First American Financial Corp - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

OR

For the transition period from                                 to                                 

Commission file number 001-34580

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

1 First American Way, Santa Ana, California 92707-5913

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

(714) 250-3000

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

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

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

None

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate 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  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    x

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

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

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2010 was $1,304,313,092.

On February 18, 2011, there were 104,646,524 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement with respect to the 2011 annual meeting of the stockholders are incorporated by reference in Part III of this report. The definitive proxy statement or an amendment to this Form 10-K will be filed no later than 120 days after the close of registrant’s fiscal year.

Table of Contents

CERTAIN STATEMENTS IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THOSE RELATING TO:

2

Table of Contents

ARE FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 27A OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED, AND SECTION 21E OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED. THESE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS MAY CONTAIN THE WORDS “BELIEVE,” “ANTICIPATE,” “EXPECT,” “PLAN,” “PREDICT,” “ESTIMATE,” “PROJECT,” “WILL BE,” “WILL CONTINUE,” “WILL LIKELY RESULT,” OR OTHER SIMILAR WORDS AND PHRASES.

RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES EXIST THAT MAY CAUSE RESULTS TO DIFFER MATERIALLY FROM THOSE SET FORTH IN THESE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS. FACTORS THAT COULD CAUSE THE ANTICIPATED RESULTS TO DIFFER FROM THOSE DESCRIBED IN THE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS INCLUDE:

3

Table of Contents

THE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS SPEAK ONLY AS OF THE DATE THEY ARE MADE. THE COMPANY DOES NOT UNDERTAKE TO UPDATE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS TO REFLECT CIRCUMSTANCES OR EVENTS THAT OCCUR AFTER THE DATE THE FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS ARE MADE.

4

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1.    Business

The Company

First American Financial Corporation (the “Company”) was incorporated in the state of Delaware in January 2008 to serve as the holding company of The First American Corporation’s (“TFAC’s”) financial services businesses following the spin-off of those businesses from TFAC (the “Separation”). The Separation was consummated on June 1, 2010, at which time the Company’s common stock was listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “FAF.” In connection with the Separation, TFAC reincorporated in Delaware and assumed the name CoreLogic, Inc. The businesses operated by the Company’s subsidiaries have, in some instances, been in existence since the late 1800s.

The Company has its executive offices at 1 First American Way, Santa Ana, California 92707-5913. The Company’s telephone number is (714) 250-3000.

General

The Company, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in the business of providing financial services through its title insurance and services segment and its specialty insurance segment. The title insurance and services segment provides title insurance, escrow or closing services and similar or related financial services domestically and internationally in connection with residential and commercial real estate transactions. It also maintains, manages and provides access to title plant records and images and provides banking, trust and investment advisory services. The specialty insurance segment issues property and casualty insurance policies and sells home warranty products. In addition, our corporate function consists of certain financing facilities as well as the corporate services that support our business operations. Financial information regarding each of these business segments is included in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 8. Financial Statements” of Part II of this report.

The substantial majority of our business is dependent upon activity in the real estate and mortgage markets, which are cyclical and seasonal. During the most recent real estate and mortgage cycle, we have primarily emphasized expense control and operational efficiency by, among other activities, reducing employee count, consolidating offices, centralizing agency and administrative functions, optimizing our organizational structure and rationalizing our brand strategy. Future activity in the real estate and mortgage markets remains uncertain and cost control measures are of continued importance. In addition, our current emphasis also includes the pursuit of targeted growth opportunities.

Title Insurance and Services Segment

Our title insurance and services segment issues title insurance policies on residential and commercial property in the United States and offers similar products and services internationally. This segment also provides escrow and closing services, accommodates tax-deferred exchanges of real estate, maintains, manages and provides access to title plant records and images and provides banking, trust and investment advisory services. In 2010, 2009, and 2008 the Company derived 92.5%, 93.1%, and 93.2% of its consolidated revenues, respectively, from this segment.

Overview of Title Insurance Industry

In most real estate transactions, mortgage lenders and purchasers of real estate desire to be protected from loss or damage in the event of defects in the title they acquire. Title insurance is a means of providing such protection.

Title Policies.    Title insurance policies insure the interests of owners or lenders against defects in the title to real property. These defects include adverse ownership claims, liens, encumbrances or other matters affecting

5

Table of Contents

title. Title insurance policies are issued on the basis of a title report, which is typically prepared after a search of the public records, maps, documents and prior title policies to ascertain the existence of easements, restrictions, rights of way, conditions, encumbrances or other matters affecting the title to, or use of, real property. In certain limited instances, a visual inspection of the property is also made. To facilitate the preparation of title reports, copies of public records, maps, documents and prior title policies may be compiled and indexed to specific properties in an area. This compilation is known as a “title plant.”

The beneficiaries of title insurance policies are usually real estate buyers and mortgage lenders. A title insurance policy indemnifies the named insured and certain successors in interest against title defects, liens and encumbrances existing as of the date of the policy and not specifically excepted from its provisions. The policy typically provides coverage for the real property mortgage lender in the amount of its outstanding mortgage loan balance and for the buyer in the amount of the purchase price of the property. In some cases the policy might provide insurance in a greater amount where the buyer anticipates constructing improvements on the property. Coverage under a title insurance policy issued to a mortgage lender generally terminates upon repayment of the mortgage loan. Coverage under a title insurance policy issued to a buyer generally terminates upon the sale of the insured property unless the owner carries back a mortgage or makes certain warranties as to the title.

Before issuing title policies, title insurers typically seek to limit their risk of loss by accurately performing title searches and examinations. The major expenses of a title company relate to such searches and examinations, the preparation of preliminary reports or commitments and the maintenance of title plants, and not from claim losses as in the case of property and casualty insurers.

The Closing Process.    Title insurance is essential to the real estate closing process in most transactions involving real property mortgage lenders. In a typical residential real estate sale transaction, a real estate broker, lawyer, developer, lender or closer involved in the transaction orders title insurance on behalf of an insured. Once the order has been placed, a title insurance company or an agent typically conducts a title search to determine the current status of the title to the property. When the search is complete, the title company or agent prepares, issues and circulates a commitment or preliminary report to the parties to the transaction. The commitment or preliminary report identifies the conditions, exceptions and/or limitations that the title insurer intends to attach to the policy and identifies items appearing on the title that must be eliminated prior to closing.

The closing function, sometimes called an escrow in the western United States, is often performed by a lawyer, an escrow company or a title insurance company or agent, generally referred to as a “closer.” Once documentation has been prepared and signed, and mortgage lender payoff demands are in hand, the transaction is “closed.” The closer records the appropriate title documents and arranges the transfer of funds to pay off prior loans and extinguish the liens securing such loans. Title policies are then issued insuring the priority of the mortgage of the real property mortgage lender in the amount of its mortgage loan and the buyer in the amount of the purchase price. The time between the opening of the title order and the issuance of the title policy is usually between 30 and 90 days. Before a closing takes place, however, the closer requests that the title insurer provide an update to the commitment to discover any adverse matters affecting title and, if any are found, works with the seller to eliminate them so that the title insurer issues the title policy subject only to those exceptions to coverage which are acceptable to the title insurer, the buyer and the buyer’s lender.

Issuing the Policy: Direct vs. Agency.    A title policy can be issued directly by a title insurer or indirectly on behalf of a title insurer through agents, which may not themselves be licensed as insurers. Where the policy is issued by a title insurer, the search is performed by or on behalf of the title insurer, and the premium is collected and retained by the title insurer. Where the policy is issued by an agent, the agent typically performs the search, examines the title, collects the premium and retains a portion of the premium. The agent remits the remainder of the premium to the title insurer as compensation for the insurer bearing the risk of loss in the event a claim is made under the policy and for other services the insurer may provide. The percentage of the premium retained by an agent varies from region to region. A title insurer is obligated to pay title claims in accordance with the terms of its policies, regardless of whether it issues its policy directly or indirectly through an agent.

6

Table of Contents

Premiums.    The premium for title insurance is typically due and earned in full when the real estate transaction is closed. Premiums generally are calculated with reference to the policy amount. The premium charged by a title insurer or an agent is subject to regulation in most areas. Such regulations vary from state to state.

Our Title Insurance Operations

Overview.    We conduct our title insurance business through a network of direct operations and agents. Through this network, we issue policies in the 49 states that permit the issuance of title insurance policies and the District of Columbia. We also offer title insurance and similar products, as well as related services, either directly or through joint ventures in foreign countries, including Canada, the United Kingdom and various other established and emerging markets as described in the “International Operations” section below.

Customers, Sales and Marketing.    We believe that three institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Company, together with their affiliates, originate in excess of 50% of the mortgages in the United States. Each of these institutions directly purchases title insurance policies and other products and services from us. These institutions also benefit from products and services which are purchased for their benefit by others, such as title insurance policies purchased by borrowers as a condition to the making of a loan. The refusal of one or more of these institutions to purchase products and services directly from us or to accept our products and services that are to be purchased for their benefit could have a material adverse effect on the title insurance and services segment.

Though we endeavor to educate customers on the value of title insurance and the closing process, we can most efficiently market to our primary sources of business referrals, including escrow or closing service providers, real estate agents and brokers, developers, mortgage brokers, mortgage bankers, lenders and attorneys. In addition, we also market our title insurance services directly to large corporate customers and mortgage lenders and servicers. We actively market to mortgage servicers, default service providers and investors who are important sources of title insurance business during periods with high levels of foreclosures. We also market our title insurance services to independent agents. Our marketing efforts emphasize our financial strength, the quality and timeliness of our services, process innovation and our national presence.

We have expanded our commercial business base primarily through increased commercial sales efforts. Because commercial transactions involve higher coverage amounts and higher premiums, commercial title insurance business generally generates greater profit margins than does residential title insurance business. Our national commercial services division also has a dedicated sales force. One of the responsibilities of the sales personnel of this division is the coordination of marketing efforts directed at large real estate lenders and companies developing, selling, buying or brokering properties on a multi-state basis.

We supplement the efforts of our sales force with general advertising in various trade and professional journals.

International Operations.    Over the past 20 years, we have led the industry in global expansion by investing in the development and growth of operations in international markets. We provide products and services in numerous countries, and our international operations accounted for approximately 9.0 percent of our title insurance and services segment revenues in 2010. Today we have direct operations and a physical presence in 11 countries including Canada and the United Kingdom. Additionally, we have partnered with leading local companies to provide services in many other countries. While reliable data are not available, we believe that we have the largest market share for title insurance outside of the United States. The Company’s operating revenues from external customers and long-lived assets are broken down between domestic and foreign operations in Note 22 Segment Financial Information to the consolidated financial statements included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of Part II of this report.

7

Table of Contents

Our range of international products and services is designed to lower our clients’ risk profiles and reduce their operating costs through enhanced operational efficiencies. In established markets, primarily British Commonwealth countries, we have combined title insurance with unique processing offerings to enhance the speed and efficiency of the mortgage and conveyancing processes. We believe that opportunities for growth exist not only in the relatively established markets, but also in the emerging markets that are heavily reliant on expensive manual business processes and dated technology and land registry systems. As the number of countries adopting Western style mortgage systems continues to increase and as the demand for greater efficiency in the real estate settlement process continues to grow, we are well situated to seize these opportunities because of our industry expertise, financial strength, existing international licenses and contacts around the world. For example, we are licensed or otherwise authorized to do business in 36 countries and we have partnered with entities authorized to do business in various additional countries.

Because title insurance is relatively new to foreign markets, our international operations present risks that may not exist in our domestic operations. These risks include unforeseen regulatory changes as regulators’ familiarity with our products increases. In addition, limited claims experience in foreign jurisdictions, especially where land ownership and mortgage lending systems meaningfully differ from the United States, makes it more difficult to set reserve rates or set prices.

Underwriting.    Before a title insurance policy is issued, a number of underwriting decisions are made. For example, matters of record revealed during the title search may require a determination as to whether an exception should be taken in the policy. We believe that it is important for the underwriting function to operate efficiently and effectively at all decision-making levels so that transactions may proceed in a timely manner. To perform this function, we have underwriters at the regional, divisional and corporate levels to whom we give varying levels of underwriting authority.

Agency Operations.    Our agreements with our agents state the conditions under which the agent is authorized to issue title insurance policies on our behalf. The agency agreement also prescribes the circumstances under which the agent may be liable to us if a policy loss occurs. Although such agency agreements typically are terminable without cause after a specified notice period has been met and are terminable immediately for cause, certain agents have negotiated terms that are more favorable to them. Beginning in early 2008, we intensified our effort to evaluate all of our agency relationships, including a review of premium splits, deductibles and claims. As a result, we terminated or renegotiated the terms of many of our agency relationships. We have also centralized the receipt of agency remittances and are in the process of centralizing other agent-related administrative activities, and we continue to evaluate the profitability of agency relationships.

We have an agent selection process and an agent audit program. In determining whether to engage an independent agent, we obtain information about the agent, including the agent’s experience and background. We maintain loss experience records for each agent and conduct periodic audits of our agents. We also maintain agent representatives and agent auditors. Agent auditors routinely perform an examination of the agent’s escrow trust accounts and supporting accounting records. In addition to these routine examinations, an expanded examination will be triggered if certain “warning signs” are evident. Warning signs that can trigger an expanded examination include the failure to implement required accounting controls, shortages of escrow funds and failure to remit title insurance premiums on a timely basis. Adverse findings in an agency audit may result in various actions, including, if warranted, termination of the agency relationship.

Title Plants.    Our network of title plants constitutes one of our principal assets. A title search is typically conducted by searching the abstracted information from public records or utilizing a title plant holding abstracted information from public records. While public title records generally are indexed by reference to the names of the parties to a given recorded document, our title plants arrange their records on a geographic basis. Because of this difference, title plant records generally may be searched more efficiently, which we believe reduces the risk of errors associated with the search. Our title plants also index prior policies, adding to searching efficiency. Most of our title plants are automated, or available on-line. Certain offices utilize jointly owned plants or utilize a plant

8

Table of Contents

under a joint user agreement with other title companies. In addition to these ownership interests, we are in the business of maintaining, managing and providing access to title plant records and images that may be owned by us or other parties. We believe that our title plants, whether wholly or partially owned or utilized under a joint user agreement, are among the best in the industry.

Reserves for Claims and Losses.    We provide for title insurance losses based upon our historical experience and other factors by a charge to expense when the related premium revenue is recognized. The resulting reserve for known claims and incurred but not reported claims reflects management’s best estimate of the total costs required to settle all claims reported to us and claims incurred but not reported, and is considered to be adequate for such purpose. Each period the reasonableness of the estimated reserves is assessed; if the estimate requires adjustment, such an adjustment is recorded.

Reinsurance and Coinsurance.    We plan to continue our practice of assuming and ceding large title insurance risks through the mechanism of reinsurance. In reinsurance arrangements, the primary insurer retains a certain amount of risk under a policy and cedes the remainder of the risk under the policy to the reinsurer. The primary insurer pays the reinsurer a premium in exchange for accepting this risk of loss. The primary insurer generally remains liable to its insured for the total risk, but is reinsured under the terms of the reinsurance agreement. Prior to 2010, our title insurance arrangements primarily involved other industry participants. Beginning in January of 2010, we established a global reinsurance program involving treaty reinsurance provided by a global syndicate of highly rated non-industry reinsurers. In addition to covering claims under policies issued while the program is in effect, the program also generally covers claims made under policies issued in certain prior years, as long as the losses are discovered while the program is in effect.

We also serve as a coinsurer in connection with certain transactions. In a coinsurance scenario, two or more insurers are selected by the insured and typically issue separate policies with respect to the subject property, with each coinsurer liable to the extent provided in the policy that it issues.

Competition.    The title insurance business is highly competitive. The number of competing companies and the size of such companies vary in the different areas in which we conduct business. Generally, in areas of major real estate activity, such as metropolitan and suburban localities, we compete with many other title insurers and agents. Our major nationwide competitors in our principal markets include Fidelity National Financial, Inc., Stewart Title Guaranty Company and Old Republic International Corporation. In addition to these national competitors, small nationwide, regional and local competitors, as well as numerous agency operations throughout the country, provide aggressive competition on the local level. Over 30 title insurance underwriters are currently members of the American Land Title Association, the title insurance industry’s national trade association. We are currently the second largest provider of title insurance in the United States, based on the most recent American Land Title Association market share data.

We believe that competition for title insurance business is based primarily on both the price of the policy and the quality and timeliness of the service, because parties to real estate transactions are usually concerned with time schedules and costs associated with delays in closing transactions. In certain transactions, such as those involving commercial properties, financial strength is also important. In those states where prices are established by regulatory authorities, the price of title insurance policies is not likely to be an important competitive factor. As part of our on-going strategy, we regularly evaluate our pricing, and based on competitive, market and regulatory conditions and claims history, among other factors, intend to continue to adjust our prices as and where appropriate.

Trust and Investment Advisory Services.    Our federal savings bank subsidiary offers trust and investment advisory services and manages equity and fixed-income securities. As of December 31, 2010, this company managed $1.5 billion of assets, administered fiduciary and custodial assets having a market value in excess of $2.9 billion, had assets of $1.1 billion, deposits of $1.0 billion and stockholder’s equity of $90.8 million.

9

Table of Contents

Lending and Deposit Products.    Our industrial bank subsidiary accepts deposits and uses deposited funds to originate and purchase loans secured by commercial properties primarily in Southern California. As of December 31, 2010, this company, First Security Business Bank, had approximately $482.4 million of deposits and $161.5 million of loans outstanding.

Loans made or acquired during 2010 by the industrial bank totaled $9.1 million, with an average new loan balance of $432,875. The average loan balance outstanding at December 31, 2010, was $654,387. Loans are made only on a secured basis, at loan-to-value percentages generally less than 70 percent. The industrial bank specializes in making commercial real estate loans. The majority of the industrial bank’s loans are made on a fixed-to-floating rate basis. The average yield on the industrial bank’s loan portfolio for the year ended December 31, 2010, was 6.69 percent. A number of factors are included in the determination of average yield, principal among which are loan fees and closing points amortized to income, prepayment penalties recorded as income, and amortization of discounts on purchased loans. The industrial bank’s primary competitors in the Southern California commercial real estate lending market are local community banks, other industrial banks and, to a lesser extent, commercial banks. The industrial bank’s average loan to value was approximately 44 percent at December 31, 2010.

The performance of the industrial bank’s loan portfolio is evaluated on an ongoing basis by management of the industrial bank. The industrial bank places a loan on non-accrual status when three payments become past due. When a loan is placed on non-accrual status, the industrial bank’s general policy is to reverse from income previously accrued but unpaid interest. Income on such loans is subsequently recognized only to the extent that cash is received and future collection of principal is probable. Interest income on non-accrual loans that would have been recognized during the year ended December 31, 2010, if all of such loans had been current in accordance with their original terms, totaled $113,198.

The following table sets forth the amount of the industrial bank’s non-performing loans as of the dates indicated.

Based on a variety of factors concerning the creditworthiness of its borrowers, the industrial bank determined that it had three non-performing assets as of December 31, 2010.

The industrial bank’s allowance for loan losses is established through charges to earnings in the form of provision for loan losses. Loan losses are charged to, and recoveries are credited to, the allowance for loan losses. The provision for loan losses is determined after considering various factors, such as loan loss experience, maturity of the portfolio, size of the portfolio, borrower credit history, the existing allowance for loan losses, current charges and recoveries to the allowance for loan losses, the overall quality of the loan portfolio, and current economic conditions, as determined by management of the industrial bank, regulatory agencies and independent credit review specialists. While many of these factors are essentially a matter of judgment and may not be reduced to a mathematical formula, we believe that, in light of the collateral securing its loan portfolio, the industrial bank’s current allowance for loan losses is an adequate allowance against foreseeable losses.

10

Table of Contents

The following table provides certain information with respect to the industrial bank’s allowance for loan losses as well as charge-off and recovery activity.

The adequacy of the industrial bank’s allowance for loan losses is based on formula allocations and specific allocations. Formula allocations are made on a percentage basis, which is dependent on the underlying collateral, the type of loan, general economic conditions and historical losses. Specific allocations are made as problem or potential problem loans are identified and are based upon an evaluation by the industrial bank’s management of the status of such loans. Specific allocations may be revised from time to time as the status of problem or potential problem loans changes.

The following table shows the allocation of the industrial bank’s allowance for loan losses and the percent of loans in each category to total loans at the dates indicated.

Specialty Insurance Segment

Property and Casualty Insurance.    Our property and casualty insurance business provides insurance coverage to residential homeowners and renters for liability losses and typical hazards such as fire, theft, vandalism and other types of property damage. We are licensed to issue policies in all 50 states and actively issues policies in 43 states. In our largest market, California, we also offer preferred risk auto insurance to better compete with other carriers offering bundled home and auto insurance. We market our property and casualty

11

Table of Contents

insurance business using both direct distribution channels, including cross-selling through our existing closing-service activities, and through a network of independent brokers. Reinsurance is used extensively to limit risk associated with natural disasters such as windstorms, winter storms, wildfires and earthquakes.

Home Warranties.    Our home warranty business provides residential service contracts that cover residential systems and appliances against failures that occur as the result of normal usage during the coverage period. Most of these policies are issued on resale residences, although policies are also available in some instances for new homes. Coverage is typically for one year and is renewable annually at the option of the contract holder and upon our approval. Coverage and pricing typically vary by geographic region. Fees for the warranties generally are paid at the closing of the home purchase or directly by the consumer and are recognized monthly over the initial contract period. Renewal premiums may be paid by a number of different options. In addition, the contract holder is responsible for a service fee for each trade call. First year warranties primarily are marketed through real estate brokers and agents, although we also market directly to consumers. We generally sell renewals directly to consumers. Our home warranty business currently operates in 39 states and the District of Columbia.

Corporate

The Company’s corporate function consists primarily of certain financing facilities as well as the corporate services that support our business operations.

Regulation

The title insurance business is heavily regulated in the United States by state insurance regulatory authorities and internationally by the applicable regulatory authorities. These authorities generally possess broad powers with respect to the licensing of title insurers, the types and amounts of investments that title insurers may make, insurance rates, forms of policies and the form and content of required annual statements, as well as the power to audit and examine title insurers. Under state laws, certain levels of capital and surplus must be maintained and certain amounts of securities must be segregated or deposited with appropriate state officials. Various state statutes require title insurers to defer a portion of all premiums in a reserve for the protection of policyholders and to segregate investments in a corresponding amount. Further, most states restrict the amount of dividends and distributions a title insurer may make to its stockholders.

Our property and casualty businesses are subject to regulation by state insurance regulators in the states in which they transact business. In order to issue policies on a direct basis in a state, the property and casualty insurer must generally be licensed by such state. In certain circumstances, such as placements through licensed surplus lines brokers, it may conduct business without being admitted and without being subject to rate and policy form approvals.

The nature and extent of regulation to which insurance companies are subject may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but typically involves prior approval of the acquisition of “control” of an insurance company, regulation of certain transactions entered into by an insurance company with any of its affiliates, the amount and payment of dividends by an insurance company, approval of premium rates and policy forms for many lines of insurance, standards of solvency and minimum amounts of capital and surplus which must be maintained.

Our home warranty business is subject to regulation in some states by insurance authorities or other applicable regulatory entities. Our federal savings bank and industrial bank are both subject to regulation by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. In addition, our federal savings bank is regulated by the United States Department of the Treasury’s Office of Thrift Supervision. After July 21, 2011, it is anticipated that the federal savings bank will instead be regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, with the Federal Reserve Board supervising its parent holding companies. The industrial bank is regulated by the California Department of Financial Institutions.

12

Table of Contents

Investment Policies

Subject to oversight by our board of directors, the Company’s investment portfolio activities such as policy setting, compliance reporting, portfolio reviews, and strategy are overseen by an investment committee made up of certain senior executives. Additionally, the Company’s regulated subsidiaries, including title insurance underwriters, property and casualty insurance companies and banking entities, are required to establish and maintain an investment committee to oversee their own investment portfolios. The investment policy of each regulated subsidiary is designed to comply with regulatory requirements and to align the investment portfolio strategy with the entity’s strategic objectives. For example, our federal savings bank is required to maintain at least 65 percent of its asset portfolio in loans or securities that are secured by real estate. Our federal savings bank currently does not make real estate loans, and therefore fulfills this regulatory requirement predominately through investments in mortgage-backed securities. In addition, state laws impose certain restrictions upon the types and amounts of investments that may be made by our regulated insurance subsidiaries.

Pursuant to our investment policy, escrow and similar fiduciary funds are to be managed in a manner designed to ensure return of the principal to the underlying beneficiaries and, where appropriate, an investment return to the Company. The policy further provides that operating and investment funds are to be managed to balance earnings, liquidity, regulatory and risk objectives, and that investments should not expose the Company to excessive levels of credit risk, interest (including call, prepayment and extension) risk or liquidity risk.

As of December 31, 2010, our debt and equity investment securities portfolio consists of approximately 88 percent of fixed income securities. As of that date, over 72 percent of our fixed income investments are held in securities that are United States government-backed or rated AAA, and approximately 96 percent of the fixed income portfolio is rated or classified as investment grade. Percentages are based on the amortized cost basis of the securities. Credit ratings are based on Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s published ratings. If a security was rated differently by both rating agencies, the lower of the two ratings was selected.

Our equity portfolio includes the CoreLogic common stock that was issued to us in connection with the Separation and which is further described in Note 18 Transactions with CoreLogic/TFAC to the consolidated financial statements included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of Part II of this report.

In addition to our debt and equity investment securities portfolio, we maintain certain money-market and other short-term investments. We also hold strategic equity investments in companies engaged in the title insurance and settlement services industries.

Employees

As of December 31, 2010, the Company employed 16,879 people on either a part-time or full-time basis. Of these employees, approximately 32% are employed outside of the United States.

Available Information

The Company maintains a website, www.firstam.com, which includes financial information and other information for investors, including open and closed title insurance orders (which typically are posted approximately 15 days after the end of each calendar month). The Company’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available free of charge through the “Investors” page of the website as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company’s website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or any other filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission unless the Company expressly incorporates such materials.

13

Table of Contents

Item 1A.    Risk Factors

You should carefully consider each of the following risk factors and the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company faces risks other than those listed here, including those that are unknown to the Company and others of which the Company may be aware but, at present, considers immaterial. Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting the Company’s operating results, past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of future performance, and historical trends should not be used to anticipate results or trends in future periods.

1. Conditions in the real estate market generally impact the demand for a substantial portion of the Company’s products and services

Demand for a substantial portion of the Company’s products and services generally decreases as the number of real estate transactions in which its products and services are purchased decreases. The number of real estate transactions in which the Company’s products and services are purchased decreases in the following situations:

2. Unfavorable economic conditions may have a material adverse effect on the Company

Uncertainty and negative trends in general economic conditions in the United States and abroad, including significant tightening of credit markets and a general decline in the value of real property, historically have created a difficult operating environment for the Company’s businesses and other companies in its industries. In addition, the Company holds investments in entities, such as title agencies, settlement service providers and property and casualty insurance companies, and instruments, such as mortgage-backed securities, which may be negatively impacted by these conditions. The Company also owns a federal savings bank and an industrial bank into which it deposits some of its own funds and some funds held in trust for third parties. These banks invest those funds and any realized losses incurred will be reflected in the Company’s consolidated results. The likelihood of such losses, which generally would not occur if the Company were to deposit these funds in an unaffiliated entity, increases when economic conditions are unfavorable. Depending upon the ultimate severity and duration of any economic downturn, the resulting effects on the Company could be materially adverse, including a significant reduction in revenues, earnings and cash flows, challenges to the Company’s ability to satisfy covenants or otherwise meet its obligations under debt facilities, difficulties in obtaining access to capital, challenges to the Company’s ability to pay dividends at currently anticipated levels, deterioration in the value of its investments and increased credit risk from customers and others with obligations to the Company.

3. Unfavorable economic or other conditions could cause the Company to write off a portion of its goodwill and other intangible assets

The Company performs an impairment test of the carrying value of goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets annually in the fourth quarter or sooner if circumstances indicate a possible impairment. Finite-lived intangible assets are subject to impairment tests on a periodic basis. Factors that may be considered in connection with this review include, without limitation, underperformance relative to historical or projected future operating results, reductions in the Company’s stock price and market capitalization, increased cost of capital and negative macroeconomic, industry and company-specific trends. These and other factors could lead to a conclusion that goodwill or other intangible assets are no longer fully recoverable, in which case the Company would be required to write off the portion believed to be unrecoverable. Total goodwill and other intangible assets reflected on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2010 is approximately $0.9 billion. Any substantial goodwill and other intangible asset impairments that may be required could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

14

Table of Contents

4. A downgrade by ratings agencies, reductions in statutory surplus maintained by the Company’s title insurance underwriters or a deterioration in other measures of financial strength may negatively affect the Company’s results of operations and competitive position

Certain of the Company’s customers use measurements of the financial strength of the Company’s title insurance underwriters, including, among others, ratings provided by ratings agencies and levels of statutory surplus maintained by those underwriters, in determining the amount of a policy they will accept and the amount of reinsurance required. Each of the major ratings agencies currently rates the Company’s title insurance operations. The Company’s principal title insurance underwriter’s financial strength ratings are “A3” by Moody’s, “A-” by Fitch, “BBB+” by Standard & Poor’s and “A-” by A.M. Best. These ratings provide the agencies’ perspectives on the financial strength, operating performance and cash generating ability of those operations. These agencies continually review these ratings and the ratings are subject to change. Statutory surplus, or the amount by which statutory assets exceed statutory liabilities, is also a measure of financial strength. The Company’s principal title insurance underwriter maintained approximately $854.6 million of statutory surplus capital as of December 31, 2010. The current minimum statutory surplus capital required to be maintained by California law is $500,000. Accordingly, if the ratings or statutory surplus of these title insurance underwriters are reduced from their current levels, or if there is a deterioration in other measures of financial strength, the Company’s results of operations, competitive position and liquidity could be adversely affected.

5. Failures at financial institutions at which the Company deposits funds could adversely affect the Company

The Company deposits substantial funds in financial institutions. These funds include amounts owned by third parties, such as escrow deposits. Should one or more of the financial institutions at which deposits are maintained fail, there is no guarantee that the Company would recover the funds deposited, whether through Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation coverage or otherwise. In the event of any such failure, the Company also could be held liable for the funds owned by third parties.

6. Changes in government regulation could prohibit or limit the Company’s operations or make it more burdensome to conduct such operations

Many of the Company’s businesses, including its title insurance, property and casualty insurance, home warranty, banking, trust and investment businesses, are regulated by various federal, state, local and foreign governmental agencies. These and other of the Company’s businesses also operate within statutory guidelines. Changes in the applicable regulatory environment, statutory guidelines or interpretations of existing regulations or statutes, enhanced governmental oversight or efforts by governmental agencies to cause customers to refrain from using the Company’s products or services could prohibit or limit its future operations or make it more burdensome to conduct such operations. The impact of these changes would be more significant if they involve jurisdictions in which the Company generates a greater portion of its title premiums, such as the states of Arizona, California, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas and the province of Ontario, Canada. These changes may compel the Company to reduce its prices, may restrict its ability to implement price increases or acquire assets or businesses, may limit the manner in which the Company conducts its business or otherwise may have a negative impact on its ability to generate revenues, earnings and cash flows.

7. Scrutiny of the Company’s businesses and the industries in which it operates by governmental entities and others could adversely affect its operations and financial condition

The real estate settlement services industry, an industry in which the Company generates a substantial portion of its revenue and earnings, has become subject to heightened scrutiny by regulators, legislators, the media and plaintiffs’ attorneys. Though often directed at the industry generally, these groups may also focus their attention directly on the Company’s businesses. In either case, this scrutiny may result in changes which could adversely affect the Company’s operations and, therefore, its financial condition and liquidity.

15

Table of Contents

Governmental entities have routinely inquired into certain practices in the real estate settlement services industry to determine whether certain of the Company’s businesses or its competitors have violated applicable laws, which include, among others, the insurance codes of the various jurisdictions and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and similar state and federal laws. Departments of insurance in the various states, either separately or in conjunction with federal regulators and applicable regulators in international jurisdictions, also periodically conduct targeted inquiries into the practices of title insurance companies in their respective jurisdictions. Further, from time to time plaintiffs’ lawyers may target the Company and other members of the Company’s industry with lawsuits claiming legal violations or other wrongful conduct. These lawsuits may involve large groups of plaintiffs and claims for substantial damages. Any of these types of inquiries or proceedings may result in a finding of a violation of the law or other wrongful conduct and may result in the payment of fines or damages or the imposition of restrictions on the Company’s conduct which could impact its operations and financial condition. Moreover, these laws and standards of conduct often are ambiguous and, thus, it may be difficult to ensure compliance. This ambiguity may force the Company to mitigate its risk by settling claims or by ending practices that generate revenues, earnings and cash flows.

8. Reform of government-sponsored enterprises could negatively impact the Company

Historically a substantial proportion of home loans originated in the United States were sold to and, generally, resold in a securitized form by, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). As a condition to the purchase of a home loan Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac generally required the purchase of title insurance for their benefit and, as applicable, the benefit of the holders of home loans they may have securitized. The federal government currently is considering various alternatives to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The role, if any, that these enterprises or other enterprises fulfilling a similar function will play in the mortgage process following the adoption of any reforms is not currently known. The timing of the adoption and, thereafter, the implementation of the reforms is similarly unknown. Due to the significance of the role of these enterprises, the mortgage process itself may substantially change as a result of these reforms and related discussions. It is possible that these entities, as reformed, or the successors to these entities may require changes to the way title insurance is priced or delivered, changes to standard policy terms or other changes which may make the title insurance business less profitable. These reforms may also alter the home loan market, such as by causing higher mortgage interest rates due to decreased governmental support of mortgage-backed securities. These consequences could be materially adverse to the Company and its financial condition.

9. The Company may find it difficult to acquire necessary data

Certain data used and supplied by the Company are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local regulatory authorities. Compliance with existing federal, state and local laws and regulations with respect to such data has not had a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition or liquidity to date. Nonetheless, federal, state and local laws and regulations in the United States designed to protect the public from the misuse of personal information in the marketplace and adverse publicity or potential litigation concerning the commercial use of such information may affect the Company’s operations and could result in substantial regulatory compliance expense, litigation expense and a loss of revenue. The suppliers of data to the Company face similar burdens and, consequently, the Company may find it financially burdensome to acquire necessary data.

10. Regulation of title insurance rates could adversely affect the Company’s results of operations

Title insurance rates are subject to extensive regulation, which varies from state to state. In many states the approval of the applicable state insurance regulator is required prior to implementing a rate change. This regulation could hinder the Company’s ability to promptly adapt to changing market dynamics through price adjustments, which could adversely affect its results of operations, particularly in a rapidly declining market.

16

Table of Contents

11. As a holding company, the Company depends on distributions from its subsidiaries, and if distributions from its subsidiaries are materially impaired, the Company’s ability to declare and pay dividends may be adversely affected; in addition, insurance and other regulations limit the amount of dividends, loans and advances available from the Company’s insurance subsidiaries

The Company is a holding company whose primary assets are investments in its operating subsidiaries. The Company’s ability to pay dividends is dependent on the ability of its subsidiaries to pay dividends or repay funds. If the Company’s operating subsidiaries are not able to pay dividends or repay funds, the Company may not be able to fulfill parent company obligations and/or declare and pay dividends to its stockholders. Moreover, pursuant to insurance and other regulations under which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries operate, the amount of dividends, loans and advances available is limited. Under such regulations, the maximum amount of dividends, loans and advances available in 2011 from these insurance subsidiaries is $194.3 million.

12. The Company’s pension plan is currently underfunded and pension expenses and funding obligations could increase significantly as a result of weak performance of financial markets and its effect on plan assets

The Company is responsible for the obligations of its defined benefit pension plan, which it assumed from its former parent, The First American Corporation, on June 1, 2010 in connection with the spin-off transaction which was consummated on that date. The plan was closed to new entrants effective December 31, 2001 and amended to “freeze” all benefit accruals as of April 30, 2008. The Company’s future funding obligations for this plan depend, among other factors, upon the future performance of assets held in trust for the plan. The pension plan was underfunded as of December 31, 2010 by approximately $108.4 million and the Company may need to make significant contributions to the plan. In addition, pension expenses and funding requirements may also be greater than currently anticipated if the market values of the assets held by the pension plan decline or if the other assumptions regarding plan earnings and expenses require adjustment. On June 1, 2010, CoreLogic, Inc. issued a $19.9 million promissory note to the Company which approximated the unfunded portion of the liability attributable to the plan participants that were employed in the information solutions group of The First American Corporation. There is no guarantee that CoreLogic, Inc. will fulfill its obligation under the note or that the amount of the note will be sufficient to ultimately cover the unfunded portion of the liability attributable to these employees. The Company’s obligations under this plan could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

13. Weakness in the commercial real estate market or an increase in the amount or severity of claims in connection with commercial real estate transactions could adversely affect the Company’s results of operations

The Company issues title insurance policies in connection with commercial real estate transactions. Premiums paid and limits on these policies are large relative to policies issued on residential transactions. Because a claim under a single policy could be significant, title insurers often seek reinsurance or coinsurance from other insurance companies, both within and outside the industry. The Company both receives and provides such coverage. Additionally, the pretax margin derived from these policies generally is higher than on other policies. Disruptions in the commercial real estate market, including limitations on available credit and defaults on loans secured by commercial real estate, may result in a decrease in the number of commercial policies issued by the Company and/or an increase in the number of claims it incurs on commercial policies. As a reference, commercial premiums earned by the Company in 2009 decreased nearly 50 percent compared with the amount earned in 2006. A further decrease in the number of commercial policies issued by the Company or an increase in the amount or severity of claims it incurs on commercial policies could adversely affect the Company’s results of operations.

17

Table of Contents

14. Actual claims experience could materially vary from the expected claims experience reflected in the Company’s reserve for incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) title claims

Title insurance policies are long-duration contracts with the majority of the claims reported within the first few years following the issuance of the policy. Generally, 70 to 80 percent of claim amounts become known in the first five years of the policy life, and the majority of IBNR reserves relate to the five most recent policy years. A material change in expected ultimate losses and corresponding loss rates for policy years older than five years, while possible, is not considered reasonably likely. However, changes in expected ultimate losses and corresponding loss rates for recent policy years are considered likely and could result in a material adjustment to the IBNR reserves. Based on historical experience, management believes a 50 basis point change to the loss rates for the most recent policy years, positive or negative, is believed to be reasonably likely given the long duration nature of a title insurance policy. For example, if the expected ultimate losses for each of the last five policy years increased or decreased by 50 basis points, the resulting impact on the Company’s IBNR reserve would be an increase or decrease, as the case may be, of $105.1 million. The estimates made by management in determining the appropriate level of IBNR reserves could ultimately prove to be inaccurate and actual claims experience may vary from the expected claims experience.

15. Systems interruptions and intrusions may impair the delivery of the Company’s products and services

System interruptions and intrusions may impair the delivery of the Company’s products and services, resulting in a loss of customers and a corresponding loss in revenue. The Company’s businesses depend heavily upon computer systems located in its data centers. Certain events beyond the Company’s control, including natural disasters, telecommunications failures and intrusions into the Company’s systems by third parties could temporarily or permanently interrupt the delivery of products and services. These interruptions also may interfere with suppliers’ ability to provide necessary data and employees’ ability to attend work and perform their responsibilities.

16. The Company may not be able to realize the benefits of its offshore strategy

The Company utilizes lower cost labor in foreign countries, such as India and the Philippines, among others. These countries are subject to relatively high degrees of political and social instability and may lack the infrastructure to withstand natural disasters. Such disruptions could decrease efficiency and increase the Company’s costs in these countries. Weakness of the United States dollar in relation to the currencies used in these foreign countries may also reduce the savings achievable through this strategy. Furthermore, the practice of utilizing labor based in foreign countries has come under increased scrutiny in the United States and, as a result, some of the Company’s customers may require it to use labor based in the United States. Laws or regulations that require the Company to use labor based in the United States or effectively increase the cost of the Company’s foreign labor also could be enacted. The Company may not be able to pass on these increased costs to its customers.

17. Product migration may result in decreased revenue

Customers of many real estate settlement services the Company provides increasingly require these services to be delivered faster, cheaper and more efficiently. Many of the traditional products it provides are labor and time intensive. As these customer pressures increase, the Company may be forced to replace traditional products with automated products that can be delivered electronically and with limited human processing. Because many of these traditional products have higher prices than corresponding automated products, the Company’s revenues may decline.

18

Table of Contents

18. Increases in the size of the Company’s customers enhance their negotiating position vis-à-vis the Company and may decrease their need for the services offered by the Company

Many of the Company’s customers are increasing in size as a result of consolidation or the failure of their competitors. For example, the Company believes that three lenders collectively originate more than 50 percent of mortgage loans in the United States. As a result, the Company may derive a higher percentage of its revenues from a smaller base of customers, which would enhance the negotiating power of these customers with respect to the pricing and the terms on which these customers purchase the Company’s products and other matters. Moreover, these larger customers may prove more capable of performing in-house some or all of the services the Company provides or, with respect to the Company’s title insurance products, more willing to assume the risk of title defects themselves and, consequently, the demand for the Company’s products and services may decrease. These circumstances could adversely affect the Company’s revenues and profitability. Changes in the Company’s relationship with any of these customers, the loss of all or a portion of the business the Company derives from these customers or any refusal of these customers to accept the Company’s policies could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

19. Certain provisions of the Company’s bylaws and certificate of incorporation may reduce the likelihood of any unsolicited acquisition proposal or potential change of control that the Company’s stockholders might consider favorable

The Company’s bylaws and certificate of incorporation contain provisions that could be considered “anti-takeover” provisions because they make it harder for a third-party to acquire the Company without the consent of the Company’s incumbent board of directors. Under these provisions:

While the Company believes that they are appropriate, these provisions, which may only be amended by the affirmative vote of the holders of approximately 67 percent of the Company’s issued voting shares, could have the effect of discouraging an unsolicited acquisition proposal or delaying, deferring or preventing a change of control transaction that might involve a premium price or otherwise be considered favorably by the Company’s stockholders.

20. The Company’s investment portfolio is subject to certain risks and could experience losses

The Company maintains a substantial investment portfolio, primarily consisting of fixed income securities (including mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities) and, as of December 31, 2010, $239.5 million in common stock of CoreLogic that was issued to the Company in connection with its spin-off separation from CoreLogic. The investment portfolio also includes money-market and other short-term investments, as well as some preferred and other common stock. Securities in the Company’s investment portfolio are subject to certain economic and financial market risks, such as credit risk, interest rate (including call, prepayment and extension) risk and/or liquidity risk. Because a substantial proportion of the portfolio consists of the common stock of a single issuer, CoreLogic, the risk of loss in the portfolio also is impacted by factors that influence the value of

19

Table of Contents

CoreLogic’s stock, including, but not limited to, CoreLogic’s financial results and the market’s perception of CoreLogic’s and its industry’s prospects. Additionally, the risk of loss associated with the portfolio is increased during periods, such as the present period, of instability in credit markets and economic conditions. If the carrying value of the investments exceeds the fair value, and the decline in fair value is deemed to be other-than-temporary, the Company will be required to write down the value of the investments, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, statutory surplus and financial condition.

21. The Company could have conflicts with CoreLogic

The Company and CoreLogic were part of a single publicly traded company, The First American Corporation, until the Company’s spin-off separation from CoreLogic on June 1, 2010. Conflicts with CoreLogic may arise as a result of the Company’s agreements with CoreLogic. Competition between the companies also could result in conflicts. While current competition between the companies is not material, the extent of future competition could increase. In addition, Parker S. Kennedy serves as the executive chairman of both the Company and CoreLogic and therefore has obligations to both companies. As such, conflicts of interest with respect to matters potentially or actually affecting both companies may arise. Conflicts, competition or conflicts of interest pertaining to the Company’s relationship with CoreLogic could adversely affect the Company.

Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.    Properties

We maintain our executive offices at MacArthur Place in Santa Ana, California. In 2005, The First American Corporation expanded its three-building office campus through the addition of two four-story office buildings totaling approximately 226,000 square feet, a two-story, free standing, 52,000 square foot technology center and a two-story parking structure, bringing the total square footage to approximately 490,000 square feet. The original three office buildings, totaling approximately 210,000 square feet, and the fixtures thereto and underlying land, are subject to a deed of trust and security agreement securing payment of a promissory note evidencing a loan made in October 2003, to our principal title insurance subsidiary in the original sum of $55.0 million. This loan is payable in monthly installments of principal and interest, is fully amortizing and matures November 1, 2023. The outstanding principal balance of this loan was $41.7 million as of December 31, 2010. Our title insurance subsidiary owns and operates these properties, and leases approximately 106,956 square feet within one of the buildings to CoreLogic for its executive offices pursuant to a lease that was entered into in connection with the separation. The technology center referred to above is primarily utilized and maintained by the Company but also houses physically segregated servers belonging to CoreLogic which are maintained by CoreLogic.

One of our subsidiaries in the title insurance and services segment leases an aggregate of approximately 134,000 square feet of office space in four buildings of the International Technology Park in Bangalore, India. Five of the six leases associated with this space expire in 2012 and the sixth is currently a month-to-month lease. We have the option to terminate all of the leases in the International Technology Park in 2011.

The office facilities we occupy are, in all material respects, in good condition and adequate for their intended use.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to a number of non-ordinary course lawsuits. Frequently these lawsuits are similar in nature to other lawsuits pending against the Company’s competitors.

20

Table of Contents

For those non-ordinary course lawsuits where the Company has determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability representing the best estimate of the Company’s financial exposure based on known facts has been recorded. Actual losses may materially differ from the amounts recorded.

For a substantial majority of these lawsuits, however, it is not possible to assess the probability of loss. Most of these lawsuits are putative class actions which require a plaintiff to satisfy a number of procedural requirements before proceeding to trial. These requirements include, among others, demonstration to a court that the law proscribes in some manner the Company’s activities, the making of factual allegations sufficient to suggest that the Company’s activities exceeded the limits of the law and a determination by the court – known as class certification – that the law permits a group of individuals to pursue the case together as a class. If these procedural requirements are not met, either the lawsuit cannot proceed or, as is the case with class certification, the plaintiffs lose the financial incentive to proceed with the case (or the amount at issue effectively becomes de minimus). Frequently, a court’s determination as to these procedural requirements are subject to appeal to a higher court. As a result of, among other factors, ambiguities and inconsistencies in the myriad of laws applicable to the Company’s business and the uniqueness of the factual issues presented in any given lawsuit, the Company often cannot determine the probability of loss until a court has finally determined that a plaintiff has satisfied applicable procedural requirements.

Furthermore, because most of these lawsuits are putative class actions, it is often impossible to estimate the possible loss or a range of loss amounts, even where the Company has determined that a loss is reasonably possible. Generally class actions involve a large number of people and the effort to determine which people satisfy the requirements to become plaintiffs—or class members—is often time consuming and burdensome. Moreover, these lawsuits raise complex factual issues which result in uncertainty as to their outcome and, ultimately, make it difficult for the Company to estimate the amount of damages which a plaintiff might successfully prove. In addition, many of the Company’s businesses are regulated by various federal, state, local and foreign governmental agencies and are subject to numerous statutory guidelines. These regulations and statutory guidelines often are complex, inconsistent or ambiguous, which results in additional uncertainty as to the outcome of a given lawsuit—including the amount of damages a plaintiff might be afforded—or makes it difficult to analogize experience in one case or jurisdiction to another case or jurisdiction.

Most of the non-ordinary course lawsuits to which the Company and its subsidiaries are parties challenge practices in the Company’s title insurance business, though a limited number of cases also pertain to the Company’s other businesses. These lawsuits include, among others, cases alleging, among other assertions, that the Company, one of its subsidiaries and/or one of its agents:

21

Table of Contents

All of these lawsuits are putative class actions. A court has granted class certification only in Campbell, Hamilton (North Carolina), Hamilton (Texas), Johnson, Lewis, Raffone and Slapikas. An appeal to a higher court is pending with respect to the granting of class certification in Hamilton (Texas) and a motion to decertify the class in Campbell is pending. For the reasons stated above, the Company has been unable to assess the probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss or, where the Company has been able to make an estimate, the Company believes the amount is immaterial to the financial statements as a whole.

All of these lawsuits are putative class actions for which a class has not been certified, except in Edwards. In Edwards a narrow class has been certified and information is being exchanged for the purpose of enabling the plaintiff to argue whether a broader class is appropriate. In addition, a petition for a hearing on the legal right of the Edwards plaintiff to sue is pending in the United States Supreme Court. For the reasons stated above, the Company has been unable to assess the probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.

22

Table of Contents

All of these lawsuits are putative class actions for which a class has not been certified. Consequently, for the reasons described above, the Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of loss.

Both of these lawsuits are putative class actions for which a class has not been certified. Consequently, for the reasons described above, the Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of loss.

23

Table of Contents

All of these lawsuits are putative class actions for which a class has not been certified. Consequently, for the reasons described above, the Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of loss.

While some of the lawsuits described above may be material to our operating results in any particular period if an unfavorable outcome results, the Company does not believe that any of these lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s overall financial condition.

Additionally, on March 5, 2010, Bank of America, N.A. filed a complaint in the North Carolina General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division against United General Title Insurance Company and First American Title Insurance Company. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants failed to pay or failed to timely respond to certain claims made on title insurance policies issued in connection with home equity loans or lines of credit that are now in default. According to the complaint, these title insurance policies, which did not require a title search, were intended to protect against the risks of certain defects in the title to real property, including undisclosed intervening liens, vesting problems and legal description errors, that would have been discovered if the plaintiff had conducted a full title search. As indicated in the complaint, Fiserv Solutions, Inc. (“Fiserv”), as agent for the defendants, was authorized to issue certificates evidencing that a given loan was insured. The complaint also indicates that plaintiff was required to satisfy certain criteria before title would be insured. This involved (a) reviewing borrower statements to the lender when applying for the loan, (b) reviewing the borrower’s credit report and (c) addressing secured mortgages appearing on the credit report which did not appear on the borrower’s loan application. The plaintiff alleges that the failure to pay or timely respond to the subject claims was done in bad faith and constitutes a breach of the title insurance policies issued to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is seeking monetary damages, punitive damages where permitted, treble damages where permitted, attorneys fees and costs where permitted, declaratory judgment and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.

On April 1, 2010, the Company filed an answer to Bank of America’s complaint and filed a third party complaint within the same litigation against Fiserv for breach of contract, indemnification and other matters. The Company’s agreement with Fiserv required Fiserv, among other things, to ensure that the Company’s policies were issued in accordance with prudent practices, to refrain from issuing the Company’s policies unless it had determined the product could be properly issued in accordance with the Company’s standards and to provide reasonable assistance in claims handling. The agreement also required Fiserv to indemnify the Company for certain losses, including losses resulting from Fiserv’s failure to comply with its agreement with the Company or with Company instructions or from its negligence or misconduct.

As indicated above, this lawsuit pertains to claims on title insurance policies issued by the defendants. The Company provides for title insurance losses through a known claims reserve and an incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) claims reserve (for a discussion of the Company’s reserve for known and IBNR claims, see Note 1 Description of the Company and Note 9 Reserve for Known and Incurred But Not Reported Claims to the consolidated financial statements included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of Part II of this report). A portion of the known claims reserve is attributable to certain of the claims that are the subject of this lawsuit and a portion of the IBNR claims reserve is attributable to the title insurance products that are the subject of the lawsuit and similar products issued to others. The ultimate outcome of this lawsuit is subject to a number of uncertainties, including the amount of responsibility that a court may apportion to Fiserv, whether a court determines that the defendants are entitled to certain documents requested as part of the claims submission process, the contents of those documents and whether a court interprets the title insurance policies that are the subject of the lawsuit in a manner consistent with the Company’s understanding. As a result of this uncertainty, it is currently not possible to estimate whether the loss or range of loss is greater than the amount of the known claims reserve and the IBNR claims reserve attributable to the claims that are the subject of this lawsuit. If this uncertainty is resolved in a manner that is unfavorable to the Company, the ultimate resolution of this lawsuit could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity.

24

Table of Contents

The Company also is a party to non-ordinary course lawsuits other than those described above. With respect to these lawsuits, the Company has determined either that a loss is not probable or that the possible loss or range of loss is not material to the financial statements as a whole.

The Company’s title insurance, property and casualty insurance, home warranty, thrift, trust and investment advisory businesses are regulated by various federal, state and local governmental agencies. Many of the Company’s other businesses operate within statutory guidelines. Consequently, the Company may from time to time be subject to audit or investigation by such governmental agencies. Currently, governmental agencies are auditing or investigating certain of the Company’s operations. These audits or investigations include inquiries into, among other matters, pricing and rate setting practices in the title insurance industry, competition in the title insurance industry, title insurance customer acquisition and retention practices and agency relationships. With respect to matters where the Company has determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, the Company has recorded a liability representing its best estimate of the financial exposure based on known facts. While the ultimate disposition of each such audit or investigation is not yet determinable, the Company does not believe that individually or in the aggregate they will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. These audits or investigations could, however, result in changes to the Company’s business practices which could ultimately have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

The Company and its subsidiaries also are involved in numerous ongoing routine legal and regulatory proceedings related to their operations. While the ultimate disposition of each proceeding is not determinable, the ultimate resolution of any of such proceedings, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in the period of disposition.

Item 4.    [Removed and Reserved]

25

Table of Contents

PART II

Common Stock Market Prices and Dividends

The Company’s common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange (ticker symbol FAF). The approximate number of record holders of common stock on February 18, 2011, was 3,075.

High and low stock prices and dividends declared for June 2 through June 30, 2010, and for the third and fourth quarters of 2010 are set forth in the table below. June 2, 2010 was the first day that the Company’s common stock traded regular way on the New York Stock Exchange following the Company’s spin-off separation from The First American Corporation on June 1, 2010.

We expect that the Company will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends at or above the historical levels reflected in the table above. The timing, declaration and payment of future dividends, however, falls within the discretion of the Company’s board of directors and will depend upon many factors, including the Company’s financial condition and earnings, the capital requirements of our businesses, industry practice, restrictions imposed by applicable law and any other factors the board of directors deems relevant from time to time. In addition, the ability to pay dividends also is potentially affected by the restrictions described in Note 2 Statutory Restrictions on Investments and Stockholders’ Equity to the consolidated financial statements included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of Part II of this report.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company did not issue any unregistered common stock.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

During the quarter ended December 31, 2010, the Company did not purchase any of the Company’s common stock.

Stock Performance Graph

The following performance graph and related information shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or “filed” with the SEC, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, except to the extent that it is specifically incorporated by reference into such filing.

26

Table of Contents

The following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder return on the Company’s common stock with the corresponding cumulative total returns of the Russell 2000 Financial Services Index and a peer group index for the period from June 2, 2010, the first day the Company’s common stock traded in the regular way market on the New York Stock Exchange, through December 31, 2010. The comparison assumes an investment of $100 on June 2, 2010 and reinvestment of dividends. This historical performance is not indicative of future performance.

Comparison of Cumulative Total Return

27

Table of Contents

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

The selected historical consolidated financial data for First American Financial Corporation (the “Company”) for the five-year period ended December 31, 2010, have been derived from the Company’s consolidated financial statements presented in Item 8. The selected historical consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto, “Item 1—Business,” and “Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

The Company became a publicly traded company in connection with its spin-off from its prior parent, The First American Corporation (“TFAC”), on June 1, 2010 (the “Separation”). The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 have been derived from the consolidated financial statements of TFAC and represent carve-out stand-alone combined financial statements. The combined financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 include items attributable to the Company and allocations of general corporate expenses from TFAC. As a result, the Company’s selected historical consolidated financial data prior to June 1, 2010 do not necessarily reflect what its financial position or results of operations would have been if it had been operated as a stand-alone public entity during the periods covered prior to June 1, 2010, and may not be indicative of the Company’s future results of operations and financial position. See Note 1 Description of the Company to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion of the Separation and basis of presentation.

First American Financial Corporation and Subsidiary Companies

28

Table of Contents

Note A—Prior to the Separation, a portion of TFAC’s combined debt, in the amount of $140.0 million, was allocated to the Company based on amounts directly incurred for the Company’s benefit. In connection with the Separation, the Company borrowed $200.0 million under its revolving credit facility and transferred such funds to CoreLogic, which fully satisfied the Company’s $140.0 million allocated portion of TFAC debt

Note B—Stockholders’ equity refers to the stockholders of the Company and excludes noncontrolling interests. TFAC’s invested equity refers to the net assets of the Company which reflects TFAC’s investment in the Company prior to the Separation and excludes noncontrolling interests.

Note C—The Company did not declare dividends prior to the Separation as it was not a stand-alone publicly traded company until the Separation.

Note D—Per share information relating to net income is based on weighted-average number of shares outstanding for the years presented. Per share information relating to stockholders’ equity is based on shares outstanding at the end of each year.

Note E—Number of common shares outstanding for the current year and prior years was computed using the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately following the Separation, as if such shares were outstanding for the entire period prior to the Separation.

Note F—Title order volumes are those processed by the direct domestic title operations of the Company and do not include orders processed by agents. Prior years title order volumes have been reclassified to conform to the 2010 presentation. See Note 1 Description of the Company to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion of this change in presentation.

Note G—Number of employees is based on actual employee headcount. The increase in headcount in 2010 is due to certain offshore functions that prior to the Separation were performed by TFAC being performed internally by the Company following the Separation. This increase in headcount is substantially related to employees employed outside of the United States.

29

Table of Contents

Item 7.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis contains certain financial measures, in particular presentation of certain balances excluding the impact of non-recurring items, that are not presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). The Company is presenting these non-GAAP financial measures because they provide the Company’s management and readers of the Annual Report on Form 10-K with additional insight into the operational performance of the Company relative to earlier periods and relative to the Company’s competitors. The Company does not intend for these non-GAAP financial measures to be a substitute for any GAAP financial information. Readers of this Annual Report on Form 10-K should use these non-GAAP financial measures only in conjunction with the comparable GAAP financial measures.

Spin-off

The Company became a publicly traded company following its spin-off from its prior parent, The First American Corporation (“TFAC”) on June 1, 2010 (the “Separation”). On that date, TFAC distributed all of the Company’s outstanding shares to the record date shareholders of TFAC on a one-for-one basis (the “Distribution”). After the Distribution, the Company owns TFAC’s financial services businesses and TFAC, which reincorporated and assumed the name CoreLogic, Inc. (“CoreLogic”), continues to own its information solutions businesses. The Company’s common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the “FAF” ticker symbol and CoreLogic’s common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “CLGX.”

To effect the Separation, TFAC and the Company entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement (the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”) that governs the rights and obligations of the Company and CoreLogic regarding the Distribution. It also governs the relationship between the Company and CoreLogic subsequent to the completion of the Separation and provides for the allocation between the Company and CoreLogic of TFAC’s assets and liabilities. The Separation and Distribution Agreement identifies assets, liabilities and contracts that were allocated between CoreLogic and the Company as part of the Separation and describes the transfers, assumptions and assignments of these assets, liabilities and contracts. In particular, the Separation and Distribution Agreement provides that, subject to the terms and conditions contained therein:

The Separation resulted in a net distribution from the Company to TFAC of $156.6 million. In connection with such distribution, the Company assumed $22.1 million of accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax, which was primarily related to the Company’s assumption of the unfunded portion of the defined benefit pension obligation associated with participants who were employees of the businesses retained by CoreLogic. See Note 14 Employee Benefit Plans to the consolidated financial statements for additional discussion of the defined benefit pension plan.

30

Table of Contents

Principles of Combination and Basis of Presentation

The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and have been derived from the consolidated financial statements of TFAC and represent carve-out stand-alone combined financial statements. The combined financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 include items attributable to the Company and allocations of general corporate expenses from TFAC.

The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 include assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses directly attributable to the Company’s operations. The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 reflect allocations of corporate expenses from TFAC for certain functions provided by TFAC, including, but not limited to, general corporate expenses related to finance, legal, information technology, human resources, communications, compliance, facilities, procurement, employee benefits, and share-based compensation. These expenses have been allocated to the Company on the basis of direct usage when identifiable, with the remainder allocated on the basis of net revenue, domestic headcount or assets or a combination of such drivers. The Company considers the basis on which the expenses have been allocated to be a reasonable reflection of the utilization of services provided to or the benefit received by the Company during the periods presented. The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 do not reflect the debt or interest expense it might have incurred if it had been a stand-alone entity. In addition, the Company expects to incur other expenses, not reflected in its historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010, as a result of being a separate publicly traded company. As a result, the Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 do not necessarily reflect what its financial position or results of operations would have been if it had been operated as a stand-alone public entity during the periods covered prior to June 1, 2010, and may not be indicative of the Company’s future results of operations and financial position.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and reflect the consolidated operations of the Company as a separate, stand-alone publicly traded company subsequent to June 1, 2010. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of First American Financial Corporation and all controlled subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Investments in which the Company exercises significant influence, but does not control and is not the primary beneficiary, are accounted for using the equity method. Investments in which the Company does not exercise significant influence over the investee are accounted for under the cost method.

Reportable Segments

The Company consists of the following reportable segments and a corporate function:

31

Table of Contents

The corporate division consists of certain financing facilities as well as the corporate services that support the Company’s business operations.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The Company’s management considers the accounting policies described below to be critical in preparing the Company’s consolidated financial statements. These policies require management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of certain assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses and related disclosures of contingencies. See Note 1 Description of the Company to the consolidated financial statements for a more detailed description of the Company’s accounting policies.

Revenue recognition.    Title premiums on policies issued directly by the Company are recognized on the effective date of the title policy and escrow fees are recorded upon close of the escrow. Revenues from title policies issued by independent agents are recorded when notice of issuance is received from the agent, which is generally when cash payment is received by the Company. Revenues earned by the Company’s title plant management business are recognized at the time of delivery, as the Company has no significant ongoing obligation after delivery.

Direct premiums of the Company’s specialty insurance segment include revenues from home warranty contracts which are recognized ratably over the 12-month duration of the contracts, and revenues from property and casualty insurance policies which are also recognized ratably over the 12-month duration of the policies.

Interest on loans of the Company’s thrift subsidiary is recognized on the outstanding principal balance on the accrual basis. Loan origination fees and related direct loan origination costs are deferred and recognized over the life of the loan. Revenues earned by the other products in the Company’s trust and banking operations are recognized at the time of delivery, as the Company has no significant ongoing obligation after delivery.

Provision for policy losses.    The Company provides for title insurance losses by a charge to expense when the related premium revenue is recognized. The amount charged to expense is generally determined by applying a rate (the loss provision rate) to total title insurance premiums and escrow fees. The Company’s management estimates the loss provision rate at the beginning of each year and reassesses the rate quarterly to ensure that the resulting incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) loss reserve and known claims reserve included in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets together reflect management’s best estimate of the total costs required to settle all IBNR and known claims. If the ending IBNR reserve is not considered adequate, an adjustment is recorded.

The process of assessing the loss provision rate and the resulting IBNR reserve involves evaluation of the results of both an in-house actuarial review and independent actuarial analysis. The Company’s in-house actuary performs a reserve analysis utilizing generally accepted actuarial methods that incorporate cumulative historical claims experience and information provided by in-house claims and operations personnel. Current economic and business trends are also reviewed and used in the reserve analysis. These include real estate and mortgage markets conditions, changes in residential and commercial real estate values, and changes in the levels of defaults and foreclosures that may affect claims levels and patterns of emergence, as well as any company-specific factors that may be relevant to past and future claims experience. Results from the analysis include, but are not limited to, a range of IBNR reserve estimates and a single point estimate for IBNR as of the balance sheet date.

For recent policy years at early stages of development (generally the last three years), IBNR is estimated by applying an expected loss rate to total title insurance premiums and escrow fees and adjusting for policy year maturity using the estimated loss development patterns. The expected loss rate and patterns are based on historical experience and the relationship of the history to the applicable policy years. This is a generally accepted actuarial method of determining IBNR for policy years at early development ages. IBNR calculated in this way differs from

32

Table of Contents

the IBNR a multiplicative loss development factor calculation would produce. Factor-based development effectively extrapolates results to date forward through the lifetime of the policy year’s development.

For more mature policy years (generally, policy years aged more than three years), IBNR is estimated using multiplicative loss development factor calculations. These years were exposed to adverse economic conditions during 2007-2010 that may have resulted in acceleration of claims and one-time losses. The possible extrapolation of these losses to future development periods by using factors was considered. The impact of economic conditions during 2007-2010 is believed to account for a much less significant portion of losses on policy years 2004 and prior than on more recent policy years. Policy years 2004 and prior were at relatively mature ages when the adverse development period began in 2007, and much of their losses had already been incurred by then. In addition, the loss development factors for policy years 2007 and prior are low enough that the potential for over-extrapolation is limited to an acceptable level.

The Company utilizes an independent third party actuary who produces a report with estimates and projections of the same financial items described above. The third party actuary’s analysis uses generally accepted actuarial methods that may in whole or in part be different from those used by the in-house actuary. The third party actuary’s report is used to validate the reasonableness of the in-house analysis.

The Company’s management uses the IBNR point estimate from the in-house actuary’s analysis and other relevant information it may have concerning claims to determine what it considers to be the best estimate of the total amount required for the IBNR reserve.

Title insurance policies are long-duration contracts with the majority of the claims reported to the Company within the first few years following the issuance of the policy. Generally, 70 to 80 percent of claim amounts become known in the first five years of the policy life, and the majority of IBNR reserves relate to the five most recent policy years. A material change in expected ultimate losses and corresponding loss rates for policy years older than five years, while possible, is not considered reasonably likely by the Company. However, changes in expected ultimate losses and corresponding loss rates for recent policy years are considered likely and could result in a material adjustment to the IBNR reserves. Based on historical experience, the Company believes that a 50 basis point change to one or more of the loss rates for the most recent policy years, positive or negative, is reasonably likely given the long duration nature of a title insurance policy. If the expected ultimate losses for each of the last five policy years increased or decreased by 50 basis points, the resulting impact on the IBNR reserve would be an increase or decrease, as the case may be, of $105.1 million. The estimates made by management in determining the appropriate level of IBNR reserves could ultimately prove to be inaccurate and actual claims experience may vary from expected claims experience.

The Company provides for property and casualty insurance losses when the insured event occurs. The Company provides for claims losses relating to its home warranty business based on the average cost per claim as applied to the total of new claims incurred. The average cost per home warranty claim is calculated using the average of the most recent 12 months of claims experience.

A summary of the Company’s loss reserves, broken down into its components of known title claims, incurred but not reported and non-title claims, follows:

Fair Value of Investment Portfolio.    The Company classifies the fair value of its debt and equity securities using a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements that distinguishes between market participant

33

Table of Contents

assumptions developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions developed based on the best information available in the circumstances (unobservable inputs). The hierarchy level assigned to each security in the Company’s available-for-sale portfolio is based on management’s assessment of the transparency and reliability of the inputs used in the valuation of such instrument at the measurement date. The three hierarchy levels are defined as follows:

Level 1—Valuations based on unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets for identical securities. The fair value of equity securities are classified as Level 1.

Level 2—Valuations based on observable inputs (other than Level 1 prices), such as quoted prices for similar assets at the measurement date; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly. The Level 2 category includes U.S. Treasury bonds, municipal bonds, foreign bonds, governmental agency bonds, governmental agency mortgage-backed securities and corporate debt securities, many of which are actively traded and have market prices that are readily verifiable.

Level 3—Valuations based on inputs that are unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement, and involve management judgment. The Level 3 category includes non-agency mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities which are currently not actively traded.

If the inputs used to measure fair value fall in different levels of the fair value hierarchy, a financial security’s hierarchy level is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The valuation techniques and inputs used to estimate the fair value of the Company’s debt and equity securities are summarized as follows:

Fair value of debt securities

The fair value of debt securities was based on the market values obtained from an independent pricing service that were evaluated using pricing models that vary by asset class and incorporate available trade, bid and other market information and price quotes from well-established independent broker-dealers. The independent pricing service monitors market indicators, industry and economic events, and for broker-quoted only securities, obtains quotes from market makers or broker-dealers that it recognizes to be market participants. The pricing service utilizes the market approach in determining the fair value of the debt securities held by the Company. Additionally, the Company obtains an understanding of the valuation models and assumptions utilized by the service and has controls in place to determine that the values provided represent fair value. The Company’s validation procedures include comparing prices received from the pricing service to quotes received from other third party sources for securities with market prices that are readily verifiable. If the price comparison results in differences over a predefined threshold, the Company will assess the reasonableness of the changes relative to prior periods given the prevailing market conditions and assess changes in the issuers’ credit worthiness, performance of any underlying collateral and prices of the instrument relative to similar issuances. To date, the Company has not made any material adjustments to the fair value measurements provided by the pricing service.

Typical inputs and assumptions to pricing models used to value the Company’s U.S. Treasury bonds, municipal bonds, foreign bonds, governmental agency bonds, governmental agency mortgage-backed securities and corporate debt securities include, but are not limited to, benchmark yields, reported trades, broker-dealer quotes, credit spreads, credit ratings, bond insurance (if applicable), benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data and industry and economic events. For mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities, inputs and assumptions may also include the structure of issuance, characteristics of the issuer, collateral attributes and prepayment speeds. The fair value of non-agency mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities was obtained from the independent pricing service referenced above and subject to the Company’s validation procedures discussed above. However, due to the fact that these securities were not actively traded, there was less observable inputs available requiring the pricing service to use more judgment in determining the fair value of the securities, therefore the Company classified non-agency mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities as Level 3.

34

Table of Contents

Other-than-temporary impairment–debt securities

If the Company intends to sell a debt security in an unrealized loss position or determines that it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell a debt security before it recovers its amortized cost basis, the debt security is other-than-temporarily impaired and it is written down to fair value with all losses recognized in earnings. As of December 31, 2010, the Company does not intend to sell any debt securities in an unrealized loss position and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell debt securities before recovery of their amortized cost basis.

If the Company does not expect to recover the amortized cost basis of a debt security with declines in fair value (even if the Company does not intend to sell the debt security and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the debt security before the recovery of its remaining amortized cost basis), the losses the Company considers to be the credit portion of the other-than-temporary impairment loss (“credit loss”) is recognized in earnings and the non-credit portion is recognized in other comprehensive income. The credit loss is the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis of the debt security. The cash flows expected to be collected are discounted at the rate implicit in the security immediately prior to the recognition of the other-than-temporary impairment.

Expected future cash flows for debt securities are based on qualitative and quantitative factors specific to each security, including the probability of default and the estimated timing and amount of recovery. The detailed inputs used to project expected future cash flows may be different depending on the nature of the individual debt security. Specifically, the cash flows expected to be collected for each non-agency mortgage-backed and asset-backed security are estimated by analyzing loan-level detail to estimate future cash flows from the underlying assets, which are then applied to the security based on the underlying contractual provisions of the securitization trust that issued the security (e.g. subordination levels, remaining payment terms, etc.). The Company uses third-party software to determine how the underlying collateral cash flows will be distributed to each security issued from the securitization trust. The primary assumptions used in estimating future collateral cash flows are prepayment speeds, default rates and loss severity. In developing these assumptions, the Company considers the financial condition of the borrower, loan to value ratio, loan type and geographical location of the underlying property. The Company utilizes publicly available information related to specific assets, generally available market data such as forward interest rate curves and CoreLogic’s securities, loans and property data and market analytics tools.

The table below summarizes the primary assumptions used at December 31, 2010 in estimating the cash flows expected to be collected for these securities.

Fair value of equity securities

The fair value of equity securities, including preferred and common stocks, was based on quoted market prices for identical assets that are readily and regularly available in an active market.

Other-than-temporary impairment–equity securities

When, in the opinion of management, a decline in the fair value of an equity security (including common and preferred stock) and, prior to the first quarter of 2009, a debt security is considered to be other-than-temporary, such security is written down to its fair value. When assessing if a decline in value is other-than-temporary, the factors considered include the length of time and extent to which fair value has been below cost, the probability that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the

35

Table of Contents

security, the seniority and duration of the securities, issuer-specific news and other developments, the financial condition and prospects of the issuer (including credit ratings), macro-economic changes (including the outlook for industry sectors, which includes government policy initiatives) and the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery.

When an equity security has been in an unrealized loss position for greater than twelve months, the Company’s review of the security includes the above noted factors as well as what evidence, if any, exists to support that the security will recover its value in the foreseeable future, typically within the next twelve months. If objective, substantial evidence does not indicate a likely recovery during that timeframe, the Company’s policy is that such losses are considered other-than-temporary and therefore an impairment loss is recorded.

Impairment testing for goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets.    The Company is required to perform an annual impairment test for goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets for each reporting unit. This annual test, which the Company has elected to perform every fourth quarter, utilizes a variety of valuation techniques, all of which require it to make estimates and judgments. Fair value is determined by employing an expected present value technique, which utilizes multiple cash flow scenarios that reflect a range of possible outcomes and an appropriate discount rate. The use of comparative market multiples (the “market approach”) compares the reporting unit to other comparable companies (if such comparables are present in the marketplace) based on valuation multiples to arrive at a fair value. The Company also uses certain of these valuation techniques in accounting for business combinations, primarily in the determination of the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities. In assessing the fair value, the Company utilizes the results of the valuations (including the market approach to the extent comparables are available) and considers the range of fair values determined under all methods and the extent to which the fair value exceeds the book value of the equity. The Company’s four reporting units are title insurance, home warranty, property and casualty insurance and trust and other services. The Company’s policy is to perform an annual impairment test for each reporting unit in the fourth quarter or sooner if circumstances indicate a possible impairment.

Management’s impairment testing process includes two steps. The first step (“Step 1”) compares the fair value of each reporting unit to its book value. The fair value of each reporting unit is determined by using discounted cash flow analysis and market approach valuations. If the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds its book value, the goodwill is not considered impaired and no additional analysis is required. However, if the book value is greater than the fair value, a second step (“Step 2”) must be completed to determine if the fair value of the goodwill exceeds the book value of the goodwill.

Step 2 involves calculating an implied fair value of goodwill for each reporting unit for which the first step indicated impairment. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in a manner similar to the amount of goodwill calculated in a business combination, by measuring the excess of the estimated fair value of the reporting unit, as determined in the first step, over the aggregate estimated fair values of the individual assets, liabilities and identifiable intangibles as if the reporting unit was being acquired in a business combination. If the implied fair value of goodwill exceeds the carrying value of goodwill assigned to the reporting unit, there is no impairment. If the carrying value of goodwill assigned to a reporting unit exceeds the implied fair value of the goodwill, an impairment loss is recorded for the excess. An impairment loss cannot exceed the carrying value of goodwill assigned to a reporting unit, and the loss establishes a new basis in the goodwill. Subsequent reversal of goodwill impairment losses is not permitted.

The valuation of goodwill requires assumptions and estimates of many critical factors including revenue growth rates and operating margins, discount rates and future market conditions, determination of market multiples and the establishment of a control premium, among others. Forecasts of future operations are based, in part, on operating results and the Company’s expectations as to future market conditions. These types of analyses contain uncertainties because they require the Company to make assumptions and to apply judgments to estimate industry economic factors and the profitability of future business strategies. However, if actual results are not consistent with the Company’s estimates and assumptions, the Company may be exposed to future impairment

36

Table of Contents

losses that could be material. The Company completed the required annual impairment testing for goodwill and other finite-lived intangible assets for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, in the fourth quarter of each year. In 2010 and 2009, management concluded that, based on its assessment of the reporting units’ operations, the markets in which the reporting units operate and the long-term prospects for those reporting units that the more likely than not threshold for decline in value had not been met and that therefore no triggering events requiring an earlier analysis had occurred.

Impairment testing for long-lived assets. Management uses estimated future cash flows (undiscounted and excluding interest) to measure the recoverability of long-lived assets held and used, including intangible assets with finite lives, whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be fully recoverable. At such time impairment in value of a long-lived asset is identified, the impairment is measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the long-lived asset exceeds its fair value.

Income taxes.    The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method, whereby deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. The Company evaluates the need to establish a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets based upon the amount of existing temporary differences, the period in which they are expected to be recovered and expected levels of taxable income. A valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets is established when it is “more likely than not” that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

The Company recognizes the effect of income tax positions only if sustaining those positions is “more likely than not.” Changes in recognition or measurement of uncertain tax positions are reflected in the period in which a change in judgment occurs. The Company recognizes interest and penalties, if any, related to uncertain tax positions in tax expense.

Depreciation and amortization lives for assets.    Management is required to estimate the useful lives of several asset classes, including capitalized data, internally developed software and other intangible assets. The estimation of useful lives requires a significant amount of judgment related to matters such as future changes in technology, legal issues related to allowable uses of data and other matters.

Share-based compensation.    The Company measures the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award (with limited exceptions). The cost is recognized over the period during which an employee is required to provide services in exchange for the award. As stock-based compensation expense recognized in the results of operations is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The Company applies the long-form method for determining the pool of windfall tax benefits.

The Company’s primary means of share-based compensation is granting restricted stock units (“RSUs”). The fair value of a RSU grant is generally based on the market value of the Company’s shares on the date of grant and is generally recognized as compensation expense over the vesting period. RSUs granted to certain key employees have graded vesting and have a service and performance requirement and are therefore expensed using the accelerated multiple-option method to record share-based compensation expense. In addition, other RSUs granted to certain executive officers have a service and market requirement and are therefore expensed using the graded-vesting method to record share-based compensation expense. Due to the existence of the market requirement, the Company calculates the fair value on grant date using a Monte-Carlo Simulation to simulate a range of possible future stock prices for the Company. All other RSU awards have graded vesting and service is the only requirement to vest in the award and are therefore generally expensed using the straight-line single

37

Table of Contents

option method to record share-based compensation expense. RSUs receive dividend equivalents in the form of RSUs having the same vesting requirements as the RSUs initially granted.

In accordance with the modified prospective method, the Company used the Black-Scholes option-pricing model for all unvested stock options as of December 31, 2005. The Company used the binomial lattice option-pricing model to estimate the fair value for any options granted after December 31, 2005. The Company utilizes the straight-line single option method of attributing the value of share-based compensation expense unless another expense attribution model is required by the guidance.

In addition to RSUs and stock options, the Company has an employee stock purchase plan that allows eligible employees to purchase common stock of the Company at 85.0% of the closing price on the last day of each month. The Company recognizes an expense in the amount equal to the discount.

Employee benefit plans. The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of defined benefit postretirement plans as an asset or liability on its consolidated balance sheets and recognizes changes in the funded status in the year in which changes occur, through accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). The funded status is measured as the difference between the fair value of plan assets and benefit obligation (the projected benefit obligation for pension plans and the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for the other postretirement plans). Actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs and credits that have not been recognized as a component of net periodic benefit cost previously are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Plan assets and obligations are measured as of December 31.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements:

In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued guidelines relating to transfers of financial assets which amended existing guidance by removing the concept of a qualifying special purpose entity and establishing a new “participating interest” definition that must be met for transfers of portions of financial assets to be eligible for sale accounting, clarifies and amends the derecognition criteria for a transfer to be accounted for as a sale, and changes the amount that can be recognized as a gain or loss on a transfer accounted for as a sale when beneficial interests are received by the transferor. Enhanced disclosures are also required to provide information about transfers of financial assets and a transferor’s continuing involvement with transferred financial assets. This guidance must be applied as of the beginning of an entity’s first annual reporting period that begins after November 15, 2009, for interim periods within that first annual reporting period, and for interim and annual reporting periods thereafter. Earlier application is prohibited. The adoption of this standard had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance amending existing guidance surrounding the consolidation of variable interest entities (“VIE”) to require an enterprise to qualitatively assess the determination of the primary beneficiary of a VIE based on whether the entity (1) has the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and (2) has the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. This guidance also requires an ongoing reconsideration of the primary beneficiary, and amends the events that trigger a reassessment of whether an entity is a VIE. Enhanced disclosures are also required to provide information about an enterprise’s involvement in a VIE. This statement is effective as of the beginning of each reporting entity’s first annual reporting period that begins after November 15, 2009, for interim periods within that first annual reporting period, and for interim and annual reporting periods thereafter. Earlier application is prohibited. The adoption of this standard had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In January 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to fair value measurements and disclosures, which requires a reporting entity to disclose separately the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and to describe the reasons for the transfers. In addition, in the reconciliation for fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs, or Level 3, a reporting entity

38

Table of Contents

should disclose separately information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements (that is, on a gross basis rather than one net number). The updated guidance also requires that an entity should provide fair value measurement disclosures for each class of assets and liabilities and disclosures about the valuation techniques and inputs used to measure fair value for both recurring and non-recurring fair value measurements for Level 2 and Level 3 fair value measurements. The updated guidance is effective for interim or annual financial reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the roll forward activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance which amended the subsequent events disclosure requirements to eliminate the requirement for Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filers to disclose the date through which it has evaluated subsequent events, clarify the period through which conduit bond obligors must evaluate subsequent events and refine the scope of the disclosure requirements for reissued financial statements. The updated guidance was effective upon issuance. Except for the disclosure requirements, the adoption of the guidance had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance that amends and clarifies the guidance on how entities should evaluate credit derivatives embedded in beneficial interests in securitized financial assets. The updated guidance eliminates the scope exception for bifurcation of embedded credit derivatives in interests in securitized financial assets, unless they are created solely by subordination of one financial instrument to another. The updated guidance is effective for interim financial reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2010, with adoption permitted at the beginning of each entity’s first fiscal quarter beginning after issuance. The adoption of this standard had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to credit risk disclosures for finance receivables and the related allowance for credit losses. The updated guidance requires entities to disclose information at disaggregated levels, specifically defined as “portfolio segments” and “classes”. Expanded disclosures include, among other things, roll-forward schedules of the allowance for credit losses and information regarding the credit quality of receivables (including their aging) as of the end of a reporting period. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2010, although the disclosures of reporting period activity are required for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. Except for the disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Pending Accounting Pronouncements:

In December 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to disclosure of supplementary pro forma information in connection with business combinations. The updated guidance clarifies the acquisition date that should be used for reporting pro forma financial information when comparative financial statements are presented. The updated guidance also expands supplemental pro forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The updated guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Except for the disclosure requirements, management does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to when goodwill impairment testing should include Step 2 for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. The updated guidance modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts requiring those entities to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists, an entity should consider

39

Table of Contents

whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating an impairment may exist. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. Management does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In October 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to accounting for costs associated with acquiring or renewing insurance contracts. The updated guidance modifies the definition of the types of costs incurred by insurance entities that can be capitalized in the acquisition of new and renewal contracts. Under the updated guidance only costs based on successful efforts (that is, acquiring a new or renewal contract) including direct-response advertising costs are eligible for capitalization. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Management does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to credit risk disclosures for finance receivables and the related allowance for credit losses. The updated guidance requires entities to disclose information at disaggregated levels, specifically defined as “portfolio segments” and “classes”. Expanded disclosures include, among other things, roll-forward schedules of the allowance for credit losses and information regarding the credit quality of receivables (including their aging) as of the end of a reporting period. The updated guidance for disclosures of reporting period activity are required for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. Except for the disclosure requirements, management does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In January 2010, the FASB issued updated guidance related to fair value measurements and disclosures, which requires a reporting entity to disclose separately, a reconciliation for fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements (that is, on a gross basis rather than one net number). The updated guidance is effective for interim or annual financial reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within the fiscal year. Management does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Results of Operations

Overview

A substantial portion of the revenues for the Company’s title insurance and services segment result from resales and refinancings of residential real estate and, to a lesser extent, from commercial transactions, and the construction and sale of new housing. In the specialty insurance segment, revenues associated with the initial year of coverage in both the home warranty and property and casualty operations are impacted by volatility in real estate transactions. Traditionally, the greatest volume of real estate activity, particularly residential resale, has occurred in the spring and summer months. However, changes in interest rates, as well as other economic factors, can cause fluctuations in the traditional pattern of real estate activity.

Residential mortgage originations in the United States (based on the total dollar value of the transactions) decreased 24.6% in 2010 when compared with 2009, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s January 14, 2011 Mortgage Finance Forecast (the “MBA Forecast”). This decrease was due to a decline in both purchase and refinance activity. According to the MBA Forecast, the dollar amount of refinance originations and purchase originations decreased 20.3% and 32.4%, respectively, in 2010 when compared with 2009. Residential mortgage originations in the United States increased 40.0% in 2009 when compared with 2008 according to the January 12, 2010 MBA Forecast. This increase reflected increases in refinance originations and purchase originations of 76.6% and 1.5%, respectively.

Despite the low interest rate environment, which has had a favorable effect on the Company’s businesses, mortgage credit still remains generally tight, which together with the uncertainty in general economic conditions,

40

Table of Contents

continues to impact the demand for most of the Company’s products and services. These conditions have also had an impact on, and continue to impact, the performance and financial condition of some of the Company’s customers; should these parties continue to encounter significant issues, those issues may lead to negative impacts on the Company’s revenue, claims, earnings and liquidity.

Management expects the above mentioned conditions will continue impacting the Company. Given this outlook, the Company continues its focus on controlling costs by, among other cost containment initiatives, reducing employee counts and improving the efficiencies of previously centralized functions.

Beginning at the end of September 2010, several lenders announced that they would suspend certain foreclosures as a result of potential deficiencies in their foreclosure processes. Additionally, over the last several months, certain court rulings have called into question some foreclosure practices. Though the ultimate effect of any such deficiencies, the foreclosure suspensions (which in large part have now been lifted) and the court rulings are currently unknown, the Company believes that revenues tied to foreclosures have declined, and may continue to decline, especially in the short term, and the Company may incur costs associated with its duty to defend its insureds’ title to foreclosed properties they have purchased. As of the current date, these matters have not had a material adverse effect on the Company. Though the Company will continue to monitor foreclosure developments, at this time, the Company does not believe these matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company in the future.

41

Table of Contents

Title Insurance and Services

During the third quarter of 2010, the Company changed the presentation of its revenues for the title insurance and services segment. This change resulted in direct revenues from escrow and insured products being presented separately from direct revenues from non-insured products. Direct revenues from escrow and insured products are included in direct premiums and escrow fees, while direct revenues from non-insured products are included in information and other. Information and other is primarily comprised of revenues generated from fees associated with title search and related reports, title and other real property records and images, and other non-insured settlement services. This change also impacted the reporting of certain metrics discussed below, such as direct title orders opened and closed, average revenues per direct title order closed, provision for title insurance policy losses as a percentage of title insurance premiums and escrow fees, and premium taxes as a percentage of title insurance premiums and escrow fees. The Company has reclassified prior period data to conform to the current presentation.

Direct premiums and escrow fees decreased 5.9% in 2010 from 2009 and 6.1% in 2009 from 2008. The decrease in 2010 from 2009 was primarily due to a decline in the number of title orders closed by the Company’s

42

Table of Contents

direct operations, which reflected the decline in mortgage originations, offset in part by an increase in the average revenues per order closed. The increase in the average revenues per order closed was primarily due to an increase in commercial activity year over year. The decrease in direct premiums and escrow fees in 2009 from 2008 was primarily due to a decline in the average revenues per order closed, which was driven by an increase in the mix of lower premium refinance activity, offset in part by an increase in the number of orders closed by the Company’s direct operations. The increase in closing reflected the increase in mortgage originations year over year. The average revenues per order closed were $1,334, $1,158 and $1,301 for 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The Company’s direct title operations closed 1,066,700, 1,305,000 and 1,236,600 domestic title orders during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Agent premiums decreased 0.4% in 2010 from 2009 and 10.9% in 2009 from 2008. The decrease in 2010 from 2009 was primarily due to the same factors impacting direct title operations offset in part by an increase in market share. According to the American Land Title Association’s comparative nine months ended September 30, 2010 market share data, the Company’s agency market share increased to 15.9% up from 14.5% for the same period of the prior year. The comparative nine months ended September 30, 2010 market share data are the most current market share data available from the American Land Title Association. The decrease in 2009 from 2008 was due to the same factors affecting the direct title operations as well as the cancellation of certain agency relationships. The Company is continuing to analyze the terms and profitability of its title agency relationships and is working to amend agent agreements to the extent possible. Amendments being sought include, among others, changing the percentage of premiums retained by the agent and the deductible paid by the agent on claims; if changes to the agreements cannot be made, the Company may elect to terminate certain agreements.

Information and other revenue decreased 7.6% in 2010 from 2009 and 7.9% in 2009 from 2008. These decreases were primarily attributable to the same factors affecting the direct title operations, as well as changes in the Company’s international and default revenues. The Company’s international information and other revenue was flat in 2010 compared to 2009, and down approximately 50% in 2009 compared to 2008. The decline in 2009 from 2008 was due to a downturn in the global economy and real estate markets. The Company’s default information and other revenue decreased approximately 14% in 2010 compared to 2009 and increased approximately 31% in 2009 compared to 2008. The decrease in 2010 compared to 2009 was primarily attributable to a decline in foreclosure activity as a result of moratoriums on foreclosures and increased market competition, which were partially offset by increased loss mitigation activities. The increase in 2009 compared to 2008 was the result of increased default and foreclosure activity driven by the decline in U.S. property values and increased unemployment rate.

Investment income decreased 27.8% in 2010 from 2009 and 23.2% in 2009 from 2008. The decrease in the current year from the prior year is primarily due to income recognized from the sale of title plant copies in 2009 while similar sales did not occur in 2010; lower interest income from deposits in 2010 due to lower yields; and a reduction in interest income from internal notes receivable when compared to 2009 due to a reduction in the notes receivable balance. The decrease in 2009 from 2008 primarily reflected declining yields earned from the investment portfolio, a decrease in interest earned on certain escrow deposits, which reflected lower yields and lower balances, and a decrease in investment income at the Company’s trust division as a result of a decline in deposits. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in the average investment portfolio balance and the sale of title plant copies in 2009.

Net realized investment gains (losses) for the title insurance segment totaled gains of $8.7 million and $14.5 million for 2010 and 2009, respectively, and losses of $53.4 million for 2008. The net gains for 2010 and 2009 were primarily from the sale of certain debt securities and equity securities, respectively. The net losses for 2008 primarily reflected $38.8 million of impairment losses on other long-term investments, including $14.9 million related to an investment in non-voting convertible preferred stock, $17.1 million related to a note receivable of a diversified provider of real estate settlement services that declared bankruptcy and $6.8 million related to an investment in affiliate. Additionally, in 2008, the Company wrote-off $5.3 million in other accounts receivable related to the aforementioned diversified provider of real estate settlement services.

43

Table of Contents

Net other-than-temporary impairment losses recognized in earnings for the title insurance segment totaled $7.9 million, $33.0 million and $31.1 million for 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The majority of the net other-than-temporary impairment losses recognized in 2010 related to the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed securities portfolio. In 2009, the net other-than-temporary impairment losses pertained primarily to the Company’s equity securities portfolio and also to the non-agency mortgage-backed securities portfolios. In 2008, a $30.3 million net other-than-temporary impairment loss was recognized related to preferred securities issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”).

The title insurance segment (primarily direct operations) is labor intensive; accordingly, a major expense component is personnel costs. This expense component is affected by two competing factors: the need to monitor personnel changes to match the level of corresponding or anticipated new orders and the need to provide quality service.

Title insurance personnel costs decreased 1.3% in 2010 from 2009 and 12.7% in 2009 from 2008. Included in personnel costs for 2010, and not in prior years, were $22.0 million of expenses associated with certain offshore functions that prior to the Separation were performed by TFAC and allocated to the Company. The allocations in prior years were included in the title insurance segment’s other operating expenses. These offshore functions are now part of the Company’s operations and their related personnel expenses are included in the title insurance segment’s personnel costs. Excluding the impact of these expenses, title insurance personnel costs decreased 3.3% in 2010 from 2009. This decrease was primarily due to domestic employee reductions, offset in part by increased expense in connection with the Company’s pension and other retirement plans. The decrease in title insurance personnel costs in 2009 from 2008 was primarily due to employee reductions, offset in part by employee separations costs and an increase in employee benefit expense due primarily to the profit-driven 401(k).

The Company continues to closely monitor order volumes and related staffing levels and will adjust staffing levels as considered necessary. The Company’s direct title operations opened 1,458,400, 1,768,900, and 1,781,700 domestic title orders in 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively, representing a decrease of 17.6% in 2010 from 2009 and a decrease of 0.7% in 2009 from 2008.

A summary of premiums retained by agents and agent premiums is as follows: