---

---

•

changes in general economic and political conditions, including high unemployment rates and weakness in the U.S. housing and mortgage credit markets, a significant downturn in the U.S. or global economies, a lack of meaningful liquidity in the capital or credit markets, changes or volatility in interest rates or consumer confidence and changes in credit spreads, each of which may be accelerated or intensified by, among other things, legislative activity or inactivity, actual or threatened downgrades of U.S. government credit ratings, or actual or threatened defaults on U.S. government obligations;

•	changes in the way customers, investors, regulators or legislators perceive the strength of private mortgage insurers or financial guaranty providers, in particular in light of the fact that certain of our former competitors have ceased writing new insurance business and have been placed under supervision or receivership by insurance regulators;

•	catastrophic events, municipal and sovereign bankruptcy filings or other economic changes in geographic regions where our mortgage insurance exposure is more concentrated or where we have financial guaranty exposure;

•	our ability to maintain sufficient holding company liquidity to meet our short- and long-term liquidity needs;

•

a reduction in, or prolonged period of depressed levels of, home mortgage originations due to reduced liquidity in the lending market, tighter underwriting standards, and general reduced housing demand in the U.S., which may be exacerbated by regulations impacting home mortgage originations, including requirements established under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”);

•	our ability to maintain an adequate risk-to-capital position, minimum policyholder position and other surplus requirements for Radian Guaranty Inc. (“Radian Guaranty”), our principal mortgage insurance subsidiary, and an adequate minimum policyholder position and surplus for our insurance subsidiaries that provide reinsurance to Radian Guaranty;

•	our ability to continue to effectively mitigate our mortgage insurance and financial guaranty losses;

•

a more rapid than expected decrease in the levels of mortgage insurance rescissions and claim denials, which have reduced our paid losses and resulted in a significant reduction in our loss reserves, including a decrease in net rescissions or denials resulting from an increase in the number of successful challenges to previously rescinded policies or claim denials, or by the government-sponsored entities (“GSEs”) intervening in or otherwise limiting our loss mitigation practices, including settlements of disputes regarding loss mitigation activities;

•	the negative impact that our loss mitigation activities may have on our relationships with our customers and potential customers, including the potential loss of current or future business and the heightened risk of disputes and litigation;

•	the need, in the event that we are unsuccessful in defending our loss mitigation activities, to increase our loss reserves for, and reassume risk on, rescinded or cancelled loans or denied claims, and to pay additional claims, including amounts previously curtailed;

•	any disruption in the servicing of mortgages covered by our insurance policies, as well as poor servicer performance;

•	adverse changes in the severity or frequency of losses associated with certain products that we formerly offered (and which remain in our insured portfolio) that are riskier than traditional mortgage insurance or financial guaranty insurance policies;

---

•	a decrease in the persistency rates of our mortgage insurance policies, which has the effect of reducing our premium income on our monthly premium policies and could decrease the profitability of our mortgage insurance business;

•

heightened competition for our mortgage insurance business from others such as the Federal Housing Administration, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and other private mortgage insurers, including in particular, those that have been assigned higher ratings than we have, that may have access to greater amounts of capital than we do, that are less dependent on capital support from their subsidiaries than we are or that are new entrants to the industry, and therefore, are not burdened by legacy obligations;

•

changes in requirements to remain an eligible insurer to the GSEs (which are expected to be released by the end of 2013 and implemented following a transition period), which may include more onerous risk-to-capital ratio requirements, higher capital requirements for loans insured prior to 2009 and a limitation on the amount of capital credit available for our subsidiaries, including capital attributable to our financial guaranty business;

•	changes in the charters or business practices of, or rules or regulations applicable to, the GSEs;

•	changes to the current system of housing finance, including the possibility of a new system in which private mortgage insurers are not required or their products are significantly limited in effect or scope;

•	the effect of the Dodd-Frank Act on the financial services industry in general, and on our mortgage insurance and financial guaranty businesses in particular, including whether and to what extent loans with private mortgage insurance may be considered “qualified residential mortgages” for purposes of the Dodd-Frank Act securitization provisions;

•

the application of existing federal or state laws and regulations, or changes in these laws and regulations or the way they are interpreted, including, without limitation: (i) the resolution of existing, or the possibility of additional, lawsuits or investigations (including in particular investigations and litigation relating to captive reinsurance arrangements under the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act of 1974); and (ii) legislative and regulatory changes (a) impacting the demand for private mortgage insurance, (b) limiting or restricting the products we may offer or increasing the amount of capital we are required to hold, (c) affecting the form in which we execute credit protection, or (d) otherwise impacting our existing businesses;

•	the amount and timing of potential payments or adjustments associated with federal or other tax examinations, including adjustments proposed by the Internal Revenue Service resulting from the examination of our 2000 through 2007 tax years;

•	the possibility that we may fail to estimate accurately the likelihood, magnitude and timing of losses in connection with establishing loss reserves for our mortgage insurance or financial guaranty businesses, or to estimate accurately the fair value amounts of derivative instruments in determining gains and losses on these instruments;

•	volatility in our earnings caused by changes in the fair value of our assets and liabilities carried at fair value, including our derivative instruments, substantially all of our investment portfolio and certain of our long-term incentive compensation awards;

•	our ability to realize some or all of the tax benefits associated with our gross deferred tax assets, which will depend on our ability to generate sufficient sustainable taxable income in future periods;

•	changes in accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America or statutory accounting principles, rules and guidance, or their interpretation; and

•	legal and other limitations on amounts we may receive from our subsidiaries as dividends or through our tax- and expense-sharing arrangements with our subsidiaries.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

•	Radian Asset Assurance continued to proactively reduce its financial guaranty portfolio through a series of risk commutations, transaction settlements and terminations, and continued to provide capital support to Radian Guaranty.

-	In January 2013, $6.7 million of statutory contingency reserves were released due to the commutation of the remaining $822.2 million net par reinsured by Radian Asset Assurance from Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (the “FGIC Commutation”), including substantially all of our exposure to general obligation bonds issued by the City of Detroit;

-	In February 2013, the New York State Department of Financial Services approved the release of an additional $61.1 million of statutory contingency reserves resulting from the reduction in Radian Asset Assurance’s net par outstanding;

---

-

During the first nine months of 2013, in our financial guaranty business, four of our CDS counterparties exercised their termination rights with respect to nine collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”) that we insured, and we agreed to the commutation of an additional CDO with another CDS counterparty (collectively, the “2013 CDO Terminations”), which reduced our net par outstanding by $3.4 billion in the aggregate; and

-	In July 2013, Radian Asset Assurance paid an ordinary dividend of $36 million to Radian Guaranty.

•	During the first nine months of 2013, Radian Group exchanged $195.5 million of its outstanding 5.375% Senior Notes due June 2015 for a new series of 9.000% Senior Notes due June 2017 in order to improve its debt maturity profile. See Note 10 for further information.

•	In March 2013, Radian Group issued $400 million principal amount of 2.250% convertible unsecured senior notes due March 2019 (the “2019 Convertible Senior Notes”) and received net proceeds of approximately $389.8 million. See Note 10 for further information.

•	In March 2013, Radian Group sold 39.1 million shares of common stock at a public offering price of $8.00 per share and received net proceeds of approximately $299.4 million.

•

In August 2013, Radian Guaranty entered into a Master Transaction Agreement with Freddie Mac (the “Freddie Mac Agreement”) related to a group of 25,760 first-lien mortgage loans guaranteed by Freddie Mac that were insured by Radian Guaranty and were in default as of December 31, 2011. The Freddie Mac Agreement caps Radian Guaranty’s total exposure on the entire population of loans subject to the agreement to $840 million. The maximum exposure of $840 million is comprised of $625 million of claim payments (consisting of $370 million of claims paid on this population of loans as of July 12, 2013 and $255 million paid at closing) and $215 million related to rescissions, denials, claim curtailments and cancellations (“Loss Mitigation Activity”) on these loans. See Notes 6 and 8 for additional information regarding this agreement.

---

---

---

---

(1)	Represents NIMS derivative assets related to consolidated NIMS VIEs and other purchased derivatives for which we do not have loss exposure that exceeds our net asset amount.

(2)

Represents the fair value of a CDS included in a VIE that we have consolidated. See Note 5 for more information on this transaction, the underlying reference securities and our maximum exposure to loss from this consolidated financial guaranty transaction. The assets in the VIE represent the only funds available to pay the CDS counterparty for amounts due under the contract; therefore, the notional exposure presented for the CDS is limited to the current trust assets.

---

Level I	—    Unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;

Level II	—    Prices or valuations based on observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities; and

Level III	—    Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.

---

(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds included within Level I and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries included within Levels II and III.

(2)	Comprising TruPs ($0.9 million) and short-term certificates of deposit (“CDs”) ($1.6 million) included within Level II, and lottery annuities ($0.5 million) and a guaranteed investment contract held by a consolidated VIE ($79.7 million) within Level III.

(3)	Does not include fixed-maturities held to maturity ($0.4 million) and certain other invested assets ($49.6 million), primarily invested in limited partnerships, accounted for as cost-method investments and not measured at fair value.

(4)	Primarily comprising manufactured housing loan collateral related to two consolidated financial guaranty VIEs.

(5)	Comprising consolidated debt related to NIMS VIEs ($11.1 million) and amounts related to financial guaranty VIEs ($93.1 million).

---

(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds included within Level I and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries included within Levels II and III.

(2)	Comprising TruPs ($0.9 million) and short-term CDs ($1.6 million) included within Level II, and lottery annuities ($1.0 million) and a guaranteed investment contract held by a consolidated VIE ($78.0 million) within Level III.

(3)	Does not include fixed-maturities held to maturity ($0.7 million) and certain other invested assets ($48.7 million), primarily invested in limited partnerships, accounted for as cost-method investments and not measured at fair value.

(4)	Primarily comprising manufactured housing loan collateral related to two consolidated financial guaranty VIEs.

(5)	Comprising consolidated debt related to NIMS VIEs ($9.9 million) and amounts related to financial guaranty VIEs ($99.0 million).

---

(1)	Includes the net fair value liability recorded within derivative assets and derivative liabilities, but does not include the net fair value liability of derivative assets or derivative liabilities within our consolidated VIEs, as Radian Group’s credit spread has no impact on the financial instruments in these VIEs.

(2)	Includes NIMS VIE debt and NIMS derivative assets.

---

(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the quarter ended September 30, 2013, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2013 as follows: $2.3 million for investments, $0.5 million for other assets, $5.9 million for derivative liabilities and $(1.0) million for VIE debt.

(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

---

(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the nine months ended September 30, 2013, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2013 as follows: $0.4 million for investments, $3.9 million for other assets, $(83.5) million for derivative liabilities and $(6.4) million for VIE debt.

(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

(3)	During the period, pricing from a third-party pricing source became available that utilized observable inputs for individual instruments. As a result, these instruments were transferred out of Level III and into Level II.

---

(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2012 as follows: $(1.1) million for investments, $3.5 million for other assets, $(48.0) million for derivative liabilities, and $(5.8) million for VIE debt.

(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

(3)	During the period, pricing from a third-party pricing source became available that utilized observable inputs for individual instruments. As a result, these instruments were transferred out of Level III and into Level II.

---

(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2012 as follows: $(0.1) million for investments, $7.3 million for other assets, $(188.3) million for derivative liabilities, and $(12.9) million for VIE debt.

(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

(3)	During the period, pricing from a third-party pricing source became available that utilized observable inputs for individual instruments. As a result, these instruments were transferred out of Level III and into Level II.

(4)	Primarily represents the settlement of our CDO of ABS.

---

(1)	Excludes certain assets and liabilities for which we do not develop quantitative unobservable inputs. The fair value estimates for these assets and liabilities are developed using third-party pricing information, generally without adjustment.

(2)	Represents the range of Radian Group’s CDS spread that a typical market participant might use in the valuation analysis based on the remaining term of the investment.

---

(1)	Excludes certain assets and liabilities for which we do not develop quantitative unobservable inputs. The fair value estimates for these assets and liabilities are developed using third-party pricing information, generally without adjustment.

(2)	Represents the range of Radian Group’s CDS spread that a typical market participant might use in the valuation analysis based on the remaining term of the investment.

---

(1)	These estimated fair values would be classified in Level II of the fair value hierarchy.

---

(2)	These estimated fair values would be classified in Level III of the fair value hierarchy.

(3)	The carrying amount of long-term debt is net of the equity component of our convertible notes, which is accounted for under the accounting standard for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion (including partial cash settlement). The fair value is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues. See Note 10 for further information.

---

(1)

The difference between the carrying amounts of the net asset/liability position and maximum exposure related to VIEs is primarily due to the difference between the face amount of the obligation and the recorded fair values, which include an adjustment for our non-performance risk, as applicable. For those VIEs that have recourse to our general credit, the maximum exposure is based on the net par amount of our insured obligation. For any VIEs that do not have recourse to our general credit, the maximum exposure is generally based on the recorded net assets of the VIE, as of the reporting date.

---

(1)	The difference between the carrying amounts of the net asset/liability position and maximum exposure related to VIEs is primarily due to the difference between the face amount of the obligation and the recorded fair values, which include an adjustment for our non-performance risk, as applicable.

---

(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds ($116.7 million fair value) and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries ($5.2 million fair value) that are carried at cost.

(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds ($98.9 million fair value) and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries ($13.2 million fair value) that are carried at cost.

---

(1)	As of September 30, 2013, there were no foreign government securities in our investment portfolio. We sold our investment in foreign government securities during the first quarter of 2013, as our market view of these investments changed, and their performance did not meet our expectations.

---

(1)	Actual maturities may differ as a result of calls before scheduled maturity.

(2)	RMBS are shown separately given their varying maturity dates.

---

---

(i)	Radian Guaranty agreed to cede to the reinsurer 20% of all premiums and losses incurred with respect to conventional GSE loans and will initially receive a 35% ceding commission; provided, that if we do not exercise our Commutation Option, the ceding commission will be reduced to 30% for the portion of the ceded RIF that was subject to the Commutation Option; and

(ii)	Radian Guaranty has the ability to cede 100% of all premiums and losses incurred with respect to non-conventional portfolio loans and will receive a 25% ceding commission. We have not ceded any risk on non-conventional portfolio loans.

---

(1)	Related to ceded losses on captive reinsurance transactions, capital markets reinsurance transactions (“Smart Home”) and QSR transactions.

(2)	Related to underlying defaulted loans with a most recent date of default notice in the year indicated. For example, if a loan had defaulted in a prior year, but then subsequently cured and later re-defaulted in the current year, that default would be considered a current year default.

---

---

(1)	Includes an amount related to a small number of submitted claims that were subsequently withdrawn by the insured.

---

(1)

Projected net cumulative rescission/denial rates represent the ratio of claims rescinded or denied to claims received (by claim count). Rescissions and denials are net of actual reinstatements, plus our current estimate for expected reinstatements of previously rescinded policies or denied claims (excluding certain potential reinstatements we are in the process of discussing with servicers). These projected amounts represent the cumulative rates for each quarter as of September 30, 2013. Until all of the claims received during the periods shown have been internally resolved, the rescission/denial rates for each quarter will be subject to change; these rates also will remain subject to change based on differences between estimated and actual reinstatements of previously rescinded policies or denied claims.

(2)

The percentage of claims resolved for each quarter presented in the table above represents the number of claims that have been internally resolved as a percentage of the total number of claims received for that specific quarter. A claim is considered internally resolved when it is either paid or it is concluded that the claim should be denied or rescinded, though such denials and rescissions could be challenged and potentially reinstated or overturned. For the second and third quarters of 2013, a significant portion of claims received for those quarters have not been internally resolved; therefore, we do not believe the projected net cumulative rescission/denial rates for those periods are presently meaningful.

---

---

---

---

(1)	The principal amount of these notes is $450 million.

(2)	The principal amount of these notes is $400 million.

---

1.

During any calendar quarter commencing after March 31, 2013 (and only during such calendar quarter), if the last reported sale price of our common stock for each of at least 20 trading days (whether or not consecutive) during the 30 consecutive trading days ending on, and including, the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter, is greater than or equal to 130% of the applicable conversion price on each applicable trading day;

2.	During the five business day period after any five consecutive trading day period in which the trading price per $1,000 principal amount of the notes (for each trading day during that five day measurement period) was less than 98% of the product of the last reported sale price of the common stock and the applicable conversion rate on such trading day;

3.	Any time prior to the close of business on the business day prior to the redemption date if we call the notes for redemption; or

4.	Upon the occurrence of specified corporate events as described in the indenture for the notes.

---

(1)	Included within long-term debt and is being amortized over the life of the convertible notes.

(2)	Included within additional paid-in capital, net of related issuance costs.

(3)	A full valuation allowance has been recorded against the deferred income tax impact.

---

(1)	Included in net (losses) gains on investments on our condensed consolidated statements of operations.

---

---

---

(1)	RIF, net excludes risk ceded through reinsurance contracts and RIF on defaulted loans.

---

---

---

•

On December 30, 2011, a putative class action under RESPA titled White v. PNC Financial Services Group was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On September 29, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. In this case, Radian Guaranty has insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs. On November 26, 2012, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. On June 20, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on July 5, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on July 22, 2013.

•

On January 13, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Menichino, et al. v. Citibank, N.A., et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Radian Guaranty was not named as a defendant in the original complaint. On December 4, 2012, plaintiffs amended their complaint to add Radian Guaranty as an additional defendant. In this case, Radian Guaranty has insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs. On February 4, 2013, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the claims against it as barred by the statute of limitations. On July 19, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on August 16, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on September 17, 2013.

•

On April 5, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Riddle v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On January 4, 2013, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. The court denied that motion on April 11, 2013, and ordered a brief period of discovery limited to the statute of limitations issue. The discovery period was scheduled to end on June 14, 2013; however, on May 31, 2013, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Radian Guaranty from the lawsuit because it did not insure any of their loans.

---

•

On April 5, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Manners, et al. v. Fifth Third Bank, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. On September 28, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding three borrowers whose loans were insured by Radian Guaranty. On November 28, 2012, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. On July 19, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on August 16, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on September 17, 2013.

•	On May 18, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Hill, et al. v. Flagstar Bank FSB, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In this case, Radian Guaranty insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs, however, that plaintiff withdrew from the lawsuit and Radian Guaranty was dismissed from the case on August 22, 2013.

•

On May 31, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Barlee, et al. v. First Horizon National Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On October 9, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and on November 5, 2012, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of standing because it did not insure any of the plaintiffs’ loans. On February 27, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion to dismiss and Radian Guaranty has been dismissed from this lawsuit.

•

On June 28, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Cunningham, et al. v. M&T Bank Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. On October 9, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in which they added one borrower whose loan was insured by Radian Guaranty. On December 10, 2012, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations, and on February 11, 2013, plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss. On October 30, 2013, the court denied that motion and ordered a brief period of discovery limited to the statute of limitations issue. The discovery period is scheduled to end on January 3, 2014.

•

On January 4, 2013, a putative class action under RESPA titled Ba, et al. v. HSBC USA, Inc., et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On February 26, 2013, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss this lawsuit for lack of standing because it did not insure any of the plaintiffs’ loans. On March 25, 2013, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Radian Guaranty from this lawsuit.

---

---

---

---

•

Premiums. Premiums on our mortgage insurance products are paid either on a monthly installment basis (“monthly premium”), in a single payment at origination (“single premium”), as a combination of up-front premium at origination plus a monthly renewal, or in some cases, as an annual or multi-year premium. An increase or decrease in insurance in force (“IIF”) will generally have a corresponding impact on premiums earned. Premiums earned are also affected by premium rates that are based on a number of borrower, loan and property characteristics.

---

•

NIW. NIW is affected by the overall size of the mortgage origination market, the penetration percentage of private mortgage insurance into the overall mortgage origination market and our market share of the private mortgage insurance market. The overall mortgage origination market is influenced by macroeconomic factors such as interest rates and housing prices, as well as credit availability. The percentage of private mortgage insurance penetration mainly is influenced by the competition from FHA insurance and the relative percentage of mortgage originations that are for purchased homes versus refinances. Typically, private mortgage insurance penetration is significantly higher on new mortgages for purchased homes than on the refinance of existing mortgages as a result of higher average loan-to-value (“LTV”) ratios on home purchases. Radian Guaranty’s share of the private mortgage insurance market is influenced by competition in the private mortgage insurance market and our ability to maintain or grow existing levels of new mortgage originations from our current customers or to gain new customers.

•

Losses. Incurred losses represent the estimated claim payments on newly defaulted insured loans as well as any change in our claim estimates for previously existing defaults. Our mortgage insurance incurred losses are driven primarily by new defaults and changes in the estimates we use to determine our losses, including estimates with respect to the likelihood, magnitude and timing of anticipated losses, and our estimate of the rate at which we expect defaults will ultimately result in paid claims. Other factors influencing incurred losses include:

-	The product mix of our total direct RIF (loans with higher risk characteristics generally result in higher delinquencies and claims);

-	The average loan size (higher average loan amounts generally result in higher losses incurred);

-	The percentage of coverage on insured loans (higher percentages of insurance coverage result in higher incurred losses) and the presence of structural mitigants such as deductibles or stop losses;

-	Changes in housing values (declines in housing values negatively impact our ability to mitigate our losses and also may negatively affect a borrower’s willingness to continue to make mortgage payments when the home value is less than the mortgage balance);

-

The distribution of claims over the life cycle of a portfolio (historically, claims are relatively low during the first two years after a loan is originated and then increase substantially over a period of several years before declining; however, as is evident with much of our legacy portfolio, several factors can impact and change this cycle, including the economic environment, the credit profile of the borrower, housing prices and unemployment rates); and

-

Our ability to mitigate potential losses through rescissions, denials, cancellations and the curtailment of claims submitted to us. These actions have been much more prevalent on our legacy portfolio loans. Generally, we rescind insurance coverage when we conclude, through our review of the underwriting of a loan, that the loan was not originated in accordance with our underwriting guidelines. Generally, we deny claims when the documentation we receive is not sufficient to perfect the claim in accordance with our master insurance policy. In addition, we may cancel coverage or curtail claim payments when we identify servicer negligence, or we may make other adjustments to claims as permitted by our master insurance policy. These actions all result in a reduction in our incurred losses. Conversely, if our loss mitigation activities are successfully challenged at rates that are higher than expected, our incurred losses will increase.

•

Other Operating Expenses. Our other operating expenses are generally affected by both the level of NIW, as well as the level of RIF. Additionally, our operating expenses may be impacted significantly by compensation expense associated with changes in the estimated fair value of certain of our long-term incentive awards that are settled in cash and which are dependent, in large part, on our stock price.

---

•	Investment Income. Investment income is determined primarily by the investment balances held and the average yield on our overall investment portfolio.

•

Third-Party Reinsurance. We use third-party reinsurance in our mortgage insurance business to manage capital and risk. When we enter into a reinsurance agreement, the reinsurer receives a premium and, in exchange, agrees to insure an agreed upon portion of incurred losses. This arrangement has the impact of reducing our earned premiums but also reduces our net RIF, which provides capital relief to the insurance subsidiary ceding the RIF and reduces our incurred losses by any incurred losses ceded in accordance with the reinsurance agreement. In addition, the ceding commissions that we receive from the reinsurer in connection with such reinsurance reduces our overall expenses. In the past, we also had entered into capital markets based reinsurance transactions designed to transfer all or a portion of the risk associated with certain higher risk mortgage insurance products.

•

Premiums. We earn premiums on our financial guaranty insurance policies and on other forms of credit protection we provide. In our financial guaranty business, premiums on public finance exposures are generally paid as single up-front premiums and are earned over the life of the contract. Premiums on our structured finance contracts are generally paid on a periodic basis (monthly or quarterly installment premiums) and are earned on a monthly basis. In addition, we recognize the remaining unearned premium revenue when securities that we insure are redeemed or otherwise retired (we refer to this activity as “refundings”), which generally results in the termination of the financial guaranty policies insuring such securities. Furthermore, our earned premiums are reduced by premiums ceded through reinsurance agreements. Since we have discontinued writing new financial guaranty insurance, our premiums earned have been reduced commensurate with the decrease in our net par outstanding.

•

Net Par Outstanding. Our net par outstanding represents principal risk exposure on insured contracts. As noted above, our net par outstanding has been declining since we discontinued writing new financial guaranty business. The decline in our net par outstanding is driven by scheduled maturities within the financial guaranty portfolio and negotiated commutations and other transactions that we have entered into proactively to reduce our net par outstanding.

•

Changes in Fair Value of Obligations. Many of our structured finance and some of our public finance contracts are accounted for as derivatives or variable interest entities (“VIEs”), which are carried at fair market value. Therefore, our results are impacted by changes in the fair value of these contracts. The estimated fair value of these obligations and instruments is measured as of a specific point in time and may be influenced by changes in interest rates, credit spreads (of both the underlying collateral as well as Radian Group Inc.’s (“Radian Group’s”) credit spread), credit ratings and other market, asset-class and transaction-specific conditions and factors that may be unrelated or only indirectly related to our obligation to pay future claims.

---

•

Losses/Credit Performance. Our financial guaranty incurred losses are driven primarily by economic conditions that affect the ability of the issuers of our insured obligations to meet such financial obligations and by changes in the assumptions used to determine our losses, including assumptions with respect to the likelihood, magnitude and timing of anticipated losses. Stronger economic conditions increase the likelihood that obligors will have the ability to pay interest and principal on the bonds we insure when due. Weaker economic conditions often place strains on the revenue flows available to pay interest and principal on our insured obligations. Other factors influencing defaults and incurred losses include:

-	Our ability, and the ability of the primary insurers (primarily subsidiaries of Assured Guaranty Ltd. (collectively “Assured”)) from whom we have ceded reinsurance, to mitigate claims;

-	The performance of the primary insurers from whom we have either ceded reinsurance or who have the primary obligation to pay claims on our second-to-pay obligations; if such primary insurers have financial difficulties, they may be unable or unwilling to devote sufficient resources to loss mitigation efforts or could fail to pay claims on transactions where we have second-to-pay obligations;

-	Real estate values, which can affect the ability of municipalities and other governmental entities to generate sufficient tax revenues to satisfy their financial obligations;

-	The potential impact of federal, state and local budgetary constraints affecting funding and payments (including Medicare and Medicaid payments) to healthcare, long-term care, educational and other governmental and non-governmental entities whose obligations we insure;

-	The potential impact of threatened or actual government shutdowns or defaults on the payment of government-issued debt securities or other financial obligations;

-	Potential changes to entitlement programs, such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that could affect the ability of the entities whose obligations we insure to receive adequate reimbursement for the services they provide and for individuals and entities to utilize the services provided by the entities whose obligations we insure;

-	Performance of commercial and residential mortgage loans and other types of indebtedness that we insure; and

-	The movement of interest rates (increases in interest rates will increase the interest component of the variable rate obligations we insure, and as a result, will increase the strain on the obligors to make payments on these obligations).

---

---

---

•

In August 2013, Radian Guaranty entered into a Master Transaction Agreement with Freddie Mac (the “Freddie Mac Agreement”) related to a group of 25,760 first-lien mortgage loans guaranteed by Freddie Mac that were insured by Radian Guaranty and were in default as of December 31, 2011. The Freddie Mac Agreement provides for the future treatment of the loans subject to the terms of the agreement including claim payments, loss mitigation activity and insurance coverage, and eliminates Radian Guaranty’s claim exposure on 9,756 loans that were delinquent and 4,586 loans that were re-performing as of July 31, 2013. The remaining loans in the original population as of December 31, 2011 were paid off, rescinded, denied or resulted in a paid claim prior to July 31, 2013. The Freddie Mac Agreement caps Radian Guaranty’s total exposure on the entire population of loans subject to the agreement to $840 million, and Radian Guaranty has no additional exposure to claims on these loans. The maximum exposure of $840 million is comprised of $625 million of claim payments (consisting of $370 million of claims paid on this population as of July 12, 2013 and $255 million paid at closing) and $215 million related to rescissions, denials, claim curtailments and cancellations (“Loss Mitigation Activity”) on these loans. At the closing, Radian Guaranty deposited $205 million into a collateral account to cover future Loss Mitigation Activity on these loans. The amount deposited in the collateral account represents $215 million, less $10 million of Loss Mitigation Activity that had become final in accordance with the Freddie Mac Agreement prior to the date the collateral account was established. The collateral account consists of investment securities and remains on our consolidated balance sheets as a result of the rights that Radian Guaranty has with respect to those funds, as further described below. Subject to certain conditions in the Freddie Mac Agreement, amounts in the collateral account will be released to Radian Guaranty over time to the extent that Loss Mitigation Activity becomes final in accordance with the terms of the Freddie Mac Agreement. From the time the collateral account was established through September 30, 2013, approximately $2.4 million of additional Loss Mitigation Activity had become final in accordance with the Freddie Mac Agreement and $137.3 million of submitted claims had been rescinded, denied, curtailed or cancelled, but were not considered final in accordance with the Freddie Mac Agreement. If the amount of Loss Mitigation Activity that becomes final in accordance with the Freddie Mac Agreement after the collateral account was established does not accumulate to $205 million prior to termination of the Freddie Mac Agreement, then any remaining funds will be paid to Freddie Mac. Radian Guaranty will continue to administer all claims submitted with respect to these loans in accordance with the applicable insurance policy for these loans and in a manner consistent with its normal claims handling practices. The Freddie Mac Agreement will terminate upon the earliest to occur of: (1) August 29, 2017; (2) any time after August 29, 2015 if the amounts remaining in the collateral account are reduced to $0; or (3) any time after August 29, 2015 if Radian Guaranty exercises its early termination option to conclude the transactions under the Freddie Mac Agreement, by paying to Freddie Mac an amount equal to the initial collateral amount less the amount of Loss Mitigation Activity that had then become final under the terms of the agreement.

---

---

---

(1)	LTV ratio: The percentage of the original loan amount to the original value of the property.

---

(1)	Includes amounts related to loans subject to the Freddie Mac Agreement.

(1)	Includes amounts related to loans subject to the Freddie Mac Agreement.

---

(1)	Excludes risk related to loans subject to the Freddie Mac Agreement.

---

---

(1)	IIF on captives as a percentage of total IIF.

(2)	RIF on captives as a percentage of total RIF.

(3)	RIF ceded under QSR Transactions and included in total RIF.

---

(1)

Represents the provision for losses attributable to loans that were in default as of the beginning of each period indicated, including: (a) the change in reserves for loans that were in default status (including pending claims) as of both the beginning and end of each period indicated; (b) the net impact to provision for losses from loans that were in default as of the beginning of each period indicated but were either cured (“cures”), prepaid, or resulted in a paid claim or a rescission or denial during the period indicated; (c) the impact to our incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) reserve during the period related to changes in actual and estimated reinstatements of previously rescinded policies and denied claims, including potential reinstatements we are in the process of discussing with servicers; (d) second-lien loss reserves; and (e) LAE and other loss reserves.

---

(1)	Represents the weighted average default to claim rate before consideration of estimated rescissions, denials and reinstatements of rescissions and denials for each category of defaulted loans.

(2)	Net of estimate of rescissions, denials and reinstatements of rescissions and denials.

---

(1)	Includes 13,163 insured loans subject to the Freddie Mac Agreement.

(2)	Excludes 8,509 loans subject to the Freddie Mac Agreement that are in default at September 30, 2013, as we no longer have claims exposure on these loans.

(1)	Amounts reflected are compiled monthly based on reports received from loan servicers. The number of new defaults and cures presented includes the following monthly defaults that both defaulted and cured within the periods indicated:

(2)	Includes those charged to a deductible or captive.

---

(3)	Net of any previously rescinded policies that were reinstated during the period. Such reinstated rescissions may ultimately result in a paid claim.

(4)	Net of any denied claims that were reinstated during the period. Such previously denied but reinstated claims are generally reviewed for possible rescission prior to any claim payment. A significant number of denials in 2012 relate to loans serviced by one servicer.

---

(1)	Includes an amount related to a small number of submitted claims that were subsequently withdrawn by the insured.

---

(1)

Projected net cumulative rescission/denial rates represent the ratio of claims rescinded or denied to claims received (by claim count). Rescissions and denials are net of actual reinstatements, plus our current estimate for expected reinstatements of previously rescinded policies or denied claims (excluding certain potential reinstatements we are in the process of discussing with servicers). These projected amounts represent the cumulative rates for each quarter as of September 30, 2013. Until all of the claims received during the periods shown have been internally resolved, the rescission/denial rates for each quarter will be subject to change; these rates also will remain subject to change based on differences between estimated and actual reinstatements of previously rescinded policies or denied claims.

(2)

The percentage of claims resolved for each quarter presented in the table above represents the number of claims that have been internally resolved as a percentage of the total number of claims received for that specific quarter. A claim is considered internally resolved when it is either paid or it is concluded that the claim should be denied or rescinded, though such denials and rescissions could be challenged and potentially reinstated or overturned. For the second and third quarters of 2013, a significant portion of claims received for those quarters have not been internally resolved; therefore, we do not believe the projected net cumulative rescission/denial rates for those periods are presently meaningful.

(1)	Represents ceded losses on captive transactions, Smart Home and the QSR Transactions.

(2)	Does not include second-lien PDR.

---

(1)	If calculated before giving effect to deductibles and stop losses in pool transactions, this would have been $26,767, $27,545 and $27,842, respectively, at September 30, 2013, December 2012 and September 30, 2012.

---

(1)	Net of reinsurance recoveries.

(2)	Calculated without giving effect to the impact of the Freddie Mac Agreement and captive terminations.

(3)	Before reinsurance recoveries.

---

•	In January 2013, $6.7 million of statutory contingency reserves were released due to the commutation of the remaining $822.2 million net par reinsured by Radian Asset Assurance from Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (the “FGIC Commutation”), including substantially all of our exposure to general obligation bonds issued by the City of Detroit;

•	In February 2013, the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYSDFS”) approved the release of an additional $61.1 million of statutory contingency reserves resulting from the reduction in Radian Asset Assurance’s net par outstanding;

•

During the first nine months of 2013, in our financial guaranty business, four of our CDS counterparties exercised their termination rights with respect to nine collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”) that we insured, and we agreed to the commutation of an additional CDO with another CDS counterparty (collectively, the “2013 CDO Terminations”), which reduced our net par outstanding by $3.4 billion in the aggregate; and

•	In July 2013, Radian Asset Assurance paid an ordinary dividend of $36 million to Radian Guaranty.

---

(1)	Represents our exposure to the aggregate outstanding principal on insured obligations.

(2)	A net claim liability is recorded on the balance sheet when there is evidence that deterioration has occurred and the net present value of our expected losses for a particular policy exceeds the unearned premium reserve for that policy. The claim liability reported is net of estimated salvage and subrogation, which may result in a net claim asset.

(3)	Represents the net (asset) liability recorded within derivative assets or derivative liabilities for derivative contracts, or the net (asset) liability recorded within VIE debt and other financial statement line items for financial guaranty consolidated VIEs.

---

(4)	Includes $1.5 billion and $1.6 billion at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, of tax supported revenue bonds.

(5)	Escrowed transactions are legally defeased bond issuances where cash or U.S. government securities, in an amount sufficient to pay remaining obligations under such bonds, have been deposited in an escrow account for the benefit of the bond holders. Although we have little to no remaining credit risk on these transactions, they remain outstanding for GAAP purposes.

(6)	Represents other types of municipal obligations, including human services providers, second-to-pay international public finance, non-profit institutions, stadiums and project finance public facilities, none of which individually constitutes a material amount of our financial guaranty net par outstanding.

(7)

Includes $2.4 billion and $2.9 billion at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, of international public finance insured obligations (which includes sovereign and sub-sovereign (“Sovereign”) indebtedness, of which $100.1 million and $105.2 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, is related to Greece, Spain, Italy, Hungary, Portugal and Ireland (collectively, the “Stressed European Countries”)).

(8)	Represents other types of structured finance obligations, including diversified payment rights, collateralized guaranteed investment contracts or letters of credit, foreign commercial assets and life insurance securitizations, none of which individually constitutes a material amount of our financial guaranty net par outstanding.

---

(1)	Represents our internal ratings category assigned to these credits utilizing our internal rating system. Each letter category includes all rating grades within that letter category (e.g., an “A” rating includes “A+,” “A” and “A-”).

(2)	Includes exposure to Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority, which is guaranteed by Puerto Rico.

(3)	All of this net par insured is second-to-pay exposure, either directly written or assumed, where the primary insurer is either Syncora ($107.3 million) or Financial Guaranty Insurance Company ($62.5 million).

---

---

---

---

---

(1)	Includes the net fair value liability recorded within derivative assets and derivative liabilities, but does not include the net fair value liability of derivative assets or derivative liabilities within our consolidated VIEs, as Radian Group’s credit spread has no impact on the fair value of financial instruments in these VIEs.

---

(1)

Represents the present value of our estimated credit loss recoveries (net of estimated credit loss payments) for those transactions for which we currently anticipate paying net losses or receiving recoveries of losses already paid. The present value is calculated using a discount rate of approximately 2.1%, which approximates the average investment yield as reported in our most recently filed statutory financial statements. As illustrated above, expected recoveries for our insured credit derivatives and VIEs exceeded estimated credit loss payments for these transactions as of September 30, 2013. This is primarily a result of our expected recovery on six TruPs (“Terminated TruPs CDOs”) that we commuted in April 2012 as part of the Commutation Transactions. We are entitled to recoveries related to these Terminated TruPs CDOs to the extent that any funds previously placed in a consolidated VIE as part of the commutation are remaining after the payment by the consolidated VIE of any credit losses on the Terminated TruPs CDOs.

---

(1)	Reflects the payment of $23.5 million to settle our obligation related to our exposure to insured sovereign indebtedness of Greece.

(2)	Reflects the payment of $41.6 million related to the FGIC Commutation.

---

•	During the first nine months of 2013, we exchanged $195.5 million of our outstanding 5.375% Senior Notes due June 2015 for a new series of 9.000% Senior Notes due June 2017 in order to improve our debt maturity profile. See Note 10 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further information, including certain covenants to which we are subject.

•	On February 15, 2013, we repaid the remaining outstanding balance of $79.4 million of our 5.625% Senior Notes due February 2013.

•	In March 2013, we issued $400 million principal amount of the 2019 Convertible Senior Notes and received net proceeds of $389.8 million. See Note 10 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further information, including certain covenants to which we are subject.

---

---

---

---

---

---

(1)	Cash item.

---

(1)	Moody’s outlook for Radian Group and all of our rated mortgage insurance subsidiaries is currently Positive. Moody’s outlook for Radian Asset Assurance is currently Negative.

(2)	S&P’s outlook for Radian Group and all of our rated insurance subsidiaries is currently Stable.

(3)	Not currently rated.

---

---

---

---

---

Level I	—    Unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;

Level II	—    Prices or valuations based on observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities; and

Level III	—    Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.

---

---

---

•	first, we define a tranche on the CDX index (defined below) that equates to the risk profile of our specific transaction (we refer to this tranche as an “equivalent-risk tranche”);

•	second, we determine the fair premium amount on the equivalent-risk tranche for those market participants engaged in trading on the CDX index (we refer to each of these participants as a “typical market participant”); and

•	third, we adjust the fair premium amount for a typical market participant to account for the difference between the non-performance or default risk of a typical market participant and the non-performance or default risk of a financial guarantor of similar credit quality to us (in each case, we refer to the risk of non-performance as “non-performance risk”).

---

---

---

---

---

•	the extent and the duration of the decline in value;

•	the reasons for the decline in value (e.g., credit event, interest related or market fluctuations); and

•	the financial position, access to capital and near term prospects of the issuer, including the current and future impact of any specific events.

---

---

---

(1)	Includes TruPs, CDOs of CMBS, and other non-corporate CDOs.

---

---

---

---

•

On December 30, 2011, a putative class action under RESPA titled White v. PNC Financial Services Group was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On September 29, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. In this case, Radian Guaranty has insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs. On November 26, 2012, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. On June 20, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on July 5, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on July 22, 2013.

•

On January 13, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Menichino, et al. v. Citibank, N.A., et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Radian Guaranty was not named as a defendant in the original complaint. On December 4, 2012, plaintiffs amended their complaint to add Radian Guaranty as an additional defendant. In this case, Radian Guaranty has insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs. On February 4, 2013, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the claims against it as barred by the statute of limitations. On July 19, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on August 16, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on September 17, 2013.

•

On April 5, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Riddle v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On January 4, 2013, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. The court denied that motion on April 11, 2013, and ordered a brief period of discovery limited to the statute of limitations issue. The discovery period was scheduled to end on June 14, 2013; however, on May 31, 2013, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Radian Guaranty from the lawsuit because it did not insure any of their loans.

---

•

On April 5, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Manners, et al. v. Fifth Third Bank, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. On September 28, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding three borrowers whose loans were insured by Radian Guaranty. On November 28, 2012, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations. On July 19, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion and dismissed plaintiffs’ claims, but granted plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on August 16, 2013. Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended complaint on September 17, 2013.

•	On May 18, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Hill, et al. v. Flagstar Bank FSB, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In this case, Radian Guaranty insured the loan of one of the plaintiffs; however, that plaintiff withdrew from the lawsuit and Radian Guaranty was dismissed from the case on August 22, 2013.

•

On May 31, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Barlee, et al. v. First Horizon National Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On October 9, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, and on November 5, 2012, Radian Guaranty filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of standing because it did not insure any of the plaintiffs’ loans. On February 27, 2013, the court granted Radian Guaranty’s motion to dismiss and Radian Guaranty has been dismissed from this lawsuit.

•

On June 28, 2012, a putative class action under RESPA titled Cunningham, et al. v. M&T Bank Corporation, et al. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. On October 9, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in which they added one borrower whose loan was insured by Radian Guaranty. On December 10, 2012, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims as barred by the statute of limitations, and on February 11, 2013, plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss. On October 30, 2013, the court denied that motion and ordered a brief period of discovery limited to the statute of limitations issue. The discovery period is scheduled to end on January 3, 2014.

•

On January 4, 2013, a putative class action under RESPA titled Ba, et al. v. HSBC USA, Inc., et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. On February 26, 2013, Radian Guaranty moved to dismiss this lawsuit for lack of standing because it did not insure any of the plaintiffs’ loans. On March 25, 2013, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed Radian Guaranty from this lawsuit.

---

---

•	establishes the CFPB to regulate the offering and provision of consumer financial products and services, including residential mortgages, under federal law;

•

authorizes regulators to issue regulations prohibiting a creditor from making a residential mortgage loan unless the creditor makes a reasonable and good faith determination that, at the time the loan is consummated, the consumer has a reasonable ability to repay the loan. The Dodd-Frank Act provides that a creditor may presume that a borrower will be able to repay a loan if the loan has certain low-risk characteristics that meet the definition of a qualified mortgage (“QM”).

---

•

requires securitizers to retain some of the credit risk associated with mortgage loans that they transfer, sell or convey, unless the mortgage loans are “qualified residential mortgages” (“QRMs”) or are insured by the FHA or another federal agency. The Dodd-Frank Act provides that the definition of QRM will be determined jointly by six separate regulators, with consideration to be given, among other things, to the presence of mortgage insurance in connection with loan performance. The risk retention requirement is imposed on “securitizers” and not the creditors or subsequent purchasers, although in certain circumstances a portion of the risk may be allocated to the originator. In March 2011, regulators released a proposed rule that included a proposed definition of QRM. That proposed rule did not include an explicit exemption for loans that are insured by private mortgage insurance. In response to public comments to the proposed rule, federal regulators issued a revised proposed risk retention rule, including a definition of QRMs, in August 2013. The revised proposed rule generally defines QRM as a mortgage meeting the requirements of a QM under the QM Rule described above. The regulators also proposed an alternative definition of QRMs (“QM-plus”) that utilizes certain QM criteria but also includes a maximum LTV of 70%. Neither of the revised proposed QRM definitions incorporate or consider the use of private mortgage insurance. The public comment period for the new proposed rule expired on October 30, 2013. Substantially all of our primary RIF includes loans for which the down payment was less than 20% and, therefore, the LTV would exceed 80%. For information regarding the percentage of our primary RIF by LTV, see “Part I. Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Results of Operations—Mortgage Insurance—NIW, IIF, RIF.”

•

sets new limitations and restrictions on banking, derivatives and ABS, including the imposition of additional registration, reporting, market conduct and capital and margin posting requirements on certain participants in the derivatives markets that may make it more difficult for us to commute, restructure, hedge or otherwise mitigate losses or reduce exposure on our existing financial guaranty portfolio; and

•

establishes a Federal Insurance Office within the U.S. Treasury. While not having a general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance, the director of this office will perform various functions with respect to insurance, including serving as a non-voting member of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) and making recommendations to the FSOC regarding insurers to be designated for more stringent regulation. The director is also required to conduct a study on how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the U.S., including by increased national uniformity through either a federal charter or effective action by the states.

---

---

---