SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

We make forward-looking statements in this Report that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations, plans and objectives. When we use the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” “should,” “may,” “plans,” “projects,” “will,” or similar expressions, or the negative of these words, we intend to identify forward-looking statements. Statements regarding the following subjects are forward-looking by their nature:

The forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future performance, taking into account all information currently available to us. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations can change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us. Some of these factors are described under the caption ‘‘Risk Factors’’ in this Report and any subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations may vary materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made. New risks and uncertainties arise from time to time, and it is impossible for us to predict those events or how they may affect us. Except as required by law, we are not obligated to, and do not intend to, update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

Bimini Capital Management, Inc., a Maryland corporation (“Bimini Capital” and, collectively with its subsidiaries, the “Company,” “we”, “us” or “our”) is a specialty finance company that operates in two business segments: investing in mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) and Orchid Island Capital, Inc. (“Orchid”) common stock in our own portfolio, and serving as the external manager of Orchid which also invests in MBS. In both cases, the principal and interest payments of these MBS are guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae” and, collectively with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, “GSEs”) and are backed primarily by single-family residential mortgage loans. We refer to these types of MBS as “Agency MBS.” The investment strategy focuses on, and the portfolios consist of, two categories of Agency MBS: (i) traditional pass-through Agency MBS, such as mortgage pass-through certificates and collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) issued by the GSEs and (ii) structured Agency MBS, such as interest only securities (“IOs”), inverse interest only securities (“IIOs”) and principal only securities (“POs”), among other types of structured Agency MBS. The Company’s operations are classified into two reportable segments: the asset management segment and the investment portfolio segment.

The investment portfolio segment includes the investment activities conducted at Bimini Capital’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Royal Palm Capital, LLC (“Royal Palm”). The investment portfolio segment receives revenue in the form of interest and dividend income on its investments. References to the general management of the Company’s portfolio of MBS refer to the operations of Royal Palm.

The Company, through Royal Palm’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Bimini Advisors Holdings, LLC (“Bimini Advisors”), serves as the external manager of Orchid and from this arrangement the Company receives management fees and expense reimbursements. The asset management segment includes these investment advisory services provided by Bimini Advisors to Orchid.

Management of Orchid

Orchid is externally managed and advised by our wholly-owned subsidiary, Bimini Advisors, and its MBS investment team pursuant to the terms of a management agreement. As Manager, Bimini Advisors is responsible for administering Orchid’s business activities and day-to-day operations. Pursuant to the terms of the management agreement, Bimini Advisors provides Orchid with its management team, including its officers, along with appropriate support personnel. Bimini Advisors is at all times subject to the supervision and oversight of Orchid’s board of directors, of which a majority of the members are independent, and is only permitted to perform such functions delegated by Orchid’s Board.

Bimini Advisors receives a monthly management fee in the amount of:

Orchid is obligated to reimburse Bimini Advisors for any direct expenses incurred on its behalf. In addition, Bimini Advisors allocates to Orchid its pro rata portion of certain overhead costs as set forth in the management agreement. Should Orchid terminate the management agreement without cause, it shall pay to Bimini Advisors a termination fee equal to three times the average annual management fee, as defined in the management agreement, before or on the last day of the initial term or automatic renewal term.

The Investment and Capital Allocation Strategy

Investment Strategy

With respect to our own portfolio, the business objective is to generate attractive risk-adjusted total returns over the long term through a combination of capital appreciation and interest income. We intend to achieve this objective by investing in and strategically allocating capital between pass-through Agency MBS and structured Agency MBS. We seek to generate income from (i) the net interest margin on the leveraged pass-through Agency MBS portfolio and the leveraged portion of the structured Agency MBS portfolio, and (ii) the interest income we generate from the unleveraged portion of the structured Agency MBS portfolio. We also seek to minimize the volatility of both the net asset value of, and income from, the portfolio through a process which emphasizes capital allocation, asset selection, liquidity and active interest rate risk management.

We fund the pass-through Agency MBS and certain of the structured Agency MBS through repurchase agreements. However, we generally do not employ leverage on the structured Agency MBS that have no principal balance, such as IOs and IIOs, because those securities contain structural leverage. We may pledge a portion of these assets to increase the cash balance, but we do not intend to invest the cash derived from pledging the assets.

Our investment strategy consists of the following components:

Our management team makes investment decisions based on various factors, including, but not limited to, relative value, expected cash yield, supply and demand, costs of hedging, costs of financing, liquidity requirements, expected future interest rate volatility and the overall shape of the U.S. Treasury and interest rate swap yield curves. We do not attribute any particular quantitative significance to any of these factors, and the weight we give to these factors depends on market conditions and economic trends.

Over time, we will modify our investment strategy as market conditions change to seek to maximize the returns from our investment portfolio. We believe that this strategy will enable us to provide attractive long-term returns to our stockholders.

The target asset categories and principal assets in which we intend to invest are as follows:

Pass-through Agency MBS

We invest in pass-through securities, which are securities secured by residential real property in which payments of both interest and principal on the securities are generally made monthly. In effect, these securities pass through the monthly payments made by the individual borrowers on the mortgage loans that underlie the securities, net of fees paid to the loan servicer and the guarantor of the securities. Pass-through certificates can be divided into various categories based on the characteristics of the underlying mortgages, such as the term or whether the interest rate is fixed or variable.

The payment of principal and interest on mortgage pass-through securities issued by Ginnie Mae, but not the market value, is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the federal government. Payment of principal and interest on mortgage pass-through certificates issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but not the market value, is guaranteed by the respective agency issuing the security.

A key feature of most mortgage loans is the ability of the borrower to repay principal earlier than scheduled. This is called a prepayment. Prepayments arise primarily due to sale of the underlying property, refinancing, foreclosure or accelerated amortization by the borrower. Prepayments result in a return of principal to pass-through certificate holders. This may result in a lower or higher rate of return upon reinvestment of principal. This is generally referred to as prepayment uncertainty. If a security purchased at a premium prepays at a higher-than-expected rate, then the value of the premium would be eroded at a faster-than-expected rate. Similarly, if a discount mortgage prepays at a lower-than-expected rate, the amortization towards par would be accumulated at a slower-than-expected rate. The possibility of these undesirable effects is sometimes referred to as “prepayment risk.”

In general, declining interest rates tend to increase prepayments, and rising interest rates tend to slow prepayments. Like other fixed-income securities, when interest rates rise, the value of Agency MBS generally declines. The rate of prepayments on underlying mortgages will affect the price and volatility of Agency MBS and may shorten or extend the effective maturity of the security beyond what was anticipated at the time of purchase. If interest rates rise, our holdings of Agency MBS may experience reduced spreads over our funding costs if the borrowers of the underlying mortgages pay off their mortgages later than anticipated. This is generally referred to as “extension” risk.

The mortgage loans underlying pass-through certificates can generally be classified into the following categories:

Collateralized Mortgage Obligation MBS

CMOs are a type of MBS the principal and interest of which are paid, in most cases, on a monthly basis. CMOs may be collateralized by whole mortgage loans, but are more typically collateralized by pools of mortgage pass-through securities issued directly by or under the auspices of the GSEs. CMOs are structured into multiple classes, with each class bearing a different stated maturity. Monthly payments of principal, including prepayments, are first returned to investors holding the shortest maturity class. Investors holding the longer maturity classes receive principal only after the first class has been retired. Generally, fixed-rate MBS are used to collateralize CMOs. However, the CMO tranches need not all have fixed-rate coupons. Some CMO tranches have floating rate coupons that adjust based on market interest rates, subject to some limitations. Such tranches, often called “CMO floaters,” can have relatively low price sensitivity to interest rates.

Structured Agency MBS

We also invest in structured Agency MBS, which include CMOs, IOs, IIOs and POs. The payment of principal and interest, to the extent accrued and payable to the security, on structured Agency MBS issued by Ginnie Mae, but not the market value, is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the federal government. Payment of principal and interest, to the extent accrued and payable to the security, on structured Agency MBS issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but not the market value, is guaranteed by the respective agency issuing the security. The types of structured Agency MBS in which we invest are described below.

Mortgage REIT Common Stock

We also maintain an investment in the common stock of Orchid. Because Orchid is a mortgage REIT that invests primarily in assets similar to those in which the Company invests, we consider this investment as a proxy for our overall investment strategy. We do not currently invest in other REIT common stock, but subject to certain limitations we are not prohibited from doing so in the future.

Capital Allocation Strategy

The percentage of capital invested in each of our asset categories will vary and will be managed in an effort to maintain the level of income generated by the combined portfolios, the stability of that income stream and the stability of the value of the combined portfolios. Typically, pass-through Agency MBS and structured Agency MBS exhibit materially different sensitivities to movements in interest rates. Declines in the value of one portfolio may be offset by appreciation in the other, although we cannot assure you that this will be the case. Additionally, we will seek to maintain adequate liquidity as we allocate capital. The value of our investment in Orchid common stock typically fluctuates with Orchid’s book value, which is affected by the same factors that affect our MBS investments.

We allocate our capital to assist our interest rate risk management efforts. The unleveraged portfolio does not require unencumbered cash or cash equivalents to be maintained in anticipation of possible margin calls. To the extent more capital is deployed in the unleveraged portfolio, our liquidity needs will generally be less.

During periods of rising interest rates, refinancing opportunities available to borrowers typically decrease because borrowers are not able to refinance their current mortgage loans with new mortgage loans at lower interest rates. In such instances, securities that are highly sensitive to refinancing activity, such as IOs and IIOs, typically increase in value. Our capital allocation strategy allows us to redeploy our capital into such securities when and if we believe interest rates will be higher in the future, thereby allowing us to hold securities the value of which we believe is likely to increase as interest rates rise. Also, by being able to re-allocate capital into structured Agency MBS, such as IOs, during periods of rising interest rates, we may be able to offset the likely decline in the value of our pass-through Agency MBS, which are negatively impacted by rising interest rates.

Financing Strategy

We borrow against our pass-through Agency MBS and certain of our structured Agency MBS using short-term repurchase agreements. A repurchase agreement (or "repo") transaction acts as a financing arrangement under which we effectively pledge our investment securities as collateral to secure a loan. Our borrowings through repo transactions are generally short-term and have maturities ranging from one day to one year but may have maturities up to five or more years. Our financing rates are typically impacted by the U.S. Federal Funds rate and other short-term benchmark rates and liquidity in the Agency MBS repo and other short-term funding markets. The terms of our master repo agreements generally conform to the terms in the standard master repurchase agreement as published by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association ("SIFMA") as to repayment, margin requirements and the segregation of all securities sold under the repurchase transaction. In addition, each lender may require that we include supplemental terms and conditions to the standard master repurchase agreement to address such matters as additional margin maintenance requirements, cross default and other provisions. The specific provisions may differ for each lender and certain terms may not be determined until we engage in individual repo transactions.

We may use other sources of leverage, such as secured or unsecured debt or issuances of preferred stock. We do not have a policy limiting the amount of leverage we may incur. However, we generally expect that the ratio of our total liabilities compared to our equity, which we refer to as our leverage ratio, will not exceed 12 to 1 and will generally be less than 10 to 1. Our amount of leverage may vary depending on market conditions and other factors that we deem relevant.

We allocate our capital between two sub-portfolios. The pass-through Agency MBS portfolio will be leveraged generally through repurchase agreement funding. The structured Agency MBS portfolio generally will not be leveraged. The leverage ratio is calculated by dividing our total liabilities by total stockholders’ equity at the end of each period. The amount of leverage typically will be a function of the capital allocated to the pass-through Agency MBS portfolio and the amount of haircuts required by our lenders on our borrowings. When the capital allocation to the pass-through Agency MBS portfolio is high, we expect that the leverage ratio will be high because more capital is being explicitly leveraged and less capital is un-leveraged. If the haircuts required by our lenders on our borrowings are higher, all else being equal, our leverage will be lower because our lenders will lend less against the value of the capital deployed to the pass-through Agency MBS portfolio. The allocation of capital between the two portfolios will be a function of several factors:

Risk Management

We invest in Agency MBS and Orchid common stock to mitigate credit risk. Additionally, our Agency MBS, as well as Orchid’s, are backed by a diversified base of mortgage loans to mitigate geographic, loan originator and other types of concentration risks.

Interest Rate Risk Management

We believe that the risk of adverse interest rate movements represents the most significant risk to the value of our portfolio. This risk arises because (i) the interest rate indices used to calculate the interest rates on the mortgages underlying our assets may be different from the interest rate indices used to calculate the interest rates on the related borrowings, and (ii) interest rate movements affecting our borrowings may not be reasonably correlated with interest rate movements affecting our assets. We attempt to mitigate our interest rate risk by using the techniques described below:

Agency MBS Backed by ARMs. We seek to minimize the differences between interest rate indices and interest rate adjustment periods of our Agency MBS backed by ARMs and related borrowings. At the time of funding, we typically align (i) the underlying interest rate index used to calculate interest rates for our Agency MBS backed by ARMs and the related borrowings and (ii) the interest rate adjustment periods for our Agency MBS backed by ARMs and the interest rate adjustment periods for our related borrowings. As our borrowings mature or are renewed, we may adjust the index used to calculate interest expense, the duration of the reset periods and the maturities of our borrowings.

Agency MBS Backed by Fixed-Rate Mortgages. As interest rates rise, our borrowing costs increase; however, the income on our Agency MBS backed by fixed-rate mortgages remains unchanged. We may seek to limit increases to our borrowing costs through the use of interest rate swap or cap agreements, options, put or call agreements, futures contracts, forward rate agreements or similar financial instruments to economically convert our floating-rate borrowings into fixed-rate borrowings.

Agency MBS Backed by Hybrid ARMs. During the fixed-rate period of our Agency MBS backed by hybrid ARMs, the security is similar to Agency MBS backed by fixed-rate mortgages. During this period, we may employ the same hedging strategy that we employ for our Agency MBS backed by fixed-rate mortgages. Once our Agency MBS backed by hybrid ARMs convert to floating rate securities, we may employ the same hedging strategy as we employ for our Agency MBS backed by ARMs.

Derivative Instruments. We may enter into derivative instruments to economically hedge against the possibility that rising rates may adversely impact the cost of our repurchase agreement liabilities. The principal instruments that the Company has used to date are federal funds ("Fed Funds"), SOFR and Treasury Note (“T-Note”) futures contracts and options to enter into interest rate swaps (“interest rate swaptions”) and “to-be-announced” (“TBA”) securities transactions, but we may enter into other derivatives in the future.

A futures contract is a legally binding agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument in a designated future month at a price agreed upon at the initiation of the contract by the buyer and seller. A futures contract differs from an option in that an option gives one of the counterparties a right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell, while a futures contract represents an obligation of both counterparties to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specified price.

Interest rate swaptions provide us the option to enter into an interest rate swap agreement for a predetermined notional amount, stated term and pay and receive interest rates in the future. We may enter into swaption agreements that provide us the option to enter into a pay fixed rate interest rate swap ("payer swaption"), or swaption agreements that provide us the option to enter into a receive fixed interest rate swap ("receiver swaptions").

Additionally, our structured Agency MBS generally exhibit sensitivities to movements in interest rates different than our pass-through Agency MBS. To the extent they do so, our structured Agency MBS may protect us against declines in the market value of our combined portfolio that result from adverse interest rate movements, although we cannot assure you that this will be the case.

We account for TBA securities as derivative instruments. Gains and losses associated with TBA securities transactions are reported in gain (loss) on derivative instruments in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

Prepayment Risk Management

The risk of mortgage prepayments is another significant risk to our portfolio. When prevailing interest rates fall below the coupon rate of a mortgage, mortgage prepayments are likely to increase. Conversely, when prevailing interest rates increase above the coupon rate of a mortgage, mortgage prepayments are likely to decrease.

When prepayment rates increase, we may not be able to reinvest the money received from prepayments at yields comparable to those of the securities prepaid. Additionally, some of our structured Agency MBS, such as IOs and IIOs, may be negatively affected by an increase in prepayment rates because their value is wholly contingent on the underlying mortgage loans having an outstanding principal balance.

A decrease in prepayment rates may also have an adverse effect on our portfolio. For example, if we invest in POs, the purchase price of such securities will be based, in part, on an assumed level of prepayments on the underlying mortgage loan. Because the returns on POs decrease the longer it takes the principal payments on the underlying loans to be paid, a decrease in prepayment rates could decrease our returns on these securities.

Prepayment risk also affects our hedging activities. When an Agency MBS backed by a fixed-rate mortgage or hybrid ARM is acquired with borrowings, we may cap or fix our borrowing costs for a period close to the anticipated average life of the fixed-rate portion of the related Agency MBS. If prepayment rates are different than our projections, the term of the related hedging instrument may not match the fixed-rate portion of the security, which could cause us to incur losses.

Because our business may be adversely affected if prepayment rates are different than our projections, we seek to invest in Agency MBS backed by mortgages with well-documented and predictable prepayment histories. To protect against increases in prepayment rates, we invest in Agency MBS backed by mortgages that we believe are less likely to be prepaid. For example, we invest in Agency MBS backed by mortgages (i) with loan balances low enough such that a borrower would likely have little incentive to refinance, (ii) extended to borrowers with credit histories weak enough to not be eligible to refinance their mortgage loans, (iii) that are newly originated fixed-rate or hybrid ARMs or (iv) that have interest rates low enough such that a borrower would likely have little incentive to refinance. To protect against decreases in prepayment rates, we may also invest in Agency MBS backed by mortgages with characteristics opposite to those described above, which would typically be more likely to be refinanced. We may also invest in certain types of structured Agency MBS as a means of mitigating our portfolio-wide prepayment risks. For example, certain tranches of CMOs are less sensitive to increases in prepayment rates, and we may invest in those tranches as a means of hedging against increases in prepayment rates.

Liquidity Management Strategy

Because of our use of leverage, we manage liquidity to meet our lenders’ margin calls by maintaining cash balances or unencumbered assets well in excess of anticipated margin calls; and making margin calls on our lenders when we have an excess of collateral pledged against our borrowings.

We also attempt to minimize the number of margin calls we receive by:

To the extent we are unable to adequately manage our interest rate exposure and are subjected to substantial margin calls, we may be forced to sell assets at an inopportune time which in turn could impair our liquidity and reduce our borrowing capacity and book value. We did not experience significant margin call activity in 2023.

Investment Company Act Exemption

We operate our business so that we are exempt from registration under the Investment Company Act. We rely on the exemption provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act, which applies to companies in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on, and interests in, real estate. In order to rely on the exemption provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C), we must maintain at least 55% of our assets in qualifying real estate assets. For the purposes of this test, structured Agency MBS are non-qualifying real estate assets. We monitor our portfolio periodically and prior to each investment to confirm that we continue to qualify for the exemption. To qualify for the exemption, we make investments so that at least 55% of the assets we own consist of qualifying mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate, which we refer to as qualifying real estate assets, and so that at least 80% of the assets we own consist of real estate-related assets, including our qualifying real estate assets.

We treat whole-pool pass-through Agency MBS as qualifying real estate assets based on no-action letters issued by the staff of the SEC. In August 2011, the SEC, through a concept release, requested comments on interpretations of Section 3(c)(5)(C). To the extent that the SEC or its staff publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may fail to qualify for this exemption. We manage our pass-through Agency MBS portfolio such that we have sufficient whole-pool pass-through Agency MBS to ensure we maintain our exemption from registration under the Investment Company Act. At present, we generally do not expect that our investments in structured Agency MBS will constitute qualifying real estate assets, but will constitute real estate-related assets for purposes of the Investment Company Act.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2023, we had 9 full-time salaried employees, none of whom are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We provide a variety of benefit programs including a 401(k) plan and health, dental and other insurance. We believe our relationship with our employees is excellent.

Competition

Our net income depends on our ability to acquire Agency MBS for our portfolio at favorable spreads over our borrowing costs. Our net income also depends on our ability to execute the same investment strategy for the Orchid portfolio, for which we receive management fees and expense reimbursement payments. When we invest in Agency MBS and other investment assets, we compete with a variety of institutional investors, including mortgage REITs, insurance companies, mutual funds, pension funds, investment banking firms, banks and other financial institutions that invest in the same types of assets, the Federal Reserve Bank and other governmental entities or government sponsored entities. Many of these investors have greater financial resources and access to lower costs of capital than we do. The existence of these competitive entities, as well as the possibility of additional entities forming in the future, may increase the competition for the acquisition of mortgage related securities, resulting in higher prices and lower yields on assets.

Available Information

Our investor relations website is https://ir.biminicapital.com. We make available on the website under "Financials/SEC filings," free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our current reports on Form 8-K and any other reports (including any amendments to such reports) as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to the SEC. Information on our website, however, is not part of this Report. In addition, all of our filed reports can be obtained at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.

Summary of Risk Factors

Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Report and our other filings with the SEC, before making an investment decision regarding our common stock.

Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the risks described below and all other information contained in this Report, including our annual consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto, before making an investment decision regarding our common stock. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed by any of these risks. Similarly, these risks could cause the market price of our common stock to decline and you might lose all or part of your investment. Our forward-looking statements in this Report are subject to the following risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated by our forward-looking statements as a result of the risk factors below.

Risks Related to Our Business

Changes in interest rates may negatively affect the value of our investments and increase the cost of our borrowings, which could result in reduced earnings or losses.

Under normal market conditions, an investment in Agency MBS will decline in value if interest rates increase. In addition, net interest income could decrease if the yield curve is inverted or flat. While one or more of the GSEs guarantee the principal and interest payments related to the Agency MBS we own, this guarantee does not protect us from declines in market value caused by changes in interest rates. Declines in the market value of our investments may ultimately result in losses to us, which may reduce earnings and cash available to fund our operations.

Significant increases in both long-term and short-term interest rates pose a substantial risk associated with our investment in Agency MBS. If long-term rates were to increase significantly, the market value of our Agency MBS would decline, and the duration and weighted average life of the investments would increase. We could realize a loss if the securities were sold. At the same time, an increase in short-term interest rates would increase the amount of interest owed on our repurchase agreements used to finance the purchase of Agency MBS, which would decrease cash. Using this business model, we are particularly susceptible to the effects of an inverted yield curve, where short-term rates are higher than long-term rates. Although rare in a historical context, the U.S. and many countries in Europe have experienced inverted yield curves. Given the volatile nature of the U.S. economy and potential future increases in short-term interest rates, there can be no guarantee that the yield curve will not become and/or remain inverted. If this occurs, it could result in a decline in the value of our Agency MBS, our business, financial position and results of operations.

Decreases in market interest rates may also adversely affect our results of operations and financial conditions.  During periods of declining interest rates or prolonged low interest rates, the interest rates we earn on our new assets may be lower. In addition, prepayments on existing mortgages may increase causing yields on our MBS to be lower, to the extent they are carried at a premium. 

An increase in interest rates may also cause a decrease in the volume of newly issued, or investor demand for, Agency MBS, which could materially adversely affect our ability to acquire assets that satisfy our investment objectives and our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Rising interest rates generally reduce the demand for consumer credit, including mortgage loans, due to the higher cost of borrowing. A reduction in the volume of mortgage loans may affect the volume of Agency MBS available to us, which could affect our ability to acquire assets that satisfy our investment objectives. Rising interest rates may also cause Agency MBS that were issued prior to an interest rate increase to provide yields that exceed prevailing market interest rates. If rising interest rates cause us to be unable to acquire a sufficient volume of Agency MBS or Agency MBS with a yield that exceeds our borrowing costs, our ability to satisfy our investment objectives and to generate income, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Interest rate mismatches between our Agency MBS and our borrowings may reduce our net interest margin during periods of changing interest rates, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our portfolio includes Agency MBS backed by ARMs, hybrid Arms and fixed-rate mortgages, and the mix of these securities in the portfolio may be increased or decreased over time. Additionally, the interest rates on ARMs and hybrid ARMs may vary over time based on changes in a short-term interest rate index, of which there are many.

We finance our acquisitions of pass-through Agency MBS with short-term financing. During periods of rising short-term interest rates, the income we earn on these securities will not change (with respect to Agency MBS backed by fixed-rate mortgage loans) or will not increase at the same rate (with respect to Agency MBS backed by ARMs and hybrid ARMs) as our related financing costs, which may reduce our net interest margin or result in losses.

Further downgrades of the U.S. credit rating, automatic spending cuts, mounting budget deficits or another government shutdown could negatively impact our liquidity, financial condition and earnings.

U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the United States. Although U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling on multiple occasions, ratings agencies have lowered or threatened to lower the long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States. The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. In addition, disagreement over the federal budget has caused the U.S. federal government to shut down for periods of time. Continued adverse political and economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We invest in structured Agency MBS, including IOs, IIOs and POs. Although structured Agency MBS are generally subject to the same risks as our pass-through Agency MBS, certain types of risks may be enhanced depending on the type of structured Agency MBS in which we invest.

The structured Agency MBS in which we invest are securitizations (i) issued by the GSEs, (ii) collateralized by Agency MBS and (iii) divided into various tranches that have different characteristics (such as different maturities or different coupon payments). These securities may carry greater risk than an investment in pass-through Agency MBS. For example, certain types of structured Agency MBS, such as IOs, IIOs and POs, are more sensitive to prepayment risks than pass-through Agency MBS. If we were to invest in structured Agency MBS that were more sensitive to prepayment risks relative to other types of structured Agency MBS or pass-through Agency MBS, we may increase our portfolio-wide prepayment risk.

Differences in the stated maturity of our fixed rate assets, or in the timing of interest rate adjustments on our adjustable-rate assets, and our borrowings may adversely affect our profitability.

We rely primarily on short-term and/or variable rate borrowings to acquire fixed-rate securities with long-term maturities. In addition, we may have adjustable rate assets with interest rates that vary over time based upon changes in an objective index, such as SOFR, or the U.S. Treasury rate. These indices generally reflect short-term interest rates but these assets may not reset in a manner that matches our borrowings.

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

Purchases and sales of Agency MBS by the Fed may adversely affect the supply, price and returns associated with Agency MBS.

The Fed owned approximately $2.4 trillion of Agency MBS as of December 31, 2023. After nearly doubling its Agency MBS holdings from $1.4 trillion in March 2020 to a peak of over $2.7 trillion in April of 2022 as a result of its COVID-19 policy response, the Fed halted purchases of Agency MBS in September 2022 and began allowing up to $35 billion per month of Agency MBS to run off its balance sheet.  This, combined with the Fed’s aggressive hikes to the Fed Funds rate in an effort to curb inflation, has resulted in an increase in interest rates and an inversion of the yield curve that has negatively impacted the market value of Agency MBS.  With prepayments slowing in response to rising mortgage rates, Agency MBS runoffs may not reduce the Fed’s balance sheet quickly enough to meet its stated policy goals, raising the possibility of the Fed selling Agency MBS outright.  These actions by the Fed to date, along with interest rate increases, have adversely impacted the prices and returns of Agency MBS.  While it is very difficult to predict the impact of a continuing Fed portfolio runoff or potential sales of Agency MBS on the supply, prices and liquidity of Agency MBS, returns on Agency MBS may be adversely affected.

Short-term interest rates are currently higher than long-term interest rates.  This phenomenon, typically referred to as an inverted treasury or yield curve, occurred during 2022 and 2023, and may continue well into the future.  Under such conditions the Company’s funding costs may equal or exceed yields available on the Company assets, adversely impacting our financial condition and results of operations and our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders.

As the Federal Reserve began to increase over-night funding rates during 2022 short-term interest rates began to rise faster than longer-term interest rates and eventually the treasury yield curve became inverted, whereby yields on short-terms rates exceeded yields on long-term interest rates.  This condition continued through 2023 and continues into 2024, and may continue into the future.  Consistent with this development, funding costs associated with the Company’s borrowings have increased relative to yields on the Company’s MBS securities.  As a result, the Company’s net interest income has declined.  The Company has employed various hedging strategies to off-set the phenomenon.  However, such hedges may not be adequate to protect the Company’s net interest income in the future, adversely affecting our financial conditions, results of operations and the Company may have to reduce or even eliminate is monthly distributions of dividends.

Increased levels of prepayments on the mortgages underlying our Agency MBS might decrease net interest income or result in a net loss, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the case of residential mortgages, there are seldom any restrictions on borrowers’ ability to prepay their loans. Prepayment rates generally increase when interest rates fall and decrease when interest rates rise. Prepayment rates also may be affected by other factors, including, without limitation, conditions in the housing and financial markets, governmental action, general economic conditions and the relative interest rates on ARMs, hybrid ARMs and fixed-rate mortgage loans. To the extent that our pass-through Agency MBS are carried at a premium to par, faster-than-expected prepayments could also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations in various ways, including, if we are unable to quickly acquire new Agency MBS that generate comparable returns to replace the prepaid Agency MBS.

When we acquire structured Agency MBS, we anticipate that the underlying mortgages will prepay at a projected rate, generating an expected yield. When the prepayment rates on the mortgages underlying our structured Agency MBS are higher than expected, our returns on those securities may be materially adversely affected. For example, the value of our IOs and IIOs are extremely sensitive to prepayments because holders of these securities do not have the right to receive any principal payments on the underlying mortgages. Therefore, if the mortgage loans underlying our IOs and IIOs are prepaid, such securities would cease to have any value, which, in turn, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

While we seek to minimize prepayment risk, we must balance prepayment risk against other risks and the potential returns of each investment. No strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment or other such risks.

A decrease in prepayment rates on the mortgages underlying our Agency MBS might decrease net interest income or result in a net loss, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Certain of our structured Agency MBS may be adversely affected by a decrease in prepayment rates. For example, because POs are similar to zero-coupon bonds, our expected returns on such securities will be contingent on our receiving the principal payments of the underlying mortgage loans at expected intervals that assume a certain prepayment rate. If prepayment rates are lower than expected, we will not receive principal payments as quickly as we anticipated and, therefore, our expected returns on these securities will be adversely affected, which, in turn, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

While we seek to minimize prepayment risk, we must balance prepayment risk against other risks and the potential returns of each investment. No strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment or other such risks.

Interest rate caps on the ARMs and hybrid ARMs backing our Agency MBS may reduce our net interest margin during periods of rising interest rates, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

ARMs and hybrid ARMs are typically subject to periodic and lifetime interest rate caps. Periodic interest rate caps limit the amount an interest rate can increase during any given period. Lifetime interest rate caps limit the amount an interest rate can increase through the maturity of the loan. Our borrowings typically are not subject to similar restrictions. Accordingly, in a period of rapidly increasing interest rates, our financing costs could increase without limitation while caps could limit the interest we earn on the ARMs and hybrid ARMs backing our Agency MBS. This problem is magnified for ARMs and hybrid ARMs that are not fully indexed because such periodic interest rate caps prevent the coupon on the security from fully reaching the specified rate in one reset. Further, some ARMs and hybrid ARMs may be subject to periodic payment caps that result in a portion of the interest being deferred and added to the principal outstanding. As a result, we may receive less cash income on Agency MBS backed by ARMs and hybrid ARMs than necessary to pay interest on our related borrowings. Interest rate caps on Agency MBS backed by ARMs and hybrid ARMs could reduce our net interest margin if interest rates were to increase beyond the level of the caps, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to procure adequate repurchase agreement financing, or to renew or replace existing repurchase agreement financing as it matures, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We intend to maintain master repurchase agreements with several counterparties. We cannot assure you that any, or sufficient, repurchase agreement financing will be available to us in the future on terms that are acceptable to us. Any decline in the value of Agency MBS, or perceived market uncertainty about their value, would make it more difficult for us to obtain financing on favorable terms or at all, or maintain our compliance with the terms of any financing arrangements already in place. We may be unable to diversify the credit risk associated with our lenders. In the event that we cannot obtain sufficient funding on acceptable terms, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Furthermore, because we intend to rely primarily on short-term borrowings to fund our acquisition of Agency MBS, our ability to achieve our investment objectives will depend not only on our ability to borrow money in sufficient amounts and on favorable terms, but also on our ability to renew or replace on a continuous basis our maturing short-term borrowings. If we are not able to renew or replace maturing borrowings, we will have to sell some or all of our assets, possibly under adverse market conditions. In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us. Our lenders also may revise their eligibility requirements for the types of assets they are willing to finance or the terms of such financings, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of perceived risk.

Adverse market developments could cause our lenders to require us to pledge additional assets as collateral. If our assets were insufficient to meet these collateral requirements, we might be compelled to liquidate particular assets at inopportune times and at unfavorable prices, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Adverse market developments, including a sharp or prolonged rise in interest rates, a change in prepayment rates or increasing market concern about the value or liquidity of one or more types of Agency MBS, might reduce the market value of our portfolio, which might cause our lenders to initiate margin calls. A margin call means that the lender requires us to pledge additional collateral to re-establish the ratio of the value of the collateral to the amount of the borrowing. The specific collateral value to borrowing ratio that would trigger a margin call is not set in the master repurchase agreements and not determined until we engage in a repo transaction under these agreements. Our fixed-rate Agency MBS generally are more susceptible to margin calls as increases in interest rates tend to more negatively affect the market value of fixed-rate securities. If we are unable to satisfy margin calls, our lenders may foreclose on our collateral. The threat or occurrence of a margin call could force us to sell, either directly or through a foreclosure, our Agency MBS under adverse market conditions. Because of the significant leverage we expect to have, we may incur substantial losses upon the threat or occurrence of a margin call, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. This risk is magnified given that the Company’s equity capital, particularly its tangible equity, is relatively small.

Hedging against interest rate exposure may not completely insulate us from interest rate risk and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may enter into interest rate cap or swap agreements or pursue other hedging strategies, including the purchase of puts, calls or other options and futures contracts in order to hedge the interest rate risk of our portfolio. In general, our hedging strategy depends on our view of our entire portfolio consisting of assets, liabilities and derivative instruments, in light of prevailing market conditions. We could misjudge the condition of our investment portfolio or the market. Our hedging activity will vary in scope based on the level and volatility of interest rates and principal prepayments, the type of Agency MBS we hold and other changing market conditions. Hedging may fail to protect or could adversely affect us because, among other things:

There are no perfect hedging strategies, and interest rate hedging may fail to protect us from loss. Alternatively, we may fail to properly assess a risk to our investment portfolio or may fail to recognize a risk entirely, leaving us exposed to losses without the benefit of any offsetting hedging activities. The derivative financial instruments we select may not have the effect of reducing our interest rate risk. The nature and timing of hedging transactions may influence the effectiveness of these strategies. Poorly designed strategies or improperly executed transactions could actually increase our risk and losses. In addition, hedging activities could result in losses if the event against which we hedge does not occur. These risks are magnified given that the Company’s equity capital, particularly its tangible equity, is relatively small. 

Because of the foregoing risks, our hedging activity could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our use of certain hedging techniques may expose us to counterparty risks.

To the extent that our hedging instruments are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearinghouse, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities, there may not be requirements with respect to record keeping, financial responsibility or segregation of customer funds and positions. Furthermore, the enforceability of agreements underlying hedging transactions may depend on compliance with applicable statutory, exchange and other regulatory requirements and, depending on the domicile of the counterparty, applicable international requirements. Consequently, if any of these issues causes a counterparty to fail to perform under a derivative agreement we could incur a significant loss.

For example, if a swap exchange utilized in an interest rate swap agreement that we enter into as part of our hedging strategy cannot perform under the terms of the interest rate swap agreement, we may not receive payments due under that agreement, and, thus, we may lose any potential benefit associated with the interest rate swap. Additionally, we may also risk the loss of any collateral we have pledged to secure our obligations under these swap agreements if the exchange becomes insolvent or files for bankruptcy. Similarly, if an interest rate swaption counterparty fails to perform under the terms of the interest rate swaption agreement, in addition to not being able to exercise or otherwise cash settle the agreement, we could also incur a loss for the premium paid for that swaption.

Our use of leverage could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We calculate our leverage ratio by dividing our total liabilities by total equity at the end of each period. Under normal market conditions, we generally expect our leverage ratio to be less than 10 to 1, although at times our borrowings may be above or below this level. We incur this indebtedness by borrowing against a substantial portion of the market value of our pass-through Agency MBS and a portion of our structured Agency MBS. Our total indebtedness, however, is not expressly limited by our policies and will depend on our prospective lenders’ estimates of the stability of our portfolio’s cash flow. As a result, there is no limit on the amount of leverage that we may incur. We face the risk that we might not be able to meet our debt service obligations or a lender’s margin requirements from our income and, to the extent we cannot, we might be forced to liquidate some of our Agency MBS at unfavorable prices. Our use of leverage could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, our borrowings are secured by our pass-through Agency MBS and a portion of our structured Agency MBS under repurchase agreements. A decline in the market value of the pass-through Agency MBS or structured Agency MBS used to secure these debt obligations could limit our ability to borrow or result in lenders requiring us to pledge additional collateral to secure our borrowings. In that situation, we could be required to sell Agency MBS under adverse market conditions in order to obtain the additional collateral required by the lender. If these sales are made at prices lower than the carrying value of the Agency MBS, we would experience losses. If we experience losses as a result of our use of leverage, such losses could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

It may be uneconomical to "roll" our TBA dollar roll transactions or we may be unable to meet margin calls on our TBA contracts, which could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We may utilize TBA dollar roll transactions as a means of investing in and financing Agency MBS securities. TBA contracts enable us to purchase or sell, for future delivery, Agency MBS with certain principal and interest terms and certain types of collateral, but the particular Agency MBS to be delivered are not identified until shortly before the TBA settlement date. Prior to settlement of the TBA contract we may choose to move the settlement of the securities out to a later date by entering into an offsetting position (referred to as a "pair off"), net settling the paired off positions for cash, and simultaneously purchasing a similar TBA contract for a later settlement date, collectively referred to as a "dollar roll." The Agency MBS purchased for a forward settlement date under the TBA contract are typically priced at a discount to Agency MBS for settlement in the current month. This difference (or discount) is referred to as the "price drop." The price drop is the economic equivalent of net interest income earned from carrying the underlying Agency MBS over the roll period (interest income less implied financing cost). Consequently, TBA dollar roll transactions and such forward purchases of Agency MBS represent a form of off-balance sheet financing and increase our "at risk" leverage.

Under certain market conditions, TBA dollar roll transactions may result in negative carry income whereby the Agency MBS purchased for a forward settlement date under the TBA contract are priced at a premium to Agency MBS for settlement in the current month. Additionally, sales of some or all of the Fed's holdings of Agency MBS or declines in purchases of Agency MBS by the Fed could adversely impact the dollar roll market. Under such conditions, it may be uneconomical to roll our TBA positions prior to the settlement date and we could have to take physical delivery of the underlying securities and settle our obligations for cash. We may not have sufficient funds or alternative financing sources available to settle such obligations. In addition, pursuant to the margin provisions established by the Mortgage-Backed Securities Division ("MBSD") of the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation ("FICC"), we are subject to margin calls on our TBA contracts. Further, our clearing and custody agreements may require us to post additional margin above the levels established by the MBSD. Negative carry income on TBA dollar roll transactions or failure to procure adequate financing to settle our obligations or meet margin calls under our TBA contracts could result in defaults or force us to sell assets under adverse market conditions and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Volatile market conditions for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets can result in a significant contraction in liquidity for mortgages and mortgage-related assets, which may adversely affect the value of the assets in which we invest.

Our results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the markets for mortgages and mortgage-related assets, including Agency MBS, as well as the broader financial markets and the economy generally.

Significant adverse changes in financial market conditions can result in a deleveraging of the global financial system and the forced sale of large quantities of mortgage-related and other financial assets. Concerns over rising interest rates, growing inflation, economic recession, geopolitical issues including events such as the COVID-19 pandemic or other global pandemics, the wars in Ukraine and Israel, policy priorities of a new U.S. presidential administration, trade wars, unemployment, the availability and cost of financing, the mortgage market and a declining real estate market or prolonged government shutdown may contribute to increased volatility and diminished expectations for the economy and markets.

Increased volatility and deterioration in the markets for mortgages and mortgage-related assets as well as the broader financial markets may adversely affect the performance and market value of our Agency MBS and our investment in Orchid common stock. If these conditions exist, institutions from which we seek financing for our investments may tighten their lending standards, increase margin calls or become insolvent, which could make it more difficult for us to obtain financing on favorable terms or at all. Our profitability and financial condition may be adversely affected if we are unable to obtain cost-effective financing for our investments.

Our forward settling transactions, including TBA transactions, subject us to certain risks, including price risks and counterparty risks.

We purchase some of our Agency MBS through forward settling transactions, including TBAs. In a forward settling transaction, we enter into a forward purchase agreement with a counterparty to purchase either (i)  an identified Agency MBS, or (ii) a TBA, or to-be-issued, Agency MBS with certain terms. As with any forward purchase contract, the value of the underlying Agency MBS may decrease between the trade date and the settlement date. Furthermore, a transaction counterparty may fail to deliver the underlying Agency MBS at the settlement date. If any of these risks were to occur, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

We rely on analytical models and other data to analyze potential asset acquisition and disposition opportunities and to manage our portfolio. Such models and other data may be incorrect, misleading or incomplete, which could cause us to purchase assets that do not meet our expectations or to make asset management decisions that are not in line with our strategy.

We rely on analytical models, and information and other data supplied by third parties. These models and data may be used to value assets or potential asset acquisitions and dispositions and in connection with our asset management activities. If our models and data prove to be incorrect, misleading or incomplete, any decisions made in reliance thereon could expose us to potential risks.

Our reliance on models and data may induce us to purchase certain assets at prices that are too high, to sell certain other assets at prices that are too low or to miss favorable opportunities altogether. Similarly, any hedging activities that are based on faulty models and data may prove to be unsuccessful.

Some models, such as prepayment models, may be predictive in nature. The use of predictive models has inherent risks. For example, such models may incorrectly forecast future behavior, leading to potential losses. In addition, the predictive models used by us may differ substantially from those models used by other market participants, resulting in valuations based on these predictive models that may be substantially higher or lower for certain assets than actual market prices. Furthermore, because predictive models are usually constructed based on historical data supplied by third parties, the success of relying on such models may depend heavily on the accuracy and reliability of the supplied historical data, and, in the case of predicting performance in scenarios with little or no historical precedent (such as extreme broad-based declines in home prices, or deep economic recessions or depressions), such models must employ greater degrees of extrapolation and are therefore more speculative and less reliable.

All valuation models rely on correct market data input. If incorrect market data is entered into even a well-founded valuation model, the resulting valuations will be incorrect. However, even if market data is inputted correctly, “model prices” will often differ substantially from market prices, especially for securities with complex characteristics or whose values are particularly sensitive to various factors. If our market data inputs are incorrect or our model prices differ substantially from market prices, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Valuations of some of our assets may fluctuate over short periods of time and may differ from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these assets existed. 

While in many cases our determination of the fair value of our assets is based on valuations provided by third-party dealers and pricing services, we can and do value assets based upon our judgment, and such valuations may differ from those provided by third-party dealers and pricing services. In general, dealers and pricing services heavily disclaim their valuations. Additionally, dealers may claim to furnish valuations only as an accommodation and without special compensation, and so they may disclaim any and all liability for any direct, incidental or consequential damages arising out of any inaccuracy or incompleteness in valuations, including any act of negligence or breach of any warranty. Depending on the complexity and illiquidity of an asset, valuations of the same asset can vary substantially from one dealer or pricing service to another. The valuation process during times of market distress can be particularly difficult and unpredictable and during such time the disparity of valuations provided by third-party dealers can widen. Because the price estimates provided by third-party dealers and pricing services may vary, we must make certain judgments and assumptions about the appropriate price to use to calculate the fair values. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected if our fair value determinations of these assets were materially higher than the values that would exist if a ready market existed for these assets.

Because the assets that we acquire might experience periods of illiquidity, we might be prevented from selling our Agency MBS at favorable times and prices, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Agency MBS generally experience periods of illiquidity. Such conditions are more likely to occur for structured Agency MBS because such securities are generally traded in markets much less liquid than the pass-through Agency MBS market. As a result, we may be unable to dispose of our Agency MBS at advantageous times and prices or in a timely manner. The lack of liquidity might result from the absence of a willing buyer or an established market for these assets as well as legal or contractual restrictions on resale. The illiquidity of Agency MBS could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our use of repurchase agreements may give our lenders greater rights in the event that either we or any of our lenders file for bankruptcy, which may make it difficult for us to recover our collateral in the event of a bankruptcy filing.

Our borrowings under repurchase agreements may qualify for special treatment under the bankruptcy code, giving our lenders the ability to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the bankruptcy code and to take possession of and liquidate our collateral under the repurchase agreements without delay if we file for bankruptcy. Furthermore, the special treatment of repurchase agreements under the bankruptcy code may make it difficult for us to recover our pledged assets in the event that any of our lenders files for bankruptcy. Thus, the use of repurchase agreements exposes our pledged assets to risk in the event of a bankruptcy filing by either our lenders or us. In addition, if the lender is a broker or dealer subject to the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, or an insured depository institution subject to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, our ability to exercise our rights to recover our investment under a repurchase agreement or to be compensated for any damages resulting from the lender’s insolvency may be further limited by those statutes.

If a repurchase agreement counterparty defaults on their obligations to resell the Agency MBS back to us at the end of the repo transaction term, or if the value of the Agency MBS has declined by the end of the repo transaction term or if we default on our obligations under the repo transaction, we will lose money on these transactions, which, in turn, may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

When we engage in a repo transaction, we initially sell securities to the financial institution under one of our master repurchase agreements in exchange for cash, and our counterparty is obligated to resell the securities to us at the end of the term of the transaction, which is typically from 24 to 90 days but may be up to 364 days or more. The cash we receive when we initially sell the securities is less than the value of those securities, which is referred to as the “haircut.” Many financial institutions from which we may obtain repurchase agreement financing have increased their haircuts in the past and may do so again in the future. When haircuts are increased, we are required to post additional cash or securities as collateral for our Agency MBS. If our counterparty defaults on its obligation to resell the securities to us, we would incur a loss on the transaction equal to the amount of the haircut (assuming there was no change in the value of the securities). We would also lose money on a repo transaction if the value of the underlying securities had declined as of the end of the transaction term, as we would have to repurchase the securities for their initial value but would receive securities worth less than that amount. Any losses we incur on our repo transactions could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we default on one of our obligations under a repo transaction, the counterparty can terminate the transaction and cease entering into any other repo transactions with us. In that case, we would likely need to establish a replacement repurchase facility with another financial institution in order to continue to leverage our portfolio and carry out our investment strategy. There is no assurance we would be able to establish a suitable replacement facility on acceptable terms or at all.

We have issued long-term debt to fund our operations which can increase the volatility of our earnings and stockholders’ equity.

In October 2005, Bimini Capital completed a private offering of trust preferred securities of Bimini Capital Trust II, of which $26.8 million are still outstanding. The Company must pay interest on these junior subordinated notes on a quarterly basis at a rate equal to CME 3-month Term SOFR plus a tenor spread adjustment of 0.26161% plus the coupon spread of 3.50%. To the extent the Company’s does not generate sufficient earnings to cover the interest payments on the debt, our earnings and stockholders’ equity may be negatively impacted. The Company considers the junior subordinated notes as part of its long-term capital base. Therefore, for purposes of all disclosure in this report concerning our capital or leverage, the Company considers both stockholders’ equity and the $26.8 million of junior subordinated notes to constitute capital.

The Company has also elected to account for its investments in MBS under the fair value option and, therefore, will report MBS on our financial statements at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in earnings. Changes in the value of the MBS do not impact the outstanding balance of the junior subordinated notes but rather our stockholders’ equity. Therefore, changes in the value of our MBS will be absorbed solely by our stockholders’ equity. Because our stockholders’ equity is small in relation to our total capital, such changes may result in significant changes in our stockholders’ equity.

Clearing facilities or exchanges upon which some of our hedging instruments are traded may increase margin requirements on our hedging instruments in the event of adverse economic developments.

In response to events having or expected to have adverse economic consequences or which create market uncertainty, clearing facilities or exchanges upon which some of our hedging instruments, such as T-Note, Fed Funds and SOFR futures contracts, are traded may require us to post additional collateral against our hedging instruments. In the event that future adverse economic developments or market uncertainty result in increased margin requirements for our hedging instruments, it could materially adversely affect our liquidity position, business, financial condition and results of operations. 

Our inability to access funding or the terms on which such funding is available could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, particularly in times of significant market dislocations.

Our ability to fund our operations, meet financial obligations and finance asset acquisitions is dependent upon our ability to secure and maintain our repurchase agreements with our counterparties. Because repurchase agreements are short-term commitments of capital, lenders may respond to market conditions in ways that make it more difficult for us to renew or replace on a continuous basis our maturing short-term borrowings and have imposed and may continue to impose more onerous terms when rolling such financings. If we are not able to renew our existing repurchase agreements or arrange for new financing on terms acceptable to us, or if we are required to post more collateral or face larger haircuts, we may have to curtail our asset acquisition activities and/or dispose of assets.

Issues related to financing are exacerbated in times of significant dislocation in the financial markets, for example, such as those experienced related to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is possible our lenders will become unwilling or unable to provide us with financing, and we could be forced to sell our assets at an inopportune time when prices are depressed. In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us. Our lenders also have revised and may continue to revise the terms of such financings, including haircuts and requiring additional collateral in the form of cash, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of actual and perceived risk. Moreover, the amount of financing we receive under our repurchase agreements will be directly related to our lenders’ valuation of our assets that collateralize the outstanding borrowings. Typically, repurchase agreements grant the lender the absolute right to re-evaluate the fair market value of the assets that cover outstanding borrowings at any time. If a lender determines in its sole discretion that the value of the assets has decreased, the lender has the right to initiate a margin call. These valuations may be different than the values that we ascribe to these assets and may be influenced by recent asset sales at distressed levels by forced sellers. A margin call requires us to transfer additional assets to a lender without any advance of funds from the lender for such transfer or to repay a portion of the outstanding borrowings. Significant margin calls could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, business, liquidity and ability to make distributions to our stockholders, and could cause the value of our common stock to decline. Historically, we have experienced an increase in haircuts on financings we have rolled. As haircuts are increased, we are required to post additional collateral. We may also be forced to sell assets at significantly depressed prices to meet such margin calls and to maintain adequate liquidity. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced margin calls in 2020 well beyond historical norms. As of December 31, 2023, we had met all margin call requirements, but a sufficiently deep and/or rapid increase in margin calls or haircuts could have an adverse impact on our liquidity.

We may change our investment strategy, investment guidelines and asset allocation without notice or stockholder consent, which may result in riskier investments.

Our Board of Directors has the authority to change our investment strategy or asset allocation at any time without notice to or consent from our stockholders. To the extent that our investment strategy changes in the future, we may make investments that are different from, and possibly riskier than, the investments described in this Report. A change in our investment strategy may increase our exposure to interest rate and real estate market fluctuations. Furthermore, a change in our asset allocation could result in our allocating assets in a different manner than as described in this Report.

Competition might prevent us from acquiring Agency MBS at favorable yields, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities. Our net income largely depends on our ability to acquire Agency MBS at favorable spreads over our borrowing costs. In acquiring Agency MBS, we compete with a variety of institutional investors, including mortgage REITs, investment banking firms, savings and loan associations, banks, insurance companies, mutual funds, other lenders, other entities that purchase Agency MBS, the Fed, other governmental entities and government-sponsored entities, many of which have greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources than we do. Some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that may not be available to us, such as funding from the U.S. government. Additionally, many of our competitors are required to maintain an exemption from the Investment Company Act. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments. Furthermore, competition for investments in Agency MBS may lead the price of such investments to increase, which may further limit our ability to generate desired returns. As a result, we may not be able to acquire sufficient Agency MBS at favorable spreads over our borrowing costs, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The occurrence of cyber-incidents, or a deficiency in our cybersecurity or in those of any of our third-party service providers could negatively impact our business by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information or damage to our business relationships or reputation, all of which could negatively impact our business and results of operations.

A cyber-incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of our information resources or the information resources of our third-party service providers. More specifically, a cyber-incident is an intentional attack or an unintentional event that can include gaining unauthorized access to systems to disrupt operations, corrupt data, or steal confidential information. As our reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our systems, both internal and those we have outsourced. The primary risks that could directly result from the occurrence of a cyber-incident include operational interruption and private data exposure. We have implemented processes, procedures and controls to help mitigate these risks, but these measures, as well as our focus on mitigating the risk of a cyber-incident, do not guarantee that our business and results of operations will not be negatively impacted by such an incident.

We are highly dependent on communications and information systems operated by third parties, and systems failures could significantly disrupt our business, which may, in turn, adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is highly dependent on communications and information systems that allow us to monitor, value, buy, sell, finance and hedge our investments. These systems are operated by third parties and, as a result, we have limited ability to ensure their continued operation. In the event of a systems failure or interruption, we will have limited ability to affect the timing and success of systems restoration. Any failure or interruption of these systems could cause delays or other problems in our securities trading activities, including Agency MBS trading activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Computer malware, ransomware, viruses, and computer hacking and phishing attacks have become more prevalent in the financial services industry and may occur on our or certain of our third party service providers' systems in the future. We rely heavily on our financial, accounting and other data processing systems. Although we have not detected a breach to date, financial services institutions have reported breaches of their systems, some of which have been significant. Even with all reasonable security efforts, not every breach can be prevented or even detected. It is possible that we, or certain of our third-party service providers have experienced an undetected breach, and it is likely that other financial institutions have experienced more breaches than have been detected and reported. There is no assurance that we, or certain of the third parties that facilitate our business activities, have not or will not experience a breach. It is difficult to determine what, if any, negative impact may directly result from any specific interruption or cyber-attacks or security breaches of our networks or systems (or the networks or systems of certain third parties that facilitate our business activities) or any failure to maintain performance, reliability and security of certain of our third-party service providers' technical infrastructure, but such computer malware, ransomware, viruses, and computer hacking and phishing attacks may negatively affect our operations.

We depend primarily on a limited number of individuals to operate our business, and the sudden loss of certain key individuals could adversely impact our business.

Our Company only has nine full-time employees, and therefore we depend on the efforts of all to operate our business.  Our current senior management consists of two individuals, Robert E. Cauley, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and G. Hunter Haas, our President, Chief Investment Officer and Chief Financial Officer.  They are supported by others to manage our business, including the recent addition of another senior executive. We depend on the diligence, experience and skill of all of our senior executives in managing all aspects of our business, including the selection, acquisition, structuring and monitoring of securities portfolios and associated borrowings. We have entered into contracts and compensation arrangements with Mr. Cauley and Mr. Haas that encourage their continued employment, although these contracts may not prevent either Mr. Cauley or Mr. Haas from leaving our company. While our Company has succession plans in place for the orderly departure of any key individual, the sudden loss of any of our senior executives could have a short-term adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we issue debt securities, our operations may be restricted and we will be exposed to additional risk.

If we decide to issue debt securities in the future, it is likely that such securities will be governed by an indenture or other instrument containing covenants restricting our operating flexibility. Additionally, any convertible or exchangeable securities that we issue in the future may have rights, preferences and privileges more favorable than those of our Class A Common Stock. We, and indirectly our stockholders, will bear the cost of issuing and servicing such securities. Holders of debt securities may be granted specific rights, including but not limited to, the right to hold a perfected security interest in certain of our assets, the right to accelerate payments due under the indenture, rights to restrict dividend payments, and rights to approve the sale of assets. Such additional restrictive covenants and operating restrictions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. 

New laws may be passed affecting the relationship between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, on the one hand, and the federal government, on the other, which could adversely affect the price of, or our ability to invest in and finance, Agency MBS.

The interest and principal payments we expect to receive on the Agency MBS in which we invest are guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae. Principal and interest payments on Ginnie Mae certificates are directly guaranteed by the U.S. government. Principal and interest payments relating to the securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are only guaranteed by each respective GSE.

In September 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into the conservatorship of the FHFA, their federal regulator, pursuant to its powers under The Federal Housing Finance Regulatory Reform Act of 2008, a part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (the “Recovery Act”). In addition to the FHFA becoming the conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the U.S. Treasury entered into Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (“PSPAs”) with the FHFA and have taken various actions intended to provide Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with additional liquidity in an effort to ensure their financial stability. In September 2019, the FHFA and the U.S. Treasury agreed to modifications to the PSPAs that will permit Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to maintain capital reserves of $25 billion and $20 billion, respectively. As of September 30, 2020, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had retained equity capital of approximately $21 billion and $14 billion, respectively. In December 2020, a final rule was published in the federal register regarding GSE capital framework (the “December rule”), which requires Tier 1 capital in excess of 4% (approximately $265 billion) and a risk-weight floor of 20% for residential mortgages. On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Treasury and the FHFA executed letter agreements (the “January agreement”) allowing the GSEs to continue to retain capital up to their regulatory minimums, including buffers, as prescribed in the December rule. These letter agreements provide, in part, (i) there will be no exit from conservatorship until all material litigation is settled and the GSEs have common equity Tier 1 capital of at least 3% of their assets, (ii) the GSEs will comply with the FHFA’s regulatory capital framework, (iii) higher-risk single-family mortgage acquisitions will be restricted to current levels, and (iv) the U.S. Treasury and the FHFA will establish a timeline and process for future GSE reform. On September 14, 2021, the U.S. Treasury and the FHFA suspended certain policy provisions in the January agreement, including limits on loans acquired for cash consideration, multifamily loans, loans with higher risk characteristics and second homes and investment properties. On September 15, 2021, the FHFA announced a notice of proposed rulemaking for the purpose of amending the December rule to, among other things, reduce the Tier 1 capital and risk-weight floor requirements.

Shortly after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed in federal conservatorship, the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury suggested that the guarantee payment structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the U.S. housing finance market should be re-examined. The future roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be significantly reduced and the nature of their guarantees could be eliminated or considerably limited relative to historical measurements. The U.S. Treasury could also stop providing credit support to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the future. Any changes to the nature of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could redefine what constitutes an Agency MBS and could have broad adverse market implications. If Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac was eliminated, or their structures were to change in a material manner that is not compatible with our business model, we would not be able to acquire Agency MBS from these entities, which could adversely affect our business operations. Such changes would likely have a similar impact on the business operations of Orchid, which could adversely affect the value and performance of our investment in Orchid common stock and the amount of management fees and expense reimbursements we receive from Orchid.

On June 23, 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in Collins v. Mnuchin, a case presenting a question of the constitutionality of the FHFA and its director’s protection from being replaced at will by the President. The Supreme Court held that the FHFA did not exceed its powers or functions as a conservator under the Recovery Act, and that the President may replace the director at will. On June 23, 2021, President Biden appointed Sandra Thompson as acting director of the FHFA.

Our investment in Orchid Island Capital, Inc. or other mortgage REIT common stock may fluctuate in value which materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Investments in the securities of companies that own Agency MBS will be subject to all of the risks associated with the direct ownership of Agency MBS discussed above that could adversely affect the market price of the investment and the ability of the REIT to pay dividends. In addition, the market value of the common stock could be affected by market conditions beyond the Company’s control, such as limited liquidity in trading market for the common stock. A decrease in the dividend payment rate or the market value of the common stock could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the Company’s ability to dispose of the common stock investment because selling investments in Orchid’s common equity securities may be hindered due to its relationship as Orchid’s manager and the possession of inside information. Also, if we or other significant investors sell or are perceived as intending to sell a substantial number of shares in a short period of time, the market price of our remaining shares could be adversely affected.

The termination of our management agreement with Orchid would significantly reduce our revenues in the near term.

Orchid is externally managed and advised by Bimini Advisors. As Manager, Bimini Advisors is responsible for administering Orchid’s business activities and day-to-day operations. Pursuant to the terms of the management agreement, Bimini Advisors provides Orchid with its management team, including its officers, along with appropriate support personnel.

In exchange for these services, Bimini Advisors receives a monthly management fee. In addition, Orchid is obligated to reimburse Bimini Advisors for any direct expenses incurred on its behalf and Bimini Advisors allocates to Orchid its pro rata portion of certain overhead costs. The significance of these management fees and overhead reimbursements has increased, and is expected to continue to increase, as Orchid’s capital base continues to grow. If Orchid were to terminate the management agreement without cause, it would be obligated to pay to Bimini Advisors a termination fee equal to three times the average annual management fee, as defined in the management agreement, before or on the last day of the initial term or automatic renewal term. The loss of these revenues, if it were to occur, would have a severe and immediate impact on the Company.

We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory changes that could reduce the market price of our common stock.

At any time, laws or regulations, or the administrative or judicial interpretations of those laws or regulations, which impact our business and Maryland corporations may be amended. In addition, the markets for MBS and derivatives, including interest rate swaps, have been the subject of intense scrutiny in recent years. We cannot predict when or if any new law, regulation or administrative or judicial interpretation, or any amendment to any existing law, regulation or administrative or judicial interpretation, will be adopted or promulgated or will become effective. Additionally, revisions to these laws, regulations or administrative or judicial interpretations could cause us to change our investments. We could be materially adversely affected by any such change to any existing, or any new, law, regulation or administrative or judicial interpretation, which could reduce the market price of our common stock.

We may incur losses as a result of unforeseen or catastrophic events, including the emergence of a pandemic and acts of terrorism.

The occurrence of unforeseen or catastrophic events, including the emergence of a pandemic, such as coronavirus, or other widespread health emergency (or concerns over the possibility of such an emergency) terrorist attacks could create economic and financial disruptions, and could lead to operational difficulties that could impair our ability to manage our businesses.

We are subject to risks related to corporate social responsibility.

Our business faces public scrutiny related to environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) activities. We risk damage to our reputation if we fail to act responsibly in a number of areas, such as diversity and inclusion, environmental stewardship, support for local communities, corporate governance and transparency and considering ESG factors in our investment processes. Adverse incidents with respect to ESG activities could impact the cost of our operations and relationships with investors, all of which could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, new legislative or regulatory initiatives related to ESG could adversely affect our business.

Risks Related to Our Organization and Structure

Loss of our exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act would negatively affect the value of shares of our common stock.

We have operated and intend to continue to operate our business so as to be exempt from registration under the Investment Company Act, because we are “primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.” Specifically, we invest and intend to continue to invest so that at least 55% of the assets that we own on an unconsolidated basis consist of qualifying mortgages and other liens and interests in real estate, which are collectively referred to as “qualifying real estate assets,” and so that at least 80% of the assets we own on an unconsolidated basis consist of real estate-related assets (including our qualifying real estate assets). We treat Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae whole-pool residential mortgage pass-through securities issued with respect to an underlying pool of mortgage loans in which we hold all of the certificates issued by the pool as qualifying real estate assets based on no-action letters issued by the SEC. To the extent that the SEC publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may fail to qualify for this exemption.

If we fail to qualify for this exemption and for any other exemption, we could be required to restructure our activities in a manner that, or at a time when, we would not otherwise choose to do so, which could negatively affect the value of shares of our common stock and our ability to distribute dividends. For example, if the market value of our investments in CMOs or structured Agency MBS, neither of which are qualifying real estate assets for Investment Company Act purposes, were to increase by an amount that resulted in less than 55% of our assets being invested in pass-through Agency MBS, we might have to sell CMOs or structured Agency MBS in order to maintain our exemption from the Investment Company Act. The sale could occur during adverse market conditions, and we could be forced to accept a price below that which we believe is acceptable.

Alternatively, if we fail to qualify for this exemption and for any other exemption, we may have to register under the Investment Company Act and we could become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use leverage), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the Investment Company Act), portfolio composition, including restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration, and other matters.

We may be required at times to adopt less efficient methods of financing certain of our securities, and we may be precluded from acquiring certain types of higher yielding securities. The net effect of these factors would be to lower our net interest income. If we fail to qualify for an exemption from registration as an investment company or an exclusion from the definition of an investment company, our ability to use leverage would be substantially reduced, and we would not be able to conduct our business as described in this prospectus. Our business will be materially and adversely affected if we fail to qualify for and maintain an exemption from regulation pursuant to the Investment Company Act.

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

The Dodd-Frank Act established a comprehensive regulatory framework for derivative contracts commonly referred to as “swaps.” As a result, any investment fund that trades in swaps may be considered a “commodity pool,” which would cause its operators (in some cases the fund’s directors) to be regulated as “commodity pool operators,” (“CPOs”). Under new rules adopted by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, (the “CFTC”), those funds that become commodity pools solely because of their use of swaps must register with the National Futures Association (the “NFA”). Registration requires compliance with the CFTC’s regulations and the NFA’s rules with respect to capital raising, disclosure, reporting, recordkeeping and other business conduct.

We use hedging instruments in conjunction with our investment portfolio and related borrowings to reduce or mitigate risks associated with changes in interest rates, mortgage spreads, yield curve shapes and market volatility. These hedging instruments may include interest rate swaps, interest rate futures and options on interest rate futures. We do not currently engage in any speculative derivatives activities or other non-hedging transactions using swaps, futures or options on futures. We do not use these instruments for the purpose of trading in commodity interests, and we do not consider the Company or its operations to be a commodity pool as to which CPO registration or compliance is required. We have received a no-action letter from the CFTC for relief from registration as a commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor.

The CFTC has substantial enforcement power with respect to violations of the laws over which it has jurisdiction, including their anti-fraud and anti-manipulation provisions. For example, the CFTC may suspend or revoke the registration of or the no-action relief afforded to a person who fails to comply with commodities laws and regulations, prohibit such a person from trading or doing business with registered entities, impose civil money penalties, require restitution and seek fines or imprisonment for criminal violations. In the event that the CFTC asserts that we are not entitled to the no-action letter relief claimed, we may be obligated to furnish additional disclosures and reports, among other things. Further, a private right of action exists against those who violate the laws over which the CFTC has jurisdiction or who willfully aid, abet, counsel, induce or procure a violation of those laws. In the event that we fail to comply with statutory requirements relating to derivatives or with the CFTC’s rules thereunder, including the no-action letter described above, we may be subject to significant fines, penalties and other civil or governmental actions or proceedings, any of which could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our Rights Plan could inhibit a change in our control that would otherwise be favorable to our stockholders.

In December 2015, our Board of Directors adopted a Rights Agreement (the “Rights Plan”) in an effort to protect against a possible limitation on our ability to use our net operating losses “(NOLs”) and net capital losses (“NCLs”) by discouraging investors from aggregating ownership of our Class A Common Stock and triggering an “ownership change” for purposes of Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. Under the terms of the Rights Plan, in general, if a person or group acquires ownership of 4.9% or more of the outstanding shares of our Class A Common Stock without the consent of our Board of Directors (an “Acquiring Person”), all of our other stockholders will have the right to purchase securities from us at a discount to such securities’ fair market value, thus causing substantial dilution to the Acquiring Person. As a result, the Rights Plan may have the effect of inhibiting or impeding a change in control not approved by our Board of Directors and, notwithstanding its purpose, could adversely affect our shareholders’ ability to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price for our common stock in connection with such a transaction. In addition, because our Board of Directors may consent to certain transactions, the Rights Plan gives our Board of Directors significant discretion over whether a potential acquirer’s efforts to acquire a large interest in us will be successful. There can be no assurance that the Rights Plan will prevent an “ownership change” within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 of the Code, in which case we may lose all or most of the anticipated tax benefits associated with our prior losses.

Certain provisions of applicable law and our charter and bylaws may restrict business combination opportunities that would otherwise be favorable to our stockholders.

Our charter and bylaws and Maryland law contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a change in control or other transaction that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders, including business combination provisions, supermajority vote and cause requirements for removal of directors, provisions that vacancies on our Board of Directors may be filled only by the remaining directors, for the full term of the directorship in which the vacancy occurred, the power of our Board of Directors to increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of stock or the number of shares of any class or series of stock, to cause us to issue additional shares of stock of any class or series and to fix the terms of one or more classes or series of stock without stockholder approval, the restrictions on ownership and transfer of our stock and advance notice requirements for director nominations and stockholder proposals. These provisions, along with the restrictions on ownership and transfer contained in our charter and certain provisions of Maryland law described below, could discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or make it more difficult for a third party to gain control of us, which could adversely affect the market price of our securities.

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

Our charter limits the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages, except for liability resulting from:

We have entered into indemnification agreements with our directors and executive officers that obligate us to indemnify them to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. In addition, our charter authorizes the Company to obligate itself to indemnify our present and former directors and officers for actions taken by them in those and other capacities to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law. Our bylaws require us, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, to indemnify each present and former director or officer in the defense of any proceeding to which he or she is made, or threatened to be made, a party by reason of his or her service to us. In addition, we may be obligated to advance the defense costs incurred by our directors and officers. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights against our directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent the provisions in our charter, bylaws and indemnification agreements or that might exist with other companies.

Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit changes in control.

Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law ( the “MGCL”), may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or impeding a change of control under circumstances that otherwise could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our common stock, including:

We have elected to opt-out of these provisions of the MGCL, in the case of the business combination provisions, by resolution of our Board of Directors (provided that such business combination is first approved by our Board of Directors, including a majority of our directors who are not affiliates or associates of such person), and in the case of the control share provisions, pursuant to a provision in our bylaws. However, our Board of Directors may by resolution elect to repeal the foregoing opt-out from the business combination provisions of the MGCL, and we may, by amendment to our bylaws, opt in to the control share provisions of the MGCL in the future.

U.S. Federal Income Tax Risks

An investment in our common stock has various income tax risks.

This summary is limited to the U.S. federal income tax risks addressed below. Additional risks or issues may exist that are not addressed in this Form 10-K and that could affect the U.S. federal and state income tax treatment of us or our stockholders. This summary is not intended to be used and cannot be used by any stockholder to avoid penalties that may be imposed on stockholders under the Code. Management strongly urges shareholders to seek advice based on their particular circumstances from their tax advisor concerning the effects of federal, state and local income tax law on an investment in our common stock.

Our ability to use net operating loss (“NOL”) carryovers and net capital loss (“NCL”) carryovers to reduce our taxable income may be limited.

We must have taxable income or net capital gains to benefit from our NOL and NCL, as well as certain other tax attributes. Although we believe that a significant portion of our NOLs will be available to use to offset the future taxable income of Bimini Capital and Royal Palm, no assurance can be provided that we will have taxable income or gains in the future to apply against our remaining NOLs and NCLs.

In addition, our NOL and NCL carryovers may be limited by Sections 382 and 383 of the Code if we undergo an “ownership change.” Generally, an “ownership change” occurs if certain persons or groups increase their aggregate ownership in our company by more than 50 percentage points looking back over the relevant testing period. If an ownership change occurs, our ability to use our NOLs and NCLs to reduce our taxable income in a future year would be limited to a Section 382 limitation equal to the fair market value of our stock immediately prior to the ownership change multiplied by the long-term tax-exempt interest rate in effect for the month of the ownership change. In the event of an ownership change, NOLs and NCLs that exceed the Section 382 limitation in any year will continue to be allowed as carryforwards for the remainder of the carryforward period and such losses can be used to offset taxable income for years within the carryforward period subject to the Section 382 limitation in each year. However, if the carryforward period for any NOL or NCL were to expire before that loss had been fully utilized, the unused portion of that loss would be lost. The carryforward period for NOLs incurred through 2017 is 20 years from the year in which the losses giving rise to the NOLs were incurred, and the carryforward period for NCL is five years from the year in which the losses giving rise to the NCL were incurred. Our use of new NOLs or NCLs arising after the date of an ownership change would not be affected by the Section 382 limitation (unless there were another ownership change after those new losses arose).

Based on our knowledge of our stock ownership, we do not believe that an ownership change has occurred since our losses were generated. Accordingly, we believe that at the current time there is no limitation imposed by the application of Section 382 on our use of NOLs or NCLs.  However, for post-2017 losses, the Jobs and Tax Cuts Act of 2017 modified the general rule such that an NOL carryover can only offset 80 percent of taxable income in the year it is utilized, so our post-2017 NOLs are limited by this tax law change. The rules for pre-2017 NOLs remain unchanged, and are 100% available to offset taxable income.  In addition, post-2017 NOLs can now be carried forward indefinitely instead of being limited to 20 years for pre-2017 NOLs. The determination of whether an ownership change has occurred or will occur is complicated and depends on changes in percentage stock ownership among stockholders. We adopted the Rights Plan described above in order to discourage or prevent an ownership change. However, there can be no assurance that the Rights Plan will prevent an ownership change. In addition, we have not obtained, and currently do not plan to obtain, a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, regarding our conclusion as to whether our losses are subject to any such limitations. Furthermore, we may decide in the future that it is necessary or in our interest to take certain actions that could result in an ownership change. Therefore, no assurance can be provided as to whether an ownership change has occurred or will occur in the future.

Preserving the ability to use our NOLs and NCLs may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.

Limitations imposed by Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code may discourage us from, among other things, redeeming our stock or issuing additional stock to raise capital or to acquire businesses or assets. Accordingly, our desire to preserve our NOLs and NCLs may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.

Changes in tax laws could adversely affect our future results.

We have recorded a net deferred tax asset in the consolidated balance sheet based on the differences between the financial statement and income tax bases of assets using enacted tax rates. When U.S. corporate income tax rates change, we are required to reevaluate our deferred tax assets using the new tax rate. Changes in enacted tax rates require an adjustment to the carrying value of our deferred tax assets with a corresponding charge or benefit to earnings in the period of the tax rate change. Based on the size of our deferred tax assets, any such adjustment could be significant.

Risks Related to Conflicts of Interest in Our Relationship with Orchid

Royal Palm and Orchid may compete for opportunities to acquire assets, which are allocated in accordance with the Investment Allocation Agreement by and among Orchid and Bimini Advisors.

From time to time we may seek to purchase for Royal Palm the same or similar assets that we seek to purchase for Orchid. In such an instance, we may allocate such opportunities in a manner that preferentially favors Orchid. We will make available to either Royal Palm or Orchid opportunities to acquire assets that we determine, in our reasonable and good faith judgment, based on the objectives, policies and strategies, and other relevant factors, are appropriate for either entity in accordance with the Investment Allocation Agreement among Bimini Capital, Orchid and Bimini Advisors.

Because many of Royal Palm’s targeted assets are typically available only in specified quantities and because many of our targeted assets are also targeted assets for Orchid, we may not be able to buy as much of any given asset as required to satisfy the needs of both Royal Palm and Orchid. In these cases, the Investment Allocation Agreement will require the allocation of such assets to both accounts in proportion to their needs and available capital. The Investment Allocation Agreement will permit departure from such proportional allocation when (i) allocating purchases of whole-pool Agency MBS, because those securities cannot be divided into multiple parts to be allocated among various accounts, and (ii) such allocation would result in an inefficiently small amount of the security being purchased for an account. In that case, the Investment Allocation Agreement allows for a protocol of allocating assets so that, on an overall basis, each account is treated equitably.

There are conflicts of interest in our relationships with Orchid, which could result in decisions that may be considered as being not in the best interests of Bimini Capital’s stockholders.

We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of Bimini Advisors relationship as Manager of Orchid. All of our executive officers may have conflicts between their duties to Bimini Capital and their duties to Orchid as its Manager.

Bimini Capital may acquire or sell assets in which Orchid may have an interest. Similarly, Orchid may acquire or sell assets in which Bimini Capital has or may have an interest. Although such acquisitions or dispositions may present conflicts of interest, we nonetheless may pursue and consummate such transactions. Additionally, Bimini Capital may engage in transactions directly with Orchid, including the purchase and sale of all or a portion of a portfolio asset.

Our officers devote as much time to Bimini Capital and to Orchid as they deem appropriate. However, these officers may have conflicts in allocating their time and services among Bimini Capital and Orchid. During turbulent conditions in the mortgage industry, distress in the credit markets or other times when we will need focused support and assistance from employees, Orchid and other entities for which we may act as manager in the future will likewise require greater focus and attention, placing personnel resources in high demand. In such situations, Bimini Capital may not receive the necessary support and assistance it requires or would otherwise receive if it were not acting as manager of one or more other entities.

Mr. Cauley, our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of our Board of Directors, also serves as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Orchid and owns shares of common stock of Orchid at the time of this filing and may continue to hold shares in the future. Mr. Haas, our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Investment Officer and President, is a member of the Board of Directors of Orchid, serves as the Chief Financial Officer, Chief Investment Officer and Treasurer of Orchid and owns shares of common stock of Orchid at the time of this filing and may continue to hold shares in the future. Mr. Dwyer and Mr. Jaumot, the two independent members of our Board of Directors, own shares of common stock of Orchid at the time of this filing and may continue to own shares in the future. Accordingly, Messrs. Cauley, Haas, Dwyer and Jaumot may have a conflict of interest with respect to actions by Bimini Capital or Bimini Advisors that relate to Orchid as its Manager.

Bimini continues to hold an investment in the common stock of Orchid. In evaluating opportunities for ourselves and Orchid, this may lead us to emphasize certain asset acquisition, disposition or management objectives over others, such as balancing risk or capital preservation objectives against return objectives. This could increase the risks or decrease the returns of your investment in our common stock.

Orchid may elect not to renew the management agreement without cause which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Orchid may elect not to renew the management agreement, even without cause. The management agreement is automatically renewed in accordance with the terms of the agreement, each year, on February 20. However, with the consent of the majority of Orchid’s independent directors, and upon providing 180-days’ prior written notice, Orchid may elect not to renew the management agreement. If Orchid elects to not renew the agreement because of a decision by its Board of Directors that the management fee is unfair, Bimini Advisors will have the right to renegotiate a mutually agreeable management fee. If Orchid elects to not renew the management agreement without cause, it is required to pay Bimini Advisors a termination fee equal to three times the average annual management fee incurred during the prior 24-month period immediately preceding the most recently completed calendar quarter prior to the effective date of termination. Notwithstanding the termination fee, nonrenewal of the management agreement may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Investing in our common stock may involve a high degree of risk.

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objectives may result in a high amount of risk when compared to alternative investment options and volatility or loss of principal. Our investments may be highly speculative and aggressive, and therefore an investment in our common stock may not be suitable for someone with lower risk tolerance.

There is a limited market for our Class A Common Stock.

Our Class A Common Stock trades on the OTCQB under the symbol “BMNM”. We may apply to list our Class A Common Stock on a national securities market if, in the future, we qualify for such a listing. However, even if listed on a national securities market, the ability to buy and sell our Class A Common Stock may be limited due to our small public float, and significant sales may depress or result in a decline in the market price of our Class A Common Stock. Additionally, until such time that our Class A Common Stock is approved for listing on a national securities market, our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional securities may be limited. Accordingly, no assurance can be given as to:

We have not made distributions to our stockholders since 2011.

Our Board of Directors has not authorized the payment of any cash dividends to our stockholders since 2011. Dividends will be declared and made at the discretion of our Board of Directors out of funds legally available therefor and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. We do not expect to make distributions for the foreseeable future.

Future offerings of debt securities, which would be senior to our common stock upon liquidation, or equity securities, which would dilute our existing stockholders and may be senior to our common stock for the purposes of distributions, may harm the value of our common stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources by making additional offerings of debt or equity securities, including commercial paper, medium-term notes, senior or subordinated notes and classes of preferred stock or common stock, as well as warrants to purchase shares of common stock or convertible preferred stock. Upon the liquidation of the Company, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive a distribution of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings by us may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market value of our common stock, or both. Furthermore, our Board of Directors may, without stockholder approval, amend our charter to increase the aggregate number of shares or the number of shares of any class or series that we have the authority to issue, and to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of common stock or preferred stock. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future securities offerings. Our stockholders are therefore subject to the risk of our future securities offerings reducing the market price of our common stock and diluting their common stock.

The market value of our common stock may be volatile.

The market value of shares of our common stock may be highly volatile and subject to wide price fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Some of the factors that could negatively affect the share price or trading volume of our common stock include:

We cannot make any assurances that the market price of our common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future.

Sales of our common stock may harm our share price.

There is very limited liquidity in the trading market for our common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of shares of our common stock, or the perception that these sales could occur, may harm prevailing market prices for our common stock.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.

None.

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

The Board plays an active role in overseeing management of our risks, and cybersecurity represents an important component of the Company’s overall approach to risk management and oversight. Our cybersecurity processes and practices are integrated into the Company’s risk management and oversight program.  In general, the Company seeks to address cybersecurity risks through a comprehensive, cross-functional approach that is focused on preserving the confidentiality, security and availability of the information that the Company collects and stores by identifying, preventing and mitigating cybersecurity threats and effectively responding to cybersecurity incidents when they occur. The Company has adopted a cybersecurity incident response plan to enable rapid response, curtail further security breaches, mitigate and manage costs, and facilitate timely disclosure of material cyber incidents as required by the SEC.

Risk Management and Strategy

The Company and our Board place a high priority on maintaining security over our financial information that can be accessed via the Internet and mitigating information security risks. The Company engages a third-party security firm to provide threat detection and reports, conduct annual testing of our systems, train our employees and generally advise on cybersecurity processes. At least annually, our information technology team make a formal presentation to our Audit Committee and the Board to keep them apprised of the level of cybersecurity that exists to protect our financial information, training of the Company’s officers and employees, and the latest threats that have emerged, including a presentation from the third-party security firm.

The Company’s cybersecurity program is focused on the following key areas:

Governance

The Company believes oversight of cybersecurity risk is the responsibility of the Audit Committee and the full Board. Accordingly, the Audit Committee and the Board oversee the Company’s cybersecurity risk management process. The Board considers the Company’s cybersecurity posture and risk exposure with management taking into consideration the Company’s operations and the types of data retained on its systems as part of its and the Audit Committee’s periodic review of the Company’s risk management. The Company’s primary business involves investments in Agency MBS, which are securities backed primarily by single-family residential mortgage loans. The Company does not receive personal information on individual mortgage borrowers. The Board reviews the Company’s cybersecurity program and risk exposure with management on at least an annual basis and receives periodic reports from management, the information technology team, and the Company’s third-party security firm on these matters from time to time. The Board may also conduct additional cybersecurity reviews or receive additional updates or reports as it deems necessary. Messrs. Cauley and Haas work collaboratively to implement a program designed to protect our information systems from cybersecurity threats and to promptly respond to any cybersecurity incidents in accordance with the Company’s incident response and recovery plan. These members of the Company’s management team monitor the prevention, detection, mitigation and remediation of cybersecurity threats and incidents and report such threats and incidents to the Board when appropriate. Messrs. Cauley and Haas each hold undergraduate and graduate degrees in their respective fields, and each have approximately 20 years of experience managing risks at the Company and at similar companies, including risks arising from cybersecurity threats. Cybersecurity threats, including as a result of any previous cybersecurity incidents, have not materially affected and are not reasonably likely to affect the Company, including its business strategy, results of operations or financial condition. The Company is not aware of any material security breach to date. Accordingly, the Company has not incurred any expenses over the last three years on information security breaches. However, the Company faces certain ongoing risks from cybersecurity that, if realized, could materially affect the Company. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors - The occurrence of cyber-incidents, or a deficiency in our cybersecurity or in those of any of our third party service providers could negatively impact our business by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of our confidential information or damage to our business relationships or reputation, all of which could negatively impact our business and results of operations.” There can be no assurance that the Company's cybersecurity risk management program and processes, including its policies, controls or procedures, will be fully implemented, complied with or effective in protecting its systems and information.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.

Our executive offices and principal administrative offices are located at 3305 Flamingo Drive, Vero Beach, Florida, 32963, in an office building which Bimini Capital owns. This facility is shared with our subsidiaries and Orchid. This property is suitable and adequate for our business as currently conducted.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

In April 2020 and November 2021, the Company received demands for payment from Citigroup, Inc. in the total amount of $33.3 million related to the indemnification provisions of various mortgage loan purchase agreements entered into prior to the date Royal Palm’s mortgage origination operations ceased in 2007. The Company believes the demands are without merit and intends to defend against the demands vigorously if pursued by Citigroup. No provision or accrual has been recorded related to the Citigroup demands.

We are not party to any other material pending legal proceedings as described in Item 103 of Regulation S-K.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Not Applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Market Information

Our Class A Common Stock is traded over-the-counter under the symbol “BMNM”. As of March 7, 2024, we had 10,005,457 shares of Class A Common Stock issued and outstanding, which were held by 105 shareholders of record and 799 beneficial owners whose shares were held in “street name” by brokers and depository institutions.

As of March 7, 2024, we had 31,938 shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding, which were held by 2 holders of record and 31,938 shares of Class C Common Stock outstanding, which were held by one holder of record. There is no established public trading market for our Class B Common Stock or Class C Common Stock.

Dividend Distribution Policy

We have not made a distribution to stockholders since 2011. We do not expect to make distributions for the foreseeable future.

Preferred Stock

Our charter authorizes us to issue preferred stock that could have a preference over our common stock with respect to distributions. If we were to issue any preferred stock, the distribution preference on the preferred stock could limit our ability to make distributions to the holders of our common stock.

Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

None.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

None.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

None. 

ITEM 6. [RESERVED]

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

The following discussion of our consolidated financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes to those statements included in Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The discussion may contain certain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements are those that are not historical in nature. As a result of many factors, such as those set forth under “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K, our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements.

Overview

Bimini Capital Management, Inc. ("Bimini Capital" or the "Company") is a holding company that was formed in September 2003. The Company’s principal wholly-owned operating subsidiary is Royal Palm Capital, LLC. We operate in two business segments: the asset management segment, which includes (a) the investment advisory services provided by Royal Palm’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Bimini Advisors Holdings, LLC, to Orchid Island Capital, Inc. ("Orchid") and to Royal Palm, and (b) the investment portfolio segment, which includes the investment activities conducted by Royal Palm.

Royal Palm Capital, LLC (collectively with its wholly-owned subsidiaries referred to as “Royal Palm”) maintains an investment portfolio, consisting primarily of residential mortgage-backed securities ("MBS") issued and guaranteed by a federally chartered corporation or agency ("Agency MBS"). We also invest in the common stock of Orchid. Our investment strategy focuses on, and our portfolio consists of, two categories of Agency MBS: (i) traditional pass-through Agency MBS, such as mortgage pass-through certificates issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae (the “GSEs”) and collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) issued by the GSEs (“PT MBS”) and (ii) structured Agency MBS, such as interest only securities ("IOs"), inverse interest only securities ("IIOs") and principal only securities ("POs"), among other types of structured Agency MBS. In addition, Royal Palm receives dividends from its investment in Orchid common shares.

Bimini Advisors Holdings, LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Bimini Advisors, LLC (an investment advisor registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission), are collectively referred to as “Bimini Advisors.” Bimini Advisors serves as the external manager of the portfolio of Orchid. From this arrangement, the Company receives management fees and expense reimbursements. As manager, Bimini Advisors is responsible for administering Orchid's business activities and day-to-day operations and, commencing April 1. 2022, provides certain repurchase agreement trading, clearing and administrative services. Pursuant to the terms of the management agreement, Bimini Advisors provides Orchid with its management team, including its officers, along with appropriate support personnel. Bimini Advisors is at all times subject to the supervision and oversight of Orchid's board of directors and has only such functions and authority as delegated to it.

Stock Repurchase Plans

On September 16, 2021, the Board authorized a share repurchase plan pursuant to Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “2021 Repurchase Plan”). Pursuant to the 2021 Repurchase Plan, we could purchase shares of our Class A Common Stock from time to time for an aggregate purchase price not to exceed $2.5 million. Share repurchases could be executed through various means, including, without limitation, open market transactions. The 2021 Repurchase Plan did not obligate the Company to purchase any shares, and it expired on September 16, 2023. From the commencement of the 2021 Repurchase Plan, through its expiration, we repurchased a total of 789,024 shares at an aggregate cost of approximately $1.2 million, including commissions and fees, for a weighted average price of $1.60 per share. During the year ended December 31, 2023, we repurchased a total of 14,431 shares at an aggregate cost of approximately $13,133, including commissions and fees, for a weighted average price of $0.91 per share. 

On March 7, 2024, the Board authorized a share repurchase plan pursuant to Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “2024 Repurchase Plan”). Pursuant to the 2024 Repurchase Plan, we can purchase shares of our Class A Common Stock from time to time for an aggregate purchase price not to exceed $2.5 million. Share repurchases can be executed through various means, including, without limitation, open market transactions. The 2024 Repurchase Plan does not obligate the Company to purchase any shares and expires on March 7, 2026.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 signed into law during in August 2022 includes a provision for an excise tax equal to 1% of the fair market value of any stock repurchased by covered corporations during a taxable year, subject to certain limits and provisions. The excise tax is effective beginning in 2023. While we may complete transactions subject to the new excise tax, we do not expect a material impact to our financial condition or result of operations.

Factors that Affect our Results of Operations and Financial Condition

A variety of industry and economic factors may impact our results of operations and financial condition. These factors include:

In addition, a variety of factors relating to our business may also impact our results of operations and financial condition. These factors include:

Results of Operations

Described below are the Company’s results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2023, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2022.

Net Loss Summary

Consolidated net loss for the year ended December 31, 2023 was $4.0 million, or $0.40 basic and diluted loss per share of Class A Common Stock, as compared to consolidated net loss of $19.8 million, or $1.90 basic and diluted loss per share of Class A Common Stock, for the year ended December 31, 2022.

The components of net loss for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, along with the changes in those components are presented in the table below:

GAAP and Non-GAAP Reconciliation

Economic Interest Expense and Economic Net Interest Income

We use derivative instruments, primarily U.S. Treasury Note (“T-Note”) and SOFR futures contracts and TBA short positions to hedge a portion of the interest rate risk on repurchase agreements in a rising rate environment.

We have not designated our derivative financial instruments as hedge accounting relationships, but rather hold them for economic hedging purposes. Changes in fair value of these instruments are presented in a separate line item in our consolidated statements of operations and not included in interest expense. As such, for financial reporting purposes, interest expense and cost of funds are not impacted by the fluctuation in value of the derivative instruments.

For the purpose of computing economic net interest income and ratios relating to cost of funds measures, GAAP interest expense, as reflected in our consolidated statements of operations, is adjusted to reflect the realized and unrealized gains or losses on certain derivative instruments the Company uses that pertain to each period presented. We believe that adjusting our GAAP interest expense for the periods presented by the gains or losses on these derivative instruments may not accurately reflect our economic interest expense for these periods. The reason is that these derivative instruments may cover periods that extend into the future, not just the current period. Any realized or unrealized gains or losses on the derivative instruments reflect the change in market value of the instrument caused by changes in underlying interest rates applicable to the term covered by the instrument, which changes are reflected of the future periods covered by the derivative instrument, not just the current period.

For each period presented, we have combined the effects of the derivative financial instruments in place for the respective period with the actual interest expense incurred on our borrowings to reflect total economic interest expense for the applicable period. Interest expense, including the effect of derivative instruments for the period, is referred to as economic interest expense. Net interest income, when calculated to include the effect of derivative instruments for the period, is referred to as economic net interest income.

We believe that economic interest expense and economic net interest income provide meaningful information to consider, in addition to the financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP. The non-GAAP measures help management to evaluate our financial position and performance without the effects of certain transactions and GAAP adjustments that are not necessarily indicative of our current investment portfolio or operations. The gains or losses on derivative instruments presented in our consolidated statements of operations are not necessarily representative of the total interest expense that we will ultimately realize. This is because as interest rates move up or down in the future, the gains or losses we ultimately realize, and which will affect our total interest expense in future periods, may differ from the unrealized gains or losses recognized as of the reporting date.

Our presentation of the economic value of our hedging strategy has important limitations. First, other market participants may calculate economic interest expense and economic net interest income differently than the way we calculate them. Second, while we believe that the calculation of the economic value of our hedging strategy described above helps to present our financial position and performance, it may be of limited usefulness as an analytical tool. Therefore, the economic value of our investment strategy should not be viewed in isolation and is not a substitute for interest expense and net interest income computed in accordance with GAAP.

The tables below present a reconciliation of the adjustments discussed above to interest expense shown for each period relative to our derivative instruments, and the consolidated statements of operations line item, gains (losses) on derivative instruments, calculated in accordance with GAAP for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 and for each quarter during 2023 and 2022. 

Gains (Losses) on Derivative Instruments

Economic Net Portfolio Interest Income

Economic Net Interest Income

Segment Information

We have two operating segments. The asset management segment includes the investment advisory services provided by Bimini Advisors to Orchid and Royal Palm. The investment portfolio segment includes the investment activities conducted by Royal Palm. Segment information for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 is as follows:

Asset Management Segment

Advisory Services Revenue

Advisory services revenue consists of management fees and overhead reimbursements charged to Orchid for the management of its portfolio pursuant to the terms of a management agreement. We receive a monthly management fee in the amount of:

On April 1, 2022, pursuant to the third amendment to the management agreement entered into on November 16, 2021, the Company began providing certain repurchase agreement trading, clearing and administrative services to Orchid that had been previously provided by AVM, L.P. under an agreement terminated on March 31, 2022.  In consideration for such services, Orchid pays the following fees to the Company:

In addition, Orchid is obligated to reimburse us for any direct expenses incurred on its behalf and to pay to us an amount equal to Orchid's pro rata portion of certain overhead costs set forth in the management agreement. The management agreement has been renewed through February 2025 and provides for automatic one-year extension options. Should Orchid terminate the management agreement without cause, it will be obligated to pay to us a termination fee equal to three times the average annual management fee, as defined in the management agreement, before or on the last day of the applicable renewal term.

The following table summarizes the advisory services revenue received from Orchid for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 and each quarter during 2023 and 2022.

Investment Portfolio Segment

Net Portfolio Interest Income (Expense)

We define net portfolio interest income as interest income on MBS less interest expense on repurchase agreement funding. During the year ended December 31, 2023, we generated $0.2 million of net portfolio interest income, consisting of $3.3 million of interest income from MBS assets offset by $3.1 million of interest expense on repurchase liabilities. For the year ended December 31, 2022, we generated $1.1 million of net portfolio interest income, consisting of $1.9 million of interest income from MBS assets offset by $0.7 million of interest expense on repurchase liabilities. The $1.4 million increase in interest income for the year ended December 31, 2023 was due to a $18.2 million increase in average MBS balances, combined with a 113 basis point ("bp") increase in yields earned on the portfolio. The $2.4 million increase in interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2023 was due to a 339 bp increase in cost of funds, combined with a $16.0 million increase in average repurchase liabilities.

Our economic interest expense on repurchase liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 was $3.2 million and $1.5 million, respectively, resulting in $0.1 million and $0.4 million of economic net portfolio interest income (expense), respectively.

The tables below provide information on our portfolio average balances, interest income, yield on assets, average repurchase agreement balances, interest expense, cost of funds, net interest income and net interest rate spread for each quarter in 2023 and 2022 and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 on both a GAAP and economic basis.

Average Asset Yield

The table below presents the average portfolio size, income and yields of our respective sub-portfolios, consisting of structured MBS and pass-through MBS (“PT MBS”) for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 and each quarter during 2023 and 2022.