GHIV Gores Holdings IV Inc

RISK FACTORS

You should carefully review and consider the following risk factors and the other information contained in this prospectus, including the financial statements and notes to the financial statements included herein. The following risk factors apply to our business and operations. The occurrence of one or more of the events or circumstances described in these risk factors, alone or in combination with other events or circumstances, may have an adverse effect on our business, cash flows, financial condition and results of operations. You should also carefully consider the following risk factors in addition to the other information included in this prospectus, including matters addressed in the section entitled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements; Risk Factor Summary.” We may face additional risks and uncertainties that are not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, which may also impair our business or financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our loan origination and servicing revenues are highly dependent on macroeconomic and U.S. residential real estate market conditions.

Our success depends largely on the health of the U.S. residential real estate industry, which is seasonal, cyclical, and affected by changes in general economic conditions beyond our control. Economic factors such as increased interest rates, slow economic growth or recessionary conditions, the pace of home price appreciation or the lack of it, changes in household debt levels, and increased unemployment or stagnant or declining wages affect our borrowers’ income and thus their ability and willingness to make loan payments.

National or global events affect all such macroeconomic conditions. Weak or a significant deterioration in economic conditions reduce the amount of disposable income consumers have, which in turn reduces consumer spending and the willingness of qualified potential borrowers to take out loans. It is uncertain what impact the recent American Rescue Plan, other actions that the new Biden administration may adopt or steps that may be implemented by the new leadership at the Treasury Department may have on the macroeconomic conditions of the U.S. Furthermore, several state and local governments in the United States are experiencing, and may continue to experience, budgetary strain. One or more states or significant local governments could default on their debt or seek relief from their debt under the U.S. bankruptcy code or by agreement with their creditors. Any or all of the circumstances described above may lead to further volatility in or disruption of the credit markets at any time and could adversely affect our financial condition. Such economic factors typically affect buyers’ demand for new homes or their willingness or ability to refinance their current mortgages which could adversely affect the wholesale loan origination market and our financial condition or results of operations.

Any uncertainty or deterioration in market conditions that leads to a decrease in loan originations will likely result in lower revenue on loans sold into the secondary market. Lower loan origination volumes generally place downward pressure on margins, thus compounding the effect of the deteriorating market conditions. Moreover, any deterioration in market conditions that leads to an increase in loan delinquencies will result in higher expenses for loans we service for the GSEs and Ginnie Mae. The increased cost to service loans could decrease the estimated value of our MSRs. In addition, an increase in delinquencies lowers the interest income we receive on cash held in collection and other accounts and may increase our obligation to advance certain principal, interest, tax and insurance obligations owed by the delinquent mortgage loan borrower. While increased delinquencies generate higher ancillary revenues, including late fees, these fees are likely not sufficient to offset the increased cost of servicing the loans. An increase in delinquencies could therefore be detrimental to our business.

Recently, financial markets have experienced significant volatility. Unemployment levels remain higher than before the COVID-19 pandemic began and may rise again in the future. There may be a significant increase in the rate and number of mortgage payment delinquencies, and house sales, home prices and multifamily fundamentals may be adversely affected, which could lead to a material adverse decrease of our mortgage origination activities.

5

Any of the circumstances described above, alone or in combination, could lead to volatility in or disruption of the credit markets at any time and have a detrimental effect on our business. For additional information on macroeconomic and U.S. residential real estate market conditions, please consider the matters addressed in the section below entitled “—The COVID-19 pandemic and the actions taken by local, state and federal governments have and are expected to continue to adversely affect the national economy and the macroeconomic environment which could adversely affect our current operations and our ability to continue to grow.”

Our financial performance is directly affected by, and subject to substantial volatility from changes in prevailing interest rates.

Our financial performance is directly affected by, and subject to substantial volatility from changes in prevailing interest rates. We are beginning to experience a rise in interest rates and increased inflation expectations in the U.S. which could lead to stagflation in coming years. For example, the yield on U.S. 10 Year Treasury bonds, often referred to as one of the primary market indicator rates, has increased sharply since the start of 2021. In addition, certain other preliminary signs of inflation have become more prevalent since the start of this year, especially in connection with the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan stimulus package in March. Rising interest rates and inflation will likely decrease the demand for new mortgage originations and refinancings and increase competition for borrowers, which would likely pressure our margins and have an adverse impact on our origination volumes and financial performance.

With regard to the portion of our business that is centered on refinancing existing mortgages, generally, the refinance market experiences more significant fluctuations than the purchase market as a result of interest rate changes. Long-term residential mortgage interest rates are currently at or near record lows, but they may increase in the future. As interest rates rise, refinancing generally becomes a smaller portion of the market as fewer consumers are interested in refinancing their mortgages. With regard to our purchase mortgage loan business, higher interest rates may also reduce demand for purchase mortgages as home ownership becomes more expensive. This could adversely affect our revenues or require us to increase marketing expenditures in an attempt to increase or maintain our volume of mortgages. Decreases in interest rates can also adversely affect our financial condition, the value of our MSR portfolio, and our results of operations. With sustained low interest rates, such as those we have been experiencing, refinancing transactions may decline over time, as many consumers have already taken advantage of the low interest rates.

Changes in interest rates are also a key driver of the performance of our servicing business, particularly because our portfolio includes MSRs, the values of which are highly sensitive to changes in interest rates. Historically, the value of MSRs has increased when interest rates rise as higher interest rates lead to decreased prepayment rates, and has decreased when interest rates decline as lower interest rates lead to increased prepayment rates. In addition, increased prepayment rates may lead to increased asset decay and a decrease in servicing fees. As a result, decreases in interest rates could have a detrimental effect on our business.

Borrowings under some of our finance and warehouse facilities are at variable rates of interest based on short term rate indexes, whereas our mortgage loans that serve as collateral for such facilities are generally based on long-term interest rates, which also exposes us to interest rate risk. If short term interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on certain of our variable-rate indebtedness will increase and if long-term rates do not increase in kind (i.e., the yield curve flattens or inverts) our net income and cash flows, including cash available for servicing our indebtedness, could correspondingly decrease.

Our business is highly dependent on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and certain U.S. government agencies, and any changes in these entities or their current roles could be detrimental to our business.

We originate loans eligible for sale to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and government insured or guaranteed loans, such as the FHA, the Veteran Affairs (“VA”) and the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) loans eligible for Ginnie Mae securities issuance.

6

In 2008, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship and, as their conservator, controls and directs their operations. There is significant uncertainty regarding the future of the GSEs, including with respect to how long they will continue to be in existence, the extent of their roles in the market and what forms they will have, and whether they will be government agencies, government-sponsored agencies or private for-profit entities. Since they have been placed into conservatorship, many legislative and administrative plans for GSE reform have been put forth, but all have been met with resistance from various constituencies.

With the change in administrations from the Trump administration, which made a number of recommendations concerning reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to the Biden administration, as well as the shift in control of the United States Senate, future government policy toward the GSEs continues to be uncertain.

The extent and timing of any regulatory reform regarding the GSEs and the U.S. housing finance market, as well as any effect they may have on our business operations and financial results, are uncertain. It is not yet possible to determine whether such proposals will be enacted and, if so, when they will be enacted, what form any final legislation or policies might take or how proposals, legislation or policies may impact the MBS market and our business. Our inability to make the necessary adjustments to respond to these changing market conditions or loss of our approved seller/servicer status with the GSEs could have a material adverse effect on our mortgage origination operations and our mortgage servicing operations. If those agencies cease to exist, wind down, or otherwise significantly change their business operations or if we lose approvals with those agencies or our relationships with those agencies is otherwise adversely affected, we would need to seek alternative secondary market participants to acquire our mortgage loans at a volume sufficient to sustain our business. If such participants are not available or available on reasonably comparable economic terms, the above changes could have a material effect on our ability to profitably sell loans we originate that are securitized through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae.

Changes in the GSEs, FHA, VA, and USDA guidelines or GSE and Ginnie Mae guarantees could adversely affect our business.

We are required to follow specific guidelines and eligibility standards that impact the way we service and originate GSE and U.S. government agency loans, including guidelines and standards with respect to:

These guidelines provide the GSEs and other government agencies with the ability to provide monetary incentives for loan servicers that perform well and to assess penalties for those that do not. At the direction of the FHFA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have aligned their guidelines for servicing delinquent mortgages, which could result in monetary incentives for servicers that perform well and to assess compensatory penalties against servicers in connection with the failure to meet specified timelines relating to delinquent loans and foreclosure proceedings, and other breaches of servicing obligations. We generally cannot negotiate these terms with the agencies and they are subject to change at any time without our specific consent. A significant change in these guidelines, that decreases the fees we charge or requires us to expend additional resources to provide mortgage services, could decrease our revenues or increase our costs.

In addition, changes in the nature or extent of the guarantees provided by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, the USDA or the VA, or the insurance provided by the FHA, or coverage provided by private mortgage

7

insurers, could also have broad adverse market implications. Any future increases in guarantee fees or changes to their structure or increases in the premiums borrowers are required to pay to the FHA or private mortgage insurers for insurance or to the VA or the USDA for guarantees could increase mortgage origination costs. These industry changes could negatively affect demand for our mortgage services and consequently our origination volume, which could be detrimental to our business.

To the extent that mortgage loans originated and sold by us do not comply with GSE, FHA or VA guidelines, we are required to repurchase or substitute mortgage loans or indemnify for losses related to our mortgage loans.

A significant majority of our mortgage loans are conforming loans sold to GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or insured by FHA or VA and sold into GNMA securities. In connection with such sales and insuring, we make representations and warranties to the GSE, FHA or VA that the mortgage loans conform to their respective standards. These standards include, among other items, compliance with origination guidelines, underwriting, appraisals, insurance and legal documents. In August 2021, we piloted, as part of a larger roll-out, a new program, UWM Appraisal Direct, in which we directly engage with appraisers rather than utilizing an appraisal management company. While we believe that this new program meets all of the GSE guidelines, there is a risk that the GSEs could decide that our implementation of this new process did not meet their standards.

If a mortgage loan does not comply with the representations and warranties that we made with respect to it at the time of our sale or insuring, we are required to repurchase the loan, replace it with a substitute loan and/or indemnify the applicable agency for losses. In the case of repurchases, we typically repurchase such loan and resell it into a non-conforming market at a discount to the repurchase price. As of September 30, 2021, we had accrued a $84.7 million reserve for repurchase and indemnification obligations. Actual repurchase and indemnification obligations could materially exceed the reserves we have recorded in our consolidated financial statements. Any significant repurchases, substitutions, indemnifications or premium recapture could be detrimental to our business.

Our business is dependent on our ability to maintain and expand our relationships with our clients, the Independent Mortgage Advisors.

Our clients are the Independent Mortgage Advisors who refer us mortgage loans to originate. Consequently, our results of operations are dependent, in large part, on our ability to maintain and expand our relationships with Independent Mortgage Advisors. If we are unable to attract Independent Mortgage Advisors to join our network and to provide a level of service such that our clients remain with the network or refer a greater number of their mortgage loans to us, our ability to originate loans will be significantly impaired. The willingness of Independent Mortgage Advisors to originate mortgage loans with us is dependent on (i) the rates that we are able to offer our clients’ borrowers for mortgage loans, (2) our customer service, and (3) compensation. In determining with whom to partner, Independent Mortgage Advisors are also focused on the technological services and platforms we can provide so that the Independent Mortgage Advisors can best attract and serve consumers. We recently adopted our “All-In” policy of requiring that Independent Mortgage Advisors that generate mortgage loans with us not generate business with certain other market participants. To the extent that a material number of our Independent Mortgage Advisors are unwilling to commit to such requirement, it could reduce the volume of mortgage loans that we are able to originate which could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, the policy, which has generated significant publicity and a legal proceeding, could adversely affect our reputation or affect our ability to attract new Independent Mortgage Advisors. If our clients are dissatisfied with our services or platform or technological capabilities, or they cannot offer prospective borrowers competitive rates, we could lose a number of clients which would have a negative impact on our business, operating results and financial condition.

All of our mortgage loans are initiated by third parties, which exposes us to business, competitive and underwriting risks.

As a Wholesale Mortgage Lender, we market and originate mortgage loans exclusively through independent third-parties, comprised of Independent Mortgage Advisors. While we believe using Independent Mortgage

8

Advisors best serves mortgage consumers, our reliance on third parties presents risks and challenges, including the following:

The conduct of the Independent Mortgage Advisors through whom we originate mortgage loans could subject us to fines or other penalties.

We depend exclusively on Independent Mortgage Advisors for our loan originations. These clients are subject to parallel and separate legal obligations. While these laws may not explicitly hold the originating lenders responsible for the legal violations of such entities, U.S. federal and state agencies increasingly have sought to impose such liability. For example, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), through its use of a disparate impact

9

theory under the Fair Housing Act, has held home loan lenders responsible for the pricing practices of third parties, alleging that the lender is directly responsible for the total fees and charges paid by the borrower even if the lender neither dictated what the third party could charge nor kept the money for its own account. See “—Regulatory agencies and consumer advocacy groups are becoming more aggressive in asserting claims that the practices of lenders and loan servicers result in a disparate impact on protected classes.” In addition, under the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (“TRID”) rule, we may be held responsible for improper disclosures made to borrowers by our clients. While we seek to use technology, such as our loan origination systems (“LOS”), to monitor whether these clients and their loan officers are complying with their obligations, our ability to enforce such compliance is extremely limited. Consequently, we may be subject to claims for fines or other penalties based upon the conduct of our clients and their loan officers with whom we do business, which could have a material effect on our operating results and financial condition.

We may not be able to continue to grow our mortgage loan origination volume which could negatively affect our reputation and business, financial condition and results of operations.

We originate mortgage loans exclusively through Independent Mortgage Advisors in the wholesale channel. Our loan origination volume is highly dependent on (1) macroeconomic factors, including interest rates, and U.S. residential real estate market conditions, (2) the efforts of third-party Independent Mortgage Advisors and loan officers and (3) the market share controlled by the wholesale channel. Any of these factors could negatively affect our mortgage loan origination volume and in turn, adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our ability to continue to grow our mortgage loan origination volume will be greatly influenced by residential real estate market conditions, including seasonality, cyclicality and general economic conditions outside of our control. Furthermore, we market and originate mortgage loans exclusively through Independent Mortgage Advisors who are not contractually obligated to sell or promote our products and who may also sell or promote competitors’ loan products. Our competitors actively compete for the same Independent Mortgage Advisors, and we may not be successful in maintaining our existing relationships or expanding our network of Independent Mortgage Advisors. For example, increased competition from new and existing market participants or reductions in the overall volume of mortgage loans, from new homes and refinancings, can impact our ability to continue to grow our loan production volumes, and we may be forced to accept lower margins to continue to compete. If we are unable to continue to grow our loan origination business, this could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Historically, more competitors have focused on “direct-to-the-customer” distribution models, and continued advancements or the perception of efficiency in these models may impact the overall market share controlled by our Independent Mortgage Advisor clients in the wholesale channel and make it more difficult for us to grow our loan origination volume, or require us to establish relationships with, more clients.

If we are unable to effectively manage our significant increases in mortgage volume, including by hiring, training and retaining qualified personnel to support our growth, it could adversely affect our current business operations and our growth.

During 2020, we increased our loan origination volume by 69% and increased our number of team members by 52%. During the nine months ended September 30, 2021, we increased our loan origination by 34% as compared to the prior year period, while our number of team members increased by 13% as compared to the year-end period. Our ability to manage this significant increase in volume and continue to grow and succeed will depend on our ability to continue to hire, integrate, develop and retain highly-qualified personnel for all areas of our organization. Any talent acquisition and retention challenges could reduce our operating efficiency, increase our costs of operations and harm our overall financial condition. We could face these challenges if competition for qualified personnel intensifies or the pool of qualified candidates becomes more limited. Additionally, we invest heavily in training our team members, which increases their value to competitors who may seek to recruit them. If we do not effectively manage our growth, it could disrupt our business operations and have a negative impact on our long-term growth.

10

The COVID-19 pandemic and the actions taken by local, state and federal governments have and are expected to continue to adversely affect the national economy and the macroeconomic environment which could adversely affect our current operations and our ability to continue to grow.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had, and continues to have, a significant impact on the national economy and the communities in which we operate. While the pandemic’s effect on the macroeconomic environment has yet to be fully determined and could continue for months or years, we expect that the pandemic and governmental programs created as a response to the pandemic, will affect the core aspects of our business and the business of our clients, including the origination of mortgages, our servicing operations, our liquidity and our team members. Such effects, if they continue for a prolonged period, may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. These effects may be exacerbated should there be another wave of infections or if the pandemic otherwise intensifies.

Moreover, the FHFA establishes certain liquidity requirements for agency and Ginnie Mae loan servicers that are generally tied to the unpaid principal balance of loans serviced by such loan servicer for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, FHA and VA. To the extent that the percentage of seriously delinquent loans (“SDQ”), i.e., loans that are 90 days or more delinquent, exceeds defined thresholds, the liquidity requirements for loan servicers could increase materially. Exceeding such SDQ thresholds would result in substantially higher liquidity requirements, which could materially impact our results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, our business could be disrupted if we are unable to operate due to changing governmental restrictions such as travel bans and quarantines placed on our team members, other measures that ensure the protection of our team members’ health, measures aimed at maintaining our information technology infrastructure, or if an outbreak occurs in our headquarters that prevents us from operating.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the major purchasers in the bulk MSR secondary market experienced liquidity constraints; consequently, the liquidity of the bulk MSR market has been, and may continue to be, adversely affected. This market disruption may adversely affect our ability to sell MSRs and the pricing that we are able to achieve, which in turn could adversely affect our liquidity and reduce our margins. If we are unable to access sources of capital or liquidity as a result of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the financial markets, our ability to maintain or grow our business could be limited.

We may not be able to detect or prevent cyberattacks and other data and security breaches, which could adversely affect our business and subject us to liability to third parties.

We are dependent on information technology networks and systems, particularly for our loan origination systems and other technology-driven platforms, designed to provide best-in-class service and experience for clients and to ensure adherence to regulatory compliance, operational governance, training and security. In the ordinary course of our business, we receive, process, retain and transmit proprietary information and sensitive or confidential data, including the public and non-public personal information of our team members, clients and loan applicants. Despite devoting significant time and resources to ensure the integrity of our information technology systems, we have not always been able to, and may not be able to in the future, anticipate or implement effective preventive measures against all security breaches or unauthorized access of our information technology systems or the information technology systems of third-party vendors that receive, process, retain and transmit electronic information on our behalf.

Cybersecurity risks for lenders have significantly increased in recent years, in part, because of the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions, and the increased sophistication and activities of computer hackers, organized crime, terrorists, and other external parties, including foreign state actors. We, our clients, borrowers and loan applicants, regulators and other third parties have been subject to, and are likely to continue to be the target of, cyberattacks and other security breaches. Security breaches, cyberattacks such as computer viruses, malicious or

11

destructive code, phishing attacks, denial of service or information, acts of vandalism, natural disasters, fire, power loss, telecommunication failures, team member misconduct, human error and developments in computer intrusion capabilities could result in a compromise or breach of the technology that we or our third-party vendors use to collect, process, retain, transmit and protect the personal information and transaction data of our team members, clients, borrowers and loan applicants. Similar events outside of our control can also affect the demands we and our vendors may make to respond to any security breaches or similar disruptive events. We invest in industry-standard security technology designed to protect our data and business processes against risk of a data security breach and cyberattack. Our data security management program includes identity, trust, vulnerability and threat management business processes as well as the adoption of standard data protection policies. We measure our data security effectiveness through industry-accepted methods and remediate significant findings. The technology and other controls and processes designed to secure our team member, client, borrower and loan applicant information and to prevent, detect and remedy any unauthorized access to that information were designed to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that such information is secure and that any unauthorized access is identified and addressed appropriately. Such controls have not always detected, and may in the future fail to prevent or detect, unauthorized access to our team member, client, borrower and loan applicant information.

The techniques used to obtain unauthorized, improper or illegal access to our systems and those of our third-party vendors, our data, our team members’, clients’, borrowers’ and loan applicants’ data or to disable, degrade or sabotage service are constantly evolving, and have become increasingly complex and sophisticated. Furthermore, such techniques change frequently and are often not recognized or detected until after they have been launched. Therefore, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques and may not become aware of such a security breach in a timely manner, which could exacerbate any damage we experience. Security attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources, including third parties such as computer hackers, persons involved with organized crime or associated with external service providers, or foreign state or foreign state-supported actors. Those parties may also attempt to fraudulently induce team members, clients, borrowers and loan applicants or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data or that of our team members, clients, borrowers and loan applicants. Our failure to detect or prevent a cyberattack or other data or security breach could adversely affect our business.

The occurrence of any of the foregoing events could subject us to increased costs, litigation, disputes, damages, and other liabilities. In addition, the foregoing events could result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws. If this information is inappropriately accessed and used by a third party or a team member for illegal purposes, such as identity theft, we may be responsible to the affected individuals for any losses they may have incurred as a result of such misappropriation. In such an instance, we may also be subject to regulatory action, investigation or liability to a governmental authority for fines or penalties associated with a lapse in the integrity and security of our team members’, clients’, borrowers’ and loan applicants’ information. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against and remedy any potential or existing security breaches and their consequences. In addition, our remediation efforts may not be successful and it may not have adequate insurance to cover these losses. Furthermore, any publicized security problems affecting our businesses and/or those of such third parties may negatively impact the market perception of our products and discourage clients or borrowers from doing business with us.

Technology disruptions or failures, including a failure in our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties with whom we do business, could disrupt our business, cause legal or reputational harm and adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

We are dependent on the secure, efficient, and uninterrupted operation of our technology infrastructure, including computer systems, related software applications and data centers, as well as those of certain third parties and affiliates. Our websites and computer/telecommunication networks must accommodate a high volume of traffic and deliver frequently updated information, the accuracy and timeliness of which is critical to our business. Our technology must be able to facilitate a loan application experience that equals or exceeds the

12

experience provided by our competitors. We have or may in the future experience service disruptions and failures caused by system or software failure, fire, power loss, telecommunications failures, team member misconduct, human error, computer hackers, computer viruses and disabling devices, malicious or destructive code, denial of service or information, as well as natural disasters, health pandemics and other similar events and our disaster recovery planning may not be sufficient for all situations. The implementation of technology changes and upgrades to maintain current and integrate new technology systems may also cause service interruptions. Any such disruption could interrupt or delay our ability to provide services to our clients and could also impair the ability of third parties to provide critical services to our business.

Additionally, the technology and other controls and processes we have created to help it identify misrepresented information in our loan origination operations were designed to obtain reasonable, not absolute, assurance that such information is identified and addressed appropriately. Accordingly, such controls may not have detected, and may fail in the future to detect, all misrepresented information in our loan origination operations. If our operations are disrupted or otherwise negatively affected by a technology disruption or failure, this could result in client dissatisfaction and damage to our reputation and brand, and have a material impact on our business.

Loss of our key management could result in a material adverse effect on our business.

Our future success depends to a significant extent on the continued services of our senior management, including Mat Ishbia, our President and Chief Executive Officer. The experience of our senior management is a valuable asset to us and would be difficult to replace. The loss of the services of our President and Chief Executive Officer or other members of senior management could disrupt and have a detrimental effect on our business.

Our products rely on software and services from third-party vendors and if any of these services became unavailable or unreliable, it could adversely affect the quality and timeliness of our mortgage origination process.

In addition to our proprietary software, we license third-party software and depend on services from various third parties for use in our products. For example, we rely on third-party vendors for our online mortgage application services, to generate the documents required for closing the document, to generate flood certifications and to confirm employment. While there are other providers of these services in the market, any loss of the right to use any of the software or services could result in decreased functionality of our products until equivalent technology is either developed by us or, if available from another provider, is identified, obtained and integrated, which could adversely affect our reputation and our future financial results of operations.

Furthermore, we remain responsible for ensuring our loans are originated in compliance with applicable laws. Despite our efforts to monitor such compliance, any errors or failures of such third-party vendors or their software to perform in the manner intended could result in loan defects potentially requiring repurchase. In addition, any errors or defects in or failures of the other software or services we rely on, whether maintained by us or by third parties, could result in errors or defects in our products or cause our products to fail, which could adversely affect our business and be costly to correct. Many of our third-party vendors attempt to impose limitations on their liability for such errors, defects or failures, and if enforceable, we may have additional liability to our clients, borrowers or other third parties that could harm our reputation and increase our operating costs. Any failure to do so could adversely affect our ability to deliver effective products to our clients, borrowers and loan applicants and adversely affect our business.

We rely on third party sub-servicers who service all the mortgage loans on which we hold MSRs, and our financial performance may be adversely affected by their inability to adequately perform their servicing functions.

We contract with third party sub-servicers for the servicing of the portion of the mortgage loans in our portfolio for which we retain MSRs. Although we use third-party servicers, we, as master servicer, retain primary responsibility to ensure these loans are serviced in accordance with the contractual and regulatory requirements.

13

Therefore, the failure of our sub-servicers to adequately perform their servicing obligations may subject it to liability for their improper acts or omissions and adversely affect our financial performance. Specifically, we may be adversely affected:

Furthermore, we utilize two nationally-recognized sub-servicers to service all of our mortgage loans for which we have retained MSRs. This sub-servicer counterparty concentration subjects us to a potentially greater impact if any of the risks described above were to occur, and any delay in transferring servicing to a new sub-servicer could further adversely affect servicing performance and cause financial losses. Any of these risks could adversely affect our results of operations, including our loan servicing income and the cash flow generated by our MSR portfolio. Any of these risks may be further exacerbated to the extent we materially increase our MSR portfolio in the future.

We are required to make servicing advances that can be subject to delays in recovery or may not be recoverable in certain circumstances and could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, business and financial condition.

During any period in which one of our borrowers is not making payments on a loan we service, we are required under most of our servicing agreements to advance our own funds to meet some combination of contractual principal and interest remittance requirements, pay property taxes and insurance premiums, legal expenses and other protective advances. We also advance funds to maintain, repair and market real estate properties. In certain situations, our contractual obligations may require us to make certain advances for which we may not be reimbursed. In addition, in the event a loan serviced by us defaults or becomes delinquent, or the mortgagee is allowed to enter into a forbearance, the repayment of advances may be delayed, which may adversely affect our liquidity. Any significant increase in required servicing advances or delinquent loan repurchases, could have an adverse impact on our cash flows, even if they are reimbursable.

With delinquent VA guaranteed loans, the VA guarantee may not make us whole on losses or advances we may have made on the loan. In addition, for certain loans sold to Ginnie Mae, we, as the servicer, have the unilateral right to repurchase any individual loan in a Ginnie Mae securitization pool if that loan meets defined

14

criteria, including being delinquent for longer than 90 days. Once we have the unilateral right to repurchase the delinquent loan, we have effectively regained control over the loan and we must recognize the loan on our balance sheet and recognize a corresponding financial liability. Any significant increase in seriously delinquent Ginnie Mae loans could have an adverse impact on our balance sheet, as well as our borrowing covenants that are based on balance sheet ratios.

As part of the federal response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the CARES Act allows borrowers to apply for a mortgage forbearance up until September 30, 2021. Nevertheless, servicers of mortgage loans are often times contractually bound to advance monthly payments to investors, insurers and taxing authorities regardless of whether the borrower actually makes those payments. While Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issued guidance limiting the number of payments a servicer must advance in the case of a forbearance, we expect that a borrower who has experienced a loss of employment or a reduction of income may not repay the forborne payments at the end of the forbearance period. Additionally, pursuant to the amended rules announced by the CFPB on June 28, 2021, we are now subject to new regulations which impact our ability to collect servicing related fees, such as late fees, and initiating foreclosure proceedings. The new rules implemented by the CFPB create additional procedures which servicers must follow, and the costs and administrative burden associated with complying with these regulations may have a material adverse effect on our cash flows, business, and financial condition. Even though delinquencies generate higher ancillary revenues, including late fees, it is unlikely that we will be able to collect such ancillary fees for delinquencies relating to the COVID-19 pandemic as the federal and state legislation and regulations responding to the COVID-19 pandemic continue to evolve. Approximately 0.83% of our serviced loans are in forbearance as of September 30, 2021.

Much like what has occurred in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, government intervention also occurs periodically as a result of natural disasters or other events that cause widespread borrower harm. Similar challenges and risks to servicers, including us, will likely occur when such events transpire in the future.

We face intense competition that could adversely affect our business.

Competition in the mortgage lending space is intense. In addition, the mortgage business has experienced substantial consolidation. As we depend solely on third parties to deliver us mortgage loans, we may be at a competitive disadvantage to financial institutions or direct-to-consumer mortgage lenders that market to, and have a direct relationship with, the borrower. In addition, some of our competitors may have greater financial and other resources than we have (including access to capital) while other of our competitors, such as financial institutions who originate mortgage loans using their own funds, may have more flexibility in holding loans. Additionally, we operate at a competitive disadvantage to U.S. federal banks and thrifts and their subsidiaries because they enjoy federal preemption and, as a result, conduct their business under relatively uniform U.S. federal rules and standards and are generally not subject to the laws of the states in which they do business (including state “predatory lending” laws). Unlike our federally chartered competitors, we are generally subject to all state and local laws applicable to lenders in each jurisdiction in which we originate and service loans. To compete effectively, we must have a very high level of operational, technological and managerial expertise, as well as access to capital at a competitive cost.

Competition in our industry can take many forms, including the variety of loan programs being made available, interest rates and fees charged for a loan, convenience in obtaining a loan, client service levels, the amount and term of a loan, as well as access to marketing and distribution channels, including independent mortgage advisors that generate mortgage loan applications. Claims of collusion and other anti-competitive conduct have also become more common, and many financial institutions and lenders have been the subject of legal claims by regulatory agencies and consumers. For example, on March 4, 2021, we announced a new policy that we would no longer enter into new transactions with independent mortgage advisors who also sold mortgage loans to two certain market participants, but still allowed these independent mortgage advisors to engage with any of the more than 70 other mortgage loan originators or lenders. If our policy or any other actions were found to be anti-competitive or non-compliant with state or federal antitrust laws or other regulations it could result in

15

state or federal governmental actions or private civil claims, including class actions, being brought against us. Such litigation would cause us to incur costs, fines and legal expenses in connection with these matters, regardless of any eventual ruling in our favor, and could also harm the reputation of our brand, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Fluctuations in interest rates and general economic conditions may also affect our competitive position. During periods of rising rates, competitors that have locked in low borrowing costs may have a competitive advantage. Furthermore, a cyclical decline in the industry’s overall level of originations, or decreased demand for loans due to a higher interest rate environment, may lead to increased competition for the remaining loans. Any increase in these competitive pressures could be detrimental to our business.

The success and growth of our business will depend upon our ability to be a leader in technological innovation in our industry.

We operate in an industry experiencing rapid technological change and frequent product introductions. In order to succeed, we must lead our peers in designing, innovating and introducing new technology and product offerings. The process of developing new technologies and products is complex, and if we are unable to successfully innovate and continue to deliver a superior client experience, the demand for our products and services may decrease, we may lose market share and our growth and operations may be harmed.

The origination process is increasingly dependent on technology, and our business relies on our continued ability to process loan applications over the internet, accept electronic signatures, provide instant process status updates and other client- and loan applicant-expected conveniences. Our proprietary and exclusively licensed technology is integrated into all steps of the loan origination process, from the original submission, to the underwriting to the closing. Our dedication to incorporating technological advancements into our loan origination and servicing platforms requires significant financial and personnel resources. For example, we have, and will continue to, expend significant capital expenditures on our proprietary technology platforms. Maintaining and improving this technology will require significant capital expenditures.

To the extent we are dependent on any particular technology or technological solution, we may be harmed if such technology or technological solution (1) becomes non-compliant with existing industry standards, (2) fails to meet or exceed the capabilities of our competitors’ equivalent technologies or technological solutions, (3) becomes increasingly expensive to service, retain and update, (4) becomes subject to third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violation, or (5) malfunctions or functions in a way we did not anticipate or that results in loan defects potentially requiring repurchase. Additionally, new technologies and technological solutions are continually being released. As such, it is difficult to predict the problems we may encounter in improving our websites’ and other technologies’ functionality.

We could be adversely affected if we do not adequately obtain, maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights and may encounter disputes from time to time relating to our use of the intellectual property of third parties.

Our proprietary technology platforms and other proprietary rights are important to our success and our competitive position. We rely on intellectual property to protect our proprietary rights. Despite these measures, third parties may attempt to disclose, obtain, copy or use intellectual property rights owned or licensed by us and these measures may not prevent misappropriation, infringement, reverse engineering or other violation of intellectual property or proprietary rights owned or licensed by us. Furthermore, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions can be difficult to enforce and, even if successfully enforced, may not be entirely effective. In addition, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into confidentiality agreements with all team members, partners, independent contractors or consultants that have or may have had access to our trade secrets and other proprietary information. Any issued or registered intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to us may be challenged, invalidated, held unenforceable or circumvented in litigation or other proceedings, and such

16

intellectual property rights may be lost or no longer provide us meaningful competitive advantages. Third parties may also independently develop products, services and technology similar to or duplicative of our products and services.

Our success and ability to compete also depends in part on our ability to operate without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property or proprietary rights of third parties. We may encounter disputes from time to time concerning intellectual property rights of others, including our competitors, and we may not prevail in these disputes. Third parties may raise claims against us alleging an infringement, misappropriation or other violation of their intellectual property rights, including trademarks, copyrights, patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property or proprietary rights. An assertion of an intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violation claim against us could result in adverse judgments, settlement on unfavorable terms or cause us to spend significant amounts to defend the claim, even if we ultimately prevail and we may have to pay significant money damages, lose significant revenues, be prohibited from using the relevant systems, processes, technologies or other intellectual property, cease offering certain products or services, or incur significant license, royalty or technology development expenses.

Fraud could result in significant financial losses and harm to our reputation.

We use automated underwriting engines from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to assist us in determining if a loan applicant is creditworthy, as well as other proprietary and third-party tools and safeguards to detect and prevent fraud. We are unable, however, to prevent every instance of fraud that may be engaged in by our clients, borrowers or team members, and any seller, real estate broker, notary, settlement agent, appraiser, title agent, or third-party originator that misrepresents facts about a loan, including the information contained in the loan application, property valuation, title information and employment and income stated on the loan application. If any of this information was intentionally or negligently misrepresented and such misrepresentation was not detected prior to the acquisition or closing of the loan, the value of the loan could be significantly lower than expected, resulting in a loan being approved in circumstances where it would not have been, had we been provided with accurate data. A loan subject to a material misrepresentation is typically unsalable or subject to repurchase if it is sold before detection of the misrepresentation. In addition, the persons and entities making a misrepresentation are often difficult to locate and it is often difficult to collect from them any monetary losses we have suffered.

High profile fraudulent activity also could negatively impact our brand and reputation, which could impact our business. In addition, significant increases in fraudulent activity could lead to regulatory intervention, which could increase our costs and also negatively impact our business.

Our counterparties may terminate our servicing rights, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenues.

The majority of the mortgage loans we service are serviced on behalf of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. These entities establish the base service fee to compensate us for servicing loans as well as the assessment of fines and penalties that may be imposed upon us for failing to meet servicing standards.

As is standard in the industry, under the terms of our master servicing agreements with the GSEs, the GSEs have the right to terminate us as servicer of the loans we service on their behalf at any time and also have the right to cause us to sell the MSRs to a third party. In addition, failure to comply with servicing standards could result in termination of our agreements with the GSEs with little or no notice and without any compensation. If any of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae were to terminate us as a servicer, or increase our costs related to such servicing by way of additional fees, fines or penalties, such changes could have a material adverse effect on the revenue we derive from servicing activity, as well as the value of the related MSRs. These agreements, and other servicing agreements under which we service mortgage loans for non-GSE loan purchasers, also require that we service in accordance with GSE servicing guidelines and contain financial covenants. If we were to have

17

our servicing rights terminated on a material portion of our servicing portfolio, this could adversely affect our business.

From time to time, we are subject to various legal actions that if decided adversely, could be detrimental to our business.

From time to time, we are named as a defendant in legal proceedings alleging improper lending, servicing or marketing practices, abusive loan terms and fees, disclosure violations, quiet title actions, improper foreclosure practices, violations of consumer protection, securities or other laws, breach of contract and other related matters. In addition, we have grown our number of team members materially in recent years and have increased our profile in the community and nationally. As a result, the number of lawsuits against us regarding alleged violation of employment laws, including wage and hour, and other employment issues, has and may continue to increase. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of collective and class actions with respect to employment matters against employers generally. Coupled with the expansion of social media platforms and similar devices that allow individuals access to a broad audience, these claims, whether or not they have merit, could result in reputational risk, negative publicity, of-of-pockets costs and distraction to our management team.

We are subject to various consumer protection regulatory regimes which expose us to liability directly from consumers.

We operate in an industry that is highly sensitive to consumer protection, and we and our clients are subject to numerous local, state and federal laws that are continuously changing. Remediation for non-compliance with these laws can be costly and significant fines may be incurred. We are routinely involved in consumer complaints, regulatory actions and legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our business and may become subject to class action suits alleging non-compliance with these laws. If we were to become involved in a lengthy litigation, we could incur substantial costs and our resources and the attention of management could be diverted from our business. We are also routinely involved in state regulatory audits and examinations, and occasionally involved in other governmental proceedings arising in connection with our respective businesses. Negative public opinion can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities. Negative public opinion can also result from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to our activities, from consumer complaints, including in the CFPB complaints database, and from media coverage, whether accurate or not. Any of these types of matters could cause us to incur costs, loss of business, fines and legal expenses, regardless of any eventual ruling in our favor, and could also harm the reputation of our brand, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

If we cannot maintain our corporate culture, we could lose the innovation, collaboration and focus on the mission that contribute to our business.

We believe that a critical component of our success is our corporate culture and our deep commitment to our mission. We believe this mission-based culture fosters innovation, encourages teamwork and cultivates creativity. Our mission defines our business philosophy as well as the emphasis that it places on our clients, our people and our culture and is consistently reinforced to and by our team members. As we have significantly increased our team members it may be harder to maintain our corporate culture. If we are unable to preserve our culture, this could negatively impact our future success, including our ability to attract and retain team members, encourage innovation and teamwork, and effectively focus on and pursue our mission and corporate objectives.

Substantially all of our operations are housed on one campus, and if the facilities are damaged or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, our business may be negatively impacted.

Substantially all of our operations are housed on one campus in Pontiac, Michigan. Our campus could be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including earthquakes, fires, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, extreme weather conditions, medical

18

epidemics, and other natural or man-made disasters, pandemics, epidemics, or other business interruptions, including as a result of COVID-19. If due to such disaster a significant portion of our team members must work remotely for an extended period of time, our business may be negatively impacted. See “—If we cannot maintain our corporate culture, we could lose the innovation, collaboration and focus on the mission that contribute to our business.” In addition, it could be costly and time-consuming to repair or replace our campus.

In certain circumstances, UWM LLC will be required to make distributions to us and SFS Corp. and the distributions that UWM LLC will be required to make may be substantial and in excess of our tax liabilities and obligations under the tax receivable agreement. To the extent we do not distribute such excess cash, SFS Corp. would benefit from any value attributable to such cash balances as a result of their ownership of Class B common stock (or Class A common stock, as applicable) following an exchange of UWM LLC Common Units and the stapled shares of Common Stock.

UWM LLC will continue to be treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes and, as such, will not be subject to any entity-level U.S. federal income tax. Instead, taxable income will be allocated to us and SFS Corp., as holders of membership interests in UWM LLC (the “UWM LLC Common Units”). Accordingly, we will incur income taxes on our allocable share of any net taxable income of UWM LLC. Under the UWM LLC’s Second Amended & Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (the “UWM LLC A&R Company Agreement”), UWM LLC will generally be required from time to time to make pro rata distributions in cash to its equityholders, SFS Corp. and us, in amounts sufficient to cover the taxes on their allocable share of the taxable income of UWM LLC. As a result of (i) potential non pro rata allocations of net taxable income allocable to us and SFS Corp., (ii) the lower tax rate applicable to corporations as compared to individuals and (iii) the favorable tax benefits that we anticipate receiving from (a) the exchange of UWM LLC Common Units from SFS Corp. and (b) payments under the tax receivable agreement, we expect that these tax distributions will be in amounts that exceed our tax liabilities and obligations to make payments under the tax receivable agreement. Our Board of Directors will determine the appropriate uses for any excess cash so accumulated, which may include, among other uses, any potential dividends, stock buybacks, the payment obligations under the tax receivable agreement and the payment of other expenses. We will have no obligation to distribute such cash (or other available cash other than any declared dividend) to our stockholders. No adjustments to the exchange ratio for UWM LLC Common Units and the stapled shares of Common Stock will be made as a result of (x) any cash distribution by UWM LLC or (y) any cash that we retain and do not distribute to our stockholders, and in any event the ratio will remain one-to-one.

We are required to pay SFS Corp. for certain tax benefits we may claim, and the amounts we may pay could be significant.

We entered into a tax receivable agreement with SFS Corp. that provides for the payment by us to SFS Corp. (or its transferees or other assignees) of 85% of the amount of cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal, state and local income tax or franchise tax that we actually realize as a result of (i) certain increases in tax basis resulting from exchanges of UWM LLC Common Units; (ii) imputed interest deemed to be paid by us as a result of payments it makes under the tax receivable agreement; (iii) certain increases in tax basis resulting from payments we make under the tax receivable agreement; and (iv) disproportionate allocations (if any) of tax benefits to us which arise from, among other things, the sale of certain assets such as MSRs as a result of section 704(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) (the tax attributes in clauses “(i)” through “(iv)” collectively referred to as the “Covered Tax Attributes”). The tax receivable agreement will make certain simplifying assumptions regarding the determination of the cash savings that we realize or are deemed to realize from the Covered Tax Attributes, which may result in payments pursuant to the tax receivable agreement in excess of those that would result if such assumptions were not made.

The actual tax benefit, as well as the amount and timing of any payments under the tax receivable agreement, will vary depending upon a number of factors, including, among others, the timing of exchanges by or purchases from SFS Corp., the price of our Class A common stock at the time of the exchanges or purchases,

19

the extent to which such exchanges are taxable, the amount and timing of the taxable income we generate in the future and the tax rate then applicable, and the portion of our payments under the tax receivable agreement constituting imputed interest.

Future payments under the tax receivable agreement could be substantial. The payments under the tax receivable agreement are not conditioned upon SFS Corp.’s continued ownership of us.

We are not required to make a payment of the 85% applicable tax savings to SFS Corp. unless and until at least one of the payment conditions has been satisfied (the “Payment Conditions”). One condition is a requirement that we have received a tax opinion that provides that the applicable assets of UWM LLC giving rise to the payment are “more likely than not” amortizable (the “Indemnifiable Condition”). If we determine that none of the Payment Conditions have been satisfied with respect to all or a portion of such applicable tax savings, we will pay such applicable tax savings (or portion thereof) at the time we reasonably determine a Payment Condition has been satisfied.

If we make a payment and the applicable tax savings are subsequently disallowed, we may deposit future payments due under the tax receivable agreement in an escrow account up to an amount necessary to cover 85% of the estimated additional taxes due by us as a result of the disallowance until such time as there has been a conclusive determination as to the validity of the disallowance. Upon a conclusive determination of the validity of the disallowance, we may recover from the escrow account any excess payments paid to SFS Corp. (or its transferees or assignees), and to the extent the amounts in the escrow account are insufficient, we may net any additional excess payments paid to SFS Corp. (or its transferees or assignees) against future payments that would otherwise be made under the tax receivable agreement. In addition, if we make a payment pursuant to the satisfaction of the Indemnifiable Condition and the applicable tax savings are subsequently disallowed, SFS Corp. will be required to indemnify us for 85% of the taxes and any additional losses attributable to the disallowance. At our election, SFS Corp. may satisfy all or a portion of this indemnity by transferring UWM LLC Common Units held by it. There is no guarantee that SFS Corp. will hold UWM LLC Common Units with a value sufficient to satisfy this indemnity or that the escrow account will hold sufficient funds to cover the cost of any disallowed tax savings. We could make payments to SFS Corp. under the tax receivable agreement that are greater than our actual cash tax savings and may not be able to recoup those payments, which could negatively impact our liquidity.

In addition, the tax receivable agreement will provide that in the case of a change in control of UWMC or a material breach of our obligations under the tax receivable agreement, we will be required to make a payment to SFS Corp. in an amount equal to the present value of future payments (calculated using a discount rate equal to the lesser of 6.50% or LIBOR plus 100 basis points, which may differ from our, or a potential acquirer’s, then-current cost of capital) under the tax receivable agreement, which payment would be based on certain assumptions, including those relating to our future taxable income. For additional discussion of LIBOR, see “—Risks Related to our Financing—We are exposed to risk relating to the transition from LIBOR and the volatility of LIBOR or any replacement reference rate, which can result in higher than market interest rates and may have a detrimental effect on our business.” In these situations, our obligations under the tax receivable agreement could have a substantial negative impact on our, or a potential acquirer’s, liquidity and could have the effect of delaying, deferring, modifying or preventing certain mergers, asset sales, other forms of business combinations or other changes of control. These provisions of the tax receivable agreement may result in situations where SFS Corp. has interests that differ from or are in addition to those of our other stockholders. In addition, we could be required to make payments under the tax receivable agreement that are substantial, significantly in advance of any potential actual realization of such further tax benefits, and in excess of our, or a potential acquirer’s, actual cash savings in income tax.

Decisions we make in the course of running our business, such as with respect to mergers, asset sales, other forms of business combinations or other changes in control, may influence the timing and amount of payments made under the tax receivable agreement. For example, the earlier disposition of assets following an exchange or

20

purchase of UWM LLC Common Units (along with the stapled shares of Class D common stock or Class C common stock) may accelerate payments under the tax receivable agreement and increase the present value of such payments, and the disposition of assets before such an exchange or purchase may increase the tax liability of SFS Corp. (or its direct or indirect owners) without giving rise to any rights to receive payments under the tax receivable agreement. Such effects may result in differences or conflicts of interest between the interests of SFS Corp. and the interests of other stockholders.

Finally, because we are a holding company with no operations of our own, our ability to make payments under the tax receivable agreement is dependent on the ability of our subsidiaries to make distributions to us. Our debt agreements restrict the ability of our subsidiaries to make distributions to us, which could affect our ability to make payments under the tax receivable agreement. To the extent that we are unable to make payments under the tax receivable agreement as a result of restrictions in our debt agreements, such payments will be deferred and will accrue interest until paid, which could negatively impact our results of operations and could also affect our liquidity in periods in which such payments are made.

Risks Related to our Financing

We rely on our short-term warehouse facilities to finance our loan originations and our inability to access such funding could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and business.

We fund a vast majority of the mortgage loans we originate through borrowings under our short-term warehouse facilities and funds generated by our operations. Our ability to fund our loan originations may be impacted by our ability to secure further such borrowings on acceptable terms. Our warehouse facilities typically renew annually, although our $3 billion facility renews every two years. However, as of September 30, 2021, all but $1.7 billion of our warehouse facilities are uncommitted and can be terminated by the applicable lender at any time. Our use of this short-term financing exposes it to the risk that our lenders may respond to market conditions by making it more difficult for us to renew or replace on a continuous basis our maturing short-term warehouse facility borrowings. If we are not able to renew our then existing warehouse facilities or arrange for new financing on terms acceptable to us, or if we default on our covenants or are otherwise unable to access funds under this type of financing, we may have to curtail our loan origination activities and/or dispose of assets.

It is possible that the warehouse lenders that will provide us with financing could experience changes in their ability to advance funds to us, independent of our performance or the performance of our portfolio of assets. Further, if many of our potential warehouse lenders are unwilling or unable to provide us with financing, we could be forced to sell our assets at an inopportune time when prices are depressed. In addition, if the regulatory capital requirements imposed on our warehouse lenders change, they may be required to significantly increase the cost of the financing that they provide to us.

Our warehouse lenders also may revise their eligibility requirements for the types of assets they are willing to finance or the terms of such financings, based on, among other factors, the regulatory environment and their management of perceived risk, particularly with respect to assignee liability. Moreover, the amount of financing we receive under our warehouse facilities will be directly related to the lenders’ valuation of our assets that cover the outstanding borrowings.

In the event that any of our warehouse facilities is terminated or is not renewed, or if the principal amount that may be drawn under our funding agreements that provide for immediate funding at closing were to significantly decrease, we may be unable to find replacement financing on commercially favorable terms, or at all, which could be detrimental to our business. Further, if we are unable to obtain additional funds for borrowing, our ability to maintain or grow our business could be limited.

In addition, our ability to refinance existing debt and borrow additional funds is affected by a variety of factors including (1) limitations imposed on us under the indentures governing our 5.500% senior notes due 2025

21

(the “2020 Senior Notes”) and our 5.500% senior notes due 2029 (the “2021 Senior Notes” and collectively with the 2020 Senior Notes, the “Senior Notes”), respectively, and other existing and future financing facilities that contain restrictive covenants and borrowing conditions that may limit our ability to raise additional debt, (2) a decline in liquidity in the credit markets, (3) prevailing interest rates, (4) the financial strength of the lenders from whom we borrow, and (5) the decision of lenders from whom we borrow to reduce their exposure to mortgage loans due to a change in such lenders’ strategic plan, future lines of business or otherwise.

Substantially all of our warehouse facilities are structured as repurchase agreements, which operate differently and subject us to various risks different from other types of credit facilities, which may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Our warehouse facilities are generally structured in the form of repurchase agreements. We currently leverage and, to the extent available, intend to continue to leverage the mortgage loans we originate with borrowings under these repurchase agreements. When we enter into repurchase agreements, we sell mortgage loans to other lenders, which are the repurchase agreement counterparties, and receive cash from these lenders. These lenders are obligated to resell the same assets back to us at the end of the term of the transaction, which typically ranges from 30 to 90 days, but which may have terms of up to 364 days or longer. These repurchase agreements subject us to various risks:

We have previously, and may in the future utilize other sources of borrowings, including term loans, bank credit facilities, senior notes and structured financing arrangements, among others. The amount of leverage we

22

employ will vary depending on the asset class being financed, our available capital, our ability to obtain and access financing arrangements with lenders and the lenders’ estimate of, among other things, the stability of our cash flows. We can provide no assurance that we will have access to any debt or equity capital on favorable terms or at the desired times, or at all. Our inability to raise such capital or obtain financing on favorable terms could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We depend on our ability to sell loans in the secondary market to a limited number of investors and to the GSEs, and to securitize our loans into MBS. If our ability to sell or securitize mortgage loans is impaired, we may not be able to originate mortgage loans, and if the GSEs and Ginnie Mae become less competitive, it could affect our volume and margins.

Substantially all of our loan originations are sold into the secondary market. We securitize loans into MBS through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae. Loans originated outside of the guidelines of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHA, USDA, or VA (for loans securitized with Ginnie Mae), such as jumbo loans are sold individually or in bulk to private investors, through mortgage conduits and through our own private label securitization into MBS. GSE-eligible products are also sold through private label securitization transactions, in certain situations, such as when the GSE’s limit the volume of certain products they will purchase.

The gain recognized from producing and subsequent sales in the secondary market represents a significant portion of our revenues and net earnings. A decrease in the prices paid to us upon sale of our loans could be detrimental to our business, as we are dependent on the cash generated from such sales to fund our future loan closings and repay borrowings under our warehouse facilities. If it is not possible or economical for us to complete the sale or securitization of certain of our mortgage loans, we may lack liquidity to continue to fund such loans and our revenues and margins on new loan originations could be materially and negatively impacted.

The severity of the impact would be most significant to the extent we were unable to sell conforming home loans to the GSEs or securitize such loans pursuant to the GSEs and government agency-sponsored programs. We also derive other material financial benefits from these relationships, including the assumption of credit risk on securitized loans in exchange for our payment of guarantee fees and the ability to avoid certain loan inventory finance costs through streamlined loan funding and sale procedures, which benefits we would lose if we were unable to complete the sale or securitization of our loans.

We sell those loans that we originate that are non-GSE products, such as jumbo mortgage loans, or for which the GSEs may have imposed limitations, directly to either private investors or into the market through private label securitizations. These non-GSE sales typically take longer to execute which can increase the amount of time that a mortgage loan is on our books, which exposes us to additional market risk and increased liquidity requirements. Furthermore, the availability and pricing of these alternative distribution markets can fluctuate materially and external macroeconomic factors could result in reduced demand or pricing for our non-GSE products. For example, in March 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic many private and non-GSE investors significantly reduced their demand, as a result we had certain non-GSE products in our portfolio longer than anticipated and were unable to continue to originate jumbo loans due to liquidity constraints. If such a market shift were to occur again, we may need to change our business model to accommodate such shifts and our origination volume, margins and liquidity would likely be adversely affected.

The value of our MSRs can fluctuate significantly and these changes in value, or inaccuracies in the estimates of their value, could adversely affect our financial condition.

The value of our MSRs is based on the cash flows projected to result from the right to service of the related mortgage loans and continually fluctuates due to a number of factors. The primary factor driving the value of MSRs is interest rates, which impact the likelihood of loan prepayments through refinancing. In periods of rising interest rates, the fair value of the MSRs generally increases as prepayment expectations decrease, consequently extending the average estimated life of the MSRs resulting in expected increases in cash flows. In a declining

23

interest rate environment, the fair value of MSRs generally decreases as prepayment expectations increase consequently truncating the average estimated life of the MSRs resulting in expected decreases in cash flows. Other market conditions also affect the number of loans that are refinanced and thus no longer result in cash flows, and the number of loans that become delinquent.

A substantial portion of our assets are measured at fair value, and if our estimates with respect to the determination of the fair value of those assets prove to be incorrect, we may be required to write down the value of such assets, which could adversely affect our earnings, financial condition and liquidity.

We measure the fair value of our mortgage loans, derivatives and MSRs on a recurring basis. Fair value determinations require many assumptions, especially to the extent there are not active markets for identical assets. For example, we generally estimate the fair value of loans at fair value based on quoted market prices for securities backed by similar types of loans. If quoted market prices are not available, fair value is estimated based on other relevant factors, including dealer price quotations and prices available for similar instruments, to approximate the amounts that would be received from a third party. In addition, the fair value of IRLCs are measured based upon the difference between the current fair value of similar loans (as determined generally for mortgages at fair value) and the price at which we have committed to originate the loans, subject to the pull-through factor. Further, MSRs do not trade in an active market with readily observable prices and, therefore, their fair value is determined using a valuation model that calculates the present value of estimated net future cash flows, using estimates of prepayment speeds, discount rate, cost to service, float earnings, contractual servicing fee income and ancillary income, and late fees. If our estimates of fair value prove to be incorrect, we may be required to write down the value of such assets, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our outstanding Warrants are accounted for as liabilities and the changes in value of our outstanding Warrants could have an adverse effect on our financial results and thus may have an adverse effect on the market price of our securities.

On April 12, 2021, the SEC issued an SEC staff statement in which the SEC staff expressed its view that certain terms and conditions common to special purpose acquisition company warrants may require such warrants to be classified as liabilities rather than equity. As described in this registration statement, we account for our outstanding Warrants as liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. The Warrants are subject to remeasurement at each balance sheet date and any change in fair value is recognized as a component of change in fair value as of the end of each period for which our earnings are reported. We will continue to adjust the liability for changes in fair value until the earlier of exercise or expiration of the Warrants. The volatility introduced by changes in fair value on earnings may have an adverse effect on our quarterly financial results.

Our hedging strategies may not be successful in mitigating our risks associated with changes in interest rates.

Our profitability is directly affected by changes in interest rates. The market value of closed mortgage loans and interest rate locks generally change along with interest rates. The value of such assets moves opposite of interest rate changes. For example, as interest rates rise, the value of existing mortgage assets falls.

We employ various economic hedging strategies to mitigate the interest rate and the anticipated loan financing probability or “pull-through risk” inherent in such mortgage assets. Our use of these hedge instruments may expose us to counterparty risk as they are not traded on regulated exchanges or guaranteed by an exchange or our clearinghouse and, consequently, there may not be the same level of protections with respect to margin requirements and positions and other requirements designed to protect both us and our counterparties. Furthermore, the enforceability of agreements underlying hedging transactions may depend on compliance with applicable statutory, commodity and other regulatory requirements and, depending on the domicile of the counterparty, applicable international requirements. Consequently, if a counterparty fails to perform under a derivative agreement we could incur a significant loss.

24

Our hedge instruments are accounted for as free-standing derivatives and are included on our consolidated balance sheet at fair value. Our operating results could be negatively affected because the losses on the hedge instruments we enter into may not be offset by a change in the fair value of the related asset or liability.

Our hedging strategies also require us to provide cash margin to our hedging counterparties from time to time. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) requires us to provide daily cash margin to (or receive daily cash margin from, depending on the daily value of related instrument) our hedging counterparties from time to time. The collection of daily margins between us and our hedging counterparties could, under certain market conditions, adversely affect our short-term liquidity and cash-on-hand. Additionally, our hedge instruments may expose us to counterparty risk—the possibility that a loss may occur from the failure of another party to perform in accordance with the terms of the contract, which loss exceeds the value of existing collateral, if any.

Our hedging activities in the future may include entering into interest rate swaps, caps and floors, options to purchase these items, purchasing or selling U.S. Treasury securities, and/or other tools and strategies. These hedging decisions will be determined in light of the facts and circumstances existing at the time and may differ from our current hedging strategy. These hedging strategies may be less effective than our current hedging strategies in mitigating the risks described above, which could be detrimental to our business and financial condition.

Our rights under our repurchase agreements may be subject to the effects of bankruptcy laws in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of us or our lenders under the repurchase agreements, which may allow our lenders to repudiate our repurchase agreements.

In the event of insolvency or bankruptcy, repurchase agreements normally qualify for special treatment under the U.S. bankruptcy code, the effect of which, among other things, would be to allow the lender under the applicable repurchase agreement to avoid the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. bankruptcy code and to foreclose on the collateral agreement without delay. In the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of a lender during the term of a repurchase agreement, the lender may be permitted, under applicable insolvency laws, to repudiate the contract, and our claim against the lender for damages may be treated simply as an unsecured creditor. In addition, if the lender is a broker or dealer subject to the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, or an insured depository institution subject to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, our ability to exercise our rights to recover our securities under a repurchase agreement or to be compensated for any damages resulting from the lender’s insolvency may be further limited by those statutes. These claims would be subject to significant delay and, if and when received, may be substantially less than the damages we actually incur.

Our financing arrangements contain, and the government agencies impose, certain financial and restrictive covenants that limit our ability to operate our business and a default under such agreements or requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.

Our warehouse facilities contain, and our other current or future debt agreements may contain, covenants imposing operating and financial restrictions on our business, including requirements to maintain a certain minimum tangible net worth, minimum liquidity, maximum total debt or liabilities to net worth ratio, pre-tax net income requirements, litigation judgment thresholds, and other customary debt covenants. We are also subject to minimum financial eligibility requirements established by the FHA, VA, GSEs and Ginnie Mae, including net worth, capital ratio and/or liquidity criteria in order to set a minimum level of capital needed to adequately absorb potential losses and a minimum amount of liquidity needed to service such agency mortgage loans and MBS and cover the associated financial obligations and risks. In addition, the indentures governing our 2020 Senior Notes and 2021 Senior Notes contain covenants imposing operating and financial restrictions on our business. As a result, we may not be able to leverage our assets as fully as we would choose, which could reduce our return on equity, and could significantly impede us from growing our business and place us at a competitive disadvantage in relation to federally chartered banks and certain other financial institutions.

25

A breach of the covenants under our warehouse facilities or Senior Notes can result in an event of default under these facilities and as such allow the lenders to pursue certain remedies. In addition, each of these facilities includes cross default or cross acceleration provisions that could result in most, if not all, facilities terminating if an event of default or acceleration of maturity occurs under any facility. To the extent that the minimum financial requirements imposed by the agencies are not met, the agencies may suspend or terminate our agency approvals or agreements, which could cause us to cross default under our warehouse facilities arrangements, could have an adversely effect on our ability to access these markets and could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and future growth.

In addition, the covenants and restrictions in our warehouse facilities and indentures governing our Senior Notes may restrict our ability to, among other things:

These restrictions may interfere with our ability to obtain financings or to engage in other business activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations. In addition, if we are unable to meet or maintain the necessary covenant requirements or satisfy, or obtain waivers for, the continuing covenants, it may lose the ability to borrow under all of our financing facilities, which could be detrimental to our business.

We are exposed to risk relating to the transition from LIBOR and the volatility of LIBOR or any replacement reference rate, which can result in higher than market interest rates and may have a detrimental effect on our business.

The interest rate of our variable-rate indebtedness and the interest rate on the adjustable rate loans we originate and service is based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). In July 2017, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority announced that it intends to stop collecting LIBOR rates from banks after 2021. The announcement indicates that LIBOR will not continue to exist on the current basis. U.S.-dollar LIBOR is expected to be replaced with the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), a new index calculated by reference to short-term repurchase agreements for U.S. Treasury securities. Although there have been a few issuances utilizing SOFR or the Sterling Over Night Index Average, an alternative reference rate that is based on transactions, it is unknown whether any of these alternative reference rates will attain market acceptance as replacements for LIBOR. There is currently no definitive successor reference rate to LIBOR and various industry organizations are still working to develop workable transition mechanisms. As part of this industry transition, we will be required to migrate any current adjustable rate loans it services to any such successor reference rate. Until a successor rate is determined, we cannot implement the transition away from LIBOR for the adjustable rate loans it services. As such, we are unable to predict the effect of any changes to LIBOR, the establishment and success of any alternative reference rates, or any other reforms to LIBOR or any replacement of LIBOR that may be enacted in the United States or elsewhere. Such changes, reforms or replacements relating to LIBOR could have an adverse impact on the market for or value of any LIBOR-linked securities, loans, derivatives or other financial instruments or extensions of credit held by us. LIBOR-related changes could affect our overall results of operations and financial condition.

26

At some point in the future we may decide to accept cryptocurrency, such as bitcoin, to satisfy mortgage payments, in which case we would be subject to additional regulatory requirements.

In October 2021, we announced that we had evaluated and accepted six cryptocurrency mortgage payments in September and October from borrowers as part of a pilot program. While we have concluded that we are not going to proceed with accepting cryptocurrencies beyond such pilot at this time due to the current combination of incremental costs and regulatory uncertainty with respect to cryptocurrencies, we may consider accepting cryptocurrencies in the future if the costs and regulatory environment materially change. Cryptocurrencies are not currently considered legal tender or backed by any government. The prices of digital assets have been in the past and may continue to be highly volatile, including as a result of various associated risks and uncertainties. For example, the prevalence of such assets is a relatively recent trend, and their long-term adoption by investors, consumers and businesses is unpredictable. Moreover, their lack of a physical form, their reliance on technology for their creation, existence and transactional validation and their decentralization may subject their integrity to the threat of malicious attacks and technological obsolescence. As intangible assets without centralized issuers or governing bodies, digital assets have been, and may in the future be, subject to security breaches, cyberattacks or other malicious activities, as well as human errors or computer malfunctions that may result in the loss or destruction of private keys needed to access such assets.

If we were to accept cryptocurrencies in the future, we anticipate that we would not accept such cryptocurrencies payments directly, but would use a third party vendor to accept and process cryptocurrency payments on our behalf. That third party vendor then immediately converts the cryptocurrencies payments into U.S. dollars so that we receive interest payment in U.S. dollars. However, the regulatory environment covering the acceptance of cryptocurrencies is still evolving and the extent to which we would be responsible for any decrease in the value of the cryptocurrency after the borrower has tendered the funds but prior to its delivery to us in U.S. dollars has not been established. Furthermore, it is unclear the extent to which accepting cryptocurrency would subject us to additional money laundering regulations, KYC procedures or other laws or to additional taxation. If we fail to comply with prohibitions applicable to us, we could face regulatory or other enforcement actions and potential fines and other consequences.

Risks Related to our Regulatory Environment

We operate in a heavily regulated industry, and our mortgage loan origination and servicing activities expose us to risks of noncompliance with an increasing and inconsistent body of complex laws and regulations at the U.S. federal, state and local levels.

Due to the heavily regulated nature of the mortgage industry, we and our clients are required to comply with a wide array of U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations that regulate, among other things, the manner in which we conduct our loan origination and servicing businesses and the fees that we may charge, and the collection, use, retention, protection, disclosure, transfer and other processing of personal information by us and our clients. Governmental authorities and various U.S. federal and state agencies have broad oversight and supervisory authority over our business.

Because we originate mortgage loans and provide servicing activities nationwide, we must be licensed in all relevant jurisdictions that require licensure and comply with each such jurisdiction’s respective laws and regulations, as well as with judicial and administrative decisions applicable to us. Such licensing requirements also generally require the submission of information regarding any person who has 10% or more of the combined voting power of our outstanding equity interests. In addition, we and our clients are currently subject to a variety of, and may in the future become subject to additional U.S. federal, state and local laws that are continuously evolving and developing, including, but not limited to, laws on advertising, as well as privacy laws, including the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), the CAN-SPAM Act, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act and the Colorado Privacy Act. We expect more states to enact legislation similar to the CCPA and CPRA, which provide consumers with privacy rights such as the right to request deletion of

27

their data, the right to receive data on record for them and the right to know what categories of data (generally) are maintained about them, and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information of such consumers. These regulations directly impact our business and require ongoing compliance, monitoring and internal and external audits as they continue to evolve, and may result in ever-increasing public scrutiny and escalating levels of enforcement and sanctions. Subsequent changes to data protection and privacy laws could also impact how we process personal information, and therefore limit the effectiveness of our products or services or our ability to operate or expand our business, including limiting strategic partnerships that may involve the sharing of personal information. Additionally, the interpretation of such data protection and privacy laws is rapidly evolving, making implementation and enforcement, and thus compliance requirements, ambiguous, uncertain, and potentially inconsistent. Although we make reasonable efforts to comply with all applicable data protection laws and regulations, our interpretations and such measures may have been or may prove to be insufficient or incorrect.

We and our clients must also comply with a number of federal, state and local consumer protection laws and regulations including, among others, the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Housing Act, the TCPA, the GLBA, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, the Homeowners Protection Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the SAFE Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the TRID rules, the Dodd-Frank Act, the Appraisal Independence Rule, the Bank Secrecy Act, U.S. federal and state laws prohibiting unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, and state foreclosure laws. These laws and regulations apply to loan origination, marketing, use of credit reports, safeguarding of non-public, personally identifiable information about borrowers, foreclosure and claims handling, investment of and interest payments on escrow balances and escrow payment features, and mandate certain disclosures and notices to borrowers. The Appraisal Independence Rule requires that there be a separation of duties to ensure no conflicts of interest. In August 2021, we piloted, as part of a larger roll-out, a new program, UWM Appraisal Direct, in which we directly engage appraisers rather than utilizing an appraisal management company. While we believe that this new program meets all of the regulatory and legal requirements, there is a risk that a regulatory agency could decide that our program does not meet all of the regulatory and legal requirements or that the new process could expose us to additional liability.

In particular, various federal, state and local laws have been enacted that are designed to discourage predatory lending and servicing practices. The Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (“HOEPA”) prohibits inclusion of certain provisions in residential loans that have mortgage rates or origination costs in excess of prescribed levels and requires that borrowers be given certain disclosures prior to origination. Some states have enacted, or may enact, similar laws or regulations, which in some cases impose restrictions and requirements greater than those in HOEPA. In addition, under the anti-predatory lending laws of some states, the origination of certain residential loans, including loans that are not classified as “high cost” loans under applicable law, must satisfy a net tangible benefits test with respect to the related borrower. This test may be highly subjective and open to interpretation. As a result, a court may determine that a residential loan, for example, does not meet the test even if the related originator reasonably believed that the test was satisfied. Our failure to comply with these laws, or the failure of residential loan originators or servicers to comply with these laws, to the extent any of their residential loans are or become part of our mortgage-related assets, could subject us, as an originator or a servicer, as applicable, or, in the case of acquired loans, as an assignee or purchaser, to monetary penalties and could result in the borrowers rescinding the affected loans. Lawsuits have been brought in various states making claims against originators, servicers, assignees and purchasers of high cost loans for violations of state law. Named defendants in these cases have included numerous participants within the secondary mortgage market. If our loans are found to have been originated in violation of predatory or abusive lending laws, we could be subject to lawsuits or governmental actions, or could be fined or incur losses.

Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which our business is subject have increased over time, in response to the financial crisis as well as other factors such as technological and market changes. Regulatory enforcement and fines have also increased across the banking and financial services sector. We expect that our business and that of our clients will remain subject to extensive regulation

28

and supervision. These regulatory changes could result in an increase in our regulatory compliance burden and associated costs and place restrictions on our origination and servicing operations. Our failure to comply with applicable U.S. federal, state and local consumer protection and data privacy laws could lead to:

As these U.S. federal, state and local laws evolve, it may be more difficult for us to identify these developments comprehensively, to interpret changes accurately and to train our team members effectively with respect to these laws and regulations. These difficulties potentially increase our exposure to the risks of noncompliance with these laws and regulations, which could be detrimental to our business. In addition, our failure to comply with these laws, regulations and rules may result in reduced payments by borrowers, modification of the original terms of loans, permanent forgiveness of debt, delays in the foreclosure process, increased servicing advances, litigation, enforcement actions, and repurchase and indemnification obligations. A failure to adequately supervise our clients, service providers and vendors, including outside foreclosure counsel, may also have these negative results.

The laws and regulations applicable to us are subject to administrative or judicial interpretation, but some of these laws and regulations have been enacted only recently and may not yet have been interpreted or may be interpreted infrequently. Ambiguities in applicable laws and regulations may leave uncertainty with respect to permitted or restricted conduct and may make compliance with laws, and risk assessment decisions with respect to compliance with laws difficult and uncertain. In addition, ambiguities make it difficult, in certain circumstances, to determine if, and how, compliance violations may be cured. The adoption by industry participants of different interpretations of these statutes and regulations has added uncertainty and complexity to compliance. If we are deemed to have violated applicable statutes or regulations, it could result in regulatory investigations, state or federal governmental actions or private civil claims, including class actions, being brought against us. Such litigation would cause us to incur costs, fines and legal expenses in connection with these matters, regardless of any eventual ruling in our favor, and could also harm the reputation of our brand, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

To resolve issues raised in examinations or other governmental actions, we may be required to take various corrective actions, including changing certain business practices, making refunds or taking other actions that could be financially or competitively detrimental to us. We expect to continue to incur costs to comply with

29

governmental regulations. In addition, certain legislative actions and judicial decisions can give rise to the initiation of lawsuits against us for activities we conducted in the past. Furthermore, provisions in our mortgage loan documentation, including but not limited to the mortgage and promissory notes we use in loan originations, could be construed as unenforceable by a court. We have been, and expect to continue to be, subject to regulatory enforcement actions and private causes of action from time to time with respect to our compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

The recent influx of new laws, regulations, and other directives adopted in response to the recent COVID-19 pandemic exemplifies the ever-changing and increasingly complex regulatory landscape we operate in. While some regulatory reactions to COVID-19 relaxed certain compliance obligations, the forbearance requirements imposed on mortgages servicers in the recently passed CARES Act added new regulatory responsibilities. The GSEs and the FHFA, Ginnie Mae, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), various investors and others have also issued guidance relating to COVID-19. Future regulatory scrutiny and enforcement resulting from COVID-19 is unknown.

Although we have systems and procedures directed to comply with these legal and regulatory requirements, we cannot assure you that more restrictive laws and regulations will not be adopted in the future, or that governmental bodies or courts will not interpret existing laws or regulations in a more restrictive manner, which could render our current business practices non-compliant or which could make compliance more difficult or expensive. Any of these, or other, changes in laws or regulations could have a detrimental effect on our business.

The CFPB continues to be active in its monitoring of the loan origination and servicing sectors, and its recently issued rules and heightened examination and enforcement scrutiny increase our regulatory compliance burden and associated costs.

We are subject to the regulatory, supervisory and examination authority of the CFPB, which has oversight of federal and state non-depository lending and servicing institutions, including residential mortgage originators and loan servicers. With the change in Presidential Administrations and, in turn, CFPB leadership, the CFPB is heightening its examination and enforcement scrutiny of the consumer finance, including mortgage, industry. The CFPB has rulemaking authority with respect to many of the federal consumer protection laws applicable to mortgage lenders and servicers, including TILA and RESPA and the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act. The CFPB has issued a number of regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act relating to loan origination and servicing activities, including ability-to-repay, “Qualified Mortgage” standards and other origination standards and practices as well as guidance addressing relationships with brokers, communication with borrowers, secondary market transactions, servicing requirements that address, among other things, periodic billing statements, certain notices and acknowledgements, prompt crediting of borrowers’ accounts for payments received, additional notice, review and timing requirements with respect to delinquent borrowers, loss mitigation, prompt investigation of complaints by borrowers, and lender-placed insurance notices. These regulations and guidance may adversely impact our ability or the cost to develop new products which respond to market conditions, subject us to additional requirements under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act with respect to valuations, including appraisals and automated valuation models, subject us to additional rules and potential liability arising from our role as an originator, lender or loan servicer and potentially increase our lender liability, vendor management risk or other risks.

For example, the CFPB has iteratively adopted rules over the course of several years regarding mortgage servicing practices that required us to make modifications and enhancements to our mortgage servicing processes and systems. This year, the CFPB issued a final rule amending RESPA Regulation X to provide additional protections relating to loss mitigation and foreclosures to mortgage borrowers impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as a supervisory bulletin 2021-02 warning that companies “unable to adequately manage loss mitigation can expect the Bureau to take enforcement or supervisory action to address violations under Regulation X, CFPA, or other authorities.” The intersection of the CFPB’s mortgage servicing rules and COVID-19 continues to evolve and poses new challenges to the servicing industry.

30

The CFPB’s examinations have increased, and will likely continue to increase, our administrative and compliance costs. They could also greatly influence the availability and cost of residential mortgage credit and increase servicing costs and risks. These increased costs of compliance, the effect of these rules on the lending industry and loan servicing, and any failure in our ability, or our clients’ ability, to comply with the new rules by their effective dates, could be detrimental to our business. The CFPB also issued guidelines on sending examiners to banks and other institutions that service and/or originate mortgages to assess whether consumers’ interests are protected. The CFPB has conducted routine examinations of our business and will conduct future examinations.

The CFPB also has broad enforcement powers, and can order, among other things, rescission or reformation of contracts, the refund of moneys or the return of real property, restitution, disgorgement or compensation for unjust enrichment, the payment of damages or other monetary relief, public notifications regarding violations, limits on activities or functions, remediation of practices, external compliance monitoring and civil money penalties. The CFPB has been active in investigations and enforcement actions and, when necessary, has issued civil money penalties to parties the CFPB determines has violated the laws and regulations it enforces. Our failure to comply with the federal consumer protection laws, rules and regulations to which we are subject, whether actual or alleged, could expose us to enforcement actions or potential litigation liabilities.

In addition, the occurrence of one or more of the foregoing events or a determination by any court or regulatory agency that our policies and procedures do not comply with applicable law could impact our business operations. For example, if the violation is related to our servicing operations it could lead to a transfer of our servicing responsibilities, increased delinquencies on mortgage loans we service or any combination of these events. Such a determination could also require us to modify our servicing standards. The expense of complying with new or modified servicing standards may be substantial. Any such changes or revisions may have a material impact on our servicing operations, which could be detrimental to our business.

We are required to hold various agency approvals in order to conduct our business and there is no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain those agency approvals or that changes in agency guidelines will not materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We are required to hold certain agency approvals in order to sell mortgage loans to GSEs and service such mortgage loans on their behalf. Our failure to satisfy the various requirements necessary to obtain and maintain such agency approvals over time would restrict our direct business activities and could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

We are also required to follow specific guidelines that impact the way that we originate and service such agency loans. A significant change in these guidelines that has the effect of decreasing the fees we charge or require us to expend additional resources in providing mortgage services could decrease our revenues or increase our costs, which would also adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In addition, the FHFA has directed the GSEs to align their guidelines for servicing delinquent mortgages and assess compensatory penalties against servicers in connection with the failure to meet specified timelines relating to delinquent loans and foreclosure proceedings, and other breaches of servicing obligations. Our failure to operate efficiently and effectively within the prevailing regulatory framework and in accordance with the applicable origination and servicing guidelines and/or the loss of our seller/servicer license approval or approved issuer status with the agencies could result in our failure to benefit from available monetary incentives and/or expose us to monetary penalties and curtailments, all of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

31

The executive, legislative and regulatory reaction to COVID-19, including the passage of the CARES Act, poses evolving compliance obligations on our business, and we may experience unfavorable changes in or failure to comply with existing or future regulations and laws adopted in response to COVID-19.

Due to the unprecedented pause of major sectors of the U.S. economy from COVID-19, numerous states and the federal government adopted measures requiring mortgage servicers to work with consumers negatively impacted by COVID-19. The CARES Act imposes several new compliance obligations on our mortgage servicing activities, including, but not limited to mandatory forbearance offerings, altered credit reporting obligations, and moratoriums on foreclosure actions and late fee assessments. Many states have taken similar measures to provide mortgage payment and other relief to consumers, which create additional complexity around our mortgage servicing compliance activities.

With the urgency to help consumers, the expedient passage of the CARES Act increases the likelihood of unintended consequences from the legislation. For example, certain provisions of the CARES Act are subject to interpretation given the existing ambiguities in the legislation, which creates class action and other litigation risk.

Although much of the executive, legislative and regulatory actions stemming from COVID-19 are servicing-centric, regulators are adjusting compliance obligations impacting our mortgage origination activities. Many states have adopted temporary measures allowing for otherwise prohibited remote mortgage loan origination activities. While these temporary measures allow us to continue to do business remotely, they impose notice, procedural, and other compliance obligations on our origination activity. As jurisdictions begin to roll back COVID-19 related measures, inconsistencies in the modification of regulations could also impose notice, procedural, and other compliance obligations on our origination activity.

Federal, state, and local executive, legislative and regulatory responses to COVID-19 are still evolving, not consistent in scope or application, and subject to change without advance notice. Such efforts may impose additional compliance obligations, which may negatively impact our mortgage origination and servicing business. Any additional legal or regulatory responses to COVID-19 may unfavorably restrict our business, our established business practices, and otherwise raise our compliance costs.

The state regulatory agencies continue to be active in their supervision of the loan origination and servicing sectors and the results of these examinations may be detrimental to our business.

We are also supervised by regulatory agencies under state law. State attorneys general, state licensing regulators, and state and local consumer financial protection offices have authority to examine and/or investigate consumer complaints and to commence investigations and other formal and informal proceedings regarding our operations and activities. In addition, the GSEs and the FHFA, Ginnie Mae, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), HUD, various investors, non-agency securitization trustees and others subject us to periodic reviews and audits. A determination of our failure to comply with applicable law could lead to enforcement action, administrative fines and penalties, or other administrative action.

If we do not obtain and maintain the appropriate state licenses, we will not be allowed to originate or service loans in some states, which would adversely affect our operations.

Our operations are subject to regulation, supervision and licensing under various federal, state and local statutes, ordinances and regulations. In most states in which we operate, a regulatory agency regulates and enforces laws relating to mortgage lenders and mortgage loan servicing companies such as us. In most states, we are subject to periodic examination by state regulatory authorities. Some states in which we operate require special licensing or provide extensive regulation of our business.

As part of licensing requirements, we are typically required to designate individual licensees of record. We cannot ensure that we are, and will always remain, in full compliance with all state licensing laws and

32

regulations, and we may be subject to fines or penalties, including license revocation, for any non-compliance. If we lose a license or are otherwise found to be in violation of a law or regulation, our business operations in that state may be suspended until we obtain the license or otherwise remedy the compliance issue.

We may not be able to maintain all requisite licenses and permits, and the failure to satisfy those and other regulatory requirements could restrict our ability to originate, purchase, sell or service loans. In addition, our failure to satisfy any such requirements relating to servicing of loans could result in a default under our servicing agreements and have a material adverse effect on our operations. Those states that currently do not provide extensive regulation of our business may later choose to do so, and if such states so act, we may not be able to obtain or maintain all requisite licenses and permits. The failure to satisfy those and other regulatory requirements could limit our ability to originate, purchase, sell or service loans in a certain state, or could result in a default under our financing and servicing agreements and have a material adverse effect on our operations. Furthermore, the adoption of additional, or the revision of existing, rules and regulations could have a detrimental effect on our business.

If new laws and regulations lengthen foreclosure times or introduce new regulatory requirements regarding foreclosure procedures, our operating costs could increase and it could be subject to regulatory action.

When a mortgage loan we service is in foreclosure, we are generally required to continue to advance delinquent principal and interest to the securitization trust and to make advances for delinquent taxes and insurance and foreclosure costs and the upkeep of vacant property in foreclosure to the extent that we determine that such amounts are recoverable. These servicing advances are generally recovered when the delinquency is resolved. Regulatory actions that lengthen the foreclosure process will increase the amount of servicing advances that we are required to make, lengthen the time it takes for us to be reimbursed for such advances and increase the costs incurred during the foreclosure process.

The CARES Act paused all foreclosures from March 18, 2020 until May 17, 2020. Many state governors issued orders, directives, guidance or recommendations halting foreclosure activity including evictions. On June 28, 2021, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized amendments to the federal mortgage servicing regulations. The amendments have the goal of supporting the housing market’s smooth and orderly transition to post-pandemic operation and may have an impact on foreclosure and eviction activity. As noted above, the CFPB has issued new rules and guidance concerning default servicing, including implementing a bar on new foreclosure filings until December 31, 2021, unless certain criteria are met or exemptions apply. These regulatory actions and similar actions that may be passed in the future could increase our operating costs and negatively impact our liquidity, as they may extend the period for which we are required to make advances for delinquent principal and interest, taxes and insurance, and could delay our ability to seek reimbursement from the investor to recoup some or all of the advances.

Increased regulatory scrutiny and new laws and procedures could cause us to adopt additional compliance measures and incur additional compliance costs in connection with our foreclosure processes. We may incur legal and other costs responding to regulatory inquiries or any allegation that we improperly foreclosed on a borrower. We could also suffer reputational damage and could be fined or otherwise penalized if we are found to have breached regulatory requirements.

Our servicing policies and procedures are subject to examination by our regulators, and the results of these examinations may be detrimental to our business.

As a loan servicer, we are examined for compliance with U.S. federal, state and local laws, rules and guidelines by numerous regulatory agencies. It is possible that any of these regulators will inquire about our servicing practices, policies or procedures and require us to revise them in the future. The occurrence of one or more of the foregoing events or a determination by any court or regulatory agency that our servicing policies and procedures do not comply with applicable law could lead to a transfer of our servicing responsibilities, increased

33

delinquencies on mortgage loans we service or any combination of these events. Such a determination could also require us to modify our servicing standards.

Regulatory agencies and consumer advocacy groups are becoming more aggressive in asserting claims that the practices of lenders and loan servicers violate anti-discrimination laws.

Antidiscrimination statutes, such as the FHA and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, prohibit creditors from discriminating against loan applicants and borrowers based on certain characteristics, such as race, religion and national origin. Various federal regulatory agencies and departments, including the DOJ and CFPB, take the position that these laws apply not only to intentional discrimination, but also to neutral practices that have a disparate impact on a group that shares a characteristic that a creditor may not consider in making credit decisions (i.e., creditor or servicing practices that have a disproportionate negative effect on a protected class of individuals).

These regulatory agencies, as well as consumer advocacy groups and plaintiffs’ attorneys, are focusing greater attention on “disparate impact” claims. The U.S. Supreme Court recently confirmed that the “disparate impact” theory applies to cases brought under the FHA, while emphasizing that a causal relationship must be shown between a specific policy of the defendant and a discriminatory result that is not justified by a legitimate objective of the defendant. Although it is still unclear whether the theory applies under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, regulatory agencies and private plaintiffs can be expected to continue to apply it to both the FHA and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act in the context of home loan lending and servicing. To the extent that the “disparate impact” theory continues to apply, we may be faced with significant administrative burdens and potential liability for failures to comply.

Furthermore, many industry observers believe that the “ability to repay” rule issued by the CFPB, discussed above, will have the unintended consequence of having a disparate impact on protected classes. Specifically, it is possible that lenders that make only qualified mortgages may be exposed to discrimination claims under a disparate impact theory.

Beyond exposure to potential fair lending or servicing claims under disparate impact theory, lenders face increasing regulatory, enforcement and litigation risk under the FHA and Equal Credit Opportunity Act from claims of “redlining” and “reverse redlining.” Redlining is the practice of denying a creditworthy applicant a loan for housing in a certain neighborhood even though the applicant may be otherwise qualified. Reverse redlining is targeting an applicant in a certain neighborhood for a higher cost products. The CFPB has recently indicated that policing mortgage lenders to prevent both practices is a high priority.

In addition to reputational harm, violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act can result in actual damages, punitive damages, injunctive or equitable relief, attorneys’ fees and civil money penalties.

Risks Associated with Our Corporate Structure and Common Stock

We are controlled by SFS Corp., whose interests may conflict with our interests and the interests of other stockholders.

SFS Corp. holds all of our issued and outstanding Class D common stock, which has ten votes per share, and controls approximately 79% of the combined voting power of our Common Stock (our Class A common stock, Class B common stock, Class C common stock and Class D common stock collectively, the “Common Stock”) (based on the Voting Limitation). Without the Voting Limitation, SFS Corp. would have 99% of the combined voting power of our capital stock. As long as SFS Corp. owns at least 10% of the outstanding Common Stock, SFS Corp. will have the ability to determine all corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors and the size of our Board, any amendment to our certificate of

34

incorporation or bylaws, or the approval of any merger or other significant corporate transaction, including a sale of substantially all of our assets. This could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control or otherwise discouraging a potential acquirer from attempting to obtain control of us, which could cause the market price of our Class A common stock to decline or prevent stockholders from realizing a premium over the market price for our Class A common stock. SFS Corp.’s interests may conflict with our interests as a company or the interests of our other stockholders.

Resales of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock or issuable upon UWM LLC Unit Exchanges or exercise of warrants could depress the market price of our Class A common stock or result in dilution.

As November 3, 2021, there were 100,367,478 shares of our Class A common stock outstanding. In addition, (1) 1,502,069,787 shares of Class A common stock (or approximately 1,592,831,471 shares of Class A common stock if the full amount of the Earn-Out Shares is earned) may be issued to SFS Corp. or its transferees or assignees in connection with future UWM LLC Unit Exchanges and (2) 15,874,987 shares may be issued upon exercise of our outstanding warrants with a strike price of $11.50 per share. Currently, all of the shares outstanding, are either freely tradable or can be resold pursuant to our effective registration statement. In addition, SFS Corp and certain other restricted stockholders have the ability to make a demand request at any time, subject to certain conditions, that we register an underwritten offering pursuant to such registration statement. We also expect that 50,000,000 shares of our Class A common stock will be eligible to be resold under Rule 144 commencing on January 22, 2022 (one year from the date that we filed the Current Report on Form 8-K that included the required Form 10 information that reflected we are no longer a shell company). In addition, the shares of Class A common stock issuable upon the exercise of our Warrants or upon a UWM LLC Unit Exchange may result in dilution to the then existing holders of our Class A common stock and increase the number of shares eligible for resale in the public market. Such sales of shares of Class A common stock or the perception that such sales may occur could depress the market price of our Class A common stock.

As a “controlled company” within the meaning of NYSE listing rules, we qualify for exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements. We have the opportunity to elect any of the exemptions afforded a controlled company.

Because SFS Corp. controls more than a majority of our total voting power, we are a “controlled company” within the meaning of NYSE listing rules. Under NYSE rules, a company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by another person or group of persons acting together is a “controlled company” and may elect not to comply with the following NYSE rules regarding corporate governance:

Three of our nine directors are independent directors and our Board has an independent audit committee. However, our Board does not have a majority of independent directors, or a compensation committee comprised of solely independent directors or a nominating committee. Rather, actions with respect to executive compensation will be taken by the compensation committee on which Mr. Mat Ishbia sits, and compensation decisions with respect to Mr. Ishbia’s compensation will be taken by a special subcommittee, and director nominations will be made by our full Board. Our Board has determined that Kelly Czubak, Isiah Thomas and Robert Verdun are “independent directors,” as defined in the NYSE listing rules and applicable SEC rules.

35

We may experience volatility in the trading price of our shares due to fluctuations in our quarterly operating results or other factors.

Significant fluctuations in the price of our securities could contribute to the loss of all or part of your investment. Since the consummation of our Business Combination, trading in the shares of our Class A common stock has been extremely volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. Accordingly, the valuation ascribed to us and our Class A common may not be indicative of the price of that will prevail in the trading market in the future. Any of the factors in this prospectus could have a material adverse effect on your investment in our securities and our securities may trade at prices significantly below the price you paid for them. In such circumstances, the trading price of our securities may not recover and may experience a further decline.

In addition, broad market and industry factors may materially harm the market price of our securities irrespective of our operating performance. The stock market in general and NYSE have experienced price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the particular companies affected. In addition, the trading prices of companies that were formerly special purpose acquisition companies have, and may continue to, experience volatility unrelated to the operating performance of the specific company. The trading prices and valuations of these stocks, and of our securities, may not be predictable. A loss of investor confidence in the market for the stocks of other companies that investors perceive to be similar to our business could depress our stock price regardless of our business, prospects, financial conditions or results of operations. A decline in the market price of our securities also could adversely affect our ability to issue additional securities and our ability to obtain additional financing in the future.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against companies following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, and could also require us to make substantial payments to satisfy judgments or to settle litigation.

Anti-takeover provisions contained in our Charter and Amended and Restated Bylaws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could impair a takeover attempt.

Our Charter contains provisions that may discourage unsolicited takeover proposals that stockholders may consider to be in their best interests. We are also subject to anti-takeover provisions under Delaware law, which could delay or prevent a change of control. Together, these provisions may make more difficult the removal of management and may discourage transactions that otherwise could involve payment of a premium over prevailing market prices for our securities. These provisions include:

36

Our Charter contains a provision renouncing our interest and expectancy in certain corporate opportunities.

Our Charter provides that we have no interests or expectancy in, or being offered an opportunity to participate in any corporate opportunity, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, with respect to any lines of business or business activity or business venture conducted by any UWM Related Persons as of the date of the filing of our Charter with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware or received by, presented to or originated by UWM Related Persons after the date of the filing of our Charter with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware in such UWM Related Person’s capacity as a UWM Related Person (and not in his, her or its capacity as a director, officer or employee of ours), in each case, other than any corporate opportunity with respect to residential mortgage lending. These provisions of our Charter create the possibility that a corporate opportunity of ours may be used for the benefit of the UWM Related Persons.

37

The provision of our Charter requiring exclusive forum in the state courts in the State of Michigan or the State of Delaware for certain types of lawsuits may have the effect of discouraging lawsuits against our directors and officers.

Our Charter requires that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, (i) any derivative action brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer, or employee of our business to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our Charter or Amended and Restated Bylaws, or (iv) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine of the State of Delaware, in each case, to be filed in either (x) the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Oakland County, Michigan (or, if the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Oakland County, Michigan lacks jurisdiction over any such action or proceeding, then another state court of the State of Michigan, or if no state court of the State of Michigan has jurisdiction over any such action or proceeding, then the United Stated District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan) or (y) the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware lacks jurisdiction over any such action or proceeding, then the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, or, if the Superior Court of the State of Delaware lacks jurisdiction then the United States District Court for the District of Delaware). The exclusive forum provision described above does not apply to actions arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder, and Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder.

Although we believe these exclusive forum provisions benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law, the exclusive forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers or stockholders, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Further, in the event a court finds the exclusive forum provision contained in our Charter to be unenforceable or inapplicable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

financial reporting or are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 or assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our Common Stock could be negatively affected, and we could become subject to investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources.

Unanticipated changes in effective tax rates or adverse outcomes resulting from examination of our income or other tax returns could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to income taxes in the United States and other jurisdictions. Our future effective tax rates could be subject to volatility or adversely affected by a number of factors, including:

In addition, we may be subject to audits of our income, sales and other transaction taxes by taxing authorities. Outcomes from these audits could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

39