TRTX · Read the filing

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

The following is a summary of the principal risks and uncertainties that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. This summary should be read together with the more detailed risk factors contained below.

Risks Related to Our Lending and Investment Activities

Risks Related to Our Financing

Risks Related to Our Relationship with Our Manager and its Affiliates

Risks Related to Our Company

Risks Related to our REIT Status and Certain Other Tax Items

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Risks Related to COVID-19

General Risks

Risks Related to Our Lending and Investment Activities

Our success depends on the availability of attractive investment opportunities and our Manager’s ability to identify, structure, consummate, leverage, manage and realize returns on our investments.

Our operating results are dependent upon the availability of, as well as our Manager’s ability to identify, structure, consummate, leverage, manage and realize returns on, our loans and other investments. In general, the availability of attractive investment opportunities and, consequently, our operating results, will be affected by the level and volatility of interest rates, conditions in the financial markets, general economic conditions, the demand for investment opportunities in our target assets and the supply of capital for such investment opportunities. We cannot assure you that our Manager will be successful in identifying and consummating attractive investments or that such investments, once made, will perform as anticipated.

Our commercial mortgage loans and other commercial real estate-related debt instruments expose us to risks associated with real estate investments generally.

We seek to originate and selectively acquire commercial mortgage loans and other commercial real estate-related debt instruments. Any deterioration of real estate fundamentals generally, and in the United States in particular, could negatively impact our performance by making it more difficult for borrowers to satisfy their debt payment obligations, increasing the default risk applicable to borrowers and making it relatively more difficult for us to generate attractive risk-adjusted returns. Real estate investments will be subject to various risks, including:

• economic and market fluctuations;

• political instability or changes, terrorism and acts of war;

• changes in environmental, zoning and other laws;

• casualty or condemnation losses;

• decreases in property values;

• energy supply shortages;

• various uninsured or uninsurable risks;

• natural disasters and outbreaks of pandemic or contagious diseases;

• changes in government regulations (such as rent control);

• changes in monetary policy;

• increased mortgage defaults;

• increases in borrowing rates; and

We cannot predict the degree to which economic conditions generally, and the conditions for commercial real estate debt investing in particular, will improve or decline. Any declines in the performance of the U.S. and global economies or in the real estate debt markets could have a material adverse effect on us.

Commercial real estate debt instruments that are secured or otherwise supported, directly or indirectly, by commercial property are subject to delinquency, foreclosure and loss, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Commercial real estate debt instruments, such as mortgage loans, that are secured or, in the case of certain assets (including participation interests, mezzanine loans and preferred equity), supported by commercial property are subject to risks of delinquency and foreclosure and risks of loss that are greater than similar risks associated with loans made on the security of single-family residential property. The ability of a borrower to pay the principal of and interest on a loan secured by an income-producing property typically is dependent primarily upon the successful operation of such property rather than upon the existence of independent income or assets of the borrower. If the net operating income of the property is reduced, the borrower’s ability to pay the principal of and interest on the loan in a timely manner, or at all, may be impaired and therefore could reduce our return from an affected property or investment, which could materially and adversely affect us. Net operating income of an income-producing property may be adversely affected by the risks particular to commercial real property described above, as well as, among other things:

• tenant mix and tenant bankruptcies;

• success of tenant businesses;

• competition from comparable types of properties;

• declines in regional or local real estate values or rental or occupancy rates;

• government regulations.

In the event of any default under a mortgage loan held directly by us, we will bear a risk of loss to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal of and accrued interest on the mortgage loan. In the event of the bankruptcy of a mortgage loan borrower, the mortgage loan to that borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the mortgage loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law. Foreclosure of a mortgage loan can be an expensive and lengthy process that could have a substantial negative effect on any anticipated return on the foreclosed mortgage loan.

We originate and acquire transitional loans, which involves greater risk of loss than stabilized commercial mortgage loans.

We originate and acquire transitional loans secured by first lien mortgages on commercial real estate. These loans provide interim financing to borrowers seeking short-term capital for the acquisition, lease up or repositioning of commercial real estate and generally have a maturity of three years or less. A borrower under a transitional loan has usually identified an asset that has been under-managed and/or is located in a recovering market. If the market in which the asset is located fails to recover according to the borrower’s projections, or if the borrower fails to improve the operating performance of the asset or the value of the asset, the borrower may not receive a sufficient return on the asset to satisfy the transitional loan, and we will bear the risk that we may not recover some or all of our investment.

In addition, borrowers often use the proceeds of a conventional mortgage loan to repay a transitional loan. We may therefore be dependent on a borrower’s ability to obtain permanent financing, or another transitional loan, to repay a transitional loan, which could depend on market conditions and other factors. In the event of any failure to repay under a transitional loan held by us, we will bear the risk of loss of principal and non-payment of interest and fees to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the mortgage collateral and the principal amount and unpaid interest of the transitional loan.

There can be no assurances that the U.S. or global financial systems will remain stable, and the occurrence of another significant credit market disruption may negatively impact our ability to execute our investment strategy, which would materially and adversely affect us.

The U.S. and global financial markets experienced significant disruptions in the past, during which times global credit markets collapsed, borrowers defaulted on their loans at historically high levels, banks and other lending institutions suffered heavy losses and the value of real estate declined. During such periods, a significant number of borrowers became unable to pay principal and interest on outstanding loans as the value of their real estate declined. After the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, liquidity eventually returned to the market and property values recovered to levels that exceeded those observed prior to the Global Financial Crisis. However, declining real estate values due to the COVID-19 pandemic, or other factors, could in the future reduce the level of new mortgage and other real estate-related loan originations. Instability in the U.S. and global financial markets in the future could be caused by any number of factors beyond our control, including, without limitation, terrorist attacks or other acts of war and adverse changes in national or international economic, market and political conditions or another health pandemic. Any future sustained period of increased payment delinquencies, foreclosures or losses could adversely affect both our net interest income from loans in our portfolio as well as our ability to originate and acquire loans, which would materially and adversely affect us.

The planned discontinuance of LIBOR has affected and will continue to affect financial markets generally, and may adversely affect our interest income, interest expense, or both.

On March 5, 2021, the Financial Conduct Authority of the U.K. (the “FCA”), which regulates LIBOR, announced (the “FCA Announcement”) that all LIBOR tenors relevant to us will cease to be published or will no longer be representative after June 30, 2023. The FCA Announcement coincides with the March 5, 2021 announcement (the “IBA Announcement” and, together with the FCA Announcement, the “Announcements”) of LIBOR’s administrator, the ICE Benchmark Administration Limited (the “IBA”), indicating that, as a result of not having access to input data necessary to calculate LIBOR tenors relevant to us on a representative basis after June 30, 2023, the IBA would have to cease publication of such LIBOR tenors immediately after the last publication on June 30, 2023.

As of December 31, 2021, our loan portfolio included $5.4 billion of floating rate loan commitments in which the interest rate was tied to LIBOR. Additionally, we had $2.8 billion of floating rate liabilities tied to LIBOR. The Announcements mean that our assets or liabilities with interest rates tied to LIBOR that extend beyond June 30, 2023 will need to be converted to a replacement rate. In the United States, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (the “ARRC”), a committee of private sector entities with ex-officio official sector members convened by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, has confirmed that, in its opinion, the March 5, 2021 announcements by the IBA and the FCA on future cessation and loss of representativeness of the LIBOR benchmarks constituted a “Benchmark Transition Event” with respect to all U.S. Dollar LIBOR settings and has recommended the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) plus a recommended spread adjustment as LIBOR’s replacement.

There are significant differences between LIBOR and SOFR, such as LIBOR being an unsecured lending rate while SOFR is a secured lending rate, and SOFR is an overnight rate while LIBOR reflects term rates at different maturities. If our LIBOR-based borrowings are converted to SOFR, the differences between LIBOR and SOFR, plus the recommended spread adjustment, could result in higher interest costs for us, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. Although SOFR is the ARRC’s recommended replacement rate, it is also possible that lenders may instead choose alternative replacement rates that may differ from LIBOR in ways similar to SOFR or in other ways that would result in higher interest costs for us. In addition, the planned discontinuance of LIBOR and/or changes to another index could result in mismatches with the interest rate of investments that we are financing, and the overall financial markets may be disrupted as a result of the phase-out or replacement of LIBOR; however, we cannot reasonably estimate the impact of the transition at this time. The transition from LIBOR to SOFR or other alternative reference rates may also introduce operational risks in our accounting, financial reporting, loan servicing, liability management and other aspects of our business.

LIBOR being discontinued as a benchmark may cause one or more of the following to occur, among other impacts: (i) there may be an increase in the volatility of LIBOR prior to its discontinuance; (ii) fewer investments may be made using interest payment benchmarks based on LIBOR and more investments may be made using interest payment benchmarks other than LIBOR or bearing interest at a fixed rate, resulting in differential investment returns; (iii) there may be an increase in pricing volatility with respect to our investments and/or a reduction in the value of our investments; (iv) there may be a reduction in our ability to effectively hedge interest rate risks; and (v) we may incur losses from hedging disruptions due to transition basis risk, the cessation of LIBOR or an inability of us and our counterparties to effectively value our existing trades due to a lack of dealers providing LIBOR-based quotations in the derivatives markets. There is no certainty as to what rate or rates may become market-accepted alternatives to LIBOR or how those alternatives may impact us or our investment returns. There may not be any alternative benchmark that reflects the composition and characteristics of LIBOR. Financial markets, particularly the trading market for LIBOR-based obligations, may be adversely affected by the discontinuation of LIBOR, the remaining uncertainties regarding its discontinuation, the alternative reference rates that will be used when LIBOR is discontinued (including SOFR) and other reforms related to LIBOR. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect us.

Difficulty in redeploying the proceeds from repayments of our existing loans and other investments could materially and adversely affect us.

As our loans and other investments are repaid, we attempt to redeploy the proceeds we receive into new loans and investments and repay borrowings under our secured credit facilities and other financing arrangements. It is possible that we will fail to identify reinvestment options that would provide a yield and/or a risk profile that is comparable to the asset that was repaid. If we fail to redeploy the proceeds we receive from repayment of a loan or other investment in equivalent or better alternatives, we could be materially and adversely affected. If we cannot redeploy the proceeds we receive from repayments into funding loans in property types or geographic markets that our Manager has identified as priorities for us, such repayments may cause the composition of our loan portfolio to skew towards less favored property types or geographies and prevent us from achieving our portfolio construction objectives.

If we are unable to successfully integrate new assets and manage our growth, our results of operations and financial condition may suffer.

We have in the past and may in the future significantly increase the size and/or change the mix of our portfolio of assets. We may be unable to successfully and efficiently integrate newly-acquired assets into our existing portfolio or otherwise effectively manage our assets or our growth effectively. In addition, increases in our portfolio of assets and/or changes in the mix of our assets may place significant demands on our Manager’s administrative, operational, asset management, financial and other resources. Any failure to manage increases in size effectively could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We operate in a competitive market for the origination and acquisition of attractive investment opportunities and competition may limit our ability to originate or acquire attractive investments in our target assets, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

We operate in a competitive market for the origination and acquisition of attractive investment opportunities. We compete with a variety of institutional investors, including other REITs, debt funds, specialty finance companies, savings and loan associations, banks, mortgage bankers, insurance companies, mutual funds, institutional investors, investment banking firms, financial institutions, private equity and hedge funds, governmental bodies and other entities and may compete with TPG Funds, subject to duty to offer and other internal rules. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. Several of our competitors, including other REITs, have recently raised, or are expected to raise, significant amounts of capital, and may have investment objectives that overlap with our investment objectives, which may create additional competition for lending and other investment opportunities. Some of our competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that may not be available to us or are only available to us on substantially less attractive terms. Many of our competitors are not subject to the operating constraints associated with REIT tax compliance or maintenance of an exclusion or 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 and establish more lending relationships than we do. Competition may result in realizing fewer investments, higher prices, acceptance of greater risk, greater defaults, lower yields or a narrower spread of yields over our borrowing costs. In addition, competition for attractive investments could delay the investment of our capital. Furthermore, changes in the financial regulatory regime could decrease the restrictions on banks and other financial institutions and allow them to compete with us for investment opportunities that were previously not available to, or otherwise pursued by, them. See “—Risks Related to Our Company—Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations, changes in the interpretation thereof or newly enacted laws or regulations and any failure by us to comply with these laws or regulations could materially and adversely affect us.”

As a result, competition may limit our ability to originate or acquire attractive investments in our target assets and could result in reduced returns. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to identify and originate or acquire attractive investments that are consistent with our investment strategy.

The due diligence process undertaken by our Manager in regard to our investment opportunities may not reveal all facts relevant to an investment and, as a result, we may experience losses, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Before originating a loan to a borrower or making other investments for us, our Manager conducts due diligence that it deems reasonable and appropriate based on the facts and circumstances relevant to each potential investment. When conducting due diligence, our Manager may be required to evaluate important and complex issues, including but not limited to those related to business, financial, tax, accounting, environmental, ESG, legal and regulatory and macroeconomic trends. With respect to ESG, the nature and scope of our Manager's diligence will vary based on the investment, but may include a review of, among other things: energy management, air and water pollution, land contamination, risks of fire, floods, hurricanes and wind storms, and other climate-related hazards, employee health and safety, accounting standards and bribery and corruption. Outside consultants, legal advisors, accountants and investment banks may be involved in the due diligence process in varying degrees depending on the type of potential investment. Selecting and evaluating material ESG factors is subjective by nature, and there is no guarantee that the criteria utilized or judgment exercised by our Manager or a third-party ESG specialist (if any) will reflect the beliefs, values, internal policies or preferred practices of any particular investor or align with the beliefs or values or preferred practices of other asset managers or with market trends. The materiality of sustainability risks and impacts on an individual potential investment or portfolio as a whole are dependent on many factors, including the relevant industry, country, asset class and investment style. Further, some matters covered by our Manager's diligence, such as ESG, are continuously evolving and our Manager may not accurately or fully anticipate such evolution. For instance, our Manager's ESG framework does not represent a universally recognized standard for assessing ESG considerations as there are different frameworks and methodologies being implemented by other asset managers, in addition to numerous international initiatives on the subject. Relying on the resources available to it, our Manager evaluates our potential investments based on criteria it deems appropriate for the relevant investment. Our Manager’s estimates may not prove accurate, as actual results may vary from estimates. If our Manager underestimates the asset-level losses relative to the price we pay for a particular investment, we may experience losses with respect to such investment. Additionally, during the mortgage loan underwriting process, appraisals will generally be obtained by our Manager on the collateral underlying each prospective mortgage. Inaccurate or inflated appraisals may result in an increase in the severity of losses on the mortgage loans. Any such losses could materially and adversely affect us.

Interest rate fluctuations could significantly decrease our ability to generate income on our investments, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Our primary interest rate exposure relates to the yield on our investments and the financing cost of our debt. Changes in interest rates affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest-earning investments and the interest expense we incur in financing these investments. Interest rate fluctuations resulting in our interest expense exceeding our interest income would result in operating losses for us. Changes in the level of interest rates also may affect our ability to originate or acquire investments and may impair the value of our investments and our ability to realize gains from the disposition of assets. Changes in interest rates may also affect borrower default rates. We expect that in 2022 the U.S. Federal Reserve will raise benchmark overnight interest rates on multiple occasions. Any such increases would increase our interest expense, increase our borrowers’ interest payments, and, for certain borrowers, may cause defaults and possible losses to us. Such increases could also adversely affect commercial real estate property values.

Our operating results depend, in part, on differences between the income earned on our investments, net of credit losses, and our financing costs. For any period during which our investments are not match-funded, the income earned on such investments may respond more slowly to interest rate fluctuations than the cost of our borrowings. Consequently, changes in interest rates, particularly short-term interest rates, could materially and adversely affect us.

Prepayment rates may adversely affect our financial performance and cash flows and the value of certain of our investments.

Our business is currently focused on originating floating rate mortgage loans secured by commercial real estate assets. Generally, our mortgage loan borrowers may repay their loans prior to their stated maturities. In periods of declining interest rates and/or credit spreads, prepayment rates on loans generally increase. If general interest rates or credit spreads decline at the same time, the proceeds of such prepayments received during such periods may not be reinvested for some period of time or may be reinvested by us in comparable assets with lower yields than the assets that were prepaid.

Because our mortgage loans are generally not originated or acquired at a premium to par value, prepayment rates do not materially affect the value of such loan assets. However, the value of certain other assets may be affected by prepayment rates. For example, if in the future we acquire fixed rate commercial real estate (“CRE”) debt securities investments or other fixed rate mortgage-related securities, or a pool of such fixed rate mortgage-related securities, we anticipate that the mortgage loans underlying these fixed rate securities will prepay at a projected rate generating an expected yield. If we were to purchase these securities at a premium to par value, when borrowers prepay the mortgage loans underlying these securities faster than expected, the increase in corresponding prepayments on these securities will likely reduce the expected yield. Conversely, if we were to purchase these securities at a discount to par value, when borrowers prepay the mortgage loans underlying these securities slower than expected, the decrease in corresponding prepayments on these securities will likely increase the expected yield. In addition, if we were to purchase these securities at a discount to par value, when borrowers prepay the mortgage loans underlying these securities faster than expected, the increase in corresponding prepayments on these securities will likely increase the expected yield.

Prepayment rates on floating rate and fixed rate loans may differ in different interest rate environments, and may be affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, fluctuations in asset values, the availability of mortgage credit, the status of the business plan for the underlying property, the relative economic vitality of the area in which the related properties are located, the servicing of the loans, possible changes in tax laws, other opportunities for investment, and other economic, social, geographic, demographic and legal factors, all of which are beyond our control, and structural factors such as call protection. Consequently, such prepayment rates cannot be predicted with certainty and no strategy can completely insulate us from prepayment risk.

Our loans often contain penalty provisions to borrowers that repay their loan prior to initial maturity. These deterrents to repayment include prepayment fees expressed as a percentage of the unpaid principal balance, or the amount of foregone net interest income due us from the date of repayment through initial maturity, or a sooner date that is frequently 12 or 18 months after the origination date. Loans that are outstanding beyond the end of the call protection or yield maintenance period can be repaid at any time, subject only to interest due through the next interest payment date. The absence of call protection provisions may expose the company to the risk of early repayment of loans, and the inability to redeploy its capital accretively.

Our investments may be concentrated and could be subject to risk of default.

We are not required to observe specific diversification criteria. Therefore, our investments may be concentrated in certain property types that are subject to higher risk of foreclosure, or secured by properties concentrated in a limited number of geographic locations. For example, as of December 31, 2021, 41.9% and 42.4% of the loan investments in our portfolio, based on total loan commitments and unpaid principal balance, respectively, consisted of loans secured by office buildings and 29.5% and 30.0% of the loan investments in our portfolio, based on total loan commitments and unpaid principal balance, respectively, consisted of loans secured by multifamily properties. Although we attempt to mitigate our risk through various credit and structural protections, we cannot assure you that these efforts will be successful. To the extent that our portfolio is concentrated in any one region or type of asset, downturns relating generally to such region or type of asset may result in defaults on a number of our investments within a short time period, which may reduce our net income and, depending upon whether such loans are matched-term funded, may pressure our liquidity position. While we seek to construct our portfolio to mitigate such risk, we may not be successful and this may be beyond our control, such as due to underlying loan repayments concentrated in a particular property type. Such outcomes may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and, accordingly, have a material adverse effect on us.

For more information on the concentration of credit risk in our loan portfolio by geographic region, property type and loan category, see Note 16 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K.

The illiquidity of certain of our loans and other investments may materially and adversely affect us.

The illiquidity of certain of our loans and other investments may make it difficult for us to sell such loans and other investments if the need or desire arises. In addition, certain of our loans and other investments may become less liquid after we originate or acquire them as a result of periods of delinquencies or defaults or turbulent market conditions, which may make it more difficult for us to dispose of such loans and other investments at advantageous times or in a timely manner. Moreover, we expect that many of our investments are not or will not be registered under the relevant securities laws, resulting in prohibitions against their transfer, sale, pledge or their disposition except in transactions that are exempt from registration requirements or are otherwise in accordance with such laws. As a result, many of our loans and other investments are or will be illiquid, and if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, for example as a result of margin calls, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. For a discussion of losses that we recorded from sales of our CRE debt securities that we made in connection with margin calls against our former CRE debt securities portfolio in March and April of 2020, see “—Risks Related to Our Financing —Our financing arrangements may require us to provide additional collateral or repay debt.”

Further, we may face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate a loan or other investment to the extent that we or our Manager (and/or its affiliates) has or could be attributed as having material, non-public information regarding such business entity. As a result, our ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic and other conditions may be relatively limited, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Most of the commercial mortgage loans that we originate or acquire are nonrecourse loans and the assets securing these loans may not be sufficient to protect us from a partial or complete loss if the borrower defaults on the loan, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Except for customary nonrecourse carve-outs for certain actions and environmental liability, most commercial mortgage loans are nonrecourse obligations of the sponsor and borrower, meaning that there is no recourse against the assets of the borrower or sponsor other than the underlying collateral. In the event of any default under a commercial mortgage loan held directly by us, we will bear a risk of loss to the extent of any deficiency between the value of the collateral and the principal of and accrued interest on the mortgage loan, which could materially and adversely affect us. Even if a commercial mortgage loan is recourse to the borrower, in most cases, the borrower’s assets are limited primarily to its interest in the related mortgaged property. Further, although a commercial mortgage loan may provide for limited recourse to a principal or affiliate of the related borrower, there is no assurance that any recovery from such principal or affiliate will be made or that such principal’s or affiliate’s assets would be sufficient to pay any otherwise recoverable claim. In the event of the bankruptcy of a borrower, the loan to such borrower will be deemed to be secured only to the extent of the value of the underlying collateral at the time of bankruptcy (as determined by the bankruptcy court), and the lien securing the loan will be subject to the avoidance powers of the bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession to the extent the lien is unenforceable under state law.

We may not have control over certain of our investments.

Our ability to manage our portfolio may be limited by the form in which our investments are made. In certain situations, we may:

• pledge our investments as collateral for financing arrangements;

Therefore, we may not be able to exercise control over all aspects of our loans and investments. Such financial assets may involve risks not present in investments where senior creditors, junior creditors, servicers or third-party controlling investors are not involved. Our rights to control the process following a borrower default may be subject to the rights of senior or junior creditors or servicers whose interests may not be aligned with ours. A partner or co-venturer may have financial difficulties resulting in a negative impact on such asset, may have economic or business interests or goals that are inconsistent with ours, or may be in a position to take action contrary to our investment objectives. In addition, we may, in certain circumstances, be liable for the actions of our partners or co-venturers.

Future joint venture investments could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on joint venture partners’ financial condition and liquidity and disputes between us and our joint venture partners.

We may in the future make investments through joint ventures. Such joint venture investments may involve risks not otherwise present when we originate or acquire investments without partners, including the following:

Any of the above may subject us to liabilities in excess of those contemplated and adversely affect the value of our future joint venture investments.

We are subject to additional risks associated with investments in the form of loan participation interests.

We have in the past invested, and may in the future invest, in loan participation interests in which another lender or lenders share with us the rights, obligations and benefits of a commercial mortgage loan made by an originating lender to a borrower. Accordingly, we will not be in privity of contract with a borrower because the other lender or participant is the record holder of the loan and, therefore, we will not have any direct right to any underlying collateral for the loan. These loan participations may be senior, pari passu or junior to the interests of the other lender or lenders in respect of distributions from the commercial mortgage loan. Furthermore, we may not be able to control the pursuit of any rights or remedies under the commercial mortgage loan, including enforcement proceedings in the event of default thereunder. In certain cases, the original lender or another participant may be able to take actions in respect of the commercial mortgage loan that are not in our best interests. In addition, in the event that (1) the owner of the loan participation interest does not have the benefit of a perfected security interest in the lender’s rights to payments from the borrower under the commercial mortgage loan or (2) there are substantial differences between the terms of the commercial mortgage loan and those of the applicable loan participation interest, such loan participation interest could be recharacterized as an unsecured loan to a lender that is the record holder of the loan in such lender’s bankruptcy, and the assets of such lender may not be sufficient to satisfy the terms of such loan participation interest. Accordingly, we may face greater risks from loan participation interests than if we had made first mortgage loans directly to the owners of real estate collateral.

Mezzanine loans, B-Notes and other investments that are subordinated or otherwise junior in an issuer’s capital structure, such as preferred equity, and that involve privately negotiated structures, will expose us to greater risk of loss.

We have in the past originated and acquired, and may in the future originate and acquire, mezzanine loans, B-Notes and other investments that are subordinated or otherwise junior in an issuer’s capital structure, such as preferred equity, and that involve privately negotiated structures. To the extent we invest in subordinated debt or preferred equity, such investments and our remedies with respect thereto, including the ability to foreclose on any collateral securing such investments, will be subject to the rights of holders of more senior tranches in the issuer’s capital structure and, to the extent applicable, contractual co-lender, intercreditor, and/or participation agreement provisions, which will expose us to greater risk of loss.

As the terms of such loans and investments are subject to contractual relationships among lenders, co-lending agents and others, they can vary significantly in their structural characteristics and other risks. For example, the rights of holders of B-Notes to control the process following a borrower default may vary from transaction to transaction. Like B-Notes, mezzanine loans are by their nature structurally subordinated to more senior property-level financings. If a borrower defaults on our mezzanine loan or on debt senior to our loan, or if the borrower is in bankruptcy, our mezzanine loan will be satisfied only after the property-level debt and other senior debt is paid in full. As a result, a partial loss in the value of the underlying collateral can result in a total loss of the value of the mezzanine loan. In addition, even if we are able to foreclose on the underlying collateral following a default on a mezzanine loan, we would be substituted for the defaulting borrower and, to the extent income generated on the underlying property is insufficient to meet outstanding debt obligations on the property, we may need to commit substantial additional capital and/or deliver a replacement guarantee by a creditworthy entity, which could include us, to preserve the existing mortgage loan on the property, stabilize the property and prevent

additional defaults to lenders with existing liens on the property. In addition, mezzanine loans may have higher LTVs than conventional mortgage loans, resulting in less equity in the underlying property and increasing the risk of default and loss of principal. Significant losses related to our B-Notes and mezzanine loans would result in operating losses for us and may limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Our origination or acquisition of construction loans exposes us to an increased risk of loss.

We may originate or acquire construction loans. If we fail to fund our entire commitment on a construction loan or if a borrower otherwise fails to complete the construction of a project, there could be adverse consequences associated with the loan, including, but not limited to: a loss of the value of the property securing the loan, especially if the borrower is unable to raise funds to complete construction from other sources; a borrower claim against us for failure to perform under the loan documents; increased costs to the borrower that the borrower is unable to pay; a bankruptcy filing by the borrower; and abandonment by the borrower of the collateral for the loan. A borrower default on a construction loan where the property has not achieved completion poses a greater risk than a conventional loan, as completion would be required before the property is able to generate revenue. As described below, the process of foreclosing on a property is time-consuming, and we may incur significant expense if we foreclose on a property securing a loan under these or other circumstances.

Risks of cost overruns and non-completion of the construction or renovation of the properties underlying loans we originate or acquire could materially and adversely affect us.

The renovation, refurbishment or expansion by a borrower of a mortgaged property involves risks of cost overruns and non-completion. Costs of construction or renovation to bring a property up to market standards for the intended use of that property may exceed original estimates, possibly making a project uneconomical. Other risks may include: environmental risks, permitting risks, other construction risks, and subsequent leasing of the property not being completed on schedule or at projected rental rates. If such construction or renovation is not completed in a timely manner, or if it costs more than expected, the borrower may experience a prolonged reduction of net operating income and may be unable to make payments of interest or principal to us, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Investments that we make in CRE debt securities and other similar structured finance investments, as well as those that we structure, sponsor or arrange, pose additional risks.

We have in the past invested, and may in the future invest, in CRE debt securities such as commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) and CRE CLO debt securities, including in select instances subordinate classes of CLOs and other similar structured finance investments secured by a pool of mortgages or loans. Such investments are the first or among the first to bear loss upon a restructuring or liquidation of the underlying collateral, and the last to receive payment of interest and principal. There is generally only a nominal amount of equity or other debt securities junior to such positions, if any, issued in such structures. The estimated fair values of such subordinated interests tend to be much more sensitive to economic downturns and adverse underlying borrower developments than more senior securities. A projection of an economic downturn, for example, could cause a decline in the price of lower credit quality CRE debt securities because the ability of borrowers to make principal and interest payments on the mortgages or loans underlying such securities may be impaired.

There may not be a trading market for subordinate interests in CMBS and CRE CLOs and similar structured finance investment vehicles generally, and volatility in CMBS and CRE CLO trading markets may cause the value of these investments to decline. In addition, if the underlying mortgage portfolio has been overvalued by the issuer, or if the value of the underlying mortgage portfolio declines and, as a result, less collateral value is available to satisfy interest and principal payments and any other fees in connection with the trust or other conduit arrangement for such securities, we may incur significant losses. Subordinate interests in CRE CLOs are typically rated non-investment grade, and the most subordinate class is typically not rated, and any investments that we make in such interests would subject us to the risks inherent in such investments. See “—Risks Related to Our Lending and Investment Activities—Investments in non-investment grade rated investments involve an increased risk of default and loss.”

With respect to the CRE debt securities in which we may invest, control over the related underlying loans will be exercised through a special servicer or collateral manager designated by a “directing certificate holder” or a “controlling class representative,” or otherwise pursuant to the related securitization documents. We may acquire classes of CRE debt securities for which we may not have the right to appoint the directing certificate holder or otherwise direct the special servicing or collateral management, either at inception of the investment or at a later date if the controlling class is determined to be a class of CRE debt securities other than the class we acquired. With respect to the management and servicing of those loans, the related special servicer or collateral manager may take actions that could materially and adversely affect our interests.

Investments in non-investment grade, rated or unrated, investments involve an increased risk of default and loss.

Many of our investments may not conform to conventional loan standards applied by traditional lenders and either will not be rated (as is often the case for private loans) or will be rated as non-investment grade by the rating agencies. As a result, these investments should be expected to have an increased risk of default and loss as compared to investment-grade rated assets. Any loss we incur may be significant and may materially and adversely affect us. Our investment guidelines do not limit the percentage of unrated or non-investment grade rated assets we may hold in our portfolio.

Any credit ratings assigned to our investments will be subject to ongoing evaluations and revisions and we cannot assure you that those ratings will not be downgraded.

Some of our investments may be rated by rating agencies. Any credit ratings on our investments are subject to ongoing evaluation by credit rating agencies, and we cannot assure you that any such ratings will not be downgraded or withdrawn by a rating agency in the future if, in its judgment, circumstances warrant. If rating agencies assign a lower-than-expected rating or reduce or withdraw, or indicate that they may reduce or withdraw, their ratings of our investments in the future, the value and liquidity of our investments could significantly decline, which would adversely affect the value of our investment portfolio and could result in losses upon disposition or the failure of borrowers to satisfy their debt service obligations to us.

The United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union could materially and adversely affect us.

The United Kingdom has withdrawn from the European Union (an event known as Brexit). The United Kingdom and the European Union have entered into a trade and cooperation agreement governing certain aspects of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The agreement addresses trade, economic arrangements, law enforcement, judicial cooperation and a governance framework including procedures for dispute resolution, among other things. However, significant political and economic uncertainty remains about how the precise terms of the relationship between the parties will differ from the terms before Brexit. These developments, or the perception that any related developments could occur, have had and may continue to have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and financial markets, and could significantly reduce global market liquidity and restrict the ability of key market participants to operate in certain financial markets. Since we rely on access to the financial markets in order to refinance our debt liabilities and gain access to new financing, ongoing political uncertainty and any worsening of the economic environment may reduce our ability to refinance our existing and future liabilities or gain access to new financing, in each case on favorable terms or at all.

We may need to foreclose on certain of the loans we originate or acquire, which could result in losses that materially and adversely affect us.

We may find it necessary or desirable to foreclose on certain of the loans we originate or acquire, and the foreclosure process may be lengthy and expensive. Whether or not we have participated in the negotiation of the terms of any such loans, we cannot assure you as to the adequacy of the protection of the terms of the applicable loan, including the validity or enforceability of the loan and the maintenance of the anticipated priority and perfection of the applicable security interests. Furthermore, claims may be asserted by lenders or borrowers that might interfere with enforcement of our rights. Borrowers may resist foreclosure actions by asserting numerous claims, counterclaims and defenses against us, including, without limitation, lender liability claims and defenses, even when the assertions may have no basis in fact, in an effort to prolong the foreclosure action and seek to force the lender into a modification of the loan or a favorable discounted pay-off of the borrower’s position in the loan. In some states, foreclosure actions can take several years or more to litigate. At any time prior to or during the foreclosure proceedings, the borrower may file for bankruptcy, which would have the effect of staying the foreclosure actions and further delaying the foreclosure process and could potentially result in a reduction or discharge of a borrower’s debt.

Foreclosure may create a negative public perception of the related property, resulting in a diminution of its value. Even if we are successful in foreclosing on a loan, the liquidation proceeds upon sale of the underlying real estate may not be sufficient to recover our cost basis in the loan, resulting in a loss to us. Furthermore, any costs or delays involved in the foreclosure of the loan or a liquidation of the underlying property will further reduce the net proceeds and, thus, increase the loss. The incurrence of any such losses could materially and adversely affect us.

Real estate valuation is inherently subjective and uncertain.

The valuation of the commercial real estate that secures or otherwise supports our investments is inherently subjective and uncertain due to, among other factors, the individual nature of each property, its location, the expected future rental revenues from that particular property and the valuation methodology adopted. In addition, where we invest in construction loans, initial valuations will assume completion of the project. As a result, the valuations of the commercial real estate that secures or otherwise supports investments are made on the basis of assumptions and methodologies that may not prove to be accurate, particularly in periods of volatility, low

transaction flow or restricted debt availability in the commercial real estate marketssuch as that recently experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our reserves for loan losses may prove inadequate, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

We evaluate our loans, and we will evaluate the adequacy of any future loan loss reserves we are required to recognize, on a quarterly basis. In the future, we may maintain varying levels of loan loss reserves. Our determination of general and asset-specific loan loss reserves may rely on material estimates regarding many factors, including the fair value of any loan collateral. The estimation of ultimate loan losses, loss reserves, and credit loss expense is a complex and subjective process. As such, there can be no assurance that our judgment will prove to be correct and that any future loan loss reserves will be adequate over time to protect against losses inherent in our portfolio at any given time. Any such losses could be caused by various factors, including, but not limited to, unanticipated adverse changes in the economy or events adversely affecting specific assets, borrowers, industries in which our borrowers operate or markets in which our borrowers or their properties are located. If our future reserves for loan losses prove inadequate, we may recognize additional losses, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

In June 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2016-13, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (Topic 326),” which on its adoption date of January 1, 2020 replaced the former “incurred loss” model for recognizing credit losses with an “expected loss” model referred to as the Current Expected Credit Losses (“CECL”) model. Under the CECL model, which we adopted on January 1, 2020, we are required to present certain financial assets carried at amortized cost, such as loans held for investment, at the net amount expected to be collected. The measurement of expected credit losses over the life of each financial asset is based on information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. This measurement occurs when the financial asset is first added to the balance sheet and updated quarterly thereafter. This differs significantly from the “incurred loss” model that was previously required under GAAP, which delayed recognition until it was probable a loss had been incurred. Thus, the amount that we report as our allowance for loan losses has been and will likely continue to be more volatile than under the “incurred loss” model that we were required to use prior to January 1, 2020. The CECL model is an accounting estimate and is inherently uncertain because it is sensitive to changes in economic and credit conditions in the geographic locations in which we operate. Economic and credit conditions are interdependent and as a result there is no single factor to which the Company as a whole is sensitive; therefore, it is possible that actual events will ultimately differ from the assumptions built into the financial model used by the Company to determine its future expected loan losses, resulting in material adjustments to the Company’s financial assets measured at amortized cost. Additionally, the Company’s application of CECL is subject to ongoing review and evaluation and open to change should relevant information emerge. If we are required to materially increase our level of allowance for loan losses for any reason, such increase could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may experience a decline in the fair value of investments we may make in CRE debt securities, which could materially and adversely affect us.

A decline in the fair value of investments we may make in CRE debt securities may require us to recognize an other-than-temporary (“OTTI”) impairment against such assets under GAAP if we were to determine that, with respect to any assets in unrealized loss positions, we do not have the ability and intent to hold such assets to maturity or for a period of time sufficient to allow for recovery to the original acquisition cost of such assets. If such a determination were to be made, we would recognize unrealized losses through earnings and write down the amortized cost of such assets to a new cost basis, based on the fair value of such assets on the date they are considered to be other-than-temporarily impaired. Such impairment charges reflect non-cash losses at the time of recognition. The subsequent disposition or sale of such assets could further affect our future losses or gains, as they are based on the difference between the sale price received and adjusted amortized cost of such assets at the time of sale. If we experience a decline in the fair value of our investments, it could materially and adversely affect us, our financial condition, and our results of operations.

Some of our investments may be recorded at fair value and, as a result, there will be uncertainty as to the value of these investments.

Our investments are not publicly-traded but some of our investments may be publicly-traded in the future. The fair value of securities and other investments that are not publicly-traded may not be readily determinable. Any of our investments classified as available-for-sale or as trading assets will be recorded each quarter at their fair value, which may include unobservable inputs. Because such valuations are subjective, the fair value of certain of our investments may fluctuate over short periods of time and our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these investments existed. The value of our common stock could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of these investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon their disposal.

Additionally, our results of operations for a given period could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of investments treated as available-for-sale or trading assets were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon their disposal.

In addition to other analytical tools, our Manager utilizes financial models to evaluate commercial mortgage loans and estimate expected losses.The accuracy and effectiveness of these analytical tools cannot be guaranteed.

In addition to other analytical tools, our Manager utilizes financial models to evaluate the credit quality of commercial mortgage loans. The accuracy and effectiveness of these analytical tools cannot be guaranteed. It is possible that financial models used for our CECL estimate may fail to include relevant factors or to accurately estimate the impact of factors they identify. In all cases, financial models are only estimates of future results which are based upon assumptions made at the time that the projections are developed. There can be no assurance that our Manager’s projected results will be attained and actual results may vary significantly from the projections. General economic and industry-specific conditions, which are not predictable, can have an adverse impact on the reliability of projections.

Insurance proceeds on a property may not cover all losses, which could result in the corresponding non-performance of or loss on our investment related to such property.

There are certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, terrorism or acts of war, which may be uninsurable or not economically insurable. Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations and other factors, including terrorism or acts of war, also might result in insurance proceeds that are insufficient to repair or replace a property if it is damaged or destroyed. Under these circumstances, the insurance proceeds received with respect to a property relating to one of our investments might not be adequate to restore our economic position with respect to our investment. Any uninsured loss could result in the corresponding non-performance of or loss on our investment related to such property.

The impact of any future terrorist attacks and the availability of affordable terrorism insurance expose us to certain risks.

Terrorist attacks, the anticipation of any such attacks, the consequences of any military or other response by the U.S. and its allies, and other armed conflicts could cause consumer confidence and spending to decrease or result in increased volatility in the U.S. and worldwide financial markets and economy. The economic impact of these events could also adversely affect the credit quality of some of our investments and the properties underlying our interests.

We may suffer losses as a result of the adverse impact of any future attacks and these losses may adversely impact our performance and may cause the market price of our common stock to decline or be more volatile. A prolonged economic slowdown, a recession or declining real estate values could impair the performance of our investments, increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us, any of which could materially and adversely affect us. Losses resulting from these types of events may not be fully insurable.

In addition, with the enactment of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (“TRIA”) and the subsequent enactment of legislation extending TRIA through the end of 2027, insurers are required to make terrorism insurance available under their property and casualty insurance policies, but this legislation does not regulate the pricing of such insurance, and there is no assurance that TRIA will be extended beyond 2027. The absence of affordable insurance coverage may adversely affect the general real estate finance market, lending volume and the market’s overall liquidity and may reduce the number of suitable investment opportunities available to us and the pace at which we are able to make investments. If the properties underlying our investments are unable to obtain affordable insurance coverage, the value of those investments could decline, and in the event of an uninsured loss, we could lose all or a portion of our investment.

Liability relating to environmental matters may impact the value of properties that we may acquire upon foreclosure of the properties underlying our loans.

To the extent we foreclose on properties underlying our loans, we may be subject to environmental liabilities arising from such foreclosed properties. Under various U.S. federal, state and local laws, an owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of removal of certain hazardous substances released on its property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of such hazardous substances. If we foreclose on any properties underlying our loans, the presence of hazardous substances on a property may adversely affect our ability to sell the property and we may incur substantial remediation costs. As a result, the discovery of material environmental liabilities attached to such properties could materially and adversely affect us.

Climate change has the potential to impact the properties underlying our investments.

Currently, it is not possible to predict how legislation or new regulations that may be adopted to address greenhouse gas emissions will impact commercial properties. However, any such future laws and regulations imposing reporting obligations or limitations on greenhouse gas emissions or additional taxation of energy use could require the owners of properties to make significant expenditures to attain and maintain compliance. Any new legislative or regulatory initiatives related to climate change could adversely affect our business.

We also face business trend-related climate risks. Investors are increasingly taking into account ESG factors, including climate risks, in determining whether to invest in companies or properties. Additionally, our reputation and investor relationships could be damaged as a result of our involvement with certain industries or assets associated with activities perceived to be causing or exacerbating climate change, as well as any decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to considerations relating to climate change.

The physical impact of climate change could also have a material adverse effect on the properties underlying our investments. Physical effects of climate change such as increases in temperature, sea levels, the severity of weather events and the frequency of natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tropical storms, tornadoes, wildfires, floods and earthquakes, among other effects, could damage the properties underlying our investments. The costs of remediating or repairing such damage, or of investments made in advance of such weather events to minimize potential damage, could be considerable. Additionally, such actual or threatened climate change related damage could increase the cost of, or make unavailable, insurance on favorable terms on the properties underlying our investments. Such repair, remediation or insurance expenses could reduce the net operating income of the properties underlying our investments which may in turn impair borrowers’ ability to repay their obligations to us.

We may be subject to lender liability claims, and if we are held liable under such claims, we could be subject to losses.

In recent years, a number of judicial decisions have upheld the right of borrowers to sue lending institutions on the basis of various evolving legal theories, collectively termed “lender liability.” Generally, lender liability is founded on the premise that a lender has either violated a duty, whether implied or contractual, of good faith and fair dealing owed to the borrower or has assumed a degree of control over the borrower resulting in the creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or stockholders. We cannot assure you that such claims will not arise or that we will not be subject to significant liability and losses if a claim of this type were to arise.

If the loans that we originate or acquire do not comply with applicable laws, we may be subject to penalties, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Loans that we originate or acquire may be directly or indirectly subject to U.S. federal, state or local governmental laws. Real estate lenders and borrowers may be responsible for compliance with a wide range of laws intended to protect the public interest, including, without limitation, the Truth in Lending, Equal Credit Opportunity, Fair Housing and Americans with Disabilities Acts and local zoning laws (including, but not limited to, zoning laws that allow permitted non-conforming uses). If we or any other person fails to comply with such laws in relation to a loan that we have originated or acquired, legal penalties may be imposed, which could materially and adversely affect us. Additionally, jurisdictions with “one action,” “security first” and/or “anti-deficiency rules” may limit our ability to foreclose on a real property or to realize on obligations secured by a real property. In the future, new laws may be enacted or imposed by U.S. federal, state or local governmental entities, and such laws could have a material adverse effect on us.

If we originate or acquire commercial mortgage loans or commercial real estate-related debt instruments secured by liens on facilities that are subject to a ground lease and such ground lease is terminated unexpectedly, our interests in such loans could be materially and adversely affected.

A ground lease is a lease of land, usually on a long-term basis, that does not include buildings or other improvements on the land. Normally, any real property improvements made by the lessee during the term of the lease will revert to the landowner at the end of the lease term. We may originate or acquire commercial mortgage loans or commercial real estate-related debt instruments secured by liens on facilities that are subject to a ground lease, and, if the ground lease were to expire or terminate unexpectedly, due to the borrower’s default on such ground lease, our interests in such loans could be materially and adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Financing

We have a significant amount of debt, which subjects us to increased risk of loss, and our charter and bylaws contain no limitation on the amount of debt we may incur or have outstanding.

As of December 31, 2021, we had $3.7 billion of debt outstanding. In the future, subject to market conditions and availability, we may incur additional debt through secured credit agreements, secured revolving credit agreements, structured financing such as non-recourse CLO liabilities, and derivative instruments, in addition to transaction or asset-specific financing arrangements. We may also rely on short-term financing that would especially expose us to changes in availability. We may also issue additional equity, equity-related and debt securities to fund our investment strategy. On May 28, 2020, we issued $225.0 million in shares of 11% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Series B Preferred Stock”). On June 14, 2021, we issued $201.3 million in shares of 6.25% Series C Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Series C Preferred Stock”) and redeemed all of our outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock. As of December 31, 2021, we were a party to secured credit agreements with each of Goldman Sachs Bank USA, JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association, Morgan Stanley Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Barclays Bank PLC, U.S. Bank National Association, and Bank of America N.A., with an aggregate maximum amount of approximately $3.1 billion available to finance our loan investments.

Subject to compliance with the leverage covenants contained in our secured credit agreements and other financing documents, we expect that the amount of leverage that we will incur in the future will take into account a variety of factors, which may include our Manager’s assessment of credit, liquidity, price volatility and other risks of our investments and the financing counterparties, the potential for losses and extension risk in our portfolio and availability of particular types of financing at the then-current rate. Given current market conditions, we expect that our overall leverage, measured as the ratio of debt to equity excluding cash on our consolidated balance sheets, will generally be less than 3.75:1 (as defined under our secured credit agreements), subject to compliance with our financial covenants under our secured credit agreements, and other contractual obligations, although we may employ more or less leverage on individual loan investments after consideration of the impact on expected risk and return of the specific situation, and future changes in value of underlying properties. To the extent we believe market conditions are favorable, we may revise our leverage policy in the future. Incurring substantial debt could subject us to many risks that, if realized, would materially and adversely affect us, including the risk that:

There can be no assurance that our leverage strategy will be successful, and our leverage strategy may cause us to incur significant losses, which could materially and adversely affect us.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or utilize additional financing arrangements in the future on similar or more favorable terms, or at all.

Our ability to fund our investments and refinance our existing indebtedness will be impacted by our ability to secure additional financing on favorable terms through various arrangements, including secured credit agreements, non-recourse CLO financing, mortgage loans, and asset-specific borrowings. In certain instances, we create structural leverage through the co-origination or non-recourse syndication of a senior loan interest to a third party. In either case, the senior mortgage loan is not included on our consolidated balance sheets, and we refer to such senior loan interest as a “non-consolidated senior interest.” When we create structural leverage through the co-origination or non-recourse syndication of a senior loan interest to a third party, we retain on our balance sheet a mezzanine loan. Over time, in addition to these types of financings, we may use other forms of leverage, including derivative instruments and public and private secured and unsecured debt issuances by us or our subsidiaries. Our access to additional sources of financing will depend upon a number of factors, over which we have little or no control, including:

• general economic or market conditions;

• the market’s view of the quality of our investments;

• the market’s perception of our growth potential;

• our current and potential future earnings and cash distributions; and

• the market price of our common stock.

We also expect to periodically access the capital markets to raise cash to fund new investments. Unfavorable economic or capital market conditions may increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or could result in a decision by our potential lenders not to extend credit. An inability to successfully access the capital markets could limit our ability to grow our business and fully execute our investment strategy and could decrease our earnings and liquidity. In addition, any dislocation or weakness in the capital and credit markets could adversely affect one or more lenders and could cause one or more of our lenders to be unwilling or unable to provide us with financing or to increase the costs of that financing. In addition, if regulatory capital requirements imposed on our lenders are increased, they may be required to limit, or increase the cost of, financing they provide to us. In general, this could potentially increase our financing costs and reduce our liquidity or require us to sell assets at an inopportune time or price. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or utilize any financing arrangements in the future on similar or more favorable terms, or at all. In addition, even if we are able to access the capital markets, significant balances may be held in cash or cash equivalents pending future investment as we may be unable to invest proceeds on the timeline anticipated.

Certain of our current financing arrangements contain, and our future financing arrangements likely will contain, various financial and operational covenants, and a default of any such covenants could materially and adversely affect us.

Certain of our current financing arrangements contain, and our future financing arrangements likely will contain, various financial and operational covenants affecting our ability and, in certain cases, our subsidiaries’ ability, to incur additional debt, make certain investments, reduce liquidity below certain levels, make distributions to our stockholders and otherwise affect our operating policies. For a description of certain of the covenants, see Item 7- “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Investment Portfolio Financing.” There have been instances in the past where we were not in compliance with certain of these covenants, due to negative impacts on our business related to COVID-19. Although these instances of non-compliance have since been cured or waived, if we were to fail to meet or satisfy any of the covenants in our financing arrangements in the future and are unable to obtain a waiver or other suitable relief from the lenders, we would be in default under these agreements, which could result in a cross-default or cross-acceleration under other financing arrangements, and our lenders could elect to declare outstanding amounts due and payable (or such amounts may automatically become due and payable), terminate their commitments, require the posting of additional collateral and enforce their respective interests against existing collateral. A default also could limit significantly our financing alternatives, which could cause us to curtail our investment activities or dispose of assets when we otherwise would not choose to do so. Further, this could make it difficult for us to satisfy the requirements necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As a result, a default on any of our debt agreements, and in particular our secured credit agreements (since a significant portion of our assets are or will be, as the case may be, financed thereunder), could materially and adversely affect us.

As of March 31, 2020, we were not in compliance with respect to the debt-to-equity ratio covenant included in certain of our financing arrangements. This non-compliance was caused by negative impacts on our business related to COVID-19 and was cured on April 2, 2020 when we utilized proceeds from sales of certain CRE debt securities to repay outstanding borrowings under the related secured credit facilities. We received waivers from the lender under each of the applicable agreements on May 8, 2020.

Certain of our financing arrangements also include a covenant that obligates us to deliver certain audited financial statements for Holdco to the lenders within 90 days after each December 31. We were not in compliance with respect to this covenant as of March 31, 2020. This non-compliance was cured on May 7, 2020, when the required audited financial statements were delivered. We received waivers from the lender under each of the applicable agreements on May 8, 2020.

Our financing arrangements may require us to provide additional collateral or repay debt.

Certain of our current and future financing arrangements involve the risk that the market value of the assets pledged or sold by us to the provider of the financing may decline in value, in which case the lender or counterparty may require us to provide additional collateral or lead to margin calls that may require us to repay all or a portion of the funds advanced. We may not have the funds available to repay our debt at that time, which would likely result in defaults unless we are able to raise the funds from alternative sources, including by selling assets at a time when we might not otherwise choose to do so, which we may not be able to achieve on favorable terms or at all. See “—Certain of our current financing arrangements contain, and our future financing arrangements likely will contain, various financial and operational covenants, and a default of any such covenants could materially and adversely affect us.” Posting additional margin would reduce our cash available to make other, higher yielding investments, thereby decreasing our return on equity. For example, fluctuations in the value of our former CRE debt securities portfolio previously resulted in us being required to post cash collateral with lenders under daily mark-to-market secured credit facilities. We sold during March and April 2020 all of our CRE debt

securities, and retired at par all of our related secured borrowings (including margin calls outstanding). However, we cannot assure you that we will not face margin calls in the future in connection with borrowings secured by our first mortgage loan investments. If we cannot meet these requirements, the lender or counterparty could accelerate our indebtedness, increase the interest rate on advanced funds and terminate our ability to borrow funds from it, which could materially and adversely affect us. In the case of repurchase transactions, if the value of the underlying security has declined as of the end of that term, or if we default on our obligations under the secured credit facilities, we will likely incur a loss on our repurchase transactions. In addition, if a lender or counterparty files for bankruptcy or becomes insolvent, our loans may become subject to bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, thus depriving us, at least temporarily, of the benefit of these assets. Such an event could restrict our access to financing and increase our cost of capital.

Interest rate fluctuations could increase our financing costs, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Our primary interest rate exposures relate to the yield on our loans and the financing cost of our debt, as well as any interest rate swaps utilized for hedging purposes. Changes in interest rates affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest-earning assets and the interest expense we incur in financing these assets. In a period of rising interest rates, our interest expense on floating rate debt would increase, while any additional interest income we earn on floating rate assets may not compensate for such increase in interest expense and the interest income we earn on fixed rate assets would not change. Similarly, in a period of declining interest rates, our interest income on floating rate assets would decrease (subject to the existence of any interest rate floors), while any decrease in the interest we are charged on our floating rate debt may not compensate for such decrease in interest income, and the interest expense we incur on our fixed rate debt would not change. Consequently, changes in interest rates may significantly influence our net interest income. Interest rate fluctuations resulting in our interest expense exceeding interest income would result in operating losses, which could materially and adversely affect us. Changes in the level of interest rates also may affect our ability to originate or acquire loans or other investments, the value of our investments and our ability to realize gains from the disposition of assets. Moreover, changes in interest rates may affect borrower default rates.

We may enter into hedging transactions that could expose us to contingent liabilities in the future and adversely impact our financial condition.

Subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, we may enter into hedging transactions that could require us to fund cash payments in certain circumstances (e.g., the early termination of the hedging instrument caused by an event of default or other early termination event, or the decision by a counterparty to request margin securities it is contractually owed under the terms of the hedging instrument). The amount due would be equal to the unrealized loss of the open swap positions with the respective counterparty and could also include other fees and charges. Any such economic losses will be reflected in our results of operations, and our ability to fund these obligations will depend on the liquidity of our assets and access to capital at the time, and the need to fund these obligations could adversely impact our financial condition.

In addition, certain of the hedging instruments that we may enter into could involve risks since they often are not traded on regulated exchanges, guaranteed by an exchange or its clearing house, or regulated by any U.S. or foreign governmental authorities. A liquid secondary market may not exist for hedging instruments that we may purchase or sell in the future, and we may be required to maintain a position until exercise or expiration, which could result in significant losses.

In addition, subject to maintaining our qualification as a REIT, we may pursue various hedging strategies to seek to reduce our exposure to adverse changes in interest rates. We may fail to recalculate, readjust and execute hedges in an efficient manner.

While we may enter into such transactions seeking to reduce interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged may vary materially. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio positions or liabilities being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss.

Furthermore, we intend to record any derivative and hedging transactions we enter into in accordance with GAAP. However, we may choose not to pursue, or fail to qualify for, hedge accounting treatment relating to such derivative instruments. As a result, our operating results may suffer because any losses on these derivative instruments may not be offset by a change in the fair value of the related hedged transaction or item.

Our investments may be subject to fluctuations in interest rates that may not be adequately protected, or protected at all, by our hedging strategies.

Our investments currently include loans with floating interest rates and, in the future, may include loans with fixed interest rates. Floating rate investments earn interest at rates that adjust from time to time (typically, in our case, monthly) based upon an index (in our case, LIBOR). These floating rate loans are insulated from changes in value specifically due to changes in interest rates; however, the interest they earn fluctuates based upon interest rates (for example, LIBOR) and, in a declining and/or low interest rate environment, these loans will earn lower rates of interest and this will impact our operating performance. For more information about risks relating to changes to, or the elimination of, LIBOR, see “Risks Related to Our Lending and Investment Activities—The planned discontinuance of LIBOR has affected and will continue to affect financial markets generally, and may adversely affect our interest income, interest expense, or both.” Fixed interest rate investments, however, do not have adjusting interest rates and the relative value of the fixed cash flows from these investments will decrease as prevailing interest rates rise or increase as prevailing interest rates fall, causing potentially significant changes in value. Our Manager may employ various hedging strategies on our behalf to limit the effects of changes in interest rates (and in some cases credit spreads), including engaging in interest rate swaps, caps, floors and other interest rate derivative products. We believe that no strategy can completely insulate us from the risks associated with interest rate changes and there is a risk that hedging strategies may provide no protection at all and potentially compound the impact of changes in interest rates. Hedging transactions involve certain additional risks such as counterparty risk, leverage risk, the legal enforceability of hedging contracts, the early repayment of hedged transactions and the risk that unanticipated and significant changes in interest rates may cause a significant loss of basis in the contract and a change in current period expense. We cannot make assurances that we will be able to enter into hedging transactions or that such hedging transactions will adequately protect us against the foregoing risks.

Our use of leverage may create a mismatch with the duration and index of the investments that we are financing.

We generally seek to structure our leverage such that we minimize the differences between the term of our investments and the leverage we use to finance such an investment. However, under certain circumstances, we may determine not to do so or we may otherwise be unable to do so. Accordingly, the extended term of the financed loan or other investment may not correspond to the term to extended maturity of the financing for such loan or other investment. In the event that our leverage is for a shorter term than the financed loan or other investment, we may not be able to extend or find appropriate replacement leverage and that would have an adverse impact on our liquidity and our returns. In the event that our leverage is for a longer term than the financed loan or other investment, we may not be able to repay such leverage or replace the financed loan or other investment with an optimal substitute or at all, which would negatively impact our desired leveraged returns.

We generally attempt to structure our leverage such that we minimize the differences between the index of our investments and the index of our leverage (for example, financing floating rate investments with floating rate leverage and fixed rate investments with fixed rate leverage). If such a product is not available to us from our lenders on reasonable terms, we may use hedging instruments to effectively create such a match. For example, in the case of future fixed rate investments, we may finance such investments with floating rate leverage, but effectively convert all or a portion of the attendant leverage to fixed rate using hedging strategies.

Our attempts to mitigate such risk are subject to factors outside our control, such as the availability of favorable financing and hedging options, which is subject to a variety of factors, of which duration and term matching are only two. The risks of a duration mismatch are magnified by the potential for the extension of loans in order to maximize the likelihood and magnitude of their recovery value in the event the loans experience credit or performance challenges. Employment of this asset management practice would effectively extend the duration of our investments, while our liabilities have set maturity dates. While our CLO liabilities have set maturity dates, repayment of these are dependent on timing of related collateral loan asset repayments after the reinvestment period concludes.

Warehouse facilities that we may obtain in the future may limit our ability to originate or acquire assets, and we may incur losses if the collateral is liquidated.

We may utilize, if available, warehouse facilities pursuant to which we would accumulate loans in anticipation of a securitization or other financing, which assets would be pledged as collateral for such facilities until the securitization or other transaction is consummated. To borrow funds to originate or acquire assets under any future warehouse facilities, we expect that our lenders thereunder would have the right to review the potential assets for which we seek financing. We may be unable to obtain the consent of a lender to originate or acquire assets that we believe would be beneficial to us and we may be unable to obtain alternate financing for such assets. In addition, no assurance can be given that a securitization or other financing would be consummated with respect to the assets being warehoused. If the securitization or other financing is not consummated, the lender could demand repayment of the facility, and in the event that we were unable to timely repay, could liquidate the warehoused collateral and we would then have to pay any amount by which the original purchase price of the collateral assets exceeds its sale price, subject to negotiated caps, if any, on our exposure. In addition, regardless of whether the securitization or other financing is consummated, if any of the warehoused collateral is sold before the securitization or other financing is completed, we would have to bear any resulting loss on the sale.

We have utilized and may in the future utilize non-recourse securitizations to finance our investments, which may expose us to risks that could result in losses.

We have utilized and may in the future utilize non-recourse securitizations of certain of our investments to generate cash for funding new investments and for other purposes. Such financing generally involves creating a special purpose vehicle, contributing a pool of our investments to the entity, and selling interests in the entity on a non-recourse basis to purchasers (whom we would expect to be willing to accept a lower interest rate to invest in investment-grade loan pools). We would expect to retain all or a portion of the equity and potentially other tranches in the securitized pool of portfolio investments. Prior to any such financings, we may use our secured credit agreements, or other short-term facilities, to finance the acquisition of investments until a sufficient quantity of investments had been accumulated, at which time we would refinance these facilities through a securitization, such as a CLO, or issuance of CMBS, or the private placement of loan participations or other long-term financing. When employing this strategy, we would be subject to the risk that we would not be able to acquire, during the period that our short-term credit facilities are available, a sufficient amount of eligible investments or loans to maximize the efficiency of a CLO, CMBS, or private placement issuance. We also would be subject to the risk that we would not be able to obtain short-term credit facilities or would not be able to renew any short-term credit facilities after they expire should we find it necessary to extend our short-term credit facilities to allow more time to seek and acquire the necessary eligible investments for a long-term financing. The inability to consummate securitizations to finance our investments on a long-term basis could require us to seek other forms of potentially less attractive financing or to liquidate assets at an inopportune time or price, which could adversely affect our performance and our ability to grow our business.

Moreover, conditions in the capital markets, including volatility and disruption in the capital and credit markets, may not permit a securitization at any particular time or may make the issuance of any such securitization less attractive to us even when we do have sufficient eligible assets. We may also suffer losses if the value of the mortgage loans we acquire declines prior to securitization. Declines in the value of a mortgage loan can be due to, among other things, changes in interest rates and changes in the credit quality of the loan. In addition, we may suffer a loss due to the incurrence of transaction costs related to executing these transactions. To the extent that we incur a loss executing or participating in future securitizations for the reasons described above or for other reasons, it could materially and adversely impact our business and financial condition. The inability to securitize our portfolio may hurt our performance and our ability to grow our business.

We may be subject to losses arising from guarantees of debt and contingent obligations of our subsidiaries or joint venture or co-investment partners.

We conduct substantially all of our operations and own substantially all of our assets through our holding company subsidiary, Holdco. Holdco has guaranteed repayment of 25% of the principal amount borrowed and other payment obligations under each of our secured credit agreements secured by loans. Our secured credit agreements provide for significant aggregate borrowings. Holdco may in the future guarantee the performance of additional subsidiaries’ obligations. The guarantee agreements contain financial covenants covering liquid assets, debt-to-equity ratio, and net worth requirements. Holdco’s failure to satisfy these covenants and other requirements could result in defaults under each of our secured credit agreements and acceleration of the amount borrowed thereunder. Such defaults could have a material adverse effect on us. We may also agree to guarantee indebtedness incurred by a joint venture or co-investment partner. Such a guarantee may be on a joint and several basis with such joint venture or co-investment partner, in which case we may be liable in the event such partner defaults on its guarantee obligation. The non-performance of such obligations may cause losses to us in excess of the capital we initially may have invested or committed under such obligations and there is no assurance that we will have sufficient capital to cover any such losses.

We are subject to counterparty risk associated with our debt obligations.

Our counterparties for critical financial relationships may include both domestic and international financial institutions. These institutions could be severely impacted by credit market turmoil, changes in legislation, allegations of civil or criminal wrongdoing and may as a result experience financial or other pressures. In addition, if a lender or counterparty files for bankruptcy or becomes insolvent, our borrowings under financing agreements with them may become subject to bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings, thus depriving us, at least temporarily, of the benefit of these assets. Such an event could restrict our access to financing and increase our cost of capital. If any of our counterparties were to limit or cease operation, it could lead to financial losses for us.

Certain of our current financing arrangements contain financial covenants that, if violated, could result in the diversion of cash flow from us to our lenders to pay interest due and reduce the principal amount outstanding of our borrowings until such time as the default is cured, which may reduce our cash available to pay interest and operating expenses, satisfy other obligations, and fund required distributions to common stockholders to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

Our CRE CLO liabilities are issued by certain of our wholly-owned trust subsidiaries pursuant to indentures that include a range of covenants and operational tests, including: (a) a minimum ratio of aggregate pledged loan collateral (valued in accordance with the indenture) divided by the aggregate principal amount of bonds outstanding (the “overcollateralization test”); and (b) a minimum ratio

of interest income collected with respect to pledged loan collateral divided by interest expense with respect to bonds outstanding. A failure of either or both tests generally entitles the trustee to divert (“sweep”) cash from the trust waterfall that would otherwise be distributed to us to pay interest and, to the extent sufficient cash remains after the payment of interest, to retire the senior-most bonds until the tests are satisfied. In certain circumstances, such diversions may last for extended periods depending upon the credit performance of the pledged loans.

Our secured credit agreements are between wholly-owned subsidiaries and our lender counterparties. Each involves cross-collateralized pools of pledged loans, and one of our agreements includes a pool-wide debt yield test where failure to comply triggers a cash flow sweep to pay interest and retire borrowings until compliance is restored.

The temporary or prolonged loss of these cash receipts by us may reduce our cash-on-hand to levels that threaten our ability to pay operating expenses, dividends due on our Series C Preferred Stock or distributions to our common shareholders in amounts sufficient to preserve our REIT status. Cash flow with respect to interest receipts that is swept by our lenders is considered as taxable income to us, and our distribution requirements as a REIT are not lessened.

Risks Related to Our Relationship with Our Manager and its Affiliates

We depend on our Manager and the personnel of TPG provided to our Manager for our success. We may not find a suitable replacement for our Manager if our Management Agreement is terminated, or if key personnel cease to be employed by TPG or otherwise become unavailable to us, which would materially and adversely affect us.

We are externally managed and advised by our Manager, an affiliate of TPG. We currently have no employees and all of our executive officers are employees of TPG. We are completely reliant on our Manager, which has significant discretion as to the implementation of our investment and operating policies and strategies.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon the ongoing efforts, experience, diligence, skill, and network of business contacts of our executive officers and the other key personnel of TPG provided to our Manager and its affiliates. These individuals evaluate, negotiate, execute and monitor our loans and other investments and financings and advise us regarding maintenance of our REIT status and exclusion or exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act. Our success depends on their skills and management expertise and continued service with our Manager and its affiliates. Furthermore, there is increasing competition among financial sponsors, investment banks and other real estate debt investors for hiring and retaining qualified investment professionals, and there can be no assurance that such professionals will continue to be associated with us, our Manager or its affiliates or that any replacements will perform well.

In addition, we can offer no assurance that our Manager will remain our investment manager or that we will continue to have access to our executive officers and the other key personnel of TPG who provide services to us. If we terminate our Management Agreement other than upon the occurrence of a cause event or if our Manager terminates our Management Agreement upon our material breach, we would be required to pay a very substantial termination fee to our Manager. See “—Termination of our Management Agreement would be costly.” Furthermore, if our Management Agreement is terminated and no suitable replacement is found to manage us, we may not be able to execute our business plan, which would materially and adversely affect us.

Other than any dedicated or partially dedicated chief financial officer that our Manager may elect to provide to us, the TPG personnel provided to our Manager, as our external manager, are not required to dedicate a specific portion of their time to the management of our business.

Other than with respect to any dedicated or partially dedicated chief financial officer that our Manager may elect to provide to us, neither our Manager nor any other TPG affiliate is obligated to dedicate any specific personnel exclusively to us nor are they or their personnel obligated to dedicate any specific portion of their time to the management of our business. Although our Manager has informed us that Robert Foley will continue to serve as our chief financial officer and that he will spend a substantial portion of his time on our affairs, key personnel, including Mr. Foley, provided to us by our Manager may become unavailable to us as a result of their departure from TPG or for any other reason. As a result, we cannot provide any assurances regarding the amount of time our Manager or its affiliates will dedicate to the management of our business and our Manager and its affiliates may have conflicts in allocating their time, resources and services among our business and any TPG Funds they may manage, and such conflicts may not be resolved in our favor. Each of our executive officers is also an employee of TPG, who has now or may be expected to have significant responsibilities for TPG Funds managed by TPG now or in the future. Consequently, we may not receive the level of support and assistance that we otherwise might receive if we were internally managed. Our Manager and its affiliates are not restricted from entering into other investment advisory relationships or from engaging in other business activities.

Our Manager manages our portfolio pursuant to broad investment guidelines and is not required to seek the approval of our board of directors for each investment, financing, asset allocation or hedging decision made by it, which may result in our making riskier loans and other investments and which could materially and adversely affect us.

Our Manager is authorized to follow broad investment guidelines that provide it with substantial discretion regarding investment, financing, asset allocation and hedging decisions. Our board of directors will periodically review our investment guidelines and our portfolio but will not, and will not be required to, review and approve in advance all of our proposed loans and other investments or our Manager’s financing, asset allocation or hedging decisions. In addition, in conducting periodic reviews, our directors may rely primarily on information provided, or recommendations made, to them by our Manager or its affiliates. Subject to maintaining our REIT qualification and our exclusion or exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act, our Manager has significant latitude within the broad investment guidelines in determining the types of loans and other investments it makes for us, and how such loans and other investments are financed or hedged, which could result in investment returns that are substantially below expectations or losses, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Our Manager’s fee structure may not create proper incentives or may induce our Manager and its affiliates to make certain loans or other investments, including speculative investments, which increase the risk of our portfolio.

We pay our Manager base management fees regardless of the performance of our portfolio. Our Manager’s entitlement to base management fees, which are not based solely upon performance metrics or goals, might reduce its incentive to devote its time and effort to seeking loans or other investments that provide attractive risk-adjusted returns for our stockholders. Because the base management fees are also based in part on our outstanding equity, our Manager may also be incentivized to advance strategies that increase our equity, and there may be circumstances where increasing our equity will not optimize the returns for our stockholders. Consequently, we are required to pay our Manager base management fees in a particular period despite experiencing a net loss or a decline in the value of our portfolio during that period.

In addition, our Manager has the ability to earn incentive compensation each quarter based on our Core Earnings, as calculated in accordance with our Management Agreement, which may create an incentive for our Manager to invest in assets with higher yield potential, which are generally riskier or more speculative, or sell an asset prematurely for a gain, in an effort to increase our short-term net income and thereby increase the incentive compensation to which it is entitled. This could result in increased risk to our investment portfolio. If our interests and those of our Manager are not aligned, the execution of our business plan could be adversely affected, which could materially and adversely affect us.

We may compete with existing and future TPG Funds, which may present various conflicts of interest that restrict our ability to pursue certain investment opportunities or take other actions that are beneficial to our business and result in decisions that are not in the best interests of our stockholders.

We are subject to conflicts of interest arising out of our relationship with TPG, including our Manager and its affiliates. As of December 31, 2021, two of our seven directors are employees of TPG. In addition, our chief financial officer and our other executive officers are also employees of TPG, and we are managed by our Manager, a TPG affiliate. There is no guarantee that the policies and procedures adopted by us, the terms and conditions of our Management Agreement or the policies and procedures adopted by our Manager, TPG and their affiliates, as the case may be, will enable us to identify, adequately address or mitigate these conflicts of interest. Some examples of conflicts of interest that may arise by virtue of our relationship with our Manager and TPG include:

To the extent any TPG Funds otherwise have investment objectives or guidelines that overlap with ours, in whole or in part, then, pursuant to TPG’s allocation policy, investment opportunities that fall within such common objectives or guidelines will generally be allocated among our company and one or more of such TPG Funds on a basis that our Manager and applicable TPG affiliates determine to be fair and reasonable in their sole discretion, subject to the following considerations:

• our and the relevant TPG Funds’ investment focuses and objectives;

• the TPG professionals who sourced the investment opportunity;

• the TPG professionals who are expected to oversee and monitor the investment;

• the stage of development of the prospective portfolio company or borrower;

• our and the relevant TPG Funds’ respective existing portfolio of investments;

• the investment opportunity’s risk profile;

• our and the relevant TPG Funds’ respective expected life cycles;

There is no assurance that any such conflicts arising out of the foregoing will be resolved in our favor. Our Manager and TPG affiliates are entitled to amend their investment objectives or guidelines at any time without prior notice to us or our consent.

TPG has long-term relationships with a significant number of corporations and their senior management. In determining whether to invest in a particular transaction on our behalf, our Manager may consider those relationships (subject to its

obligations under our Management Agreement), which may result in certain transactions that our Manager would not otherwise undertake or refrain from undertaking on our behalf in view of such relationships.

TPG may enter into one or more strategic relationships in certain geographical regions or with respect to certain types of investments that, although intended to provide greater opportunities for us, may require us to share such opportunities or otherwise limit the amount of an opportunity we can otherwise take.

Further conflicts could arise once we and TPG have made our and their respective investments. For example, if a company goes into bankruptcy or reorganization, becomes insolvent or otherwise experiences financial distress or is unable to meet its payment obligations or comply with covenants relating to securities held by us or by TPG, TPG may have an interest that conflicts with our interests or TPG may have information regarding the company that we do not have access to. If additional financing is necessary as a result of financial or other difficulties, it may not be in our best interests to provide such additional financing. If TPG were to lose investments as a result of such difficulties, the ability of our Manager to recommend actions in our best interests might be impaired.

Termination of our Management Agreement would be costly.

Termination of our Management Agreement without cause would be difficult and costly. Our independent directors will review our Manager’s performance and the fees that may be payable to our Manager annually, and our Management Agreement may be terminated each year upon the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of our independent directors, based upon their determination that (1) our Manager’s performance is unsatisfactory and materially detrimental to us and our subsidiaries taken as a whole or (2) the base management fee and incentive compensation, taken as a whole, payable to our Manager is not fair, subject to our Manager’s right to

prevent any termination due to unfair fees by accepting a reduction of fees agreed to by at least two-thirds of our independent directors. We are required to provide our Manager with 180 days’ prior written notice of any such termination. Additionally, upon such a termination unrelated to a cause event, or if we materially breach our Management Agreement and our Manager terminates our Management Agreement, our Management Agreement provides that we will pay our Manager a termination fee equal to three times the sum of (x) the average annual base management fee and (y) the average annual incentive compensation earned by our Manager, in each case during the 24-month period immediately preceding the most recently completed calendar quarter prior to the date of termination. These provisions increase the cost to us of terminating our Management Agreement and adversely affect our ability to terminate our Manager in the absence of a cause event.

Our Manager maintains a contractual as opposed to a fiduciary relationship with us. Our Manager’s liability is limited under our Management Agreement, and we have agreed to indemnify our Manager against certain liabilities.

Pursuant to our Management Agreement, our Manager assumes no responsibility to us other than to render the services called for thereunder in good faith and will not be responsible for any action of our board of directors in following or declining to follow its advice or recommendations, including as set forth in our investment guidelines. Our Manager maintains a contractual as opposed to a fiduciary relationship with us. Under the terms of our Management Agreement, our Manager and its affiliates, and their respective directors, officers, employees, members, partners and stockholders, will not be liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our board of directors, our stockholders or any of our subsidiaries’ stockholders, members or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to our Management Agreement, except by reason of acts or omissions constituting bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence or reckless disregard of their duties under our Management Agreement. We have agreed to indemnify our Manager, its affiliates and the directors, officers, employees, members, partners and stockholders of our Manager and its affiliates from any and all expenses, losses, damages, liabilities, demands, charges and claims of any nature whatsoever (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) in respect of or arising from any acts or omissions of such party performed in good faith under our Management Agreement and not constituting bad faith, willful misconduct, gross negligence or reckless disregard of duties of such party under our Management Agreement. As a result, we could experience poor performance or losses for which our Manager would not be liable.

We do not own the TPG name, but we may use it as part of our corporate name pursuant to a trademark license agreement with an affiliate of TPG. Use of the name by other parties or the termination of our trademark license agreement may harm our business.

We have entered into a trademark license agreement (the “trademark license agreement”) with an affiliate of TPG (the “licensor”), pursuant to which it has granted us a fully paid-up, royalty-free, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable license to use the name “TPG RE Finance Trust, Inc.” and the ticker symbol “TRTX.” Under this agreement, we have a right to use this name for so long as our Manager (or another TPG affiliate that serves as our manager) remains an affiliate of the licensor under the trademark license agreement. The trademark license agreement may be terminated by either party as a result of certain breaches or upon 90 days’ prior written notice; provided that upon notification of such termination by us, the licensor may elect to effect termination of the trademark license agreement immediately at any time after 30 days from the date of such notification. The licensor will retain the right to continue using the “TPG” name. The trademark license agreement does not permit us to preclude the licensor from licensing or transferring the ownership of the “TPG” name to third parties, some of whom may compete with us. Consequently, we may be unable to prevent any damage to goodwill that may occur as a result of the activities of the licensor, TPG or others. Furthermore, in the event that the trademark license agreement is terminated, we will be required to, among other things, change our name and NYSE ticker symbol. Any of these events could disrupt our recognition in the marketplace, damage any goodwill we may have generated and otherwise have a material adverse effect on us.

Our business may be adversely affected if our reputation, the reputation of the Manager or TPG, or the reputation of counterparties with whom we associate is harmed.

We may be harmed by reputational issues and adverse publicity relating to us, the Manager or TPG. Issues could include real or perceived legal or regulatory violations or could be the result of a failure in performance, risk-management, governance, technology or operations, or claims related to employee misconduct, conflict of interests, ethical issues or failure to protect private information, among others. Similarly, market rumors and actual or perceived association with counterparties whose own reputation is under question could harm our business. Such reputational issues may depress the market price of our capital stock or have a negative effect on our ability to attract counterparties for our transactions, or otherwise adversely affect us.

Risks Related to Our Company

Our investment strategy and guidelines, asset allocation and financing strategy may be changed without stockholder consent.

Our Manager is authorized to follow broad investment guidelines that have been approved by our board of directors. Those investment guidelines, as well as our target assets, investment strategy, financing strategy and hedging policies with respect to investments, originations, acquisitions, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions, may be changed at any time without notice to, or the consent of, our stockholders. This could result in an investment portfolio with a different risk profile. A change in our investment strategy may increase our exposure to interest rate risk, default risk and real estate market fluctuations. Furthermore, a change in our asset allocation could result in our making investments in asset categories different from those described in this Form 10-K. These changes could materially and adversely affect us.

We may not be able to operate our business successfully or implement our operating policies and investment strategy.

We cannot assure you that our past experience will be sufficient to enable us to operate our business successfully or implement our operating policies and investment strategy as described in this Form 10-K. Furthermore, we may not be able to generate sufficient operating cash flows to pay our operating expenses or service our indebtedness. Our operating cash flows will depend on many factors, including the performance of our existing portfolio, the availability of attractive investment opportunities for the origination and selective acquisition of additional assets, the level and volatility of interest rates, readily accessible short-term and long-term financing, conditions in the financial markets, the real estate market and the economy, and our ability to successfully operate our business and execute our investment strategy. We face substantial competition in originating and acquiring attractive loans and other investments, which could adversely impact the returns from new loans and other investments.

TPG and our Manager may not be able to hire and retain qualified investment professional or grow and maintain our relationships with key borrowers and loan brokers, and if they are unable to do so, we could be materially and adversely affected.

We depend on TPG and our Manager to generate borrower clients by, among other things, developing relationships with property owners, developers, mortgage brokers and investors and others, which we believe leads to repeat and referral business. Accordingly, TPG and our Manager must be able to attract, motivate and retain skilled investment professionals. The market for investment professionals is highly competitive and may lead to increased costs to hire and retain them. We cannot guarantee that TPG and our Manager will be able to attract or retain qualified investment professionals. If TPG and our Manager cannot attract, motivate or retain a sufficient number of skilled investment professionals, or even if they can motivate or retain them but at higher costs, we could be materially and adversely affected. We also depend on TPG and our Manager for a network of loan brokers, which generates a significant portion of our loan originations. While TPG and our Manager will strive to continue to cultivate long-standing broker relationships that generate repeat business for us, brokers are free to transact business with other lenders and have done so in the past and will do so in the future. Our competitors also have relationships with some of our brokers and actively compete with us in bidding on loans marketed by these brokers, which could impair our loan origination volume and reduce our returns. There can be no assurance that TPG and our Manager will be able to maintain or develop new relationships with additional brokers.

Maintenance of our exemptions from registration as an investment company under the Investment Company Act imposes significant limits on our operations. Your investment return may be reduced if we are required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.

We conduct, and intend to continue to conduct, our operations so that we are not required to register as an “investment company” as defined in Section 3(a)(1)(A) or Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act. We believe we are not an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act because we do not engage primarily, or hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Rather, through our wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries, we are primarily engaged in non-investment company businesses related to real estate. In addition, we intend to conduct our operations so that we do not come within the definition of an investment company under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act because less than 40% of the value of our total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis will consist of “investment securities” (the “40% test”). Excluded from the term “investment securities” (as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act) are securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are themselves not investment companies and are not relying on the exclusions from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act. Our interests in wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that qualify for the exclusion pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C), as described below, Rule 3a-7, as described below, or another exclusion or exception under the Investment Company Act (other than Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) thereof), do not constitute “investment securities.”

To maintain our status as a non-investment company, the securities issued to us by any wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries that we may form in the future that are excluded from the definition of investment company under Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, together with any other investment securities we may own, may not have a value in excess of 40% of the value of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis. We will monitor our holdings to ensure ongoing compliance with this test, but there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain an exclusion or exemption from registration. The 40% test limits the types of businesses in which we may engage through our subsidiaries. In addition, the assets we and our subsidiaries may originate or acquire are limited by the provisions of the Investment Company Act and the rules and regulations promulgated under the Investment Company Act, which may materially and adversely affect us.

We hold our assets primarily through direct or indirect wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries, certain of which are excluded from the definition of investment company pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the Investment Company Act. We will classify our assets for purposes of certain of our subsidiaries’ Section 3(c)(5)(C) exemption from the Investment Company Act based upon positions set forth by the SEC staff. Based on such positions, to qualify for the exclusion pursuant to Section 3(c)(5)(C), each such subsidiary generally is required to hold at least (i) 55% of its assets in “qualifying” real estate assets, which we refer to as “Qualifying Interests,” and (ii) at least 80% of its assets in Qualifying Interests and real estate-related assets. Qualifying Interests for this purpose include senior mortgage loans, certain B-Notes and certain mezzanine loans that satisfy various conditions as set forth in SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and other assets that the SEC staff in various no-action letters and other guidance has determined are Qualifying Interests for the purposes of the Investment Company Act. We treat as real estate-related assets B-Notes, CRE debt securities and mezzanine loans that do not satisfy the conditions set forth in the relevant SEC staff no-action letters and other guidance, and debt and equity securities of companies primarily engaged in real estate businesses. The SEC has not published guidance with respect to the treatment of the pari passu participation interests in senior mortgage loans held by certain of our subsidiaries for purposes of the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion. Unless the SEC or its staff issues guidance applicable to the participation interests, we intend to treat such participation interests as real estate-related assets. Because of the composition of the assets of our subsidiaries that own such participation interests, we currently treat such subsidiaries as excluded from the definition of investment company under Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act, and treat the securities issued by them to us as “investment securities” for purposes of the 40% test.

Certain of our subsidiaries rely on Rule 3a-7 under the Investment Company Act. We refer to these subsidiaries as our “CLO subsidiaries.” Rule 3a-7 under the Investment Company Act is available to certain structured financing vehicles that are engaged in the business of holding financial assets that, by their terms, convert into cash within a finite time period and that issue fixed income securities entitling holders to receive payments that depend primarily on the cash flows from these assets, provided that, among other things, the structured finance vehicle does not engage in certain portfolio management practices resembling those employed by management investment companies (e.g., mutual funds). Accordingly, each of these CLO subsidiaries is subject to an indenture (or similar transaction documents) that contains specific guidelines and restrictions limiting the discretion of the CLO subsidiary and its collateral manager, if applicable. In particular, these guidelines and restrictions prohibit the CLO subsidiary from acquiring and disposing of assets primarily for the purpose of recognizing gains or decreasing losses resulting from market value changes. Thus, a CLO subsidiary cannot acquire or dispose of assets primarily to enhance returns to the owner of the equity in the CLO subsidiary; however, subject to this limitation, sales and purchases of assets may be made so long as doing so does not violate guidelines contained in the CLO subsidiary’s relevant transaction documents. A CLO subsidiary generally can, for example, sell an asset if the collateral manager believes that its credit characteristic qualifies it as an impaired asset, subject to fulfilling the requirements set forth in Rule 3a-7 under the Investment Company Act and the CLO subsidiary’s relevant transaction documents. As a result of these restrictions, our CLO subsidiaries may suffer losses on their assets and we may suffer losses on our investments in those CLO subsidiaries.

SEC no-action positions are based on specific factual situations that differ in some regards from the factual situations we and our subsidiaries may face, and as a result, we may have to apply SEC staff guidance that relates to other factual situations by analogy. A number of these no-action positions were issued more than twenty years ago. There may be no guidance from the SEC staff that applies directly to our factual situations, and the SEC may disagree with our conclusion that the published guidance applies in the manner we have concluded. No assurance can be given that the SEC or its staff will concur with our classification of our assets. In addition, the SEC or its staff may, in the future, issue further guidance that may require us to re-classify our assets for purposes of the Investment Company Act, including for purposes of our subsidiaries’ compliance with the exclusions provided in Section 3(c)(5)(C) or Rule 3a-7 of the Investment Company Act. There is no guarantee that we will be able to adjust our assets in the manner required to maintain our exclusion or exemption from the Investment Company Act and any adjustment in our strategy or assets could have a material adverse effect on us.

To the extent that the SEC or its staff provides more specific guidance regarding any of the matters bearing upon the definition of investment company and the exemptions to that definition, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. On August 31, 2011, the SEC issued a concept release and request for comments regarding the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion (Release No. IC-29778) in which it contemplated the possibility of issuing new rules or providing new interpretations of the exemption that might, among other things, define the phrase “liens on and other interests in real estate” or consider sources of income in determining a company’s “primary business.” Any additional guidance from the SEC or its staff could further inhibit our ability to pursue the strategies we have chosen.

Because registration as an investment company would significantly affect our (or our subsidiaries’) ability to engage in certain transactions or be structured in the manner we currently are, we intend to conduct our business so that we and our wholly-owned subsidiaries and majority-owned subsidiaries will continue to satisfy the requirements to avoid regulation as an investment company. However, there can be no assurance that we or our subsidiaries will be able to satisfy these requirements and maintain our and their exclusion or exemption from such registration. If we or our wholly-owned subsidiaries or our majority-owned subsidiaries do not meet these requirements, we could be forced to alter our investment portfolio by selling or otherwise disposing of a substantial portion of the assets that do not satisfy the applicable requirements or by acquiring a significant position in assets that are Qualifying Interests. Such investments may not represent an optimum use of capital when compared to the available investments we and our subsidiaries target pursuant to our investment strategy. These investments may present additional risks to us, and these risks may be compounded by our inexperience with such investments. Altering our investment portfolio in this manner may materially and adverse affect us if we are forced to dispose of or acquire assets in an unfavorable market.

There can be no assurance that we and our subsidiaries will be able to successfully avoid operating as an unregistered investment company. If it were established that we were an unregistered investment company, there would be a risk that we would be subject to monetary penalties and injunctive relief in an action brought by the SEC, that we would be unable to enforce contracts with third parties, that third parties could seek to obtain rescission of transactions undertaken during the period for which it was established that we were an unregistered investment company, and that we would be subject to limitations on corporate leverage that would have an adverse impact on our investment returns.

If we were required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we would become subject to substantial regulation with respect to our capital structure (including our ability to use borrowings), management, operations, transactions with affiliated persons (as defined in the Investment Company Act) and portfolio composition, including disclosure requirements and restrictions with respect to diversification and industry concentration and other matters. Compliance with the Investment Company Act would, accordingly, limit our ability to make certain investments and require us to significantly restructure our business plan, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders. Because affiliate transactions generally are prohibited under the Investment Company Act, we would not be able to enter into transactions with any of our affiliates if we fail to maintain our exclusion or exemption, and our Manager may terminate our Management Agreement if we become required to register as an investment company, with such termination deemed to occur immediately before such event. If our Management Agreement is terminated, it could constitute an event of default under our financing arrangements and financial institutions may then have the right to accelerate their outstanding loans to us and terminate their arrangements and their obligation to advance funds to us in the future. In addition, we may not be able to secure a replacement manager on favorable terms, if at all. Thus, compliance with the requirements of the Investment Company Act imposes significant limits on our operations, and our failure to comply with those requirements would likely have a material adverse effect on us.

Rapid changes in the market value or income potential of our assets may make it more difficult for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT or our exclusion or exemption from regulation under the Investment Company Act.

If the market value or income potential of our assets declines, we may need to acquire additional assets and/or liquidate certain types of assets in order to maintain our REIT qualification or our exclusion or exemption from the Investment Company Act. If the decline in the market value and/or income of our assets occurs quickly, this may be especially difficult to accomplish. This difficulty may be exacerbated by the illiquid nature of the assets that we may own. We may have to make investment decisions that we otherwise would not make absent the REIT qualification and Investment Company Act considerations, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Failure to obtain, maintain or renew required licenses and authorizations necessary to operate our mortgage-related activities may materially and adversely affect us.

We and our Manager are required to obtain, maintain or renew certain licenses and authorizations (including “doing business” authorizations and licenses to act as a commercial mortgage lender) from U.S. federal or state governmental authorities, government sponsored entities or similar bodies in connection with some or all of our mortgage-related activities. There is no assurance that we or our Manager will be able to obtain, maintain or renew any or all of the licenses and authorizations that we require or that we or our Manager will avoid experiencing significant delays in connection therewith. The failure of our company or our Manager to obtain, maintain or renew licenses will restrict our options and ability to engage in desired activities, and could subject us to fines, suspensions, terminations and various other adverse actions if it is determined that we or our Manager have engaged without the requisite licenses or authorizations in activities that required a license or authorization, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations or those of our competitors, or changes in the interpretation thereof, or newly enacted laws or regulations, could result in increased competition for our target assets, require changes to our business practices and collectively could adversely impact our revenues and impose additional costs on us, which could materially and adversely affect us.

The laws and regulations governing our operations or those of our competitors, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws and regulations may be enacted. We may be required to adopt or suspend certain business practices as a result of any changes, which could impose additional costs on us, which could materially and adversely affect us. For example, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, some government entities have instituted remedies such as moratoria on business activities, construction, evictions and foreclosures and rent cancellation, all of which may adversely affect us or our borrowers. Furthermore, if “regulatory capital” or “capital adequacy” requirements—whether under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), Basel III, or other regulatory action—are further strengthened or expanded with respect to lenders that provide us with debt financing, or were to be imposed on us directly, they or we may be required to limit, or increase the cost of, financing they provide to us or that we provide to others. Among other things, this could potentially increase our financing costs, reduce our ability to originate or acquire loans and other investments and reduce our liquidity or require us to sell assets at an inopportune time or price.

In addition, various laws and regulations currently exist that restrict the investment activities of banks and certain other financial institutions but do not apply to us, which we believe creates opportunities for us to originate loans and participate in certain other investments that are not available or attractive to these more regulated institutions. However, proposals for legislation that would change how the financial services industry is regulated are continually being introduced in the U.S. Congress and in state legislatures. Federal financial regulatory agencies may adopt regulations and amendments intended to effect regulatory reforms including reforms to certain Dodd-Frank-related regulations. Changes in the regulatory and business landscape as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and as a result of other current or future legislation and regulation may decrease the restrictions on banks and other financial institutions and allow them to compete with us for investment opportunities that were previously not available or attractive to, or otherwise pursued by, them, which could have a material adverse impact on us. See “—Risks Related to Our Lending and Investment Activities—We operate in a competitive market for the origination and acquisition of attractive investment opportunities and competition may limit our ability to originate or acquire attractive investments in our target assets, which could have a material adverse effect on us.”

Over the last several years, there also has been an increase in regulatory attention to the extension of credit outside of the traditional banking sector, raising the possibility that some portion of the non-bank financial sector will become subject to new regulation. While it cannot be known at this time whether any regulation will be implemented or what form it may take, increased regulation of non-bank lending could negatively impact our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition, impose additional costs on us, intensify the regulatory supervision of us or otherwise materially and adversely affect us.

In addition, the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (the “ITRA”) expands the scope of U.S. sanctions against Iran and Syria. In particular, Section 219 of the ITRA amended the Exchange Act to require companies subject to SEC reporting obligations under Section 13 of the Exchange Act to disclose in their periodic reports specified dealings or transactions involving Iran or other individuals and entities targeted by certain sanctions promulgated by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Treasury Department engaged in by the reporting company or any of its affiliates during the period covered by the relevant periodic report. These companies are required to separately file with the SEC a notice that such activities have been disclosed in the relevant periodic reports, and the SEC is required to post this notice of disclosure on its website and send the report to the U.S. President and certain U.S. Congressional committees. The U.S. President thereafter is required to initiate an investigation and, within 180 days of initiating such an investigation with respect to certain disclosed activities, to determine whether sanctions should be imposed. Disclosure of such activity, even if such activity is not subject to sanctions under applicable law, and any sanctions actually imposed on us or our affiliates as a result of these activities, could harm our reputation and have a negative impact on our business.

Actions of the U.S. government, including the U.S. Congress, Federal Reserve Board, U.S. Treasury Department and other governmental and regulatory bodies, designed to stabilize or reform the financial markets, or market response to those actions, may not achieve the intended effect and could materially and adversely affect us.

In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law, which imposes significant investment restrictions and capital requirements on banking entities and other organizations that are significant to U.S. financial stability. For instance, the so-called “Volcker Rule” provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act impose significant restrictions on the proprietary trading activities of banking entities and on their ability to sponsor or invest in private equity and hedge funds. It also subjects nonbank financial companies that have been designated as “systemically important” by the Financial Stability Oversight Council to increased capital requirements and quantitative limits for engaging in such activities, as well as consolidated supervision by the Federal Reserve Board. The Dodd-Frank Act also seeks to reform the asset-backed securitization market (including the mortgage-backed securities market) by requiring the retention of a portion of the credit risk inherent in the pool of securitized assets and by imposing additional registration and disclosure requirements. In October 2014, five U.S. federal banking and housing agencies and the SEC issued final credit risk retention rules, which generally require sponsors of asset-backed securities to retain at least 5% of the credit risk relating to the assets that underlie such asset-backed securities.

These rules, which generally became effective in 2016 with respect to new securitization transactions backed by mortgage loansother than residential mortgage loans, could restrict credit availability and could negatively affect the terms and availability of credit to fund our investments. See “—Risks Related to Our Financing—We have utilized and may in the future utilize non-recourse securitizations to finance our investments, which may expose us to risks that could result in losses.” The Dodd-Frank Act’s extensive requirements may have a significant effect on the financial markets and may affect the availability or terms of financing from our lender counterparties and the availability or terms of mortgage-backed securities, which may, in turn, have a material adverse effect on us.

On December 16, 2015, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) published a final rule governing margin requirements for uncleared swaps entered into by registered swap dealers and major swap participants who are not supervised by the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Farm Credit Administration and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (collectively, the “Prudential Regulators”), referred to as “covered swap entities”, and such rule was amended on November 19, 2018. The final rule generally requires covered swap entities, subject to certain thresholds and exemptions, to collect and post margin in respect of uncleared swap transactions with other covered swap entities and financial end-users. In particular, the final rule requires covered swap entities and financial end-users having “material swaps exposure,” defined as an average aggregate daily notional amount of uncleared swaps exceeding a certain specified amount, to collect and/or post (as applicable) a minimum amount of “initial margin” in respect of each uncleared swap; the specified amounts for material swaps exposure differ subject to a phase-in schedule, when the average aggregate daily notional amount will thenceforth be $8.0 billion as calculated from June, July and August of the previous calendar year. On November 9, 2020, the CFTC published a final rule extending the last implementation phase of its initial margin requirements for uncleared swaps from September 1, 2021 to September 1, 2022. In addition, the final rule requires covered swap entities entering into uncleared swaps with other covered swap entities or financial-end users, regardless of swaps exposure, to post and/or collect (as applicable) “variation margin” in reflection of changes in the mark-to-market value of an uncleared swap since the swap was executed or the last time such margin was exchanged. The CFTC final rule is broadly consistent with a similar rule requiring the exchange of initial and variation margin adopted by the Prudential Regulators in October 2015, as amended, which apply to registered swap dealers, major swap participants, security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants that are supervised by one or more of the Prudential Regulators. These rules on margin requirements for uncleared swaps could adversely affect our business, including our ability to enter such swaps or our available liquidity.

The current regulatory environment may be impacted by future legislative developments, such as amendments to key provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, including provisions setting forth capital and risk retention requirements. Financial services regulation, including regulations applicable to us, has increased significantly in recent years, and may in the future be subject to further enhanced governmental scrutiny and/or increased regulation. Although we cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, changes to legal rules and regulations, or interpretation or enforcement of them, could have a negative effect on our business.

We depend on our Manager to develop appropriate systems and procedures to control operational risk.

We depend on our Manager and its affiliates to develop the appropriate systems and procedures to control operational risk. Operational risks arising from mistakes made in the confirmation or settlement of transactions, from transactions not being properly booked, evaluated or accounted for or other similar disruption in our operations may cause us to suffer financial losses, the disruption of our business, liability to third parties, regulatory intervention or damage to our reputation. We rely heavily on our Manager’s financial, accounting and other data processing systems. The ability of our systems to accommodate transactions could also constrain our ability to properly manage our portfolio. Generally, our Manager will not be liable for losses incurred due to the occurrence of any such errors.

Operational risks, including the risks of cyberattacks, may disrupt our businesses, result in losses or limit our growth.

We rely heavily on our and TPG’s financial, accounting, communications and other data processing systems. Such systems may fail to operate properly or become disabled as a result of tampering or a breach of the network security systems or otherwise. In addition, such systems are from time to time subject to cyberattacks, which may continue to increase in sophistication and frequency in the future. Attacks on TPG and its affiliates and their portfolio companies’ and service providers’ systems could involve attacks that are intended to obtain unauthorized access to our proprietary information or personal identifying information of our stockholders, destroy data or disable, degrade or sabotage our systems, including through the introduction of computer viruses and other malicious code.

Cybersecurity incidents and cyber-attacks have been occurring globally at a more frequent and severe level and will likely continue to increase in frequency in the future. Remote working as a result of COVID-19 work-from-home policies may increase our vulnerability to such incidents and attacks. Our information and technology systems as well as those of TPG, its portfolio entities and other related parties, such as service providers, may be vulnerable to damage or interruption from cyber security breaches, computer viruses or other malicious code, network failures, computer and telecommunication failures, infiltration by unauthorized persons and other security breaches, usage errors by their respective professionals or service providers, power, communications or other service outages and catastrophic events such as fires, tornadoes, floods, hurricanes and earthquakes. Cyberattacks and other security threats could originate from a wide variety of sources, including cyber criminals, nation state hackers, hacktivists and other outside parties. There has been an

increase in the frequency and sophistication of the cyber and security threats TPG faces, with attacks ranging from those common to businesses generally to those that are more advanced and persistent, which may target TPG because TPG holds a significant amount of confidential and sensitive information about its and our investors, its portfolio companies and potential investments. As a result, we and TPG may face a heightened risk of a security breach or disruption with respect to this information. If successful, these types of attacks on our or TPG’s network or other systems could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations, due to, among other things, the loss of investor or proprietary data, interruptions or delays in the operation of our business and damage to our reputation. There can be no assurance that measures that TPG takes to ensure the integrity of its systems will provide protection, especially because cyberattack techniques change frequently or are not recognized until successful.

TRTX US Equity

TRTX · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

TRTX US Equity☆

TRTX · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

TRTX US Equity