As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 2, 2012.

Registration No. 333-169824

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

 

 

Amendment No. 11

to

Form S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

 

 

 

 

EVERBANK FINANCIAL CORP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

 

 

501 Riverside Ave.
Jacksonville, Florida 32202
(904) 281-6000

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

 

 

 

 

Thomas A. Hajda
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
501 Riverside Ave.
Jacksonville, Florida 32202
(904) 281-6000

(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

 

 

 

 

Copies of Communications to:

 

 

 

 

 

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public:  As soon as practicable after the effective date of this registration statement.

 

 

 

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933 check the following box.  o

 

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  o

 

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  o

 

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.  o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

 

CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until this Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to Section 8(a), may determine.

 

 

Subject to Completion, Dated May 2, 2012

 

19,220,000 Shares

 

 

EverBank Financial Corp

Common Stock

 

 

 

 

This is an initial public offering of shares of common stock of EverBank Financial Corp.

 

We are offering 19,220,000 shares of common stock to be sold in the offering.

 

Prior to this offering there has been no public market for our common stock. It is currently estimated that the initial public offering price per share will be between $11.00 and $12.00. Our common stock has been approved for listing on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “EVER.”

 

See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 17 to read about factors you should consider before buying shares of the common stock.

 

 

 

 

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

 

EverBank Financial Corp is an emerging growth company, as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act of 1933.

 

 

 

 

 

To the extent that the underwriters sell more than 19,220,000 shares of common stock, the underwriters have the option to purchase up to an additional 2,883,000 shares from EverBank Financial Corp at the initial public offering price less the underwriting discount.

 

 

 

 

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in New York, New York on          , 2012.

Joint Book-Running Managers

 

 

Goldman, Sachs & Co.

Co-Managers

 

 

 

 

 

Prospectus dated          , 2012.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus or in any free writing prospectus we may authorize to be delivered to you. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized anyone to provide you with different information. If anyone provides you with different information, you should not rely on it. We are not, and the underwriters are not, making an offer of these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer is not permitted. You should not assume that the information contained in this prospectus is accurate as of any date other than the date on the front of this prospectus.

 

These securities are not deposits, bank accounts or obligations of any bank and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other governmental agency and are subject to investment risks, including possible loss of the entire amount invested.

 

For investors outside the United States: Neither we nor any of the underwriters have done anything that would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. You are required to inform yourselves about and to observe any restrictions relating to this offering and the distribution of this prospectus.

 

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

	•	Consumer Direct.  Our consumer direct channel includes Internet, email, telephone and mobile device access to products and services.
	•	Financial Centers.  We have a network of 14 high-volume financial centers in key Florida metropolitan areas, including the Jacksonville, Naples, Ft. Myers, Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Tampa Bay and Clearwater markets with average deposits per financial center of $130.5 million as of December 31, 2011.
	•	Financial Intermediaries.  We offer deposit products nationwide through relationships with financial advisory firms representing over 2,800 independent financial professionals.

	•	general business or economic conditions;
	•	liquidity risk, which could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition;
	•	changes in interest rates, which may make our results volatile and difficult to predict from quarter to quarter;
	•	legislative or regulatory actions affecting or concerning mortgage loan modification and refinancing programs;
	•	our potential need to make further increases in our provisions for loan and lease losses and to charge off additional loans and leases in the future;
	•	our exposure to risk related to our commercial real estate loan portfolio;

	•	limited ability to rely on brokered deposits as a part of our funding strategy;
	•	conditions in the real estate market and higher than normal delinquency and default rates;
	•	our concentration of jumbo mortgage loans and mortgage servicing rights;
	•	uncertainty resulting from the implementation of new and pending legislation and regulations;
	•	our potential failure to comply with the complex laws and regulations that govern our operations; and
	•	our dependence on programs administered by government agencies and government- sponsored enterprises.

	•	Our net interest income will be between $114 million and $117 million;
	•	Our provision for loan and lease losses will be between $10 million and $13 million;
	•	Our net income will be between $10 million and $13 million; and
	•	Our adjusted net income will be between $25 million and $28 million. Adjusted net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 excludes a $3.9 million after-tax charge for transaction and

		non-recurring regulatory related cost, a $2.1 million after-tax charge for an increase in Bank of Florida nonaccretable discount, and a $9.4 million after-tax charge for MSR impairment.

	•	Our net loans held for investment will be approximately $7.2 billion;
	•	Our total assets will be approximately $13.8 billion; and
	•	Our deposits will be approximately $10.6 billion.

	•	Our net interest margin will be between 3.9% and 4.0%;

	•	Our adjusted non-performing assets as a percentage of total assets will be between 1.6% and 1.7%. Total regulatory non-performing assets will be approximately $1.9 billion, which includes $1.5 billion of government insured loans that were 90 days past due and still accruing and approximately $0.2 billion of loans and other real estate owned acquired from the Bank of Florida and accounted for under ASC 310-30. We define non-performing assets, or NPA, as non-accrual loans, accruing loans past due 90 days or more and foreclosed property. Our adjusted NPA will be between $220 million and $234 million. Our adjusted NPA calculation excludes government insured pool buyout loans for which payment is insured by the government. We also exclude loans, leases and foreclosed property acquired in the Tygris and Bank of Florida acquisitions accounted for under ASC 310-30 because, as of March 31, 2012, we expected to fully collect the carrying value of such loans, leases and foreclosed property;

	•	Our bank level Tier 1 (core) capital ratio will be 7.7% at March 31, 2012 as compared to 8.0% at December 31, 2011. The ratio is calculated as Tier 1 (core) capital divided by adjusted total assets. Total assets are adjusted for goodwill, deferred tax assets disallowed from Tier 1 (core) capital and other regulatory adjustments;
	•	Our bank level total risk-based capital ratio will be 15.2% at March 31, 2012 as compared to 15.7% at December 31, 2011. The ratio is calculated as total risk-based capital divided by total risk-weighted assets. Risk-based capital includes Tier 1 (core) capital, allowance for loan and lease losses, subject to limitations, and other regulatory adjustments;
	•	Our tangible equity to tangible assets will be approximately 7.1%. Tangible equity and assets as of March 31, 2012 exclude goodwill of $10.2 million and intangible assets of $7.1 million;
	•	Our net charge-offs to average loans held for investment will be approximately 0.65% (annualized) based on the three months ended March 31, 2012 compared to 1.45% for the three months ended March 31, 2011; and
	•	We organically generated approximately $2.2 billion of loans and leases of which approximately $0.5 billion are retained on our balance sheet.

Common stock offered by us		19,220,000 shares
Option to purchase additional shares from us		2,883,000 shares
Total shares of common stock to be outstanding immediately after this offering		113,179,343 shares (or 116,062,343 shares if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares from us in full)
Use of proceeds		We estimate that the net proceeds to us from the sale of our common stock in this offering will be $198.2 million, at an assumed initial public offering price of $11.50 per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover of this prospectus, and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering for general corporate purposes, which may include organic growth or the acquisition of businesses or assets that we believe are complementary to our present business and provide attractive risk-adjusted returns. See “Use of Proceeds.”
Dividend policy		Commencing in the third quarter of 2012, we intend to pay a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share, subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our ability to pay dividends is limited by various regulatory requirements and policies of bank regulatory agencies having jurisdiction over us and our banking subsidiary, our earnings, cash resources and capital needs, general business conditions and other factors deemed relevant by our Board of Directors. See “Dividend Policy,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Restrictions on Paying Dividends” and “Regulation and Supervision — Regulation of Federal Savings Banks — Limitation on Capital Distributions.”
New York Stock Exchange symbol		“EVER”
Risk factors		Please read the section entitled “Risk Factors” beginning on page 17 for a discussion of some of the factors you should carefully consider before deciding to invest in our common stock.

	•	12,222,787 shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options at a weighted average exercise price of $11.21 per share;
	•	406,999 shares of common stock issuable upon the vesting of outstanding restricted stock units with a remaining weighted average vesting period, as of April 15, 2012, of 217 days; and
	•	15,000,000 additional shares reserved for issuance under our equity incentive plans.

	•	gives effect to the Reorganization;

	•	assumes an initial public offering price of $11.50 per share, the midpoint of the estimated initial public offering price range; and

	•	assumes no exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional 2,883,000 shares from us.

 

SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

		Year Ended December 31,
		2011				2010				2009
		(In millions, except share and per share data)
Income Statement Data:
Interest income		$	588.2			$	612.5			$	440.6
Interest expense			135.9				147.2				163.2
Net interest income			452.3				465.3				277.4
Provision for loan and lease losses(1)			49.7				79.3				121.9
Net interest income after provision for loan and lease losses			402.6				386.0				155.5
Noninterest income(2)			233.1				357.8				232.1
Noninterest expense(3)			554.2				493.9				299.2
Income before income taxes			81.5				249.9				88.4
Provision for income taxes			28.8				61.0				34.9
Net income from continuing operations			52.7				188.9				53.5
Discontinued operations, net of income taxes			—				—				(0.2	)
Net income		$	52.7			$	188.9			$	53.4
Net income allocated to common shareholders		$	41.5			$	144.8			$	33.8
Share Data:
Weighted-average common shares outstanding:
(units in thousands)
Basic			74,892				72,479				42,126
Diluted			77,506				74,589				43,299
Earnings from continuing operations per common share:
Basic		$	0.55			$	2.00			$	0.80
Diluted			0.54				1.94				0.78
Net tangible book value per as converted common share at period end(4):
Basic		$	10.12			$	10.65			$	8.54
Diluted			9.93				10.40				8.33

		As of December 31,
		2011				2010				2009
		(In millions)
Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	295.0			$	1,169.2			$	23.3
Investment securities			2,191.8				2,203.6				1,678.9
Loans held for sale			2,725.3				1,237.7				1,283.0
Loans and leases held for investment, net			6,441.5				6,005.6				4,072.7
Total assets			13,041.7				12,007.9				8,060.2
Deposits			10,265.8				9,683.1				6,315.3
Total liabilities			12,074.0				10,994.7				7,506.3
Total shareholders’ equity			967.7				1,013.2				553.9
		Year Ended December 31,
		2011				2010				2009
Capital Ratios (period end):
Tangible equity to tangible assets(5)			7.3%				8.3%				6.9%
Tier 1 (core) capital ratio (bank level)(6)			8.0%				8.7%				8.0%
Total risk-based capital ratio (bank level)(7)			15.7%				17.0%				15.0%
Performance Metrics:
Adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations (in millions)(8)		$	107.6			$	127.0			$	53.5
Return on average assets			0.4	%			1.8	%			0.7	%
Return on average equity			5.2	%			20.9	%			11.5	%
Adjusted return on average assets(9)			0.9	%			1.2	%			0.7	%
Adjusted return on average equity(9)			10.7	%			14.0	%			11.5	%

(1)		For the year ended December 31, 2011, provision for loan and lease losses includes a $4.9 million increase in non-accretable discount related to Bank of Florida acquired credit-impaired loans, a $1.9 million impact of change in ALLL methodology and a $10.0 million impact of early adoption of troubled debt restructuring, or TDR, guidance and policy change. For the year ended December 31, 2010, provision for loan and lease losses includes a $6.2 million increase in non-accretable discount related to Bank of Florida acquired credit-impaired loans.
(2)		For the year ended December 31, 2011, noninterest income includes a $4.7 million gain on repurchase of trust preferred securities including $0.3 million resulting from the unwind of the associated cash flow hedge and a $39.5 million impairment charge related to mortgage servicing rights, or MSR. For the year ended December 31, 2010, noninterest income includes a $68.1 million non-recurring bargain purchase gain associated with the Tygris acquisition, a $19.9 million gain on sale of investment securities due to portfolio concentration repositioning and a $5.7 million gain on repurchase of trust preferred securities.
(3)		For the year ended December 31, 2011, noninterest expense includes $27.1 million in transaction and non-recurring regulatory related expense and an $8.7 million decrease in fair value of the Tygris indemnification asset resulting from a decrease in estimated future credit losses. The carrying value of the indemnification asset was $0 as of December 31, 2011. For the year ended December 31, 2010, noninterest expense includes $9.7 million in transaction related expense, a $10.3 million loss on early extinguishment of acquired debt and a $22.0 million decrease in fair value of the Tygris indemnification asset.
(4)		Calculated as tangible shareholders’ equity divided by shares of common stock. For purposes of computing net tangible book value per as converted common share, tangible book value equals shareholders’ equity less goodwill and intangible assets. See Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements of EverBank Financial Corp and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011, and 2010 and

		for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 for additional information regarding our goodwill and intangible assets.
		Basic and diluted net tangible book value per as converted common share are calculated using a denominator that includes actual period end common shares outstanding and additional common shares assuming conversion of all outstanding preferred stock to common stock. Diluted net tangible book value per as converted common share also includes in the denominator common stock equivalent shares related to stock options and common stock equivalent shares related to nonvested restricted stock units.
		Net tangible book value per as converted common share is a non-GAAP financial measure, and its most directly comparable GAAP financial measure is book value per common share.
(5)		Calculated as tangible shareholders’ equity divided by tangible assets, after deducting goodwill and intangible assets from the numerator and the denominator. Tangible equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP financial measure, and the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure for tangible equity is shareholders’ equity and the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure for tangible assets is total assets.
(6)		Calculated as Tier 1 (core) capital divided by adjusted total assets. Total assets are adjusted for goodwill, deferred tax assets disallowed from Tier 1 (core) capital and other regulatory adjustments.
(7)		Calculated as total risk-based capital divided by total risk-weighted assets. Risk-based capital includes Tier 1 (core) capital, allowance for loan and lease losses, subject to limitations, and other regulatory adjustments.
(8)		Adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations includes adjustments to our net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations for certain material items that we believe are not reflective of our ongoing business or operating performance, including the Tygris and Bank of Florida acquisitions. There were no material items that gave rise to adjustments prior to the year ended December 31, 2010. Accordingly, for periods presented before the year ended December 31, 2010, we have not reflected adjustments to net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations calculated in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations to net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations, which is the most directly comparable GAAP measure, is as follows:

		Year Ended December 31,
						2011				2010				2009
		(In thousands)
Net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations						$	52,729			$	188,900			$	53,537
Bargain purchase gain on Tygris transaction, net of tax							—				(68,056	)
Gain on sale of investment securities due to portfolio concentration repositioning, net of tax							—				(12,337	)
Gain on repurchase of trust preferred securities, net of tax							(2,910	)			(3,556	)
Transaction and non-recurring regulatory related expense, net of tax							16,831				5,984
Loss on early extinguishment of acquired debt, net of tax							—				6,411
Decrease in fair value of Tygris indemnification asset resulting from a decrease in estimated future credit losses, net of tax							5,382				13,654
Increase in Bank of Florida non-accretable discount, net of tax							3,007				3,837
Impact of change in ALLL methodology, net of tax							1,178				—

		Year Ended December 31,
						2011				2010				2009
		(In thousands)
Early adoption of TDR guidance and policy change, net of tax							6,225				—
MSR impairment, net of tax							24,462				—
Tax benefit (expense) related to revaluation of Tygris net unrealized built-in losses, net of tax							691				(7,840	)
Adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations						$	107,595			$	126,997			$	53,537

(9)		Adjusted return on average assets equals adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations divided by average total assets and adjusted return on average equity equals adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations divided by average shareholders’ equity. Adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations is a non-GAAP measure of our financial performance and its most directly comparable GAAP measure is net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations. For a reconciliation of net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations to adjusted net income attributable to the Company from continuing operations, see Note 8 above.

 

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as all of the other information contained in this prospectus, before deciding to invest in our common stock.

 

Risks Related to Our Business

 

General business and economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Our businesses and operations are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the United States. If the U.S. economy is unable to steadily emerge from the recession that began in 2007 or we experience worsening economic conditions, such as a so-called “double-dip” recession, our growth and profitability could be constrained. In addition, economic conditions in foreign countries can affect the stability of global financial markets, which could hinder the U.S. economic recovery. Financial markets remain concerned about the ability of certain European countries, particularly Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy, to finance and service their debt. The default by any one of these countries on their debt payments could lead to weaker economic conditions in the United States. Weak economic conditions are characterized by deflation, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, including a lack of liquidity and/or depressed prices in the secondary market for mortgage loans, increased delinquencies on mortgage, consumer and commercial loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines and lower home sales and commercial activity. All of these factors are detrimental to our business. Our business is significantly affected by monetary and related policies of the U.S. federal government, its agencies and government-sponsored entities, or GSEs. Changes in any of these policies are influenced by macroeconomic conditions and other factors that are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Liquidity risk could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition.

 

Liquidity is essential to our business. Actions by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, or FHLB, or the FRB may reduce our borrowing capacity. Additionally, we may not be able to attract deposits at competitive rates. An inability to raise funds through traditional deposits, brokered deposits, borrowings, the sale of securities or loans and other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity or result in increased funding costs. Furthermore, we invest in several asset classes, including significant investments in mortgage servicing rights, or MSR, which may be less liquid in certain markets. Liquidity may also be adversely impacted by bank supervisory and regulatory authorities mandating changes in the composition of our balance sheet to asset classes that are less liquid.

 

Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities or on terms that are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry or economy in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a downturn in the markets in which our loans are concentrated or adverse regulatory action against us. In addition, our access to deposits may be affected by the liquidity and/or cash flow needs of depositors. Although we have historically been able to replace maturing deposits and FHLB advances as necessary, we might not be able to replace such funds in the future and can lose a relatively inexpensive source of funds and increase our funding costs if, among other things, customers move funds out of bank deposits and into alternative investments, such as the stock market, that are perceived as providing superior expected returns. Furthermore, an inability to increase our deposit base at all or at attractive rates would impede our ability to fund our continued growth, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our ability to raise funds through deposits or borrowings could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry in light of the recent turmoil faced by banking organizations and the continued deterioration in credit markets.

 

Although we consider our sources of funds adequate for our liquidity needs, we may be compelled to seek additional sources of financing in the future. We may be required to seek additional regulatory capital through capital raising at terms that may be very dilutive to existing stockholders. Likewise, we may need to incur additional debt in the future to achieve our business objectives, in connection with future acquisitions or for other reasons. Any borrowings, if sought, may not be available to us or, if available, may not be on favorable terms.

 

Our financial results are significantly affected in a number of ways by changes in interest rates, which may make our results volatile and difficult to predict from quarter to quarter.

 

Most of our assets and liabilities are monetary in nature, which subjects us to significant risks from changes in interest rates and can impact our net income and the valuation of our assets and liabilities. Our operating results depend to a great extent on our net interest margin, which is the difference between the amount of interest income we earn and the amount of interest expense we incur. If the rate of interest we pay on our interest-bearing deposits, borrowings and other liabilities increases more than the rate of interest we receive on loans, securities and other interest-earning assets, our net interest income, and therefore our earnings, would be adversely affected. Our earnings also could be adversely affected if the rates on our loans and other investments fall more quickly than those on our deposits and other liabilities. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond our control, including competition, general economic conditions and monetary and fiscal policies of various governmental and regulatory authorities, including the FRB. A strengthening U.S. economy would be expected to cause the FRB to increase short-term interest rates, which would increase our borrowing costs and may reduce our profit margins. A sustained low interest rate environment could cause many of our loans subject to adjustable rates to reprice downward to lower interest rates, which would decrease our loan yields and reduce our profit margins.

 

Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on our mortgage loan origination revenues. Historically, there has been an inverse correlation between the demand for mortgage loans and interest rates. Mortgage origination volume and revenues usually decline during periods of rising or high interest rates and increase during periods of declining or low interest rates. Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on the carrying value of a significant percentage of the assets on our balance sheet. Furthermore, our MSR are valued based on a number of factors, including assumptions about borrower repayment rates, which are heavily influenced by prevailing interest rates. When interest rates fall, borrowers are usually more likely to prepay their mortgage loans by refinancing them at a lower rate. As the likelihood of prepayment increases, the fair value of our MSR can decrease, which, in turn, may reduce earnings in the period in which the decrease occurs.

 

We recorded a $39.5 million impairment charge related to MSR for the year ended December 31, 2011. In addition, mortgage loans held for sale for which an active secondary market and readily available market prices exist and other interests we hold related to residential loan sales and securitizations are carried at fair value. The value of these assets may be negatively affected by changes in interest rates. We may not correctly or adequately hedge this risk, and even if we do hedge the risk with derivatives and other instruments, we may still incur significant losses from changes in the value of these assets or from changes in the value of the hedging instruments.

 

Even though originating mortgage loans, which benefit from declining rates, and servicing mortgage loans, which benefit from rising rates, can act as a “natural hedge” to soften the overall impact of changes in rates on our consolidated financial results, the hedge is not perfect, either in amount or timing. For example, the negative effect on revenue from a decrease in the fair value of

residential MSR is generally immediate, but any offsetting revenue benefit from more originations and the MSR relating to the new loans would generally accrue over time. In addition, in recent quarters it has become apparent that even a low interest rate environment may not result in a significant increase in mortgage originations in light of other macroeconomic variable factors, declining real estate values and changes in underwriting standards resulting from the recent recession.

 

We enter into forward starting swaps as a hedging strategy related to our expected future issuances of debt. This hedging strategy allows us to fix the interest rate margin between our interest earning assets and our interest bearing liabilities. A continued prolonged period of lower interest rates could affect the duration of our interest earning assets and adversely impact our operations in future periods.

 

We may be required to make further increases in our provisions for loan and lease losses and to charge-off additional loans and leases in the future, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

 

The real estate market in the United States since late 2007 has been characterized by high delinquency rates and price deterioration. Despite historically low interest rates beginning in 2008, higher credit standards, weak employment, slow economic growth and an overall de-leveraging in the residential and commercial sectors have perpetuated these trends. We maintain an allowance for loan and lease losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan and lease loss expense that represents management’s best estimate of probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio. The level of the allowance reflects management’s judgment with respect to:

 

 

The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan and lease losses involves a high degree of subjectivity and judgment and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. Changes in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans and other factors both within and outside of our control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan and lease losses. If current trends in the real estate markets continue, we expect that we will continue to experience increased delinquencies and credit losses, particularly with respect to construction, land development and land loans.

 

In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review our allowance for loan and lease losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. If charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan and lease losses, we will need additional provisions to increase the allowance for loan and lease losses, which would result in a decrease in net income and capital, and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

Mortgage loan modification and refinancing programs and future legislative action may adversely affect the value of, and our returns on, residential mortgage-backed securities and on MSR.

 

The U.S. Government, through the FRB, the FHA and the FDIC, has initiated a number of loss mitigation programs designed to afford relief to homeowners facing foreclosure and to assist borrowers whose home value is less than the principal on their mortgage, including the Home

Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, which provides homeowners with assistance in avoiding residential mortgage loan foreclosures, the Hope for Homeowners Program, or H4H Program, which allows certain distressed borrowers to refinance their mortgages into Federal Housing Administration, or FHA, insured loans in order to avoid residential mortgage loan foreclosures, and the Home Affordable Refinancing Program, or HARP, which make it easier for borrowers to refinance at lower interest rates. These loan modification programs, future legislative or regulatory actions, including possible amendments to the bankruptcy laws, which result in the modification of outstanding residential mortgage loans, as well as changes in the requirements necessary to qualify for refinancing mortgage loans with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, may adversely affect the value of, and the returns on, our portfolio of mortgage-backed securities, or MBS, and on the value of our MSR. Our MSR is valued based on a number of factors, including assumptions about borrower repayment rates and costs of servicing. If the interest rate on a mortgage is adjusted, or if a borrower is permitted to refinance at a lower rate, or the costs of servicing or costs of foreclosures increase, the value of our MSR with respect to that mortgage can decrease, which, in turn, may reduce earnings in the period in which the decrease occurs. In addition, increases in our servicing costs from changes to our foreclosure and other servicing practices, including resulting from the consent orders, adversely affects the fair value of our MSR.

 

Our commercial real estate loan portfolio exposes us to risks that may be greater than the risks related to our other mortgage loans and a high percentage of these loans are secured by properties located in Florida.

 

Many analysts and economists are predicting that commercial mortgage loans could continue to see further deterioration. At December 31, 2011, our commercial real estate loans, net of discounts, were $1.0 billion, or approximately 11% of our total loan portfolio, net of allowances. Commercial real estate loans generally carry larger loan balances and involve a greater degree of financial and credit risk than residential mortgage loans or home equity loans. The repayment of these loans is typically dependent upon the successful operation of the related real estate or commercial projects. If the cash flow from the project is reduced, a borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Furthermore, the repayment of commercial mortgage loans is generally less predictable and more difficult to evaluate and monitor and collateral may be more difficult to dispose of in a market decline. In such cases, we may be compelled to modify the terms of the loan or engage in other potentially expensive work-out techniques. Any significant failure to pay on time by our customers would adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

 

As a result of our 2010 acquisition of the banking operations of Bank of Florida in an FDIC-assisted transaction, we have increased our exposure to risks related to economic conditions in Florida. Unlike our residential mortgage loan portfolio, which is more geographically diverse, approximately 81% of our commercial loans as of December 31, 2011, are secured by properties located in Florida. Florida has experienced a deeper recession and more dramatic slowdown in economic activity than other states and the decline in real estate values in Florida has been significantly higher than the national average. Our concentration of commercial loans in this region subjects us to risk that a further downturn in the local economy could result in increases in delinquencies and foreclosures or losses on these loans. In addition, the occurrence of natural disasters in Florida, such as hurricanes, or man-made disasters, such as the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, could result in a decline in the value or destruction of our mortgaged properties and an increase in the risk of delinquencies or foreclosures. Losses we may experience on loans acquired from Bank of Florida may be covered by loss sharing agreements we entered into with the FDIC in connection with the acquisition. See “Business — Recent Acquisitions — Acquisition of Bank of Florida.” Nevertheless, these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

Conditions in the real estate market and higher than normal delinquency and default rates could adversely affect our business.

 

The origination and servicing of residential mortgages is a significant component of our business and our earnings have been and may continue to be adversely affected by weak real estate markets and historically high delinquency and default rates. Mortgage origination volume has been low in recent fiscal periods compared to historical levels (and refinancing activity in particular) and may remain low for the foreseeable future even if economic trends improve, particularly if interest rates significantly rise and more restrictive underwriting standards persist. At December 31, 2011, our MSR assets decreased by approximately 15%, from December 31, 2010 with MSR at the end of such period representing 4% of total assets and 43% of our Tier 1 capital plus the general allowance for loan and lease losses.

 

If the frequency and severity of our loan delinquencies and default rates increase, we could experience losses on loans held for investment and on newly originated or purchased loans that we hold for sale. During 2009, we experienced an increase in foreclosures and reserves due to an increase in loss severity and foreclosure frequency resulting primarily from a decline in housing prices during 2008 and 2009. We may need to further increase our reserves for foreclosures if foreclosure rates return to the levels experienced in these recent periods.

 

Continued or worsening conditions in the real estate market and higher than normal delinquency and default rates on loans have other adverse consequences for our mortgage banking business, including:

 

 

We may be required to repurchase mortgage loans with identified defects, indemnify the investor or guarantor, or reimburse the investor for credit loss incurred on the loan in the event of a material breach of representations or warranties.

 

We may be required to repurchase mortgage loans or reimburse investors as a result of breaches in contractual representations and warranties, from our sales of loans we originate and servicing of loans originated by other parties. We conduct these activities under contractual provisions that include various representations and warranties which typically cover ownership of the loan, compliance with loan criteria set forth in the applicable agreement, validity of the lien securing the loan and similar matters. We may be required to repurchase mortgage loans with identified defects, indemnify the investor or guarantor, or reimburse the investor for credit loss incurred on the loan in the event of a material breach of such contractual representations or warranties.

 

We experienced increased levels of repurchase demands in 2010 and further increased levels in 2011 as compared to prior periods, which has led to material increases in our loan repurchase reserves and we may need to increase such reserves in the future, which would adversely affect net

income. As of December 31, 2009, 2010 and 2011 our loan repurchase reserve for loans that we sold or securitized was $3.6 million, $26.8 million and $32.0 million, respectively.

 

In addition, we also service residential mortgage loans where a GSE is the owner of the underlying mortgage loan asset. Prior to late 2009, we had not historically experienced a significant amount of repurchases related to the servicing of mortgage loans as we were indemnified by the seller of the servicing rights but due to the failures of several of our counterparties, in 2010 and 2011 we have experienced losses related to the repurchase of loans from GSEs and subsequent disposal or payment demands from the GSEs. As of December 31, 2009, 2010 and 2011 our reserve for servicing repurchase losses was $6.3 million, $30.0 million and $30.4 million, respectively.

 

If future repurchase demands remain at these heightened levels or increase further or the severity of the repurchase requests increases, or our success at appealing repurchase or other requests differs from past experience, we may need to further increase our loan repurchase reserves, and increased repurchase obligations could adversely affect our financial position and results of operations. For additional information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Loans Subject to Representations and Warranties.”

 

Our concentration of mass-affluent customers and so-called “jumbo” mortgages in our residential mortgage portfolio makes us particularly vulnerable to a downturn in high-end real estate values and economic factors disproportionately affecting affluent consumers of financial services.

 

The Federal Housing Administration, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will only purchase or guarantee so-called “conforming” loans, which may not exceed certain principal amount thresholds. As of December 31, 2011, approximately 61% of our residential mortgage loans held for investment was comprised of so-called “jumbo” loans based on the current threshold of $417,000 in most states, and 91% of the carrying value of our securities portfolio was comprised of residential nonagency investment securities, substantially all of which are backed by jumbo loans. Jumbo loans have principal balances exceeding the thresholds of the agencies described above, and tend to be less liquid than conforming loans, which may make it more difficult for us to rapidly rebalance our portfolio and risk profile than is the case for financial institutions with higher concentrations of conforming loan assets. Due to macroeconomic conditions, jumbo mortgage loans have, in recent periods, experienced increased rates of delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy and loss, and they are likely to continue to experience delinquency, foreclosure, bankruptcy and loss rates that are higher, and that may be substantially higher, than conforming mortgage loans. In such event, liquidity in the capital markets for such assets could be diminished and we could be faced with increased losses and an inability to dispose of such assets.

 

Hedging strategies that we use to manage our mortgage pipeline may be ineffective to mitigate the risk of changes in interest rates.

 

We typically use derivatives and other instruments to hedge a portion of our mortgage banking interest rate risk. Hedging is a complex process, requiring sophisticated models and constant monitoring, and is not a perfect science. We may use hedging instruments tied to U.S. Treasury rates, London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, or Eurodollars that may not perfectly correlate with the value or income being hedged. Our mortgage pipeline consists of our commitments to purchase mortgage loans, or interest rate locks, and funded mortgage loans that will be sold in the secondary market. The risk associated with the mortgage pipeline is that interest rates will fluctuate between the time we commit to purchase a loan at a pre-determined price, or the customer locks in the interest rate on a loan, and the time we sell or commit to sell the mortgage loan. Generally speaking, if interest rates increase, the value of an unhedged mortgage pipeline decreases, and gain on sale margins are adversely impacted. Typically, we hedge the risk of overall changes in fair value of loans held for sale by either entering into forward loan sale agreements, selling forward Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac MBS or using other derivative instruments to hedge loan commitments and to create fair

value hedges against the funded loan portfolios. We generally do not hedge all of the interest rate risk on our mortgage portfolio and have not historically hedged the risk of changes in the fair value of our MSR resulting from changes in interest rates. To the extent we fail to appropriately reduce our exposure to interest rate changes, our financial results may be adversely affected.

 

We could recognize realized and unrealized losses on securities held in our securities portfolio, particularly if economic and market conditions deteriorate.

 

As of December 31, 2011, the fair value of our securities portfolio was approximately $2.1 billion, of which approximately 90% was comprised of residential nonagency investment securities. Factors beyond our control can significantly influence the fair value of securities in our portfolio and can cause potential adverse changes to the fair value of these securities. These factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults by the issuer or individual mortgagors with respect to the underlying securities, changes in market interest rates and continued instability in the credit markets. Any of these factors could cause an other-than-temporary impairment in future periods and result in realized losses. The process for determining whether impairment is other-than-temporary usually requires difficult, subjective judgments about the future financial performance of the issuer and any collateral underlying the security in order to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security. Because of changing economic and market conditions affecting issuers and the performance of the underlying collateral, we may recognize realized and/or unrealized losses in future periods, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

We may experience higher delinquencies on our equipment leases and reductions in the resale value of leased equipment.

 

In connection with the acquisition of Tygris, we acquired a significant portfolio of equipment leases. Although we purchased these leases at a discount, they were not subjected to our credit standards. The non-impaired leases we acquired may become impaired and the impaired leases may suffer further deterioration in value, resulting in additional charge-offs to this portfolio. Fluctuations in national, regional and local economic conditions may increase the level of charge-offs that we make to our lease portfolio, and, consequently, reduce our net income. Although a significant portion of these losses will be satisfied out of escrowed portions of the purchase price paid by us, we are not protected for all losses and any charge-off of related losses that we experience will negatively impact our results of operations.

 

The realization of equipment values (i.e., residual values) during the life and at the end of the term of a lease is an important element of our commercial finance business. At the inception of each lease, we record a residual value for the leased equipment based on our estimate of the future value of the equipment at the expected disposition date. A decrease in the market value of leased equipment at a rate greater than the rate we projected, whether due to rapid technological or economic obsolescence, unusual or excessive wear-and-tear on the equipment, recession or other adverse economic conditions, or other factors, would adversely affect the current or the residual values of such equipment. Further, certain equipment residual values are dependent on the manufacturer’s or vendor’s warranties, reputation and other factors, including market liquidity. In addition, we may not realize the full market value of equipment if we are required to sell it to meet liquidity needs or for other reasons outside of the ordinary course of business. Consequently, we may not realize our estimated residual values for equipment. If we are unable to realize the expected value of a substantial portion of the equipment under lease, our business could be adversely affected.

 

We may become subject to a number of risks if we elect to pursue acquisitions and may not be able to acquire and integrate acquisition targets successfully if we choose to do so.

 

As we have done in the past, we may pursue acquisitions as part of our growth strategy. We may consider acquisitions of loans or securities portfolios, lending or leasing firms, commercial and

small business lenders, residential lenders, direct banks, banks or bank branches (whether in FDIC-assisted or unassisted transactions), wealth and investment management firms, securities brokerage firms, specialty finance or other financial services-related companies. We expect that competition for suitable acquisition targets may be significant. Additionally, we must generally receive federal regulatory approval before we can acquire an institution or business. Such regulatory approval may be denied or, if granted, could be subject to conditions that materially affect the terms of the acquisition or our ability to capture some of the opportunities presented by the acquisition. We may not be able to successfully identify and acquire suitable acquisition targets on terms and conditions we consider to be acceptable.

 

Even if suitable candidates are identified and we succeed in consummating these transactions, acquisitions involve risks that may adversely affect our market value and profitability. These risks include, among other things: credit risk associated with acquired loans and investments; retaining, attracting and integrating personnel; loss of customers; reputational risks; difficulties in integrating or operating acquired businesses or assets; and potential disruption of our ongoing business operations and diversion of management’s attention. Through our acquisitions we may also assume unknown or undisclosed liabilities, fail to properly assess known contingent liabilities or assume businesses with internal control deficiencies. While in most of our transactions we seek to mitigate these risks through, among other things, adequate due diligence and indemnification provisions, we cannot be certain that the due diligence we have conducted is adequate or that the indemnification provisions and other risk mitigants we put in place will be sufficient.

 

In addition, FDIC-assisted acquisitions involve risks similar to acquiring existing banks even though the FDIC might provide assistance to mitigate certain risks, such as sharing in the exposure to loan losses and providing indemnification against certain liabilities of a failed institution. However, because these acquisitions are typically conducted by the FDIC in a manner that does not allow the time normally associated with preparing for the integration of an acquired institution, we may face additional risks in FDIC-assisted transactions. These risks include, among other things, the loss of customers, strain on management resources related to collection and management of problem loans and problems related to integration of personnel and operating systems. We may not be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with acquisitions. Our inability to overcome these risks could have an adverse effect on our results of operations, particularly during periods in which the acquisitions are being integrated into our operations.

 

We may become subject to additional risks as a result of our recent acquisition of MetLife Bank’s warehouse finance business.

 

Although we believe the recent acquisition of MetLife Bank’s warehouse finance business represented an attractive opportunity to expand our business, any new business operation we acquire could expose us to additional fraud and counterparty risk which we may fail to adequately address. For example, our underwriting, operational controls and risk mitigants may fail to prevent or detect fraud or collusion with multiple parties which could result in losses that would affect our financial results. Since warehouse loans are typically larger than residential mortgage loans, the systemic deterioration of one or a few of these loans could cause an increase in non-performing loans. Our proposed structural agreements to minimize counterparty risk could be ineffective. Additionally, warehouse counterparties may become subject to repurchase demands by investors which could adversely affect their financial position.

 

We may have to take ownership of mortgage loans not directly underwritten by us if the mortgage broker is unable to sell them to investors and repay its underlying note with us. There is no guarantee that an active or liquid market for the types of loans we would be forced to sell will exist which could result in losses.

Concern of customers over deposit insurance may cause a decrease in deposits.

 

With recent concerns about bank failures, customers have become concerned about the extent to which their deposits are insured by the FDIC, particularly mass-affluent customers that may maintain deposits in excess of insured limits. Customers may withdraw deposits in an effort to ensure that the amount they have on deposit with our bank is fully insured and may place them in other institutions or make investments that are perceived as being more secure, such as securities issued by the U.S. Treasury. We may be forced by such activity to pay higher interest rates to retain deposits, which may constrain our liquidity as we seek to meet funding needs caused by reduced deposit levels, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

 

Our ability to rely on brokered deposits as a part of our funding strategy may be limited.

 

Deposits raised by EverBank continue to be a key part of our funding strategy. Our ability to maintain our current level of deposits or grow our deposit base could be affected by regulatory restrictions, including the possible imposition of prior approval requirements or restrictions on deposit growth through brokered channels, or restrictions on our rates offered. In addition, as a supervisory matter, reliance on brokered deposits as a significant source of funding is discouraged. As a result, in order to grow our deposit base, we will need to expand our non-brokered channels for deposit generation, including through new marketing and advertising efforts, which may require significant time or effort to implement. Further, we are likely to face significant competition for deposits from other banking organizations that are also seeking stable deposits to support their funding needs. If EverBank is unable to develop new channels of deposit origination, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial position.

 

We are exposed to risks associated with our Internet-based systems and online commerce security, including “hacking” and “identity theft.”

 

We operate primarily as an online bank with a small number of financial center locations and, as such, we conduct a substantial portion of our business over the Internet. We rely heavily upon data processing, including loan servicing and deposit processing, software, communications and information systems from a number of third parties to conduct our business.

 

Third party, or internal, systems and networks may fail to operate properly or become disabled due to deliberate attacks or unintentional events. Our operations are vulnerable to disruptions from human error, natural disasters, power loss, computer viruses, spam attacks, denial of service attacks, unauthorized access and other unforeseen events. Undiscovered data corruption could render our customer information inaccurate. These events may obstruct our ability to provide services and process transactions. While we are in compliance with all applicable privacy and data security laws, an incident could put our customer confidential information at risk.

 

Although we have not experienced a cyber incident which has been successful in compromising our data or systems, we can never be certain that all of our systems are entirely free from vulnerability to breaches of security or other technological difficulties or failures. We monitor and modify, as necessary, our protective measures in response to the perpetual evolution of cyber threats.

 

A breach in the security of any of our information systems, or other cyber incident, could have an adverse impact on, among other things, our revenue, ability to attract and maintain customers and business reputation. In addition, as a result of any breach, we could incur higher costs to conduct our business, to increase protection, or related to remediation. Furthermore our customers could incorrectly blame us and terminate their account with us for a cyber incident which occurred on their own system or with that of an unrelated third party. In addition, a security breach could also subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability.

Our business may be impaired if a third party infringes on our intellectual property rights.

 

Our business depends heavily upon intellectual property that we have developed or will develop in the future. Monitoring infringement of intellectual property rights is difficult, and the steps we have taken may not prevent unauthorized use of our intellectual property. In the past, we have had to engage in enforcement actions to protect our domain names from theft, including administrative proceedings. We may in the future be unable to prevent third parties from acquiring domain names that infringe or otherwise decrease the value of our trademarks and other intellectual property rights. Intellectual property theft on the Internet is relatively widespread, and individuals anywhere in the world can purchase infringing domains or use our service marks on their pay-per-click sites to draw customers for competitors while exploiting our service marks. To the extent that we are unable to rapidly locate and stop an infringement, our intellectual property assets may become devalued and our brand may be tarnished. Third parties may also challenge, invalidate or circumvent our intellectual property rights and protections, registrations and licenses. Intellectual property litigation is expensive, and the outcome of any action is often highly uncertain.

 

We may become involved in intellectual property or other disputes that could harm our business.

 

Third parties may assert claims against us, asserting that our marks, services, associated content in any medium, or software applications infringe on their intellectual property rights. The laws and regulations governing intellectual property rights are continually evolving and subject to differing interpretations. Trademark owners often engage in litigation in state or federal courts or oppositions in the United States Patent and Trademark Office as a strategy to broaden the scope of their trademark rights. If any infringement claim is successful against us, we may be required to pay substantial damages or we may need to seek to obtain a license of the other party’s intellectual property rights. We also could lose the expected future benefit of our marketing and advertising spending. Moreover, we may be prohibited from providing our services or using content that incorporates the challenged intellectual property.

 

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

 

Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, custody, counterparty or other relationships. At various times, we may have significant exposure to a relatively small group of counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds and other institutional customers. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of a counterparty or customer. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due to us. Losses suffered through such increased credit risk exposure could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We face increased risks with respect to our WorldCurrency^® and other market-based deposit products.

 

As of December 31, 2011, we had outstanding market-based deposits of $1.4 billion, representing approximately 13% of our total deposits, the significant majority of which are WorldCurrency^® deposits. Many of our WorldCurrency^® depositors have chosen that family of products in order to diversify their portfolios with respect to foreign currencies. Appreciation of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies, political and economic disruptions in foreign markets or significant changes in commodity prices or securities indices could significantly reduce the demand for our WorldCurrency^® and other market-based products as well as a devaluation of these deposit balances, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and results of operations. In addition, although we routinely use derivatives to offset changes to our deposit obligations due to

fluctuations in currency exchange rates, commodity prices or securities indices to which these products are linked, these derivatives may not be effective. To the extent that these derivatives do not offset changes to our deposit obligations, our financial results may be adversely affected. Furthermore, these rates, prices and indices are subject to significant changes due to factors beyond our control, which may subject us to additional risks.

 

We operate in a highly competitive industry and market area.

 

We face substantial competition in all areas of our operations from a variety of different competitors, many of which are larger and may have more financial resources. Such competitors primarily include Internet banks and national, regional and community banks within the various markets we serve. We also face competition from many other types of financial institutions, including, without limitation, savings and loan institutions, credit unions, mortgage companies, other finance companies, brokerage firms, insurance companies, factoring companies and other financial intermediaries. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Banks, securities firms and insurance companies can (unless laws are changed) merge under the umbrella of a financial holding company, which can offer virtually any type of financial service, including banking, securities underwriting, insurance (both agency and underwriting) and merchant banking. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures.

 

In addition, many of our competitors have significantly more physical branch locations than we do, which may be an important factor to potential customers. Because we offer our services over the Internet, we compete nationally for customers against financial institutions ranging from small community banks to the largest international financial institutions. Many of our competitors continue to have access to greater financial resources than we have, which allows them to invest in technological improvements. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could place us at a competitive disadvantage.

 

Our historical growth rate and performance may not be indicative of our future growth or financial results.

 

Our historical growth must be viewed in the context of the recent opportunities available to us as a result of the confluence of our access to capital at a time when market dislocations of historical proportions resulted in unprecedented asset acquisition opportunities. When evaluating our historical growth and prospects for future growth, it is also important to consider that while our business philosophy has remained relatively constant over time, our mix of business, distribution channels and areas of focus have changed frequently and dramatically over the last several years. Historically, we have entered and exited lines of business to adapt to changing market conditions and perceived opportunities, and may continue to do so in future periods. For example, we are currently seeking to build a wealth management line of business. Although we have a track record of successfully offering investment-oriented deposit products, we have limited operational experience in wealth management. Our resources, personnel and expertise may prove to be insufficient to execute our wealth management strategy, which could impact our future earnings and the retention of high net worth customers. Moreover, our dynamic business model makes it difficult to assess our prospects for future growth.

 

In recent fiscal periods, we have completed several significant transactions, including the acquisitions of Tygris and Bank of Florida in 2010, the acquisition of a number of residential mortgage loan and securities portfolios in 2008 and 2009 and the divestiture of our reverse mortgage operations in 2008. These transactions, along with equity capital infusions, have significantly expanded our asset and capital base, product mix and distribution channels. We also benefited from significant purchase price discounts from these transactions, which are highly accretive to our earnings and which may not be available in the future. Over the longer-term, we expect margins on loans to revert to longer-term historical levels.

We have historically generated a significant amount of fee income through the origination and servicing of residential mortgage loans. Fundamental changes in bank regulations and the mortgage industry, unusually weak economic conditions and the historically low interest rate environment that has characterized the last several fiscal quarters make it difficult to predict our future results or draw meaningful comparisons between our historical results and our results in future fiscal periods. We materially increased our investments in residential MSR from 2008 through the first quarter of 2010. During that time, we also significantly increased our investments in nonagency residential collateralized mortgage obligation securities, or CMOs. Due to concentration limits we adopted pursuant to new regulatory constraints and possible future regulatory guidance, our concentration in such asset classes has been reduced. We may not be able to achieve similar performance from alternative asset classes in the future.

 

We may not be able to sustain our historical rate of growth or grow our business at all. Because of the tremendous amount of uncertainty in the general economy and with respect to the effectiveness of recent governmental intervention in the credit markets and mortgage lending industry, as well as increased delinquencies, continued home price deterioration and lower home sales volume, it will be difficult for us to replicate our historical earnings growth as we continue to expand. We have benefited from the recent low interest rate environment, which has provided us with high net interest margins which we use to grow our business. Higher rates would compress our margins and may impact our ability to grow. Consequently, our historical results of operations will not necessarily be indicative of our future operations.

 

We are dependent on key personnel and the loss of one or more of those key personnel could harm our business.

 

Our future success significantly depends on the continued services and performance of our key management personnel. We believe our management team’s depth and breadth of experience in the banking industry is integral to executing our business plan. We also will need to continue to attract, motivate and retain other key personnel. The loss of the services of members of our senior management team or other key employees or the inability to attract additional qualified personnel as needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We are subject to losses due to fraudulent and negligent acts on the part of loan applicants, mortgage brokers, other vendors and our employees.

 

When we originate mortgage loans, we rely heavily upon information supplied by loan applicants and third parties, including the information contained in the loan application, property appraisal, title information and employment and income documentation provided by third parties. If any of this information is misrepresented and such misrepresentation is not detected prior to loan funding, we generally bear the risk of loss associated with the misrepresentation.

 

We may be exposed to unrecoverable losses on the loans acquired in the Bank of Florida acquisition, despite the loss sharing agreements we have with the FDIC.

 

Although we acquired the loan assets of Bank of Florida at a substantial discount and we have entered into loss sharing agreements which provide that the FDIC will bear 80% of losses on such assets in excess of $385.6 million, we are not protected from all such losses. The FDIC has the right to refuse or delay payment for such loan losses if the loss sharing agreements are not managed in accordance with their terms. Additionally, the loss sharing agreements have limited terms; therefore, any losses that we experience after the terms of the loss sharing agreements have ended will not be recoverable from the FDIC, which would negatively impact our net income. See “Business — Recent Acquisitions — Acquisition of Bank of Florida” for a description of our loss sharing arrangements with the FDIC.

 

The acquisition of assets and liabilities of financial institutions in FDIC-sponsored or assisted transactions involves risks similar to those faced in unassisted acquisitions, even though the FDIC might provide assistance to mitigate certain risks (e.g., entering into loss sharing arrangements). However, because such acquisitions are structured in a manner that does not allow the time normally associated with evaluating and preparing for the integration of an acquired institution, we face the additional risk that the anticipated benefits of such an acquisition may not be realized fully or at all, or within the time period expected.

 

Any of these factors, among others, could adversely affect our ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of the Bank of Florida acquisition.

 

Certain provisions of the loss sharing agreements entered into with the FDIC in connection with the Bank of Florida acquisition may have anti-takeover effects and could limit our ability to engage in certain strategic transactions our Board of Directors believes would be in the best interests of stockholders.

 

The FDIC’s agreement to bear 80% of qualifying losses in excess of $385.6 million on single family residential loans for ten years and all other loans for five years is a significant advantage for us and a feature of the Bank of Florida acquisition without which we would not have entered into the transaction. Our agreement with the FDIC requires that we receive prior FDIC consent, which may be withheld by the FDIC in its sole discretion, prior to us or our stockholders engaging in certain transactions. If any such transaction is completed without prior FDIC consent, the FDIC would have the right to discontinue the loss sharing arrangement.

 

Among other things, prior FDIC consent is required for (1) a merger or consolidation of us or EverBank with or into another company if our stockholders will own less than 66.66% of the combined company, (2) the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of EverBank and (3) a sale of shares by a stockholder, or a group of related stockholders, that will effect a change in control of us, as determined by the FDIC with reference to the standards set forth in the Change in Bank Control Act (generally, the acquisition of between 10% and 25% of our voting securities where the presumption of control is not rebutted, or the acquisition by any person, acting directly or indirectly or through or in concert with one or more persons, of more than 25% of our voting securities). Although our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation contains a provision that, with reference to the Change in Bank Control Act, restricts any person from acquiring control of us, or more than 9.9% of our voting securities, without the prior approval of our Board of Directors, such an acquisition by stockholders could occur beyond our control. If we or any stockholder desired to enter into any such transaction, the FDIC may not grant its consent in a timely manner, without conditions, or at all. If one of these transactions were to occur without prior FDIC consent and the FDIC withdrew its loss share protection, there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Regulatory and Legal Risks

 

We operate in a highly regulated environment and the laws and regulations that govern our operations, corporate governance, executive compensation and accounting principles, or changes in them, or our failure to comply with them, may adversely affect us.

 

We are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and legislation that govern almost all aspects of our operations. Intended to protect customers, depositors, the Deposit Insurance Fund, or DIF, and the overall financial system, these laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on the business activities in which we can engage, limit the dividend or distributions that EverBank can pay to us, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee our debt, impose certain specific accounting requirements on us that may be more restrictive and may result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in our capital than generally accepted accounting principles, among other things. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional compliance costs. We are

currently facing increased regulation and supervision of our industry as a result of the financial crisis in the banking and financial markets, and, to the extent that we participate in any programs established or to be established by the U.S. Treasury or by the federal bank regulatory agencies, there will be additional and changing requirements and conditions imposed on us. Such additional regulation and supervision may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities. Further, our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure is inadvertent or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to restrictions on our business activities, fines and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations, capital base and the price of our common stock.

 

Federal banking agencies periodically conduct examinations of our business, including for compliance with laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with any supervisory actions to which we are or become subject as a result of such examinations may adversely affect us.

 

On April 13, 2011, we and EverBank each entered into a consent order with the OTS with respect to EverBank’s mortgage foreclosure practices and our oversight of those practices. The consent orders require, among other things, that we establish a new compliance program for our mortgage servicing and foreclosure operations and that we ensure that we have dedicated resources for communicating with borrowers, policies and procedures for outsourcing foreclosure or related functions and management information systems that ensure timely delivery of complete and accurate information. We are also required to retain an independent firm to conduct a review of residential foreclosure actions that were pending from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2010 in order to determine whether any borrowers sustained financial injury as a result of any errors, misrepresentations or deficiencies and to provide remediation as appropriate. We are working to fulfill the requirements of the consent orders. In response to the consent orders, we have established an oversight committee to monitor the implementation of the actions required by the consent orders. Furthermore, we have enhanced and updated several policies, procedures, processes and controls to help ensure the mitigation of the findings of the consent orders, and submitted them to the FRB and the OCC (the applicable successors to the OTS) for review. In addition, we have enhanced our third-party vendor management system and our compliance program, hired additional personnel and retained an independent firm to conduct foreclosure reviews.

 

In addition to the horizontal review, other government agencies, including state attorneys general and the U.S. Department of Justice, investigated various mortgage related practices of certain servicers, some of which practices were also the subject of the horizontal review. In March 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and 50 state attorneys general entered into separate consent judgments with five major mortgage servicers with respect to these matters. In total, the five mortgage servicers agreed to $25 billion in borrower restitution assistance and refinancing. Monetary sanctions imposed by the federal banking agencies as a consequence of the horizontal review are being held in abeyance, subject to provision of borrower assistance and remediation under the consent judgments. We understand certain other institutions subject to the consent decrees with the banking regulators announced in April 2011 recently have been contacted by the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general regarding a settlement. If an investigation of EverBank were to occur, it could result in material fines, penalties, equitable remedies (including requiring default servicing or other process changes), other enforcement actions or additional litigation, and could result in significant legal costs in responding to governmental investigations and additional litigation. In addition, the federal banking agencies may impose civil monetary penalties on the remaining banks that were subject to the horizontal review as part of such an investigation or independently but have not indicated what the amount of any such penalties would be. Any other requirements or remedies or penalties that may be imposed on us as a result of the horizontal review or any other investigation or action related to mortgage origination or servicing may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, capital base and the price of our common stock.

We expect that mortgage-related assessments and waivers, costs, including compensatory fees assessed by the GSEs, and other costs associated with foreclosures will remain elevated as additional loans are delayed in the foreclosure process. This will likely continue to increase noninterest expenses, including increasing default servicing costs and legal expenses. In addition, changes to our processes and policies, including those required under the consent orders with federal bank regulators, are likely to result in further increases in our default servicing costs over the longer term. Delays in foreclosure sales may result in additional costs associated with the maintenance of properties or possible home price declines, result in a greater number of nonperforming loans and increased servicing advances and may adversely affect the collectability of such advances and the value of our MSR asset and real estate owned properties. In addition, the valuation of certain of our agency residential MBS could be negatively affected under certain scenarios due to changes in the timing of cash flows.

 

In addition, under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, or the Dodd-Frank Act, as of July 21, 2011, the functions and personnel of the OTS were transferred among the OCC, FDIC and FRB. As a result, the OTS no longer supervises or regulates savings associations or savings and loan holding companies. The supervision of federal thrifts, such as EverBank, was transferred to the OCC, and the supervision of thrift holding companies, such as us, was transferred to the FRB. A number of steps have been made and will be taken by the FRB to align the regulation and supervision of thrift holding companies more closely with that of bank holding companies. As a result of this change in supervision and related requirements, we are subject to new and uncertain examination and reporting requirements that could be more stringent than the OTS examinations we have had historically. For a more detailed description of the Dodd-Frank Act, see “Regulation and Supervision.”

 

Governmental and other actions relating to recording mortgages in the name of MERS may have adverse consequences on us.

 

Mortgage notes, assignments or other documents are often required to be maintained and are often necessary to enforce mortgages loans. There has been significant public commentary regarding the industry practice of recording mortgages in the name of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., or MERS, as nominee on behalf of the note holder, and whether securitization trusts own the loans purported to be conveyed to them and have valid liens securing those loans. We currently use the MERS system for a substantial portion of the residential mortgage loans that we originate, including loans that have been sold to investors. A component of the consent orders described above requires significant changes in the manner in which we service loans identifying MERS as the mortgagee. Additionally, certain local and state governments have commenced legal actions against MERS and certain MERS members, questioning the validity of the MERS model. Other challenges have also been made to the process for transferring mortgage loans to securitization trusts, asserting that having a mortgagee of record that is different than the holder of the mortgage note could ‘break the chain of title‘ and cloud the ownership of the loan. If certain required documents are missing or defective, or if the use of MERS is found not to be valid, we could be obligated to cure certain defects or in some circumstances be subject to additional costs and expenses in servicing mortgages. Our use of MERS as nominee for mortgages may also create reputational and other risks for us.

 

The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act may have a material effect on our operations.

 

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, which imposes significant regulatory and compliance changes. The key effects of the Dodd-Frank Act on our business are:

 

 

 

As noted above, the Dodd-Frank Act has changed the regulatory and supervisory framework governing federal thrifts and thrift holding companies, and as a result of this change in supervision and related requirements, we are subject to new and uncertain examination and reporting requirements that could be more stringent than the OTS examinations we have had historically. It is also expected that the FRB will impose regulatory capital requirements on thrift holding companies, such as us, which have not been historically subject to such requirements.

 

The Dodd-Frank Act also includes numerous provisions that impact mortgage origination. For example, approximately 53% of our total mortgage loan origination volume for the year ended December 31, 2011 was originated through mortgage brokers not affiliated with us. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the loss of federal preemption for operating subsidiaries and agents of national banks and federal thrifts, as well as changes to the compensation and compliance obligations of independent mortgage brokers, could change the manner in which our mortgage loans are originated. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, there will likely be fewer independent, nonbank mortgage brokers and lenders. A reduction in the number of independent mortgage brokers may adversely affect our mortgage volume and, thus, our revenues and earnings. In addition, in April 2012 the CFPB announced that it is considering adopting new standards that would require servicers (i) to maintain reasonable information management policies and procedures, (ii) to intervene early with troubled and delinquent borrowers and (iii) to ensure staff who deals with a homeowner have access to records about that homeowner, including records of the homeowner’s previous communications with the servicer. These proposals, if adopted, or any other standards or rules adopted by the CFPB in the future may impose greater restrictions on our operations.

 

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act contains provisions designed to limit the ability of insured depository institutions, their holding companies and their affiliates to conduct certain swaps and derivatives activities and to take certain principal positions in financial instruments. While it is generally understood that these limitations are not intended to restrict hedging activities, the impact of the statutory limitations on our ability to conduct our hedging strategies will not be clear until the implementing regulations have been promulgated.

 

The Dodd-Frank Act currently impacts, or may impact in the future, other aspects of our operations and activities. For a more detailed description of the Dodd-Frank Act, see “Regulation and Supervision.”

 

The short-term and long-term impact of the new Basel III capital standards and the forthcoming new capital rules for non-Basel U.S. banks is uncertain.

 

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, announced an agreement to a strengthened set of capital requirements for internationally active banking organizations in the United States and around the world, known as Basel III. When implemented by U.S. banking authorities, which have expressed support for the new capital standards, we expect Basel III will eventually preclude us from including certain assets in our regulatory capital ratios, including MSR. MSR currently comprise a significant portion of our regulatory capital. At December 31, 2011, our net MSR totaled $489.5 million. For a more detailed description of Basel III, see “Regulation and Supervision.”

 

We are highly dependent upon programs administered by government agencies or government-sponsored enterprises, such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, to generate liquidity in connection with our conforming mortgage loans. Any changes in existing U.S. government or government-sponsored mortgage programs could materially and adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Our ability to generate revenues through securities issuances guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, or GNMA, and through mortgage loan sales to GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (as well as

to other institutional investors), depends to a significant degree on programs administered by those entities. The GSEs play a powerful role in the residential mortgage industry, and we have significant business relationships with them. Many of the loans that we originate are conforming loans that qualify under existing standards for sale to the GSEs or for guarantee by GNMA. We also derive other material financial benefits from these relationships, including the assumption of credit risk by these GSEs on all loans sold to them that are pooled into securities, in exchange for our payment of guaranty fees, and the ability to avoid certain loan inventory finance costs through streamlined loan funding and sale procedures. Any discontinuation of, or significant reduction in, the operation of these GSEs or any significant adverse change in the level of activity in the secondary mortgage market or the underwriting criteria of these GSEs could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Because nearly all other non-governmental participants providing liquidity in the secondary mortgage market left that market during the mortgage financial crisis, the GSEs have been the only significant purchasers of residential mortgage loans. It remains unclear when private investors may begin to re-enter the market. As described above, GSEs (which are in conservatorship, with heavy capital support from the U.S. government, and subject to serious speculation about their future structure, if any) may not be able to provide the substantial liquidity upon which our residential mortgage loan business relies.

 

Federal, state and local consumer lending laws may restrict our ability to originate or increase our risk of liability with respect to certain mortgage loans and could increase our cost of doing business.

 

Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered “predatory.” These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans, and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. It is our policy not to make predatory loans, but these laws create the potential for liability with respect to our lending, servicing and loan investment activities. They increase our cost of doing business, and ultimately may prevent us from making certain loans and cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that we do make.

 

Legislative action regarding foreclosures or bankruptcy laws may negatively impact our business.

 

Recent laws delay the initiation or completion of foreclosure proceedings on specified types of residential mortgage loans (some for a limited period of time), or otherwise limit the ability of residential loan servicers to take actions that may be essential to preserve the value of the mortgage loans underlying the MSR. Any such limitations are likely to cause delayed or reduced collections from mortgagors and generally increased servicing costs. Any restriction on our ability to foreclose on a loan, any requirement that we forego a portion of the amount otherwise due on a loan or any requirement that we modify any original loan terms will in some instances require us to advance principal, interest, tax and insurance payments, which is likely to negatively impact our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

 

We are exposed to environmental liabilities with respect to properties that we take title to upon foreclosure that could increase our costs of doing business and harm our results of operations.

 

In the course of our activities, we may foreclose and take title to residential and commercial properties and become subject to environmental liabilities with respect to those properties. The laws and regulations related to environmental contamination often impose liability without regard to responsibility for the contamination. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous

or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. Moreover, as the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based upon damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. If we ever become subject to significant environmental liabilities, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations would be significantly harmed.

 

Risks Related to This Offering and Ownership of Our Common Stock

 

An active trading market for our common stock may not develop, and you may not be able to sell your common stock at or above the initial public offering price.

 

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common stock. An active trading market for shares of our common stock may never develop or be sustained following this offering. If an active trading market does not develop, you may have difficulty selling your shares of common stock at an attractive price, or at all. The initial public offering price for our common stock will be determined by negotiations between us and the representative of the underwriters and may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the open market following this offering. Consequently, you may not be able to sell your common stock at or above the initial public offering price or at any other price or at the time that you would like to sell. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling our common stock and may impair our ability to acquire other companies, products or technologies by using our common stock as consideration.

 

The price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate substantially.

 

Since our common stock has not been publicly traded prior to this offering, it is difficult to predict the future volatility of the trading price of our stock as compared to the broader stock market indices. Our share price may be volatile for several reasons. We are currently operating through a protracted period of historically low interest rates that will not be sustained indefinitely. Recent and pending legislative, regulatory, monetary and political developments have led to a high level of uncertainty, and these factors could have profound implications for the banking industry and the outlook for our future profitability. In addition, our business model is highly adaptive. In the past, we have rapidly entered and exited lines of business as circumstances have changed and this practice may continue, which could lead to higher levels of volatility in our share price as compared to other financial institutions that conduct business in more predictable ways. You should consider an investment in our common stock risky and invest only if you can withstand a significant loss and wide fluctuations in the market value of your investment.

 

If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they issue unfavorable commentary or downgrade our common stock, the price and trading volume of our common stock could decline.

 

The trading market for our common stock will rely in part on the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. The price of our stock could decline if one or more securities analysts downgrade our stock or if those analysts issue other unfavorable commentary or cease publishing reports about us or our business.

 

If any of the analysts who elect to cover us downgrades our stock, our stock price would likely decline rapidly. If any of these analysts ceases coverage of us, we could lose visibility in the market, which in turn could cause our common stock price or trading volume to decline and our common stock to be less liquid.

 

Our ability to pay dividends is subject to regulatory limitations and to the extent we are not able to access those funds, may impair our ability to accomplish our growth strategy and pay our operating expenses.

 

Although we intend to pay an initial quarterly cash dividend to our stockholders, we have no obligation to do so and may change our dividend policy at any time without notice to our stockholders.

Further, as a holding company separate and distinct from EverBank, our only bank subsidiary, with no significant assets other than EverBank’s capital stock, we will need to depend upon dividends from EverBank for substantially all of our income. Accordingly, our ability to pay dividends and cover operating expenses depends primarily upon the receipt of dividends or other capital distributions from EverBank. EverBank’s ability to pay dividends to us is subject to, among other things, its earnings, financial condition and need for funds, as well as federal and state governmental policies and regulations applicable to us and EverBank, including the statutory requirement that we serve as a source of financial strength for EverBank, which limit the amount that may be paid as dividends without prior regulatory approval. Additionally, if EverBank’s earnings are not sufficient to pay dividends to us while maintaining adequate capital levels, we may not be able to pay dividends to our stockholders. See “Dividend Policy,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Restrictions on Paying Dividends” and “Regulation and Supervision — Regulation of Federal Savings Banks — Limitation on Capital Distributions.”

 

The obligations associated with being a public company will require significant resources and management attention, which may divert from our business operations.

 

As a result of this offering, we will become subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. As a result, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not previously incur.

 

The need to establish the corporate infrastructure demanded of a public company may divert management’s attention from implementing our growth strategy, which could prevent us from improving our business, results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, we strive to maintain a work environment that reinforces our culture of collaboration, motivation and disciplined growth strategy. The effects of becoming public, including potential changes in our historical business practices, which focused on long-term growth instead of short-term gains, could adversely affect this culture. In connection with the audit for the year ended December 31, 2010, a material weakness was identified, however, this weakness was remediated in 2011 and there were no material weaknesses identified for the year ended December 31, 2011. We have made, and will continue to make, changes to our internal controls and procedures for financial reporting and accounting systems to meet our reporting obligations as a stand-alone public company. However, the measures we take may not be sufficient to satisfy our obligations as a public company. If we do not continue to develop and implement the right processes and tools to manage our changing enterprise and maintain our culture, our ability to compete successfully and achieve our business objectives could be impaired, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur in order to comply with these requirements. We anticipate that these costs will materially increase our general and administrative expenses.

 

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, starting with the second annual report that we would expect to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and will likely require in the same report, a report by our independent auditors on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, as an “emerging growth company” as defined by the recently enacted JOBS Act, our independent auditors will not be required to furnish such an assessment until we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company. In connection with the implementation of the necessary procedures and practices related to internal control over financial reporting, we may identify deficiencies. We may not be able to remediate any future deficiencies in time to meet the deadline imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for compliance with the requirements of Section 404. In addition, failure to achieve and maintain an effective internal control environment could have a material adverse effect on our business and stock price. Further, we may take advantage of other exemptions afforded to “emerging growth companies” from time to time.

We are an emerging growth company within the meaning of the Securities Act, and if we decide to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our common stock could be less attractive to investors.

 

We are an “emerging growth company” within the meaning of the rules under the Securities Act. We are eligible to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including, but not limited to, reduced disclosure about our executive compensation and omission of compensation discussion and analysis, and an exemption from the requirement of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation. In addition, we will not be subject to certain requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, including the additional level of review of our internal control over financial reporting as may occur when outside auditors attest as to our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, our stockholders may not have access to certain information they may deem important. Further, we are eligible to delay adoption of new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies and we intend to take advantage of the benefits of this extended transition period. To the extent we choose to do so, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with such new or revised accounting standards. We will remain an emerging growth company for up to five years, though we may cease to be an emerging growth company earlier under certain circumstances. If we take advantage of any of these exemptions, we do not know if some investors will find our common stock less attractive as a result. The result may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

 

You will incur immediate dilution as a result of this offering.

 

If you purchase common stock in this offering, you will pay more for your shares than the amounts paid by existing stockholders for their shares. As a result, you will incur immediate dilution of $1.40 per share, representing the difference between the initial public offering price of $11.50 per share (the midpoint of the range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus) and our as adjusted net tangible book value per share after giving effect to this offering. See “Dilution.”

 

Our management team may allocate the proceeds of this offering in ways in which you may not agree.

 

We have broad discretion in applying the net proceeds we will receive in this offering. As part of your investment decision, you will not be able to assess or direct how we apply these net proceeds. If we do not apply these funds effectively, we may lose significant business opportunities. Furthermore, our stock price could decline if the market does not view our use of the net proceeds from this offering favorably.

 

Future sales, or the perception of future sales, of our common stock may depress the price of our common stock.

 

The market price of our common stock could decline significantly as a result of sales of a large number of shares of our common stock in the market after this offering, including shares which might be offered for sale by our existing stockholders. The perception that these sales might occur could depress the market price. These sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem appropriate.

 

Upon completion of this offering, we will have 113,179,343 shares of common stock outstanding, assuming no exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase an additional 2,883,000 shares from us and excluding any additional shares that may be issued in respect of outstanding stock options or the

vesting of outstanding restricted stock units. Of such outstanding shares of common stock, excluding shares being sold in this offering and after giving effect to the lock-up agreements described below:

 

 

 

 

Of this amount, 53,010,963 shares of common stock will be held by our directors, executive officers and other affiliates and may not be sold in the public market unless the sale is registered under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Act, or an exemption from registration is available.

 

In connection with this offering, we, our directors and executive officers and substantially all of our stockholders have each agreed to enter into a lock-up agreement and thereby be subject to a lock-up period, meaning that they and their permitted transferees will not be permitted to sell any of the shares of our common stock for 180 days after the date of this prospectus, subject to certain extensions without the prior consent of the underwriters. Although we have been advised that there is no present intention to do so, the underwriters may, in their sole discretion and without notice, release all or any portion of the shares of our common stock from the restrictions in any of the lock-up agreements described above.

 

As of April 15, 2012, holders of approximately 53,958,382 shares of our common stock, including any securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of our common stock, have demand and piggyback registration rights with respect to those securities. Any shares registered pursuant to the registration rights agreement would be freely tradable in the public market following customary lock-up periods. See “Shares Eligible for Future Sale.” In addition, immediately following this offering, we intend to file a registration statement registering under the Securities Act the shares of common stock reserved for issuance in respect of incentive awards to our officers and certain of our employees. If any of these holders cause a large number of securities to be sold in the public market following expiration of any applicable lock-up period, the sales could reduce the trading price of our common stock. These sales also could impede our ability to raise future capital.

 

Anti-takeover provisions could adversely affect our stockholders.

 

We are a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change in control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. In addition, our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Amended and Restated By-laws may discourage, delay or prevent a change in our management or control over us that stockholders may consider favorable. Our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Amended and Restated By-laws, which will be in effect upon the closing of this offering:

 

 

 

For additional information regarding these and other provisions of our organizational documents that may make it more difficult to acquire our company on an unsolicited basis, see “Description of Our Capital Stock — Certain Provisions of Delaware Law and Certain Charter and By-law Provisions.”

 

In addition, there are substantial regulatory limitations on changes of control of savings and loan holding companies and federal savings associations. Any company that acquires control of a savings association becomes a “savings and loan holding company” subject to registration, examination and regulation by the FRB. “Control,” as defined under federal banking regulations, includes ownership or control of shares, or holding irrevocable proxies (or a combination thereof), representing 25% or more of any class of voting stock, control in any manner of the election of a majority of the institution’s directors, or a determination by the FRB that the acquirer has the power to direct, or directly or indirectly to exercise a controlling influence over, the management or policies of the institution. Further, an acquisition of 10% or more of our common stock creates a rebuttable presumption of “control” under federal banking regulations. These provisions could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire EverBank or us even if such an acquisition might be in the best interest of our stockholders.

 

Some of the statements under “Prospectus Summary,” “Risk Factors,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” “Business” and elsewhere in this prospectus may contain forward-looking statements that reflect our current views with respect to, among other things, future events and financial performance. We generally identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “outlook,” “believes,” “expects,” “potential,” “continues,” “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “predicts,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates,” “anticipates” or the negative version of those words or other comparable words. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts, and are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our industry, management’s beliefs and certain assumptions made by management, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and beyond our control. Accordingly, you are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable as of the date made, expectations may prove to have been materially different from the results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Unless otherwise required by law, we also disclaim any obligation to update our view of any such risks or uncertainties or to announce publicly the result of any revisions to the forward-looking statements made in this prospectus. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, those factors described in “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” These factors include without limitation:

 

 

 

We estimate that the net proceeds to us from the sale of our common stock in this offering will be $198.2 million, at an assumed initial public offering price of $11.50 per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover of this prospectus, and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Our net proceeds will increase by approximately $31.0 million if the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares is exercised in full. Each $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price of $11.50 per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover of this prospectus, would increase (decrease) the net proceeds to us of this offering by $18.0 million, or $20.7 million if the underwriters’ option is exercised in full, assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses.

 

We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering for general corporate purposes, which may include organic growth or the acquisition of businesses or assets that we believe are complementary to our present business and provide attractive risk-adjusted returns.

 

In September 2010, EverBank Financial Corp, a Florida corporation, or EverBank Florida, formed EverBank Financial Corp, a Delaware corporation, or EverBank Delaware. EverBank Delaware holds no assets and has no subsidiaries and has not engaged in any business or other activities except in connection with its formation and as the registrant in this offering. Prior to the consummation of this offering, EverBank Florida will merge with and into EverBank Delaware, with EverBank Delaware continuing as the surviving corporation and succeeding to all of the assets, liabilities and business of EverBank Florida. In the merger, (1) all of the outstanding shares of common stock of EverBank Florida will be converted into approximately 77,994,699 shares of EverBank Delaware common stock, (2) all of the holders of outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock will receive a pro rata special one-time cash dividend of an aggregate of approximately $1.1 million, and (3) all of the outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock will be converted into 15,964,644 shares of EverBank Delaware common stock.

 

The Reorganization will cause the “reincorporation” of EverBank Florida in Delaware. It will not result in any change of the business, management, jobs, fiscal year, assets, liabilities or location of the principal facilities of EverBank Florida.

 

We have historically not paid cash dividends to holders of our common stock. However, we anticipate paying a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share, commencing in the third quarter of 2012, subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and dependent on, among other things, our results of operations, financial condition, level of indebtedness, cash requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant. In addition, our ability to pay dividends may be limited by covenants of any future outstanding indebtedness we or our subsidiaries incur. Dividends from EverBank will be the principal source of funds for the payment of dividends on our common stock.

 

EverBank is subject to certain regulatory restrictions that may limit its ability to pay dividends to us and, therefore, our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders. EverBank must seek approval from the FRB prior to any declaration of the payment of any dividends or other capital distributions to us. EverBank may not pay dividends to us if, after paying those dividends, it would fail to meet the required minimum levels under risk-based capital guidelines and the minimum leverage and tangible capital ratio requirements, or in the event the FRB notified EverBank that it was in need of more than normal supervision. Further, under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, or FDIA, an insured depository institution such as EverBank is prohibited from making capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, if, after making such distribution, the institution would become “undercapitalized.” Payment of dividends by EverBank also may be restricted at any time at the discretion of the appropriate regulator if it deems the payment to constitute an “unsafe and unsound” banking practice. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Restrictions on Paying Dividends” and “Regulation and Supervision — Regulation of Federal Savings Banks — Limitation on Capital Distributions.”

 

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and our capitalization as of December 31, 2011:

 

 

 

You should read this information together with the consolidated historical and pro forma financial statements and the related notes thereto included in this prospectus and the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the “Selected Financial Information” sections of this prospectus.

 

 

Both columns include 5,950,046 shares of common stock held in escrow at December 31, 2011 as a result of our acquisition of Tygris. Pursuant to the terms of the Tygris acquisition agreement and related escrow agreement, we are required to review the average carrying value of the remaining Tygris portfolio annually and upon certain events, including this offering, release a number of escrowed shares to the former Tygris shareholders to the extent that the aggregate value of the escrowed shares (on a determined per share value) equals 17.5% of the average carrying value of the remaining Tygris portfolio on the date of each release (see “Business — Recent Acquisitions — Acquisition of Tygris Commercial Finance Group, Inc.”). Based on our first annual review of the average carrying value of the remaining Tygris portfolio, we released 2,808,175 escrowed shares of our common stock to the former Tygris shareholders on April 25, 2011. As of December 31, 2011, 5,950,046 shares of our common stock remain in escrow. Following the offering, based on our second annual review of the carrying value of the remaining Tygris portfolio, we will release 2,915,043 escrowed shares of our common stock to the former Tygris shareholders. We expect that another partial release of the escrowed shares to the former Tygris shareholders will occur in connection with the consummation of this offering. As the necessary valuation of the remaining Tygris portfolio for the partial release of escrowed shares triggered by this offering must be made after the consummation of this offering, the number of shares to be released from escrow cannot be determined at present.

 

Both columns exclude 11,507,077 shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding stock options at a weighted-average exercise price of $11.04 per share, 470,605 shares of common stock issuable upon the vesting of outstanding restricted stock units with a remaining weighted average vesting period, as of December 31, 2011, of 1.4 years and 18,574,468 additional shares of common stock reserved for issuance under our equity incentive plans.

 

If you invest in our common stock, your ownership interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between the initial public offering price per share of our common stock and the as adjusted net tangible book value per share of our common stock immediately after this offering. Our historical net tangible book value as of December 31, 2011, after giving effect to the conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock and the Reorganization, was $944.5 million, or $10.05 per as converted common share at period end. Net tangible book value per share is determined by dividing our total tangible assets less our total liabilities by the number of shares of common stock outstanding.

 

After giving effect to the Reorganization and our sale of 19,220,000 shares of common stock at an assumed initial public offering price of $11.50 per share, the midpoint of the range on the cover of this prospectus, and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses, our as adjusted net tangible book value as of December 31, 2011 would have been $1,142.6 million, or $10.10 per share. This amount represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value to our existing stockholders of $0.05 per share and an immediate dilution to new investors of $1.40 per share. The following table illustrates this per share dilution:

 

 

Each $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed public offering price of $11.50 per share would increase (decrease) our as adjusted net tangible book value by approximately $18.0 million, or approximately $0.15 per share, and the dilution per share to investors in this offering by approximately $0.85 per share, assuming that the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. The as adjusted information discussed above is illustrative only and will adjust based on the actual public offering price and other terms of this offering determined at pricing.

 

If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full in this offering at the assumed offering price of $11.50 per share, our as adjusted net tangible book value at December 31, 2011 would be $1,173.6 million, or $10.11 per share, representing an immediate increase in as adjusted net tangible book value to our existing stockholders of $0.06 per share and an immediate dilution to investors participating in this offering of $1.39 per share.

 

The following table summarizes as of December 31, 2011, on an as adjusted basis and after giving effect to the Reorganization, the number of shares of common stock purchased from us, the total consideration paid to us and the average price per share paid by our existing stockholders and by investors participating in this offering, based upon an assumed initial public offering price of

$11.50 per share, the mid-point of the range on the cover of this prospectus, and before deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us.

 

 

The above discussion and tables do not include 12,222,787 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of options outstanding as of April 15, 2012 at a weighted average exercise price of $11.21 per share and 406,999 shares of common stock issuable upon the vesting of restricted stock units outstanding as of April 15, 2012.

 

Effective upon the completion of this offering, an additional 15,000,000 shares of our common stock will be reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans. To the extent that any of these options and restricted stock units are exercised, new options or restricted stock units are issued under our equity incentive plans or we issue additional shares of common stock in the future, there will be further dilution to investors participating in this offering.

 

The selected statement of income data for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 and the selected balance sheet data as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 have been derived from our audited financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The selected income statement data for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the selected balance sheet data as of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 have been derived from our audited financial statements that are not included in this prospectus. The selected financial information should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the historical and pro forma financial statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus. We have prepared the unaudited consolidated financial information on the same basis as our audited consolidated financial information.

 

We consummated several significant transactions in prior fiscal periods, including the acquisition of Tygris in February 2010 and the acquisition of the banking operations of Bank of Florida in May 2010. Accordingly, our operating results for the historical periods presented below are not comparable and may not be predictive of future results. For additional information, see the consolidated historical and pro forma financial statements and the related notes thereto included in this prospectus.

 

 

 

 

The summary quarterly financial information set forth below for each of the last six quarters has been derived from our unaudited interim consolidated financial statements and other financial information. The summary historical quarterly financial information includes all adjustments consisting of normal recurring accruals that we consider necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and the results of operations for these periods.

 

We consummated several significant transactions in prior fiscal periods, including the acquisition of Tygris in February 2010 and the acquisition of the banking operations of Bank of Florida in an FDIC-assisted transaction in May 2010. Accordingly, our operating results for the historical periods presented below are not comparable and may not be predictive of future results.

 

The information below is only a summary and should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated historical and pro forma financial statements and the related notes thereto included in this prospectus.

 

As indicated in the notes to the tables below, certain items included in the tables are non-GAAP financial measures. For a more detailed discussion of these items, including a discussion of why we believe these items are meaningful and a reconciliation of each of these items to the most directly comparable generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, financial measure, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Primary Factors Used to Evaluate Our Business.”