We use hedging instruments in conjunction with our investment portfolio and related borrowings to reduce or mitigate risks associated with changes in interest rates, mortgage spreads, yield curve shapes and market volatility. These hedging instruments include interest rate swaps, interest rate futures and options on interest rate futures. We do not currently engage in any speculative derivatives activities or other non-hedging transactions using swaps, futures or options on futures. We do not use these instruments for the purpose of trading in commodity interests, and we do not consider our company or our operations to be a commodity pool as to which CPO registration or compliance is required. We have submitted the required filing to claim the no-action relief afforded by the above-described no-action letter. Consequently, we will be restricted to operating within the parameters discussed in the no-action letter and will not enter into hedging transactions covered by the no-action letter if they would cause us to exceed the limits set forth in the no-action letter.

The CFTC has substantial enforcement power with respect to violations of the laws over which it has jurisdiction, including its anti-fraud and anti-manipulation provisions. For example, the CFTC may suspend or revoke the registration of or the no-action relief afforded to a person who fails to comply with commodities laws and regulations, prohibit such a person from trading or doing business with registered entities, impose civil money penalties, require restitution and seek fines or imprisonment for criminal violations. Additionally, a private right of action exists against those who violate the laws over which the CFTC has jurisdiction or who willfully aid, abet, counsel, induce or procure a violation of those laws. In the event that we fail to comply with statutory requirements relating to derivatives or with the CFTC's rules thereunder, including the no-action letter described above, we may be subject to significant fines, penalties and other civil or governmental actions or proceedings, any of which could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit a change in our control.

Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law, or the MGCL, may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change in our control under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of our common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then prevailing market price of such shares. We are subject to the “business combination” provisions of the MGCL that, subject to limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between us and an “interested stockholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our then outstanding voting shares or an affiliate or associate of ours who, at any time within the two-year period prior to the date in question, was the beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power of our then outstanding voting shares) or an affiliate thereof for five years after the most recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder and, thereafter, imposes special stockholder voting requirements to approve these combination unless the consideration being received by common stockholders satisfies certain conditions. These provisions of the MGCL do not apply, however, to business combinations that are approved or exempted by the board of directors prior to the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Pursuant to the statute, our board of directors has by resolution exempted business combinations between us and any other person, provided that the business combination is first approved by our board of directors. This resolution, however, may be altered or repealed in whole or in part at any time. If this resolution is repealed, or our board of directors does not otherwise approve a business combination, this statute may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating any offer.

The “control share” provisions of the MGCL provide that “control shares” of a Maryland corporation (defined as shares which, when aggregated with all other shares controlled by the stockholder, entitle the stockholder to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in the election of directors) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the acquisition of “control shares,” subject to certain exceptions) have no voting rights except to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding votes entitled to be cast by the acquirer of control shares, our officers and our directors who are also our employees. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the control share acquisition statute any and all acquisitions by any person of our shares. There can be no assurance that this provision will not be amended or eliminated at any time in the future.

The “unsolicited takeover” provisions of the MGCL permit our board of directors, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in our charter or bylaws, to implement certain provisions since we have a class of equity securities registered under the Exchange Act, and at least three directors who are not officers or employees of the corporation and are not affiliated with any acquiring person. These provisions may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us or of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in our control under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of our common stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then current market price. Our charter contains a provision whereby we elect to be subject to the provisions of Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL relating to the filling of vacancies on our board of directors as soon as we become eligible to do so.

Our authorized but unissued common and preferred shares may prevent a change in our control.

Our charter authorizes us to issue additional authorized but unissued common stock and preferred shares. In addition, our board of directors may, without stockholder approval, increase the aggregate number of our authorized shares or the number of shares of any class or series that we have authority to issue and classify or reclassify any unissued common stock or preferred shares and may set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares. As a result, among other things, our board may establish a class or series of common stock or preferred shares that could delay or prevent a transaction or a change in our control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions not in your best interest.

Our charter limits the liability of our present and former directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law, our present and former directors and officers will not have any liability to us or our stockholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:

Our charter authorizes us to indemnify our present and former directors and officers for actions taken by them in those capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. Our bylaws require us to indemnify each present and former director or officer, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, in the defense of any proceeding to which he or she is made, or threatened to be made, a party by reason of his or her service to us. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former directors and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our present and former directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent the current provisions in our charter and bylaws or that might exist with other companies, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions not in your best interest.

Our charter contains provisions that make removal of our directors difficult, which could make it difficult for our stockholders to effect changes to our management.

Our charter and bylaws provide that, subject to the rights of any series of preferred shares, a director may be removed only for “cause” (as defined in our charter), and then only by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast generally in the election of directors. Vacancies generally may be filled only by a majority of the remaining directors in office, even if less than a quorum, for the full term of the director who vacated. These requirements make it more difficult to change our management by removing and replacing directors and may prevent a change in our control that is in the best interests of our stockholders.

Our charter generally does not permit ownership in excess of 9.8% of our common stock and attempts to acquire our shares in excess of the share ownership limits will be ineffective unless an exemption is granted by our board of directors.

Our charter generally prohibits beneficial or constructive ownership by any person of more than 9.8% by vote or value, whichever is more restrictive, of our outstanding common stock. Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may grant an exemption to these prohibitions, subject to certain conditions and receipt by our board of certain representations and undertakings. Our board of directors may from time to time increase certain of these limits for one or more persons and may increase or decrease such limits for all other persons. Any decrease in the share ownership limits generally applicable to all stockholders will not be effective for any person whose percentage ownership of our shares is in excess of such decreased limits until such time as such person’s percentage ownership of our shares equals or falls below such decreased limits, but any further acquisition of our shares in excess of such person’s percentage ownership of our shares will be in violation of the applicable limits. Our board of directors may not increase these limits (whether for one person or all stockholders) if such increase would allow five or fewer persons to beneficially own more than 49.9% in value of our outstanding shares or otherwise cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

The constructive ownership rules contained in our charter are complex and may cause the outstanding shares owned by a group of related individuals or entities to be deemed to be constructively owned by one individual or entity. As a result, the acquisition of less than these percentages of the outstanding shares by an individual or entity could cause that individual or entity to own constructively in excess of these percentages of the outstanding shares and thus violate the share ownership limits. Any attempt to own or transfer our common stock or preferred shares (if and when issued) in excess of the share ownership limits without the consent of our board of directors or in a manner that would cause us to be “closely held” under Section 856(h) of the Code (without regard to whether the shares are held during the last half of a taxable year) will result in the shares being deemed to be transferred to a director for a charitable trust or, if the transfer to the charitable trust is not automatically effective to prevent a violation of the share ownership limits or the restrictions on ownership and transfer of our shares, any such transfer of our shares will be void ab initio. Further, any transfer of our shares that would result in our shares being held by fewer than 100 persons will be void ab initio.

Risks related to taxation

Our failure to qualify as a REIT would result in higher taxes and reduced cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

We operate in a manner that is intended to cause us to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. However, the U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs are complex, and interpretations of the U.S. federal income tax laws governing qualification as a REIT are limited. Qualifying as a REIT requires us to meet various tests regarding the nature of our assets and our income, the ownership of our outstanding stock, and the amount of our distributions on an ongoing basis.

Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. Our compliance with the REIT income and quarterly asset requirements also depends upon our ability to successfully manage the composition of our income and assets on an ongoing basis. Although we intend to operate so that we will qualify as a REIT, given the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs, the ongoing importance of factual determinations, and the possibility of future changes in our circumstances, no assurance can be given that we will so qualify for any particular year.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any calendar year, we would be required to pay U.S. federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to our stockholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Further, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we might need to borrow money or sell assets in order to pay any resulting tax. Our payment of income tax would decrease the amount of our income available for distribution to our stockholders. Furthermore, if we fail to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we no longer would be required to distribute substantially all of our REIT taxable income to our stockholders. Unless our failure to qualify as a REIT was subject to relief under U.S. federal tax laws, we could not re-elect to qualify as a REIT until the fifth calendar year following the year in which we failed to qualify.

Complying with the REIT requirements can be difficult and may cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the nature and diversification of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our shares. We may be required to make distributions to our stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution, and may be unable to pursue otherwise attractive investments in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

The REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business strategies.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our net taxable income, excluding any net capital gain, in order for corporate income tax not to apply to earnings that we distribute. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement, but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our stockholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under U.S. federal income tax laws. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply with the requirements of the Code and to avoid paying corporate tax on undistributed income. However, differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash could require us to sell assets or borrow funds on a short-term or long-term basis to meet the distribution requirements of the Code.

We may find it difficult or impossible to meet distribution requirements in certain circumstances. Due to the nature of the assets in which we will invest, we may be required to recognize taxable income from those assets in advance of our receipt of cash flow on or proceeds from disposition of such assets. For example, we may be required to accrue interest and discount income on mortgage loans, mortgage-backed securities, and other types of debt securities or interests in debt securities before we receive any payments of interest or principal on such assets. We may also acquire distressed debt investments that are subsequently modified by agreement with the borrower. If the amendments to the outstanding debt are “significant modifications” under the applicable Treasury regulations, the modified debt may be considered to have been reissued to us at a gain in a debt-for-debt exchange with the borrower, with gain recognized by us to the extent that the principal amount of the modified debt exceeds our cost of purchasing it prior to modification. Finally, we may be required under the terms of indebtedness that we incur to use cash received from interest payments to make principal payments on that indebtedness, with the effect of recognizing income but not having a corresponding amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

As a result, to the extent such income is not recognized within a TRS, the requirement to distribute a substantial portion of our net taxable income could cause us to: (i) sell assets in adverse market conditions, (ii) borrow on unfavorable terms, (iii) distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions, capital expenditures or repayment of debt or (iv) make a taxable distribution of our shares as part of a distribution in which stockholders may elect to receive shares or (subject to a limit measured as a percentage of the total distribution) cash, in order to comply with REIT requirements. Moreover, if our only feasible alternative were to make a taxable distribution of our shares to comply with the REIT distribution requirements for any taxable year and the value of our shares was not sufficient at such time to make a distribution to our stockholders in an amount at least equal to the minimum amount required to comply with such REIT distribution requirements, we would generally fail to qualify as a REIT for such taxable year and would be precluded from being taxed as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which we ceased to qualify as a REIT.

Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may face tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state and local taxes on our income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income, tax on income from certain activities conducted as a result of a foreclosure, and state or local income, property and transfer taxes, such as mortgage recording taxes. In addition, in order to meet the REIT qualification requirements, or to avert the imposition of a 100% tax that applies to certain gains derived by a REIT from dealer property or inventory, we may hold certain assets through, and derive a significant portion of our taxable income and gains in, TRSs. Such subsidiaries are subject to corporate level income tax at regular rates. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to our stockholders.

Liquidation of assets may jeopardize our REIT qualification.

To qualify as a REIT, we must comply with requirements regarding our assets and our sources of income. If we are compelled to liquidate our investments to repay obligations to our lenders, we may be unable to comply with these requirements, ultimately jeopardizing our qualification as a REIT, or we may be subject to a 100% tax on any resultant gain if we sell assets that are treated as dealer property or inventory.

The failure of assets subject to repurchase agreements to be treated as owned by us for U.S. federal income tax purposes could adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT.

We have entered and may in the future enter into financing arrangements that are structured as sale and repurchase agreements pursuant to which we nominally sell certain of our assets to a counterparty and simultaneously enter into an agreement to repurchase these assets at a later date in exchange for a purchase price. Economically, these agreements are financings which are secured by the assets sold pursuant thereto. We believe that we are treated for REIT asset and income test purposes as the owner of the assets that are the subject of any such sale and repurchase agreement notwithstanding that such agreements may transfer record ownership of the assets to the counterparty during the term of the agreement. It is possible, however, that the IRS could assert that we did not own the assets during the term of the sale and repurchase agreement, in which case we could fail to qualify as a REIT.

Complying with the REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively.

The REIT provisions of the Code may limit our ability to hedge our assets and operations. Under current law, any income that we generate from transactions intended to hedge our interest rate, inflation and/or currency risks will be excluded from gross income for purposes of the REIT 75% and 95% gross income tests if the instrument hedges (i) risk of interest rate or currency fluctuations on indebtedness incurred or to be incurred to carry or acquire real estate assets or (ii) risk of currency fluctuations with respect to any item of income or gain that would be qualifying income under the REIT 75% or 95% gross income tests, and such instrument is properly identified under applicable Treasury Regulations. Income from hedging transactions that do not meet these requirements will generally constitute nonqualifying income for purposes of both the REIT 75% and 95% gross income tests. As a result of these rules, we may have to limit our use of hedging techniques that might otherwise be advantageous, which could result in greater risks associated with interest rate or other changes than we would otherwise be subject to.

Our ability to invest in distressed debt may be limited by our intention to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

We have acquired distressed debt and may acquire distressed debt in the future. In general, under the applicable Treasury Regulations, if a loan is secured by real property and other property and the highest principal amount of the loan outstanding during a taxable year exceeds the fair market value of the real property securing the loan as of (i) the date we agreed to acquire the loan or (ii) in the event of a significant modification, the date we modified the loan, then a portion of the interest income from such a loan will not be qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, but will be qualifying income for purposes of the 95% gross income test. Although the law is not entirely clear, a portion of the loan will also likely be a non-qualifying asset for purposes of the 75% asset test. The non-qualifying portion of such a loan would be subject to, among other requirements, the 10% value test. Revenue Procedure 2011-16 provides a safe harbor under which the IRS has stated that it will not challenge a REIT’s treatment of a loan as being, in part, a qualifying real estate asset in an amount equal to the lesser of (i) the fair market value of the real property securing the loan determined as of the date the REIT committed to acquire the loan or (ii) the fair market value of the loan on the date of the relevant quarterly REIT asset testing date. This safe harbor will help us comply with the REIT asset tests immediately following the acquisition of distressed debt. It will be less helpful if the value of the distressed debt increases over time. Under the safe harbor, when the current value of a distressed debt exceeds the fair market value of the real property that secures the debt, determined as of the date we committed to acquire the debt, the excess will be treated as a non-qualifying asset. Accordingly, an increasing portion of a distressed debt will be treated as a non-qualifying asset as the value of the distressed debt increases. Additionally, Revenue Procedure 2011-16 states that the IRS will treat distressed debt secured by real property and other property as producing in part non-qualifying income for the 75% gross income test. Specifically, Revenue Procedure 2011-16 indicates that interest income on distressed debt will be treated as qualifying income based on the ratio of (i) fair market value of the real property securing the debt determined as of the date we committed to acquire the debt and (ii) the face amount of the debt (and not the purchase price or current value of the debt). The face amount of a distressed debt will typically exceed the fair market value of the real property securing the debt on the date we commit to acquire the debt. Because distressed debt that is secured by real property and other property may produce a significant amount of non-qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test and a significant portion of such distressed debt may be treated as a non-qualifying asset for the REIT asset tests once the debt increases in value, we may be limited in our ability to invest in distressed debt and maintain our qualification as a REIT.

Our ability to invest in and dispose of “to-be-announced” securities could be limited by our REIT status, and we could lose our REIT status as a result of these investments.

We purchase Agency RMBS through “to-be-announced” forward contracts, or TBAs. The law is unclear regarding whether TBAs will be qualifying assets for the 75% asset test and whether income and gains from dispositions of TBAs will be qualifying income for the 75% gross income test.

Until such time as we seek and receive a favorable private letter ruling from the IRS or we are advised by counsel that TBAs should be treated as qualifying assets for purposes of the 75% asset test, we will limit our net investment in TBAs and any non-qualifying assets to no more than 25% of our assets at the end of any calendar quarter and will limit our investments in TBAs with a single counterparty to no more than 5% of our total assets at the end of any calendar quarter. Further, until such time as we seek and receive a favorable private letter ruling from the IRS or we are advised by counsel that income and gains from the disposition of TBAs should be treated as qualifying income for purposes of the 75% gross income test, we will limit our gains from dispositions of TBAs and any non-qualifying income to no more than 25% of our gross income for each calendar year. Accordingly, our ability to purchase Agency RMBS through TBAs and to dispose of contracts for forward settling transactions, through dollar roll transactions or otherwise, could be limited.

Moreover, even if we are advised by counsel that TBAs should be treated as qualifying assets or that income and gains from dispositions of TBAs should be treated as qualifying income, it is possible that the IRS could successfully take the position that such assets are not qualifying assets and such income is not qualifying income. In that event, we could be subject to a penalty tax or we could fail to qualify as a REIT if (i) the value of our TBAs, together with our non-qualifying assets for the 75% asset test, exceeded 25% of our gross assets at the end of any calendar quarter or if the value of our investments in TBAs with a single counterparty exceeded 5% of our total assets at the end of any calendar quarter or (ii) our income and gains from the disposition of TBAs, together with our non-qualifying income for the 75% gross income test, exceeded 25% of our gross income for any taxable year.

The tax on prohibited transactions will limit our ability to engage in transactions, including certain methods of securitizing mortgage loans that would be treated as sales for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% tax with no offset for losses. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, but including mortgage loans, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. We might be subject to this tax if we dispose of or securitize loans in a manner that was treated as a sale of the loans for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Therefore, in order to avoid the prohibited transactions tax, we may choose to engage in certain sales of loans through a TRS and not at the REIT level, and may limit the structures we utilize for our securitization transactions, even though the sales or structures might otherwise be beneficial to us.

The share ownership limits applicable to us that are imposed by the Code for REITs and our charter may restrict our business combination opportunities.

In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Code, not more than 50% in value of our outstanding shares may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Code to include certain entities) at any time during the last half of each taxable year after our first taxable year. Our charter, with certain exceptions, authorizes our board of directors to take the actions that are necessary or appropriate to preserve our qualification as a REIT. Under our charter, no person may own, directly or indirectly, (i) more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of our outstanding common stock, or (ii) more than 9.8% in value or in number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of our outstanding capital stock. However, our board of directors may, in its sole discretion, grant an exemption to the share ownership limits (prospectively or retrospectively), subject to certain conditions and the receipt by our board of certain representations and undertakings. In addition, our board of directors may change the share ownership limits as described under “Business—Restrictions on ownership and transfer of our shares.” The share ownership limits in is based upon direct or indirect ownership by “persons,” which is defined to include entities and certain groups of stockholders. Our share ownership limits might delay or prevent a transaction or a change in our control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

New legislation or administrative or judicial action, in each instance potentially with retroactive effect, could make it more difficult or impossible for us to qualify as a REIT.

The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of REITs may be modified, possibly with retroactive effect, by legislative, judicial or administrative action at any time, which could affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in our common stock. The U.S. federal tax rules that affect REITs are under review constantly by persons involved in the legislative process, the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department, which results in statutory changes as well as frequent revisions to Treasury regulations and interpretations. Revisions in U.S. federal tax laws and interpretations thereof could cause us to change our investments and commitments, which could also affect the tax considerations of an investment in our stock.

ERISA may restrict investments by certain plans in our common stock.

A plan fiduciary considering an investment in our common stock should consider, among other things, whether such an investment might constitute or give rise to a prohibited transaction under ERISA, the Code, or any substantially similar federal, state, or local law. ERISA and the Code impose restrictions on: (i) employee benefit plans (as defined in Section 3(3) of ERISA) that are subject to Title I of ERISA; (ii) plans described in Section 4975 (e)(1) of the Code that are subject to Section 4975 of the Code, including retirement accounts and Keogh Plans; (iii) any entity whose underlying assets include “plan assets” by reason of investment in such entity by a plan described in (i) or (ii) (each of (i), (ii), and (iii), or a Plan); and (iv) persons described as “parties in interest” under ERISA and “disqualified persons” under the Code who have certain specified relationships to a Plan. Also, some non-U.S. plans and governmental plans may be subject to non-U.S., U.S. federal, state or local laws which are, to a material extent, similar to the provisions of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Code.

ERISA imposes certain duties on persons who are fiduciaries with respect to a Plan. Under ERISA, any person who exercises any authority or control over the management or disposition of a Plan’s assets is considered to be a fiduciary of that Plan. Both ERISA and Section 4975 of the Code prohibit certain transactions involving “plan assets” between a Plan and “parties in interest” or “disqualified persons.” Violations of these rules may result in the imposition of an excise tax or penalty, and violations of similar laws likewise may result in the imposition of taxes or penalties.

Certain affiliates of our Manager, Angelo, Gordon, and/or the underwriters may be fiduciaries, “parties in interest,” or “disqualified persons” with respect to a number of Plans. Accordingly, investment in shares of our common stock by a Plan that has such a relationship could be deemed to constitute a prohibited transaction under Title I of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Code. Such transactions may, however, be subject to one or more statutory or administrative exemptions, such as: Section 408(b)(17) of ERISA, which exempts certain transactions with non-fiduciary service providers; Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption, or PTCE, 90-1, which exempts certain transactions involving insurance company pooled separate accounts; PTCE 91-38, which exempts certain transactions involving bank collective investment funds; PTCE 84-14, which exempts certain transactions effected on behalf of a Plan by a “qualified professional asset manager” PTCE 95-60, which exempts certain transactions involving insurance company general accounts; PTCE 96-23, which exempts certain transactions effected on behalf of a Plan by an “in-house asset manager” PTCE 75-1, which exempts certain transactions involving a Plan and certain members of an underwriting syndicate; or another available exemption. Such exemptions may not, however, apply to all of the transactions that could be deemed prohibited transactions in connection with a Plan’s investment in shares of our common stock. If a purchase was to result in a non-exempt prohibited transaction, such purchase may have to be rescinded, though there can be no assurance that a rescission would avoid the imposition of taxes or penalties.

Under ERISA, if a Plan acquires an “equity interest” in an entity, such a Plan’s assets may be deemed to include an interest in the underlying assets of that entity. In that event, the operations of such entity could be deemed to constitute a prohibited transaction under ERISA and Section 4975 the Code.

If, however, a Plan acquires a “publicly offered security,” as defined under the rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Labor (the “Plan Asset Rules”), the issuer of such security is not deemed to hold the assets of a Plan for purposes of ERISA or the Code. Under the Plan Asset Rules, a “publicly offered security” is a security that is freely transferable, widely-held, and is either (i) part of a class of securities registered under Section 12(b) or 12(g) of the Exchange Act or (ii) sold to the Plan as part of an offering of securities to the public pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act and the class of securities of which such security is part is registered under the Exchange Act within the requisite time.  

It is anticipated that the shares of our common stock will meet the criteria of “publicly offered securities” under the Plan Asset Rules. Although no assurances can be given, the underwriters expect that there will be no restrictions imposed on the transfer of interests in the shares of our common stock and the shares of our common stock will be held by at least 100 independent investors at the conclusion of the offering. In addition, the shares of our common stock will be sold as part of an offering pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act and will be timely registered under the Exchange Act.

If the shares of our common stock fail to meet the criteria of “publicly offered securities” under the Plan Asset Rules, and if “benefit plan investors,” as that term is defined in ERISA, hold twenty-five percent (25%) or more of any class of our equity interests, our assets may be deemed to include the assets of any Plan that is a purchaser of shares of our common stock. In that event, transactions between us or involving our assets and “parties in interest” or “disqualified persons” with respect to such a Plan might be prohibited under ERISA and Section 4975 of the Code unless a statutory or administrative exemption exists and all conditions for such exemptive relief are satisfied. However, there is no assurance that such an exemption or any other exemption would apply.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

We do not own any material property. Our principal executive offices are located at 245 Park Avenue, 26^th Floor, New York, New York 10167. Our telephone number is (212)-692-2000.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We are not party to any litigation or legal proceedings, or to the best of our knowledge, any threatened litigation or legal proceedings, which, in our opinion, individually or in the aggregate, would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

Item 4. Mine safety disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market and dividend information

Our common stock is traded on the NYSE under the symbol “MITT.” As of February 28, 2013, there were 27,459,346 shares of common stock outstanding and approximately 91 registered holders of our common stock. The 91 holders of record include Cede & Co., which holds shares as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, which itself holds shares on behalf of the beneficial owners of the Company’s common stock. Such information was obtained through the Company’s registrar and transfer agent, based on the results of a broker search.

The following tables set forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sale price of our common stock as reported on the NYSE and the dividends declared per share of our common stock.

We intend to pay quarterly dividends and to distribute to our stockholders all of our annual taxable income in a timely manner. This will enable us to maintain our qualification as a REIT under the Code. We have not established a minimum dividend payment level and our ability to pay dividends may be adversely affected for the reasons described under the caption “Risk Factors.” All distributions will be made at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our REIT status and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time.

Recent sales of unregistered securities

For the year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period from December 31, 2012 to February 28, 2013, the Company issued 411,452 shares of common stock upon the exercise of 1,563,000 outstanding warrants and 116,154 shares of common stock upon the exercise of 350,000 outstanding warrants, respectively, to purchase such common stock in private offerings exempt from the registration requirements pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act. The warrants had been received by the holders in connection with the Company’s initial public offering that closed on July 6, 2011.

Equity incentive plan information

We have adopted equity incentive plans to provide incentive compensation to attract and retain qualified directors, officers, advisors, consultants and other personnel, including our Manager and affiliates and personnel of our Manager and its affiliates. The total number of shares that may be made subject to awards under our Manager Equity Incentive Plan and our Equity Incentive Plan is 277,500 shares. Awards under our equity incentive plans are forfeitable until they become vested.

The following table presents certain information about our equity incentive plans as of December 31, 2012:

The following table presents certain information about our equity incentive plans as of December 31, 2011:

Performance graph

The following graph provides a comparison of the cumulative total return on our common stock from January 1, 2012 to the NYSE closing price per share on December 31, 2012 with the cumulative total return on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Price Index (the “S&P 500”) and an index of selected issuers of FTSE NAREIT Mortgage REITs. Total return values were calculated assuming $100 invested with the reinvestment of all dividends.

Source: Bloomberg.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

The selected financial data set forth below at December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period from March 7, 2011 (date of inception) to December 31, 2011 has been derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements.

The information presented below is only a summary and does not provide all of the information contained in our historical financial statements, including the related notes. You should read the information below in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our historical financial statements, including the related notes, included elsewhere in this report.

Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes to our consolidated financial statements, which are included in this report.

Overview

We are a Maryland real estate investment trust focused on investing in, acquiring and managing a diversified portfolio of residential mortgage assets, other real estate-related securities and financial assets, which we refer to our target assets. We are externally managed by our Manager, a subsidiary of Angelo, Gordon. Our Manager, pursuant to the delegation agreement dated as of June 29, 2011, has delegated to Angelo, Gordon the overall responsibility for its day-to-day duties and obligations arising under our management agreement.

We are currently invested substantially in residential mortgage-backed securities, or RMBS, for which a U.S. government agency such as the Government National Mortgage Association, or Ginnie Mae, or a federally-chartered corporation such as the Federal National Mortgage Association, or Fannie Mae, or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, or Freddie Mac, guarantees payments of principal and interest on the securities. We refer to these securities as Agency RMBS. Our Agency RMBS investments include mortgage pass-through securities and may include collateral mortgage obligations (“CMOs”). We expect our portfolio, over time, will include a more significant portion of RMBS that are not issued or guaranteed by a U.S. government agency or a U.S. government-sponsored entity, or Non-Agency RMBS. Our Non-Agency RMBS investments may include fixed- and floating- rate securities, including investment grade and non-investment grade. We have invested in other target assets, including commercial mortgage-backed securities, or CMBS, and asset backed securities, or ABS, which, together with Agency RMBS and Non-Agency RMBS, we collectively refer to as real estate securities. We have also invested in commercial mortgage loans. We have the discretion to invest in other target assets such as residential mortgage loans, other real estate structured finance products, other real estate-related loans and securities and direct or indirect interests in real estate. Non-Agency RMBS, ABS, CMBS and residential and commercial loans are referred to as our credit portfolio, and residential and commercial mortgage loans are collectively referred to as loans.

We conduct our operations to qualify and be taxed as REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income that we distribute currently to our stockholders as long as we maintain our intended qualification as a REIT. We operate our business in a manner that permits us to maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act.

Recent developments

In January 2013, the Company closed on a $30 million commercial real estate investment secured by a property in midtown Manhattan consisting of both retail and office space. This investment bears interest at LIBOR + 875 bps, with 5% paid current and the remaining interest accruing until the loan pays off. The Company collected an origination fee of 50 bps at closing, and will collect an additional 50 bps fee upon pay off.

Factors impacting our operating results

Our operating results can be affected by a number of factors and primarily depend on, among other things, the level of our net interest income, the market value of our assets and the supply of, and demand for, our target assets in the marketplace. Our net interest income, which reflects the amortization of purchase premiums and accretion of purchase discounts, varies primarily as a result of changes in market interest rates and prepayment speeds, as measured by the Constant Prepayment Rate, (“CPR”), on our RMBS. Interest rates vary according to the type of investment, conditions in the financial markets, competition and other factors, none of which can be predicted with any certainty. Our operating results can be impacted by unanticipated credit events experienced by borrowers whose mortgage loans are included in our RMBS.

Market conditions

We believe that 2012 marked a bottoming in the U.S. commercial and residential real estate markets. Furthermore, we believe the deep dislocations that occurred in these markets have resulted or will result in an “over-correction” in pricing, thus creating a potential opportunity for us to capitalize on these market dislocations. The recent actions taken by the U.S. government, the Federal Reserve and other governmental and regulatory bodies to address the financial crisis, specifically QE3, has exacerbated the shortage of high quality assets in the market place, leading to stronger interest in credit assets. As we look ahead to 2013 and 2014 we believe further opportunities will arise from the evolution of the housing finance market. We expect that market conditions will continue to impact our operating results and will cause us to adjust our investment and financing strategies over time as new opportunities emerge and risk profiles of our business change.

Our investment activities

We are currently invested in Agency RMBS, Non-Agency RMBS, CMBS, mortgage loans and other real estate-related assets. For the period from our IPO to December 31, 2011, the risk-reward profile of investment opportunities supported the deployment of a majority of our capital in Agency RMBS. Labor, housing and economic fundamentals, together with U.S. monetary policy designed to keep interest rates low, supported our Agency RMBS investments in this period. Overweighting of these investments was also favored by the relative ease of funding and superior liquidity. We also acquired a limited amount of Non-Agency RMBS, ABS and ABS and CMBS assets for our investment portfolio.

Over the course of 2012 we accomplished our goal of increasing our exposure to credit securities and leveraging the broader Angelo, Gordon platform. In particular, subsequent to the announcement by the Federal Reserve of a third round of Quantitative Easing in September, 2012 we elected to minimize additional investments into Agency RMBS. Despite current capacity constraints in the mortgage origination channel we believe that organize prepayments are likely to increase into 2013 and over the course of the fourth quarter we therefore elected to increase our hedges. Subject to available yields and market conditions, we expect to continue our gradual and opportunistic allocation of capital to Non-Agency RMBS, ABS, CMBS, and mortgage loan assets.

We finance our investments in real estate securities primarily through short-term borrowings structured as repurchase agreements. Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our Investment Company Act exemption, to the extent leverage is deployed, we utilize derivative financial instruments (or hedging instruments), including interest rate swap agreements and interest rate cap agreements, in an effort to hedge the interest rate risk associated with the financing of our portfolio. Specifically, we may seek to hedge our exposure to potential interest rate mismatches between the interest we earn on our investments and our borrowing costs caused by fluctuations in short-term interest rates. In utilizing leverage and interest rate hedges, our objectives are to improve risk-adjusted returns and, where possible, to lock in, on a long-term basis, a spread between the yield on our assets and the cost of our financing.

As discussed further in the Critical Accounting Policies section below, if we purchase a security and finance it with a repurchase agreement, and the transaction is considered linked under ASC 860-10, we will record the initial transfer and repurchase financing on a net basis and record a forward commitment to purchase assets as a derivative instrument with changes in market value being recorded on the statement of operations. Throughout Item 7 where we disclose our unlinked investment portfolio and the related repurchase agreements that finance it, we have un-linked the transactions and used the gross presentation as used for all other securities, and we have presented a reconciliation to GAAP. The presentation inclusive of linked transactions is consistent with how the Company’s management evaluates the business, and believes provides the most accurate depiction of the Company’s investment portfolio and financial condition.

The following table presents a reconciliation of certain information related to securities inclusive of unlinked securities to securities on a GAAP basis as of December 31, 2012:

(2) Equity residual investments with a zero coupon rate are excluded from this calculation.

The following table presents a reconciliation of certain information related to securities inclusive of unlinked securities to securities on a GAAP basis as of December 31, 2011:

As mentioned above, our investments have been focused in Agency RMBS given the relative ease of funding and superior liquidity. We evaluate investments in Agency RMBS using factors including expected future prepayment trends, supply and demand, costs of financing, costs of hedging, expected future interest rate volatility and the overall shape of the U.S. Treasury and interest rate swap yield curves.

Our Non-Agency RMBS, ABS, CMBS and mortgage loans are subject to risk of loss with regard to principal and interest payments. We evaluate each investment based on the characteristics of the underlying collateral and securitization structure, rather than relying on the ratings assigned by rating agencies.

Certain of our real estate securities are in an unrealized loss position and have been determined to be temporary. Any decline in fair value of these real estate securities is solely due to market conditions and not the quality of the assets. All of the principal and interest payments on the Agency RMBS have an explicit guarantee by either an agency of the U.S. government or a U.S. government-sponsored enterprise.

Our investments currently in unrealized loss positions are not considered other than temporarily impaired because we currently have the ability and intent to hold the investments to maturity or for a period of time sufficient for a forecasted market price recovery up to or beyond the cost of the investments and we are not required to sell for regulatory or other reasons.

The Company has used leverage to complete the purchase of securities in its investment portfolio. Through December 31, 2012 the leverage has been in the form of repurchase agreements. Repurchase agreements involve the sale and a simultaneous agreement to repurchase the transferred assets or similar assets at a future date. The amount borrowed generally is equal to the fair value of the assets pledged less an agreed-upon discount, referred to as a “haircut.” Repurchase agreements entered into by the Company are accounted for as financings and require the repurchase of the transferred securities at the end of each agreement’s term, typically 30 to 90 days. The Company maintains the beneficial interest in the specific securities pledged during the term of the repurchase agreement and receives the related principal and interest payments. Interest rates on these borrowings are fixed based on prevailing rates corresponding to the terms of the borrowings, and interest is paid at the termination of the repurchase agreement at which time the Company may enter into a new repurchase agreement at prevailing market rates with the same counterparty or repay that counterparty and negotiate financing with a different counterparty. In response to declines in fair value of pledged securities due to changes in market conditions or the publishing of monthly security paydown factors, lenders typically require the Company to post additional securities as collateral, pay down borrowings or establish cash margin accounts with the counterparties in order to re-establish the agreed-upon collateral requirements, referred to as margin calls. The Company finances certain of its Agency RMBS, Non-Agency RMBS, ABS and CMBS through the use of repurchase agreements.

The following table presents a reconciliation of certain information related to repurchase agreements inclusive of unlinked repurchase agreements on a GAAP basis as of December 31, 2012:

The following table presents a reconciliation of certain information related to repurchase agreements inclusive of unlinked repurchase agreements on a GAAP basis as of December 31, 2011:

The following table presents a reconciliation of our leverage ratio at December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, inclusive of linked transactions to our leverage on a GAAP basis. Leverage numbers presented are inclusive of net payables/receivables on unsettled trades on our GAAP balance sheet, and the calculations divide leverage by our GAAP stockholders’ equity.

The Company seeks to transact with several different counterparties in order to reduce the exposure to any single counterparty. The Company has entered into MRAs with 30 counterparties, under which we had outstanding debt from 29 counterparties at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2012, the Company did not have greater than 10% of stockholders’ equity at risk with any individual counterparty.

To help mitigate exposure to higher short-term interest rates, the Company uses currently-paying and forward-starting, one-and three-month LIBOR-indexed, pay-fixed, receive-variable, interest rate swap agreements. This arrangement establishes a relatively stable fixed rate on related borrowings because the variable-rate payments received on the swap agreements largely offset interest accruing on the related borrowings, leaving the fixed-rate payments to be paid on the swap agreements as the Company’s effective borrowing rate, subject to certain adjustments including changes in spreads between variable rates on the swap agreements and actual borrowing rates.

The following table presents information about the Company’s interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2012:  

* These figures include forward starting swaps with a total notional of $100.0 million and a weighted average start date of April 2, 2013. Weighted average rates shown are inclusive of rates corresponding to the terms of the swap as if the swap were effective as of December 31, 2012.

The following table presents information about the Company’s interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2011:

The Company has entered into to-be-announced, or TBA, security positions to facilitate the future purchase of specified Agency RMBS. Pursuant to these TBAs, the Company agrees to purchase, for future delivery, Agency RMBS with certain principal and interest terms and certain types of underlying collateral, but the particular Agency RMBS to be delivered would not be identified until shortly, generally two days, before the TBA settlement date. The Company records TBA purchases on trade date, and it presents the purchase net of the corresponding payable until the settlement date of the transaction. Contracts for the purchase or sale of specified Agency RMBS are accounted for as derivatives if the delivery of the specified Agency security and settlement extends beyond the shortest period possible for that type of security.

The following table presents information about the Company’s TBAs for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the period ended December 31, 2011:

Results of operations

The table below presents certain information from our Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the period from March 7, 2011 to December 31, 2011:

During the period ended December 31, 2011 we commenced our investing operations and completed our initial deployment of capital.

Investment income, financing and hedging costs

Our primary source of income is the net interest earned on our investment portfolio. Our current portfolio is primarily comprised of fixed rate Agency RMBS. The portfolio has been financed with repurchase agreements. The difference between the interest earned on our assets and the interest accrued on our repurchase agreements is our net interest margin.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, we had a weighted average cost of securities and repurchase agreements of $3.3 billion and $2.9 billion, respectively. The average yield earned on the assets was 3.36%, and the average rate paid on repurchase agreements was 0.65%. The annualized cost associated with swaps as a percentage of the average repurchase agreement balance outstanding during the year ended December 31, 2012 was 0.35%. During the period from March 7, 2011 to December 31, 2011, we had a weighted average cost of securities and repurchase agreements of $1.2 billion and $1.0 billion, respectively. The average yield earned on the assets was 3.33%, and the average rate paid on repurchase agreements was 0.38%. The annualized cost associated with swaps as a percentage of the average repurchase agreement balance outstanding during the period from March 7, 2011 to December 31, 2011 was 0.50%.  

Realized and unrealized gains (losses) on investments and derivatives

For the year ended December 31, 2012, we sold certain real estate securities realizing a net gain of $23.7 million, settled certain derivatives realizing a net gain of $2.4 million and realized net gains of $3.4 million from the unlinking of securities previously accounted for as derivatives through linked transactions. During the period ended December 31, 2011, we sold certain real estate securities realizing a net gain of $4.9 million and settled certain derivatives realizing a net loss of $1.2 million. We may opportunistically reposition the portfolio from time to time for numerous reasons including rotating into investments with what we believe to be better relative value. The timing and amount of future realized gains and losses will be impacted by these portfolio management decisions.

We have not designated any of our derivative instruments as hedges for GAAP. Therefore the change in market value on such derivatives is included as a component of our net income. Our derivative instruments include interest rate derivatives, and certain TBA securities.

We have elected the fair value option on our real estate securities and loan portfolio’s. As a result, the change in market value of our securities and loans are included as a component of net income.

The change in unrealized gains (losses) was attributable to the changes in market pricing on the underlying instruments during the period.

Management fees and other expenses

For the year ended December 31, 2012, and for the period ended December 31, 2011, our management fees were $6.4 million and $1.5 million, respectively. Management fees are based upon a percentage of our stockholders’ equity after certain adjustments, including the exclusion of unrealized gains or losses.

For the year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period ended December 31, 2011, the Company expensed into Other operating expenses $2.2 million and $0.0 million, respectively, of reimbursable expenses payable to the Manager. The Manager waived its right to receive $2.2 million and $1.9 million of expense reimbursement for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the period ended December 31, 2011, respectively.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, we elected to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements in part with a dividend to be paid in 2013. In conjunction with this, we accrued an excise tax of $1.7 million, which is included in the excise tax line item on the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

For the period ended December 31, 2011, we elected to satisfy the REIT distribution requirements in part with a dividend to be paid in 2012. In conjunction with this, we accrued an excise tax of $0.1 million, which is included in the excise tax line item on the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

Book value per share

As of December 31, 2012, our book value per common share was $23.47.

Critical accounting policies

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP, which requires the use of estimates that involve the exercise of judgment and use of assumptions as to future uncertainties. Our most critical accounting policies involve decisions and assessments that could affect our reported assets and liabilities, as well as our reported revenues and expenses. We believe that all of the decisions and assessments upon which our consolidated financial statements are based are reasonable at the time made and based upon information available to us at that time. We rely upon independent pricing of our assets at each quarter end to arrive at what we believe to be reasonable estimates of fair market value, whenever available.

Investments in real estate securities

Our real estate securities portfolio consists primarily of Agency RMBS, Non-Agency RMBS, CMBS and other real estate-related assets, on which we have chosen to make a fair value election pursuant to ASC 825. Real estate securities are recorded at fair market value on our balance sheet and the period change in fair market value is recorded in current period earnings on our consolidated statement of operations as a component of “Unrealized gain on real estate securities.” Electing the fair value option allows us to record changes in fair value in the Statement of Operations, which, in management’s view, more appropriately reflects the results of our operations for a particular reporting period as all securities activities will be recorded in a similar manner.

Valuation of our real estate securities portfolio is determined by our Manager using third-party pricing services. The evaluation methodology of third-party pricing services used incorporates commonly used market pricing methods, including a spread measurement to various indices such as the one-year constant maturity treasury and LIBOR, which are observable inputs. The evaluation also considers the underlying characteristics of each security, which are also observable inputs, including: coupon; maturity date, loan age, reset date, collateral type, periodic and life cap, geography, and prepayment speeds. We collect and consider current market intelligence on all major markets, including benchmark security evaluations and bid-lists from various sources, when available. Changes in the market environment and other events that may occur over the life of our investments may cause the gains or losses ultimately realized on these investments to be different than the valuations currently estimated.

Investments in mortgage loans

Our mortgage loan portfolio consists of one commercial mortgage loan as of December 31, 2012, in which we have chosen to make a fair value election pursuant to ASC 825. Loans are recorded at fair market value on the balance sheet and any periodic change in fair market value will be recorded in current period earnings on the consolidated statement of operations. The loan portfolio had no unrealized gains or losses as of December 31, 2012. Electing the fair value option allows us to record changes in fair value in the Statement of Operations, which, in management’s view, more appropriately reflects the results of our operations for a particular reporting period as all loans activities will be recorded in a similar manner.

Valuation of our mortgage loan portfolio is determined by our Manager using third-party pricing services. The evaluation considers the underlying characteristics of each loan, which are observable inputs, including: coupon; maturity date, loan age, reset date, collateral type, periodic and life cap, geography, and prepayment speeds. These valuations also require significant judgments, which include assumptions regarding capitalization rates, leasing, creditworthiness of major tenants, occupancy rates, availability of financing, exit plan, loan sponsorship, actions of other lenders and other factors deemed necessary by management. Changes in the market environment and other events that may occur over the life of our investments may cause the gains or losses ultimately realized on these investments to be different than the valuations currently estimated.

Interest income

Interest income on our real estate securities and loan portfolios is accrued based on the actual coupon rate and the outstanding principal balance of such securities and loans. We have elected to record interest in accordance with ASC 835-30-35-2 using the effective interest method for all securities and loans accounted for under the fair value option (ASC 825). As such, premiums and discounts are amortized or accreted into interest income over the lives of the respective investments. We estimate future expected cash flows at the time of purchase and determine the effective interest rate based on these estimated cash flows and our purchase price. At least quarterly, these estimated cash flows are assessed and a revised yield is computed based on the current amortized cost of the investment, as needed. As further explained below, there are uncertainties and contingencies involved in estimating cash flows, which are difficult to predict and are subject to future events that may impact our estimates and, as a result, our interest income.

On at least a quarterly basis for securities accounted for under ASC 320-10 and ASC 310-20 (generally, Agency RMBS), prepayments of the underlying collateral must be estimated, which directly affect the speed at which we amortize such securities. If actual and anticipated cash flows differ from previous estimates; we recognize a “catch-up” adjustment in the current period to the amortization of premiums for the impact of the cumulative change in the effective yield through the reporting date.

Similarly, we also reassess the cash flows on at least a quarterly basis for securities accounted for under ASC 325-40 (generally, Non-Agency RMBS, ABS and CMBS). In estimating these cash flows, there are a number of assumptions that will be subject to uncertainties and contingencies. These include the rate and timing of principal and interest receipt, (including assumptions of prepayments, repurchases, defaults and liquidations), the pass-through or coupon rate and interest rate fluctuations. In addition, interest payment shortfalls due to delinquencies on the underlying mortgage loans have to be judgmentally estimated. Differences between previously estimated cash flows and current actual and anticipated cash flows are recognized prospectively through an adjustment of the yield over the remaining life of the security based on the current amortized cost of the investment as adjusted for credit impairment, if any.  

Linked transactions

In instances where we acquire assets through repurchase agreements with the same counterparty from whom the assets were purchased, we will evaluate such transactions in accordance with ASC 860-10. This standard requires the initial transfer of a financial asset and repurchase financing that are entered into contemporaneously with, or in contemplation of, one another to be considered linked unless all of the criteria found in ASC 860-10 are met at the inception of the transaction. If the transaction meets all of the conditions, the initial transfer shall be accounted for separately from the repurchase financing, and we will record the assets and the related financing on a gross basis on our balance sheet with the corresponding interest income and interest expense in our statements of operations. If the transaction is determined to be linked, we will record the initial transfer and repurchase financing on a net basis and record a forward commitment to purchase assets as a derivative instrument with changes in market value being recorded on the statement of operations. Such forward commitments are recorded at fair value with subsequent changes in fair value recognized in income. The analysis of transactions under these rules requires assumptions based on management’s judgment and experience.

Derivatives

We enter into various types of derivative instruments to hedge our exposure to market risks. We may use derivative instruments such as interest rate swaps, TBA security positions, and credit derivatives as instruments to reduce such exposure, and non-derivative instruments including Agency interest-only securities to manage interest rate risk. As discussed above, our derivative instruments also include linked transactions, which reflect a forward commitment to purchase assets. We recognize all derivatives as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet, measured at fair value. As we have not designated any derivatives as hedging instruments, all changes in fair value are reported in earnings during the period in which they occur.

Recent accounting pronouncements

In April 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-03, “Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements” (ASU 2011-03). ASU 2011-03 simplifies the accounting for financial assets transferred under repurchase agreements and similar arrangements, by eliminating the transferor’s ability criterion from the assessment of effective control over those assets. The guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011. We do not believe that the adoption of the amended guidance will have a significant effect on our consolidated financial statements now or in the future.

In May 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-04, “Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRS” (ASU 2011-04). ASU 2011-04 amends Topic 820 and does not modify the requirements for when fair value measurements apply; rather, it clarifies the Board’s intent about the application of existing fair value measurement requirements, and changes to a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For public entities, this guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early application by public entities is not permitted. We do not anticipate any material impact from this guidance now or in the future.

In December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Updated 2011-11, “Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities” (ASU 2011-11). ASU 2011-11 amends Topic 210 to require additional disclosure information about offsetting and related arrangements. Entities will be required to disclose both gross information and net information about both instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. This scope would include derivatives, sale and repurchase agreements and reverse sale and repurchase agreements. The objective of this disclosure is to facilitate comparison between those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of US GAAP and those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The guidance is effective for periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. The Company does not anticipate any material impact from this guidance.

Liquidity and capital resources

Liquidity is a measurement of our ability to meet potential cash requirements, including commitments to make distributions to our stockholders, finance our investments and expenses and satisfy other general business needs. Our principal sources of cash consist of borrowings under repurchase agreements, payments of principal and interest we receive on our real estate securities and loan portfolios, cash generated from our operating results, and proceeds from capital market transactions. We typically use cash to repay principal and interest on our repurchase agreements, to purchase real estate securities, loans and other real estate related assets, to make dividend payments on our capital stock, and to fund our operations.

At December 31, 2012 we had $149.6 million cash available to support our liquidity needs. Additionally, we had $164.5 million of Agency RMBS and $2.5 million of loans that had not been pledged as collateral under any of our financing agreements. We use leverage on certain of our assets to increase potential returns to our stockholders. The amount of leverage we may deploy for particular assets depends upon our Manager’s assessment of the credit and other risks of those assets, and also depends on any limitations placed upon us through covenants contained in our master repurchase agreements as discussed below. We generate income principally from the yields earned on our investments and, to the extent that leverage is deployed, on the difference between the yields earned on our investments and our cost of borrowing and any hedging activities. Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes and our Investment Company Act exemption, to the extent leverage is deployed, we may use a number of sources to finance our investments.

We have entered into MRAs with 30 counterparties, allowing us to utilize leverage in our operations. As of December 31, 2012, we had debt outstanding of $3.9 billion from 29 counterparties. The current borrowings under repurchase agreements have maturities between January 2, 2013 and June 17, 2013. These agreements generally include customary representations, warranties, and covenants, but may also contain more restrictive supplemental terms and conditions. Although specific to each MRA, typical supplemental terms include requirements of minimum equity, leverage ratios, performance triggers or other financial ratios. If we fail to meet or satisfy any covenants, supplemental terms or representations and warranties, we would be in default under these agreements and our lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their respective interests against collateral pledged under such agreements and restrict our ability to make additional borrowings. Certain financing agreements may contain cross-default provisions, so that if a default occurs under any one agreement, the lenders under our other agreements could also declare a default.

Further, under our repurchase agreements, we may be required to pledge additional assets to our lenders in the event the estimated fair value of the existing pledged collateral under such agreements declines and such lenders demand additional collateral, which may take the form of additional securities or cash. Certain securities that are pledged as collateral under our repurchase agreements are in an unrealized loss positions. We have the ability and intent to hold the investments to maturity or for a period of time sufficient for a forecasted market price recovery up to or beyond the cost of the investments and we are not required to sell for regulatory or other reasons.

The following table presents contractual maturity information about our repurchase agreements, including those accounted for within linked transactions, at December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011:

We enter into a linked transaction when the initial transfer of a financial asset and repurchase financing are entered into contemporaneously with, or in contemplation of, one another, and all of the criteria found in ASC 860-10 are met at the inception of the transaction. In this situation, we then record the initial transfer and repurchase financing on a net basis. The fair value of linked transactions reflects the value of the underlying real estate securities and linked repurchase agreement borrowings; resulting in an embedded repurchase agreement. As of December 31, 2012, we had sixteen linked transactions resulting in $282.3 million of embedded repurchase agreements with a weighted average rate of 1.85 %. The weighted average contractual maturity of the repurchase agreements was January 15, 2013.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT and our Investment Company Act exemption, to the extent leverage is deployed, we may utilize derivative financial instruments (or hedging instruments); including interest rate swap agreements and interest rate cap agreements, in an effort to hedge the interest rate risk associated with the financing of our portfolio. Specifically, we may seek to hedge our exposure to potential interest rate mismatches between the interest we earn on our investments and our borrowing costs caused by fluctuations in short-term interest rates. In utilizing leverage and interest rate hedges, our objectives will be to improve risk-adjusted returns and, where possible, to lock in, on a long-term basis, a spread between the yield on our assets and the cost of our financing. As of December 31, 2012, we have entered into $2.2 billion notional of pay-fixed receive-LIBOR swaps that have variable maturities between July 14, 2014 and September 6, 2022.

Effects of margin requirements, leverage and credit spreads

Our securities have values that fluctuate according to market conditions and, as discussed above, the market value of our securities will decrease as prevailing interest rates or credit spreads increase. When the value of the securities pledged to secure a repurchase agreement decreases to the point where the positive difference between the collateral value and the repurchase agreement amount is less than the haircut, our lenders may issue a “margin call,” which means that the lender will require us to pay the margin call in cash or pledge additional collateral to meet that margin call. Under our repurchase facilities, our lenders have full discretion to determine the value of the securities we pledge to them. Most of our lenders will value securities based on recent trades in the market. Lenders also issue margin calls as the published current principal balance factors change on the pool of mortgages underlying the securities pledged as collateral when scheduled and unscheduled paydowns are announced monthly. We experience margin calls in the ordinary course of our business. In seeking to manage effectively the margin requirements established by our lenders, we maintain a position of cash and unpledged securities. We refer to this position as our “liquidity.” The level of liquidity we have available to meet margin calls is directly affected by our leverage levels, our haircuts and the price changes on our securities. If interest rates increase as a result of a yield curve shift or any another reason, or if credit spreads widen, then the prices of our collateral (and our unpledged assets that constitute our liquidity) will decline, we will experience margin calls, and we will use our liquidity to meet the margin calls. There can be no assurance that we will maintain sufficient levels of liquidity to meet any margin calls. If our haircuts increase, our liquidity will proportionately decrease. In addition, if we increase our borrowings, our liquidity will decrease by the amount of additional haircut on the increased level of indebtedness. We intend to maintain a level of liquidity in relation to our assets that enables us to meet reasonably anticipated margin calls but that also allows us to be substantially invested in securities. We may misjudge the appropriate amount of our liquidity by maintaining excessive liquidity, which would lower our investment returns, or by maintaining insufficient liquidity, which would force us to liquidate assets into potentially unfavorable market conditions and harm our results of operations and financial condition.

Forward-looking statements regarding liquidity

Based upon our current portfolio, leverage rate and available borrowing arrangements, we believe that the net proceeds of our common equity offerings, preferred equity offerings, and private placements, combined with cash flow from operations and available borrowing capacity, will be sufficient to enable us to meet anticipated liquidity requirements such as to fund our investment activities, pay fees under our management agreement, fund our distributions to stockholders, and pay general corporate expenses.

Contractual obligations

As of December 31, 2012, we had the following contractual obligations. On June 29, 2011, we entered into an agreement with our Manager pursuant to which our Manager is entitled to receive a management fee and the reimbursement of certain expenses. The management fee will be calculated and payable quarterly in arrears in an amount equal to 1.50% of our stockholder’s equity, per annum. Our Manager will use the proceeds from its management fee in part to pay compensation to its officers and personnel, who, notwithstanding that certain of them also are our officers, will receive no cash compensation directly from us. We are required to reimburse our Manager for operating expenses related to us incurred by our Manager, including certain salary expenses and other expenses relating to legal, accounting, due diligence and other services. For the year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period ended December 31, 2011, we expensed into Other operating expenses $2.2 million and $0.0 million, respectively, of reimbursable expenses payable to the Manager. Our Manager waived its right to receive $2.2 million and $1.9 million of expense reimbursement for the year ended December 31, 2012 and the period ended December 31, 2011, respectively.

On July 6, 2011 we entered into (i) warrant agreements with the purchasers of units in the private placement, (ii) a restricted stock award agreement with our Manager under the Manager Equity Incentive Plan, pursuant to which the Manager received 40,250 shares of our common stock, and (iii) restricted stock award agreements with our independent directors under the Equity Incentive Plan, pursuant to which each of the independent directors received 1,500 shares of our common stock.

We have presented a table that details the contractual maturity of our repurchase agreements at December 31, 2012. All repurchase agreements entered into by the Company mature in less than one year, which can be found in “Liquidity and Capital Resources” section. As of December 31, 2012, we are obligated to pay accrued interest on our repurchase agreements in the amount of $3.5 million.

Off-balance sheet arrangements

Our linked transactions are comprised of real estate securities, associated repurchase agreements and interest receivable/payable on such accounts. The extent to which these transactions become unlinked in the future, the underlying real estate securities and the borrowings under repurchase agreements and associated interest income and expense will be presented on a gross basis on our consolidated balance sheet and statement of operations, prospectively. As of December 31, 2012, our maximum exposure to loss on linked transactions was $326.6 million.

We may also utilize credit derivatives, such as credit default swaps, to provide credit event protection based on a financial index or specific security in exchange for receiving a fixed-rate fee or premium over the term of the contract. These instruments enable us to synthetically assume the credit risk of a reference security, portfolio of securities or index of securities. The counterparty pays a premium to us and we agree to make a payment to compensate the counterparty for losses upon the occurrence of a specified credit event. As of December 31, 2012, we did not employ any credit derivatives.

We have entered into TBA positions to facilitate the future purchase of specified Agency RMBS. Pursuant to these TBAs, we agree to purchase, for future delivery, Agency RMBS with certain principal and interest terms and certain types of underlying collateral, but the particular Agency RMBS to be delivered would not be identified until shortly, generally two days, before the TBA settlement date. We record TBA purchases on the trade date and present the purchase net of the corresponding payable until the settlement date of the transaction. Our maximum exposure to loss represents the payable amount until the settlement date. As of December 31, 2012, our maximum exposure to loss on TBAs is $41.7 million.

Certain related person transactions

Our board of directors has adopted a policy regarding the approval of any “related person transaction,” which is any transaction or series of transactions in which we or any of our subsidiaries is or are to be a participant, the amount involved exceeds $120,000, and a “related person” (as defined under SEC rules) has a direct or indirect material interest. Under the policy, a related person would need to promptly disclose to our Secretary or Assistant Secretary and related person transaction and all material facts about the transaction. Our Secretary or Assistant Secretary would then assess and promptly communicate that information to the audit committee of our board of directors. Based on its consideration of all of the relevant facts and circumstances, this committee will decide whether or not to approve such transaction and will generally approve only those transactions that do not create a conflict of interest. If we become aware of an existing related person transaction that has not bee pre-approved under this policy, the transaction will be referred to this committee which will evaluate all options available, including ratification, revision or termination of such transaction. Our policy requires any director who may be interested in a related person transaction to recuse himself or herself from any consideration of such related person transaction. We are not aware of any related person transactions as of December 31, 2012.

Management agreement

On June 29, 2011 we entered into a management agreement with our Manager, which governs the relationship between us and our Manager and describes the services to be provided by our Manager and its compensation for those services. The terms of our management agreement, including the fees payable by us to Angelo, Gordon, were not negotiated at arm’s length, and its terms may not be as favorable to us as if they had been negotiated with an unaffiliated party. Our Manager, pursuant to the delegation agreement dated as of June 29, 2011, has delegated to Angelo, Gordon the overall responsibility with respect to our Manager’s day-to-day duties and obligations arising under our management agreement.

Grants of restricted common stock

As of December 31, 2012, we have granted an aggregate of 13,248 shares of restricted common stock to our independent directors and 40,250 shares of restricted common stock to our Manager under our equity incentive plans. As of December 31, 2012, 26,018 shares of restricted common stock granted to our Manager and directors have vested.

See Note 9 of this report for further detail on restricted stock grants.

Dividends

We intend to continue to make regular quarterly distributions to holders of our common stock if and to the extent authorized by our board of directors. Federal income tax law generally requires that a REIT distribute annually at least 90% of its REIT ordinary taxable income, without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and excluding net capital gains, and that it pay tax at regular corporate rates to the extent that it annually distributes less than 100% of its net taxable income. Before we pay any dividend, we must first meet both our operating requirements and debt service on our repurchase agreements and other debt payable. If our cash available for distribution is less than our net taxable income, we could be required to sell assets or borrow funds to make cash distributions or we may make a portion of the required distribution in the form of a taxable stock distribution or distribution of debt securities. In addition, prior to the time we have fully deployed the net proceeds of our follow-on offerings to acquire assets in our target asset classes, we may fund our quarterly distributions out of such net proceeds.

The following table details the Company’s common stock dividends:

The following table details the Company’s preferred stock dividends:

Inflation

Virtually all of our assets and liabilities are interest rate sensitive in nature. As a result, interest rates and other factors influence our performance far more than inflation. Changes in interest rates do not necessarily correlate with inflation rates or changes in inflation rates.

Other matters

We intend to conduct our business so as to maintain our exempt status under, and not to become regulated as an investment company for purposes of the Investment Company Act. If we failed to maintain our exempt status under the Investment Company Act and became regulated as an investment company, our ability to, among other things, use leverage would be substantially reduced and, as a result, we would be unable to conduct our business as described in the “Business” section of this report. Accordingly, we monitor our compliance with both the 55% Test and the 80% Test of the Investment Company Act in order to maintain our exempt status. As of December 31, 2012, we determined that we maintained compliance with both the 55% Test and the 80% Test requirements.

We calculate that at least 75% of our assets were real estate assets, cash and cash items and government securities for the year ended December 31, 2012. We also calculate that our revenue qualifies for the 75% gross income test and for the 95% gross income test rules for the year ended December 31, 2012. Overall, we believe that we met the REIT income and asset tests. We also met all other REIT requirements, including the ownership of our common stock and the distribution of our net income. Therefore, for the year ended December 31, 2012, we believe that we qualified as a REIT under the Code.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The primary components of our market risk relate to interest rates, liquidity, prepayment rates and credit risk. While we do not seek to avoid risk completely, we seek to assume risk that can be quantified from historical experience and to actively manage that risk, to earn sufficient returns to justify taking those risks and to maintain capital levels consistent with the risks we undertake.

Interest rate risk

Interest rate risk is highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary and tax policies, domestic and international economic and political considerations and other factors beyond our control. We are subject to interest rate risk in connection with both our investments and the financing under our repurchase agreements. We seek to reduce interest rate risks on any outstanding debt and minimize exposure to interest rate fluctuations thereon through the use of interest rate swaps, interest rate caps or other financial instruments, or through a combination of these strategies.

Interest rate effect on net interest income

Our operating results depend in large part upon differences between the yields earned on our investments and our cost of borrowing and upon the effectiveness of our interest rate hedging activities. The majority of our repurchase agreements are short term in nature with an initial term of between 30 and 90 days. The financing rate on these agreements will generally be fixed at the outset of each repurchase transaction by reference to prevailing short-term repurchase rates plus a spread. As a result, our borrowing costs will tend to increase during periods of rising short-term interest rates as we renew, or “roll”, maturing transactions at the higher prevailing rates. When combined with the fact that the income we earn on our fixed interest rate investments will remain substantially unchanged, this will result in a narrowing of the net interest spread between the related assets and borrowings and may even result in losses. We are actively looking to obtain term financing for our credit portfolio. The financing on term facilities generally are fixed at the outset of each transaction by reference to a pre-determined interest rate plus a spread.

Interest rate effects on fair value

Another component of interest rate risk is the effect that changes in interest rates will have on the market value of the assets that we acquire.

Generally, in a rising interest rate environment, the fair value of our real estate securities and loan portfolios would be expected to decrease, all other factors being held constant. In particular, the portion of our real estate securities portfolio with fixed-rate coupons would be expected to decrease more severely than that portion with a floating-rate coupon. This is because fixed-rate coupon real estate securities tend to have significantly more duration, or price sensitivity to changes in interest rates, than floating-rate coupon real estate securities. We anticipate that fixed-rate coupon real estate securities will comprise a substantial majority of our portfolio for the foreseeable future.

The following table quantifies the estimated changes in net interest income and GAAP equity should interest rates go up or down by 50 and 100 basis points, assuming (i) the yield curves of the rate shocks will be parallel to each other and the current yield curve and (ii) all other market risk factors remain constant. These estimates were compiled using a combination of third-party services and models, market data and internal models. All changes in income and equity are measured as percentage changes from the projected net interest income and GAAP equity from our base interest rate scenario. The base interest rate scenario assumes interest rates as of December 31, 2012.

Actual results could differ materially from estimates. The accuracy of the projected Agency RMBS prices relies on assumptions that define specific Agency RMBS spreads and varying prepayment activity at projected interest rate levels. To the extent that these estimates or other assumptions do not hold true, actual results will likely differ materially from projections and could be larger or smaller than the estimates in the table below. Moreover, if different models were employed in the analysis, materially different projections could result. In addition, while the tables below reflect the estimated impact of interest rate increases and decreases on a static portfolio as of December 31, 2012, our Manager may from time to time sell any of our investments as a part of the overall management of our investment portfolio.

Liquidity risk

Our primary liquidity risk arises from financing long-maturity assets with shorter-term borrowing primarily in the form of repurchase agreements.

We pledge real estate securities and cash as collateral to secure our repurchase transactions. Should the fair value of our real estate securities pledged as collateral decrease (as a result of rising interest rates, changes in prepayment speeds, widening of credit spreads or otherwise), we will likely be subject to margin calls for additional collateral from our financing counterparties. Should the fair value of our real estate securities decrease materially and suddenly, margin calls will likely increase causing an adverse change to our liquidity position which could result in substantial losses. In addition, we cannot be assured that we will always be able to roll our repurchase transactions at their scheduled maturities which could cause material additional harm to our liquidity position and result in substantial losses. Further, should general market liquidity tighten as it did in 2007, 2008 and 2009, our repurchase agreement counterparties may increase our margin requirements on new financings, including repurchase transactions that we roll at maturity with the same counterparty, which would require us to post additional collateral and would reduce our ability to use leverage and could potentially cause us to incur substantial losses.

Our Manager seeks to mitigate our liquidity risks by maintaining a prudent level of leverage, monitoring our liquidity position on a daily basis and maintaining a substantial cushion of cash and unpledged real estate securities and loans in our portfolio in order to meet future margin calls. In addition, our Manager seeks to further mitigate our liquidity risk by (i) diversifying our exposure across a broad number of financing counterparties, (ii) limiting our exposure to any single financing counterparty and (iii) monitoring the ongoing financial stability of our financing counterparties.

Prepayment risk

Premiums arise when we acquire real estate securities at a price in excess of the principal balance of the mortgages securing such real estate securities (i.e., par value). Conversely, discounts arise when we acquire real estate securities at a price below the principal balance of the mortgages securing such real estate securities. Premiums paid on our real estate securities are amortized against interest income and accretable purchase discounts on our real estate securities are accreted to interest income. Purchase premiums on our real estate securities, which are primarily carried on our Agency RMBS, are amortized against interest income over the life of each respective security using the effective yield method, adjusted for actual prepayment activity. An increase in the prepayment rate, as measured by the CPR, will typically accelerate the amortization of purchase premiums, thereby reducing the yield/interest income earned on such assets. Generally, if prepayments on our Non-Agency RMBS are less than anticipated, we expect that the income recognized on such assets would be reduced due to the slower accretion of purchase discounts, and impairments could result.

As further discussed in the “Critical Accounting Policies” section above, differences between previously estimated cash flows and current actual and anticipated cash flows caused by changes to prepayment or other assumptions are adjusted retrospectively through a “catch up” adjustment for the impact of the cumulative change in the effective yield through the reporting date, or adjusted prospectively through an adjustment of the yield over the remaining life of the security for securities accounted for under ASC 320-10 (generally, Agency RMBS) and ASC 325-40 (generally, Non-Agency RMBS, ABS and CMBS) respectively.

In addition, our interest rate hedges are structured in part based upon assumed levels of future prepayments within our real estate securities portfolio. If prepayments are slower or faster than assumed, the life of the real estate securities will be longer or shorter than assumed, which could reduce the effectiveness of our Manager’s hedging strategies and may cause losses on such transactions.

Our Manager seeks to mitigate our prepayment risk by investing in real estate securities with a variety of prepayment characteristics as well as by attempting to maintain in our portfolio a mix of assets purchased at a premium with assets purchased at a discount.

Real estate value risk

Residential and commercial property values are subject to volatility and may be affected adversely by a number of factors outside of our control, including, but not limited to, national, regional and local economic conditions (which may be adversely affected by industry slowdowns and other factors); local real estate conditions (such as an oversupply of housing or commercial real estate); construction quality, age and design; demographic factors; and retroactive changes to building or similar codes. Decreases in property values reduce the value of the collateral underlying our RMBS and CMBS portfolios as well as the potential sale proceeds available to repay our loans in the event of a default. In addition, substantial decreases in property values can increase the rate of strategic defaults by residential mortgage borrowers which can impact and create significant uncertainty in the recovery of principal and interest on our investments.

Credit risk

Although we expect to encounter only de minimis credit risk in our Agency RMBS portfolio, we are exposed to the risk of potential credit losses from an unanticipated increase in borrower defaults as well as general credit spread widening on any Non-Agency assets in our portfolio, including residential and commercial mortgage whole loans as well as Non-Agency RMBS and CMBS. We seek to manage this risk through our Manager’s pre-acquisition due diligence process and, if available, through the use of non-recourse financing, which limits our exposure to credit losses to the specific pool of mortgages that are the subject of the non-recourse financing. Our Manager’s pre-acquisition due diligence process includes the evaluation of, among other things, relative valuation, supply and demand trends, the shape of various yield curves, prepayment rates, delinquency and default rates, recovery of various sectors and vintage of collateral.

Risk management

To the extent consistent with maintaining our REIT qualification, we seek to manage risk exposure to protect our investment portfolio against the effects of major interest rate changes. We generally seek to manage this risk by:

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Index to Financial Statements

All financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is included in the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders

of AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc.:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the accompanying index present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period from March 7, 2011 to December 31, 2011 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management's Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits (which was an integrated audit in 2012). We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, New York

March 6, 2013

AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Balance Sheets

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Operations

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AG Mortgage Investment Trust, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity