UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005

or

For the transition period from                  to                  .

Commission File Number 001-32141

Assured Guaranty Ltd.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

30 Woodbourne Avenue

Hamilton HM 08Bermuda

(441) 299-9375

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number,

including area code, of Registrant’s principal executive office)

None

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No x

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x

The aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant as of the close of business on June 30, 2005 was $1,137,672,763 (based upon the closing price of the Registrant’s shares of the New York Stock Exchange on that date, which was $23.36). For purposes of this information, the outstanding shares of Common Stock which were owned by all directors and executive officers of the Registrant and by ACE Limited were deemed to be shares of Common Stock held by affiliates.

As of February 24, 2006, 75,173,957 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain portions of Registrant’s definitive proxy statement relating to its Annual General Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference to Part III of this report.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements under “Business,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this Form 10-K may include forward-looking statements which reflect our current views with respect to future events and financial performance. These statements include forward-looking statements both with respect to us specifically and the insurance and reinsurance industries in general. Statements which include the words “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “project,” “anticipate,” “may,” “will,” “continue,” “further,” “seek,” and similar words or statements of a future or forward-looking nature identify forward-looking statements for purposes of the federal securities laws or otherwise.

All forward-looking statements address matters that involve risks and uncertainties. Accordingly, there are or will be important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those indicated in these statements. We believe that these factors include the following:

·       downgrades of the financial strength ratings assigned by the major rating agencies to any of our insurance subsidiaries at any time, which has occurred in the past;

·       our inability to execute our business strategy;

·       reduction in the amount of reinsurance ceded by one or more of our principal ceding companies;

·       contract cancellations;

·       developments in the world’s financial and capital markets that adversely affect our loss experience, the demand for our products or our investment returns;

·       more severe or frequent losses associated with our insurance products;

·       changes in regulation or tax laws applicable to us, our subsidiaries or customers;

·       governmental actions;

·       natural catastrophes;

·       dependence on customers;

·       decreased demand for our insurance or reinsurance products or increased competition in our markets;

·       loss of key personnel;

·       technological developments;

·       the effects of mergers, acquisitions and divestitures;

·       changes in accounting policies or practices (see Part II - Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations under the heading “—Critical Accounting Estimates—Reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses”, for more information;

·       changes in general economic conditions, including interest rates and other factors;

·       other risks and uncertainties that have not been identified at this time; and

·       management’s response to these factors.

The foregoing review of important factors should not be construed as exhaustive, and should be read in conjunction with the other cautionary statements that are included in this Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to update publicly or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

If one or more of these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may vary materially from what we projected. Any forward-looking statements you read in this Form 10-K reflect our current views with respect to future events and are subject to these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, growth strategy and liquidity.

For these statements, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

PART I

ITEM 1.              BUSINESS

Overview

Assured Guaranty Ltd. (hereafter “Assured Guaranty,” “we,” “us,” “our” or the “Company”) is a Bermuda-based holding company that provides, through its operating subsidiaries, credit enhancement products to the public finance, structured finance and mortgage markets. Credit enhancement products are financial guaranty or other types of support, including credit derivatives, that improve the credit of underlying debt obligations. We apply our credit expertise, risk management skills and capital markets experience to develop insurance, reinsurance and derivative products that meet the credit enhancement needs of our customers. Under a reinsurance agreement, the reinsurer, in consideration of a premium paid to it, agrees to indemnify another insurer, called the ceding company, for part or all of the liability of the ceding company under one or more insurance policies that the ceding company has issued. A derivative is a financial instrument whose characteristics and value depend upon the characteristics and value of an underlying security or commodity. We market our products directly and through financial institutions, serving the U.S. and international markets.

Assured Guaranty Ltd. was incorporated in Bermuda in August 2003. We operate through wholly-owned subsidiaries including Assured Guaranty Re Ltd. (“AG Re”, formerly Assured Guaranty Re International Ltd.), Assured Guaranty US Holdings Inc. and Assured Guaranty Finance Overseas Ltd. (“AGFOL”). Our principal operating subsidiaries are Assured Guaranty Corp. (“AGC”) and AG Re.

·       AG Re is incorporated under the laws of Bermuda and is licensed as a Class 3 Insurer and a Long-Term Insurer under the Insurance Act 1978 and related regulations of Bermuda. AG Re directly owns Assured Guaranty Barbados Holdings Ltd., which owns Assured Guaranty Overseas US Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation. AG Re indirectly owns, through Barbados and United States holding companies, the entire share capital of a Bermuda reinsurer, Assured Guaranty Re Overseas Ltd. (“AGRO”). AGRO, in turn, owns Assured Guaranty Mortgage Insurance Company (“Assured Guaranty Mortgage”), a New York corporation. AG Re and AGRO underwrite financial guaranty and residential mortgage reinsurance. AG Re and AGRO write business as direct reinsurers of third-party primary insurers and as reinsurers/retrocessionaires of certain affiliated companies and also provide portfolio credit default swaps, where the counterparty is usually an investment bank.

·       Assured Guaranty US Holdings Inc., a Delaware holding company, owns 100% of AG Financial Products Inc., a Delaware corporation, and AGC. AGC, a Maryland-domiciled insurance company, was organized in 1985 and commenced operations in January 1988, provides insurance and reinsurance of investment grade financial guaranty exposures, including municipal and nonmunicipal reinsurance, and credit default swap transactions. Prior to April 2004, AGC also wrote trade credit reinsurance, but has ceased writing this business since the initial public offering (“IPO”). AGC owns 100% of Assured Guaranty (UK) Ltd., a United Kingdom (“UK”) incorporated company licensed as a UK insurance company, and Assured Value Insurance Company (formerly Assured Guaranty Risk Assurance Company), a Maryland domiciled insurance company.

·       AGFOL, based in the UK, is regulated by the Financial Services Authority as an Arranger that markets and sources derivative transactions. AGFOL does not itself take risk in the transactions it arranges or places, and may not hold funds on behalf of its customers.

1

Our Operating Segments

Our financial results include four principal business segments: financial guaranty direct, financial guaranty reinsurance, mortgage guaranty and other. We primarily conduct our business in the United States, Bermuda and the European community. The following table sets forth our gross written premiums by segment for the periods presented:

Gross Written Premiums By Segment

Financial Guaranty Direct

Financial guaranty direct insurance provides an unconditional and irrevocable guaranty that protects the holder of a financial obligation against non-payment of principal and interest when due. Financial guaranty insurance may be issued to the holders of the insured obligations at the time of issuance of those obligations, or may be issued in the secondary market to holders of public bonds and structured securities. Both issuers of and investors in financial instruments may benefit from financial guaranty insurance. Issuers benefit because the insurance may have the effect of lowering an issuer’s cost of borrowing to the extent that the insurance premium is less than the value of the difference between the yield on the insured obligation (which carries the credit rating of the insurer) and the yield on the obligation if sold on the basis of its uninsured credit rating. Financial guaranty insurance also improves the marketability of obligations issued by infrequent or unknown issuers, as well as obligations with complex structures or backed by asset classes new to the market. Investors benefit from increased liquidity in the secondary market, added protection against loss in the event of the obligor’s default on its obligation, and reduced exposure to price volatility caused by changes in the credit quality of the underlying issue.

As an alternative to traditional financial guaranty insurance, credit protection relating to a particular security or issuer can be provided through a credit derivative, such as a credit default swap. Under the terms of a credit default swap, the seller of credit protection makes a specified payment to the buyer of credit protection upon the occurrence of one or more specified credit events with respect to a reference obligation or entity. Credit derivatives typically provide protection to a buyer rather than credit enhancement of an issue as in traditional financial guaranty insurance. Credit derivatives may be preferred by some customers because they generally offer ease of execution and standardized terms.

Financial guaranty direct products are generally provided for structured finance and public finance obligations in the U.S. and international markets.

2

Structured Finance—Structured finance obligations are generally backed by pools of assets, such as residential mortgage loans, consumer or trade receivables, securities or other assets having an ascertainable cash flow or market value, which are generally held by a special purpose issuing entity. Structured finance obligations can be “funded” or “synthetic.” Funded structured finance obligations generally have the benefit of one or more forms of credit enhancement, such as over-collateralization and excess cash flow, to cover credit risks associated with the related assets. Synthetic structured finance obligations generally take the form of credit derivatives or credit-linked notes that reference a pool of securities or loans, with a defined deductible to cover credit risks associated with the referenced securities or loans.

Public Finance—Public finance obligations consist primarily of debt obligations issued by or on behalf of states or their political subdivisions (counties, cities, towns and villages, utility districts, public universities and hospitals, public housing and transportation authorities), other public and quasi-public entities (including non-U.S. sovereigns and subdivisions thereof), private universities and hospitals, and investor-owned utilities. These obligations generally are supported by the taxing authority of the issuer, the issuer’s or underlying obligor’s ability to collect fees or assessments for certain projects or public services or revenues from operations. This market also includes project finance obligations, as well as other structured obligations supporting infrastructure and other public works projects.

Financial Guaranty Reinsurance

Financial guaranty reinsurance indemnifies a primary insurance company against part of a loss that the latter may sustain under a policy that it has issued. The reinsurer may itself purchase reinsurance protection (“retrocessions”) from other reinsurers, thereby reducing its own exposure.

Reinsurance agreements take two major forms: “treaty” and “facultative.” Treaty reinsurance requires the reinsured to cede, and the reinsurer to assume, specific classes of risk underwritten by the ceding company over a specified period of time, typically one year. Facultative reinsurance is the reinsurance of part of one or more specified policies, and is subject to separate negotiation for each cession.

Financial Guaranty Portfolio

The principal types of obligations covered by our financial guaranty direct and our financial guaranty reinsurance businesses are structured finance and public finance obligations. Because both businesses involve similar risks, we analyze and monitor our financial guaranty direct portfolio and our financial guaranty reinsurance portfolio on a coordinated basis. In the tables that follow, our reinsurance par outstanding is reported on a one-quarter lag due to the timing of receipt of reports prepared by our ceding companies. The following table sets forth our financial guaranty net par outstanding by product line:

Net Par Outstanding By Product Line

3

Structured Finance Obligations—We insure and reinsure a number of different types of structured finance obligations, including the following:

Mortgage-Backed and Home Equity—These include obligations backed by closed-end first mortgage loans and closed- and open-end second mortgage loans or home equity loans on one-to-four family residential properties, including condominiums and cooperative apartments. Insured domestic residential mortgage loans tend to be concentrated in the “sub-prime” sector, characterized by lower quality borrowers and higher levels of structural credit protection through subordination and/or excess spread.

Collateralized Debt Obligations—These include securities primarily backed by pooled corporate debt obligations, such as corporate bonds, bank loans or loan participations, asset-backed securities, residential and commercial mortgage-backed securities and trust preferred securities. These securities are often issued in “tranches,” with subordinated tranches providing credit support to the more senior tranches. Our financial guaranty exposures generally are to the more senior tranches of these issues. Prior to 2004 we also wrote equity layer credit protection on CDOs; these exposures are reported in our other segment.

Commercial Receivables—These include obligations backed by commercial mortgages, equipment leases, business loans and trade receivables. Credit support is derived from the cash flows generated by the underlying obligations, as well as property or equipment values as applicable. Additional credit protection for our exposure may be in the form of over-collateralization, excess spread, cash reserves, first loss letters of credit, subordinated securities or a combination of the foregoing. The properties backing commercial real estate-backed obligations include hotel properties, office buildings and warehouse properties.

Consumer Receivables—These include obligations backed by non-mortgage consumer receivables, such as automobile loans and leases, credit card receivables and other consumer receivables. Credit support is generally derived from the cash flows generated by the underlying obligations, as well as property, automobile or equipment values as applicable. Additional credit protection for our exposure may be in the form of over-collateralization, excess spread, cash reserves, first loss letters of credit, subordinated securities or a combination of the foregoing.

Other Structured Finance—Other structured finance exposures in our portfolio include bonds or other securities backed by assets not generally described in any of the other four categories.

The following table sets forth our structured finance direct and reinsurance gross par written by asset type (stated as a percentage of total structured finance direct and reinsurance gross par) for the periods presented:

Structured Finance Gross Par Written by Asset Type

4

The following table sets forth our structured finance direct and reinsurance net par outstanding by asset type (stated as a percentage of total structured finance direct and reinsurance net par outstanding) as of the dates indicated:

Structured Finance Net Par Outstanding by Asset Type

The table below shows our ten largest financial guaranty structured finance direct and reinsurance exposures by revenue source as a percentage of total financial guaranty net par outstanding as of December 31, 2005:

Ten Largest Structured Finance Exposures

(1)          These ratings represent our internal assessment of the underlying credit quality of the insured obligations. Our scale is comparable to that of the nationally recognized rating agencies.

Public Finance Obligations—We insure and reinsure a number of different types of public obligations, including the following:

Tax-Backed Bonds—These include a variety of obligations that are supported by the issuer from specific and discrete sources of taxation and include tax-backed revenue bonds, general fund obligations and lease revenue bonds. Tax-backed obligations may be secured by a lien on specific pledged tax revenues, such as a gasoline or excise tax, or incrementally from growth in property tax revenue associated with growth in property values. These obligations also include obligations secured by special assessments levied against property owners and often benefit from issuer covenants to enforce collections of such assessments and to foreclose on delinquent properties. Lease revenue bonds typically are general fund obligations of a municipality or other governmental authority that are subject to annual appropriation or

5

abatement; projects financed and subject to such lease payments ordinarily include real estate or equipment serving an essential public purpose. Bonds in this category also include moral obligations of municipalities or governmental authorities.

General Obligation Bonds—These include full faith and credit bonds that are issued by states, their political subdivisions and other municipal issuers, and are supported by the general obligation of the issuer to pay from available funds and by a pledge of the issuer to levy ad valorem taxes in an amount sufficient to provide for the full payment of the bonds.

Transportation Bonds—These include a wide variety of revenue-supported bonds, such as bonds for airports, ports, tunnels, municipal parking facilities, toll roads and toll bridges.

Municipal Utility Bonds—These include the obligations of all forms of municipal utilities, including electric, water and sewer utilities and resource recovery revenue bonds. These utilities may be organized in various forms, including municipal enterprise systems, authorities or joint-action agencies.

Investor-Owned Utility Bonds—These include obligations primarily backed by investor-owned utilities, most commonly, first mortgage bond obligations of for-profit electric or water utilities providing retail, industrial and commercial service, and also include sale-leaseback obligation bonds supported by such entities. In each case, these bonds are secured by a mortgage on property owned by or leased to an investor-owned utility.

Higher Education bonds—These include obligations secured by revenue collected by either public or private colleges and universities. Such revenue can encompass all of an institution’s revenue, including tuition and fees, or in other cases, can be specifically restricted to certain auxiliary sources of revenue.

Healthcare Bonds—These include obligations of healthcare facilities including community based hospitals and systems. In addition to healthcare facilities, obligors in this category include a small number of health maintenance organizations and long-term care facilities.

Housing Revenue Bonds—These include obligations relating to both single and multi-family housing, issued by states and localities, supported by cash flow and, in some cases, insurance from such entities as the Federal Housing Administration.

Other Public Bonds—These include other debt issued, guaranteed or otherwise supported by U.S. national or local governmental authorities, as well as student loans, revenue bonds, and obligations of some not-for-profit organizations. Also included in this category are international public obligations, including the obligations of sovereign and sub-sovereign non-U.S. issuers, project finance transactions involving projects leased to or supported by payments from non-U.S. governmental or quasi-governmental entities, as well as other obligations having international aspects, but which otherwise would fall within the other described categories.

6

The following table sets forth our public finance direct and reinsurance gross par written by bond type (stated as a percentage of total public finance direct and reinsurance gross par written) for the years presented:

Public Finance Gross Par Written by Asset Type

The following table sets forth our public finance direct and reinsurance net par outstanding by bond type (stated as a percentage of total public finance direct and reinsurance net par outstanding) as of the dates indicated:

Public Finance Net Par Outstanding by Asset Type

7

The table below shows our ten largest financial guaranty public finance direct and reinsurance exposures by revenue source as a percentage of total financial guaranty net par outstanding as of December 31, 2005:

Ten Largest Public Finance Exposures

(1)          These ratings represent our internal assessment of the underlying credit quality of the insured obligations. Our scale is comparable to that of the nationally recognized rating agencies.

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Internal Rating

The following table sets forth our financial guaranty portfolio as of December 31, 2005 by internal rating:

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Internal Rating

(1)          These ratings represent our internal assessment of the underlying credit quality of the insured obligations. Our scale is comparable to that of the nationally recognized rating agencies.

8

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Geographic Area

The following table sets forth the geographic distribution of our financial guaranty portfolio as of December 31, 2005:

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Geographic Area

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Issue Size

We seek broad coverage of the market by insuring and reinsuring small and large issues alike. The following table sets forth the distribution of our portfolio as of December 31, 2005 by original size of our exposure:

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Issue Size

9

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Source

The following table sets forth our financial guaranty portfolio as of and for the year ended December 31, 2005 by source:

Financial Guaranty Portfolio by Source

(1)          The Company had $16.6 million of gross par written in 2005.

Mortgage Guaranty Insurance/Reinsurance

Mortgage guaranty insurance is a specialized class of credit insurance that provides protection to mortgage lending institutions against the default of borrowers on mortgage loans that, at the time of the advance, had a loan-to-value (“LTV”) in excess of a specified ratio. In the United States, governmental agencies and private mortgage guaranty insurance compete in this market, while some lending institutions choose to self-insure against the risk of loss on high LTV mortgage loans.

Reinsurance in the mortgage guaranty insurance industry is used to increase the insurance capacity of the ceding company, to assist the ceding company in meeting applicable regulatory and rating agency requirements, to augment the financial strength of the ceding company, and to manage the ceding company’s risk profile.

The U.S. private mortgage guaranty insurance industry, composed of only monoline insurance companies as required by law, provides two basic types of coverage: primary insurance, which protects lenders against default on individual residential mortgage loans by covering losses on such loans to a stated percentage, and pool insurance, which protects lenders against loss on an underlying pool of individual mortgages by covering the full amount of the loss (less the proceeds from any applicable primary coverage) on individual residential mortgage loans in the pool, with an aggregate limit usually expressed as a percentage of the initial loan balances in the pool. Primary and pool insurance are used to facilitate the sale of mortgage loans in the secondary mortgage market, principally to the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”). Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac provide indirect funding for approximately half of all mortgage loans originated in the United States. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are prohibited by their charters from purchasing mortgage loans with LTV’s of greater than 80% unless the loans are insured by a designated mortgage guaranty insurer or some other form of credit enhancement is provided. In addition, pool insurance is often used to provide credit support for mortgage-backed securities and other secondary mortgage market transactions.

Mortgage guaranty reinsurance comprises the bulk of our in-force mortgage business. We have provided reinsurance of primary mortgage insurance and pool insurance in the United States on a quota share and excess of loss basis. Quota share reinsurance describes all forms of reinsurance in which the

10

reinsurer shares in a proportional part of the original premiums and losses of the business ceded by the primary company (subject to a ceding commission). Excess of loss reinsurance refers to reinsurance which indemnifies the ceding company for that portion of the loss that exceeds an agreed-upon “retention.” There has been a decrease in demand for our quota share mortgage guaranty reinsurance products over the last five years, as primary mortgage insurers have expanded their capital bases.

We have been a leading provider of excess of loss reinsurance to lender captives and third-party insurers in the United Kingdom. There is not a consistent demand for mortgage insurance guaranty (“MIG”) reinsurance in the United Kingdom although business opportunities may arise from time to time. We have entered into multi-year reinsurance arrangements with several lenders and third-party insurers.

We have also participated in the mortgage reinsurance markets in Ireland, Hong Kong and Australia. We have participated in these markets on an excess of loss basis with high attachment points and believe that our risk of loss on these transactions is remote.

The mortgage guaranty segment has a decreasing portfolio and is opportunistic with limited possibilities for new business due to our change in business strategy and the overall market for mortgage insurance. New business in this segment will be generated at irregular intervals.

Mortgage Portfolio

The following table sets forth our mortgage insurance and reinsurance risk in force by geographic region as of December 31, 2005:

Mortgage Guaranty Risk In Force By Geographic Region

The following table sets forth our mortgage guaranty risk in force by treaty type as of December 31, 2005:

Mortgage Guaranty Risk In Force By Treaty Type

Other

We have participated in several lines of business that are reflected in our historical financial statements, but that we have exited, including equity layer credit protection, trade credit reinsurance, title reinsurance, life, accident and health reinsurance (“LA&H”) and auto residual value reinsurance. Also included in this segment is the impact of the affiliate reinsurance transactions described under

11

“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Summary of Significant Affiliate Transactions.”

Our equity layer credit protection business generally consisted of first loss and mezzanine layer participations in credit derivatives or total rate of return swaps written on portfolios of primarily investment grade corporate credits and highly-rated classes of structured securities. We stopped writing new business in this line in early 2003. We have terminated all of these transactions during 2003 and 2004.

Trade credit insurance protects sellers of goods and services from the risk of non-payment of trade receivables. We participated in this market as a reinsurer. We ceased writing new trade credit business during 2004. All of our trade credit business was either retroceded or novated to a subsidiary of ACE, effective April 1, 2004.

We had offered title reinsurance products derived from excess of loss and quota share reinsurance products, on both a treaty and facultative basis, in the United States. ACE Capital Title Reinsurance Company, the company through which we had written U.S. title reinsurance business, was sold to ACE in April 2004.

We participated in a limited number of LA&H reinsurance transactions, all of which were transferred, through assignment or retrocession, to subsidiaries of ACE. We stopped writing this business in late 2001.

Auto residual value reinsurance protects automobile lessors and balloon note lenders against the risk that the actual value of an automobile at lease end or loan maturity will be less than the projected residual value of the automobile. We stopped writing new business in this line in 2001. All of this business was either retroceded to a subsidiary of ACE Limited (“ACE”), our former parent, or commuted effective April 1, 2004.

Underwriting

The underwriting, operations and risk management guidelines, policies and procedures of our insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries are tailored to their respective businesses, providing multiple levels of credit review and analysis.

Exposure limits and underwriting criteria are established, as appropriate, for sectors, countries, single risks and in the case of structured finance obligations, servicers. Single risk limits are established in relation to the Company’s capital base and are based on our assessment of potential severity of loss as well as other factors.

Critical risk factors for proposed public finance exposures include, for example, the credit quality of the issuer, the type of issue, the repayment source, security pledged, the presence of restrictive covenants, and the issue’s maturity. Underwriting consideration for exposures include (1) class, reflecting economic and social factors affecting that bond type, including the importance of the proposed project, (2) the financial management of the project and of the issuer, and (3) various legal and administrative factors. In cases where the primary source of repayment is the taxing or rate setting authority of a public entity, such as general obligation bonds, transportation bonds and municipal utility bonds, emphasis is placed on the overall financial strength of the issuer, the economic and demographic characteristics of the taxpayer or ratepayer base and the strength of the legal obligation to repay the debt. In cases of quasi-public entities such as healthcare bonds and private higher education bonds, emphasis is placed on the financial stability of the institution, its competitive position and its management.

Structured finance obligations generally present three distinct forms of risk: (1) asset risk, pertaining to the amount and quality of assets underlying an issue; (2) structural risk, pertaining to the extent to which an issue’s legal structure provides protection from loss; and (3) execution risk, which is the risk that poor performance by a servicer contributes to a decline in the cash flow available to the transaction. Each risk is

12

addressed in turn through our underwriting process. Generally, the amount and quality of asset coverage required with respect to a structured finance exposure is dependent upon the historic performance of the subject asset class, or those assets actually underlying the risk proposed to be insured or reinsured. Future performance expectations are developed from this history, taking into account economic, social and political factors affecting that asset class as well as, to the extent feasible, the subject assets themselves. Conclusions are then drawn about the amount of over-collateralization or other credit enhancement necessary in a particular transaction in order to protect investors (and therefore the insurer or reinsurer) against poor asset performance. In addition, structured securities usually are designed to protect investors (and therefore the guarantor) from the bankruptcy or insolvency of the entity which originated the underlying assets, as well as the bankruptcy or insolvency of the servicer of those assets.

For international transactions, an analysis of the country or countries in which the risk resides is performed. Such analysis includes as assessment of the political risk as well as the economic and demographic characteristics of the country or countries. For each transaction, we perform an assessment of the legal regime governing the transaction and the laws affecting the underlying assets supporting the obligations.

Underwriting Procedures

Each insurance, facultative reinsurance and credit derivative transaction after passing an initial assessment intended to consider the desirability of the proposed exposure, is assigned to a team including relevant underwriting and legal personnel. Finance personnel review the proposed exposure for compliance with applicable accounting standards and investment guidelines. The team reviews the structure of the transaction, and the underwriter reviews credit issues pertinent to the particular line of business. In our structured financial guaranty and mortgage guaranty lines, underwriters generally apply computer models to stress cash flows in their assessment of the risk inherent in a particular transaction. For reinsurance transactions, stress model results may be provided by the primary insurer. Stress models may also be developed internally by our underwriting department and reflect both empirical research as well as information gathered from third parties, such as rating agencies, investment banks or servicers. Where warranted to assess a particular credit risk properly, we may perform a due diligence review in connection with a transaction. A due diligence review may include, among other things, meetings with issuer management, review of underwriting and operational procedures, file reviews, and review of financial procedures and computer systems. The structure of a transaction is also scrutinized from a legal perspective by in-house and, where appropriate, external counsel, and specialty legal expertise is consulted when our legal staff deems it appropriate.

Upon completion of underwriting analysis, the underwriter prepares a formal credit report that is submitted to an underwriting committee for review. In the vast majority of cases, an oral presentation is made to the committee, followed by questions from committee members and discussion among the committee members and the underwriters. In some cases, additional information may be presented at the meeting or required to be submitted prior to approval. Signatures of committee members are received and any further requirements, such as specific terms or evidence of due diligence, is noted. At the discretion of the Chief Credit Officer, for submissions that are of a relatively low-risk nature or where the transaction is substantially similar to others that have been submitted in the past, a formal meeting may be foregone. A formal submission and signatures of the committee members are required whether a formal meeting is held or not. U.S. direct business is submitted to AGC’s Underwriting Committee, which consists of senior professionals including underwriting officers, the President and Chief Credit Officer and other senior officers of AGC.  Transactions submitted by Assured Guaranty (UK) Ltd. must be approved by Assured Guaranty (UK) Ltd.’s Underwriting Committee, consisting of senior officers of Assured Guaranty (UK) Ltd., and a further Supervisory Underwriting Committee containing the President and Chief Credit Officer of AGC. Transactions submitted for execution in AGRO must be recommended by the AG Intermediary

13

Credit Committee, consisting substantially of senior officers of AGC including the President and Chief Credit Officer, and approved by AGRO’s underwriting managers in Bermuda. Transactions submitted for approval within AG Re must be approved by the AG Re Underwriting Committee, containing senior officers of AG Re, including the President and Chief Operating Officer.

Treaty Underwriting

The procedures for underwriting treaty business differ somewhat from those for facultative reinsurance, as we make a forward commitment to reinsure business from a ceding company for a specified period of time. Although we have the ability to exclude certain classes or categories of risk from a treaty, we have a limited ability to control the individual risks ceded pursuant to the terms of the treaty. As a result, we enter into reinsurance treaties only with ceding companies with proven track records and after extensive underwriting due diligence with respect to the proposed cedant. Prior to entering into a reinsurance treaty, we meet with senior management, underwriters, risk managers, and accounting and systems personnel of the proposed cedant. We evaluate the ceding company’s underwriting expertise and experience, capital position, in-force book of business, reserves, cash flow, profitability and financial strength. We actively monitor ceded treaty exposures. Collected data is evaluated regularly to detect ceded risks that are inconsistent with our expectations. If appropriate and permitted under the terms of the treaty, we add exclusions in response to risks identified during our evaluations. Our surveillance department conducts periodic audits of each ceding company. The audits entail review of underwriting and surveillance files, as well as meetings with management. Information gathered during these audits is used to re-evaluate treaties at the time of renewal.

Risk Management

The Company’s risk policies and limits are set by the Portfolio Risk Management Committee, which includes members of senior management and senior Credit and Surveillance officers. The Portfolio Risk Management Committee focuses on the measurement and management of credit, market and liquidity risk for the overall company and its main operating subsidiaries. It has established and maintains underwriting limits, policies and procedures and meets at least quarterly to review and set policy.

Our risk management personnel are responsible for transactional and treaty surveillance, insured portfolio management, risk syndication and claims administration. Risk management, in consultation with the Chief Credit Officer, designates those risks which are to be excluded from our reinsurance treaty assumptions. Tailored surveillance strategies have been developed for each type of exposure, depending upon the credit risk inherent in the exposure, with a view to determining credit trends in the insured book and making recommendations on portfolio management and risk mitigation strategies, to the extent appropriate. Because both businesses involve similar risks, we analyze and monitor our financial guaranty direct portfolio and our financial guaranty reinsurance portfolio on a coordinated basis.

We may also seek to mitigate the risk inherent in our exposures through the purchase of third party reinsurance or retrocessions, and may also periodically enter into other arrangements to alleviate all or a portion of this risk.

Direct Businesses

We conduct surveillance procedures to track risk aggregations and monitor performance of each risk. For municipal risk, we have review schedules for each credit dependent on the underlying rating of the credit and the revenue type. Credits perceived to have greater risk profiles are reviewed more frequently than other credits or classes of credits that historically have had few defaults. In the event of credit deterioration of a particular exposure, we review the credit more frequently and take remedial action as permitted by the terms of the transaction.

14

For structured securities and certain mortgage risks, we generally collect data, on a regular basis, and compare actual default and delinquency statistics to those generated by our models. To the extent that a transaction is performing materially below expectations, we seek to take steps to mitigate the potential for loss. Such steps may include meetings with servicers, re-evaluation of loan files and, in certain cases, removal of the servicer.

We have created various models to track performance of certain other large direct business lines including CDOs. These systems incorporate risk-tracking tools such as credit spreads and ratings which are obtained from third parties and incorporated into our risk tracking process.

Reinsurance Businesses

Our surveillance personnel take steps to ensure that the primary insurer is managing risk pursuant to the terms of the applicable reinsurance agreement. To this end, we conduct periodic audits of ceding companies. We may conduct additional surveillance audits during the year, at which time underwriting, surveillance and claim files of the ceding company are reviewed. In the event of credit deterioration of a particular exposure, more frequent reviews of the ceding company’s risk mitigation activities are conducted. For certain exposures, we also will undertake an independent analysis and remodeling of the transaction.

Closely Monitored Credits

Our surveillance department is responsible for monitoring our portfolio of credits and maintains a list of closely monitored credits. The closely monitored credits are divided into four categories: Category 1 (low priority; fundamentally sound, greater than normal risk); Category 2 (medium priority; weakening credit profile, may result in loss); Category 3 (high priority; claim/default probable, case reserve established); Category 4 (claim paid, case reserve established for future payments). The closely monitored credits include all below investment grade (BIG) exposures where there is a material amount of exposure (generally greater than $10.0 million) or a material risk of the Company incurring a loss greater than $0.5 million. The closely monitored credits also include investment grade (IG) risks where credit quality is deteriorating and where, in the view of the Company, there is significant potential that the risk quality will fall below investment grade. The closely monitored credits include approximately 96% of our BIG exposure, and the remaining BIG exposure of $55.2 million is distributed across 103 different credits. Other than those excluded BIG credits, credits that are not included in the closely monitored credit list are categorized as fundamentally sound risks. The following table provides financial guaranty net par outstanding by credit monitoring category as of December 31, 2005 and 2004:

(1)          As of December 31, 2005, Category 1 contains 4 credits with net par outstanding of $44.8 million and Category 2 contains 7 credits with net par outstanding of $80.6 million in geographic areas affected by Hurricane Katrina.

15

Losses and Reserves

Reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses for non-derivative transactions in our financial guaranty direct, financial guaranty assumed reinsurance and mortgage guaranty business include case reserves and portfolio reserves. See the “Valuation of Derivative Financial Instruments” of the Critical Accounting Estimates section for more information on our derivative transactions. Case reserves are established when there is significant credit deterioration on specific insured obligations and the obligations are in default or default is probable, not necessarily upon non-payment of principal or interest by an insured. Case reserves represent the present value of expected future loss payments and loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”), net of estimated recoveries, but before considering ceded reinsurance. This reserving method is different from case reserves established by traditional property and casualty insurance companies, which establish case reserves upon notification of a claim and establish incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) reserves for the difference between actuarially estimated ultimate losses and recorded case reserves. Financial guaranty direct and assumed reinsurance case reserves and related salvage and subrogation, if any, are discounted at 6%, which is the approximate taxable equivalent yield on our investment portfolio in all periods presented.

We record portfolio reserves in our financial guaranty direct, financial guaranty assumed reinsurance and mortgage guaranty business. Portfolio reserves are established with respect to the portion of our business for which case reserves have not been established. Portfolio reserves are not established for quota share mortgage insurance contract types, all of which are in run-off, rather IBNR reserves have been established for these contracts.

Portfolio reserves are not established based on a specific event, rather they are calculated by aggregating the portfolio reserve calculated for each individual transaction. Individual transaction reserves are calculated on a quarterly basis by multiplying the par in-force by the product of the ultimate loss and earning factors without regard to discounting. The ultimate loss factor is defined as the frequency of loss multiplied by the severity of loss, where the frequency is defined as the probability of default for each individual issue. The earning factor is inception to date earned premium divided by the estimated ultimate written premium for each transaction. The probability of default is estimated from historical rating agency data and is based on the transaction’s credit rating, industry sector and time until maturity. The severity is defined as the complement of historical recovery/salvage rates gathered by the rating agencies of defaulting issues and is based on the industry sector.

Portfolio reserves are recorded gross of reinsurance. To date our reinsurance programs have been made up of excess of loss contracts. We have not ceded any amounts under these contracts, as our recorded portfolio reserves have not exceeded our contractual retentions.

The Company records an incurred loss that is reflected in the statement of operations upon the establishment of portfolio reserves. When we initially record a case reserve, we reclassify the corresponding portfolio reserve already recorded for that credit within the balance sheet. The difference between the initially recorded case reserve and the reclassified portfolio reserve is recorded as a charge in our statement of operations. It would be a remote occurrence when the case reserve is not greater than the reclassified portfolio reserve. Any subsequent change in portfolio reserves or initial case reserves are recorded quarterly as a charge or credit in our statement of operations in the period such estimates change.  Due to the inherent uncertainties of estimating loss and LAE reserves, actual experience may differ from the estimates reflected in our consolidated financial statements, and the differences may be material.

We also record IBNR reserves for our mortgage guaranty and other segments. IBNR is an estimate of losses for which the insured event has occurred but the claim has not yet been reported to us. In establishing IBNR, we use traditional actuarial methods to estimate the reporting lag of such claims based on historical experience, claim reviews and information reported by ceding companies. We record IBNR

16

for mortgage guaranty quota-share reinsurance contracts, all of which are in run-off, within our mortgage guaranty segment. We also record IBNR for title reinsurance, auto residual value reinsurance and trade credit reinsurance within our other segment.  The other segment represents lines of business we have exited or sold prior to the IPO.

For all other mortgage guaranty transactions we record portfolio reserves in a manner consistent with our financial guaranty business. While other mortgage guaranty insurance companies do not record portfolio reserves, rather just case and IBNR reserves, we record portfolio reserves because we write business on an excess of loss basis, while other industry participants write quota share or first layer loss business. We manage and underwrite this business in the same manner as our financial guaranty insurance and reinsurance business because they have similar characteristics as insured obligations of mortgage-backed securities.

FAS No. 60, “Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises” (“FAS 60”) is the authoritative guidance for an insurance enterprise. FAS 60 prescribes differing reserving methodologies depending on whether a contract fits within its definition of a short-duration contract or a long-duration contract. Financial guaranty contracts have elements of long-duration insurance contracts in that they are irrevocable and extend over a period that may exceed 30 years or more, but for regulatory purposes are reported as property and liability insurance, which are normally considered short-duration contracts. The short-duration and long-duration classifications have different methods of accounting for premium revenue and contract liability recognition. Additionally, the accounting for deferred acquisition costs (“DAC”) could be different under the two methods.

We believe the guidance of FAS 60 does not expressly address the distinctive characteristics of financial guaranty insurance, so we also apply the analogous guidance of Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 85-20, “Recognition of Fees for Guaranteeing a Loan” (“EITF 85-20”), which provides guidance relating to the recognition of fees for guaranteeing a loan, which has similarities to financial guaranty insurance contracts. Under the guidance in EITF 85-20, the guarantor should assess the probability of loss on an ongoing basis to determine if a liability should be recognized under FAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies” (“FAS 5”). FAS 5 requires that a loss be recognized where it is probable that one or more future events will occur confirming that a liability has been incurred as of the date of the financial statements and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated.

The Company is aware that there are certain differences regarding the measurement of portfolio loss liabilities among companies in the financial guaranty industry. In January and February 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) staff had discussions concerning these differences with a number of industry participants. Based on these discussions, in June 2005 the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) staff decided additional guidance is necessary regarding financial guaranty contracts. When the FASB staff reaches a conclusion on this issue, which is expected during the first half of 2006, the Company and the rest of the financial guaranty industry may be required to change some aspects of their loss reserving policies, but the Company cannot currently assess how the FASB or SEC staffs’ ultimate resolution of this issue will impact our reserving policy or other balances, i.e., premiums and DAC. Until the issue is resolved, the Company intends to continue to apply its existing policy with respect to the establishment of both case and portfolio reserves.

17

The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of reserves for losses and LAE:

(1)          The prior year loss recovery of $ 77.3 million in 2005 is primarily due to $71.0 million in loss recoveries from a third party litigation settlement agreement, with two parties, relating to a reinsurance claim incurred in 1998 and 1999 as well as a $2.4 million recovery related to the equity layer credit protection business.