DYNEX CAPITAL INC - Quarter Report: 2009 March (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
DC 20549
FORM
10-Q
Quarterly
Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
|
For
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
or
Transition
Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
|
Commission
File Number: 1-9819
|
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Virginia
|
52-1549373
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
incorporation
or organization)
|
Identification
No.)
|
4991
Lake Brook Drive, Suite 100, Glen Allen, Virginia
|
23060-9245
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
Code)
|
(804)
217-5800
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
|
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 þ No o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this
chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes o No o
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.
Large
accelerated filer
|
o
|
Accelerated
filer
|
þ
|
Non-accelerated
filer
|
o (Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Smaller reporting
company
|
o
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
On April
30, 2009, the registrant had 13,059,762 shares outstanding of common stock,
$0.01 par value, which is the registrant’s only class of common
stock.
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
FORM
10-Q
Page
|
|||
PART
I.
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
||
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2009 (unaudited) and December 31,
2008
|
1
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended March 31,
2009 and 2008 (unaudited)
|
2
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Shareholders’ Equity for the three months ended
March 31, 2009 (unaudited)
|
3
|
||
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31,
2009 and 2008 (unaudited)
|
4
|
||
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
5
|
||
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
21
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
37
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
43
|
|
PART
II.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
||
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
44
|
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
45
|
|
Item
2.
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
45
|
|
Item
3.
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
45
|
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
45
|
|
Item
5.
|
Other
Information
|
45
|
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
45
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
i
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
(amounts
in thousands except share data)
March
31,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Agency
MBS:
|
||||||||
Pledged to counterparties, at
fair value
|
$ | 415,360 | $ | 300,277 | ||||
Unpledged, at fair
value
|
35,440 | 11,299 | ||||||
450,800 | 311,576 | |||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans, net
|
238,838 | 243,827 | ||||||
Investment
in joint venture
|
5,417 | 5,655 | ||||||
Other
investments
|
10,450 | 12,735 | ||||||
705,505 | 573,793 | |||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
21,841 | 24,335 | ||||||
Restricted
cash
|
– | 2,974 | ||||||
Other
assets
|
7,210 | 6,089 | ||||||
$ | 734,556 | $ | 607,191 | |||||
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
||||||||
LIABILITIES
|
||||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
$ | 403,145 | $ | 274,217 | ||||
Securitization
financing
|
174,337 | 178,165 | ||||||
Obligation
under payment agreement
|
7,971 | 8,534 | ||||||
Other
liabilities
|
5,166 | 5,866 | ||||||
590,619 | 466,782 | |||||||
Commitments
and Contingencies (Note 13)
|
||||||||
SHAREHOLDERS’
EQUITY
|
||||||||
Preferred
stock, par value $0.01 per share, 50,000,000 shares authorized, 9.5%
Cumulative Convertible Series D, 4,221,539 shares issued and outstanding
($43,218 aggregate liquidation preference)
|
41,749 | 41,749 | ||||||
Common
stock, par value $0.01 per share, 100,000,000 shares authorized,
12,169,762 shares issued and outstanding
|
122 | 122 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
366,836 | 366,817 | ||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss)
|
228 | (3,949 | ) | |||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(264,998 | ) | (264,330 | ) | ||||
143,937 | 140,409 | |||||||
$ | 734,556 | $ | 607,191 | |||||
See
notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
1
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
(amounts
in thousands except per share data)
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||
March
31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Interest
income:
|
||||||||
Investments
|
$ | 9,472 | $ | 6,159 | ||||
Cash and cash
equivalents
|
5 | 324 | ||||||
9,477 | 6,483 | |||||||
Interest
expense
|
4,433 | 4,062 | ||||||
Net
interest income
|
5,044 | 2,421 | ||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
(179 | ) | (26 | ) | ||||
Net
interest income after provision for loan losses
|
4,865 | 2,395 | ||||||
Equity
in loss of joint venture
|
(754 | ) | (2,251 | ) | ||||
Gain
on sale of investments, net
|
83 | 2,093 | ||||||
Fair
value adjustments, net
|
645 | 4,231 | ||||||
Other
income
|
21 | 67 | ||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
||||||||
Compensation and
benefits
|
(883 | ) | (495 | ) | ||||
Other general and
administrative expenses
|
(843 | ) | (721 | ) | ||||
Net
income
|
3,134 | 5,319 | ||||||
Preferred
stock dividends
|
(1,003 | ) | (1,003 | ) | ||||
Net
income to common shareholders
|
$ | 2,131 | $ | 4,316 | ||||
Net
income per common share:
|
||||||||
Basic
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.36 | ||||
Diluted
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.32 | ||||
See
notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
2
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (UNAUDITED)
Three
Months Ended March 31, 2009
(amounts
in thousands)
Preferred
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in
Capital
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
(Loss)
Income
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
$ | 41,749 | $ | 122 | $ | 366,817 | $ | (3,949 | ) | $ | (264,330 | ) | $ | 140,409 | ||||||||||
Net
income
|
– | – | – | – | 3,134 | 3,134 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other
comprehensive income:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change
in market value of securities and other investments
|
– | – | – | 3, 553 | – | 3,553 | ||||||||||||||||||
Reclassification
adjustment for equity in the joint venture’s other-than-temporary
impairment
|
707 | 707 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Reclassification
adjustment for net gains included in net income
|
– | – | – | (83 | ) | – | (83 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Total
comprehensive income
|
7,311 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends
on common stock
|
– | – | – | – | (2,799 | ) | (2,799 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Dividends
on preferred stock
|
– | – | – | – | (1,003 | ) | (1,003 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Vesting
of restricted stock
|
– | – | 19 | – | – | 19 | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2009
|
$ | 41,749 | $ | 122 | $ | 366,836 | $ | 228 | $ | (264,998 | ) | $ | 143,937 |
See
notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
|
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
|
|
OF CASH FLOWS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||
March
31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Operating
activities:
|
||||||||
Net
income
|
$ | 3,134 | $ | 5,319 | ||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to cash provided by operating
activities:
|
||||||||
Equity
in loss of joint venture
|
754 | 2,251 | ||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
179 | 26 | ||||||
Gain
on sale of investments, net
|
(83 | ) | (2,093 | ) | ||||
Fair
value adjustments, net
|
(645 | ) | (4,231 | ) | ||||
Amortization
and depreciation
|
436 | (264 | ) | |||||
Stock
based compensation expense (benefit)
|
67 | (67 | ) | |||||
Net
change in other assets and other liabilities
|
(1,340 | ) | 1,979 | |||||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
2,502 | 2,920 | ||||||
Investing
activities:
|
||||||||
Principal
payments received on securitized mortgage loans
|
5,089 | 6,825 | ||||||
Purchases
of Agency MBS
|
(153,951 | ) | (27,742 | ) | ||||
Payments
received on Agency MBS and other investments
|
18,169 | 2,581 | ||||||
Purchases
of other investments
|
– | (9,988 | ) | |||||
Proceeds
from sales of other investments
|
1,860 | 8,991 | ||||||
Other
|
(549 | ) | 85 | |||||
Net
cash used by investing activities
|
(129,382 | ) | (19,248 | ) | ||||
Financing
activities:
|
||||||||
Net
borrowings under repurchase agreements
|
128,928 | 24,945 | ||||||
Principal
payments on securitization financing
|
(3,714 | ) | (3,814 | ) | ||||
Decrease
in restricted cash
|
2,974 | – | ||||||
Dividends
paid
|
(3,802 | ) | (2,220 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
124,386 | 18,911 | ||||||
Net
change in cash and cash equivalents
|
(2,494 | ) | 2,583 | |||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
24,335 | 35,352 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 21,841 | $ | 37,935 | ||||
See
notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
|
4
DYNEX
CAPITAL, INC.
March 31,
2009
(amounts
in thousands except share and per share data)
NOTE 1
– SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis
of Presentation
The
accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in
accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and do not include all of the
information and notes required by accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. The
condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Dynex
Capital, Inc., its qualified real estate investment trust ("REIT") subsidiaries
and its taxable REIT subsidiary (together, “Dynex” or the
“Company”). All intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
In the
opinion of management, all significant adjustments, consisting of normal
recurring accruals considered necessary for a fair presentation of the condensed
consolidated financial statements, have been included. The financial statements
presented are unaudited. Operating results for the three months ended
March 31, 2009 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be
expected for the year ending December 31, 2009. Certain information and footnote
disclosures normally included in the consolidated financial statements prepared
in accordance with GAAP have been omitted. The unaudited financial
statements included herein should be read in conjunction with the financial
statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).
Consolidation
of Subsidiaries
The
Company consolidates entities in which it owns more than 50% of the voting
equity and control does not rest with others and variable interest entities in
which it is determined to be the primary beneficiary in accordance with
Financial Interpretation No. 46(R) (“FIN 46(R)”). The Company follows
the equity method of accounting for investments with greater than 20% and less
than a 50% interest in partnerships and corporate joint ventures or when it is
able to influence the financial and operating policies of the investee but owns
less than 50% of the voting equity.
Federal
Income Taxes
The
Company believes it has complied with the requirements for qualification as a
REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
“Code”). As such, the Company believes that it qualifies as a REIT
for federal income tax purposes, and that it generally will not be subject to
federal income tax on the amount of its income or gain that is distributed as
dividends to shareholders. The Company uses the calendar year for
both tax and financial reporting purposes. There may be differences
between taxable income and income computed in accordance with GAAP.
Investments
The
Company’s investments include Agency mortgage backed securities (“MBS”),
securitized mortgage loans, investment in joint venture and other
investments.
Agency MBS. Agency
MBS are MBS issued or guaranteed by a federally chartered corporation, such as
Federal National Mortgage Corporation, or Fannie Mae, or Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation, or Freddie Mac, or an agency of the U.S. government, such
as Government National Mortgage Association, or Ginnie Mae. MBS
issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae are commonly
referred to as “Agency MBS”. The Company’s Agency MBS are comprised
primarily of Hybrid Agency ARMs and Agency ARMs and, to a lesser extent,
fixed-rate Agency MBS. Hybrid Agency ARMs are MBS collateralized by
hybrid adjustable mortgage
5
loans. Hybrid
adjustable rate mortgage loans are loans which have a fixed rate of interest for
a specified period (typically three to ten years) and which then adjust their
interest rate at least annually to an increment over a specified interest rate
index as further discussed below. Agency ARMs are MBS collateralized
by adjustable rate mortgage loans which have interest rates that generally will
adjust at least annually to an increment over a specified interest rate
index. Agency ARMs also include Hybrid Agency ARMs that are past
their fixed rate periods.
Interest
rates on the adjustable rate loans collateralizing the Hybrid Agency ARMs or
Agency ARMs are based on specific index rates, such as the one-year constant
maturity treasury, or CMT rate, the London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, the
Federal Reserve U.S. 12-month cumulative average one-year CMT, or MTA, or the
11th District Cost of Funds Index, or COFI. These loans will
typically have interim and lifetime caps on interest rate adjustments, or
interest rate caps, limiting the amount that the rates on these loans may reset
in any given period. All of the Company’s Agency MBS are classified
as available-for-sale, and substantially all of the Company’s Agency MBS are
pledged as collateral against repurchase agreements.
Securitized Mortgage
loans. Securitized mortgage loans consist of loans pledged to
support the repayment of securitization financing bonds issued by the
Company. Securitized mortgage loans are reported at amortized
cost. An allowance has been established for currently existing
estimated losses on such loans. Securitized mortgage loans can only
be sold subject to the lien of the respective securitization financing
indenture.
Investment in Joint
Venture. The Company accounts for its investment in joint
venture using the equity method as it does not exercise control over significant
asset decisions such as buying, selling or financing nor is it the primary
beneficiary under FIN 46(R). Under the equity method, the Company
increases its investment for its proportionate share of net income and
contributions to the joint venture and decreases its investment balance by
recording its proportionate share of net loss and distributions.
The
Company periodically reviews its investment in joint venture for other than
temporary declines in market value. Any decline that is not expected
to be recovered in the next twelve months is considered other than temporary,
and an impairment charge is recorded as a reduction to the carrying value of the
investment.
Other
Investments. Other investments include non-Agency MBS and
equity securities, unsecuritized delinquent property tax receivables, and
unsecuritized single-family and commercial mortgage loans. The
unsecuritized delinquent property tax receivables and mortgage loans are carried
at amortized cost. Non-Agency MBS and equity securities are
considered available-for-sale and are reported at fair value, with unrealized
gains and losses excluded from earnings and reported as accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Other
investments also include real estate owned acquired through, or in lieu of,
foreclosure in connection with the servicing of the delinquent tax lien
receivables portfolio. Such investments are considered held for sale
and are initially recorded at fair value less cost to sell (net realizable
value) at the date of foreclosure, establishing a new cost
basis. Subsequent to foreclosure, management periodically performs
valuations and adjusts the property to the lower of cost or net realizable
value. Revenue and expenses related to and changes in the valuation
of the real estate owned are included in other income (expense).
Interest
Income. Interest income is recognized when earned according to
the terms of the underlying investment and when, in the opinion of management,
it is collectible. For loans, the accrual of interest is discontinued
when, in the opinion of management, the interest is not collectible in the
normal course of business, when the loan is significantly past due or when the
primary servicer of the loan fails to advance the interest and/or principal due
on the loan. For securities and other investments, the accrual of
interest is discontinued when, in the opinion of management, it is probable that
all amounts contractually due will not be collected. Loans are
considered past due when the borrower fails to make a timely payment in
accordance with the underlying loan agreement, inclusive of all applicable cure
periods. All interest accrued but not collected for investments that
are placed on a non-accrual status or are charged-off is reversed against
interest income. Interest on these investments is accounted for on
the cash-basis or cost-recovery method, until qualifying for return to accrual
status. Investments are returned to accrual status when all the
principal and interest amounts contractually due are brought current and future
payments are reasonably assured.
6
Repurchase
Agreements
The
Company uses repurchase agreements to finance certain of its
investments. Under these repurchase agreements, the Company sells the
securities to a lender and agrees to repurchase the same securities in the
future for a price that is higher than the original sales price. The
difference between the sale price that the Company receives and the repurchase
price that the Company pays represents interest paid to the
lender. Although structured as a sale and repurchase obligation, a
repurchase agreement operates as a financing, in accordance with the provision
of SFAS 140, under which the Company pledges its securities as collateral to
secure a loan, which is equal in value to a specified percentage of the
estimated fair value of the pledged collateral. The Company retains
beneficial ownership of the pledged collateral. At the maturity of a
repurchase agreement, the Company is required to repay the loan and concurrently
receives back its pledged collateral from the lender or, with the consent of the
lender, the Company may renew the agreement at the then prevailing financing
rate. These repurchase agreements may require the Company to pledge
additional assets to the lender in the event the estimated fair value of the
existing pledged collateral declines.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements, in conformity with GAAP, requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and
expenses during the reported period. Actual results could differ from
those estimates. The primary estimates inherent in the accompanying
condensed consolidated financial statements are discussed below.
Fair
Value Pursuant to SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”
(“SFAS 157”), the fair value is the exchange price in an orderly transaction,
that is not a forced liquidation or distressed sale, between market participants
to sell an asset or transfer a liability in the market in which the reporting
entity would transact for the asset or liability, that is, the principal or most
advantageous market for the asset/liability. The transaction to sell
the asset or transfer the liability is a hypothetical transaction at the
measurement date, considered from the perspective of a market participant that
holds the asset/liability. SFAS 157 provides a consistent definition
of fair value which focuses on exit price and prioritizes, within a measurement
of fair value, the use of market-based inputs over entity-specific
inputs. In addition, SFAS 157 provides a framework for measuring fair
value and establishes a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based
upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability as of
the measurement date.
The three
levels of the valuation hierarchy established by SFAS 157 are as
follows:
|
·
|
Level
1 — Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical
assets or liabilities at the measurement date. The Company’s
investments included in Level 1 fair value generally are equity securities
listed in active markets.
|
|
·
|
Level
2 — Inputs (other than quoted prices included in Level 1) are either
directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability through
correlation with market data at the measurement date and for the duration
of the instrument’s anticipated life. Fair valued assets and
liabilities that are generally included in this category are Agency MBS,
which are valued based on the average of multiple dealer quotes that are
active in the Agency MBS market.
|
|
·
|
Level
3 — Inputs reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants
would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement
date. Consideration is given to the risk inherent in the
valuation technique and the risk inherent in the inputs to the
model. Generally, assets and liabilities carried at fair value
and included in this category are non-Agency mortgage-backed securities,
delinquent property tax receivables and the obligation under payment
agreement liability.
|
Estimates
of fair value for financial instruments are based primarily on management’s
judgment. Since the fair value of the Company’s financial instruments
is based on estimates, actual fair values recognized may differ from those
estimates recorded in the consolidated financial statements.
7
Other-than-Temporary
Impairments. The Company evaluates all securities in its
investment portfolio for other-than-temporary impairments. A security
is generally defined to be impaired if the carrying value of such security
exceeds its estimated fair value. Based on the provisions of FSP FAS
115-2, a security is considered to be other-than-temporarily impaired if the
present value of cash flows expected to be collected is less than the security’s
amortized cost basis (the difference being defined as the credit loss) or if the
fair value of the security is less than the security’s amortized cost basis and
the investor intends, or more-likely-than-not will be required, to sell the
security before recovery of the security’s amortized cost basis. The
charge to earnings is limited to the amount of credit loss if the investor does
not intend, and it is more-likely-than-not that it will not be required, to sell
the security before recovery of the security’s amortized cost basis. Any
remaining difference between fair value and amortized cost is recognized in
other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes. Otherwise, the entire
difference between fair value and amortized cost is charged to
earnings. In certain instances, as a result of the
other-than-temporary impairment analysis, the recognition or accrual of interest
will be discontinued and the security will be placed on non-accrual
status. Securities normally are not placed on non-accrual status if
the servicer continues to advance on the impaired loans in the
security.
Allowance for Loan
Losses. An allowance for loan losses has been estimated and
established for currently existing probable losses for loans in the Company’s
investment portfolio that are considered impaired. Factors considered
in establishing an allowance include current loan delinquencies, historical cure
rates of delinquent loans, and historical and anticipated loss severity of the
loans as they are liquidated. The factors differ by loan type (e.g.,
single-family versus commercial) and collateral type (e.g., multifamily versus
office property). The allowance for losses is evaluated and adjusted
periodically by management based on the actual and estimated timing and amount
of probable credit losses, using the above factors, as well as industry loss
experience. Where loans are considered homogeneous, the allowance for
losses are established and evaluated on a pool basis. Otherwise, the
allowance for losses is established and evaluated on a loan-specific
basis. Provisions made to increase the allowance are charged as a
current period expense. Single-family loans are considered impaired
when they are 60 days past due. Commercial mortgage loans are
evaluated on an individual basis for impairment. Commercial mortgage
loans are secured by income-producing real estate and are evaluated for
impairment when the debt service coverage ratio on the loan is less than 1:1 or
when the loan is delinquent. Certain of the commercial mortgage loans
are covered by loan guarantees that limit the Company’s exposure on these
loans.
Loans
secured by low-income housing tax credit properties, with at least twelve months
remaining in their tax credit compliance period, account for 46% of the
Company’s securitized commercial mortgage loan portfolio. Section 42
of the Code provides tax credits to investors in projects to construct or
substantially rehabilitate properties that provide housing for qualifying low
income families. Failure to comply with certain income and rental
restrictions required by Section 42 or default on a loan financing a Section 42
property during the compliance period can result in the recapture of previously
received tax credits. The potential cost of tax credit recapture
provides an incentive to the property owner to support the property during the
compliance period.
Amortization of Premiums/Discounts
on Agency MBS. Premiums and discounts on investments and
obligations are amortized into interest income or expense, respectively, over
the life of the related investment or obligation using the effective yield
method in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”)
No. 91, “Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated with Originating
or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases.”
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 160, “Noncontrolling
Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51”
(“SFAS 160”). SFAS 160 addresses reporting requirements in the
financial statements of non-controlling interests to their equity share of
subsidiary investments. SFAS 160 applies to reporting periods
beginning after December 15, 2008. The adoption of SFAS 160 did not
have an impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
141(R)”) which revised SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations.” This
pronouncement is effective as of January 1, 2009. Under SFAS
No.
8
141,
organizations utilized the announcement date as the measurement date for the
purchase price of the acquired entity. SFAS 141(R) requires
measurement at the date the acquirer obtains control of the acquiree, generally
referred to as the acquisition date. SFAS 141(R) will have a
significant impact on the accounting for transaction costs, restructuring costs,
as well as the initial recognition of contingent assets and liabilities assumed
during a business combination. Under SFAS 141(R), adjustments to the
acquired entity’s deferred tax assets and uncertain tax position balances
occurring outside the measurement period are recorded as a component of the
income tax expense, rather than goodwill. As the provisions of SFAS
141(R) are applied prospectively, the impact cannot be determined until the
transactions occur. The Company does not believe this pronouncement
will have a material effect on its financial statements.
On March
20, 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133”
(“SFAS 161”). SFAS 161 provides for enhanced disclosures about how
and why an entity uses derivatives and how and where those derivatives and
related hedged items are reported in the entity’s financial
statements. SFAS 161 also requires certain tabular formats for
disclosing such information. SFAS 161 is effective for fiscal years
and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application
encouraged. SFAS 161 applies to all entities and all derivative
instruments and related hedged items accounted for under SFAS
133. Among other things, SFAS 161 requires disclosures of an entity’s
objectives and strategies for using derivatives by primary underlying risk and
certain disclosures about the potential future collateral or cash requirements
as a result of contingent credit-related features. The adoption of
SFAS 161 did not have an impact on the Company’s financial
statements.
On
February 20, 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) 140-3,
“Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets and Repurchase Financing
Transactions,” (“FSP 140-3”), which provides guidance on accounting for
transfers of financial assets and repurchase financings. FSP 140-3
presumes that an initial transfer of a financial asset and a repurchase
financing are considered part of the same arrangement (i.e., a linked
transaction) under SFAS No. 140 “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of
Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities” (“SFAS
140”). However, if certain criteria, as described in FSP 140-3, are
met, the initial transfer and repurchase financing shall not be evaluated as a
linked transaction and shall be evaluated separately under SFAS
140. If the linked transaction does not meet the requirements for
sale accounting, the linked transaction shall generally be accounted for as a
forward contract, as opposed to the current presentation, where the purchased
asset and the repurchase liability are reflected separately on the balance
sheet. FSP 140-3 is effective on a prospective basis for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2008, with earlier application not
permitted. The adoption of FSP 140-3 did not have an impact on the
Company’s financial statements.
On
October 10, 2008, the FASB issued FSP No. 157-3, “Determining the Fair Value of
a Financial Asset When the Market for That Asset Is Not Active” (“FSP 157-3”).
FSP 157-3 clarifies the application of SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements”
(“SFAS 157”) in a market that is not active and provides an example to
illustrate key considerations in determining the fair value of a financial asset
when the market for that financial asset is not active. The issuance of FSP
157-3 did not have any impact on the Company’s determination of fair value for
its financial assets.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP 107-1 and APB 28-1, “Interim Disclosures about Fair
Value of Financial Instruments” (“FSP 107-1”) which amends
disclosures about fair value of financial instruments. The FSP requires a public
entity to provide disclosures about fair value of financial instruments in
interim financial information. The Company elected to adopt the
provisions of FAS 107-1 during the first quarter of 2009 and has included the
required disclosures in its notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, “Recognition and Presentation
of Other-Than-Temporary-Impairment” (“FSP 115-2”) which clarifies
other-than-temporary impairment. FSP 115-2 (i) changes existing guidance
for determining whether an impairment is other than temporary to debt securities
and (ii) replaces the existing requirement that the entity’s management
assert it has both the intent and ability to hold an impaired security until
recovery with a requirement that management assert: (a) it does not have
the intent to sell the security; and (b) it is more likely than not it will
not have to sell the security before recovery of its cost basis. Under FSP 115-2
declines in the fair value of held-to-maturity and available-for-sale securities
below their cost that are deemed to be other than temporary are reflected in
earnings as realized losses to the extent the impairment is related to credit
losses. The amount of impairment related to other factors is
recognized in other comprehensive income. The
9
Company
adopted FSP 115-2 during the first quarter of 2009. The adoption of
this FSP 115-2 did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial
statements.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP FAS 157-4, “Determining Fair Value When the Volume and
Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased and
Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly” (“FSP 157-4”) which clarifies the
application of fair value accounting. FSP 157-4 affirms the objective
of fair value when a market is not active, clarifies and includes additional
factors for determining whether there has been a significant decrease in market
activity, eliminates the presumption that all transactions are distressed unless
proven otherwise, and requires an entity to disclose a change in valuation
technique. The Company adopted FSP 157-4 during the first quarter of
2009. The adoption of FSP 157-4 did not have a significant impact on
the Company’s financial statements.
NOTE
2 – NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
Net
income per common share is presented on both a basic and diluted
basis. Diluted net income per common share assumes the conversion of
the convertible preferred stock into common stock, using the two-class method,
and stock options, using the treasury stock method, but only if these items are
dilutive. The Series D preferred stock is convertible into one share
of common stock for each share of preferred stock. The following
table reconciles the numerator and denominator for both basic and diluted net
income per common share for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and
2008.
Three
Months Ended March 31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Income
|
Weighted-Average
Common Shares
|
Income
|
Weighted-
Average
Common
Shares
|
|||||||||||||
Net
income
|
$ | 3,134 | $ | 5,319 | ||||||||||||
Preferred
stock dividends
|
(1,003 | ) | (1,003 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net
income to common shareholders
|
2,131 | 12,169,762 | $ | 4,316 | 12,156,887 | |||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive items
|
– | – | 1,003 | 4,230,105 | ||||||||||||
Diluted
|
$ | 2,131 | 12,169,762 | $ | 5,319 | 16,386,992 | ||||||||||
Net
income per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.36 | ||||||||||||
Diluted
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.32 | ||||||||||||
Reconciliation
of shares included in calculation of income per common share due to
dilutive effect:
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
effect of dilutive:
|
||||||||||||||||
Convertible
preferred stock
|
– | – | 1,003 | 4,221,539 | ||||||||||||
Stock
options
|
– | – | – | 8,566 | ||||||||||||
$ | – | – | $ | 1,003 | 4,230,105 |
The following securities were excluded from the calculation of diluted income per common share, as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive:
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||
March
31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Shares
issuable under stock option awards
|
110,000 | 95,000 | ||||||
Convertible
preferred stock
|
4,221,539 | – |
10
NOTE
3 – AGENCY MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES
The
following table presents the components of the Company’s investment in Agency
MBS as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008:
March
31,
2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||
Principal/par
value
|
$ | 438,883 | $ | 307,548 | ||||
Purchase
premiums
|
7,609 | 3,585 | ||||||
Purchase
discounts
|
(54 | ) | (59 | ) | ||||
Amortized cost
|
446,438 | 311,074 | ||||||
Gross
unrealized gains
|
4,426 | 1,355 | ||||||
Gross
unrealized losses
|
(64 | ) | (853 | ) | ||||
Fair value
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | 311,576 | ||||
Weighted
average coupon
|
5.15 | % | 5.06 | % | ||||
Weighted
average months to reset
|
25 | 21 |
Principal/par
value in the table above includes principal payments receivable on Agency MBS of
$2,122 and $956 as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively.
The
Company received principal payments of $17,946 on its portfolio of Agency MBS
and purchased approximately $153,951 of Agency MBS during the three-month period
ended March 31, 2009. Approximately $129,147 of the purchases were
financed with repurchase agreements, and the remaining $24,804 were purchased
without the use of financing.
NOTE
4 – SECURITIZED MORTGAGE LOANS, NET
The
following table summarizes the components of securitized mortgage loans at March
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008:
March
31,
2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans:
|
||||||||
Commercial
mortgage loans
|
$ | 162,072 | $ | 164,032 | ||||
Single-family
mortgage loans
|
67,653 | 70,607 | ||||||
229,725 | 234,639 | |||||||
Funds
held by trustees, including funds held for defeasance
|
11,151 | 11,267 | ||||||
Accrued
interest receivable
|
1,522 | 1,538 | ||||||
Unamortized
discounts and premiums, net
|
328 | 90 | ||||||
Other
|
(106 | ) | – | |||||
Loans,
at amortized cost
|
242,620 | 247,534 | ||||||
Allowance
for loan losses
|
(3,782 | ) | (3,707 | ) | ||||
$ | 238,838 | $ | 243,827 |
All of
the securitized mortgage loans are encumbered by securitization financing bonds
(see Note 9).
NOTE
5 – ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES
The
allowance for loan losses is included in securitized mortgage loans, net in the
accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. The following
table summarizes the aggregate activity for the allowance for loan losses for
the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008:
11
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Allowance
at beginning of period
|
$ | 3,707 | $ | 2,721 | ||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
179 | 26 | ||||||
Credit
losses, net of recoveries
|
(9 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||
Allowance
at end of period
|
$ | 3,877 | $ | 2,745 |
The
following table presents the components of the allowance for loan losses at
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008:
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||
Securitized
commercial mortgage loans
|
$ | 3,567 | $ | 3,527 | ||||
Securitized
single-family mortgage loans
|
215 | 180 | ||||||
3,782 | 3,707 | |||||||
Other
mortgage loans
|
95 | – | ||||||
$ | 3,877 | $ | 3,707 |
The
following table presents certain information on impaired commercial mortgage
loans at December 31, 2008 and March 31, 2009:
Investment
in Impaired Loans
|
Allowance
for Loan Losses
|
Investment
in Excess of Allowance
|
||||||||||
December
31, 2008
|
$ | 24,022 | $ | 3,527 | $ | 20,495 | ||||||
March
31, 2009
|
22,429 | 3,567 | 18,862 |
Impaired
loans included three delinquent loans with an amortized cost basis of $5,531 at
March 31, 2009 and two loans with an amortized cost basis of $3,082 at December
31, 2008.
NOTE
6 — INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE
The
Company, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, holds a 49.875% interest in
Copperhead Ventures, LLC, a joint venture primarily between the Company
and DBAH Capital, LLC, an affiliate of Deutsche Bank,
A.G.
The
Company accounts for its investment in the joint venture using the equity
method, under which it recognizes its proportionate share of the joint venture’s
earnings or loss and changes in accumulated other comprehensive income or
loss.
The joint
venture owns interests in commercial mortgage backed securities (“CMBS”) and an
investment in a payment agreement from the Company (see Note
10). Under the payment agreement amounts received, after payment on
the associated securitization financing bonds outstanding, monthly by the
Company on certain securitized commercial mortgage loans are paid to the joint
venture. During the three months ended March 31, 2009, the joint
venture received $0.4 million of payments under this payment
agreement.
The
Company recorded equity in the loss of the joint venture of $754, which includes
$60 of amortization expense, and a decrease of $1,035 in accumulated other
comprehensive loss of the joint venture for the three months ended March 31,
2009 resulting from the venture’s ownership of CMBS.
12
The
following tables present the condensed results of operations for the joint
venture for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 and the financial
condition as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 of the joint
venture.
Condensed
Statements of Operations
|
||||||||
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Interest
income
|
$ | 635 | $ | 1,354 | ||||
Other-than-temporary
impairment
|
(1,417 | ) | (965 | ) | ||||
Fair
value adjustments, net
|
(563 | ) | (4,680 | ) | ||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
(47 | ) | (42 | ) | ||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (1,392 | ) | $ | (4,333 | ) |
Condensed
Balance Sheets
|
||||||||
March
31,
2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 10,924 | $ | 11,240 | ||||
Total
liabilities
|
$ | 62 | $ | 21 | ||||
Total
members’ capital
|
$ | 10,862 | $ | 11,219 |
The
other-than-temporary impairment of $1,417 in the first quarter of 2009 and the
$563 negative fair value adjustment are related to the joint venture’s
investment in subordinate CMBS. The CMBS declined in value during the
quarter from an increase in the estimated default rates and estimated loss
severities used in calculating the fair values of the CMBS.
The joint
venture’s investments at March 31, 2009 were comprised of $2,273 of
available-for-sale subordinate CMBS and a financial instrument backed by
commercial mortgage loans accounted for under SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value
Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“SFAS 159”)with a fair
value of $7,971. See Note 11.
NOTE
7 – OTHER INVESTMENTS
The
following table summarizes the amortized cost basis and fair value of the
Company’s other investments and the related average effective interest rates at
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008:
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Carrying
Value
|
Weighted
Average Yield
|
Carrying
Value
|
Weighted
Average Yield
|
|||||||||||||
Non-Agency
MBS
|
$ | 6,830 | 8.24 | % | $ | 6,959 | 8.02 | % | ||||||||
Equity
securities of publicly traded companies
|
1,696 | 3,441 | ||||||||||||||
8,526 | 10,400 | |||||||||||||||
Gross
unrealized gains
|
560 | 802 | ||||||||||||||
Gross
unrealized losses
|
(1,282 | ) | (1,335 | ) | ||||||||||||
7,804 | 9,867 | |||||||||||||||
Other
loans, net
|
2,478 | 2,657 | ||||||||||||||
Other
|
168 | 211 | ||||||||||||||
$ | 10,450 | $ | 12,735 |
Non-Agency
MBS consist principally of fixed rate securities collateralized by single-family
residential loans originated in 1994.
13
The
Company sold approximately $1,747 and $5,247 of equity securities during the
three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, on which it recognized
gains of $82 and $2,088, respectively.
Other
loans are comprised principally of unsecuritized mortgage loans originated
predominately between 1986 and 1997. Of the approximately 35 mortgage
loans that make up the balance, four loans were 60 days or more delinquent as of
March 31, 2009. Three of the delinquent loans are carried at
discounts in excess of the estimated losses on those loans. An
allowance for loan losses of $95 was provided for one of the delinquent loans
during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
NOTE
8 – REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS
The
Company uses repurchase agreements, which are recourse to the Company, to
finance certain of its investments. The following tables present the
components of the Company’s repurchase agreements by the type of securities
collateralizing the repurchase agreement at March 31, 2009 and December 31,
2008, respectively.
March
31, 2009
|
||||||||||||
Collateral
Type
|
Balance
|
Weighted
Average Rate
|
Fair
Value of Collateral
|
|||||||||
Agency
MBS
|
$ | 387,641 | 0.90 | % | $ | 415,360 | ||||||
Securitization
financing bonds (See Note 9)
|
15,504 | 2.52 | % | 26,877 | ||||||||
$ | 403,145 | 0.96 | % | $ | 442,237 |
December
31, 2008
|
||||||||||||
Collateral
Type
|
Balance
|
Weighted
Average Rate
|
Fair
Value of Collateral
|
|||||||||
Agency
MBS
|
$ | 274,217 | 2.70 | % | $ | 300,277 | ||||||
Securitization
financing bonds
|
– | – | – | |||||||||
$ | 274,217 | 2.70 | % | $ | 300,277 |
At March
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, the repurchase agreements had the following
maturities:
Original
Maturity
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
30
days or less
|
$ | 15,504 | $ | 38,617 | ||||
31
to 60 days
|
356,620 | 187,960 | ||||||
61
to 90 days
|
31,021 | 47,640 | ||||||
$ | 403,145 | $ | 274,217 |
NOTE
9 – SECURITIZATION FINANCING
The
Company, through limited-purpose finance subsidiaries, has issued bonds pursuant
to indentures in the form of non-recourse securitization
financing. Each series of securitization financing may consist of
various classes of bonds, either at fixed or variable rates of interest and
having varying repayment terms. The Company, on occasion, may retain
bonds or redeem bonds and hold such bonds outstanding for possible future resale
or reissuance. Payments received on securitized mortgage loans and
any reinvestment income earned thereon are used to make payments on the
bonds.
The
obligations under the securitization financings are payable solely from the
securitized mortgage loans and are otherwise non-recourse to the
Company. The stated maturity date for each class of bonds is
generally calculated based on the final scheduled payment date of the underlying
collateral pledged. The actual maturity of each class will be
directly affected by the rate of principal prepayments on the related
collateral. Each series is also subject to redemption at the
Company’s option according to specific terms of the respective
indentures. As a result, the actual maturity of any class of a series
of securitization financing is likely to occur earlier than its stated
maturity.
14
The
Company has three series of bonds remaining outstanding pursuant to three
separate indentures. One series with a principal amount of $26,547 is
collateralized by $67,653 in single-family mortgage loans (the “single-family
series”). The two remaining series with principal amounts of $17,866
and $129,657, respectively, are collateralized by commercial mortgage loans,
including defeased loans, with unpaid principal balances at March 31, 2009 of
$22,522 and $150,552, respectively.
The
Company has the right to redeem $17,036 and $830 of bonds, which have current
interest rates of 6.65% and 8.82%, at par as of March 31, 2009. The
Company expects to redeem substantially all of these bonds in May
2009. The Company owns one securitization bond with a par value of
$33,830 from the single-family series which is rated “AAA” by two of the
nationally recognized rating agencies. This bond is pledged as
collateral to support repurchase agreement borrowings.
The
components of securitization financing along with certain other information at
March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 are summarized as follows:
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Bonds
Outstanding
|
Range
of Interest Rates
|
Bonds
Outstanding
|
Range
of Interest Rates
|
|||||||||||||
Fixed-rate
classes
|
$ | 147,523 | 6.6% - 8.8 | % | $ | 149,598 | 6.6% - 8.8 | % | ||||||||
Variable-rate
classes
|
26,547 | 0.8 | % | 28,186 | 1.7 | % | ||||||||||
Accrued
interest payable
|
994 | 1,008 | ||||||||||||||
Unamortized
net bond premium and deferred costs
|
(727 | ) | (627 | ) | ||||||||||||
$ | 174,337 | $ | 178,165 | |||||||||||||
Range
of stated maturities
|
2024-2027
|
2024-2027
|
||||||||||||||
Estimated
weighted average life
|
2.4
years
|
2.6
years
|
||||||||||||||
Number
of series
|
3
|
3
|
At March
31, 2009, the weighted-average effective rate of the coupon on the bonds
outstanding was 5.9%. The average effective rate on the bonds was
5.9% and 6.1% for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and the year ended
December 31, 2008, respectively. The variable-rate bonds pay interest
based on one-month LIBOR plus 30 basis points.
NOTE
10 – OBLIGATION UNDER PAYMENT AGREEMENT
Obligation
under payment agreement represents the fair value of estimated future payments
due to the joint venture discussed in Note 6. The amounts due under
the payment agreement are based on the amounts received monthly by the Company
on certain securitized commercial mortgage loans with an unpaid principal
balance, including defeased loans, of $150,552 at March 31, 2009, after payment
of the associated securitization financing bonds outstanding with an unpaid
principal balance of $129,657 at March 31, 2009. The present value of
the payment agreement was determined based on the total estimated future
payments discounted at a weighted average rate of 39.6%. Factors
which significantly impact the valuation of the payment agreement include the
credit performance of the underlying securitized mortgage loans, estimated
prepayments on the loans and the weighted average discount rate used on the cash
flows.
The
Company made payments of $401 and $402 under the payment agreement for the three
months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, all of which was recorded as
interest expense in the condensed financial statements.
NOTE
11 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
Pursuant
to SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS 157”), the fair value is the
exchange price in an orderly transaction, that is not a forced liquidation or
distressed sale, between market participants to sell an asset
or
15
transfer
a liability in the market in which the reporting entity would transact for the
asset or liability, that is, the principal or most advantageous market for the
asset/liability. The transaction to sell the asset or transfer the
liability is a hypothetical transaction at the measurement date, considered from
the perspective of a market participant that holds the
asset/liability. SFAS 157 provides a consistent definition of fair
value which focuses on exit price and prioritizes, within a measurement of fair
value, the use of market-based inputs over entity-specific inputs. In
addition, SFAS 157 provides a framework for measuring fair value and establishes
a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency
of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability as of the measurement
date.
The three
levels of the valuation hierarchy established by SFAS 157 are as
follows:
Level 1 —
Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities at the measurement date. The types of assets and
liabilities carried at Level 1 fair value generally are equity securities listed
in active markets.
Level 2 —
Inputs (other than quoted prices included in Level 1) are either directly or
indirectly observable for the asset or liability through correlation with market
data at the measurement date and for the duration of the instrument’s
anticipated life. Fair valued assets and liabilities that are
generally included in this category are Agency MBS, which are valued based on
the average of multiple dealer quotes that are active in the Agency MBS
market.
Level 3 —
Inputs reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would use
in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement
date. Consideration is given to the risk inherent in the valuation
technique and the risk inherent in the inputs to the
model. Generally, assets and liabilities carried at fair value and
included in this category are non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, delinquent
property tax receivables and the obligation under payment agreement
liability.
The
following table presents the Company’s assets and liabilities at March 31, 2009,
which are carried at fair value, segregated by the hierarchy level of the fair
value estimate:
Fair
Value Measurements
|
||||||||||||||||
Fair
Value
|
Level
1
|
Level
2
|
Level
3
|
|||||||||||||
Assets:
|
||||||||||||||||
Agency MBS
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | – | $ | 450,800 | $ | – | ||||||||
Non-Agency MBS
|
6,070 | – | – | 6,070 | ||||||||||||
Equity securities
|
1,734 | 1,734 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Other
|
168 | – | – | 168 | ||||||||||||
Total assets carried at fair
value
|
$ | 458,772 | $ | 1,734 | $ | 450,800 | $ | 6,238 | ||||||||
Liabilities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Obligation under payment
agreement
|
$ | 7,971 | $ | – | $ | – | $ | 7,971 | ||||||||
Total liabilities carried at fair
value
|
$ | 7,971 | $ | – | $ | – | $ | 7,971 |
The
following table presents the reconciliations of the beginning and ending
balances of the Level 3 fair value estimates for the three month period ended
March 31, 2009:
16
Level
3 Fair Values
|
||||||||||||||||
Non-Agency
MBS
|
Other
|
Total
assets
|
Obligation
under payment agreement
|
|||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
$ | 6,259 | $ | 211 | $ | 6,470 | $ | (8,534 | ) | |||||||
Total
realized and unrealized gains (losses)
|
||||||||||||||||
Included in
earnings
|
– | 1 | 1 | 563 | ||||||||||||
Included in other comprehensive
income (loss)
|
(760 | ) | 6 | (754 | ) | – | ||||||||||
Purchases,
sales, issuances and other settlements, net
|
571 | (50 | ) | 521 | – | |||||||||||
Transfers
in and/or out of Level 3
|
– | – | – | – | ||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2009
|
$ | 6,070 | $ | 168 | $ | 6,238 | $ | (7,971 | ) |
There
were no assets or liabilities which were measured at fair value on a
non-recurring basis during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
SFAS No.
107, “Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments” requires the
disclosure of the estimated fair value of financial instruments. The
following table presents the recorded basis and estimated fair values of the
Company’s financial instruments as of March 31, 2009 and December 31,
2008:
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Recorded
Basis
|
Fair
Value
|
Recorded
Basis
|
Fair
Value
|
|||||||||||||
Assets:
|
||||||||||||||||
Agency
MBS
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | 450,800 | $ | 311,576 | $ | 311,576 | ||||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans, net
|
238,838 | 197,676 | 243,827 | 201,252 | ||||||||||||
Investment
in joint venture
|
5,417 | 5,417 | 5,655 | 5,595 | ||||||||||||
Other
investments
|
10,450 | 10,186 | 12,735 | 12,358 | ||||||||||||
Liabilities:
|
||||||||||||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
403,145 | 403,145 | 274,217 | 274,217 | ||||||||||||
Securitization
financing
|
174,337 | 152,155 | 178,165 | 153,370 | ||||||||||||
Obligation
under payment agreement
|
7,971 | 7,971 | 8,534 | 8,534 |
NOTE
12 – PREFERRED AND COMMON STOCK
The
following table presents the preferred and common dividends paid from January 1,
2009 through March 31, 2009:
Declaration
|
Record
|
Payment
|
Dividend
per Share
|
|||||||
Date
|
Date
|
Date
|
Common
|
Preferred
|
||||||
Common
Stock
|
||||||||||
December
10, 2008
|
December
22, 2008
|
January
30, 2009
|
$ | 0.23 | – | |||||
March
20, 2009
|
March
31, 2009
|
April
30, 2009
|
0.23 | – | ||||||
Preferred
Stock
|
||||||||||
December
22, 2008
|
December
31, 2008
|
February
2, 2009
|
– | $ | 0.2375 | |||||
March
20, 2009
|
March
31, 2009
|
April
30, 2009
|
– | $ | 0.2375 |
There
were no changes in the number of preferred and common shares outstanding during
the three months ended March 31, 2009.
17
Shelf
Registration
On
February 29, 2008, the Company filed a shelf registration statement on Form S-3
(the “Shelf Registration”), which became effective on April 17,
2008. The Shelf Registration permits the Company to sell up to $1.0
billion of securities, including common stock, preferred stock, debt securities
and warrants. No shares had been sold or otherwise issued under this
Shelf Registration as of March 31, 2009.
Controlled Equity Offering
Program
The
Company initiated a controlled equity offering program (“CEOP”) on
March 16, 2009 by filing a prospectus supplement under its Shelf
Registration. The CEOP allows the Company to offer and sell, from
time to time through Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. (“Cantor”) as agent, up to
3,000,000 shares of its common stock in negotiated transactions or transactions
that are deemed to be “at the market offerings”, as defined in Rule 415 under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, including sales made directly on the New
York Stock Exchange or sales made to or through a market maker other than on an
exchange.
Subsequent
to the end of the first quarter, the Company sold through the CEOP 890,000
shares of its common stock at $6.75 per share, for which it received proceeds of
$5,857, net of a $150 sales commission paid to Cantor. After this
transaction, 2,110,000 shares of the Company’s common stock remain available for
offer and sale under the CEOP.
NOTE
13 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The
Company and its subsidiaries may be involved in certain litigation matters
arising in the ordinary course of business from time to
time. Although the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be
ascertained at this time, and the results of legal proceedings cannot be
predicted with certainty, the Company believes, based on current knowledge, that
the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s financial position or results of operations.
Information
on litigation arising out of the ordinary course of business is described
below.
One of
the Company’s subsidiaries, GLS Capital, Inc. (“GLS”), and the County of
Allegheny, Pennsylvania are defendants in a class action lawsuit (“Pentlong”)
filed in 1997 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
(the "Court of Common Pleas"). Between 1995 and 1997, GLS purchased
delinquent county property tax receivables for properties located in Allegheny
County. Plaintiffs allege that GLS did not enjoy the same rights as
its assignor, Allegheny County, to recover from delinquent taxpayers certain
attorney fees, costs and expenses and interest in the collection of the tax
receivables. Class action status has been certified in this matter,
but a motion to reconsider is pending. This Pentlong litigation has
been stayed pending the outcome of similar litigation before the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court in which GLS is not a defendant. The plaintiff in that
case had disputed the application of curative legislation enacted in 2003 but
retroactive to 1996 which specifically set forth the right to collect reasonable
attorney fees, costs, and interest which were properly taxable as part of the
tax debt owed. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court subsequently issued an
opinion in favor of the defendants in that matter, which the Company believes
will favorably impact the Pentlong litigation by substantially reducing the
Pentlong plaintiffs’ universe of actionable claims of illegal actions by GLS in
connection with the collection of the tax receivables. No timetable
has been set by the Court of Common Pleas for the recommencement of the
litigation. The Pentlong plaintiffs have not enumerated their damages
in this matter, and the Company believes that the ultimate outcome of this
litigation will not have a material impact on its financial condition, but may
have a material impact on its reported results for the particular period
presented.
Dynex
Capital, Inc. and Dynex Commercial, Inc. (“DCI”), a former affiliate of the
Company and now known as DCI Commercial, Inc., are appellees (or respondents) in
the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Judicial District of Texas at
18
Dallas,
related to the matter of Basic Capital Management et al. (collectively,
“BCM” or the “Plaintiffs”) versus DCI et al. as previously discussed by the
Company in prior filings. There has been no material change in this
litigation since the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008 filed on March 16, 2009.
As
discussed in prior filings, Dynex Capital, Inc. and MERIT Securities
Corporation, a subsidiary, were defendants in a putative class action complaint
alleging violations of the federal securities laws in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York (“District Court”) by the Teamsters
Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund (“Teamsters”). The complaint
was filed on February 7, 2005, and purported to be a class action on behalf of
purchasers between February 2000 and May 2004 of MERIT Series 12 and MERIT
Series 13 securitization financing bonds, which are collateralized by
manufactured housing loans. After a series of rulings by the District
Court and an appeal by the Company and MERIT, on February 22, 2008 the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on February 22, 2008 dismissed
the litigation against the Company and MERIT but with leave for Teamsters to
amend and replead. Teamsters filed an amended complaint on August 6,
2008 with the District Court which essentially restated the same allegations as
the original complaint and added the Company’s former president and its current
Chief Operating Officer as defendants. The Company is seeking to have
the amended complaint dismissed and intends to vigorously defend itself in this
matter. Although no assurance can be given with respect to the
ultimate outcome of this matter, the Company believes the resolution of this
matter will not have a material effect on its consolidated balance sheet but
could materially affect its consolidated results of operations in a given year
or period.
NOTE
14 – STOCK BASED COMPENSATION
Pursuant
to the Company’s 2004 Stock Incentive Plan, as approved by the shareholders at
the Company’s 2005 annual shareholders’ meeting (the “Stock Incentive Plan”),
the Company may grant to eligible officers, directors and employees stock
options, stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) and restricted stock
awards. An aggregate of 1,500,000 shares of common stock may be
granted pursuant to the Stock Incentive Plan. The Company may also
grant dividend equivalent rights in connection with the grant of options or
SARs.
The
following table presents a summary of the SAR activity for the Stock Incentive
Plan:
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||
March
31, 2009
|
||||||||
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
|||||||
SARs
outstanding at beginning of period
|
278,146 | $ | 7.27 | |||||
SARs
granted
|
– | – | ||||||
SARs
forfeited or redeemed
|
– | – | ||||||
SARs
exercised
|
– | – | ||||||
SARs
outstanding at end of period
|
278,146 | $ | 7.27 | |||||
SARs
vested and exercisable
|
219,396 | $ | 7.37 |
19
The
following table presents a summary of the option activity for the Stock
Incentive Plan:
Three
Months Ended
|
||||||||
March
31, 2009
|
||||||||
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
|||||||
Options
outstanding at beginning of period
|
110,000 | $ | 8.55 | |||||
Options
granted
|
– | – | ||||||
Options
forfeited or redeemed
|
– | – | ||||||
Options
exercised
|
– | – | ||||||
Options
outstanding at end of period
|
110,000 | $ | 8.55 | |||||
Options
vested and exercisable
|
110,000 | $ | 8.55 |
The
following table presents a summary of the restricted stock activity for the
Stock Incentive Plan:
Three
Months Ended
|
||||
March
31, 2009
|
||||
Number
of Shares
|
||||
Restricted
stock at beginning of period
|
30,000 | |||
Restricted
stock granted
|
– | |||
Restricted
stock forfeited or redeemed
|
– | |||
Restricted
stock vested
|
(7,500 | ) | ||
Restricted
stock outstanding at end of period
|
22,500 |
The
Company recognized stock based compensation expense of $48 for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 and stock based compensation benefit of $83 for the three
months ended March 31, 2008 for its SARs and options. The total
compensation cost related to non-vested awards was $13 and $519 at March 31,
2009 and 2008, respectively, and will be recognized as the awards
vest.
As
required by SFAS No. 123(R) “Share-Based Payment,” stock options, which may be
settled only in shares of common stock, have been treated as equity awards, with
their fair value measured at the grant date, and SARs, which may be settled in
cash, have been treated as liability awards, with their fair value measured at
the grant date and remeasured at the end of each reporting
period. The fair value of SARs was estimated at March 31, 2009 using
the Black-Scholes option valuation model based upon the assumptions in the table
below.
The
following table provides the assumptions used for calculating the fair value of
the SARs outstanding at March 31, 2009.
SARs
Fair Value
|
||||
March
31, 2009
|
||||
Weighted-average
volatility
|
28.43 | % | ||
Expected
dividends
|
13.18 | % | ||
Expected
term (in months)
|
41 | |||
Risk-free
rate
|
1.60 | % |
20
The
following discussion and analysis is provided to increase understanding of, and
should be read in conjunction with, our condensed consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008. In addition to current and historical information, the
following discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These
statements relate to our future business, financial condition or results of
operations. For a description of certain factors that may have a significant
impact on our future business, financial condition or results of operations, see
“Forward-Looking Statements” at the end of this discussion and
analysis.
EXECUTIVE
OVERVIEW
We are a
specialty finance company organized as a real estate investment trust, or REIT,
which invests in mortgage loans and securities on a leveraged
basis. We invest in residential mortgage-backed securities, or MBS,
issued or guaranteed by a federally chartered corporation, such as Federal
National Mortgage Corporation, or Fannie Mae, or Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation, or Freddie Mac, or an agency of the U.S. government, such as
Government National Mortgage Association, or Ginnie Mae. MBS issued
or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae are commonly referred to
as “Agency MBS”.
We have
also invested in securitized single-family residential and commercial mortgage
loans, non-Agency mortgage-backed securities, or non-Agency MBS, and, through a
joint venture, commercial mortgage-backed securities
(“CMBS”). Substantially all of these loans and securities, including
those owned by the joint venture, consist of, or are secured by, first lien
mortgages which were originated by us from 1992 to 1998. We are no
longer originating loans.
Our
primary investment activity for 2009 has been in Agency MBS and we expect to
continue to invest in Agency MBS for the foreseeable future. We may
also invest in non-Agency MBS or CMBS depending on the nature and risks of the
investment, its expected return and future economic and market
conditions. Where economically beneficial to us, we may also invest
additional capital in our securitized mortgage loan pools by redeeming the
associated securitization financing in whole or in part pursuant to our right to
redeem such financing as discussed below.
We have
generally financed our investments through a combination of repurchase
agreements, securitization financing, and equity capital. We employ
leverage in order to increase the overall yield on our invested
capital. Our primary source of income is net interest income, which
is the excess of the interest income earned on our investments over the cost of
financing these investments. We may occasionally sell investments
prior to their maturity although our intention is generally to hold our
investments on a long-term basis.
As a
REIT, we are required to distribute to our shareholders as dividends at least
90% of our taxable income, which is our income as calculated for income tax
purposes after consideration of our tax net operating loss carryforwards
(“NOLs”). We may be able to manage our distribution requirements
through the use of our NOLs, which were approximately $150 million at December
31, 2008, to offset, partially or in total, our distribution
requirements. Our use of NOLs to offset income distribution
requirements will be tempered by our desire to continue to pay a reasonable
dividend to our shareholders.
21
At March
31, 2009, we had total investments of approximately $705.5 million. Our
investments consisted of $450.8 million of Agency MBS, $69.0 million of
securitized single-family residential mortgage loans and $169.9 million of
securitized commercial mortgage loans. We have a $5.4 million
investment in a joint venture which owns subordinate CMBS and
cash. We also had $1.7 million of equity securities and $6.1 million
in non-Agency MBS.
The
Agency MBS is pledged as collateral to support $387.6 million in repurchase
agreement financing and the securitized single-family and commercial mortgage
loans are pledged to support $174.1 million in securitzation
financing. A securitization financing bond backed by single-family
loans is pledged to support a $15.5 million repurchase agreement
financing. A discussion of our investments and financing activity is
included under “Financial Condition” below.
With
respect to our investment in Agency MBS, we invest in Hybrid Agency ARMs and
Agency ARMs and, to a lesser extent, fixed-rate Agency MBS. Hybrid
ARMs are MBS collateralized by hybrid adjustable mortgage loans, which have a
fixed rate of interest for a specified period (typically three to ten years) and
which then reset their interest rate at least annually to an increment over a
specified interest rate index. Hybrid Agency ARMs are Hybrid ARMs
that are issued or guaranteed by a federally chartered corporation or an agency
of the U.S. government. Agency ARMs are MBS collateralized by
adjustable rate mortgage loans which have interest rates that generally will
adjust at least annually to an increment over a specified interest rate
index. Agency ARMs may be collateralized by Hybrid Agency ARMs that
are past their fixed rate periods. At March 31, 2009, we had
approximately $347.4 million in Hybrid Agency ARMs and approximately $103.4
million in Agency ARMs.
We have
the right to redeem the securitization financing collateralized by commercial
mortgage loans under certain conditions. We have exercised this right
in the past when economically beneficial to us. As of March 31, 2009,
approximately $17.9 million in securitization financing with a weighted average
coupon of 6.8% was redeemable by us. The principal amount of $17.0
million of this financing is guaranteed by Fannie Mae.
The
joint venture in which we invest also owns the right to call certain CMBS
at its current unpaid principal balance. Such CMBS had an outstanding
balance of $185.2 million at March 31, 2009, $141.9 million of which are rated
‘AAA’ by two of the nationally recognized ratings agencies. The
current economic and market conditions have made it unfeasible to redeem these
bonds, and any future decision on whether to redeem these bonds will be based on
the economic and market conditions at that time. The termination date
for the joint venture was originally intended to be April 15, 2009, commensurate
with the redemption of the CMBS discussed above. As the CMBS were not
redeemed, the partnership remains in existence. We are currently
working with our joint venture partner to determine what actions to take with
regard to the joint venture. If the joint venture is terminated, we
may purchase certain assets from the joint venture in connection with its
termination.
FINANCIAL
CONDITION
The
following table presents certain balance sheet items that had significant
activity, which are discussed after the table.
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
Agency
MBS, at fair value
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | 311,576 | ||||
Securitized
mortgage loans, net
|
238,838 | 243,827 | ||||||
Investment
in joint venture
|
5,417 | 5,655 | ||||||
Other
investments
|
10,450 | 12,735 | ||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
403,145 | 274,217 | ||||||
Securitization
financing
|
174,337 | 178,165 | ||||||
Obligation
under payment agreement
|
7,971 | 8,534 | ||||||
Shareholders’
equity
|
143,937 | 140,409 |
22
Agency
MBS
Our
Agency MBS investments, which are classified as available-for-sale and carried
at fair value, are comprised as follows:
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
Agency
MBS:
|
||||||||
Hybrid Agency
ARMs
|
$ | 346,247 | $ | 217,800 | ||||
Agency ARMs
|
102,272 | 92,626 | ||||||
448,519 | 310,426 | |||||||
Fixed
Rate
|
159 | 194 | ||||||
448,678 | 310,620 | |||||||
Principal
receivable
|
2,122 | 956 | ||||||
$ | 450,800 | $ | 311,576 |
Agency
MBS increased from $311.6 million at December 31, 2008 to $450.8 million at
March 31, 2009 primarily as a result of our purchase of approximately $154.0
million of Hybrid Agency MBS during the three month period ended March 31,
2009. Partially offsetting the purchases was the receipt of $17.9
million of principal on the securities during the three month period ended March
31, 2009. At March 31, 2009, our Hybrid Agency MBS portfolio had a
weighted average of 25 months remaining until the rates on the underlying loans
collateralizing the Agency MBS reset. The weighted average coupon on
our portfolio of Agency MBS was 5.15% as of March 31, 2009. At March
31, 2009, approximately $415.4 million of the Hybrid Agency MBS had been pledged
to counterparties as security for repurchase agreement financing.
The
average quarterly constant prepayment rate (“CPR”) realized on our Agency MBS
portfolio was 14.8% for the first quarter of 2009 and 13.6% for the fourth
quarter of 2008. CPR for the first quarter of 2008 was not
meaningful.
Securitized Mortgage Loans,
Net
Securitized
mortgage loans are comprised of loans secured by first deeds of trust on
single-family residential and commercial properties. The following
table presents our net basis in these loans at amortized cost, which includes
accrued interest receivable, discounts, premiums, deferred costs and reserves
for loan losses, by the type of property collateralizing the loan.
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans, net:
|
||||||||
Commercial
|
$ | 169,881 | $ | 171,963 | ||||
Single-family
|
68,957 | 71,864 | ||||||
238,838 | 243,827 |
Securitized
commercial mortgage loans includes the loans pledged to two securitization
trusts, which were issued in 1993 and 1997 and have outstanding principal
balances, including defeased loans, of $22.5 million and $150.6 million,
respectively, at March 31, 2009. The decrease in these loans was
primarily related to principal payments of $2.1 million during the three months
ended March 31, 2009 partially offset by $0.1 million of net discount
amortization.
Securitized
single-family mortgage loans includes loans pledged to one securitization trust,
which was issued in 2002 using loans that were principally originated between
1992 and 1997. The decrease in the securitized single-family mortgage
loans was primarily related to principal payments on the loans of $2.9 million,
$2.2 million of which were unscheduled, during the three months ended March 31,
2009.
23
Investment in Joint
Venture
Investment
in joint venture declined during the three months ended March 31, 2009 as a
result of our interest in the net loss of the joint venture of $1.4 million and
other comprehensive loss of the joint venture of $0.4 million. For
discussion of the net loss of the joint venture see discussion under “Results of
Operations.”
At March
31, 2009, the joint venture owns various subordinate interests in CMBS issued by
two securitization trusts created by us in 1997 and 1998. The
carrying value of these securities at March 31, 2009 was $8.0 million and $2.3
million respectively, relative to their principal balances of $20.9 million and
$17.8 million. The joint venture also had cash and cash equivalents
of $0.7 million at March 31, 2009.
Other
Investments
Our other
investments are comprised of non-Agency MBS and equity securities, which are
classified as available-for-sale and carried at fair value, and other loans and
investments, which are stated at amortized cost, as follows:
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
Non-Agency
MBS
|
$ | 6,830 | $ | 6,959 | ||||
Equity
securities of publicly traded companies
|
1,696 | 3,441 | ||||||
8,526 | 10,400 | |||||||
Gross
unrealized gains
|
560 | 802 | ||||||
Gross
unrealized losses
|
(1,282 | ) | (1,335 | ) | ||||
7,804 | 9,867 | |||||||
Other
loans, net
|
2,478 | 2,657 | ||||||
Other
|
168 | 211 | ||||||
$ | 10,450 | $ | 12,735 |
Non-Agency
MBS is primarily comprised of investment grade MBS issued by a subsidiary of the
Company in 1994. The decline of $0.1 million to $6.8 million at March
31, 2009 was primarily related to the principal payments received on these
securities during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
Equity
securities decreased approximately $1.7 million to $1.7 million and include
common stock of publicly-traded mortgage REITs. We sold approximately
$1.7 million of equity securities on which we recognized a net gain of $0.1
million during the first quarter of 2009.
Other
loans and investments declined approximately $0.2 million to $2.6 million during
the three months ended March 31, 2009. The balance at March 31, 2009
is comprised primarily of $2.5 million of seasoned residential and commercial
mortgage loans and $0.2 million related to our remaining investment in
delinquent property tax receivables. The decline is primarily related
to the receipt of approximately $0.1 million of principal on the mortgage loans
and a $0.1 million provision for loan losses.
Repurchase
Agreements
Repurchase
agreements increased to $403.1 million at March 31, 2009 from $274.2 million at
December 31, 2008. The increase is primarily related to our use of
repurchase agreements to finance our acquisition of Agency MBS, net of
repayments during the quarter.
We
entered into a repurchase agreement during the first quarter of 2009, which had
a balance of $15.5 million at March 31, 2009 to finance a securitization
financing bond with a par value of $33.8 million at March 31,
2009. The securitization financing bond collateralizing the
repurchase agreement is collateralized by single-family mortgage loans and had
an estimated fair value of $26.9 million as of March 31, 2009.
24
Securitization
Financing
Securitization
financing consists of fixed and variable rate bonds as set forth in the table
below. The table includes the unpaid principal balance of the bonds
outstanding, accrued interest, discounts, premiums and deferred costs at March
31, 2009.
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
December
31, 2008
|
||||||
Securitization
financing:
|
||||||||
Fixed, secured by commercial
mortgage loans
|
$ | 148,359 | $ | 150,588 | ||||
Variable, secured by single-family
mortgage loans
|
25,978 | 27,577 | ||||||
$ | 174,337 | $ | 178,165 |
The fixed
rate bonds were issued pursuant to two separate indentures (via two
securitization trusts) and finance our securitized commercial mortgage loans,
which are also fixed rate. The $2.2 million decrease is primarily
related to principal payments on the bonds during the three months ended March
31, 2009 of $2.1 million. There was also $0.1 million of bond premium
and deferred cost amortization during the three months ended March 31,
2009.
The bonds
issued by one of the securitization trusts, which had a balance of $17.9 million
at March 31, 2009, consisted of two separate classes of bonds both of which were
callable by us, beginning June 15, 2008, and remain redeemable at our
option.
Our
single-family securitized mortgage loans are financed by variable rate
securitization financing bonds issued pursuant to a single
indenture. The $1.6 million decline in the balance during the three
months ended March 31, 2009 to $26.0 million is primarily related to principal
payments on the bonds.
Obligation
under payment agreement represents the fair value of estimated future payments
due to the joint venture discussed in Note 6 and Note 10 to our condensed
consolidated financial statements. The fair value of the obligation
decreased to $8.0 million at March 31, 2009 from $8.5 million at December 31,
2008. The change in value was recorded as a favorable fair value
adjustment in the condensed consolidated statement of operations. The
decline in value of the obligation under payment agreement was primarily related
to an increase in the estimated losses on the bonds covered by the agreement,
which decreased the estimated payments we will need to make in the future under
the instrument.
Shareholders’
Equity
Shareholders’
equity increased $3.5 million to $143.9 million at March 31,
2009. The increase was primarily related to net income of $3.1
million and a $4.2 million improvement from accumulated other comprehensive loss
of $3.9 million to accumulated other comprehensive income of $0.2 million during
the three months ended March 31, 2009. These increases were partially
offset by common and preferred stock dividends of $3.8
million. Accumulated other comprehensive income increased primarily
due to an increase in the price of our Agency MBS portfolio from
101.6 as of December 31, 2008 to 103.2 at March 31, 2009.
Supplemental
Discussion of Investments
The use
of leverage limits the amount of equity capital invested in a particular asset
while enhancing the potential overall returns on our equity capital
invested. The amount of equity capital invested and the amount of
financing for a particular investment are important considerations for us in
managing our investment portfolio.
In the
table below we have calculated our net invested capital using amounts for our
investments and financing from the consolidated balance sheets and the estimated
fair value of such net invested capital. For investments carried at
fair value in our financial statements, estimated fair value of net invested
capital is equal to the basis as presented in
25
the
financial statements less the financing amount associated with that
investment. For investments carried on an amortized cost basis, the
estimated fair value of net invested capital is based on the present value of
the projected
cash flow
from the investment adjusted for the impact and assumed level of future
prepayments and credit losses less the projected principal and interest due on
the associated financing. In general, because of the age of these
investments, an active secondary market does not currently exist so management
makes assumptions as to market expectations of prepayment speeds, losses and
discount rates.
With
respect to the joint venture, the estimated fair value for the CMBS held by the
joint venture is based on the present value of the projected cash flow from the
investment adjusted for the impact and assumed level of future prepayments and
credit losses less the projected principal and interest due on the associated
financing.
For
purposes of the table below, we have attempted to calculate fair value of the
investments based on what we believe to be reasonable assumptions that would be
made by a reasonable buyer. If we actually were to have attempted to
sell these investments at March 31, 2009, there can be no assurance that the
amounts set forth in the table below could have been realized.
Estimated Fair Value of Net
Investment
March
31, 2009
(amounts
in thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Investment
|
Investment
basis
|
Financing (1)
|
Net
invested capital
|
Estimated
fair value of net invested capital
|
||||||||||||
Agency
MBS (2)
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | 387,641 | $ | 63,159 | $ | 63,159 | ||||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans: (3)
|
||||||||||||||||
Single-family
mortgage loans – 2002 Trust
|
68,957 | 41,482 | 27,475 | 18,476 | ||||||||||||
Commercial
mortgage loans – 1993 Trust
|
21,002 | 17,938 | 3,064 | 3,571 | ||||||||||||
Commercial
mortgage loans – 1997 Trust
|
148,879 | 138,392 | 10,487 | – | ||||||||||||
238,838 | 197,812 | 41,026 | 22,047 | |||||||||||||
Investment
in joint venture(4)
|
5,417 | – | 5,417 | 5,417 | ||||||||||||
Other
investments:
(5)
|
||||||||||||||||
Non-Agency
MBS
|
6,070 | – | 6,070 | 6,070 | ||||||||||||
Equity
securities
|
1,734 | – | 1,734 | 1,734 | ||||||||||||
Other
loans and investments
|
2,646 | – | 2,646 | 2,382 | ||||||||||||
10,450 | – | 10,450 | 10,186 | |||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 705,505 | $ | 585,453 | $ | 120,052 | $ | 100,809 |
(1)
|
Financing
includes repurchase agreements and securitization financing issued to
third parties. Financing for the 1997 Trust also includes
obligation under payment agreement, which at March 31, 2009 had a balance
of $7,971.
|
(2)
|
Fair
values are based on a third-party pricing service and dealer
quotes.
|
(3)
|
Fair
values are based on discounted cash flows using assumptions set forth in
the table below, inclusive of amounts invested in unredeemed
securitization financing bonds.
|
(4)
|
Fair
value for investment in joint venture represents our share of the fair
value of the joint venture’s assets valued using methodologies and
assumptions consistent with note 3
above.
|
26
(5)
|
Fair
values are based on closing prices from national exchange for equity
securities. For the other items, fair value is calculated as
the net present value of expected future cash
flows.
|
The
following table summarizes the assumptions used in estimating fair value for our
net investment in securitized mortgage loans and the cash flow related to those
net investments during 2009.
Fair
Value Assumptions
|
|||||
Loan
type
|
Approximate
date of loan origination
|
Weighted-average
prepayment speeds(1)
|
Projected
annual losses (2)
|
Weighted-average
discount
rate(3)
|
YTD
2009 Cash Flows (4)
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Single-family
mortgage loans – 2002 Trust
|
1994
|
15%
CPR
|
0.2%
|
13%
|
$ 2,376
|
Commercial
mortgage loans – 1993 Trust
|
1993
|
0%
CPR
|
0.8%
|
20%
|
$ 229
|
Commercial
mortgage loans – 1997 Trust
|
1997
|
(5)
|
2.0%
|
40%
|
$ –
|
(1)
|
Assumed
CPR speeds generally are governed by underlying pool
characteristics. Loans currently delinquent in excess of 30
days are assumed to be liquidated in six months at a loss amount that is
calculated for each loan based on its specific
facts.
|
(2)
|
Represents
management’s estimate of losses that would be used by a third party in
valuing these or similar assets.
|
(3)
|
Represents
management’s estimate of the market discount rate that would be used by a
third party in valuing these or similar
assets.
|
(4)
|
Represents
net cash flows received on the investment including principal
and interest. Cash flows from the Commercial mortgage loans –
1997 Trust are paid by the Company to the joint venture pursuant to the
obligation under payment agreement.
|
(5)
|
Although
no prepayments are modeled, estimated cash flows assume these
loans prepay on the expiration of their lockout period, which is before
their scheduled maturity.
|
The
following table presents the net basis of investments included in the “Estimated
Fair Value of Net Investment” table above by their rating
classification. Investments in the unrated and non-investment grade
classification primarily include other loans that are not rated but are
substantially seasoned and performing loans. Securitization
over-collateralization generally includes the excess of the securitized mortgage
loan collateral pledged over the outstanding bonds issued by the securitization
trust.
(amounts
in thousands)
|
March
31, 2009
|
|||
Investments:
|
||||
Agency
MBS
|
$ | 63,159 | ||
AAA
rated non-Agency MBS
|
23,659 | |||
AA
and A rated non-Agency MBS
|
329 | |||
Unrated
and non-investment grade
|
4,787 | |||
Securitization
over-collateralization
|
22,701 | |||
Investment
in joint venture
|
5,417 | |||
$ | 120,052 |
27
The
following table reconciles the above to shareholders’ equity as presented on the
Company’s balance sheets:
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Book
Value
|
|||
Total
investment assets (per table above)
|
$ | 120,052 | ||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
21,841 | |||
Other
assets and liabilities, net
|
2,044 | |||
$ | 143,937 |
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
(amounts
in thousands except per share information)
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Interest
income
|
$ | 9,477 | $ | 6,483 | ||||
Interest
expense
|
4,433 | 4,062 | ||||||
Provision
for loan losses
|
(179 | ) | (26 | ) | ||||
Net
interest income after provision for loan losses
|
4,865 | 2,395 | ||||||
Equity
in loss of joint venture
|
(754 | ) | (2,251 | ) | ||||
Gain
on sale of investments, net
|
83 | 2,093 | ||||||
Fair
value adjustments, net
|
645 | 4,231 | ||||||
Other
income
|
21 | 67 | ||||||
General
and administrative expenses:
|
||||||||
Compensation
and benefits
|
(883 | ) | (495 | ) | ||||
Other
administrative and general expenses
|
(843 | ) | (721 | ) | ||||
Net
income
|
3,134 | 5,319 | ||||||
Net
income per common share:
|
||||||||
Basic
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.36 | ||||
Diluted
|
$ | 0.18 | $ | 0.32 | ||||
Three Months Ended March 31,
2009 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2008
Interest
Income
Interest
income includes interest earned on the investment portfolio and also reflects
the amortization of any related discounts, premiums and deferred
costs. The following table presents the significant components of our
interest income.
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Interest
income - Investments:
|
||||||||
Agency MBS
|
$ | 4,435 | $ | 104 | ||||
Securitized mortgage
loans
|
4,820 | 5,602 | ||||||
Other
investments
|
217 | 453 | ||||||
9,472 | 6,159 | |||||||
Interest
income – Cash and cash equivalents
|
5 | 324 | ||||||
$ | 9,477 | $ | 6,483 |
The
change in interest income on securitized mortgage loans and Agency MBS is
examined in the discussion and tables that follow.
28
Interest Income – Agency
MBS
Interest
income on Agency MBS increased $4.3 million to $4.4 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 from less than approximately $0.1 million for the same
period in 2008. The increase is related to the net purchase of
approximately $491.6 million of Agency MBS during the twelve months ended March
31, 2009, which increased the average balance of Agency MBS investments from
$8.9 million for the first quarter of 2008 to $401.6 million for the same period
in 2009. The average balance increased less than the gross purchases
during 2009, because the Agency MBS portfolio was built progressively over 2008
and principal payments on the securities were received during the
period.
Interest Income –
Securitized Mortgage Loans
The
following table summarizes the detail of the interest income earned on
securitized mortgage loans.
Three
Months Ended March 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Interest
Income
|
Net
Amortization
|
Total
Interest Income
|
Interest
Income
|
Net
Amortization
|
Total
Interest Income
|
||||||||||||||||||
Securitized
mortgage loans:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial
|
$ | 3,519 | $ | 125 | $ | 3,644 | $ | 3,985 | $ | 100 | $ | 4,085 | ||||||||||||
Single-family
|
1,063 | 113 | 1,176 | 1,604 | (87 | ) | 1,517 | |||||||||||||||||
$ | 4,582 | $ | 238 | $ | 4,820 | $ | 5,589 | $ | 13 | $ | 5,602 |
The
majority of the decrease of $0.4 million in interest income on securitized
commercial mortgage loans is related to the lower average balance of the
commercial mortgage loans outstanding in the first quarter of 2009, which
decreased approximately $17.6 million (9%) compared to the balance for the same
period in 2008. The decrease in the average balance between the
periods is primarily related to payments on the commercial mortgage loans of
$22.4 million, which includes both scheduled and unscheduled payments, during
the period from March 31, 2008 to March 31, 2009. The average yield
was 8.36% and 8.54% for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Interest
income on securitized single-family mortgage loans declined $0.3 million to $1.2
million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. The decline in
interest income on single-family mortgage loans was related to the decrease in
the average balance of the loans outstanding from the first quarter of 2008,
which declined approximately $15.7 million, or approximately 18%, to $70.0
million for the first quarter of 2009. Approximately $12.3 million of
unscheduled payments were received on our single-family mortgage loans since
March 31, 2008, constituting about 15% of outstanding unpaid principal balance
at that time. Interest income on single-family mortgage loans also
declined as a result of an approximately 16% decrease in the average yield on
our single-family mortgage loan portfolio to 5.9% for the quarter ended March
31, 2009. Approximately 87% of our single-family mortgage
loans were variable rate at March 31, 2009. The average
yield on all securitized mortgage loans was 7.65% and 8.08% for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Interest Income – Cash and
Cash Equivalents
Interest
income on cash and cash equivalents decreased to $5 thousand for the three
months ended March 31, 2009 from $0.3 million for the same period in
2008. This decrease is primarily the result of a decrease in
short-term interest rates and a $12.0 million decrease in the average balance of
cash and cash equivalents for the first quarter of 2009 compared to the same
period of 2008. We also made the decision to invest our cash to
maximize liquidity in order to have cash available to fund our investments in
Agency MBS. The yield on cash decreased from 3.0% for the three
months ended March 31, 2008 to 0.1% for the same period in 2009.
29
Interest
Expense
The
following table presents the significant components of interest
expense.
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Interest
expense:
|
||||||||
Securitization
financing
|
$ | 2,975 | $ | 3,599 | ||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
1,064 | 54 | ||||||
Obligation under payment
agreement
|
401 | 401 | ||||||
Other
|
(7 | ) | 8 | |||||
$ | 4,433 | $ | 4,062 |
Interest Expense –
Securitization Financing
The
following table summarizes the detail of the interest expense recorded on
securitization financing bonds.
Three
Months Ended March 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Interest
Expense
|
Net
Amortization
|
Total
Interest Expense
|
Interest
Expense
|
Net
Amortization
|
Total
Interest Expense
|
||||||||||||||||||
Securitization
financing:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial
|
$ | 2,983 | $ | (187 | ) | $ | 2,796 | $ | 3,441 | $ | (325 | ) | $ | 3,116 | ||||||||||
Single-family
|
51 | 39 | 90 | 338 | 52 | 390 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other bond related
costs
|
89 | – | 89 | 93 | – | 93 | ||||||||||||||||||
$ | 3,123 | $ | (148 | ) | $ | 2,975 | $ | 3,872 | $ | (273 | ) | $ | 3,599 |
Interest
expense on commercial securitization financing decreased from $3.1 million for
2008 to $2.8 million for 2009. The majority of this $0.3 million
decrease is related to the $20.2 million (12%) decrease in the weighted average
balance of securitization financing, from $168.3 million in 2008 to $148.1
million in 2009 related to the prepayments on the mortgage loans collateralizing
these bonds. The average cost of securitization financing was 7.64%
and 7.58% for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
The
interest expense on single-family securitization financing decreased from $0.4
million for 2008 to $0.1 million for 2009. This $0.3 million decrease
is related to the $6.6 million (20%) decrease in the weighted average balance of
securitization financing, from $33.1 million in 2008 to $26.5 million in 2009
related to the prepayments on the mortgage loans collateralizing these
bonds. The cost of financing decreased from 4.7% for the three months
ended March 31, 2008 compared to 1.4% for the same period in
2009. Average one-month LIBOR for the three months ended March 31,
2009 was 0.46% compared to 3.31% for the same period in 2008.
Interest Expense –
Repurchase Agreements
The
increase in interest expense related to repurchase agreements is due primarily
to a $370.4 million increase in the average balance of repurchase agreements
during the quarter ended March 31, 2009 to $376.1 million compared to the same
period in 2008. The increase in the balance of repurchase agreements
was related primarily to our purchase of additional Agency MBS, which we
financed with repurchase agreements. Average repurchase agreement
financing also increased by $6.9 million from the financing of a bond backed by
securitized single-family mortgage loans. The increase in expense related to the
increase in the average balance was partially offset by a decrease in
the
30
yield on
the repurchase agreements from 3.78% to 1.15% for the three month periods ended
March 31, 2008 and 2009, respectively.
Provision for Loan
Losses
During
the three months ended March 31, 2009, we added approximately $0.2 million of
reserves for estimated losses on our portfolio of mortgage
loans. Approximately $0.1 million was provided for our securitized
mortgage loan portfolio and $0.1 million for our other loans, which are included
in other investments in our balance sheet. The additional amount
provided for loan losses was related to increases in delinquent loans during the
quarter ended March 31, 2009. Delinquent loans decreased by $0.4
million to $8.7 million primarily due to a single commercial loan that became
delinquent during the period. Additional reserves were not deemed
necessary for this loan due to a loan loss guarantee from a third party
guarantor.
Equity in Loss of Joint
Venture
Our
interest in the operations of the joint venture, in which we hold a 49.875%
interest, improved from a loss of $2.3 million to a loss of $0.8 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2008 and 2009, respectively. The joint
venture had interest income of approximately $0.6 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 which decreased by $0.7 million from the same period in
2008 as a result of the one of its subordinate CMBS no longer receiving interest
payments. The subordinate CMBS stopped receiving interest payments
due to an increase in the rates of the bonds senior to it in the same
securitization. The joint venture’s results for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009 were reduced by an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $1.4
million it recognized on its interests in CMBS and a $0.6 million decrease in
the estimated fair value of certain interests in CMBS, which it accounts for
under SFAS 159. The three months ended March 31, 2008 reflected
fair-value decreases of $4.7 million. Our proportionate share of
these items was $0.8 million and $2.3 million for the three months ended March
31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Fair Value Adjustments,
Net
Fair
value adjustments, net of $0.6 million resulted from the decrease of the fair
value of our obligation under a payment agreement for the three months ended
March 31, 2009. This decrease resulted primarily from an increase in
projected loss rates decreasing expected cash flows to be paid to the joint
venture, pursuant to the payment agreement. Increases in projected
loss rates resulted from market expectations of deteriorating credit performance
in commercial real estate assets. The fair value of the obligation
under payment agreement declined by $4.2 million for the three month period
ended March 31, 2008 resulting in a similar amount of income for that
period. The 2008 decrease in fair value resulted from widening CMBS
spreads which caused a commensurate increase in discount rates.
General and Administrative
Expenses
Compensation and
Benefits
Compensation
and benefits expense increased by approximately $0.4 million to $0.9 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2009 from $0.5 million for the same period in
2008. The increase is primarily related to an increase in salaries
and bonuses related to hiring two additional executive officers during
2008.
Other General and
Administrative
Other
general and administrative expenses increased by approximately $0.1 million to
$0.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009 from $0.7 million for the
same period in 2008. The increase is primarily related to additional
costs associated with expanding our investment platform and the related
infrastructure.
31
Average
Balances and Effective Interest Rates
The
following table summarizes the average balances of interest-earning assets and
their average effective yields, along with the average interest-bearing
liabilities and the related average effective interest rates, for each of the
periods presented. Assets that are on non-accrual status are excluded from
the table below for each period presented.
Three
Months Ended March 31,
|
||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands, except for percentages)
|
Average
Balance(1)(2)
|
Effective
Rate(3)
|
Average
Balance(1)(2)
|
Effective
Rate(3)
|
||||||||||||
Agency
MBS
|
||||||||||||||||
Agency MBS
|
$ | 401,573 | 4.47 | % | $ | 8,862 | 4.69 | % | ||||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
369,159 | 1.12 | % | 1,096 | 2.96 | % | ||||||||||
Net interest
spread
|
3.35 | % | 1.73 | % | ||||||||||||
Securitized Mortgage
Loans
|
||||||||||||||||
Securitized mortgage
loans
|
$ | 243,166 | 7.65 | % | $ | 276,399 | 8.08 | % | ||||||||
Securitization financing
(4)
|
174,627 | 6.68 | % | 201,443 | 7.11 | % | ||||||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
6,943 | 2.52 | % | 4,612 | 3.98 | % | ||||||||||
Net interest
spread
|
1.13 | % | 1.04 | % | ||||||||||||
Other
investments
|
$ | 9,507 | 9.11 | % | $ | 15,871 | 11.85 | % | ||||||||
Total
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest-earning
assets
|
$ | 654,246 | 5.72 | % | $ | 301,133 | 8.18 | % | ||||||||
Interest-bearing
liabilities
|
550,729 | 2.90 | % | 207,151 | 7.00 | % | ||||||||||
Net interest
spread
|
2.82 | % | 1.18 | % |
(1)
|
Average
balances exclude unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale
securities.
|
(2)
|
Average
balances exclude funds held by trustees except collateral received on
defeased loans held by trustees.
|
(3)
|
Certain
income and expense items of a one-time nature are not annualized for the
calculation of effective rates. Examples of such one-time items
include retrospective adjustments of discount and premium amortization
arising from adjustments of effective interest
rates.
|
(4)
|
Effective
rates are calculated excluding non-interest related securitization
financing expenses.
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, 2009 Compared to March 31, 2008
The
overall yield on interest-earning assets decreased to 5.72% for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 from 8.18% for the same period in 2008. The
overall cost of financing decreased from 7.00% for the three months ended March
31, 2008 to 2.90% for the same period in 2009. This resulted in an
overall increase in net interest spread of 164 basis points and is discussed
below by investment type.
Agency MBS
The yield
on Agency MBS decreased for the first quarter of 2009 compared to the same
period in 2008 primarily as a result of the significant increase in our
investment in Hybrid Agency MBS during 2009. We used repurchase
agreements to finance the acquisition of these Agency MBS during 2008 and 2009,
which resulted in the increase in the average balance of repurchase
agreements. The cost of repurchase agreement financing decreased by
184 basis points as short term interest rates declined (as evidenced by LIBOR’s
average decline of 2.85%) during the previous 12 months resulting in the
increase in the net interest spread on Agency MBS of 162 basis points to 3.35%
for the three months ended March 31, 2009.
32
Securitized Mortgage
Loans
The net
interest spread for the three months ended March 31, 2009 for securitized
mortgage loans was 1.13% versus 1.04% for the same period in
2008. The yield on securitized mortgage loans decreased from 8.08%
for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 to 7.65% for the same period in 2009 as a
result of a 115 basis points decrease in the average yield on our securitized
single-family mortgage loans to 5.91% for the three months ended March 31,
2009. The majority of our single-family mortgage loans (87% at March
31, 2009) are variable rate, with indices based principally on LIBOR and
constant maturity treasuries, and were resetting at lower rates between March
31, 2008 and March 31, 2009.
The cost
of securitization financing decreased to 6.68% for the quarter ended March 31,
2009 from 7.11% for the same period in 2008. This decrease resulted
from a 285 basis point decline of one-month LIBOR from the three-month period
ended March 31, 2008 compared to same period in 2009 and a $20.2 million
reduction in the average balance of the higher yielding fixed rate commercial
securitization financing, as a result of principal payments between March 31,
2008 and March 31, 2009.
The
average rate on our repurchase agreements that finance securitized mortgage
loans declined along with LIBOR during the period, which more than offset the
increase in the average outstanding balance of these repurchase
agreements.
Other Investments
The yield
on other investments decreased by 274 basis points to 9.11% for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 compared to the same period in 2008. This
decrease in yield was primarily due to the collection in February 2008 of a note
receivable, which had a higher yield than the average of the other
investments.
Changes
in Net Income Attributable to Rates and Volumes
The
following table summarizes the amount of change in interest income and interest
expense due to changes in interest rates versus changes in volume (excluding
cash and cash equivalents):
Three
Months Ended March 31, 2009 vs. 2008
|
||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Rate
|
Volume
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Agency
MBS
|
$ | (6 | ) | $ | 4,337 | $ | 4,331 | |||||
Securitized
mortgage loans
|
(121 | ) | (661 | ) | (782 | ) | ||||||
Other
investments
|
(77 | ) | (159 | ) | (236 | ) | ||||||
Total
interest income
|
(204 | ) | 3,517 | 3,313 | ||||||||
Securitization
financing
|
(170 | ) | (450 | ) | (620 | ) | ||||||
Repurchase
agreements
|
(29 | ) | 1,039 | 1,010 | ||||||||
Total
interest expense
|
(199 | ) | 589 | 390 | ||||||||
Net
interest income
|
$ | (5 | ) | $ | 2,928 | $ | 2,923 |
Note:
|
The change in interest income
and interest expense due to changes in both volume and rate, which cannot
be segregated, has been allocated proportionately to the change due to
volume and the change due to rate. This table excludes non-interest
related, securitization financing expense, other interest expense,
provision for credit losses and dividends on equity
securities.
|
33
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are
based in large part upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. The preparation of these financial
statements requires management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. We base these
estimates and judgments on historical experience and assumptions believed to be
reasonable under current facts and circumstances. Actual results,
however, may differ from the estimated amounts we have recorded.
Our
accounting policies that require significant management estimates, judgments or
assumptions and are considered critical to our results of operations or
financial position relate to consolidation of subsidiaries, securitization, fair
value measurements, impairments, allowance for loan losses and amortization of
premiums/discounts on Agency MBS. Our critical accounting policies
are discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008 under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations – Critical Accounting Policies.” There have
been no changes in our critical accounting policies as discussed in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, except as discussed in
“Use of Estimates” in Note 1 to our condensed consolidated financial statements
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
For a
discussion of recently adopted accounting pronouncements and recently issued
accounting pronouncements which are not yet effective and the impact, if any, on
our financial statements, see “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” in Note 1 to
our condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
We have
historically financed our investments and operations from a variety of sources,
including a mix of collateral-based short-term financing sources such as
repurchase agreements, collateral-based long-term financing sources such as
securitization financing, equity capital, and net earnings. As a
REIT, we are required to distribute to our shareholders amounts equal to at
least 90% of our REIT taxable income for each taxable year. We have
the ability to utilize our NOL carryforwards to offset taxable income, thereby
giving us the flexibility to reduce our REIT distribution
requirements. This would allow us to retain capital and increase our
book value per common share and also increase our liquidity by reducing or
eliminating our dividend payout to common shareholders.
During
the first quarter of 2009, we purchased $154.0 million of Hybrid Agency MBS,
using repurchase agreements and equity capital to finance the
acquisitions. Through March 31, 2009 we have received principal
payments on Agency MBS of $17.9 million. We generally intend to hold
our Agency MBS as a long-term investment, but we will occasionally sell these
securities when market conditions warrant or to manage our interest-rate risks
or liquidity needs.
We have
filed a registration statement on Form S-3 to register $1 billion of equity and
debt securities. The Form S-3, which was filed on February 29, 2008
and declared effective on April 17, 2008, will allow us to issue shares of
common or preferred stock, debt securities such as secured or unsecured senior
notes or subordinated notes, and warrants.
We
initiated a controlled equity offering program (“CEOP”) on March 16, 2009
by filing a prospectus supplement under our Shelf Registration. The
CEOP allows us to offer and sell, from time to time through Cantor Fitzgerald
& Co. (“Cantor”) as agent, up to 3,000,000 shares of our common stock in
negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market
offerings”, as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
including sales made directly on the New York Stock Exchange or sales made to or
through a market maker other than on an exchange.
34
We intend
to use any net proceeds from the CEOP to acquire additional investments
consistent with our investment policy, including Agency MBS, and for general
corporate purposes which may include, among other things, repayment of maturing
obligations, capital expenditures and working capital.
Subsequent
to the end of the first quarter, we sold through the CEOP 890,000 shares of our
common stock at $6.75 per share, for which we received proceeds of $5.9 million,
net of a $150.1 thousand sales commission paid to Cantor. After this
transaction, 2,110,000 shares of our common stock remain available for offer and
sale under the CEOP.
In
deploying our capital, we typically utilize repurchase agreement financing which
will subject us to liquidity risk driven by fluctuations in market values of the
collateral pledged to support the repurchase agreement. We will
attempt to mitigate this risk by limiting the investments that we purchase to
higher-credit quality investments, and by managing certain aspects of the
investments such as potential market value changes from changes in interest
rates, as much as possible. We will also seek to manage the ratio of
our debt-to-equity in order to give us financial flexibility and allow us to
better manage through, and possibly take advantage of, periods of market
volatility. Our operating policies provide that repurchase agreements
used to finance Agency MBS will be in the range of five to nine times to our
equity capital and non-Agency MBS will be in the range of one to four times our
equity capital. Our current debt-to-equity ratio for Agency MBS at
March 31, 2009 was seven times our equity capital. Our current
debt-to-equity capital for non-Agency MBS was one times our equity capital at
March 31, 2009. Our overall debt-to-equity ratio including
securitization financing was approximately four times our equity capital at
March 31, 2009.
Repurchase
agreement financing is recourse to both the assets pledged and to
us. We are required to post margin to the lender (i.e., collateral
deposits in excess of the repurchase agreement financing) in order to support
the amount of the financing and to give the lender a cushion against the value
of the collateral pledged. The repurchase agreement lender at any
time can request that we post additional margin (or “margin calls”), and in
certain circumstances can request that we repay all financing
balances. If we fail to meet this margin call, the lender can
terminate the repurchase agreement and immediately sell the
collateral. Repurchase agreement borrowings generally will have a
term of between one and three months and carry a rate of interest based on a
spread to an index such as LIBOR. Our repurchase agreements are
renewable at the discretion of our lenders and, as such, do not contain
guaranteed roll-over terms. If we fail to repay the lender at
maturity, the lender has the right to immediately sell the collateral and pursue
us for any shortfall if the sales proceeds are inadequate to cover the
repurchase agreement financing.
While
repurchase agreement funding currently remains available to us at attractive
rates, we are cautious as to the use of repurchase agreements given the state of
the global banking system and the overall health of financial
institutions. Our repurchase agreement counterparties are both
foreign and domestic institutions and we believe substantially all of these
institutions have received some form of assistance from their respective federal
government or central bank. To protect against unforeseen reductions
in our borrowing capabilities, we maintain unused capacity under our existing
repurchase agreement credit lines with multiple counterparties and an asset
“cushion,” comprised of cash and cash equivalents, unpledged Agency MBS and
collateral in excess of margin requirements held by our counterparties, to meet
potential margin calls. At March 31, 2009, we had cash and unpledged
Agency MBS of $57.3 million. In addition to these measures, we manage
our debt-to-equity ratio as discussed above.
Notwithstanding
our efforts to manage our repurchase agreement counterparties, as a result of
market events in 2008, several of our repurchase agreement lenders were
acquired. In addition, certain lenders acted to decrease their own
leverage ratios by decreasing the amount of repurchase funding they make
available. In the normal course of our business, we continually seek
to obtain new repurchase agreement counterparties. Since the
beginning of 2009, we have seen generally the amount of repurchase agreement
availability increase and the terms improve, including the availability of
repurchase agreement maturities of up to 90 days and declining interest
costs. In addition, during the quarter, we were able to pledge
as collateral to support repurchase agreement financing, a ‘AAA’-rated
securitization financing bond previously issued and then redeemed by
us. We had not been able to effectively borrow against non-Agency
securities since the second quarter of 2008.
35
As
previously noted, securitization financing represents bonds issued that are
recourse only to the assets pledged as collateral to support the financing and
are not otherwise recourse to us. At March 31, 2009, we had $174.3
million of non-recourse securitization financing outstanding, most of which
carries a fixed rate of interest. The maturity of each class of
securitization financing is directly affected by the rate of principal
prepayments on the related collateral and is not subject to margin call
risk. Each series is also subject to redemption according to specific
terms of the respective indentures, generally on the earlier of a specified date
or when the remaining balance of the bond equals 35% or less of the original
principal balance of the bonds. At March 31, 2009, we had the right
to redeem $17.8 million in securitization financing and expect to redeem
substantially all of these bonds in May 2009. Such financing is
guaranteed by Fannie Mae and carries a coupon of 6.65%.
We
believe that we have adequate financial resources to meet our obligations,
including margin calls, and to fund dividends that we declare and our
operations. Should the various federal governments and central banks
around the world be unsuccessful in stabilizing the global credit markets, or
withdraw their support, particularly in the purchases of Agency MBS and U.S.
Treasury Notes, causing market volatility in prices of investments that we own
or cause continued weakness in financial institutions, we may be subject to
margin calls from fluctuating values of assets pledged to support repurchase
agreement financing, or financial institutions may be unable or unwilling to
renew such financing depending on the severity of the market
volatility. In such an instance, we may be forced to liquidate
investments in potentially unfavorable market conditions.
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements. As of March 31, 2009,
there have been no material changes to the off-balance sheet arrangements
disclosed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008.
Contractual
Obligations. As of March 31, 2009, there have been no material
changes outside the ordinary course of business to the contractual obligations
disclosed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
In
addition to current and historical information, this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking
statements are those that predict or describe future events or trends and that
do not relate solely to historical matters. All statements contained in this
Quarterly Report addressing the results of operations, our operating
performance, events, or developments that we expect or anticipate will occur in
the future, including statements relating to investment strategies, net interest
income growth, earnings or earnings per share growth, and market share, as well
as statements expressing optimism or pessimism about future operating results,
are forward-looking statements. You can generally identify forward-looking
statements as statements containing the words “will,” “believe,” “expect,”
“anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “assume,” “plan,” “continue,” “should,”
“may” or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on our
beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future performance, taking into
account all information currently available to us. These beliefs, assumptions
and expectations are subject to risks and uncertainties and can change as a
result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us. If
a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of
operations may vary materially from those expressed in our forward-looking
statements. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to
vary from our forward-looking statements:
|
·
|
risks
associated with investing in real estate assets, including changes in
general economic and market conditions, including the ongoing volatility
in the credit markets which impacts assets prices and the cost and
availability of financing,
|
|
·
|
our
ability to borrow to continue to finance our
assets,
|
|
·
|
defaults
by borrowers and/or guarantors,
|
|
·
|
availability
of suitable reinvestment
opportunities,
|
|
·
|
fluctuations
in interest rates and the market value of our Agency securities,
particularly in response to changes in government
policy,
|
|
·
|
fluctuations
in property capitalization rates and values of commercial real
estate,
|
36
|
·
|
defaults
by third-party servicers,
|
|
·
|
prepayments
of investment portfolio assets,
|
|
·
|
other
general competitive factors,
|
|
·
|
uncertainty
around government policy, and the impact of regulatory changes, the full
impact of which is unknown at this
time,
|
|
·
|
our
ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT for federal income tax
purposes,
|
|
·
|
our
ability to maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment
Company Act of 1940, as amended,
|
|
·
|
the
impact of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002,
|
|
·
|
changes
in government regulations affecting our business;
and
|
|
·
|
the
impact of new accounting pronouncements or changes in current accounting
estimates and assumptions on our financial
results.
|
These and
other risks, uncertainties and factors, including those described in the other
annual, quarterly and current reports that we file with the SEC, could cause our
actual results to differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking
statements we make. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on
which they are made. New risks and uncertainties arise over time and it is not
possible 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.
We are
including this cautionary statement in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to
make applicable and take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for any forward-looking statements made
by, or on behalf, of us. Any forward-looking statements should be considered in
context with the various disclosures made by us about our businesses in our
public filings with the SEC, including without limitation the risk factors
described above and those more specifically described in Item 1A. “Risk Factors”
of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008.
We seek
to manage risks related to our investment strategy, including interest rate,
prepayment, reinvestment, market value, liquidity and credit
risks. We do not seek to avoid risk completely, but rather, we
attempt to manage these risks while earning an acceptable risk-adjusted return
for our shareholders. Below is a discussion of the current risks in
our business model and investment strategy.
Prepayment
and Reinvestment Risk
We are
subject to prepayment risk from premiums paid on our investments and for
discounts accepted on the issuance of securitization financing. In
general, purchase premiums on our investments and discounts on securitization
financing are amortized as a reduction in interest income or an increase in
interest expense using the effective yield method under GAAP, adjusted for the
prepayment activity of the investment and/or securitization
financing. An increase in the rate of prepayment will typically
accelerate the amortization of purchase premiums or issuance discounts, thereby
reducing the yield/interest income earned on such assets or increasing the cost
of such financing.
We are
also subject to reinvestment risk. In the current economic climate,
yields on assets in which we invest now are generally lower than yields on
existing assets that we may sell or which may be repaid, due to lower overall
interest rates and more competition for these assets as investment assets have
repaid or been sold. In addition, yields in general on Agency MBS in
which we invest are near historic lows. As a result, our interest
income may decline in the future, resulting in lower earnings per share over
time. In order to maintain our investment portfolio size and our
earnings, we need to reinvest our capital into new interest-earning
assets. If we are unable to find suitable reinvestment opportunities,
interest income on our investment portfolio and investment cash flows could be
negatively impacted.
37
Market
Value Risk
Market
risk generally represents the risk of loss that may result from the potential
change in the value of a financial instrument due to fluctuations in interest
rates and changes in the perceived risk in owning such financial
instrument. Market risk is inherent to both derivative and
non-derivative financial instruments, and accordingly, the scope of our market
risk management includes all market risk sensitive financial
instruments. Certain of our investments are classified as available
for sale and as such they are reflected at fair value in our financial
statements. Certain of our investments are carried at historical cost
in accordance with GAAP. Regardless of whether an investment is
carried at fair value in our financial statements, we will monitor the change in
market value on any investment. In particular, we will monitor
changes in the value of investments which collateralize a repurchase agreement
for liquidity management and other purposes. We attempt to manage
this risk by managing our exposure to factors that can impact the market value
of our investments such as changes in interest rates. We
may also enter into derivative transactions, which would tend to increase in
value when our investment portfolio decreases in value. At March 31,
2009, we had not entered into any such derivative transactions. See
the analysis in Tabular Presentation below, which presents the estimated change
in our portfolio given changes in market interest rates.
Liquidity
Risk
We have
historically financed our investments and operations from a variety of sources,
including a mix of collateral-based short-term financing sources such as
repurchase agreements, collateral-based long-term financing sources such as
securitization financing, equity capital, and net income. Repurchase
agreement financing is recourse to both us and the assets pledged and requires
us to post margin (i.e., collateral deposits in excess of the repurchase
agreement financing). The repurchase agreement counterparty at any
time can request that we post additional margin or repay all financing
balances. Repurchase agreement financing is not committed financing,
and it generally renews or rolls on a set schedule, typically a period between
30 and 90 days. The amounts advanced to us by the repurchase
agreement counterparty are determined largely based on the fair value of the
asset pledged to the counterparty, subject to its willingness to provide
financing. Should the value of our investment securities pledged as
collateral suddenly decrease, margin calls relating to our repurchase agreements
could increase, causing an adverse change in our liquidity
position. Given the uncommitted nature of repurchase agreement
financing and the varying collateral requirements with regard to collateral
quality and amount, we cannot assure that we will always be able to roll over
our repurchase agreements as they mature. If we fail to meet margin
calls or repay repurchase agreement borrowings when due, our lenders have the
right to terminate these agreements and sell the underlying collateral, possibly
under adverse conditions.
In order
to attempt to mitigate liquidity risk, we typically pledge only Agency MBS and
‘AAA’-rated non-Agency securities to secure our outstanding repurchase
agreements. Agency MBS generally are considered the most liquid
security in the marketplace and is generally less subject to extreme shifts in
market value. We attempt to maintain an appropriate amount of cash
and unpledged investments in order to meet margin calls on our repurchase
agreements and to fund our on-going operations. See also “Liquidity
and Capital Resources” in Item 2. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
Credit
Risk
Credit
risk is the risk that we will not receive all contractual amounts due on
investments that we have purchased as a result of a default by the borrower or
guarantor and the resulting deficiency in proceeds from the liquidation of the
collateral securing the obligation. All of our investments have
credit risk in varying degrees.
Some of
our investments including Agency MBS and certain securitized mortgage loans
include guaranty of payment from third parties. For example, our
Agency MBS have credit risk to the extent that Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac fail to
remit payments on these MBS for which they have issued a guaranty of
payment. In addition, certain of our securitized mortgage loans have
“pool” guarantees where certain parties provide guarantees of repayment on pools
of loans up to a limited amount.
38
The
following table presents information at March 31, 2009 with respect to our
investments and the amounts guaranteed, if applicable.
Investment
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Amortized
Cost Basis
|
Amount
of Guaranty
|
Guarantor
|
Average
Credit Rating of Guarantor (1)
|
|||||||||
With
Guaranty of Payment
|
|||||||||||||
Agency MBS
|
$ | 450,800 | $ | 436,761 |
Fannie
Mae/Freddie Mac
|
AAA
|
|||||||
Securitized mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||||||
Commercial
|
64,501 | 6,935 |
American
International Group
|
A3
|
|||||||||
Single-family
|
22,375 | 21,883 |
PMI/GEMICO
|
Ba3/Baa2
|
|||||||||
Defeased loans
|
11,031 | 11,003 |
Fully
secured with cash
|
||||||||||
Without
Guaranty of Payment
|
|||||||||||||
Securitized mortgage
loans:
|
|||||||||||||
Commercial
|
97,915 | – | |||||||||||
Single-family
|
46,798 | – | |||||||||||
Investment in joint
venture
|
5,417 | – | |||||||||||
Other
investments
|
10,545 | – | |||||||||||
709,382 | 476,582 | ||||||||||||
Allowance
for loan losses
|
(3,877 | ) | – | ||||||||||
Total
investments
|
$ | 705,505 | $ | 476,582 |
(1)
|
Reflects
lowest rating of the three nationally-recognized ratings agencies for the
senior unsecured debt of the
guarantor.
|
Aside
from guaranty of payment, for our securitized mortgage loans, we have limited
our credit risk through the securitization process and the issuance of
securitization financing. The securitization process limits our
credit risk from an economic point of view as the securitization financing is
recourse only to the assets pledged. Therefore, our risk is limited
to the difference between the amount of securitized mortgage loans pledged and
the amount of securitization financing outstanding. This difference
is referred to as “overcollateralization.” We have also attempted to
minimize our credit risk through the prudent underwriting of loans at their
origination, the seasoning of the loans and the close monitoring of the
performance of the servicer of the loan. Where we have retained
credit risk, we provide an allowance for loan loss.
39
The
following table presents information with respect to securitized mortgage loans
at March 31, 2009.
Investment
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Amortized
Cost Basis of loans
|
Average
Seasoning
(in
years)
|
Current
Loan-to-Value based on Original Appraised Value
|
Amortized
Cost Basis of Delinquent Loans(1)
|
Delinquency
%
|
|||||||||||||||
Commercial
mortgage loans
|
$ | 169,881 | 13 | 49 | % | $ | 3,037 | 3.20 | % | |||||||||||
Single-family
mortgage loans
|
68,957 | 15 | 53 | % | 5,667 | (2) | 7.99 | % |
(1)
|
Loans
contractually delinquent by 30 or more days. An additional
commercial mortgage loan with an unpaid principal balance of $2,508 became
delinquent during the three months ended March 31,
2009.
|
(2)
|
Of
the $5,667 of delinquent single-family loans, approximately $1,583 are
pool insured and, of the remaining $4,084, $2,865 of the loans made a
payment within the 90 days prior to March 31,
2009.
|
Loans
secured by low-income multifamily housing tax credit (“LIHTC”) properties
account for 87% of our securitized commercial loan portfolio. LIHTC
properties are properties eligible for tax credits under Section 42 of the
Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). Section 42 of the Code provides
tax credits to investors in projects to construct or substantially rehabilitate
properties that provide housing for qualifying low income families for as much
as 90% of the eligible cost basis of the property. Failure by the
borrower to comply with certain income and rental restrictions required by
Section 42 or, more importantly, a default on a loan financing a Section 42
property during the Section 42 prescribed tax compliance period (generally 15
years from the date the property is placed in service) can result in the
recapture of previously used tax credits from the borrower. The
potential cost of tax credit recapture provides an incentive to the property
owner to support the property during the compliance period. The
following table shows the weighted average remaining compliance period of our
portfolio of LIHTC commercial loans at March 31, 2009 as a percent of the total
LIHTC commercial loan portfolio.
Months
remaining to end of compliance period
|
As
a Percent of Unpaid Principal Balance
|
|||
Compliance
period already exceeded
|
31.3 | % | ||
Up
to one year remaining
|
11.9 | |||
Between
one and three years remaining
|
54.3 | |||
Between
four and six years remaining
|
2.5 | |||
Total
|
100.0 | % |
There
were three delinquent LIHTC commercial mortgage loans with a total unpaid
principal balance of $5.6 million at March 31, 2009. Of the three
loans, one loan with an unpaid principal balance of $1,334 was past its
compliance period and two loans with unpaid principal balances of $2,508 and
$1,723 whose compliance periods will expire in 5 months and 21 months,
respectively. There were two delinquent LIHTC commercial mortgage
loans at December 31, 2008.
Interest
Rate Risk
Our
investments on a leveraged basis subject us to interest rate risk. At
any given time, our Agency MBS investments may consist of Hybrid Agency ARMs
which have a fixed rate of interest for an initial period, and Agency ARMs or
adjustable-rate loans which generally have interest rates which reset annually
based on a spread to an index such as LIBOR, and which are subject to interim
and lifetime interest rate caps. Of our Agency ARMs and
adjustable-rate loans, approximately 5% of these loans reset based upon the
level of six month LIBOR, 84% reset based on the level of one-year LIBOR and 11%
reset based on the level of one-year CMT. The interest rate caps
could limit the amount that the interest rate may reset. Generally
the borrowings used to finance these assets will have interest rates resetting
every 30-to-90 days and they will not have periodic and lifetime interest rate
caps. Periodic caps ranges from 1-2% annually, and lifetime caps are
generally 5%. In addition, certain of our securitized mortgage loans
have a fixed rate of interest and are financed with borrowings with interest
rates that adjust monthly. During a period of rising short-term
interest rates, the rates on our borrowings will reset higher on a more
frequent
40
basis
than the interest rates on our investments, decreasing our net interest income
earned and the corresponding cash flow on our investments.
Conversely, net interest income may increase following a fall in
short-term
interest
rates. This increase may be temporary as the yields on the
adjustable-rate loans adjust to the new market conditions after a lag
period. The net interest spread may also be increased or decreased by
the proceeds or costs of interest rate swap, cap or floor agreements, to the
extent that we have entered into such agreements.
At March
31, 2009, the interest rates on our Agency MBS and securitized mortgage loans
investments and the associated borrowings, if any, on these investments will
prospectively reset based on the following time frames (not considering the
impact of prepayments):
Investments
|
Borrowings
|
|||||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Amounts
(1)
|
Percent
|
Amounts
|
Percent
|
||||||||||||
Fixed-Rate
Investments/Obligations
|
$ | 182,653 | 26.3 | % | $ | 156,330 | 26.7 | % | ||||||||
Adjustable-Rate
Investments/Obligations:
|
||||||||||||||||
Less than 3
months
|
18,550 | 2.7 | 429,123 | 73.3 | ||||||||||||
Greater than 3 months and less
than 1 year
|
144,953 | 20.9 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 1 year and less
than 2 years
|
146,311 | 21.1 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 2 years and less
than 3 years
|
112,902 | 16.3 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 3 years and less
than 5 years
|
88,052 | 12.7 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 693,421 | 100.0 | % | $ | 585,453 | 100.0 | % |
(1)
|
The
investment amount represents the fair value of the related securities and
amortized cost basis of the related loans, excluding any related allowance
for loan losses.
|
At
December 31, 2008, the interest rates on our investments and the associated
borrowings, if any, on these investments will prospectively reset based on the
following time frames (not considering the impact of prepayments):
Investments
|
Borrowings
|
|||||||||||||||
(amounts
in thousands)
|
Amounts(1)
|
Percent
|
Amounts
|
Percent
|
||||||||||||
Fixed-Rate
Investments/Obligations
|
$ | 184,877 | 33.0 | % | $ | 159,121 | 34.5 | % | ||||||||
Adjustable-Rate
Investments/Obligations:
|
||||||||||||||||
Less than 3
months
|
– | – | 301,795 | 65.5 | ||||||||||||
Greater than 3 months and less
than 1 year
|
156,279 | 28.0 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 1 year and less
than 2 years
|
116,304 | 20.8 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 2 years and less
than 3 years
|
68,246 | 12.2 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Greater than 3 years and less
than 5 years
|
33,404 | 6.0 | – | – | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 559,110 | 100.0 | % | $ | 460,916 | 100.0 | % |
(1)
|
The
investment amount represents the fair value of the related securities and
amortized cost basis of the related loans, excluding any related allowance
for loan losses.
|
41
Adjustable
rate mortgage loans collateralize our Hybrid Agency and Agency ARM MBS
portfolio. The interest rates on the adjustable rate mortgage loans
are typically fixed for a predetermined period and then reset generally annually
to an increment over a specified interest rate index. The following
tables present information about the lifetime and interim interest rate caps on
our Hybrid Agency and Agency ARM MBS portfolio as of March 31,
2009:
Lifetime
Interest Rate Caps on ARM MBS
|
Interim
Interest Rate Caps on ARM MBS
|
|||||
%
of Total
|
%
of Total
|
|||||
9.0%
to 10.0%
|
17.85%
|
1.0%
|
3.12%
|
|||
10.1%
to 11.0%
|
60.46%
|
|
2.0%
|
34.31%
|
||
11.1%
to 12.0%
|
21.69%
|
5.0%
|
62.57%
|
|||
100.00%
|
100.00%
|
Interest
rate caps impact a security’s yield and its to reset to market
rates.
In an
effort to mitigate the interest-rate risk associated with the mismatch in the
timing of the interest rate resets in our investments versus our borrowings, we
may enter into derivative transactions, in the form of forward purchase
commitments and interest rate swaps, which are intended to serve as a hedge
against future interest rate increases on our repurchase agreements, which rates
are typically LIBOR based. Swaps generally result in interest savings in a
rising interest rate environment, while in a declining interest rate environment
generally result in our paying the stated fixed rate on the notional amount for
each of the swap transactions, which could be higher than the market
rate.
We take
into account both anticipated coupon resets and expected prepayments when
measuring the sensitivity of our Agency MBS investments to changes in interest
rates. In measuring our repricing gap (i.e., the weighted average
time period until our Agency MBS are expected to prepay or reprice less the
weighted average time period for liabilities to reprice (or “Repricing Gap”)),
we measure the difference between: (a) the weighted average months until the
next coupon adjustment or projected prepayment on the Agency MBS investments;
and (b) the months remaining until our repurchase agreements mature, applying
the same projected prepayment rate and including the impact of derivative
transactions, if any. A constant prepayment rate (or “CPR”) is
applied in order to reflect, to a certain extent, the prepayment characteristics
inherent in our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing
liabilities.
The
following table presents information at March 31, 2009 about our Repricing Gap
based on contractual maturities (i.e., 0% CPR), and applying a 15% CPR, 25% CPR
and 35% CPR.
CPR
|
Estimated
Months to Asset
Reset
or Expected Prepayment
|
Estimated
Months to Liabilities Reset
|
Repricing
Gap
in Months
|
0% (1)
|
25
months
|
1 month
|
24
months
|
15%
|
20
months
|
1 month
|
19
months
|
25%
|
18
months
|
1 month
|
17
months
|
35%
|
13
months
|
1 month
|
12
months
|
(1)
|
Reflects
contractual maturities, which do not consider any
prepayments.
|
TABULAR
PRESENTATION
We
monitor the aggregate cash flow, projected net interest income and estimated
market value of our investment portfolio under various interest rate and
prepayment assumptions. While certain investments may perform poorly
in an increasing or decreasing interest rate environment, other investments may
perform well, and others may not be impacted at all.
The
information presented in the table below projects the impact of sudden changes
in interest rates on our annual
42
projected
net interest income and projected portfolio value, as more fully discussed
below, based on our investments at March 31, 2009, and includes all of our
interest rate-sensitive assets and liabilities, except for equity securities
with a carrying value of $1.7 million. We had no hedges at March 31,
2009.
Changes
in projected net interest income equals the change that would occur in the
calculated net interest income for the next twenty-four months relative to the
0% change scenario if interest rates were to instantaneously parallel shift to
and remain at the stated level for the next twenty-four months.
Changes
in projected market value equals the change in value of our assets that we carry
at fair value rather than at historical amortized cost and any change in the
value of any derivative instruments or hedges, such as interest rate swap
agreements, in the event of an interest rate shift as described above. We
acquire interest rate-sensitive assets and fund them with interest
rate-sensitive liabilities. We generally plan to retain such assets and
the associated interest rate risk to maturity.
The
analysis below is heavily dependent upon the assumptions used in the
model. The effect of changes in future interest rates beyond the
forward LIBOR curve, the shape of the yield curve or the mix of our assets and
liabilities may cause actual results to differ significantly from the modeled
results. In addition, certain investments which we own provide a
degree of “optionality.” The most significant option affecting the portfolio is
the borrowers’ option to prepay the loans. The model applies
prepayment rate assumptions representing management’s estimate of prepayment
activity on a projected basis for each collateral pool in the investment
portfolio. For Agency MBS, prepayment rates are adjusted based on
modeled and management estimates for each of the rate scenarios set forth
below. For all the other investments, the model applies the same
prepayment rate assumptions for all five cases indicated below. The
extent to which borrowers utilize the ability to exercise their option may cause
actual results to significantly differ from the
analysis. Furthermore, the projected results assume no additions or
subtractions to our portfolio, and no change to our liability
structure. Historically, there have been significant changes in our
investment portfolio and the liabilities incurred by us in response to interest
rate movement, as such changes are a tool by which we can mitigate interest rate
risk in response to changed conditions. As a result of anticipated
prepayments on assets in the investment portfolio, there are likely to be such
changes in the future.
The table
below represents immediate changes, or “shocks,” to the interest rate
environment as it existed as of March 31, 2009. At that date,
one-month LIBOR was 0.50% and six-month LIBOR was 1.74%. Modeled
LIBOR rates used to determine the Base Case ranged from a low of 0.51% to a high
of 3.29% during the modeled period.
Basis
Point Change in
Interest
Rates
|
Percentage
change in projected net interest income
|
Percentage
change in projected market value
|
|||
+200
|
(17.55)%
|
(7.91)%
|
|||
+100
|
(6.19)%
|
(3.26)%
|
|||
0
|
–
|
–
|
|||
-100
|
(1.60)%
|
1.27%
|
|||
-200
|
(8.02)%
|
1.36%
|
Item
4. Controls
and Procedures
Evaluation of disclosure
controls and procedures.
Disclosure
controls and procedures are controls and other procedures that are designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or
submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and
forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without
limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required
to be disclosed in our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to management, including our Principal Executive
Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosures.
43
Our
management evaluated, with the participation of our Principal Executive Officer
and Principal Financial Officer, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls
and procedures, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e), as of the end of the
period covered by this report. Based upon that evaluation, our
Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of March 31,
2009.
Changes in internal
controls.
Our
management is also responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate
internal control over financial reporting 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. There were no changes in our internal controls
over financial reporting during the quarter ended March 31, 2009 that materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
As
discussed in Note 13 to our condensed consolidated financial statements included
in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we and certain of our subsidiaries are
defendants in litigation. The following discussion is the current status of the
litigation.
One of
Dynex Capital, Inc.’s subsidiaries, GLS Capital, Inc. (“GLS”), and the County of
Allegheny, Pennsylvania are defendants in a class action lawsuit (“Pentlong”)
filed in 1997 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
(the “Court of Common Pleas"). Between 1995 and 1997, GLS purchased
delinquent county property tax receivables for properties located in Allegheny
County. Plaintiffs allege that GLS did not enjoy the same rights as
its assignor, Allegheny County, to recover from delinquent taxpayers certain
attorney fees, costs and expenses and interest in the collection of the tax
receivables. Class action status has been certified in this matter,
but a motion to reconsider is pending. This Pentlong litigation has
been stayed pending the outcome of similar litigation before the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court in which GLS is not a defendant. The plaintiff in that
case disputed the application of curative legislation enacted in 2003 but
retroactive to 1996 which specifically set forth the right to collect reasonable
attorney fees, costs, and interest which were properly taxable as part of the
tax debt owed. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court subsequently issued an
opinion in favor of the defendants in that matter, which we believe will
favorably impact the Pentlong litigation by substantially reducing the Pentlong
plaintiffs’ universe of actionable claims of illegal actions by GLS in
connection with the collection of the tax receivables. No timetable
has been set by the Court of Common Pleas for the recommencement of the
litigation. The Pentlong plaintiffs have not enumerated their damages
in this matter, and we believe that the ultimate outcome of this litigation will
not have a material impact on our financial condition, but may have a material
impact on our reported results for the particular period presented.
Dynex
Capital, Inc. and Dynex Commercial, Inc. (“DCI”), a former affiliate of Dynex
Capital, Inc. and now known as DCI Commercial, Inc., are appellees (or
respondents) in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Judicial District of Texas at
Dallas, related to the matter of Basic Capital Management et al.
(collectively, “BCM” or the “Plaintiffs”) versus DCI et al. as previously
discussed in our prior filings. There has been no material change in
this litigation since our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2008 filed on March 16. 2009..
As
discussed in prior filings, Dynex Capital, Inc. and MERIT Securities
Corporation, a subsidiary, were defendants in a putative class action complaint
alleging violations of the federal securities laws in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York (“District Court”) by the Teamsters
Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund (“Teamsters”). The complaint
was filed on February 7, 2005, and purported to be a class action on behalf of
purchasers between February 2000 and May 2004 of MERIT Series 12 and MERIT
Series 13 securitization financing bonds, which are collateralized by
manufactured housing loans. After a series of rulings by the District
Court and an appeal by us and MERIT, on February 22, 2008 the United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit dismissed the litigation against us and
MERIT but with leave for Teamsters to amend and replead. Teamsters
filed an amended complaint on August 6, 2008 with the District Court which
essentially restated the same allegations
44
as the
original complaint and added our former president and our current Chief
Operating Officer as defendants. We are seeking to have the amended
complaint dismissed and intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this
matter. Although no assurance can be given with respect to the
ultimate outcome of this matter, we believe the resolution of this matter will
not have a material effect on our consolidated balance sheet but could
materially affect our consolidated results of operations in a given year or
period.
There
have been no material changes to the risk factors disclosed in Item
1A. “Risk Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The materialization of any risks and uncertainties
identified in our Forward Looking Statements contained in the Quarterly Report
together with those previously disclosed in the Form 10-K or those that
are presently unforeseen could result in significant adverse effects on our
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. See Item 2.
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations – Forward Looking Statements” in this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q.
None
None
None
None
Exhibit
No.
|
Description
|
3.1
|
Restated
Articles of Incorporation, effective July 9, 2008 (incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Dynex’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed July
11, 2008).
|
3.2
|
Amended
and Restated Bylaws, effective March 26, 2008 (incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Dynex’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed April
1, 2008).
|
10.8
|
Sales
Agreement, dated as of March 16, 2009, between Dynex Capital, Inc. and
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.8 to Dynex’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008).
|
10.9
|
Dynex
Capital, Inc. ROAE Bonus Program (filed herewith).
|
10.10
|
Dynex
Capital, Inc. 2009 Capital Bonus Pool (filed herewith).
|
31.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
45
Exhibit No. | Description |
31.2
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed
herewith).
|
46
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
DYNEX CAPITAL, INC.
|
|
Date: May
11, 2009
|
/s/
Thomas B. Akin
|
Thomas
B. Akin
|
|
Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
Date: May
11, 2009
|
/s/
Stephen J. Benedetti
|
Stephen
J. Benedetti
|
|
Executive
Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial
Officer
|
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
|