Greetings and welcome to the ARMOUR Residential REIT First Quarter 2020 Earnings Conference Call. During the presentation, all the participants will be in a listen-only mode. Afterwards, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded, Friday, May 1, 2020. I’d now like to turn the conference over to Jim Mountain, Chief Financial Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Nelson. And thank you all for joining ARMOUR’s first quarter 2020 conference call. We hope that all of you have been able to remain safe and healthy. This morning, I’m joined by ARMOUR’s co-CEOs, Scott Ulm and Jeff Zimmer; and our Chief Investment Officer, Mark Gruber. By now, everyone has access to ARMOUR’s earnings release, which can be found on ARMOUR’s website, www.armourreit.com. This conference call may contain statements that are not mere recitations of historical fact, and therefore constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All such forward-looking statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor protection provided by the Reform Act. Actual outcomes and results could differ materially from the outcomes and results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements due to the impact of many factors beyond the control of ARMOUR. Certain factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements are included in the Risk Factors section of ARMOUR’s periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Copies of these reports are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. All forward-looking statements included in this conference call are made only as of today’s date and are subject to change without notice. We disclaim any obligation to update our forward-looking statements unless required by law to do so. Also, our discussion today may include references to certain non-GAAP measures. A reconciliation of these measures to the most comparable GAAP measure is included in our earnings release, which can also be found on ARMOUR’s website. An online replay of this conference call will be available on ARMOUR’s website shortly and it will continue to be there for one year. Like other firms in our sector and across the…

Thanks, Jim. Good morning. The world has changed significantly from our last earnings call in February. Our team has been working remotely since early March and our business continuity plan has worked well for us. While we’ll be talking today about the pandemic’s financial impact on us, we’re mindful of personal costs to so many of our customers [ph] and colleagues. We hope everyone joining us today stays healthy. March was a profoundly bad month for the mortgage investment industry. As a senior management team with each professional having 35 years or so of average experience in the capital markets, March was the worst environment we’ve had to deal with in our careers. The market movement was more sudden and violent than 2008. Our results were driven by several phenomena that occurred simultaneously. Interest rates on 10-year treasury bonds whipsawed from 1.16% at the beginning of March, down to the new historic lows of 0.54% and back up to 1.2% in a matter of days. Despite the historic risk off rally in treasuries, mortgage-backed security and TBA prices decline. This resulted in the widest MBS spread since the financial crisis. ARMOUR as well as many others in our investment sector experienced a double shock of both, interest rate hedges and asset prices moving against us. Premiums on best criteria specified pools evaporated as force selling by levered investors, mutual funds and REITs quickly drowned out all available balance sheet of banks, the lack of which was further exacerbated by quarter-end pressures. In the Fannie Mae DUS 10/9.5 market, spreads exploded from approximately [Technical Difficulty] fell from par or 100 price levels to as high as 110 price levels to as low as 60 to 80 points on the dollar price levels, if a bit could be found at all. Repo…

Nelson, can you now open up the line for questions?

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Douglas Harter with Credit Suisse. Please proceed.

Hey, guys. This is actually Josh on for Doug. Good morning. We saw the large drop in leverage in the quarter. And you mentioned on the call that we should expect that to tick up going forward. But, curious if you could talk a little bit about how you’re thinking about target leverage at this point, and if we should expect it to get back to where it was in 2019. Thanks.

Our target leverage at this point is around eight, give or take a half a turn, depending on the opportunities and how fast we can deploy our capital, based on those opportunities.

Got it. That makes sense. And then, one on funding. Can you update us on how much of the agency repos currently funded through BUCKLER and the average maturities, the average maturity of that funding?

So, approximately three quarters of the agency book is with BUCKLER. I suspect as we regrow our agency portfolio, that number will come down a little bit. But, we want to make sure that the capital at BUCKLER is completely utilized. And quite frankly, the rates that we get from BUCKLER and the trends we get from BUCKLER are fantastic, and particularly better haircuts than the Street.

Are you able to quantify how much better those terms are versus Street repo?

Well, sometimes it’s a couple basis points better; sometimes it’s a couple basis points worse. But if you add that with the fact that we have surety on overnight funding, I’m not going to do overnight funding with XYZ bank because you’re not sure if they’re going to be there the next day. We know that BUCKLER is going to be there the next day. And as you heard from some of the other participants in the sector, the overnight funding can be half the rate to some of the term funding. So, we have a trust and an ability to know that they’re going to be there every day, and sometimes you can actually quantify that.

Thank you. Our next question comes from line of Trevor Cranston with JMP Securities. Please proceed with your question.

Hey, thanks. I apologize if I missed this in the prepared remarks. But, with the credit portfolio, can you talk about sort of how you’re thinking about that going forward? If your intention is to hang on to that portfolio or as prices have started to recover some in April, are you going to be looking to sell down that book? And as the second part of that question, can you give us some additional detail around where the financing market is for credit securities now in terms of haircuts and the cost of repo? Thank you.

Sure, good morning. So, the credit book, CRTs, let’s say, had approximately in early March $900 million market value. The value of the remaining securities on our balance sheet today of non-agencies are only CRTs. Everything that’s not a CRT has been sold. And the CRT valuation is $308 million. So, we’ve reduced that by two-thirds. It is our intention over the next two to three months to sell the rest of that. And we’re doing it surgically. As opportunities and buyers come into the market and people have a better perspective on recoveries, we’re selling into strength and not selling into weakness. There are some companies and mutual funds, particularly who had withdrawals that were forced sellers during March in the first two or three weeks of April, and the opportunities for us to move out of that product were not as profound. And yesterday, actually, we made a number of very nice sales and above marks. And we’ll continue to look and do that. You should look at us by the time we get into the third quarter to be almost, if not all, agency assets and that will be our portfolio platform in the future. Now, funding for the non-agencies is and seems to be very secure today, but did not feel that way even as of two weeks ago. As Scott said in his comments, Trevor, one major central bank, one of the top five banks in the country, all of a sudden in third week of March decides to pull out of all of their CRT funding, which meant that everybody that was funding with them had to sell bonds, because very few other lenders were taking on new CRTs at the time. And it created a real whirlwind of down pricing for a while. So we refrained from selling there for a period. But today, haircuts are as low as 17.5%. Our average haircut on our CRT portfolio is right around 25% today.

Okay, great. That’s very helpful. Then, as you’re deploying capital back into the agency trade, can you talk about specifically kind of what sector of the market you like and kind of what coupons, the portfolios in today and what coupons you’re mainly looking to buy? And maybe specifically, some color on whether or not you find roles attractive enough to be buying TBAs or if you’re really going to be focused mostly on buying spec pools? Thanks.

Hey, Trevor. It’s Mark. So, we’ve been looking at both, 15-year sector and a variety of coupons there. Also, the 30-year sector, more of the higher coupons. So, 3.5 -- like Jim said earlier, most of our book is still 4 and 4.5, the higher coupon stuff we had bought earlier last few years. So, we’re sticking to those sectors. We’re looking for more stable bonds that have good convexity profile. We do like TBA roles in certain coupons, certain sectors, and we’re watching those carefully, have invested in some of that. But, you’ll continue to see us do a variety of different sectors. We still like DUS. We like those profiles. So, in the same sectors we’ve always been in and agency, but probably on the 30-year sector more higher coupons than lower coupons.

And one of the reasons there is, the Fed is now changed. If you look at the Fed repot over the last Few days, they’ve changed what they’re buying. For a long time they were buying a lot of 3.5s, 4s and 4.5. Well, they’re going to refrain from buying those now. And they’re going to start buying lower coupons, which means those are going to continue to be rich -- may not get richer, but they’re going to continue to be rich. Whereas there could be some ongoing buying opportunities above threes in areas, particularly ones that have some specialty, like 125 kind of loan balances, those kind of things. Is that helpful?

Yes, very helpful. Thank you for that. And last question. It looks like there was some assurance through the ATM plan in April. Can you just provide some additional color around sort of the rationale for that issuance, given where the stock was trading and kind of where you’re at today, in terms of the likelihood of any continued issuance of the economy? Thanks.

Sure. So, as you know, our traditional approach to capital raising is kind of threefold. Basically, how can shareholders benefit based on a variety of factors? So, is it accretive, is it accretive to earnings,, can it be a good deal? However, as we entered April, there was not clarity on how the world is going to turn out. Liquidity was at a premium. And we thought a modest amount of dilution was a very deal for our shareholders to go ahead and raise up to $50 million, and we raised $48 million. The actual dilution was just around $0.20 all-in, to be clear. So, we felt that was a very modest amount to increase the assurity and survival factor of the firm during a period of time where some of our brethren were doing for forbearance issues. We feel very good about what we did for our shareholders. I don’t anticipate, right now, turning that program back on. We’ll see how the future develops.

Okay, great. Thank you for that.

You’re very welcome.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Christopher Nolan with Ladenburg Thalmann & Company. Please proceed with your question.

Hey, guys. Hey, Scott. In your comments, you mentioned that net yields could be high single, low double digits. What do you mean by net yields? Is that core income relative to equity? Could you define that little bit, please?

Yes. That’s correct. Current income relative to equity -- core income.

Net to shareholders. That’s correct.

Okay, great. And then, from what I can gather from the press release, it looks like the investment spreads widened quite a bit this quarter. What’s sort of your anticipation for investment spreads going forward? I mean, is that just sort of an anomaly for 1Q or are we in a new world?

Just define investment spreads. Are you talking investment opportunities, as we said, low double digits, or are you talking NIM, or is there some other criteria?

NIM would be great.

No, NIM is going to be in -- on a asset basis -- I guess, I have to think about how I would define -- it’s going to be higher than it was in Q1, because spreads are going to be a little wider that we’re investing. I don’t have a -- I couldn’t give you a good concrete number for NIM, but I can tell you, it’s going to be higher than it was in the past.

And Jim also mentioned a couple of other factors. We’ve got term financing that’s rolling off, and we’ve got higher rates -- swaps that are rolling off too, both of which are going to give a little tailwind here to NIM.

Yes. But, if you look at it this way, Christopher, Jim said that our swap book’s going to be 22 basis points going forward by July 1st, because all stuff rolling off, repo is in high single digits for -- let’s say, overnight is to anywhere from 10 to 20; and let’s say, term is anywhere from 25 to 30. So, take your 22 and add, 20 to that, there’s 42. You can earn assets here in the mid to high ones. So, you can kind of do the math and figure out where you could be. And frankly, as Mark said earlier, we think prepays are going to be kind of slower for the next few months. So, NIM should be pretty good. And I’ve heard other people that we deal with on the broker side are kind of looking at the same way we are. I hope that’s helpful.

Yes. No, it is great. And then, I guess final question is, when should we expect the Q to be released?

We should be getting that out shortly. Ideally, that be on Edgar before it closes tonight. But, in any event, we ought to be able to see it Monday morning.

Great. Final question is, given the changes in interest rates, do you guys change your thinking about preferred stock at all? I mean, is the consideration to pay that down further and go with more repo funding -- yes, please go ahead.

So, we have $132 million of our 7% out there. Okay? Based on investment opportunities today, that is accretive to the overall proposition of investing. However, you don’t ever want to have preferreds to be too larger portion of your total capital structure. And currently, the firm is very comfortable with the capital structure amount of our regular equity versus our preferred. Also, there’s a very large buyer of our preferred yesterday, currently over 200,000 shares in the market at the close. But that’s still only trading at $22 a share and we would not be interested at -- at least any consideration that we’ve been approached with now of selling it under $25 a share.

Yes. Just let me amplify a little bit. In retrospect, January decision to swap out 200 and I don’t know 40 or $250 million, whatever it was of 7.875% for Series B with slightly -- on appreciably smaller amount of lower coupon, 7% Series C. In retrospect, in my mind, that looks like a really smart decision the way things have worked out.

All right. That’s it for me. Good show, guys. Thanks.

Thank you.

Nelson, do we have any more questions?

I am showing no further questions at this time.

Well, thank you all for joining us. We continue to work largely remotely but are completely connected. So, if anybody has additional questions, you’ve got our email, call the office, and we’ll get reconnected. And until next time, stay safe.

That does conclude the conference call. We thank you for your participation and ask that you please disconnect your line.