アナリー・キャピタル・マネジメント（NLY）2026年第3四半期決算説明会：純資産価値が下落する中、EADが配当をカバー

要点

• アナリー・キャピタル・マネジメントが発表した2026年第3四半期の分配可能利益（EAD）は1株当たり0.80ドルとなり、前四半期比で0.01ドル増加し、四半期配当の0.75ドルを上回りました。
• 1株当たり純資産価値（BPS）は前四半期比11.4%減少の17.86ドルとなりました。金利上昇、エージェンシーMBSのスプレッド拡大、ボラティリティが高まったことで評価額が押し下げられたため、配当を含むトータルでの経済的リターンはマイナス7.6%となりました。
• 経済的レバレッジは主に自己資本の減少により5.6倍から5.9倍に上昇し、ヘッジ比率は97%から100%に上昇しました。アナリーの当四半期末時点における資金調達可能資産は85億ドルとなりました。
• ポートフォリオの内訳は、エージェンシー部門が920億ドル、住宅ローン・クレジット部門が104億ドル、モーゲージ・サービシング・ライト（MSR）部門が43億ドルとなり、同社の自己資本全体に占める割合はそれぞれ55%、23%、22%となりました。
• 経営陣は、2026年第4四半期もEADが配当額を上回ると予想しており、現在のポートフォリオが配当支払いを十分に裏付けていると述べました。追加の資本配分に関する優先順位は引き続き、第1位が住宅ローン・クレジット、第2位がエージェンシーMBS、第3位がMSRとなっています。
• 決算説明会前の金曜日時点で、未払い配当分を除いた純資産価値は約2%増加しており、配当を含めると3%近く増加していると経営陣は語りました。

主要財務データ

クーポン収入の増加、投資有価証券および住宅モーゲージローン平均残高の拡大、証券化活動、ならびに営業費用の削減がEADを下支えしました。これらのプラス要因により、証券化負債やレポ残高の増加、ならびに調達金利の緩やかな上昇によるマイナス影響が相殺されました。

事業および業績

エージェンシーMBS

エージェンシー・ポートフォリオの第3四半期末時点の時価総額は920億ドルとなりました。アナリーは、主に5.5%および6%のクーポンを中心に、高クーポンの指定プールに焦点を当て、約20億ドルのMBS想定元本を追加しました。

10年債利回りが当四半期中に82ベーシスポイント上昇したことで、エージェンシーMBSのスプレッドが拡大しました。同社は金利リスクを抑えるため、主に国債先物を活用してヘッジを拡大しました。第4四半期初めには、指定プールの良好なパフォーマンスを利益確定させた後、主に20億ドルを超える既発プールを高クーポンのTBAに付け替えました。

経営陣は、現在のエージェンシー・スプレッドにおける新規投資の期待リターンは10%台半ばから後半になると述べました。また、現在の金利水準ではネガティブ・コンベクシティが低下し、ポートフォリオのデュレーション感応度やヘッジのリバランシング要件が緩和されると見込んでいます。

住宅ローン・クレジット

住宅ローン・クレジット・ポートフォリオは104億ドルとほぼ横ばいでした。オンスロー・ベイは70億ドルの金利ロック実績と、四半期ベースで過去最高となる58億ドルの融資実行額を記録しました。現在の金利ロックパイプラインの平均FICOスコアは766、平均LTVは67%でした。

アナリーは第3四半期中に74億ドルの証券化決済を完了し、10月にはさらに22億ドルの価格決定を行いました。決算説明会の時点で、同社は2026年に37件の証券化案件を通じて210億ドル超の価格決定を行っていました。

経営陣は、保有する証券化エクイティ、非時価評価型ファシリティを通じて資金調達されたホールローン、および厳選されたBB格付けのノンQM債券に支えられ、住宅ローン・クレジットの期待リターンは13%〜16%になると示しました。

モーゲージ・サービシング・ライト（MSR）

MSRポートフォリオは43億ドルに増加しました。アナリーは時価約1億4,000万ドルのバルクパッケージ1件を決済したほか、フローチャネルの取扱高は5,000万ドルを超え、四半期ベースで過去最高に達しました。

ポートフォリオの評価倍率は6.15倍へと緩やかに上昇しました。繰上返済速度（CPR）は4.8%に低下し、深刻な延滞率は60ベーシスポイント未満を維持しました。経営陣は、低い約定金利、限られた繰上返済、エスクロー残高からの収益が引き続き予測可能性の高いキャッシュフローを支えていると述べました。

アナリーはMSRを単体での収益機会であると同時に、ポートフォリオの分散手段としても捉えています。金利上昇はエスクローのフロート収入を支援し、金利上昇時にはMSR評価額の増加がエージェンシーMBSの軟調さを相殺するのに役立ちます。

経営陣の見通し

経営陣は、2026年第4四半期もEADが0.75ドルの配当額を再び上回ると予想しており、既存のポートフォリオと現在の新規投資リターンの双方が配当支払いを十分に裏付けていると述べました。

同社は潤沢な流動性と戦術的にレバレッジを引き上げる一定の余力を持って第4四半期を迎えましたが、経営陣は現在のレバレッジですでに必要なリターンが得られていると述べています。資本配分の優先順位は、住宅ローン・クレジット、僅差でエージェンシーMBS、それに続くMSRという順序を維持しています。

経営陣は、ボラティリティの低下が続けばエージェンシーMBSの環境にプラスになると予想しています。また、限定的なモーゲージ供給に加え、債券ファンドへの資金流入、政府系金融機関（GSE）、海外投資家、銀行からの買い支えも挙げました。

ノンQM融資について、経営陣は2026年の実行額を上限に近い1,500億〜1,750億ドルと試算し、同セグメントがモーゲージ実行総額の約8%〜9%を維持すると見込んでいます。これらの試算は経営陣の予想として明確に提示されました。

リスクおよび注視事項

• 第3四半期に10年債利回りは82ベーシスポイント上昇し、モーゲージ金利は7.5%に達したため、金利およびスプレッドのボラティリティが高まりました。
• インフレ率は米連邦準備理事会（FRB）の目標を上回ったままであり、市場は2027年末までに25ベーシスポイントの利上げがさらにほぼ3回行われることを織り込んでいました。
• 金利上昇と購入負担感の制約により住宅取引が引き続き低迷し、住宅価格の押し下げ要因となる可能性があります。経営陣は、モーゲージ金利が7.375%〜7.5%程度で推移し続けた場合、全米の住宅価格が数パーセント下落する可能性があると述べました。
• 住宅市場の状況は地域によって異なります。経営陣は、テキサス州やフロリダ州を含む南東部の軟調さを具体的に指摘し、供給月数が10年ぶりの高水準に達したことに言及しました。
• エージェンシーMBSは、ヘッジ比率100%と積極的なデュレーション管理を行っている場合でも、スプレッド拡大や時価評価のボラティリティに晒され続けています。
• 四半期末以降、住宅ローンの証券化スプレッドは緩やかに拡大しましたが、経営陣は投資家需要と市場の厚みが引き続き堅調であると説明しています。

アナリスト質疑応答の要点

• 配当のカバレッジ：経営陣は第4四半期も配当を上回る利益を確保できると見込んでおり、現在の1株当たり0.75ドルの配当水準に引き続き満足しています。
• 資本配分：追加資本の最優先事項は住宅ローン・クレジットであり、僅差でエージェンシーMBS、次いでMSRが続きます。
• ヘッジ戦略：アナリーは金利上昇に伴い国債先物を追加し、通常よりも高い先物配分で第4四半期を迎えました。経営陣はヘッジバランスを維持しつつ利回りを向上させるため、一部の先物をスワップに転換することを検討する計画です。
• クレジットの耐性：住宅ポートフォリオの時価LTVは64%で、平均借入者は40万ドル近い純資産（含み益）を保有していました。経営陣は、借り手の質が高く、重複するリスクが限られているため、全国的な住宅価格の緩やかな下落であれば対処可能であると述べました。
• MSRの供給：ローン組成の収益性低下、業界の再編、流動性ニーズを背景に、オリジネーターによるMSRの売却が続くと経営陣は予想しています。アナリーは価格が魅力的な時期に購入し、銀行の需要が強まった時期に売却する可能性があります。
• ノンQMの見通し：市場が住宅購入主導であり金利が高水準にとどまる限り、モーゲージ組成額においてノンQMが高いシェアを維持すると経営陣は見込んでいます。ただし、モーゲージ金利の低下に伴いコンベンショナル（適格）ローンや政府保証ローンの借り換えが活発化した場合、そのシェアは大幅に低下する可能性があります。

決算説明会文字起こし全文

決算説明会の完全なトランスクリプト

経営陣による説明

Operator

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Annaly Capital Management Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]

I'd now like to turn the call over to Sean Kensil, Director of Investor Relations. You may begin.

Sean Kensil

Good morning, and welcome to the Third Quarter 2026 Earnings Call for Annaly Capital Management. Please note that this call is being recorded. As a reminder, materials for today's call are available on our website at www.annaly.com.

Today's call may include forward-looking statements, which are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially and refer to certain non-GAAP measures. Please see the notices in our earnings release for important information regarding forward-looking statements and non-GAAP measures.

Participants on this morning's call include David Finkelstein, Chief Executive Officer and Co-Chief Investment Officer; Serena Wolfe, Chief Financial Officer; Mike Fania, Co-Chief Investment Officer and Head of Residential Credit; V.S. Srinivasan, Head of Agency; and Ken Adler, Head of Mortgage Servicing Rights.

And with that, I'll turn the call over to David.

David Finkelstein

Thank you, Sean. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining our Q3 earnings call. I'll begin with an overview of the macro environment and our performance during the quarter and discuss each of our 3 investment businesses, finishing with our outlook. Serena will then provide a more detailed review of our financials, after which we'll open the call up to Q&A.

Now starting with the macro landscape. The U.S. economy remains resilient, supported by heavy AI investment and healthy consumption. The labor market is stable, while inflation remains above the Fed's target, driven in part by higher energy prices. The bond market faced a challenging third quarter, with the 10-year treasury yield rising 82 basis points to multi-decade highs. The sell-off accelerated following the Fed's first rate hike since 2023, and markets are now pricing nearly 3 additional 25 basis point hikes through the end of next year. Higher rates also reflected concerns around government debt, heavy corporate issuance and a repricing of the Fed's neutral rate.

Mortgage rates have accordingly reached 7.5%. The level during this cycle seen only briefly in the fall of 2023, and thus housing activity is likely to stay subdued as affordability challenges persist and the existing borrower lock-in effect continues to constrain turnover. Weaker demand could soften home prices, though supply and demand remain broadly balanced, notwithstanding regional disparities, and underlying borrower credit remains fundamentally sound.

As upward pressure on rates intensified during the month of September, rate volatility rose significantly, with implied volatility measures reaching their highest levels since the administration's initial tariff announcement 1.5 years ago. And this drove mortgage spreads wider and led to meaningful underperformance in Agency MBS. Against this backdrop, our portfolio delivered a negative 7.6% economic return for the quarter. Earnings remain durable, however, with EAD of $0.80 per share, again, exceeding our dividend, while economic leverage ended Q3 up modestly at 5.9 turns.

In capital markets, we announced the redemption of our $443 million Series I floating rate preferred stock during the third quarter, and the redemption helps us maintain a very conservative capital structure. And we view balance sheet leverage as more attractive, particularly as repo financing remains readily available in terms of residential credit and MSR warehouse lines continue to improve. Relatedly, we issued $757 million in common equity in the quarter through our ATM program, with proceeds used both to fund the preferred redemption as well as to invest across our portfolios.

Now turning to our investment strategies and beginning with Agency. The sharp selloff in rates led to meaningful extension across the MBS universe, particularly in the more negatively [ convexed ] portions of the market. This created duration mismatches and contributed to selling pressure from some more highly levered investors late in the quarter, which exacerbated the volatility-driven MBS spread widening. While we are certainly not immune to mortgage underperformance, we were positioned for rate and spread volatility with conservative duration exposure and historically low leverage heading into the quarter.

Our Agency portfolio decreased modestly to $92 billion in market value, representing 55% of the firm's capital that we added approximately $2 billion notional in MBS in the quarter. Activity focused on deploying a portion of our common equity raised in a higher coupon specified pools, primarily [ 5.5s and 6s ]. This past quarter also demonstrated the value of our allocation of high-quality specified pools. On average, our pools for more than 3.5 years season and carry loan balances less than half those of new production, providing both call and extension protection. As mortgage rates increase, paves declined on call-protected pools as expected but increased on extension protected pools. And given the distribution and quality of our collateral, the average pay up on our portfolio increased modestly over the quarter.

Now early in the fourth quarter, we monetized some of this outperformance, rotating over $2 billion in primarily seasoned pools in the higher coupon TBAs, which stand to benefit more from a decline in volatility, something we have begun to see since the end of the third quarter. On the liability side, as rates moved higher, we responded by adding to our hedge position, primarily in treasury futures, to keep our overall interest rate exposure contained. And we entered the fourth quarter with slightly more rate exposure, however, as current higher yields offer attractive value. And we're also comfortable carrying somewhat more duration as the rise in rates materially reduced negative [ convexity ] in both our portfolio and the broader MBS universe. And as a result, asset durations should be less sensitive to further rate moves in the current environment, reducing the need for hedge rebalancing.

Moving to residential credit. Our portfolio ended the third quarter roughly flat quarter-over-quarter at $10.4 billion in market value, representing 23% of the firm's capital. Residential spreads traded in a tight range for the majority of Q3, with AAA non-QM spreads ending the quarter approximately 10 basis points wider, largely in sympathy with other securitized products. Our Onslow Bay correspondent channel delivered another strong quarter, with $7 billion of lock volume and $5.8 billion of fundings, our highest quarterly funding volume since the channel's inception more than 5 years ago. And importantly, growth has not come at the expense of credit discipline, with our current lock pipeline carrying an average FICO of 766 and an average LTV of 67%.

Now with respect to securitization, we settled $7.4 billion of transactions in Q3, while pricing an additional $2.2 billion in October. Annaly remains the market's largest expanded credit sponsor, and we have now [ prized ] more than $21 billion securitizations in 2026 across 37 deals. And while the new issue market has experienced marginal widening post quarter end, we're encouraged by the resiliency of the private label market, and expect 2026 to be a post-GFC record in transaction volume.

Now to discuss MSR, our portfolio increased to $4.3 billion market value, with our allocation of the sector representing 22% of the firm's capital. We took a measured approach to purchases during the quarter, settling one bulk package for roughly $140 million in market value, while our flow channel experienced just over $50 million in volume and new quarterly highs as we continue to gain market share in the co-issue sector. Both supply in the market increased quarter-over-quarter, and we expect it to stay robust throughout the balance of the year given current mortgage industry dynamics, as we've spoken about extensively over the past year. And this environment should provide ample opportunity to responsibly grow our portfolio. Year-to-date, we remain the largest purchaser of bulk MSR, reflecting the value we bring to the origination community as a strategic partner with a deep permitting capital base.

MSR valuations modestly increased, with our multiple ending the quarter at 6.15x, largely driven by higher interest rates and wider current coupon MBS spreads. Our prepayment speeds remained very low this past quarter, decreasing to 4.8 CPR, reflecting our portfolio's low average note rate, seasonal factors and higher mortgage rates. Credit performance remains strong, with serious delinquencies below 60 basis points and along with healthy income from our escrow deposits, these factors support a predictable cash flow profile that continues to be a complement to our other investment strategies and an important contributor to our EAD.

Now turning to our outlook. We're mindful of uncertainty in the market. We entered the fourth quarter prudently positioned with substantial liquidity, and we remain focused on preserving capital while dynamically allocating across our 3 businesses as opportunities emerge. Within Agency, we continue to manage [ call and ] extension risk proactively as the rate outlook evolves, while current spread levels offer compelling new money returns in the mid- to high teens. And while elevated volatility persists, the outlook for Agency MBS is constructive as spreads retraced the widest level since before the GSEs began more actively increasing their portfolios in mid-2025. At the same time, the technical picture remains favorable, with record bond fund inflows and continued support from the GSEs, overseas investors and banks, while supply is limited given seasonal and high primary mortgage rates.

In residential credit, our scaled Onslow Bay correspondent platform gives us direct access to high-quality whole loans, greater control over asset selection and supports one of the leading securitization programs across asset-backed finance. As the largest issuer of expanded credit MBS, we're uniquely positioned to participate in the continued growth in the non-Agency market, with non-QM issuance up nearly 60% year-to-date. And the investments we have made across our platform over the past several years have supported expansion, operating efficiency and disciplined credit execution.

And lastly, in MSR, our differentiated portfolio of low note rate, high-quality assets continues to generate durable cash flows, supported by our diversified network of servicing and recapture partnerships. And as demonstrated this year, we have the flexibility and capacity to grow the portfolio accretively, further enhancing our earnings and cash flow profile.

Now collectively, our 3 complementary businesses provide multiple avenues to deploy capital efficiently without the burden of a high fixed cost origination model. We remain patient, but we have ample liquidity and balance sheet capacity to put capital to work. And we believe the combination of diversified earnings, proprietary asset creation, conservative leverage and capital allocation flexibility positions Annaly well to continue delivering attractive risk-adjusted returns.

Now with that, I'll turn the call over to Serena to discuss our financials.

Serena Wolfe

Thank you, David. Today, I will briefly review the financial highlights for the quarter ended September 30, 2026. As in prior quarters, our earnings release discloses GAAP and non-GAAP earnings metrics. And my comments will focus on our non-GAAP EAD and related key performance metrics, which exclude PAA.

As David noted, the challenging fixed income market environment weighed on book value during the third quarter. Our diversified hub and finance platform nevertheless, continue to generate solid earnings, supported by higher coupon income, continued residential credit securitization activity and lower operating expenses.

As of September 30, 2026, our book value per share decreased 11.4% from the prior quarter to $17.86. Including our quarterly dividend of $0.75 per share, we generated an economic return of negative 7.6% for the quarter. Book value performance primarily reflected wider Agency MBS spreads and the impact of elevated rate volatility, including market-driven duration and convexity effects. Gains in our hedging instruments provided meaningful offset.

Earnings available for distribution increased by $0.01 to $0.80 per share, and again exceeded our quarterly dividend of $0.75 per share. The increase was driven primarily by higher coupon interest income on larger average investment securities and residential mortgage loan balances, along with lower operating expenses. These benefits more than offset higher interest expense from increased securitization debt and repo balances as well as modestly higher funding rates.

Net interest margin declined by 7 basis points to 1.69%, while net interest spread declined by 8 basis points to 1.42%. Average asset yields were relatively stable at 5.45%. In comparison, our average economic cost of funds increased 7 basis points to 4.03%, primarily reflecting a greater proportion of securitized debt in our funding mix and slightly higher repo rates.

We continue to actively manage the balance sheet through the market volatility. Economic leverage increased to 5.9x from 5.6x, primarily reflecting the decline in equity, while our hedge ratio increased to 100% from 97% as we maintained our defensive positioning. Our weighted average repo rate for the quarter increased 3 basis points to 3.87%, while weighted average repo days to maturity ended the quarter at 30 days, down 3 days from the prior quarter.

Despite interest rate volatility in the third quarter, the reefer funding market continues to function smoothly, ensuring reliable and efficient access to short-term financing for Agency MBS. Meanwhile, we continue to maintain ample financing availability for our credit businesses to support their growth, which David highlighted earlier. Total warehouse capacity across our residential credit and MSR businesses remained $8.3 billion, including $2.8 billion of committed capacity. We maintained significant available capacity, with utilization rates of approximately 57% for residential credit and 50% for MSR.

We ended the third quarter with $6.9 billion of unencumbered assets, including $4.2 billion in cash and unencumbered Agency MBS. In addition, we had approximately $1.6 billion of MSR collateral pledged and available to support future advances, subject to market advance rates. In total, we had approximately $8.5 billion of assets available for financing at quarter end, that approximately $1.1 billion from the prior quarter, primarily reflecting lower equity and reduced unencumbered Agency MBS. This represented approximately 54% of our total equity and continue to provide meaningful liquidity and financial flexibility.

Finally, our OpEx to equity ratio decreased 11 basis points to 1.29% for the quarter, while year-to-date ratio remained 1.34%. As anticipated, expenses moderated from the elevated second quarter level, reflecting lower compensation of the G&A expenses.

That concludes our remarks. We will now take questions. Thank you, operator.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Bose George from KBW.

質疑応答

Bose George

Can I start with the -- just get an update on the mark-to-market book value?

David Finkelstein

Sure, Bose. As of Friday, excluding the dividend accrual, we were up about 2%, inclusive of the dividend closer to 3% on a sideways since.

Bose George

Great. And then just wanted to ask about dividend coverage, just given the expectation for current economic returns, how does that compare with the required ROE to cover the dividend?

David Finkelstein

Sure. So obviously, we outearned in Q3. We expect to outearn in Q4, and we'll see how 2027 evolves. But as it stands today, we didn't delever in Q3, notwithstanding the volatility and the current portfolio delivers the dividend. And as we laid out our projected returns, which are up quarter-over-quarter, new money gets us there as well. So we're comfortable with where the dividend is at today.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Crispin Love from Piper Sandler.

Crispin Love

David, on that last point, the market level returns kind of as you showed out on Slide 7, it looks like each strategy is a little bit higher than last quarter. Can you just discuss some of the dynamics there, driving returns a little bit higher? And then also just where you're most interested in adding incremental capital today in the macro environment? And I do appreciate you guys -- 3 businesses that you want to add, but like maybe if you could stack right?

David Finkelstein

Sure. So I'll start with the end of your question on capital allocation, then we'll go through each of the 3 businesses in terms of how the returns evolve heading into Q4. So in terms of capital allocation, it's not much different than last quarter, returns across the 3 businesses are incrementally higher. And as we did say last quarter, we still want to grow the residential credit business responsibly, considerate of credit that's at the margin where we'd like to grow, and agency returns are ample and certainly compelling, and so that would be second.

And then MSR, we still have room to grow. Obviously, those headline returns are a little bit lower than Agency and resi. But one point to note is that position is largely funded with capital of very little leverage. So we do have room to grow and maintain a 20% capital allocation to the sector. So the order is resi first; close second, agency; and then not far behind is MSR. So let's just talk about returns in each, and I'll start with Srini on the agency and then go to Mike and Ken.

V.S. Srinivasan

Sure, David. So basically, Agency spreads for the quarter widened about 20 basis points. Now when we say spreads widened about 20 basis points, we generally refer to current coupon spreads. And given that only is [ 5 and 6.5s ] are over par, we really can't invest in current coupons. So we are slightly below current coupon, call it, 5.5 or 6s is our preferred coupon. And for those -- compared to where current coupon was at the last quarter spends are about 10 basis points wider. So that gets us to 15 to 17 basis points with about 100 basis point increase in prospective results.

Michael Fania

Sure, Crispin, this is Mike. On the resi side, what those returns reflect the 13% to 16%. First, it will reflect the equity that we're retaining through our securitization. So call that $0.06 to $0.07 of capital on the retained OBX securities using maybe, call it, a turn of leverage. So we'll retain, call it, 10% to 12%, 1 turn of leverage gets to that $0.06 to $0.07 of deployment.

Given spreads have widened, we've seen our equity basis has been able to widen as well. And given the volatility, we're pricing in incremental premium. We can also earn mid-teens returns on just residential loans, putting on nonmark-to-market facilities. Our non-mark-to-market facilities are very accretive in the current environment and call it maybe 4 to 5 turns of leverage, and this is non-mark-to-market, you're calling it 15%, 16%.

And lastly, there is an opportunity to buy BB non-QM bonds. So these are new issue third-party shelves. Right now, they trade, call it, [ 4 25 ] per swaps. You can use 20% to 25% haircuts on those. And the financing there is in the low 100. So that would actually get you closer to that 16%, 17%. So there's a number of options at which we'll be able to get mid-teens or potentially a little bit above mid-teens.

Ken Adler

Yes. Thanks. This is Ken. On the MSR front, the change in return from the prior quarter is largely driven by all rates rising. And as capital is deployed, that capital earns a higher rate of return. Additionally, with the MSR, a bulk of the negative duration, certainly on the lower note rate collateral, is driven by the float income as we manage the borrowers' escrow accounts. So as rates rise, we, as the servicer earn a higher rate of return on those escrow balances, and that applies to prospective investments. So those 2 items are really driving the change in prospective return quarter-over-quarter.

David Finkelstein

Yes. And Crispin, just to add to that point, we entered Q3 with about 1.25 hikes priced in to the market, and we ended the quarter and sit today with about 4, including the hike that occurred in September. So just that float income increase in income alone gets you a lot more yield.

Crispin Love

Great. That makes sense. And then just one last question for me. Just on just the recent rate fall in the third quarter and then just a little bit of a change in the fourth quarter. Have [indiscernible] any state changes to your hedging strategy in kind of recent months, recent weeks, especially as rates were rising, you had a little bit of a different environment in October. So just curious on a little bit of the change in the second half of 3Q [ and ] October.

David Finkelstein

Yes. Look, as the market was selling off, we did dynamically hedge, and we predominantly used the futures market to achieve that. And we entered Q4 with a relatively higher percentage of futures than we normally operate with. So heading into this quarter, our anticipation will be to find opportunities to convert some of those futures into swaps, which gives us a little bit more yield and keeps a good balance on our hedge profile.

But generally speaking, over the last couple of weeks, we've been somewhat encouraged by the [ vol ] subsiding to some extent. You see it both in realized and an implied vols somewhat. And so we'd like to think we're out of the woods. We're still very, very vigilant when it comes to our hedge profile and making sure that we're managing the portfolio responsibly.

When we look at the environment today and the level of rates, we understand why rates are higher. Obviously, inflation is a big driver, and we are in a hiking cycle, as shallow as that may end up being heavy debt issuance. And also, the economy has proven to be able to grow at higher rates. And so the neutral rate is higher. And so we feel like the new normal is higher rates. And so the floor on rates is higher. But we do generally like the rates market. We're carrying a little bit of duration here, and we think that's appropriate given the attractiveness of rates, and we're comfortable with the positioning.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Doug Harter from BTIG.

Douglas Harter

You guys put up a smaller decline in economic return than your peers. Clearly, diversification helped that. But I was wondering if you could help us think how, like the agency portfolio performed this quarter as we try to compare that to peers?

David Finkelstein

Yes. I would -- look, I think -- I have a brief understanding of how others performed. And I think the agency sector was largely pretty well clustered, close to one another for the most part. I think my understanding is that folks were deliberate about managing duration exposure.

And I'll tell you something, Doug, agency -- it's not that easy to differentiate an agency portfolio, which may not sound too attractive to agency monoline peers. But at the end of the day, there's a lot of correlation amongst agency assets. You can be up in coupon, down in coupon, specs, TBAs. But when the agency market cheapens, it tends to affect the entire sector and performance, ex how you manage duration can be somewhat uniform. I think this quarter, we were probably somewhat contextual with the -- our agency portfolio with how others perform because I think everybody was pretty responsible about navigating the rates market and hedging.

Douglas Harter

I appreciate that, David. And then on the residential credit, you talked a little bit about some of the spread widening you've seen on new issue deals. Can you just talk about whether there have been any kind of other structural changes or what the depth of the investor base looks like kind of as we've gone through this market?

Michael Fania

Sure, Doug. This is Mike. I would say at the top of the capital stack, we ended Q2, call it, [ 1 30 ] over the curve. That's to treasuries. At the end of Q3, we're 5, 10 basis points wider, call it [ 1 40 ]. We just priced our latest deal, our latest transaction post quarter end, non-QM 16. That was done at [ 1 50 ]. We have seen other AAA sponsors and other shelves probably price, call it 5 to 15 basis points wider. I do think reflecting the strength of the OBX main, the programmatic nature of the platform and then also the performance as well. So I do think we're still firmly in that kind of Tier 1 category, and we're benefiting from that.

In terms of structural changes, what we have seen, it's been fairly modest, right? So the deals that have been coming, they call it maybe low 7% gross WACC, low to mid-7% gross WACC. The current coupon within non-QM right now, the 102.5 rate is probably closer to 8%. So these deals are modestly out of the money.

What the market has really demanded as a concession to be able to move the risk is that the AAA bond, which traditionally is pro rata with the AA and the single A, has turned into a full sequential. So it's a fairly modest change. The BBB and down, the M1 and down has always been a sequential pay. So you're really changing the structure of the waterfall of 2 bonds. And then what you're seeing is those AA and those single A bonds because instead of being pro rata and factoring down, they become sequential pay in the initial period before the call.

So very modest changes, but I would say that the market is still healthy. The market is very resilient. We've seen 95 billion of non-QM issuance this year. Last year, the entire year was 80 billion. 45% of all issuance we've seen in non-Agency has been within the non-QM market. So I haven't really seen any change in terms of investor depth, and it's a slight structural change to be able to absorb modestly out of the money transactions.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Jason Stewart from Compass Point.

Jason Stewart

We noticed a decent uptick in home equity securitization volume. Just maybe if you could talk, Mike, about the 2 sides there, how you're approaching sizing that as an asset and then how the market is pricing those liabilities today?

Michael Fania

Sure. Thanks, Jason. So on home equity, we'll classify that as both HELOCs and closed-end seconds. We've seen, in terms of total issuance, right, in the size of the entire market. We've seen about $220 billion of issuance within the non-agency market. About 15% of that has been closed-end seconds and HELOCs. It's around $33 billion. In terms of our production and what we really focus on, it's probably, call it, 5% to 6% of our production that we see through the correspondent.

We are active predominantly in full documentation, HELOCs and closed-end seconds. We've talked about that before. There's a small kind of niche market within the alternative stock. But really, the focus continues to be on non-QM and DSCR. A lot of it is scalability. A lot of it is our competitive advantages are within non-QM and DSCR. Close-end seconds and HELOCs, they trade at very large premiums. Even to be able to aggregate them through a correspondent, you need to be willing to pay [ 1 06, 1 07 ] type dollar prices. So that is something where we've been, I think a little bit more conservative than the rest of the market.

But in terms of the distribution, the securitization market, similar to non-QM, it's very healthy. It's not the same size. But I will say that it's -- we continue to see transactions, we continue to see deals. If you call AAA, non-QM right now for Tier 1 issuers, if we call that [ 1 50 to 1 55 ], I would say for Tier 1 closed-end second issuers, it's probably 5 to 10 basis points inside of non-QM. And part of that is that the market does believe it's a better convexity profile. But in terms of our strategy, we'll continue to buy those assets, but I think we're probably a little bit more conservative in terms of our scenario analysis, analytics and are willing to pay premiums. But market is open, it's healthy. And I would say, maybe, call it, 5 to 10 basis points inside the non-QM AAA market right now.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Marissa Lobo from UBS.

Ameeta Lobo Nelson

Just on MSRs, historically, MSRs have provided you a natural offset to the negative convexity in Agency MBS. But as we're seeing the mortgage universe become more fully extended and the convexity profile improving, how are you thinking about the role of MSRs in the portfolio today? And should we think about them more as a stand-alone return opportunity? Or do they continue to provide more diversification across rate scenarios?

Ken Adler

This is Ken. Thanks for the question. I would answer as both. The stand-alone return is certainly ample and we talked about that earlier. In terms of the hedging properties, beyond the gamma, the convexity sort of hedging, there's another form of hedging that's going on, and that's the model hedging. We use prepayment models to measure our duration, convexities and other risk measures. To the extent prepayment speeds for some other reason, come in faster or slower than the model, MSR provides a direct hedge to the portfolio. Considering if speeds come in slower than expected, that's always good for MSR. And that's in today's market with the mortgage [ university ] discount, just not good for the Agency MBS portfolio. So there's this model error that's being hedged through on the MSR.

David Finkelstein

Yes. One more point, Marissa, I'll say is in -- following up on Ken's point, is that to the extent that the mortgage market's at a reasonable discount like it is, and turnover is actually lower than natural turnover, which should be the case in the MSR portfolio is going to hedge that as well. And as I talked about a moment ago in terms of float income, it's a hedge for short rates, higher short rates increases in float income and MSR benefits from that as well. So there's still a very productive balancing component to the MSR portfolio in the current environment.

V.S. Srinivasan

I would also add that away from models and all of that, agency MBS has been trading directionally with rates. So when rates sell off, MBS spreads have been under pressure. And what we have observed over the last 3 years is when rates sell off, MSR actually trades very, very well. So from a pure mark-to-market trading perspective, it does provide cushion on book value loads.

Ameeta Lobo Nelson

Okay. Great. And then just shifting to residential credit and thinking about home price appreciation, can you talk to your home price outlook and its flat HPA manageable? And what are the assumptions that are underlying that 13% to 16% residential credit return?

Michael Fania

Sure. So thanks, Marissa. I'll address the second part of it, the 13% to 16%. Again, that's mostly the OBX platform. It's non-QM and DSCR. I will say that that's modeled to, call it, maybe a 20% lifetime speed, which is generally where non-QM has come in. In terms of [ cume ] losses, that probably represents close to 75 basis points of [ cume ] loss in terms of what our projections are. So there's significant room for upside.

If you look at the totality of our securitization program, we've issued, I think, close to $67 billion life to date. The actual amount of realized losses we have taken inside the trust is around $6 million. So it's been less than 1 basis point. So one of the areas where we've outperformed our initial expectations has been within credit modeling. We do expect to take more losses and like time to losses on a lot of non-term DSCR, maybe closer to 10 to 15 basis points as they season. But it just shows you that there is a level of conservatism in terms of those projections.

In terms of the housing market, a lot of it will depend upon what mortgage rates do and where mortgage rates ultimately settle. If we stay at [ 7 and 3/8 ] to 7.5% for an extended period of time, we do believe housing can go negative. It can go negative by a couple of points nationally. So a lot of it is dependent upon mortgage rates.

In terms of where we sit today, what we would say, the modestly bullish case for housing, still positive. September was up 8 basis points month-over-month. It's up 1% year-over-year. If you look at ZIP code level, 77% have positive year-over-year increases. There's a significant amount of homeowner equity, call it, $35 trillion to $40 trillion, depending upon what you think that the size of the market is. The average borrower is locked into a [ 4 65 ] rate. Inventory is still 15% below 2019. And new listings, which is reflecting that mortgage rate, they haven't really increased. It's only up 1% to 2%.

The caution, and this is what a lot of people are seeing now, and we do have a level of conservatism in terms of just not only our purchase assumptions but also the quality of the portfolio, as Dave mentioned, the Southeast is very weak. Texas, Florida, you see the public builders talking about competing with resale, month supply is at a 10-year high. And [ 7 and 3/8 ] mortgage payment, that mortgage payment is up 6% to 7% just over the last quarter relative to Q3. And everyone knows the affordability issues that we have, right? So if we stay at these rates, yes, we do think it could go down 2% to 3%, 3% to 4%.

Ameeta Lobo Nelson

But manageable within the -- yes. I guess within the equity cushion that you...

Michael Fania

Yes, it's very manageable. As Dave mentioned in the script, our average borrower has close to 400,000 of equity. It's a 64 mark-to-market LTV in our portfolio. The D60 plus of our portfolio right now is 160 basis points. And we are predominantly targeting upper middle-class borrowers, right? So it is not necessarily this first-time home buyer. It is not necessarily the borrower who has been challenged with their discretionary income in this inflationary environment. So I think from that perspective, we feel pretty good about the strategy.

David Finkelstein

Yes. Marissa, there's also very little layered risk in the portfolio. So we can manage and wouldn't even mind seeing HPA home prices come down a little bit to increase the affordability equation to get turnover up.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Rick Shane from JPM.

Richard Shane

There's been a lot of great questions this time so. Just wanted to talk a little bit -- I mean empirically, it's one thing to understand what's going on in MSR, but there are, I would describe, a lot of exogenous factors that are impacting -- potentially impacting valuation, mortgage volumes, industry capacity, potentially the impact of AI affecting speeds. I am curious when we think about, again, sort of your empirical models and then overlay all of these different structural things that are happening in mortgage right now, how is that impacting value pricing demand and where you see attractive opportunity within MSR?

Unknown Executive

Yes. Thanks for the question, and those are certainly things we're thinking about all day and actually all night. Look, I mean, the mortgage industry is in a place because of consolidation, because of technology, where people are operating much more efficiently and are operating at much lower profit margins. So because the efficiency that's priced in because there's overcapacity, because there's technology, because there's consolidation, it's tough to decouple all the reasons.

The profitability of the origination part of the business is very low. And the value of a newly created MSR today is somewhere depending on the loan type between 1 point and 1.5 points. And the profitability of the mortgage industry is substantially lower than that. And on average, when you look at the MBA numbers is in the 20 basis point range now. And since they've been measuring it on average is in the 40 basis point range.

So originators are just forced to sell MSR going forward in our view. So if loan production picks up, they have to sell MSR because they're not making as much money. Historically, when volumes picked up, margins picked up, and they picked up because of the shortage of capacity that occurred. We think because of technology that won't occur anymore. So as a result, there'll be lots of MSRs selling volumes pick up because the profitability will not increase on a per unit basis, allowing more MSR retention.

And then we think, if origination volumes don't pick up, what we're seeing is capitulation, consolidation, needs for liquidity to keep the platforms going until profitability might increase, and that's creating MSR selling as well. So we just see a continual restructuring of how the industry works. Where folks without a cost of capital like ours or better are not really going to be able to hold MSR and they're still holding a lot of legacy MSR and then go forward the new MSR, we have a tough time on seeing how they'll be able to retain that. And I think when you look at the MSR transfer data, that's public, you'll see who the sellers are, the bulk sellers are. And you'll see this thesis kind of playing out already.

David Finkelstein

Yes, Rick, I'll jump in here and just talk about the demand side and valuation. The market -- the bid for MSR is somewhat bifurcated. You have folks like us, capital participants in the market that have obviously accumulated a lot of MSR. And you also have banks, which, particularly given the likelihood of MSR not being a constraint when it comes to the Basel re-proposal, which we expect to get out the final which in the next couple of months, banks have been a strong source of demand, particularly in lower loan balance type MSR that carry a lot of escrow balances relative to the capital committed.

And so they've been a significant bid. As we talked about last quarter, we sold into the bank bid at levels that we thought were quite attractive. And then folks like us, we benefited from all the liquidity that's been generated with the activity in the MSR market and have traded quite a bit an MSR, and we still have a fair amount of appetite to add MSR and as do others like us that are portfolio companies. So we understand the market pricing. We still think it's fair. When there's a rich bid out there, we'll sell MSRs we've evidenced very recently. And I think we're -- from a portfolio standpoint, we're positioned conservatively and our pricing is -- on our portfolio is probably the most conservative in the industry.

Richard Shane

Look, I appreciate the answer. And it's an interesting thing. I think 25 years ago, we wrote something that said the procyclicality of margins would start to erode because of technology. And it feels like we're finally on the cusp of that, and I do think that there's probably no industry that's -- financial services industry that's going to be more transformed by AI than mortgage. So it's a really interesting time, and I do appreciate your insights.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Jason Weaver from JonesTrading.

Jason Weaver

So first, Dave, since the beginning of the year, we thought of the GSEs is showing a stabilizing bid behind the BS spreads. And I don't think we've seen any data since August. But do you have any sense as to the extent they've been involved or stepped away from purchases over the past several weeks?

David Finkelstein

Yes. Look, everything is anecdotal, subsequent to August because we don't have that data either. It did appear as though the activity was a little bit slow in the summer. But anecdotally, we have heard that they have been involved in the market. And I think -- you even got a tweet out of the FHFA director in September talking about the GSEs buying and some adjective to describe a considerable quality or quantity of MSR. So our understanding is that they probably are. They still do have a fair amount of dry powder. I think a less look at the end of August. Total capacity under the PSPA caps for loans and MBS was like $140 billion. They do still have to keep a lot of dry powder for loan buyouts and things like that. But our understanding is that they still have some ammunition left.

Jason Weaver

Got it. And second, I think you mentioned layering into some higher coupon TBAs in your prepared remarks. And I wonder if you could talk just a bit about how you see the risk reward in current coupon production, where under a sharp uptick in prepayments could occur under a flight to quality?

V.S. Srinivasan

Sure. I mean -- before we go there, I just want to define what higher coupon is. We refer to [indiscernible] [ 5.5s or 6s ] as higher coupon now, 6.5 float is quite small. They're going to start getting more issuance in 6.5 in the coming months. But 5.5s and 6s are [indiscernible] right now. And at this point, they're both with convictions. The only coupon that's changing at a [ $1 trillion ] price is 6.5. So most of the PPAs we bought were [ 5.5s and 6s ].

In terms of prepayments, we think -- TBA, particularly in production coupon, continues to deteriorate at an accelerating pace because more and more collateral is being carved out in the specified pools. And so what is left for TBA is significantly more inevitably convex. So up the coupon side, we generally don't like being in TBA for very long. We obviously -- when we want to add margin exposure, we typically do it in TBA and then over time, swap it into pools. So right now, we're not worried about our TBAs at [ 5.5s and 6s ] mainly because they are discounts, but at some point, particularly for 6s, we will swap them into specified pools.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Kenneth Lee from RBC Capital Markets.

Kenneth Lee

Just at a higher level, curious as to how you'd characterize your overall risk appetite just given the current rate outlook and the potential trade-off between market vol and return opportunity as you see across the various asset categories?

David Finkelstein

Yes. Thanks, Ken. Good question. So look, we're reasonably optimistic on the outlook here. Rates are higher. We do think there's somewhat of a ceiling to rate. I think when you look at the level of interest rates, it's obviously being driven by strong growth in inflation. And there's some real costs associated with these high rate levels. Obviously, the AI sector is continuing to borrow and continuing to invest. But the rest of the economy, to some extent, is being crowded out. That's households, corporates, and it's becoming more expensive for government to issue debt. So we feel like there's limits to how high rates can go, but there's also a new floor on the level of rates, given we are, as I spoke about in this new normal environment.

So that -- what that says to us or suggests to us is that vol should come down. And it has, to some extent, as we started the fourth quarter, we've reset. And our view is that things are going to stabilize or continue to stabilize, and you will see implied vols coming down because realized vols are a little bit lower. So that gives us a little more optimism in terms of our appetite for risk. And I think the position is, to a large extent, reflecting that. We let our leverage organically increase this past quarter. We didn't delever. We did delever the capital structure a little bit on the prep side. And I'll just tell you a little bit about that because that was really about capital structure and leverage optimization.

When we issued prep a year ago, we issued it at [ 8 and 7 As ] and agency spreads were 18% to 19% or thereabout. So the spread on that was about 1,000 basis points. And then you fast forward to when we made the decision to reduce our structural leverage, which was right after earnings, I believe. And at that time, we had floating rate prep outstanding and we've gone from 2 cuts priced into the market over the prior year to 4 hikes. And so the cost of that increased to around 10%.

Meanwhile, Agency spreads were relatively tight at that time and levered returns, as we spoke about on the last call, could be -- were as low as 14% to 15%. So that spread compressed quite a bit. We reduced capital structure leverage, and we felt good about it. And then you fast forward and the market cheapened again, obviously, to get closer to the higher teens returns. So here we are again and things look pretty appealing from that standpoint. And we're comfortable with our leverage. We have a little capacity to increase it tactically, but we're generating the returns we need with current leverage. And should spreads tighten, I think we show in our spread shocks for a 25 basis point tightening, it's just over 10% return from that. So we're in a position where we like to be and we're comfortable with the risk in the market, and we think all will continue to come down, and we'll be back in business like we were prior to the episode of vol in the late summer.

Operator

Your final question comes from the line of Trevor Cranston from Citizens JMP.

Trevor Cranston

Okay. Question on the non-QM market. Obviously, it's less rate sensitive in general than the conventional space, but curious, your outlook on how the increase in rates, particularly if mortgage rates hold up here, how that impacts the non-QM space and what your outlook is for origination volumes there going forward compared to where they've been in the last couple of quarters?

Michael Fania

Sure. Thanks for the question, Trevor. This is Mike. In terms of non-QM origination this year, we still think it probably is going to be and, call it, the [ 1 50 to 1 75 ] in terms of 175 billion. I would say it's probably leaning towards the higher number and the higher amount of that range. In terms of total mortgage origination, maybe we'll call it 1.9 trillion to 2 trillion. So we do think it will continue to be around, call it, 8% to 9% of the entire market.

The reason that non-QM is still an elevated percentage of originations, a lot of it is just because mortgage rates are elevated. It is a purchase market, right? And non-QM is targeting to a lot of investors, right? So over 50% of this market is investor. Investors right now are about 20% of all real estate purchases, which is a higher share. So we are getting a higher percentage of the end borrower at this point. And also, to your point, self-employed borrowers are a little bit more inelastic in terms of -- at this level of rates.

So I don't know if the share itself will grow. I think a lot of what you've seen over the last number of years has been maturation. But originators, at this point, pretty much to a T, have rolled out the product. It's still higher gross margins than the conforming market than the government market. And it's a product that originators need to have to be able to serve their brokers or serve their LOs on the retail side. So I would expect it to continue to be 8% to 9% of originations at this point.

In terms of if the market rallies, right, if the market rallies and the mortgage rate is at 6, 6.75, that percentage is going to shrink exponentially because you're going to see a lot of rate and term refinance of government and conventional. So the share is outsized a lot just because it is a purchase market. This market does target the purchase borrower, high investor share. And there's not a lot of rate and term and cash out at this point.

Operator

And that concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call back over to CEO, David Finkelstein, for closing remarks.

David Finkelstein

Thank you, and thank you, everybody, for joining us. We'll talk to you soon.

Operator

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.