Title

Presentation

Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the MGIC Investment Corporation First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] I will now turn the conference call over to Dianna Higgins, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Dianna Higgins: Thank you, Kelly. Good morning, and welcome, everyone. Thank you for your interest in MGIC. Joining me on the call today to discuss our results for the first quarter are Tim Mattke, Chief Executive Officer; and Nathan Colson, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Risk Officer. Our press release, which contains MGIC’s first quarter financial results was issued yesterday and is available on our website at mtg.mgic.com, under Newsroom, includes additional information about our quarterly results that we will refer to during the call today. It also includes a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to their most comparable GAAP measures. In addition, we posted on our website a quarterly supplement that contains information pertaining to our primary risk in force and other information you may find valuable.

As a reminder, from time to time, we may post information about our underwriting guidelines and other presentations, or corrections to past presentations on our website. Before getting started today, I want to remind everyone that during the course of this call, we may make comments about our expectations of the future. Actual results could differ materially from those contained in these forward-looking statements. Our 8-K and 10-Q filed yesterday includes additional information about the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed on the call today. If we make any forward-looking statements, we are not undertaking an obligation to update those statements in the future in light of subsequent developments.

No one should rely on the fact that such guidance or forward-looking statements are current at any time other than the time of this call, or the issuance of our 8-K or 10-Q. With that, I now have the pleasure to turn the call over to Tim.

Timothy Mattke: Thanks, Dianna, and good morning, everyone. I’m pleased to report a strong start to 2026 as we continue to execute our business strategies while maintaining the momentum we have built over the past several years. Our performance demonstrates the strength of our business model, disciplined market approach and long-standing commitment to meeting the evolving needs of our customers in the broader market, a commitment we have maintained since 1957. For the first quarter, we generated net income of $165 million, delivering an annualized return on equity of 13%. Our solid operating performance, combined with the strength of our balance sheet, drove book value per share to $23.63, an increase of 10% year-over-year. Turning to NIW.

We wrote $14 billion of new insurance in the first quarter, an increase of 41% from last year and our largest first quarter of NIW since 2022. The increase was driven by higher refinance activity, as well as what we expect was a modestly larger purchase market. Insurance in force at the end of the first quarter stood at approximately $303 billion, relatively flat quarter-over-quarter, and up 3% from a year ago with annual persistency ending the quarter at 84%, down from 85% last quarter. Both insurance in force and annual persistency are in line with our expectations entering the year. Overall, we continue to expect our insurance in force to remain relatively flat in 2026. If mortgage rates were to decline more than currently predicted, we’d expect the size of the MI market to benefit from increased refinance activity, although the growth in insurance in force would be offset by lower persistency, which is consistent with what happened in the first quarter to some degree.

We continue to be pleased with the overall credit quality and performance of our well-balanced portfolio. Our underwriting standards remain strong, and to date, we have not seen a material change in the credit performance of our portfolio. Early payment defaults remain low, which we believe is a positive indicator of near-term credit trends. Our capital structure remains robust with $6 billion of balance sheet capital and a well-established reinsurance program with a large panel of highly rated reinsurers that continues to be a core component of our risk and capital management strategy. These reinsurance agreements reduce loss volatility and stress scenarios while providing capital diversification and flexibility at attractive costs. At the end of the first quarter, our reinsurance program reduced our PMIERs required assets by $3.1 billion or approximately 52%.

Our capital management approach remains unchanged. We prioritize prudent insurance in force growth over capital return. Market conditions have constrained insurance in force growth in recent years. And against that backdrop, our capital return activity reflects our robust position, continued strong credit performance and financial results, and share price levels that we believe are attractive to generate long-term value for our shareholders. Consistent with our commitment to disciplined capital allocation and long-term shareholder value, last week, the Board authorized an additional $750 million share repurchase program. We actively monitor capital levels at both MGIC and the holding company, carefully balancing the amount of capital we return to shareholders with what we retain to preserve financial strength and resilience across a range of macroeconomic environments.

In doing so, we consider both current conditions and expected future operating environments, while continually evaluating the most effective ways to allocate capital to drive long-term shareholder value, an approach that served our shareholders well. Consistent with this approach, earlier this week, MGIC paid a $400 million dividend to the holding company, enhancing holding company liquidity and overall financial flexibility. With that, let me turn it over to Nathan to provide more details on our financial results and capital management activities for the first quarter.

Nathaniel Colson: Thanks, Tim, and good morning. As Tim discussed, we had solid financial results for the first quarter. We earned net income of $0.76 per diluted share, compared to $0.75 per diluted share last year. Our reestimation of ultimate losses on prior delinquencies resulted in $31 million of favorable loss reserve development in the quarter. This favorable development was primarily due to delinquency notices received in 2025. Cure rates on those delinquency notices have exceeded our expectations, and we have adjusted our ultimate loss expectations accordingly. As a quick reminder, delinquency notices we received during the quarter span across various book year vintages. For the delinquency notices we received in the quarter, we continue to apply the initial claim rate assumption of 7.5%.

Looking at delinquency trends, our account-based delinquency rate increased 14 basis points year-over-year and 1 basis point in the quarter. Seasonal trends, which are historically a tailwind to mortgage credit performance in the first quarter, were less pronounced this year. Cures on new notices remain strong, and we expect the delinquency rate and the level of new notices to continue to normalize. Overall, both the number of new notices and the delinquency rate remain low by historical standards. The in force premium yield was 38 basis points in the quarter, flat sequentially and consistent with what we expected. With another year of high persistency expected and MI origination trends similar to last year, we continue to expect the in force premium yield to remain relatively flat during the year.

Investment income totaled $62 million in the first quarter, flat sequentially and year-over-year as the book yield on our investment portfolio has been approximately 4% for the last year. During the quarter, reinvestment rates on our fixed income portfolio continued to exceed our book yield, but our capital return activities have limited the growth in the investment portfolio and the resulting investment income. Underwriting and other expenses in the quarter were $48 million, down from $53 million in the first quarter last year, as we remain focused on disciplined expense management. We continue to expect operating expenses for the full year to be in the range of $190 million to $200 million, as I shared in February. In the quarter, we continued to allocate excess capital to share repurchases, which totaled 7.2 million shares for $193 million.

We also paid a quarterly common stock dividend of $35 million. Over the prior 4 quarters, share repurchases totaled $750 million and shareholder dividends totaled $138 million. Combined, they represented a 123% payout of the net income earned over the period. In the second quarter, through April 24, we repurchased an additional 1.7 million shares of common stock for a total of $47 million. In addition, the Board approved a $0.15 per share common stock dividend payable on May 21. These actions are all consistent with our capital allocation approach. With that, let me turn it back over to Tim.

Timothy Mattke: Thanks, Nathan. A few additional comments before we open it up for questions. Housing affordability remains a challenge for many prospective homebuyers. Private mortgage insurance plays a critical role in supporting housing affordability by enabling low down payment borrowers to enter the market and achieve homeownership sooner. We remain actively engaged in industry discussions and regularly advocate for responsible policy solutions that improve affordability. Last week, FHFA announced advances in credit score modernization and that the GSEs are moving forward with VantageScore 4.0 and FICO Score 10 T, with the intent of lowering cost to borrowers. We are fully supportive of these credit score modernization advances and are actively working with the GSEs, lenders and their technology partners to operationalize these changes.

In closing, our first quarter results reflect consistent execution of our business strategies and disciplined capital allocation. With our strong foundation and deep industry expertise, we remain well positioned to navigate dynamic environments and create long-term shareholder value. With that, Kelly, let’s take questions.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts

Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Terry Ma of Barclays.

Terry Ma: I wanted to start with credit. Any color you can provide on, kind of, the trends you saw this quarter? The default rate was — I think it was up 1 basis point quarter-over-quarter versus the normal seasonality of down. So just curious if you can kind of provide any color there.

Nathaniel Colson: Yes. Terry, it’s Nathan. Thanks for the question. It is something that we looked into quite a bit this quarter. And while I think broad-based didn’t see as much, maybe, seasonal benefit as we have in recent years in the first quarter, there were a couple of unique items that we identified just relative to the timing within the month that certain large servicers provide their delinquency information. So as a practical matter, we get delinquency reporting beginning on the 16th of the month for loans that have 2 missed payments. So the earlier in the month that servicers report, the more new notices they’re likely to report just because those borrowers have had only 16 days in the month to make a payment. We had a couple of servicers that gave us reporting earlier in March than they had in prior periods.

That may have accelerated, or may have increased a little bit the amount of new notices and decreased the cures that we have seen. From — we don’t have full April information yet, but from what we’ve seen so far in April, those trends look pretty favorable and more in line with what we would have expected. So I think time will ultimately tell, but it did seem like there were a couple of, maybe, unique items in the quarter. But at the end of the day, long-term cure rates still are very attractive and haven’t shown much sign of slowing down, which has led to us consistently releasing reserves and having favorable development. So all in all, I think that the credit picture is still quite favorable.

Terry Ma: Got it. That’s helpful. And then I guess as a follow-up, would the servicer reporting issue also kind of impact roll rates? So as I look at those between the buckets, those are also a little bit worse on a year-over-year basis. And then maybe just taking a step back, any commentary on how you’re thinking about just the level of gas and energy prices, how it may kind of impact your borrowers?

Nathaniel Colson: Yes, Terry, it’s Nathan. I’ll take those. I think certainly, the same reporting for new delinquencies that I talked about is also the reporting for cure activity on previously reported items. So that could definitely have an impact. We are coming off historically good levels, especially for long-term cure rates. So we’ve always expected some normalization. That may be happening to some degree. But even post the COVID crisis, we have noticed that earlier period cure rates, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, are a little — are running at lower levels than we saw pre-COVID. But that later stage cure rates, 12 months, 18, 24 are much better, which is ultimately leading to a lot of that favorable development that I mentioned.

But the servicer reporting timing does impact both new notices and cures. Relative to energy prices and just general price levels and the impact on consumers and on borrowers that we ensure. But I think any macroeconomic headwind is something that we’re conscious of and something that we think a lot about. To date, I don’t think we’ve seen a lot of direct impact. Certainly, the power of interest rates, we saw that with refinance activity, more than 20% of our NIW with rates still not meaningfully below 6%. So I do think that rates drive activity and behavior in our space a lot more than maybe higher prices for certain goods. But it’s certainly something that we’ll actively monitor. The rate of unemployment is a key factor for us. But wage growth has still been strong and nominal GDP continues to be running very high.

So those are offsetting factors. But again, always an uncertain macroeconomic environment and something that we try to maintain both from a credit policy perspective, underwriting perspective and a balance sheet and capital position, that we have flexibility to react to whatever the macroeconomic environment is that comes next.

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Bose George of KBW.

Bose George: Just on capital return. So last year, it was — your payout ratio is 124%. It sounds like it’s similar in the first quarter. I mean last year, looking at your capital, the AOCI reversal helped keep the capital fairly flat, and that wasn’t the case in the first quarter. So the question is, does AOCI play a role in how you think about the payout ratio? Or could it continue at this level even if it pushes up leverage a little bit?

Timothy Mattke: Bose, it’s Tim. It’s a good question. Generally, we don’t really think about AOCI as something that really impacts our thought about capital return. It’s much more of a GAAP concept. And so looking at statutory PMIERs. Obviously, stay focused on what might be happening with the investment portfolio. But again, I think those are viewed as sort of temporary and obviously just unrealized that we normally hold those to maturity. So that’s just — it’s noise and obviously impacts sort of book value per share. But from a capital return, it’s really not a major consideration in our discussions.

Bose George: Okay. So just given your comments on the insurance in force being fairly flat, this is kind of a reasonable payout ratio at least for this year?

Timothy Mattke: Yes. I think with all the caveats that we put on about, obviously, performance, the macroeconomic environment, all of those things being consistent, those are things that we pay close attention to make sure that we should continue at a pace that we have been. But assuming those things stay relative to how they’ve been in the past, that we’ve been very comfortable with the rate at which we’ve been returning capital.

Bose George: Okay. Great. And then just on the positive development this quarter, it looks like a bigger portion than usual just came from loss severity. Anything to call out there? Or is that just noise?

Nathaniel Colson: I don’t think there’s anything specific to call out there. We did see a little bit of a decline in the exposure on new notices, but some of that has to do with just which loans are curing and the exposure on the inventory. We’ve kept our, kind of, reserving approach relative to exposure pretty consistent. So I think that’s more of just the underlying loans, what’s curing, what’s remaining than any active change that we made.

Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Mihir Bhatia of Bank of America.

Mihir Bhatia: I wanted to start maybe going back to some of the questions around credit that Terry was talking about. I think you did mention that you expect normalization of delinquency rates to continue. Maybe the portfolio has changed a little bit over time and with regulations and stuff also. So just, maybe, help us where do you expect the delinquency rate to stabilize? And like what’s the path to get there from here?

Nathaniel Colson: Yes. Mihir, it’s Nathan. Thanks for the question. I think there’s a couple of things that, that becomes dependent on. For the last couple of years, and there’s been some periods where it’s not exactly this, but we’ve been between a 10 and 15 basis point year-over-year increase in the delinquency rate. And that feels very consistent with normalizing credit conditions. But we also have a unique book historically right now where we have a significant amount of our in force that is 3, 4, 5, 6 years aged. And those are typically higher delinquency periods, but often, they’re not a significant portion of the in force book because so much of those books have run off. That isn’t the case today. So if that continues, I think we would expect a gradual upward movement in the delinquency rate if the ’20, ’21, ’22, ’23 books persist as they have.

But if we do get in a rate environment where we’re resetting a lot of the book towards more recent vintages, if rates were to go down and we were to write a lot more new business, that would be a tailwind, I think, for the delinquency rate. So part of the answer to that question is dependent on what happens to rates and how much new business we write. But I would say the environment where the existing loans persist, even if the delinquency rate continues to tick up modestly, that’s a really good environment for us because we get the renewal premium on those loans, and that’s been the way that the last couple of years have gone for us, and we’ve had very good results. So I think we can do well in either environment. In one environment, there’s probably more pressure on the premium rates because we’d be resetting a lot of loans, refinance is typically lower LTV, higher lower DTI, higher FICO.

But we’d be resetting a lot of the premium to lower levels, but the delinquency rate would be benefited. In an environment that continues to persist, there’s probably more upward pressure on the delinquency rate, but we continue to get the renewal premium off of those vintages, which is also an attractive environment for us.

Mihir Bhatia: Got it. And then just along those lines towards the end, you mentioned the refinances have ticked up. I think it’s like up to 21% of NIW. But your premium rate, I think, is steady. That’s the outlook you’re calling for and persistency has stayed elevated. Can you just talk a little bit about that? Like your — I think your refinance share of NIW has gone from like 6% to 20%, but persistency is basically 84%, 85% still. So just what’s driving that dynamic? And where would persistency rate stay at around these levels?

Nathaniel Colson: Yes. Mihir, it’s Nathan again. The — there was a slight decline in the persistency rate during the quarter. And again, this is an annual measure. And refinance activity was a little elevated in the fourth quarter, but we’ve seen that taper off since then. So if refinance activity remained at the 20% level of NIW, I do think that, that would work its way into the premium yield that we’re seeing and persistency would continue to tick down. I think if you — if we look at what we would term the persistency run rate, which would be just looking at the quarterly activity, it’s closer to 80% — 84%. But our expectations now with rates where they are today, more in that 6.25% to 6.5%, we are seeing a falloff in refinance activity, and that’s more kind of the expectations that we were calling out in terms of, maybe, a slightly larger purchase market but that a lot of the refinance activity for the year may be behind us.

If that’s not correct, if rates do go down and there’s a lot of refinance activity, then I think you’d see lower persistency, higher NIW and potentially, depending on how much volume it was and which loans were refi-ing, you could see maybe slight headwinds to the in force premium yield. But I think our expectations are more for rates in and around the area that they are now and for moderation in refinance activity in the second quarter and the second half of the year.

Mihir Bhatia: Got it. And then I’ll just ask one last question and jump back in queue. But in terms of new notice severity, it has increased a little bit sequentially. Just wanted to check, are you seeing any regional or vintage-specific pressures? Maybe also just talk a little bit about early performance of the ’24 through ’26 vintages. Anything you’re seeing in there that makes you pause?

Nathaniel Colson: Yes. Mihir it’s Nathan. I mean the #1 driver of our new notice severity assumption is the exposure, the risk associated with the new delinquencies. And as we’ve gotten less new delinquencies on a relative basis, relatively less delinquencies from the 2008 and prior vintages at lower loan amounts and more from the 2023, ’24, starting in 2025 at much higher loan amounts. It’s just the average loan size and thus the average exposure is higher. So I think the changing vintage mix just moving closer to today’s values is far and away the driver of that increase versus anything you’d see maybe regionally, or anything that we’re seeing or changing from an assumption standpoint.

Operator: There are no further questions. I will now turn the call back over to management for closing remarks.

Timothy Mattke: Thanks, Kelly. I want to thank everyone for your interest in MGIC. We will be participating in the BTIG Housing and Real Estate Conference and the KBW Virtual Real Estate Finance and Technology Conference in May. I look forward to talking to all of you in the near future. Have a great rest of your week.

Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts