UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No. )

Filed by the Registrant ☒        
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐

Check the appropriate box:

Preliminary Proxy Statement
Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule14a-6(e)(2))
Definitive Proxy Statement
Definitive Additional Materials
Soliciting Material under§240.14a-12

☐    Preliminary Proxy Statement
☐    Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
☒    Definitive Proxy Statement
☐    Definitive Additional Materials
☐    Soliciting Material under §240.14a-12
image_1.jpg
Assured Guaranty Ltd.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)



Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box)all boxes that apply):

☒    No fee required
☐    Fee paid previously with preliminary materials
☐    Fee computed on table in exhibit required by Item 25(b) per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-1    












a094121_assuredxguarantyxc.jpg



image_1.jpg
March 23, 2022
DEAR SHAREHOLDERS:  No fee required.
Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.
(1)

Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

(2)

Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

(3)

Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

(4)

Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

(5)

Total fee paid:

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.
(1)

Amount Previously Paid:

(2)

Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

(3)

Filing Party:

(4)

Date Filed:

Persons who are to respond to the collection of information contained in this form are not required to respond unless the form displays a currently valid OMB control number.


LOGO


DEAR SHAREHOLDERS:March 27, 2019

It is with great pleasure that we invite you to our 20192022 Annual General Meeting of shareholders on Wednesday, May 8, 2019,4, 2022, at 6 Bevis Marks in London. Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, in person, please vote your shares; your vote is important to us.

Assured Guaranty’s 2018

More than five years of difficult and complex negotiation and litigation over defaulted insured Puerto Rico exposures finally bore fruit in 2021. We completed two plan support agreements with the Federal Oversight Management Board for Puerto Rico and other important stakeholders in 2021, covering 74% of the Puerto Rico debt outstanding on December 31, 2021. This led directly to the resolution just last week of a significant portion of our insurance exposure to Puerto Rico -- approximately $1.3 billion of net par outstanding at December 31, 2021. With the resolution of our Puerto Rico exposures so much more likely when we closed our books for the year, we were able to take a benefit against our expected losses related to Puerto Rico that was the primary driver of the $204 million economic benefit against our expected losses in the public finance sector.
Similarly, more than a decade of hard work with servicers in our legacy residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) portfolio, encouraging the servicers to keep borrowers in their homes through modifications and forbearances and to maintain liens on the homes, continued to pay off in 2021 as ongoing home price appreciation improved expected recoveries and performance of our insured RMBS portfolio, which, over the year, resulted in an economic benefit against our expected losses of $100 million.
Together, the many-years-long loss mitigation efforts for our Puerto Rico and legacy RMBS exposures contributed substantially to our 2021 net income of $389 million and our 2021 adjusted operating income* of $470 million, or $5.23 and $6.32 per share, respectively. Our 2021 net income per share increased by nearly 25% from 2020, and our 2021 adjusted operating income per share more than doubled from 2020.
We enjoyed a very successful year in our primary business, financial performance was excellent. Ourguaranty insurance. In our primary market for that product, U.S. municipal finance, we insured 5.0% out of the entire U.S. new issue municipal market, up substantially from 4.4% in 2020, and the most since 2011. With a more than 60% share of insured par issued, we led the municipal bond insurance industry to its highest market penetration in a dozen years. This helped us to achieve in 2021 gross written premium of $377 million and new business production in the insurance segment, a non-GAAP financial measure we refer to as PVP*, of $361 million.
We continued to make important progress in managing our capital by issuing $900 million of new public debt and retiring higher interest debt, and by returning $562 million to our shareholders through share repurchases and dividends.
In our asset management business, we issued $2.6 billion in new collateralized loan obligations (CLOs), which contributed significantly to the $3.0 billion of inflows of third-party assets under management, which we refer to as AUM, during the year — above our target. We also take advantage of the knowledge in our asset management business to enhance our returns on a portion of our insurance subsidiaries' investment assets. In 2021, we had equity in earnings of investees from funds managed by our asset management business of $80 million, nearly double the $42 million in 2020.



These and the other achievements highlighted in this proxy statement helped us to build substantial shareholder value during 2021 by all of the measures we use. By year-end 2021, our shareholders’ equity attributable to Assured Guaranty Ltd. per share,non-GAAP adjusted operating shareholder’s equityequity* per share1andnon-GAAP adjusted book valuevalue* per share1 all reached record levels, at $63.23, $61.17$93.19, $88.73 and $86.06,$130.67, respectively. These records reflect the great strides we continuedOur share price rose 59.4% from $31.49 at year-end 2020 to make on$50.20 at year-end 2021.
We accomplished all of this while successfully navigating COVID-19 restrictions and taking important steps in environmental and social responsibility areas described further within this proxy statement. We could not be prouder of all that our four main strategies:

employees accomplished in 2021.
Sincerely,

Growing our new business production.For 2018, our gross written premiums were at $612 million, while our premium production, anon-GAAP financial measure we use to measure our new business production and which we refer to as PVP1, was at $663 million. Both of these measures were the highest reported in ten years. All three of our business markets again contributed to our premium production, as did our reinsurance transaction with Syncora Guarantee Inc., which we refer to as SGI. In that transaction, we assumed, generally on a 100% quota share basis, substantially all of SGI’s insured portfolio and also reassumed a book of business previously ceded to SGI.

Managing capital efficiently.During 2018, we returned to our shareholders approximately $571 million through repurchases of our common shares and dividend payments. Over the last six years we have distributed approximately $3.1 billion to our shareholders through common share repurchases and dividends—14% morethan our entire market capitalization at December 31, 2012, just as we began our common share repurchase program. We also completed the combination of our European insurance subsidiaries, simplifying our capital structure, reducing our regulatory and financial reporting burden in Europe, and creating a surviving entity with significant capital.

Alternative strategies.In February 2018, we continued our growth into the asset management area by acquiring a minority interest in the holding company of Rubicon Investment Advisors, an investment banking firm active in the global infrastructure sector. On June 1, 2018, we closed our reinsurance transaction with SGI. We continue to look for asset management opportunities and for potential transactions with the remaining legacy bond insurers.

Proactive loss mitigation.In 2018, we achieved the resolution of the insured debt of our first major Puerto Rico credit, the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (COFINA). That resolution was incorporated into the COFINA plan of adjustment approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico in February 2019. We continue to negotiate with representatives of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico with respect to other Puerto Rico credits, and will continue to assert our rights through litigation until the Commonwealth and its advisors respond with solutions that recognize creditors’ rights, the requirements of the federal Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), and constitutional requirements of the United States and Puerto Rico.

The market rewarded us for our accomplishments with a nearly 15% total shareholder return for the year. We provide further detail about our 2018 accomplishments and our plans for the future in the Letter to Shareholders accompanying our 2018 Annual Report, which we encourage you to review.

Our Board of Directors responded to last year’ssay-on-pay vote by soliciting feedback from our shareholders and then making adjustments to our executive compensation program, effective this year. An explanation of those adjustments is included in the Proxy Statement that follows this letter, which we also encourage you to review.

We look forward to another successful year.

Sincerely,

image_2.jpg

  
image_3.jpg

Francisco L. Borges

  

Dominic J. Frederico

ChairmanChair of the Board  President and Chief Executive Officer


















1

Non-GAAP operating shareholder’s equity per share,non-GAAP adjusted book value per share,non-GAAP operating income and PVP arenon-GAAP financial measures. An explanation of these measures, which are considered when setting executive compensation, and a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP measures, may be found on pages 92 to 97 of our Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018. In addition, please refer to the section entitled “Forward Looking Statements” following the cover of that Annual Report on Form10-K.

*    Adjusted operating shareholder’s equity per share, adjusted book value per share, adjusted operating income and PVP are non-GAAP financial measures. An explanation of these measures, which are considered when setting executive compensation, and a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP measures, may be found on pages 102 to106 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, which is available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com. In addition, please refer to the section entitled “Forward Looking Statements” following the cover of that Annual Report on Form 10-K.



March 27, 2019

23, 2022

Assured Guaranty Ltd.

30 Woodbourne Avenue

Hamilton HM 08

Bermuda

NOTICE OF ANNUAL

GENERAL MEETING

TO THE SHAREHOLDERS OF ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.:

The Annual General Meeting of Assured Guaranty Ltd., which we refer to as AGL, will be held on Wednesday, May 8, 2019,4, 2022, at 8:00 a.m. London Time, at 6 Bevis Marks, London, EC3A 7BA, United Kingdom,Kingdom. The Annual General Meeting is being held for the following purposes:

1.

To elect our board of directors;

2.

To approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to AGL’s named executive officers;

3.

To approve our employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment; this will increase by 250,000 the number of common shares that our employees may purchase under this plan;

4.

To appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as AGL’s independent auditor for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019, and to authorize the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor;

5.

To direct AGL to vote for directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor for, its subsidiary Assured Guaranty Re Ltd.; and

6.

To transact such other business, if any, as lawfully may be brought before the meeting.

1.To elect our board of directors;
2.    To approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to AGL’s named executive officers;
3.    To appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as AGL’s independent auditor for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2022, and to authorize the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor;
4.    To direct AGL to vote for directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor for, its subsidiary Assured Guaranty Re Ltd.; and
5.    To transact such other business, if any, as lawfully may be brought before the meeting.
Shareholders of record are being mailed a Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials on or around March 27, 2019,23, 2022, which provides them with instructions on how to access the proxy materials and our 20182021 annual report on the Internet,internet, and if they prefer, how to request paper copies of these materials.

At this writing, governments continue to adjust various travel and gathering restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the event we postpone or change the date, time or location of our Annual General Meeting as a result of COVID-19, we will post the revised meeting information on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting as soon as possible after changing the date, time and place for the postponed meeting. We will also promptly issue a press release that we will make available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting and file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (which we refer to as the SEC) as definitive additional proxy material. Therefore, prior to and on the date of the Annual General Meeting, please visit our website or the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov) to determine if there has been any change to the date, time or location of our Annual General Meeting. If you wish to receive a physical copy of any such press release, please contact our Secretary at generalcounsel@agltd.com or (441) 279-5725.
Only shareholders of record, as shown by the transfer books of AGL, at the close of business on March 14, 2019,11, 2022, are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual General Meeting.

REGISTERED SHAREHOLDERS OF RECORDWHO HOLD OUR SHARES DIRECTLY MAY VOTE UP UNTIL 12:00 NOON EASTERN DAYLIGHT TIME ON MAY 7, 2019.3, 2022. BENEFICIAL OWNERSSHAREHOLDERS MUST SUBMIT THEIR VOTING INSTRUCTIONS SO THAT THEIR BROKERS WILL BE ABLE TO VOTE BY 11:59 P.M. EASTERN DAYLIGHT TIME ON MAY 6, 2019.

2, 2022. EMPLOYEE SHAREHOLDERS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE ASSURED GUARANTY EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN MAY VOTE UP UNTIL 11:59 P.M. EASTERN DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME ON APRIL 29, 2022.

WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING IN PERSON OR BY PROXY, AND REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF SHARES YOU OWN, PLEASE VOTE AS PROMPTLY AS POSSIBLE VIA THE INTERNET OR BY TELEPHONE. ALTERNATIVELY, IF YOU HAVE REQUESTED WRITTEN PROXY MATERIALS, PLEASE SIGN, DATE AND RETURN THE PROXY CARD IN THE RETURN ENVELOPE PROVIDED AS PROMPTLY AS POSSIBLE. IF YOU LATER DESIRE TO REVOKE YOUR PROXY FOR ANY REASON, YOU MAY DO SO IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED PROXY STATEMENT. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THE INDIVIDUALS NOMINATED AS DIRECTORS, THE PROPOSALS BEING VOTED UPON, USE OF THE PROXY AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS, YOU ARE URGED TO READ THE ATTACHED PROXY STATEMENT.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

image_4.jpg

Ling Chow

Secretary




TABLE OF CONTENTS

  

image_5.jpg

SUMMARY

____________________________
   1 

3 ____________

Overview

   3 

The Board of Directors

Overview ______________________________
   3 

Meetings of the Board

3

Director Independence

3

Director Executive Sessions

3

Other Corporate Governance Highlights

3

How Are Directors Nominated?

_____________
   4 

Committees of the Board

_________________    
   5 

   67 

   9 

   9 

Insider Participation

____________________
   10 

What Is Our Related Person Transactions Approval Policy and What Procedures Do We Use To Implement It?

________________
   10 

10

Did Our Insiders Comply With Section  16(A) Beneficial Ownership Reporting in 2018?

______________________________
   11 
Delinquent Section 16(a) Reports ___________11

PROPOSAL NO. 1:

   12 
14
   1916 

   1916 

Our Common Shares?

__________________
   2017 

ELECTION OF  DIRECTORS _____________
   2118 

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

21

21

SummaryAUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

22

Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process ____________

   27 

   3730 

Other Named Executive Officer Compensation Decisions

Discussion and Analysis ______
   4330 

Executive Compensation Conclusion

CD&A Roadmap _______________________
   4630 

Payout Under Performance Retention Plan

Summary _____________________________
   4631 

Executive Compensation Governance

Program Structure and Process _________________________
   4736 

Post-Employment Compensation

CEO Performance Review _______________
   4948 

Tax Treatment

50

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

50

52

2018 Summary Compensation Table

53

Employment Agreements

54
Decisions ________________

PROPOSAL NO. 2:

ADVISORY APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Committee Report ___________
66
Summary Compensation Table _____________   67 

PROPOSAL NO. 3:

APPROVAL OF EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN AS AMENDED

Employment Agreements _________________
   68 
Perquisite Policy ________________________68

PROPOSAL NO. 4:

APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT
AUDITOR

Severance Policy _______________________
68
Employee Stock Purchase Plan ____________68
Indemnification Agreements _______________68
2021 Grants of Plan-Based Awards _________69
Outstanding Equity Awards ________________71
2021 Stock Vested ______________________   72 

Independent Auditor Fee Information

72

Pre-Approval Policy of Audit andNon-Audit Services

Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation _______
   73 

PROPOSAL NO. 5:

PROPOSALS CONCERNING OUR SUBSIDIARY, ASSURED GUARANTY RE
LTD.

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control ______________________
   7473 

Proposal5.1-Election of AG Re Directors

74

Proposal5.2-Appointment of AG Re Auditor

CEO Pay Ratio _________________________
   75 
Non-Qualified Retirement Plans ____________75
Incentive Plans _________________________76
   77 

ADVISORY APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ______________________
78
APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT
AUDITOR _____________________________
79
Independent Auditor Fee Information ________79
Pre-Approval Policy of Audit and Non-Audit
Services ______________________________
80
PROPOSALS CONCERNING OUR SUBSIDIARY, ASSURED GUARANTY RE LTD. ______________________________
81
Proposal 4.1-Election of AG Re Directors _____81
Proposal 4.2-Appointment of AG Re Auditor ___83
84
How do I submit a proposal for inclusion in
next year’s proxy material?

_______________
   7784 

How do I submit a proposal or make a nomination at an Annual General Meeting?

__
   7784 
   7885 

OTHER MATTERS

_____________________
   83
EXHIBIT A: EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN, AS AMENDED THROUGH THE THIRD AMENDMENTA-190 





PROXY STATEMENT

Assured Guaranty Ltd.  March 27, 201923, 2022

SUMMARY

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement and does not contain all of the information that you should consider before voting. For more complete information about the following topics, please review the complete proxy statement and the Annual Report onForm 10-K of Assured Guaranty Ltd. (which we refer to as AGL, we, us or our; we use Assured Guaranty, our Company or the Company to refer to AGL together with its subsidiaries).

We intend to begin distribution of the Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials to shareholders on or about March 27, 2019.

23, 2022.

ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

Time and Date  8:00 a.m. London time, May 8, 20194, 2022
Place  

6 Bevis Marks

London, EC3A 7BA

United Kingdom

Record Date  March 14, 201911, 2022
Voting  Shareholders as of the record date are entitled to vote. Each Common Share is entitled to one vote for each director nominee and one vote for each of the proposals to be voted on. Shareholders of recordRegistered shareholders who hold our shares directly may vote up until 12:00 noonNoon Eastern Daylight Savings Time on May 7, 2019.3, 2022. Beneficial owners must submit their voting instructions so that their brokerbrokers will be able to vote by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on May 6, 2019.2, 2022. Employee shareholders who participate in the Assured Guaranty Employee Stock Purchase Plan may vote up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time on April 29, 2022. In spite of those deadlines, holders who attend the Annual General Meeting will be able to vote in person.

Agenda Item

Board Vote

Recommendation

Page Reference

(for More Detail)

Election of directors

For each director nomineePage 1218

Approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation paid to AGL’s named executive officers

ForPage 6778

Approval of our employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment

     For     Page 68

Appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as AGL’s independent auditor for 20192022 and authorization of the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor

ForPage 7279

Direction of AGL to vote for directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor of, AGL’s subsidiary, Assured Guaranty Re Ltd.

For each director nominee
and for the independent
auditor
Page 7481

We will also transact any other business that may properly come before the meeting.

If we postpone or change the date, time or location of our Annual General Meeting as a result of travel or gathering restrictions related to COVID-19, we will post the revised meeting information on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting as soon as possible after changing the date, time and place for the postponed meeting. We will also promptly issue a press release that we will make available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting and file with the SEC as definitive additional proxy material. Therefore, prior to and on the date of the Annual General Meeting, please visit our website or the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov) to determine if there has been any change to the date, time or location of our Annual General Meeting. If you wish to receive a physical copy of any such press release, please contact our Secretary at generalcounsel@agltd.com or (441) 279-5725.
This proxy statement makes a number of references to our website. The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, our website is not incorporated by reference into, and is not a part of, this proxy statement.
1

Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



SUMMARY DIRECTOR INFORMATION

The following table provides summary information about each director nominee.nominee, including their current committee assignments. Each director nominee will be elected for aone-year term by a majority of votes cast.

     
       

DIRECTOR

SINCE

     COMMITTEES
NOMINEE     PRINCIPAL OCCUPATION     A         C         F         NG         RO         E    
          

LOGO

 Francisco L. Borges  67   2007  Chairman, Landmark Partners, LLC    

«

 

  «

 

          
           
          
 

LOGO

 G. Lawrence Buhl  72   2004  

Former Regional Director for

Insurance Services, Ernst &

Young LLP

 

«

 

 

 

    
          
           
          

LOGO

 Dominic J. Frederico  66   2004  

President and Chief Executive

Officer, Assured Guaranty Ltd.

      
          
           
          
 

LOGO

 Bonnie L. Howard  65   2012  

Former Chief Auditor and Global

Head of Control and Emerging Risk, Citigroup

    

 

 

«

 

 
          
           
          

LOGO

 Thomas W. Jones  69   2015  Founder and Senior Partner of TWJ Capital, LLC      
          
           
          

LOGO

 Patrick W. Kenny  76   2004  

Former President and Chief

Executive Officer, International

Insurance Society

  

«

 

  

 

  

 

          
           
          

LOGO

 Alan J. Kreczko  67   2015  

Former Executive Vice President

and General Counsel of The

Hartford Financial Services

Group, Inc.

      
          
           
          
 

LOGO

 Simon W. Leathes  71   2013  

Former independentnon-executive director of

HSBC Bank plc

      
          
           
          

LOGO

 Michael T. O’Kane  73   2005  

Former Senior Managing Director,

Securities Division, TIAA CREF

 

 

  

«

 

   
          
           
          

LOGO

 Yukiko Omura  63   2014  Former Undersecretary General and Vice President/COO, International Fund for Agricultural Development      
          
           
          
            2018 Meetings 4 5 4 4 4 0

cast.
 NOMINEEDIRECTOR SINCEPRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONCOMMITTEES
ACES
F1
NGROE
image_6.jpg 
Francisco L. Borges70 2007Partner of Ares Management Corporation and Co-Head of Ares Secondary Solutions
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
image_7.jpg
G. Lawrence
Buhl
752004
Former Regional Director for
Insurance Services, Ernst &
Young LLP
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
image_8.jpg
Dominic J. Frederico692004President and Chief Executive
Officer, Assured Guaranty Ltd.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
image_9.jpg
Bonnie L. Howard682012
Former Chief Auditor and Global
Head of Control and Emerging Risk, Citigroup
 
  
 
 
image_10.jpg
Thomas W. Jones722015Founder and Senior Partner of TWJ Capital, LLC
 
  
 
  
image_11.jpg
Patrick W. Kenny792004Former President and Chief
Executive Officer, International Insurance Society
 
 
 
 
 
 
image_12.jpg
Alan J. Kreczko702015Former Executive Vice President
and General Counsel of The
Hartford Financial Services
Group, Inc.
 
 
 
image_13.jpg
Simon W. Leathes742013Former Independent
non-executive director of
HSBC Bank plc
   
 
 
 
image_14.jpg
Michelle McCloskey602021Former President of the Americas of Man Group and President of Man FRM
 
 
 
    
image_16.jpg
Yukiko Omura662014Former Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency of the World Bank Group
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
image_17.jpg
Lorin P.T. Radtke532021Co-founder and Partner, M Seven 8
 
 
image_18.jpg
Courtney C. Shea612021Former Managing Member, Columbia Capital Management
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2021 Meetings 4544440

:  Chair;: Member; A: Audit; C: Compensation; ES: Environmental and Social Responsibility; F: Finance; NG: Nominating and Governance; RO: Risk Oversight; E: Executive;

Executive.

«1 : Chair;Michael O'Kane, the current Chair of the Finance Committee, will retire upon the completion of his 2021 -2022 term.
2 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


: Member

2


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

OVERVIEW
OVERVIEW

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Our Board of Directors maintains strong corporate governance policies.

The Board and management have reviewed the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (which we refer to as the SEC)SEC and the New York Stock Exchange (which we refer to as the NYSE) listing standards regarding corporate governance policies and processes, and we are in compliance with the rules and listing standards.

We have adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines covering issues such as director qualification standards (including independence), director responsibilities, Board self-evaluations, and executive sessions of the Board.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines contain our Categorical Standards for Director Independence.

We have adopted a Global Code of ConductEthics for our employees and directors and charters for each Board committee.

The full text of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, our Global Code of ConductEthics and each Board committee charter, are available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance. In addition, you may request copies of the Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Global Code of ConductEthics and the committee charters by contacting our Secretary via:

Telephone  (441)279-5725
Facsimile  (441)279-5701
e-mail  generalcounsel@agltd.com

MEETINGS OF THE BOARD

Our Board of Directors oversees our business and monitors the performance of management. The directors keep themselvesup-to-date on our Company by discussing matters with Mr. Frederico, who is our Chief Executive Officer (and whom we refer to as our CEO), other key executives and our principal external advisors, such as outside auditors, outside legal counsel, investment bankers and other consultants, by reading the reports and other materials that we send them regularly and by participating in Board and committee meetings.

The Board usually meets four times per year in regularly scheduled meetings, but will meet more often if necessary. During 2018,2021, the Board met four times. All but one of our directors, Michelle McCloskey, attended at least 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the Board and committees of the Board of which they were a member held while they were in office during the year ended December 31, 2018.

2021. Ms. McCloskey was elected to the Board effective May 5, 2021, and so was eligible to attend only two of the sets of Board and committee meetings held in 2021. She missed only one set of Board and committee meetings, due to illness.

DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

In February 2019,2022, our Board determined that, other than our CEO Mr. Frederico, all of our directors are independent under the listing standards of the NYSE. These independent directors constitute substantially more than a majority of our Board. In making its determination of independence, the Board applied its Categorical Standards for Director Independence and determined that no other material relationships existed between our Company and these directors. A copy of our Categorical Standards for Director Independence is available as part of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which are available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance. In addition, as part of the independence determination, our Board monitors the independence of Audit and Compensation Committee members under rules of the SEC and NYSE listing standards that are applicable to members of the audit committeeAudit Committee and compensation committee.

Compensation Committee.

As part of its independence determinations, the Board considered the other directorships held by the independent directors and determined that none of these directorships constituted a material relationship with our Company.

DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE SESSIONS

The independent directors meet at regularly scheduled executive sessions without the participation of management. The ChairmanChair of the Board is the presiding director for executive sessions of independent directors.


3 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


OTHER CORPORATE GOVERNANCE HIGHLIGHTS

Our Board has a substantial majority of independent directors.

All members of the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Governance, Finance, Environmental and Social Responsibility, and Risk Oversight Committees are independent directors.

3


Our Audit Committee recommends to the Board, which recommends to the shareholders, the annual appointment of our independent auditor. Each year our shareholders are asked to authorize the Board, acting through its Audit Committee, to determine the compensation of, and the scope of services performed by, our independent auditor. The Audit Committee also has the authority to retain outside advisors.

No member of our Audit Committee simultaneously serves on the audit committee of more than one other public company.

Our Compensation Committee has engaged a compensation consultant, Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc., which we refer to as FW Cook, to assist it in evaluating the compensation of our CEO, based on corporate goals and objectives and, with the other independent directors, setting his compensation based on this evaluation. FW Cook has also assisted us in designing our executive compensation program. The Compensation Committee has conducted an assessment of FW Cook’s independence and has determined that FW Cook does not have any conflict of interest. Our Nominating and Governance Committee also engages FW Cook to assist it in evaluating the compensation of our Board of Directors.

independent directors.

We established an Executive Committee to exercise certain authority of the Board in the management of company affairs between regularly scheduled meetings of the Board when it is determined that a specified matter should not be postponed to the next scheduled meeting of the Board. Our Executive Committee did not meet in 2018.

2021.

We have adopted a Global Code of Conduct applicable to all directors, officers and employeesEthics that sets forth basic principles to guide theirour day-to-day activities. The Global Code of ConductEthics addresses, among other things, conflicts of interest, corporate opportunities, confidentiality, fair dealing, protection and proper use of company assets, compliance with laws and regulations, including insider trading laws, and reporting illegal or unethical behavior. The full text of our Global Code of ConductEthics is available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance.

In addition to AGL’s quarterly Board meetings, our Board has an annual business review meeting to assess specific areas of our Company’s operations and to learn about general trends affecting the financial guaranty industry and asset management.management industries. We also provide our directors with the opportunity to attend continuing education programs.

In FebruaryWe established an Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee in May 2019, which began meeting in August 2019. Prior to the establishment of the Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee, our BoardNominating and Governance Committee was responsible for many such matters.

We adopted an Environmental Policy and a Statement on Climate Change. TheseChange in February 2019 and, in February 2020, we adopted a Human Rights Statement. In February 2021 we adopted a Diversity and Inclusion Policy. The current versions of these statements are available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance.

HOW ARE DIRECTORS NOMINATED?

In accordance with its charter, the Nominating and Governance Committee identifies potential nominees for directors from various sources. The Nominating and Governance Committee:

Reviews the qualifications of potential nominees to determine whether they might be good candidates for Board of Directors membership

Reviews the potential nominees’ judgment, experience, independence, understanding of our business or other related industries and such other factors as it determines are relevant in light of the needs of the Board of Directors and our Company

Selects qualified candidates and reviews its recommendations with the Board of Directors, which will decide whether to nominate the person for election to the Board of Directors at an Annual General Meeting of Shareholders (which we refer to as an Annual General Meeting). Between Annual General Meetings, the Board, upon the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee, can fill vacancies on the Board by appointing a director to serve until the next Annual General Meeting.

The Nominating and Governance Committee has the authority to retain search firms to be used to identify director candidates and to approve the search firm’s fees and other retention terms. The Nominating and Governance Committee may also retain other advisors.

We believe that diversity among members of the Board is an important consideration and is critical to the Board’s ability to perform its duties and various roles. Accordingly, in recommending nominees, the Board considers a wide range of individual perspectives and backgrounds in addition to diversity in professional experience and training. OurIn 2021, the Board is currently composedamended our Corporate Governance Guidelines to specify that the Nominating and Governance Committee will include, and will direct any director search firm that may be retained to
4 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


identify nominees for director, to include highly qualified candidates who reflect a variety of individuals from different disciplines, including lawyers, accountants and individuals who have industry, finance, executive and international experience, and is composedbackgrounds (including in respect of both men and women and citizensgender, race or ethnicity) in the pool of the United States, the United Kingdom and Japan. potential candidates being considered.
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines address diversity of experience, requiring the Nominating and Governance Committee to review annually the skills and attributes of Board members within the context of the currentmake-up of the full Board. Our Corporate Governance GuidelinesThe guidelines also provide that Board members should have individual backgrounds that, when combined, provide a portfolio of experience and knowledge that will serve our governance and strategic needs. The Nominating and Governance Committee will consider Board candidates on the basis of a range of criteria, including broad-based business knowledge and contacts, prominence and sound reputation in their fields as well as having a global business perspective and commitment to good corporate citizenship. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines specify that directors should represent all shareholders and not any special interest group or constituency. The Nominating and Governance Committee annually reviews its own performance. In connection with such evaluation, the Nominating and Governance Committee assesses whether it effectively nominates candidates for director in accordance with the above described standards specified by the Corporate Governance Guidelines. See each nominee’s biography appearing later in this proxy statement for a description of the specific experience that each such individual brings to our Board.

4


Our Corporate Governance Guidelinesguidelines additionally specify that directors should be able and prepared to provide wise and thoughtful counsel to top management on the full range of potential issues facing us. Directors must possess the highest personal and professional integrity. Directors must have the time necessary to fully meet their duty of due care to the shareholders and be willing to commit to service over the long term.

The Nominating and Governance Committee annually reviews its own performance. In connection with such evaluation, the Nominating and Governance Committee assesses whether it effectively nominates candidates for director in accordance with the above described standards specified by the Corporate Governance Guidelines.
Our Board is currently composed of individuals from different disciplines, including lawyers, accountants and individuals who have industry, finance, executive and international experience, and is composed of both men and women of different races and ethnicities, and citizens of the United States, the United Kingdom and Japan. See each nominee’s biography appearing later in this proxy statement for a description of the specific experience that each such individual brings to our Board.
The Nominating and Governance Committee will consider a shareholder’s recommendation for director but has no obligation to recommend such candidate for nomination by the Board of Directors. Assuming that appropriate biographical and background material is provided for candidates recommended by shareholders, the Nominating and Governance Committee will evaluate those candidates by following substantially the same process and applying substantially the same criteria as for candidates recommended by other sources. If a shareholder has a suggestion for a candidate for election, the shareholder should send it to: Secretary, Assured Guaranty Ltd., 30 Woodbourne Avenue, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda. No person recommended by a shareholder will become a nominee for director and be included in a proxy statement unless the Nominating and Governance Committee recommends, and the Board approves, such person.

If a shareholder desires to nominate a person for election as director at an Annual General Meeting, that shareholder must comply with Article 14 of AGL’sBye-Laws, which requires notice no later than 90 days prior to the anniversary date of the immediately preceding Annual General Meeting. This time period has passed with respect to the 20192022 Annual General Meeting. With respect to the 20202023 Annual General Meeting, AGL must receive such written notice on or prior to February 8, 2020.3, 2023. Such notice must describe the nomination in sufficient detail to be summarized on the agenda for the meeting and must set forth:

the shareholder’s name as it appears in AGL’s books

a representation that the shareholder is a record holder of AGL’s sharesCommon Shares and intends to appear in person or by proxy at the meeting to present such proposal

the class and number of sharesCommon Shares beneficially owned by the shareholder

the name and address of any person to be nominated

a description of all arrangements or understandings between the shareholder and each nominee and any other person or persons, naming such other person or persons, pursuant to which the nomination or nominations are to be made by the shareholder

such other information regarding each nominee proposed by such shareholder as would be required to be included in a proxy statement filed pursuant to the SEC’s proxy regulations

the consent of each nominee to serve as a director of AGL, if so elected

COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD

The Board of Directors has established an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, an Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee, a Finance Committee, a Nominating and Governance Committee, a Risk Oversight Committee and an Executive Committee.

All of the Board committees other than the Executive Committee are composed entirely of directors who are independent of our Company and management, as defined by the NYSE listing standards and as applied by the Board. Mr. O'Kane, who currently serves as chair of the Finance Committee and a member of the Audit and Nominating and Governance Committees, will retire upon the completion of his 2021-2022 term.
5 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


  The Audit Committee

��

Chairman: G. Lawrence BuhlChair: Bonnie L. Howard / 4 meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Audit Committee members: G. Lawrence Buhl, Thomas W. Jones, Alan J. Kreczko,Michelle McCloskey, Michael T. O’Kane

O'Kane, Courtney C. Shea

The Audit Committee provides oversight of the integrity of our Company’s financial statements and financial reporting process, our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements (including cybersecurity and data privacy requirements), the system of internal controls, the audit process, the performance of our internal audit program and the performance, qualification and independence of the independent auditor. The Audit Committee is also responsible for the oversight of Company risks related to (i) financial reporting, accounting policies and reserving, (ii) legal, regulatory and compliance matters, (iii) information technology, which we refer to as IT, (including cybersecurity)cybersecurity and data privacy), (iv) workouts, emerging events, and counterparties, (v) outsourcing and people, and (vi) business continuity planning.

The Audit Committee is composed entirely of directors who are independent of our Company and management, as defined by the NYSE listing standards.

standards and as applied by the Board.

The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee satisfies the financial literacy requirements of the NYSE and except for Mr. Kreczko, is anfive of the six members are audit committee financial expert,experts, as that term is defined under Item 407(d) of the SEC’sRegulation S-K. For additional information about the qualifications of the Audit Committee members, see their respective biographies set forth in “Proposal No. 1: Election of Directors.”

  The Compensation Committee

Chairman: PatrickChair: Thomas W. KennyJones / 5 meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Compensation Committee members: G. Lawrence Buhl, SimonBonnie L. Howard, Patrick W. Leathes

Kenny

The Compensation Committee has responsibility for evaluating the performance of our CEO and our senior managementleadership team and determining executive compensation in conjunction with the independent directors. The Compensation Committee also works with the Nominating

5


and Governance Committee and our CEO on succession planning. The Compensation Committee is also responsible for the oversight of Company risks related to people, succession planning and compensation.

The Compensation Committee is composed entirely of directors who are independent of our Company and management, as defined by the NYSE listing standards.

standards and as applied by the Board.

The Compensation Committee’s meetings included discussions with FW Cook to review executive compensation trends and comparison group compensation data and to evaluate the risk of our executive compensation program.

  The FinanceEnvironmental and Social Responsibility Committee

Chairman: Michael T. O’KaneChair: Alan J. Kreczko / 4 meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee members: G. Lawrence Buhl, Michelle McCloskey, Yukiko Omura, Courtney C. Shea

The Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee provides oversight and review of the Company’s significant strategies, policies and practices regarding environmental and social responsibility issues. The Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee focuses on four principal subject areas: (i) environmental risks, including climate change related risks, opportunities, and stewardship; (ii) corporate social responsibility, including community engagement and corporate philanthropy; (iii) aspects of human capital management, including diversity and inclusion, training and development, and employee engagement; and (iv) related stakeholder engagement.
  The Finance CommitteeMichael T. O'Kane / 4 meetings during 2021
  Other Finance Committee members: Thomas W. Jones, Alan J. Kreczko, Simon W. Leathes, Yukiko Omura,

Lorin P.T. Radtke

The Finance Committee of the Board of Directors oversees management’s investment of our Company’s investment portfolio, including in alternative investments, and is responsible for oversight of Company risks related to capital, liquidity, investments, financial market conditions, foreign currency, and rating agencies. The Finance Committee also oversees, and makes recommendations to the Board with respect to, our capital structure, dividends, financing arrangements, investment guidelines, potential alternative investments and any corporate development activities.

Mr. O'Kane, chair of the Finance Committee, will retire upon the completion of his 2021-2022 term.

  The Nominating and Governance Committee

Chairman:Chair: Francisco L. Borges / 4 meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Nominating and Governance Committee members: Bonnie L. Howard, Thomas W. Jones, Patrick W. Kenny,

Michael T. O'Kane

The responsibilities of the Nominating and Governance Committee include identifying individuals qualified to become Board members, recommending director nominees to the Board and developing and recommending corporate governance guidelines, as well as the oversight of Company risks related to board qualification, corporate structure, governance, regulatory compliance and people. The Nominating and Governance Committee also has responsibility to review and make recommendations to the full Board regarding director compensation. In addition to general corporate governance matters, the Nominating and Governance Committee assists the Board and the Board committees in their self-evaluations and oversees matters relating to the environment, sustainability and social responsibility.self-evaluations. The Nominating and Governance Committee is composed entirely of
6 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


directors who are independent of our Company and management, as defined by the NYSE listing standards.

standards and as applied by the Board.

  The Risk Oversight Committee

Chairman: Bonnie L. HowardChair: Simon W. Leathes / 4 meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Risk Oversight Committee members: Simon W. Leathes,Alan J. Kreczko, Yukiko Omura,

Lorin P.T. Radtke

The Risk Oversight Committee oversees management’s establishment and implementation of standards, controls, limits, guidelines and policies relating to risk appetite, risk assessment and enterprise risk management. The Risk Oversight Committee focuses on the underwriting, surveillance and workout of credit risks as well as the assessment, management and oversight of other Company enterprise risks across our insurance and asset management segments and corporate division, including, but not limited to, financial, legal, operational (including information technology,IT, cybersecurity, data privacy and vendor management) and other risks concerning our Company’s governance, reputation and ethical standards.

  The Executive Committee

Chairman:Chair: Francisco L. Borges / No meetings during 2018  

2021

  Other Executive Committee members: Dominic J. Frederico, Patrick W. Kenny, Simon W. Leathes

The Executive Committee was established to have, and to exercise, certain of the powers and authority of the Board in the management of the business and affairs of our Company between regularly scheduled meetings of the Board when, in the opinion of a quorum of the Executive Committee, a matter should not be postponed to the next scheduled meeting of the Board. The Executive Committee’s authority to act is limited by our Company’sBye-Laws, rules of the NYSE and applicable law and regulation and the Committee’s charter.

HOW ARE DIRECTORS COMPENSATED?

The Nominating and Governance Committee last revised the compensation paid to members of the Board in 2017, when it engaged Cook to conduct a comprehensive review and assessment of our independent director compensation program. After considering Cook’s market data, analysis and recommendations, the Nominating and Governance Committee determined at that time that the changes it was making to independent director compensation were warranted by the expanding scope of our Company’s business and the time commitment associated with attending meetings in the United Kingdom.

Cook refreshed its analysis of the compensation paid to members of the Board in 2018, and particularly to thenon-executive Chairman of the Board. Cook compared the compensation paid to ournon-executive Chairman to that paid to othernon-executive chairmen in our

6


comparison group at that time (we have since revised our comparison group), comparing the chairman’s retainer against the comparison group typical director total direct compensation,non-executive chairman premium,non-executive chairman total direct compensation, and multiple of a typical director. In each case, the chairman’s retainer was between the median and the 75th percentile of the comparison group, which the Nominating Committee determined to be warranted in light of the expanding scope of our Company’s business and the time commitment associated with the position.

No changes were made to our independent director compensation program in 2018.

Our independent directors receive an annual retainer of $265,000 per year. We pay $145,000 of the retainer in restricted stock and $120,000 of the retainer in cash. A director also may elect to receive any or all of the cash portion of his or hertheir annual retainer (plus the additional cash amounts described below) in restricted stock.

The restricted stock vests on the day immediately prior to the next Annual General Meeting following the grant of the stock. However, if, prior to such vesting date, either (i) a change in control (as defined in the Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended) of Assured Guaranty Ltd. occurs before the director terminates service on the Board or (ii) the director terminates service on the Board as a result of such director’s death or disability, then the restricted stock will vest on the date of such change in control or the date of the director’s termination of service, whichever is applicable. Grants of restricted stock receive cash dividends and have voting rights; the cash dividends accrue during the vesting period and are paid upon vesting.

Our share ownership guidelines require that, each independent director own the greater of (i) at least 25,000 Common Shares or (ii) Common Shares with a market value of at least five times the maximum cash portion of the annual director retainer, before being permitted to dispose of any shares acquired as compensation from our Company.Company, each independent director own Common Shares with a market value of at least $600,000, which amount is five times the maximum cash portion of the annual director retainer (exclusive of committee fees). Once a director has reached the share ownership guideline, for so long as he or she serves on the Board, such director may not dispose of any Common Shares if such disposition would cause the director to be below the share ownership guideline. Common Shares that had been restricted but subsequently vested andin addition to purchased Common Shares count toward the share ownership guideline. Our five longest servingthree newer Board members (Ms. McCloskey, Mr. Radtke and Ms. Shea, who each joined the Board in May 2021) are accumulating Common Shares toward their ownership goals, while the rest of our independent directors meet our share ownership guidelines. Our four newer Board members (Mr. Leathes, who joined the Board in May 2013; Ms. Omura, who joined the Board in May 2014; and Messrs. Jones and Kreczko, who joined the Board in August 2015) are accumulating Common Shares toward their ownership goals.

In addition to the annual retainer described above:

Thenon-executive Chairman Chair of the Board receives an annual retainer of $225,000 in recognition of the strategic role he plays and the time commitment involved.

The ChairmanChair of the Board has elected not to receive any fees for serving as a member or chair of a board committee.

The chair of each committee of the Audit Committee,Board other than the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Finance Committee and the Risk OversightExecutive Committee receives an additional $30,000 annual retainer.

Members, other than the chairmanchair of the committee, or the Chairmanof each committee of the Board of each ofother than the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Finance Committee and the Risk OversightExecutive Committee receive an additional $15,000 annual retainer.

The Company generally will not pay a fee for attendance at Board or committee meetings, although the ChairmanChair of the Board has the discretion to pay attendance fees of $2,000 for extraordinary or special meetings. There were no extraordinary or special meetings of the Board in 2018.2021. We do not pay a fee for being a member, or attending meetings, of the Executive Committee.

In 2021, our Nominating and Governance Committee engaged FW Cook to conduct a comprehensive review and assessment of our independent director compensation program. FW Cook reviews this program periodically. FW Cook evaluated our director compensation by comparing it against the compensation awarded to directors of companies in our executive compensation comparison group as constituted by FW Cook in 2020, and which we refer to as the 2020 executive compensation comparison group. FW Cook also looked at a broader market segment using data from FW Cook’s 2020 Director Compensation Report, the most recent year for which
7

Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



such information was available. FW Cook found that the structure of our director compensation program was generally consistent with peer 2020 executive compensation comparison group policy and best practice design as recognized by the proxy advisory firms and investors, noting:
the absence of meeting fees to simplify program administration and avoid the implication that there is additional pay for meeting attendance, which is an expected part of Board service
the use of committee member retainers to differentiate compensation among directors based on workload
the vesting of annual restricted stock awards over a one-year period, which protects against the possibility of director entrenchment
the payment of additional retainers to the board and committee leadership to recognize the additional responsibilities and time commitment associated with these roles
our limited benefits (we provide a Company match of up to $15,000 per director for contributions to charitable organizations of the director’s choice)
a meaningful and robust stock ownership guideline
No changes were made to our independent director compensation program in 2021, 2020 or 2019.
FW Cook found in 2021 that the aggregate cost of our independent director compensation program approximates the 75th percentile of our 2020 executive compensation comparison group. FW Cook also found that, before considering the instances where our directors have chosen to receive a portion of their cash compensation in our common shares, our total per director compensation has a somewhat heavier weighting on cash compensation than that of our 2020 executive compensation comparison group.
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
The following table sets forth our 20182021 independent director compensation, including the compensation for the directors’ committee assignments as of such date.

     
  Name    Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash
     Stock
Awards
(1)
     All Other
Compensation
(2)
     Total 

 

  Francisco L. Borges(3)

 

    

 

 

 

 

$345,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$17,552

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

507,552

 

 

 

 

 

  G. Lawrence Buhl

 

    

 

 

 

 

$165,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$24,326

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

334,326

 

 

 

 

 

  Bonnie L. Howard

 

    

 

 

 

 

$165,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$20,782

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

330,782

 

 

 

 

 

  Thomas W. Jones

 

    

 

 

 

 

$150,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$25,569

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

320,569

 

 

 

 

 

  Patrick W. Kenny(4)

 

    

 

 

 

 

$165,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$22,331

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

332,331

 

 

 

 

 

  Alan J. Kreczko(5)

 

    

 

 

 

 

$150,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$26,101

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

321,101

 

 

 

 

 

  Simon W. Leathes(6)

 

    

 

 

 

 

$239,321

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

     

 

$  1,531

 

 

 

    $

 

 

385,852

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Michael T. O’Kane

 

    

 

 

 

 

$165,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$15,861

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

325,861

 

 

 

 

 

  Yukiko Omura

 

    

 

 

 

 

$150,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$145,000

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

$

 

 

295,000

 

 

 

 

(1)

Represents grant date fair value, rounded to the nearest $1,000.

(2)

Other compensation consists of matching gift donations to eligible charities paid in 2018 or paid in early 2019 for donations made in 2018, reimbursement of business-related spousal travel paid in 2018, U.K. personal tax return preparation fees paid in 2018 or paid in early 2019 for services performed in 2018, and personal use of the corporate apartment during 2018.

(3)

Mr. Borges agreed to forgo an additional fee as the Chairman of the Nominating and Governance Committee due to the substantial overlap between that position and his position as the Chairman of the Board. Mr. Borges elected to receive the entire cash component of his compensation as restricted stock.

(4)

Mr. Kenny elected to receive $40,000 of the cash component of his compensation as restricted stock and the remaining $125,000 in cash.

(5)

Mr. Kreczko elected to receive the entire cash component of his compensation as restricted stock.

(6)

The fees for Mr. Leathes include £55,000 (which was approximately $70,181 as of December 31, 2018) for serving as an independent director of our U.K. insurance subsidiaries, Assured Guaranty (UK) plc and Assured Guaranty (Europe) plc. Following the acquisition of Assured Guaranty (London) plc, Mr. Leathes was asked to serve on the post-acquisition Board of Directors of that company and, as an independent director of all three of our former U.K. insurance subsidiaries, to review and approve matters related to the combination of our three U.K. insurance subsidiaries and our French subsidiary CIFG Europe S.A. The combination was successfully consummated in November 2018. The fees for Mr. Leathes also include £15,000 (which was approximately $19,140 as of December 31, 2018) to compensate him for the additional time commitment required during the calendar year related to the combination.

  NameFees Earned or
Paid in Cash
Stock
Awards(1)
All Other
Compensation(2)
Total
  Francisco L. Borges(3)
$345,000$145,000$12,707$502,707
  G. Lawrence Buhl$165,000$145,000$16,760$326,760
  Bonnie L. Howard$180,000$145,000$16,760$341,760
  Thomas W. Jones$180,000$145,000$16,760$341,760
  Patrick W. Kenny(4)
$150,000$145,000$16,957$311,957
  Alan J. Kreczko(5)
$180,000$145,000$16,760$341,760
  Simon W. Leathes(6)
$198,840$145,000$7,521$351,361
Michelle McCloskey(7)
$150,000$145,000— $295,000
  Michael T. O’Kane$180,000$145,000$12,707$337,707
Yukiko Omura$165,000$145,000— $310,000
Lorin P.T. Radtke$150,000$145,000$10,000$305,000
Courtney C. Shea$150,000$145,000$15,000$310,000
(1)    Represents grant date fair value, rounded to the nearest $1,000.
(2)    Other compensation consists of matching gift donations to eligible charities paid in 2021 or paid in early 2022 for donations made in 2021 and U.K. personal tax return preparation fees paid in 2021 or paid in early 2022 for services performed in 2021.
(3)    Mr. Borges agreed to forgo an additional fee as the Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee due to the substantial overlap between that position and his position as the Chair of the Board. Mr. Borges also agreed to forgo additional fees for his work on executive compensation in conjunction with the Compensation Committee. Mr. Borges elected to receive the entire cash component of his compensation as restricted stock.
(4)    Mr. Kenny elected to receive $30,000 of the cash component of his compensation as restricted stock and the remaining $120,000 in cash.
(5)    Mr. Kreczko elected to receive the entire cash component of his compensation as restricted stock.
(6)    The fees for Mr. Leathes include £25,000 for service in 2020 as an independent director of Assured Guaranty UK Limited, our U.K. insurance subsidiary. Mr. Leathes retired from such board in December 2020. As of December 31, 2021, £25,000 was approximately $33,840.
(7)    Ms. McCloskey elected to receive $5,000 of the cash component of her compensation as restricted stock and the remaining $145,000 in cash.
8 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The following table shows information related to independent director equity awards outstanding on December 31, 2018:

   
  Name    Unvested
Restricted
Stock
(1)
     Vested
Stock Options  
 

 

  Francisco L. Borges

 

    

 

 

 

 

13,780

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

7,658

 

 

 

 

 

  G. Lawrence Buhl

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

7,026

 

 

 

 

 

  Bonnie L. Howard

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Thomas W. Jones

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Patrick W. Kenny

 

    

 

 

 

 

5,202

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

9,261

 

 

 

 

 

  Alan J. Kreczko

 

    

 

 

 

 

8,296

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Simon W. Leathes

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Michael T. O’Kane

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

7,026

 

 

 

 

 

  Yukiko Omura

 

    

 

 

 

 

4,078

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021:
(1)

Vests one day prior to the 2019 Annual General Meeting.

  Name
Unvested
Restricted
Stock(1)
Francisco L. Borges9,544
G. Lawrence Buhl2,824
Bonnie L. Howard2,824
Thomas W. Jones2,824
Patrick W. Kenny3,409
Alan J. Kreczko6,330
Simon W. Leathes2,824
Michelle McCloskey2,922
Michael T. O’Kane2,824
Yukiko Omura2,824
Lorin P.T. Radtke2,824
Courtney C. Shea2,824

8


(1)    Vests one day prior to the 2022 Annual General Meeting.

WHAT IS OUR BOARD LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE?

Our current ChairmanChair of the Board is Francisco L. Borges. The position of CEO is held by Dominic Frederico.

While theour Board has no fixed policy with respect to combining or separating the offices of ChairmanChair of the Board and CEO, those two positions have been held by separate individuals since our 2004 initial public offering. We believe this is the appropriate leadership structure for us at this time. Mr. Borges and Mr. Frederico have had an excellent working relationship, which has continued to permit Mr. Frederico to focus on running our business and Mr. Borges to focus on Board matters, including oversight of our management. Mr. Borges and Mr. Frederico collaborate on setting agendas for Board meetings to be sure that the Board discusses the topics necessary for its oversight of the management and affairs of our Company. As ChairmanChair of the Board, Mr. Borges sets the final Board agenda and chairs Board meetings, including executive sessions at which neither our CEO nor any other member of management is present. The ChairmanChair of the Board also chairs our Annual General Meetings.

HOW DOES THE BOARD OVERSEE RISK?

The

Our Board’s role in risk oversight is consistent with our leadership structure, with our CEO and other members of our senior managementleadership team having responsibility for assessing and managing risk exposure and the Board and its committees providing oversight in connection with these activities. Our Company’s policies and procedures relating to risk assessment and risk management are overseen by our Board. TheOur Board takesemploys an enterprise-wide approach to risk management that is designed to supportsupports our Company’s business plans at a reasonable level of risk. A fundamental part of riskRisk assessment and risk management is not only understanding the risks a company faces and what steps management is taking to manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is appropriate for us. Thethat company. Our Board annually approves our business plan, factoring risk management into account.account, and also approves our Company’s risk appetite statement, which articulates our Company’s tolerance for risk and describes the general types of risk that our Company accepts or attempts to avoid. The involvement of theour Board in setting our business strategy is a key part of its assessment of management’s risk tolerance and also a determination of what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for us.

While theour Board of Directors has the ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, various committees of theour Board also have responsibility for risk assessment and risk management. As discussed under “Committees of the Board,” theour Board has created a Risk Oversight Committee that oversees the standards, controls, limits, underwriting guidelines and policies that our Company establishes and implements in respect of credit underwriting and risk management. It focuses on management’s assessment and management of both (i) credit risks and (ii) other enterprise risks, including, but not limited to, market, financial, legal and operational risks (including cybersecurity and data privacy risks), and risks relating to our reputation and ethical standards. Our Risk Oversight Committee and Board pay particular attention to credit risks we assume when we issue financial guaranties or engage in strategic transactions.transactions and to risks related to our asset management segment. In addition, the Audit Committee of theour Board of Directors is responsible for, among other matters, reviewing policies and processes related to the evaluation of risk assessment and risk management, including our major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. It also oversees cybersecurity and data privacy risks and reviews compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. The Finance Committee of theour Board of Directors oversees the investment of theour Company’s investment portfolio (including alternative investments)
9 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


and theour Company’s capital structure, financing arrangements, rating agency matters, and any corporate development activities in support of theour Company’s financial plan. The Nominating and Governance Committee of theour Board of Directors oversees risk at theour Company by developing appropriate corporate governance guidelines and identifying qualified individuals to become board members. The NominatingEnvironmental and GovernanceSocial Responsibility Committee oversees risks related to the environment, sustainability and social responsibility, and governance, while each of theour other Board committees have responsibility for risk assessment of such risks to the extent within their purview.

As part of its oversight of executive compensation, theour Compensation Committee reviews compensation risk. TheOur Compensation Committee oversaw the performance of a risk assessment of our employee compensation program to determine whether any of the risks arising from our compensation program are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on us. Since January 2011, theour Compensation Committee has retained FW Cook to perform an annual review of each of our compensation plans and identify areas of risk and the extent of such risk. TheOur Compensation Committee directs that our Chief Risk Officer work with FW Cook to perform such risk assessment and to be sure that compensation risk is included in our enterprise risk management system. In conducting this assessment, fromtime-to-time, most recently in February 2018, FW Cook performs a comprehensive systemic, qualitative review of all of our incentive compensation programs and reviews its findings with our Chief Risk Officer for completeness and accuracy. FW Cook seeks to identify any general areas of risk or potential for unintended consequences that exist in the design of our compensation programs and to evaluate our incentive plans relative to our enterprise risks to identify potential areas of concern, if any.

FW Cook undertook aupdates its compensation risk assessment updateannually, and did so most recently in February 20192022, taking into account the changes the Compensation Committee made in connection with its consideration of incentive compensation for the 2021 performance year, which changes included amendments to our recoupment policy and implementation of compensation arrangements for certain teams at Assured Investment Management, which we refer to as AssuredIM. FW Cook concluded that our incentive plans including the changes we made for 2019, are well-aligned with sound compensation design principles and do not encourage behaviors that would create material risk for our Company. Our Chief Risk Officer reviewed their findings and agreed with their conclusion. Based on this update, theour Compensation Committee continued to find that there is an appropriate balance between the risks inherent in our business and our compensation program.

9


COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKING AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION

The Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors has responsibility for determining the compensation of our executive officers. None of the members of theour Compensation Committee is a current or former officer or employee of our Company. No executive officer of our Company serves on the compensation committee of any company that employs any member of theour Compensation Committee.

WHAT IS OUR RELATED PERSON TRANSACTIONS APPROVAL POLICY AND WHAT PROCEDURES DO WE USE TO IMPLEMENT IT?

Through our committee charters, we have established review and approval policies for transactions involving our Company and related persons, with theour Nominating and Governance Committee taking the primary approval responsibility for transactions with our executive officers and directors and theour Audit Committee taking the primary approval responsibility for transactions with 5% shareholders. No member of these committees who has an interest in a transaction being reviewed is allowed to participate in any decision regarding any such transaction.

Our Nominating and Governance Committee charter requires the Nominating and Governance Committee to review and approve or disapprove in advance all proposed transactions with executive officers and directors that, if entered into, would be required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404 ofRegulation S-K, the SEC provision which requires disclosure of any related person transaction with our Company that exceeds $120,000 per fiscal year. TheOur Nominating and Governance Committee must also review reports, which our General Counsel provides periodically, and not less often than annually, regarding transactions with executive officers and directors (other than compensation) that have resulted, or could result, in expenditures thateven if they are not required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404 ofRegulation S-K.

Our Audit Committee charter requires our Audit Committee to review and approve or disapprove all proposed transactions, prior to such transactions, with any person owning more than 5% of any class of our voting securities that, if entered into, would be required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404 ofRegulation S-K. In addition, our Audit Committee charter requires theour Audit Committee to review reports regarding such transactions, which our General Counsel provides to theour Audit Committee periodically, and not less often than annually, regarding transactions with any persons owning more than 5% of any class of the voting securities of AGL that have resulted, or could result, in expenditures thateven if they are not required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404 ofRegulation S-K. Our Audit Committee charter also requires the Audit Committee to review other reports and disclosures of insider and affiliated party transactions which our General Counsel provides periodically, and not less often than annually.


10 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Our General Counsel identifies related person transactions requiring committee review pursuant to our committee charters from transactions that are:

disclosed in director and officer questionnaires (which must also be completed by nominees for director) or in certifications of Global Code of ConductEthics compliance

reported directly by the related person or by another employee of our Company

identified by our vendor management procedures and matching gift procedures based on comparison of vendors and matching gift recipients against a list of directors, executive officers and known 5% shareholders and certain of their related persons

If we have a related person transaction that requires committee approval in accordance with the policies set forth in our committee charters, we either seek that approval before we enter into the transaction or, if that timing is not practical, we ask the appropriate committee to ratify the transaction.

WHAT RELATED PERSON TRANSACTIONS DO WE HAVE?

From time to time, institutional investors, such as large investment management firms, mutual fund management organizations and other financial organizations become beneficial owners (through aggregation of holdings of their affiliates) of 5% or more of a class of our voting securities and, as a result, are considered “related persons” under the SEC’s rules. These organizations may provide services to us. In 2018,2021, the following transactions occurred with investors who reported beneficial ownership of 5% or more of our voting securities.

As indicated in “Which Shareholders Own More Than 5% of Our Common Shares,” Wellington Management Group LLP and its affiliates, which we refer to as Wellington Management, and BlackRock, Inc., and its affiliates, which we refer to as BlackRock, own approximately 9.86%9.8% and 7.21%13.8% of AGL’sour Common Shares outstanding, respectively, as of March 14, 201911, 2022 (the record date for our Annual General Meeting), based on the amount of Common Shares they reported in their Schedule 13G filings as of the date set forth in such filing, and on the amount of our Common Shares outstanding as of the record date. We appointed both Wellington Management and BlackRock as an investment managersmanager to manage certain of our investment accounts prior to theirit reaching such ownership thresholds. As of December 31, 2018,

10


2021, Wellington Management managed approximately $2.2$2.7 billion of our investment assets, which is approximately 20% of our total fixed maturity and short-term investment portfolio, and BlackRock managed approximately $1.8 billion of our investment assets, which is approximately 17%29% of our total fixed maturity and short-term investment portfolio. In 2018,2021, we incurred expenses of approximately $1.7$1.9 million related to our investment management agreement with Wellington ManagementManagement. BlackRock supplies our investment reporting module, and $2.1 millionin 2021 we incurred expenses of approximately $497,000 with respect to that module.

From time to time, certain officers, directors, employees, their family members and related charitable foundations, some of whom may be “related persons” under the SEC’s rules, may make investments in various private funds, vehicles or accounts managed by our investmentCompany. These investments are available to those of our Company’s employees whom we have determined to have a status that reasonably permits us to offer them these types of investments in compliance with applicable laws. Generally, these investments are not subject to the management fees and investment reporting agreements with BlackRock.

DID OUR INSIDERS COMPLY WITHperformance allocations or incentive fees charged to other investors.

DELINQUENT SECTION 16(A) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING IN 2018?

16(a) REPORTS

Our executive officers and directors are subject to the reporting requirements of Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which we refer to as the Exchange Act. We believe that all of our executive officers and directors complied with all filing requirements imposed by Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act on a timely basis during fiscal year 2018.

2021.

11

Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement




HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
We recognize that our workforce, as a key driver of our long-term performance, is among our most valued assets. During this critical period in our history, as we seek to accomplish a multi-year transformation into a diversified financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty insurance and asset management, and as the global community continues to battle an ongoing health crisis, the contributions and well-being of our people are essential to our success.
As a result, our key human capital management objectives are to attract and retain a diverse group of the highest quality employees, including talented and experienced business leaders who drive our corporate strategies and build long-term shareholder value. To promote these objectives, our human capital management programs are designed to reward and support employees with competitive compensation and benefit packages in each of our locations around the globe, and with professional development opportunities to cultivate talented employees and prepare them for critical roles and future leadership positions.
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS
Our compensation program is designed to attract, retain and motivate talented individuals and to recognize and reward outstanding achievement. The components of our program consist of base salary and may include incentive compensation in the form of an annual cash incentive and deferred compensation in the form of cash and/or equity (including, in the case of certain of our asset management professionals, an entitlement to a portion of carried interest allocated to the general partners of certain of the funds we manage). We believe that a compensation program with both short-term and long-term awards provides fair and competitive compensation and aligns the interests of employees and investors. We also offer employees benefits such as life and health (medical, dental and vision) insurance, retirement savings plans, an employee stock purchase plan, paid time off, paid family leave, an employee assistance program, commuter benefits, tuition reimbursement, reimbursement of expenses for infertility treatments and adoption, emergency backup child, elder and pet care, reimbursement of health club fees, online classes for children, and corporate matches of an employee’s charitable contributions.
CULTURE
We seek to foster and maintain strong ethical standards and a reputation as a business that conducts itself professionally and with a high degree of integrity. In addition, we work to provide and support a respectful and inclusive environment that values the abilities of each employee, leading to enhanced engagement and improved retention. Education and awareness are critical components in promoting our cultural values across the organization. Upon onboarding and annually, all employees are required to complete training in our Global Code of Ethics as well as our policies on the prevention of sexual harassment and discrimination. We also provide additional targeted training and guidance to specific personnel regarding anti-fraud and anti-bribery and anti-corruption related matters.
Transparency towards stakeholders, including shareholders, policyholders, investors and employees, is another hallmark of our culture. For example, each quarter after we issue our financial results, in addition to meeting with shareholders and policyholders, our CEO and our Chief Financial Officer hold a town-hall style meeting for all employees where they provide an update on our performance and strategy, acknowledge contributions made by employees to the continued success of our business and answer questions.
EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES
We invest in the professional development of our workforce. To support the advancement of our employees, we endeavor to strengthen their qualifications by providing equitable access to training, including in leadership, management and effective communication skills, and mentoring opportunities, as well as tuition reimbursement assistance. We also provide opportunities for qualified employees to work abroad in another of our offices. As discussed below, in late 2021, we launched a formal one-on-one mentoring program to provide an additional learning resource for our employees.
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION
Diversity has long been an important consideration for us. We are committed to building and sustaining at all levels of the organization a diverse workforce that is representative of our communities, in a manner consistent with our business needs, scale and resources, and creating an inclusive culture and workplace that embraces the differences within our staff and effectively utilizes the many and varied talents of our employees.
12 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The composition of our Board reflects our long-standing commitment to diversity. Our Board has been racially and ethnically diverse for well over 15 years. We have had at least one woman serving on our Board for over ten years, and currently have four women serving on our Board.
Our Board recognizes the importance of diversity and inclusion issues to our stakeholders and, in May 2019, established a dedicated Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee to assist the Board in providing oversight of our policies and practices regarding diversity and inclusion issues that affect our business, stakeholders and long-term strategy. The Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee reviews information about our diversity and inclusion initiatives, workforce composition, turnover and other relevant data.
We formed an employee-led Diversity and Inclusion Committee, composed of employees with different backgrounds, points of view, levels of seniority and tenure with us, to provide input into our policies and strategies for achieving a diverse workforce and an inclusive culture. Our employee-led Diversity and Inclusion Committee has played a key role in recommending and working to implement strategies and initiatives, such as the mentoring program and employee resource groups described below.
Our Diversity and Inclusion Policy articulates our commitment to building and sustaining a diverse workforce at all levels of our company and creating an inclusive culture and guides our approaches for achieving these goals. You can find our Diversity and Inclusion Policy on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance.
During 2021, we continued to expand and enhance our existing diversity and inclusion initiatives by adding several new programs:
EMPLOYEE RESOURCE GROUPS. Based on employee feedback, we launched employee resource groups for African Americans, women and working parents to create community, build awareness and encourage employees to engage with and support one another. The employee resource groups began meeting in late 2021.
MENTORING. Our collegial and collaborative culture fosters informal mentoring and learning. In late 2021, we launched a formal one-on-one mentoring program to provide an additional learning resource for our employees, to facilitate the onboarding of new recruits, and to reinforce connectedness – especially during periods of remote work and also as we transition to the hybrid work schedule discussed below. The pilot program was offered to all employees across all of our offices. We engaged an outside consultant to provide workshops for both mentors and mentees.
BIAS AWARENESS TRAINING. As an equal opportunity employer, we have policies that prohibit unlawful discrimination, harassment and other forms of explicit bias. To address implicit bias, we provided bias awareness training for all of our employees in the spring of 2021 on how to identify and interrupt unconscious bias and the role each employee can play to promote diversity, equity and inclusion.
TALENT PIPELINE. We added a number of talent acquisition strategies to our recruiting practices in an effort to deliberately reach and attract a diverse and qualified applicant pool. In addition, through our philanthropy efforts, we invest in organizations that work to create a pipeline of diverse and qualified candidates.
We have taken several other steps to demonstrate our organizational commitment to diversity and inclusion. Recently, our CEO signed the CEO Action for Diversity and Inclusion Pledge, the largest CEO-driven business commitment to advance diversity and inclusion in the workplace. In addition, to incentivize and hold senior management accountable, we include environmental and social responsibility objectives (including with respect to diversity and inclusion) in our executive compensation structure.
COVID-19 RESPONSE AND HYBRID WORK
As the worldwide health crisis enters its third year, we continue to navigate through an unprecedented time. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have prioritized safety and adaptability. At the start of the global pandemic, we initiated our business continuity protocols and instructed our employees to work from home, placing an emphasis on the well-being of our employees and their families. Our investments in technology and the regular testing of our business continuity plan allowed us to quickly shift to remote work. Throughout the pandemic, we have encouraged frequent communications and the use of virtual meeting platforms to keep our teams connected and support our employees as they work from home.
The success of remote work, both at our company and across the broader labor market, sparked a collective re-evaluation of the nature of office work. In 2020, at the start of the COVID-19 remote work experience, and again in late 2021 in preparation for a return to the office, we surveyed our employees to better understand their needs and concerns. We also observed industry trends and peer practices. We used this information to craft a viable and sustainable remote work policy. Currently, we offer employees the option to work remotely for a portion of their time – both as a convenience to employees and to remain competitive as an employer.
In preparation for the return of employees to our office, we took a number of measures to provide for the safety and security of our personnel while at the office and continue to monitor and implement guidance provided by local governments in the jurisdictions where we maintain offices.

13 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Our commitment to environmental and social responsibility starts at the top of our organization. Our Board of Directors recognizes the importance of environmental and social issues to its stakeholders and, in May 2019, established a dedicated Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee to assist the Board in providing oversight of our company’s policies and practices regarding environmental and social responsibility issues that affect our business, stakeholders and long-term strategy. The Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee focuses on a number of subject areas, including environmental risk, particularly climate change related risks, and aspects of human capital management, such as diversity and inclusion, and training and development. Governance matters remain the responsibility of the Nominating and Governance Committee and Compensation Committee.
FINANCIAL GUARANTY — UNDERWRITING AND INVESTMENT
We consider climate-related risk and material environmental, social and governance factors, which we refer to as ESG factors, in managing both our insured and investment portfolios.
In our insured portfolio, we assess environmental and climate-related risks in our financial guaranty business by requiring that credit underwriting submissions include consideration of environmental and climate-related factors as part of the analysis. Vulnerability to significant or unmitigated exposure to physical risks, such as the increased severity, frequency or duration of weather events or rising sea levels, or the emergence of transition risks, are considered alongside other relevant risk factors to determine if such environmental issues materially impact an obligor’s expected performance. Surveillance review protocol for our insurance portfolio includes a variety of parameters and criteria along with the consideration of environmental risk factors, such as exposure to extreme weather events, geographic locations prone to flooding or wildfires, and compliance with environmental requirements for their potential impact on debt service payments.
In our investment portfolio, we incorporate material ESG information into the investment analysis in order to enhance the investment decisions required to achieve our principal investment objectives. Our portfolio managers rely on their respective ESG corporate philosophy statements and use ESG information, along with a variety of other economic factors, including risk and valuation metrics, when conducting research and due diligence on new investments, and again when monitoring investments for Assured Guaranty’s investment portfolio. On an annual basis, we instruct our two primary external portfolio managers to conduct an ESG analysis of their respective portions of our investment portfolio, to the extent to which ESG data is readily available, for us to analyze if there are any material ESG risks in the portfolio that may adversely impact return expectations.
In addition, we have determined not to make any new investments for our investment portfolio in thermal coal enterprises. As a consequence, we will refrain from making any new investments in (i) thermal coal enterprises that generate 30% or more of their revenue from either the ownership, exploration, mining, or refining of thermal coal, and (ii) corporate and municipally owned utilities that generate 30% or more of their electricity from thermal coal.
ASSET MANAGEMENT
AssuredIM incorporates consideration of ESG issues alongside traditional financial factors such as credit analysis and cash flow in its approach to prudent and responsible investing. AssuredIM views ESG as another factor through which it can examine an investment because it recognizes that ESG risks and opportunities can impact current asset value as well as long term investment performance. The manner and degree in which AssuredIM’s investment professionals integrate ESG issues into the investment decision making process depend upon multiple factors, including investment strategy, portfolio construction, asset class, sector, region, investment time horizon, available data, and investor objectives.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL POLICIES
We have adopted, and periodically review and update, our Environmental Policy, Statement on Climate Change, and Human Rights Statement that evidence our good corporate citizenship and express our commitments to conduct business in a sustainable and responsible manner in respect of people and the planet. These policies may be found on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance.

14 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
As a financial services firm with approximately 400 employees, the direct impact of our operations on the environment is relatively small. Nevertheless, we contribute to the global effort to combat climate change by monitoring our greenhouse gas emissions, which we refer to as GHG emissions. In 2019, we instituted a program to measure, manage and report our GHG emissions on an enterprise-wide basis and set targets for emissions reductions. Pursuant to the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, we conduct internal data collection and analysis annually for its Scope 1, Scope 2 and certain key Scope 3 GHG emissions. In 2020, our total GHG emissions equaled approximately 2,762.1 total tonnes of CO2e. Our methodology and results are reviewed periodically by an independent third party, which conducts a limited assurance review in accordance with ISO 14064-3 International Standards.
CORPORATE PHILANTHROPY
Giving is an integral part of our corporate culture. We contribute generously to a broad range of causes through direct donations, matching gifts, and corporate sponsorships. Our Corporate Philanthropy Committee, formed in 2020 and composed of volunteer employees, provides our workforce the opportunity to direct philanthropic efforts by selecting charity partners and sourcing employee volunteer activities.
In 2021, we expanded our direct donations program by allocating incremental funds to support the development of targeted strategic partnerships and made $200,000 in contributions to three organizations that work to improve access to education for New York City’s underserved populations. In response to the pattern of threats and violence targeted at Asian American and Pacific Islander communities during 2021, we made an aggregate of $100,000 in contributions to four organizations that work to address this issue across the country. We also expanded the scope of our corporate donations to further align with our vision and values which included a program to support veterans and our first ever contribution to support sustainable and local agriculture. Also, despite the pandemic, we participated in several company sponsored events, including a coat drive and a return to school backpack distribution event, which totaled 240 hours of employee volunteer time. Furthermore, we implemented an employee paid leave program which allows each employee 8 hours per annum to participate in volunteer activities.
We match employee and director gifts to eligible charitable institutions in amounts up to $15,000 each year per individual. In 2021, we provided matching gifts to approximately 250 organizations that are important to our employees and directors.
15 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



INFORMATION ABOUT OUR COMMON SHARE OWNERSHIP
HOW MUCH STOCK IS OWNED BY DIRECTORS, NOMINEES AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS?
The following table sets forth information, as of March 11, 2022, the record date for our Annual General Meeting, regarding the beneficial ownership of our Common Shares by our directors, nominees and executive officers whose compensation is reported in the compensation tables that appear later in this proxy statement, which persons we refer to as our named executive officers, and by the group comprising our directors, nominees and those persons who, as of December 31, 2021, constituted our named executive officers and other executive officers. Unless otherwise indicated, the named individual has sole voting and investment power over the Common Shares under the column “Common Shares Beneficially Owned.” The Common Shares listed for each director, nominee and executive officer constitute less than 1% of our outstanding Common Shares, except that Mr. Frederico beneficially owns approximately 2.33% of our Common Shares. The Common Shares beneficially owned by all directors, nominees, named executive officers and other executive officers as a group, including the unvested restricted Common Shares, constitute approximately 4.51% of our outstanding Common Shares.
Name of Beneficial OwnerCommon
Shares
Beneficially
Owned
Unvested
Restricted
Common
Shares(1)
Restricted
Share Units(2)
Robert A. Bailenson211,086 — 152,388 
Francisco L. Borges268,746 9,544 — 
Russell B. Brewer II(3)
196,632 — 88,355 
G. Lawrence Buhl45,580 2,824 — 
David A. Buzen81,023 — 62,661 
Ling Chow77,396 — 86,304 
Dominic J. Frederico(4)
1,528,494 — 510,171 
Bonnie L. Howard36,650 2,824 — 
Thomas W. Jones36,554 2,824 — 
Patrick W. Kenny72,874 3,409 — 
Alan J. Kreczko45,868 6,330 — 
Simon W. Leathes21,167 2,824 — 
Michelle McCloskey— 2,922 — 
Michael T. O’Kane65,491 2,824 — 
Yukiko Omura16,667 2,824 — 
Lorin P.T. Radtke— 2,824 — 
Courtney C. Shea— 2,824 — 
 
All directors, nominees and executive officers
as a group (20 individuals)(5)
2,918,76644,7971,033,681
(1)    The reporting person has the right to vote (but not dispose of) the Common Shares listed under “Unvested Restricted Common Shares.”
(2)    The Common Shares associated with restricted share units are not deliverable as of March 11, 2022, or within 60 days of March 11, 2022, and therefore cannot be voted or disposed of within such time period. As a result, these shares are not considered beneficially owned under SEC rules. We include them in the table above, however, because we view them as an integral part of share ownership by our executive officers. The restricted share units held by our executive officers vest on specified anniversaries of the date of the award, with Common Shares delivered upon vesting.
        This column includes 37,907 share units allocated to Mr. Bailenson and 28,872 share units allocated to another executive officer, due to their elections to invest a portion of their AG US Group Services Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan accounts in an employer stock fund.
(3)    Mr. Brewer resigned as an executive officer of AGL, effective December 31, 2021, in accordance with the terms of a separation agreement described under "Compensation Discussion and Analysis--Separation Agreement."
16 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


(4)    Common Shares beneficially owned by Mr. Frederico include shares owned by Mr. Frederico’s spouse and daughter, and shares owned by a family trust, over which Mr. Frederico has the power to direct the voting and disposition. Common Shares beneficially owned by Mr. Frederico also include 300,000 shares he pledged in accordance with our stock trading policy.
(5)    Giving effect to the resignation of Mr. Brewer as an executive officer of AGL as of December 31, 2021, as well as other changes to the executive officers of AGL in early 2022, as of March 11, 2022, for all directors and executive officers as a group (19 individuals), the total Common Shares beneficially owned was 2,722,134, the total unvested restricted Common Shares was 44,797, and the total restricted share units was 945,326.
WHICH SHAREHOLDERS OWN MORE THAN 5% OF OUR COMMON SHARES?
The following table shows all persons we know to be direct or indirect owners of more than 5% of our Common Shares as of the close of business on March 11, 2022, the record date for the Annual General Meeting. On March 11, 2022, 65,691,443 Common Shares were outstanding, including 44,797 unvested restricted Common Shares. Our information is based on reports filed with the SEC by each of the firms listed in the table below. You may obtain these reports from the SEC.
Name and Address of Beneficial OwnerNumber of Shares
Beneficially Owned
Percent
of Class
BlackRock, Inc.
55 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10055
9,049,844(1)
13.8%
Putnam Investments, LLC
100 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
7,706,196(2)
11.7%
The Vanguard Group
100 Vanguard Blvd.
Malvern, PA 19355
7,517,675(3)
11.4%
Wellington Management Group LLP
c/o Wellington Management Company LLP
280 Congress Street
Boston, MA 02210
6,462,794(4)
9.8%
Dimensional Fund Advisors LP
6300 Bee Cave Road, Building One
Austin, TX 78746
3,997,428(1))
6.1%
(1)    Based on a Schedule 13G/A filed by BlackRock, Inc. on January 28, 2022, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2021. BlackRock, Inc. has sole voting power over 8,806,404 shares and sole dispositive power over 9,049,844 shares
(2)    Based on a Schedule 13G/A filed by Putnam Investments, LLC on February 14, 2022, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2021. Putnam Investments, LLC has sole voting power over 1,936,848 shares and sole dispositive power over 7,706,196 shares.
(3)    Based on a Schedule 13G/A filed by The Vanguard Group on February 9, 2022, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2021. The Vanguard Group has shared voting power over 36,958 shares, sole dispositive power over 7,419,772 shares and shared dispositive power 97,903 shares.
(4)    Based on a Schedule 13G/A filed by Wellington Management Group LLP on February 4, 2022, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2021. Wellington Management Group LLP has shared voting power over 5,788,677 shares and shared dispositive power over 6,462,794 shares.
(5)    Based on a Schedule 13G filed by Dimensional Fund Advisors LP on February 8, 2022, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2021. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP has sole voting power over 3,936,353 shares and sole dispositive power over 3,997,428 shares.

17 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


PROPOSAL NO. 1:ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

OurBye-Laws provide for a maximum of 21 directors and empower our Board of Directors to fix the exact number of directors and appoint persons to fill any vacancies on the Board until the next Annual General Meeting. The Board may appoint any person as a director to fill a vacancy on the Board occurring as the result of any existing director being removed from office pursuant to theBye-Laws or prohibited from being director by law; being or becoming bankrupt or making any arrangement or composition with his or hertheir creditors generally; being or becoming disqualified, of unsound mind, or dying; or resigning. The Board may also appoint a person as a director to fill a vacancy resulting from an increase in the size of the Board or a vacancy left unfilled at an Annual General Meeting.

Our Board currently consists of 10 members.Directors has voted to reduce the Board from 13 to 12 members as of the date of our Annual General Meeting this year. Following the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee, our Board of Directors has nominated Francisco L. Borges, G. Lawrence Buhl, Dominic J. Frederico, Bonnie L. Howard, Thomas W. Jones, Patrick W. Kenny, Alan J. Kreczko, Simon W. Leathes, Michael T. O’KaneMichelle McCloskey, Yukiko Omura, Lorin P.T. Radtke, and Yukiko OmuraCourtney C. Shea as directors of AGL. Proposal No. 1 is Item 1 on the proxy card.

Our directors are elected annually to serve until their respective successors shall have been elected.

image_47.jpg
  The board of directors recommends that you vote “FOR”
the election of the nominees as directors of AGL.

It is the intention of the persons named as proxies, subject to any direction to the contrary, to vote in favor of the candidates nominated by the Board of Directors. We know of no reason why any nominee may be unable to serve as a director. If any nominee is unable to serve, your proxy may vote for another nominee proposed by the Board, or the Board may reduce the number of directors to be elected.

We have set forth below information with respect to the nominees for election as directors.

There are no arrangements or understandings between any director and any other person pursuant to which any director was or is selected as a director or nominee.

12

18 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


OUR DIVERSE BOARD
Election of the current nominees will result in our Board of Directors being composed of individuals with diverse backgrounds and experience, and will result in a Board of Directors that is, as a group, diverse by gender, race or ethnicity, age, and tenure.
GENDER DIVERSITYRACIAL OR ETHNIC DIVERSITY
chart-e36b44c2b66e423ab79.jpgchart-84a36db4ab964356971.jpg
nWomennAsian
nMennBlack or African American
nWhite
AGE DIVERSITYDIRECTOR TENURE
9.4 Years
Average Tenure
chart-659a1ae45e464c588b1.jpgchart-47476728983946e5b61.jpg
n<65n<6
n65-70n6-10
n>70n11+
19 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


OUR DIRECTORS’ SKILLS
Summary information about our director nominees and overall composition oftheir skills relevant to serving on our Board is provided in the matrix and graphs below. Further information about each director nominee may be found on the seven pages following pages.

LOGO

*

In the case of persons who are not currently serving on the Audit Committee, the individual is likely to be qualified to be an audit committee financial expert based on their experience, but was not designated as such by the Board of Directors this year.

this one.
BorgesBuhlFredericoHowardJonesKennyKreczkoLeathesMcCloskeyOmuraRadtkeShea
Financial Guaranty Industryüüüüüüüüü
U.S. Public Financeüüüü
Non - U.S. Financeüü
Infrastructure Financeüüüüü
Audit and Internal Controlüüüüüüüüüü
Government Serviceüüüü
Financial Reportingüüüüüüüüüü
Investment Managementüüüüüüüüüü
Legal and Complianceüüüüüüü
Insurance Industryüüüüüüü
Bankingüüüü
Corporate Governanceüüüüüüüüüüü
Risk Managementüüüüüüüüüüü
Enterprise Risk Managementüüüüüüü
Cybersecurity and Data Privacyüüüüüü
Human Capital Managementüüüüüü
Environmental and
Climate Change
üü üü
Audit Com. Financial Expert*üüNAüüüüü
Independentüüüüüüüüüüü
Director Since200720042004201220152004201520132021201420212021
Age707569687279707460665361



*    In the case of persons who are not currently serving on the Audit Committee, the individual is likely to be qualified to be an audit committee financial expert based on their experience, but was not designated as such by the Board of Directors this year.
20 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR

LOGO
Francisco L. Borges
Chair of the Board
Director Since: 2007
Committee Memberships:
Nominating and Governance  (Chair)
Executive (Chair)
LOGOLOGOLOGO
borges.jpg

13


NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR

Francisco L. Borges

Chairman of the Board

Director Since:2007

Committee Memberships:

    Nominating and Governance (Chair),

    Executive (Chair)

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Borges has expertise in finance arising from his experience structuring and marketing financial guaranty insurance.insurance, and in investment management. In addition, his public service background has given him insight on public finance. His current position gives Mr. Borges insights into the financial markets in which our Company operates.operates and will be particularly useful as our Company expands its asset management business. Each of these areas is important to our business.

Biography:

Mr. Borges, age 67,70, became a director of AGL in August 2007, and has been ChairmanChair of our Board of Directors since May 2015. He is Chairmana partner of Ares Management Corporation (Ares) and Co-Head of Ares Secondary Solutions. Prior to its acquisition by Ares in 2021, Mr. Borges was Chair and Managing Partner of Landmark Partners, LLC, an alternative investment management firm where he has been employed since 1999. Prior to joining Landmark,Previously, Mr. Borges was managing director of GE Capital’s Financial Guaranty Insurance Company and capital markets subsidiaries. Mr. Borges is a former Treasurer for the State of Connecticut and a former Deputy Mayor of the City of Hartford, Connecticut.

Mr. Borges serves onalso chairs the board of directors for Connecticut Public Broadcasting Network,trustees of the Knight Foundation and is a member of the board of trustees for the Millbrook School. He is also a member of the board of directors of Davis Selected Funds, where he serves on the Pricing Committee, and of Hartford Healthcare. On March 28, 2022, and after nine years of service, Mr. Borges will be stepping down from the board of directors of Jefferies Financial Group Inc., where he serves on the Audit Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

G. Lawrence Buhl
Independent Director
Director Since: 2004
Committee Memberships:
Audit
Compensation
Environmental and Social Responsibility
image_26.jpg

G. Lawrence Buhl

Independent Director

Director Since: 2004

Committee Memberships:

    Audit (Chair),

    Compensation

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Buhl’s insurance and Boardboard experience and his knowledge of specific financial reporting requirements applicable to financial guaranty companies and familiarity with compliance, finance, governance, control environment and risk management requirements and processes for public companies and the financial guaranty industry benefit the Board in its deliberations and oversight.

Biography:

Mr. Buhl, age 72,75, became a director of AGL upon completion of our 2004 initial public offering. Through 2003, Mr. Buhl served as the Regional Director for Insurance Services in Ernst & Young LLP’s Philadelphia, New York and Baltimore offices and as audit engagement partner for insurance companies, including those in the financial guaranty industry.

Mr. Buhl began in 2004 to serveserved as a director for Harleysville Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: HGIC) and its majority shareholder, Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company, from 2004 through their 2012 merger/combination with Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and served on an Advisory Board to Nationwide through April 2014. For Penn National Insurance Group in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Mr. Buhl has beenis a member of the Board of Directors of Penn National Insurance Group in Harrisburg, PA since April 2015 and serves on the Audit and Enterprise Risk Oversight Committees. He is also an emeritus member of the Board of Sponsors of the Sellinger School of Business and Management of Loyola University Maryland.


14



21 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Dominic J. Frederico
Chief Executive Officer
Director Since: 2004
Committee Memberships:
Executive
image_27.jpg

Dominic J. Frederico

Chief Executive Officer

Director Since:2004

Committee Memberships:

Executive

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Frederico has the most comprehensive knowledge of all aspects of our operations as well as executive experience. He also has extensive industry experience, which makes him valuable both as an officer and as a director of AGL.

Biography:

Mr. Frederico, age 66,69, has been a director of AGL since our 2004 initial public offering, and the President and Chief Executive Officer of AGL since 2003. During his tenure as President and Chief Executive Officer, our Company became the leading provider of municipal bond insurance and financial guaranties. OurUnder his leadership, our Company completed its 2004 initial public offering under his leadership and, in 2009, acquired the financial guaranty insurance company now named Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., thereby bringing together the only two monoline bond insurers to continue writing financial guaranty policies before, during and after the 2008 financial crisis.

In the following years, he led our acquisition of a number of the remaining legacy financial guaranty insurance companies or their portfolios, expanding our reach, consolidating industry capital and solidifying our position as the leader in the financial guaranty industry. More recently, he is leading our expansion into asset management, which we believe will provide us with a new revenue source, reduce the volatility of our earnings and create another avenue for growth.

Mr. Frederico served as Vice ChairmanChair of ACE Limited (now known as Chubb Limited) from 2003 until 2004 and served as President and Chief Operating Officer of ACE Limited and ChairmanChair of ACE INA Holdings, Inc. from 1999 to 2003. Mr. Frederico was a director of ACE Limited from 2001 through May 2005. From 1995 to 1999, Mr. Frederico served in a number of executive positions with ACE Limited, during which period he oversaw the successful acquisition and integration of the domestic and international property casualty operations acquired by ACE Limited from CIGNA Corporation in July 1999 and the acquisition of Capital Re Corp., the predecessor company to our Company, in December 1999.

Prior to joining ACE Limited, Mr. Frederico spent 13 years working for various subsidiaries of the American International Group. His last position at the group was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of AIG Risk Management.

Mr. Frederico is a member of the Amynta Group advisory board.
Bonnie L. Howard
Independent Director
Director Since: 2012
Committee Memberships:
Audit (Chair)
Compensation
Nominating and Governance
image_28.jpg

Bonnie L. Howard

Independent Director

Director Since:2012

Committee Memberships:

Risk Oversight (Chair),

Nominating and Governance

LOGO

Qualifications:

Ms. Howard’s background in audit, finance and enterprise risk management is valuable to the Board in its oversight of our financial reporting and credit and risk management policies.

Biography:

Ms. Howard, age 65,68, became a director of AGL in August 2012. Ms. Howard has more than 30 years of experience in credit, risk management and financial reporting policies. She worked at Citigroup, Inc. from 2003 to 2011, serving as Chief Auditor from 2004 to 2011 and Global Head of Control and Emerging Risk from 2010 to 2011, leading a team of over 1,500 professionals covering $1.9 trillion of assets in over 100 countries, until her retirement in 2011. She was previously Managing Director of Capital Markets Audit at Fleet Boston Financial and a Managing Director at JPMorgan in the roles of Deputy Auditor and head of Global Markets Operational Risk Management. Ms. Howard is a certified public accountant in the United States and has over a decade of experience with KPMG and Ernst & Young.

Ms. Howard serves on the board of directors of Artisan Partners Funds, where she chairs the Audit Committee. Ms. Howard previously served on the board of directors of BMO Financial Corp., where she was a member of the Audit Committee, and the board of directors of BMO Harris Bank N.A., where she chaired the Directors’ Trust Committee and the Audit Committee, until April 2018.

22 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

15



Thomas W. Jones
Independent Director
Director Since: 2015
Committee Memberships:
    Compensation (Chair)
    Audit
Nominating and Governance
image_29.jpg

Thomas W. Jones

Independent Director

Director Since:2015

Committee Memberships:

    Audit,

    Finance

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Jones’ background has given him extensive experience in investment management and in the operations of large financial institutions, which is valuable to the Board.Board as our Company expands its asset management business. His previous service on the boards of other financial services companies and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York adds value to the Board and Board committee deliberations.

Biography:

Mr. Jones, age 69,72, became a director of AGL in August 2015. Mr. Jones is the founder and senior partner of venture capital firm TWJ Capital LLC. Prior to founding TWJ Capital in 2005, he was the chief executive officer of Global Investment Management at Citigroup, which included Citigroup Asset Management, Citigroup Alternative Investments, Citigroup Private Bank and Travelers Life & Annuity. Earlier, he held a series of positions at TIAA-CREF, including vice chairmanchair and director, president and chief operating officer, and executive vice president and chief financial officer, and at John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, where he rose to senior vice president and treasurer. He began his career in public accounting and management consulting, primarily at Arthur Young & Company (predecessor to Ernst & Young).

Mr. Jones was elected to the board of directors of Jefferies Financial Group, Inc. effective March 28, 2022. A trustee emeritus of Cornell University, Mr. Jones has served on numerous boards in the past, including those of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (where he was vice chairman)chair), Altria Group, Freddie Mac, Travelers Group, Fox Entertainment Group, Pepsi Bottling Group and TIAA-CREF. Mr. Jones has been designated a Board Leadership Fellow by the National Association of Corporate Directors, (NACD), and is a licensed Certified Public Accountant (CPA).

Accountant.


Patrick W. Kenny
Independent Director
Director Since: 2004
Committee Memberships:
Compensation
    Nominating and Governance
    Executive
image_30.jpg

Patrick W. Kenny

Independent Director

Director Since:2004

Committee Memberships:

    Compensation (Chair),

    Nominating and Governance,

    Executive

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Kenny has extensive insurance industry experience, including executive experience within the industry. In addition, the Board benefits from Mr. Kenny’s experience serving as a Board member of several Voya funds as our Company expands its asset management business, as well his experience as an accountant.

Biography:

Mr. Kenny, age 76,79, became a director of AGL upon completion of our 2004 initial public offering. He served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the International Insurance Society in New York, an organization dedicated to fostering the exchange of ideas through a program of international seminars and sponsored research, from 2001 to 2009. From 1998 to 2001, Mr. Kenny served as executive vice president of Frontier Insurance Group, Inc. From 1995 to 1998, Mr. Kenny served as senior vice president of SS&C Technologies. From 1988 to 1994, Mr. Kenny served as Group Executive, Finance & Administration and Chief Financial Officer of Aetna Life & Casualty.

Until December 2018, Mr. Kenny served on the board of directors of several Voya funds, where he was a member of the Audit Committee and the Chairperson of the Nominating and Governance Committee. Until December 2009, Mr. Kenny was a director and member of the Audit and the Compensation committees of Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. Mr. Kenny was also a director of the Independent Order of Foresters from 1997 to 2009.

16


23 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Alan J. Kreczko
Independent Director
Director Since: 2015
Committee Memberships:
Environmental and Social Responsibility (Chair)
Finance
Risk Oversight
image_31.jpg

Alan J. Kreczko

Independent Director

Director Since:2015

Committee Memberships:

Audit,

Finance

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Kreczko’s lengthy service in senior legal and policy positions both in the federal government and in the insurance industry, as well as the global and governmental perspective he has gained, are valuable to the Board.

Mr. Kreczko’s experience chairing The Hartford’s Environment Committee makes him particularly valuable as the chair of our Environmental and Social Responsibility Committee.

Biography:

Mr. Kreczko, age 67,70, became a director of AGL in August 2015. Mr. Kreczko retired from The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., which we refer to as The Hartford, on December 31, 2015, where he served as executive vice president and general counsel from June 2007 until June 2015. In that capacity, Mr. Kreczko oversaw the law department, government affairs, compliance and communications. Additionally, he chaired The Hartford’s Environment Committee. From June 2015 until December 2015, he served as Special Advisor to the CEO.

Chief Executive Officer.

Mr. Kreczko joined The Hartford in 2003 after 27 years in public service at the United States Department of State, where he held various senior positions. As the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and Migration, he led the department’s response to humanitarian crises in conflict situations, including Afghanistan, Timor, and West Africa. Before that, Mr. Kreczko served as special assistant to President Clinton and legal advisor to the National Security Council. Earlier, he participated in sensitive bilateral and multilateral negotiations as deputy general counsel to the Department of State and as legal advisor to the personal representatives for Middle East negotiations of Presidents Carter and Reagan. Mr. Kreczko is on the Chairboard of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Hartford and serves on the board of directors of the Mark Twain House.

Hartford.


Simon W. Leathes
Independent Director
Director Since: 2013
Committee Memberships:
Risk Oversight (Chair)
    Finance
    Executive
image_32.jpg

Simon W. Leathes

Independent Director

Director Since:2013

Committee Memberships:

Compensation,

Risk Oversight,

Executive

LOGO

Qualifications:

Mr. Leathes’ considerable experience in investment and risk management, as well the institutional knowledge gained through his directorship of our Company’s U.K. affiliate, is valuable to the Board and its committees.

Biography:

Mr. Leathes, age 71,74, joined the Board of AGL in May 2013. From 2012 to 2017, Mr. Leathes was anon-executive director of HSBC Bank plc and was a member of its Risk Committee and its Audit Committee; he was also anon-executive director and member of the Audit and Risk Committees of HSBC Trinkaus & Burkhardt AG. In December 2011, he became an independent,non-executive director of our Company’s U.K. insurance subsidiary, Assured Guaranty (Europe) plc.UK Limited. Mr. Leathes also served as an independent,non-executive director of our Company’s two other U.K. insurance subsidiaries: Assured Guaranty (UK) plc and Assured Guaranty (London) plc, until November 7, 2018 when they were consolidated into Assured Guaranty (Europe) plc.UK Limited. After nine years of service, in December 2020 Mr. Leathes retired from the Assured Guaranty UK Limited board in accordance with Prudential Regulatory Authority Guidelines. From 1996 to 2017,2018, Mr. Leathes served as anon-executive director ofHSB-Engineering Insurance Ltd., a U.K. subsidiary of Munich Re, where he was the chairmanchair of the Audit and Finance committee.

Committee.

Mr. Leathes served as Vice ChairmanChair and Managing Director of Barclays Capital, the investment banking subsidiary of Barclays plc, from January 2001 until his retirement in December 2006. In addition, he served from 2001 to 2010 as anon-executive director of Kier Group plc, a company listed on the London Stock Exchange, where he also served as chairmanchair of the Audit Committee and a member of the Remuneration and Nominations committees. Until June 2014, Mr. Leathes served as the chairmanchair of the trustees of the Kier Group Pension Scheme.


17

24 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Michael T. O’Kane

Michelle McCloskey
Independent Director

Director Since:2005

2021

Committee Memberships:

Finance (Chair),

Audit

Environmental and Social Responsibility
LOGO
image_33.jpg

Qualifications:

Mr. O’Kane’s background has given him considerable experience in investment and risk management, both of which are key aspects of our business and are important to the Board and Board committee deliberation.

Biography:

Mr. O’Kane, age 73, became a director of AGL in August 2005. From 1986 until his retirement in August 2004, Mr. O’Kane was employed at TIAA-CREF (financial products) in a number of different capacities, most recently as Senior Managing Director, Securities Division. In that capacity, he oversaw approximately $120 billion of fixed income assets and approximately $3.5 billion of private equity fund investments.

From 2006 to 2013, Mr. O’Kane served as a director of Jefferies Group, Inc., where he was a member of the Audit, Compensation and Governance committees. In March 2013, Jefferies merged into Leucadia National Corporation (which was renamed Jefferies Financial Group Inc. in May 2018), where Mr. O’Kane now serves as the lead independent director and as a member of the Compensation, the Nominating and Corporate Governance committees and chair of the Valuation Oversight committee.

Qualifications:
Ms. McCloskey’s extensive experience in investment and risk management adds considerable value to the Board and its committees.
Biography:
Ms. McCloskey, age 60, has more than 35 years of experience in executive roles in the energy, financial trading and asset management sectors. She worked at Man Group, an investment management firm with assets in excess of $113 billion, from 2006 to 2019, serving as a member of the Man Group Executive Committee since 2012, President of Man FRM since 2015 and President of the Americas since 2017. In this capacity, Ms. McCloskey was responsible for selection and oversight of all investment strategies, managing client relationships and overseeing key strategic relationships across the business. Ms. McCloskey also led Man Group’s diversity and inclusion network in the U.S. Prior to her tenure at the Man Group, Ms. McCloskey was a portfolio manager in the commodities sector for a variety of institutions, including energy companies, investment banks, and private asset managers.
Ms. McCloskey is an independent director for the Sanford Bernstein family of funds at Alliance Bernstein.
Ms. McCloskey served as a member of the Investment Advisory Committee for the Texas Tech University System Endowments. She also served on numerous governance committees, including investment and board positions for both publicly and privately offered investment vehicles and as a trustee for the US Charitable Trust.
Yukiko Omura

Independent Director

Director Since:2014

Committee Memberships:

Environmental and Social Responsibility
Finance

Risk Oversight

LOGO
image_35.jpg

Qualifications:

Ms. Omura brings more than 3040 years of international professional experience in the financial sector working in major financial centers of the world. Her global experience adds considerable value to the Board.

Biography:

Ms. Omura, age 63,66, joined the Board of AGL in May 2014. She is anon-executive director of Nishimoto HD Co. Ltd. and anon-executive member of the Board of Directors of HSBC Bank plc. She also serves as Senior Independent Director of the Private Infrastructure Development Group where she isand has served as chair of the Board of its subsidiary, GuarantCo. Ms. Omura is also anon-executive director of HSBC Bank Plc. Ms. Omura was a Supervisory Board Member of Amatheon Agri Holding N.V. until March 2018. She served as Undersecretary General and Vice President/COOPresident of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) until February 2012 and, prior to that, as Executive Vice President and CEO of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) of the World Bank Group.

Ms. Omura began her career as a project economist with the Inter-American Development Bank, working in the infrastructure sector. She then worked in senior positions at several major investment banks in Tokyo, New York and London overLondon. At JPMorgan she worked in mergers and acquisitions and derivatives, launched the courseemerging markets operations in Tokyo and led EMSTAR (Emerging Markets Sales,Trade and Research) Marketing for Northern Europe out of her career, including JP Morgan,London. Subsequently, Ms. Omura served as Senior Vice President and Head of Emerging Markets Asia, and then as Head of Credit Business, Asia at Lehman Brothers, UBSBrothers. She then became Managing Director and Dresdner Bank. At UBSHead of the Global Fixed Income and Derivatives Department for Union Bank of Switzerland, Japan. Following a merger with Swiss Bank Corp., Ms. Omura became the new head of the merged bank’s Global Fixed Income and Derivatives Department, after which she joined Dresdner Bank she wasas Managing Director and Head of Global Markets and Debt Division,Office, Japan.

In 2002, Ms. Omura created the HIV/AIDS Prevention Fund, a charitable company based in London.

25 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

18


INFORMATION ABOUT OUR COMMON SHARE OWNERSHIP

HOW MUCH STOCK IS OWNED BY DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS?

The following table sets forth information, as of March 14, 2019, the record date for our Annual General Meeting, regarding the beneficial ownership of our Common Shares by our directors and executive officers whose compensation is reported in the compensation tables that appear later in this proxy statement, which persons we refer as our named executive officers, and by the group comprising our directors, and those persons who, as of December 31, 2018, constituted our named executive officers and other executive officers. Unless otherwise indicated, the named individual has sole voting and investment power over the Common Shares under the column “Common Shares Beneficially Owned.” The Common Shares listed for each director and executive officer constitute less than [1]% of our outstanding Common Shares, except that Mr. Frederico beneficially owns approximately 1.51% of our Common Shares. The Common Shares beneficially owned by all directors, named executive officers and other executive officers as a group constitute approximately 2.81% of our outstanding Common Shares.

     

  Name of Beneficial Owner

 

    

Common
Shares
Beneficially
Owned

 

     

Unvested
Restricted
Common
Shares
(1)

 

     

Restricted
Share Units
(2)

 

     

Common
Shares
Subject  to
Option
(3)

 

 

 

  Robert A. Bailenson

     179,068            128,314        26,835 

 

  Francisco L. Borges

     214,037      13,780      —        7,658 

 

  Russell B. Brewer II

     161,346            63,951         

 

  G. Lawrence Buhl

     51,401      4,078      —        3,153 

 

  Ling Chow

     43,303            60,808        12,598 

 

  Dominic J. Frederico(4)

     1,453,571            349,675        100,000 

 

  Bonnie L. Howard

     25,881      4,078      —         

 

  Thomas W. Jones

     15,528      4,078      —         

 

  Patrick W. Kenny

     55,827      5,202      —        7,108 

 

  Alan J. Kreczko

     21,917      8,296      —         

 

  Simon W. Leathes

     13,156      4,078      —         

 

  Michael T. O’Kane

     52,545      4,078      —        3,153 

 

  Yukiko Omura

     9,732      4,078      —         

 

  Bruce E. Stern

     138,763            43,558        18,202 

 

  All directors and executive officers

  as a group (16 individuals)

     2,642,255      51,746      748,033        201,609 

(1)

The reporting person has the right to vote (but not dispose of) the Common Shares listed under “Unvested Restricted Common Shares.”

(2)

The Common Shares associated with restricted share units are not deliverable as of March 14, 2019 or within 60 days of March 14, 2019 and therefore cannot be voted or disposed of within such time period. As a result, these shares are not considered beneficially owned under SEC rules. We include them in the table above, however, because we view them as an integral part of share ownership by our executive officers. The restricted share units held by our executive officers vest on specified anniversaries of the date of the award, with Common Shares delivered upon vesting.

This column includes 37,907 share units allocated to Mr. Bailenson and 28,872 share units allocated to another executive officer, due to their elections to invest a portion of their AG US Group Services Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan accounts in an employer stock fund.

(3)

Represents Common Shares which the reporting person has the right to acquire as of March 14, 2019 or within 60 days of March 14, 2019 pursuant to options. The options have terms of either ten years or seven years from the date of grant.

(4)

Common shares beneficially owned by Mr. Frederico include shares owned by Mr. Frederico’s spouse and daughter, and shares owned by a family trust, over which Mr. Frederico has the power to direct the voting and disposition.

19


WHICH SHAREHOLDERS OWN MORE THAN 5% OF OUR COMMON SHARES?

The following table shows all persons we know to be direct or indirect owners of more than 5% of our Common Shares as of the close of business on March 14, 2019, the record date for the Annual General Meeting. On March 14, 2019, 102,699,917 Common Shares were outstanding, including 67,319 unvested restricted Common Shares. Our information is based on reports filed with the SEC by each of the firms listed in the table below. You may obtain these reports from the SEC.

Lorin P.T. Radtke
Independent Director
Director Since: 2021
Committee Memberships:
Finance
   Risk Oversight

  Name and Address of Beneficial Owner

Number of Shares

Beneficially Owned

Percent

of Class

  The Vanguard Group

  100 Vanguard Blvd.

  Malvern, PA 19355

10,544,550(1)

10.27%

  Wellington Management Group LLP

  c/o Wellington Management Company LLP

  280 Congress Street

  Boston, MA 02210

10,121,843(2)

9.86%

  BlackRock, Inc.

  55 East 52nd Street

  New York, NY 10055

7,403,059(3)

7.21%

  Putnam Investments, LLC.

  100 Federal Street

  Boston, MA 02110

6,916,506(4)

6.73%

(1)

Based on a Schedule 13G filed by The Vanguard Group on March 11, 2019, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of February 28, 2019. The Vanguard Group has sole voting power over 50,845 shares, shared voting power over 15,544 shares, sole dispositive power over 10,488,992 shares and shared dispositive power over 55,558 shares.

(2)

Based on a Schedule 13G filed by Wellington Management Group LLP on February 12, 2019, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2018. Wellington Management Group LLP has shared voting power over 7,521,012 shares and shared dispositive power over 10,121,843 shares.

(3)

Based on a Schedule 13G filed by BlackRock, Inc. on February 4, 2019, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2018. BlackRock, Inc. has sole voting power over 6,752,776 shares and sole dispositive power over 7,403,059 shares.

(4)

Based on a Schedule 13G filed by Putnam Investments, LLC on February 14, 2019, reporting the amount of securities beneficially owned as of December 31, 2018. Putnam Investments, LLC has sole voting power over 1,001,925 shares and sole dispositive power over 6,916,506 shares.

20

image_36.jpg


EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

    CD&A ROADMAP

Overview of Philosophy and Design 

27

Shareholder Outreach on Our Executive Compensation Program 

28

Changes This Year

29

The Decision-Making Process 

29

Components of Our Executive Compensation Program 

30
Mr. Radtke’s background has given him considerable experience in investment, client franchise development, structured product marketing and risk management, all of which are valuable to the Board and its committees.

Overview 

37

Base Salary 

38

Cash Incentive 

38

Equity Compensation 

42

CEO Compensation Conclusion 

43
Mr. Radtke, age 53, is the co-founder and partner of venture capital firm M Seven 8. Prior to founding M Seven 8 in 2017, he spent 24 years in various positions with Goldman Sachs, eight years of which was as a Partner. His career at Goldman Sachs included time in the Chicago, London and New York offices. Mr. Radtke was the Head of Mortgage and Structured Product Sales through the financial crisis of 2008-09 and its emergence from that crisis (2009-14). Mr. Radtke had additional leadership roles within the credit, mortgage and structured product disciplines within the Fixed Income Currencies and Commodities (FICC) Division. He was also responsible for additional sales/marketing groups, portfolio solution groups, and public advisory groups within FICC. These positions included Head of Credit Products Group—Hard Asset and Portfolio Solutions, Head of Structured Products—Distribution and Sourcing, Head of Structured Portfolio Solutions Group and Head of CLO Origination.

Other Named Executive Officer Compensation Decisions 

43
Mr. Radtke played an integral role in the development of diverse professionals within Goldman Sachs by leading summer intern, vice president and managing director diversity development programs. He has served as a director on various non-profit boards, including Children of Fallen Patriots Foundation, University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee School of Business and Mariposa Family Learning Center.

Non-Financial Objectives and Achievements of the Other Named Executive Officers 

43
Mr. Radtke is a member of the board of directors of the Lord Abbett Family of Funds.

21


SUMMARY

Our executive compensation program is designed to attract and retain talented and experienced business leaders who drive our corporate strategies and build long-term shareholder value.

The Compensation Committee assesses performance usingpre-established measures of success that are tied to our key business strategies. This approach encourages balanced performance, measured relative to financial andnon-financial goals as well as measures of shareholder value, and discourages excessive risk taking or undue leverage by avoiding too much emphasis on any one metric or on short-term results.

Changes This Year

Every year since we started asking our shareholders to vote on the matter, oursay-on-pay proposal has been approved by shareholders holding a majority of the Common Shares voting. While investors holding over 98% of the Common Shares voting approved oursay-on-pay proposal at our Annual General Meeting in three out of the last four years, last year 60% approved. As part of our continuing dialogue with our shareholders, after the meeting we sought to engage with our shareholders to discuss their concerns and recommendations regarding our executive compensation program.

In response to last year’s say-on-pay result and based on this feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee determined to make several changes in our executive compensation program.

Changes to Short-Term Cash Incentive Compensation Program

(effective beginning with the payment determined in February 2019 for the 2018 performance year)

ChangeReason

Reduction of our CEO’s individual target cash incentive multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x

The reduction in this multiple, which is a component of our short-term cash incentive formula, results in a significantly lowered short-term cash incentive opportunity for our CEO this year compared to last year, even though he achieved greater accomplishments. This year our CEO’s short-term cash incentive payment was $713,000 less than last year, a reduction of more than 15%, despite our CEO receiving a higher total achievement score than last year for his very significant contributions during 2018.

The reduction in this multiple brings our CEO’s short-term cash incentive opportunity as a multiple of his base salary more in line with companies in our executive compensation comparison group.

Negative discretion was introduced for scoring the achievement of financial performance goals that were set below prior year actual results

For the reasons described on pages 33 to 34 under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Setting Financial Performance Goals”, the Compensation Committee may set a financial performance goal at a level that it views as challenging but that is nevertheless below prior year results. The Compensation Committee believes that it is appropriate for executives to be scored at 100% when they achieve their goals.

The Compensation Committee recognizes, however, that, depending on the circumstances, characterizing performance as extraordinary (with an achievement score over 100%) for results below the prior year results may not be appropriate in all circumstances. Permitting the Compensation Committee to weigh the circumstances when a result exceeds the goal but is below the prior year results, and to reduce an achievement score well above 100% to closer to 100%, or to 100%, allows the Compensation Committee to award an achievement score that recognizes all of these factors.

The Compensation Committee exercised that discretion in awarding achievement scores for 2018 performance related to the two financial performance goals where performance was above target levels but below 2017 actual results.

22


Changes to Long-Term Equity Compensation Program

(effective beginning with the February 2019 grants)

ChangeReason

The portion of equity compensation dependent on performance measures was increased from 50% to 60%

The Compensation Committee believes that increasing the portion of equity compensation dependent on meeting performance targets increases the incentive of its executives to improve the performance measures targeted.

The Compensation Committee changed the basis on which it measures performance for purposes of determining whether, and how many, of our Common Shares are awarded for each performance share unit granted to an executive. Performance share units granted in 2015 through 2018 generally vested at the end of a three-year performance period if the highest40-day average share price during the last eighteen months of the period exceeded certain price hurdles set by the Compensation Committee, with the number of shares awarded for each performance share unit depending on which hurdles were met.

•  Half of the new performance share units granted in 2019, or 30% of the equity compensation, was tied to growth in Core Adjusted Book Value* per share, which we refer to as Core ABV per share, over three years, with a target of 15% growth over three years

•  The other half of the new performance share units granted in 2019, or 30% of the equity compensation, was tied to the performance of our total shareholder return, which we refer to as TSR, versus the TSR of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, which we refer to as the Index, over three years with a target of the 55th percentile of that Index; the award was capped at 100% if our TSR is negative, even if our TSR is above the 55th percentile of that Index

Since the prices of our Common Shares may be influenced by many factors, including factors that may not be highly correlated to the long-term value of our Common Shares, the Compensation Committee believes that share price hurdles may no longer be the most appropriate performance measure for our performance share units.

The Compensation Committee believes that Core ABV per share is the best measure of the intrinsic value of our Common Shares, and that growth in Core ABV per share will eventually result in growth in the price of our Common Shares. The Compensation believes that this measure is so important that it has incorporated the measure into both its short-term cash incentive program and its long-term equity compensation program, so that the executives are motivated to grow Core ABV per share on both a short-term and long-term basis.

Since our ultimate goal is to create as much shareholder value as possible, the Compensation Committee believes that our long-term equity incentive compensation should also be based on our TSR. However, recognizing that share prices may be influenced by a number of factors, the Compensation Committee decided that a relative measure of TSR was most appropriate.

Since our company is the only publicly traded financial guarantor actively writing policies, there is no obvious group of companies relative to which our performance should be compared. The Compensation Committee considered a number of alternatives for measuring our TSR relative to an appropriate benchmark. Ultimately, the Compensation Committee selected the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index as the most appropriate benchmark. See the discussion under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Relative TSR PSUs” on page 36.

The Compensation Committee also decided to discontinue reimbursing its executives for the costs of financial planning in order to bring its perquisite policy more in line with that of its executive compensation comparison group.

*

Core Adjusted Book Value per share, or Core ABV per share, is one of the measures used by the Compensation Committee to assess our performance and is described in greater detail on page 32. It is anon-GAAP financial measure and is labeled “core” to distinguish it from a similarnon-GAAP financial measure that has not been adjusted to exclude the impact of consolidating financial guaranty variable interest entities.

23


2018 Achievement Highlights

For 2018, our gross written premiums were at $612 million, while our premium production, anon-GAAP financial measure we use to measure our new business production and which we refer to as PVP*, was at $663 million. Both of these measures were the highest reported in ten years. In 2018, our shareholders’ equity per share,non-GAAP operating shareholder’s equity* per shareandnon-GAAP adjusted book value* per share all reached record levels, at $63.23, $61.17 and $86.06, respectively. Our net income for the year was $521 million, or $4.68 per share, and ournon-GAAP operating income* was $482 million, or $4.34 per share.

These results were driven in part by our successful pursuit of all four of our primary business strategies:

We increased new business production, with contributions from our U.S. public finance, international infrastructure and global structured finance business, as well as from our reinsurance transaction with Syncora Guarantee Inc., which we refer to as SGI.

•  Gross written premiums were at $612 million in 2018, while PVP was at $663 million. Both of these measures were the highest reported in ten years.

•  In the U.S. public finance market, we continued to lead the market with a 57% share of all insurednew-issue par, and we began to underwrite more healthcare transactions, closing one for $500 million of par outstanding, the largest par we have insured on a single policy since 2013.

•  In thenon-U.S. public finance market, we generated $44 million of PVP, closing transactions in every calendar quarter, including closing our first Australian transaction since prior to the 2008 financial crisis.

•  Our reinsurance transaction with SGI contributed $391 million of PVP.

We further managed our capital, primarily by returning excess capital to our shareholders through repurchases of our Common Shares and quarterly dividends.

•  We returned approximately $571 million during 2018 through repurchasing Common Shares ($500 million) and distributing dividends ($71 million).

•  Over the last six years, we have distributed approximately $3.1 billion to our shareholders through Common Share repurchases and dividends —14% morethan our entire market capitalization at December 31, 2012, just before we began our Common Share repurchase program.

•  In 2018, we successfully completed the combination of our European insurance subsidiaries, simplifying our capital structure, reducing our regulatory and financial reporting burden in Europe, and creating a surviving entity with significant capital.

We improved our financial results by using alternative strategies, including closing a major reinsurance transaction.

•  On June 1, 2018, we closed our transaction with SGI in which we reinsured, generally on a 100% quota share basis, substantially all of SGI’s insured portfolio, generating $391 million of PVP*.

•  We continued our growth into the asset management area by acquiring a minority interest in the holding company of Rubicon Investment Advisors, an investment banking firm active in the global infrastructure sector.

We created value from our insured portfolio through loss mitigation and other loss recovery strategies.

•  In 2018, we achieved the resolution of the insured debt of our first major Puerto Rico credit, the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (COFINA). That resolution was incorporated into the COFINA plan of adjustment approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico in February 2019. We believe that resolution will result in a recovery of approximately 60% on the subordinated debt that we insure.

•  We continue to negotiate with representatives of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico with respect to other Puerto Rico credits, while continuing to assert our rights though litigation until the Commonwealth and its advisors respond with solutions that recognize creditors’ rights, the requirements of the federal Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), and constitutional requirements of the U.S. and Puerto Rico.

*

Non-GAAP operating shareholder’s equity,non-GAAP adjusted book value,non-GAAP operating income and PVP arenon-GAAP financial measures. An explanation of these measures, which are considered when setting executive compensation, and a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP measures, may be found on pages 92 to 97 of our Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

24


We achieved these results despite a persistently challenging business environment.

Over the last several years, municipal bond yields have been at historically low levels and credit spreads have been tight, making our product less attractive to issuers. Interest rates remained low in 2018 by historical standards, although modestly higher than in the previous year, and credit spreads were virtually unchanged.

New Issuance in the U.S. public finance market declined sharply in response to tax law changes, particularly restrictions on advance refundings.

We continued to face competition in an already tight market from a second financial guaranty insurer that focuses on a smaller portion of the market than we do and provides price competition in those markets where we overlap.

The achievements described in this section were important considerations in determining the compensation of our named executive officers for the 2018 performance year.

Our Total Shareholder Return

While the aftermath of the landfall of Hurricane Maria in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico negatively impacted ouryear-end 2017 cumulative TSR, our cumulative TSR recovered in 2018.

The table and chart below depict the cumulative TSR in dollars on our Common Shares from December 31, 2013 through December 31, 2018, relative to the cumulative TSR of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index and Standard & Poor’s 500 Financials Index over the same period. The table and chart depict the value on December 31 of each year from 2013 through 2018 of a $100 investment made on December 31, 2013, with all dividends reinvested:

LOGO

     

  Cumulative

  TSR from 12/31/13

  Assured Guaranty  Russell MC Financial Index  S&P 500 Index    S&P 500 Financial Index  

 

  12/31/2013

 

   

 

 

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

100.00

 

 

 

 

  12/31/2014

 

   

 

 

 

 

112.19

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

114.64

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

113.68

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

115.18

 

 

 

 

  12/31/2015

 

   

 

 

 

 

116.12

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

117.34

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

115.24

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

113.38

 

 

 

 

  12/31/2016

 

   

 

 

 

 

169.07

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

135.11

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

129.02

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

139.17

 

 

 

 

  12/31/2017

 

   

 

 

 

 

153.79

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

157.56

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

157.17

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

169.98

 

 

 

 

  12/31/2018

 

   

 

 

 

 

176.79

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

141.74

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

150.27

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

147.82

 

 

 

Calculated from total returns published by Bloomberg.

25


As shown below, our cumulative TSR also exceeded the average cumulative TSR of our executive compensation comparison group over the last one, three and five years. Our executive compensation comparison group is described on page 47 under “Executive Compensation Comparison Group.”

Total Shareholder Return Comparison

   
  Period Ending 12/31/18    

Comparison Group

Average TSR

      Assured Guaranty TSR  

 

1 Year

 

     

 

 

 

 

(5.94

 

 

)%

 

     

 

 

 

 

14.96

 

 

%

 

 

3 Years

 

     

 

 

 

 

30.51

 

 

%

 

     

 

 

 

 

52.24

 

 

%

 

 

5 Years

 

     

 

 

 

 

54.42

 

 

%

 

     

 

 

 

 

76.79

 

 

%

 

Calculated from total returns published by Bloomberg.

2018 Results Against Financial Performance Measure Targets

We exceeded all of the 2018 financial performance goals set by the Compensation Committee, in some instances by large amounts. The table below summarizes our 2018 results against the 2018 targets for the financial performance measures. The financial performance goals are explained in more detail under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation” on pages 31 to 32 below.

LOGO

Snapshot of Our CEO’s 2018 Compensation

For 2018, approximately 89% of Mr. Frederico’s compensation constituted incentive compensation: 35% was in the form of a performance-based cash incentive that was awarded based on measuring performance against financial performance goals andnon-financial objectives set at the beginning of the year, and 54% was in the form of a long-term equity-based incentive, with 60% of that equity award dependent on performance relative to ourpre-established objectives. The allocation between fixed and incentive compensation for the 2018 performance year was consistent with the 2017 performance year, but the allocation between the short-term cash and long-term equity portions of the incentive compensation was adjusted, with the long-term equity component of the incentive compensation rising to 61% from 56% of the incentive compensation, and the short-term cash component correspondingly decreasing to 39% from 44%.

Mr. Frederico received a compensation package for the 2018 performance year 4.0% lower than he received for the 2017 performance year.

Most of the change is attributable to the Compensation Committee’s decrease of Mr. Frederico’s Individual Cash Incentive Target Multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x in response to last year’ssay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook. Primarily as a result of that decrease in multiple, Mr. Frederico’s cash incentive was reduced by more than 15%. This was the result notwithstanding the fact that the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico a total achievement score of 152.5% in recognition of his extraordinary contributions in 2018, an increase from his total achievement score of 144.8% for 2017.

In recognition of Mr. Frederico’s 2018 accomplishments and in order to incentivize him over the long term, the Compensation Committee granted Mr. Frederico long-term equity compensation with a nominal value of $6,000,000, an increase of 4.3% from his grant for the 2017 performance year.

26


Mr. Frederico’s compensation package for 2018 and 2017 were composed of the following:

LOGO

    
    

2018 Performance Year

Compensation

   

2017 Performance Year

Compensation

   Change from
2017 to 2018
 

  Fixed Compensation—Base Salary(1)

   $1,250,000    $1,250,000    

  Incentive Compensation

      

Cash Incentive Compensation

   $3,812,000    $4,525,000    (15.8)% 

Long-Term Performance-Based Equity

   $3,600,000(2)     $2,875,000(2)     25.2

Long-Term Time-Based Equity

   $2,400,000(2)     $2,875,000(2)     (16.5)% 

  Total Direct Compensation

   $11,062,000    $11,525,000    (4.0)% 

(1)

Mr. Frederico’s base salary for each of the 2018 and 2017 performance years was established at the beginning of such performance year, in February. Accordingly, Mr. Frederico’s 2018 base salary was established in February 2018 based on Mr. Frederico’s accomplishments in the 2017 performance year.

(2)

Represents the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value for the relevant performance year. The number of units granted is calculated by dividing such value by the average closing price on the NYSE of a Common Share over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the date of grant.

The compensation package presented in the table above is different from theSEC-required disclosure in the Summary Compensation Table on page 53 and is not a substitute for the information in that table. Rather, it is intended to show how the Compensation Committee linked Mr. Frederico’s compensation and its components to our performance results and his achievements for the prior year.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND PROCESS

Overview of Philosophy and Design

Our executive compensation program is designed to recognize and reward outstanding achievement and to attract, retain and motivate the talented individuals needed to lead and grow our Company’s business. We maintain an ongoing dialog with our shareholders and incorporate their feedback into our program so that the program is aligned with their interests.

The guiding principles of our program are:

Pay for Performance

by providing an incentive for exceptional performance and the possibility of reduced compensation if executives are unable to successfully execute our strategies

Accountability

for short- and long- term performance

Alignment

with
shareholder
interests

Retention

of highly
qualified executives
with financial guaranty
experience

27


We Align Pay With Performance

Our program rewards performance by having more variable and performance-based compensation at the most senior levels. We use a mix of variableat-risk compensation with different time horizons and payout forms to provide an incentive for both annual and long-term sustained performance, in order to maximize shareholder value in a manner consistent with our Company’s risk parameters. The Compensation Committee assesses the performance of our executive officers from both a financial and anon-financial perspective, usingpre-established goals.

Our executive officers are eligible to receive a cash incentive, which is performance-based. They may also receive a long-term equity incentive, a portion of which is performance-based and cliff vests at the end of a three-year performance period if we meet certain performance targets, and a portion of which is time-based and cliff vests at the end of a three-year period. The long-term equity incentive is structured to encourage retention and a long-range mindset. In response to the result of oursay-on-pay vote and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, we made changes to our long-term equity incentive program beginning with the awards granted in February 2019 for the 2018 performance year.

Executive Compensation Is Closely Tied To Long-Term Performance

The compensation program is structured with upside potential for superior executive achievements, but also the possibility of reduced compensation if executives are unable to successfully execute our Company’s strategies. By increasing management’s motivation to enhance shareholder value over the long term, our compensation program aligns executive officer incentives and shareholder interests.

For the 2018 performance year, the compensation package for the executive officers contains three principal elements.

   Principal Elements of Executive Compensation PackagePurpose

   Base Salary

Based on responsibilities, skill set and experience, and market measures

   Cash Incentive Compensation

Cash reward for performance against annual financial performance goals and progress against strategicnon-financial objectives that we expect to drive our growth over the moderate to long term

   Long-Term Equity Incentives

60% in performance share units, which we refer to as PSUs, that can be earned over a3-year performance period based on performance targets, with half of the PSUs (or 30% of the long-term equity incentive) being based on growth in our Core Adjusted Book Value per share, and half of the PSUs (or 30% of the long-term equity incentive) being based on our TSR, relative to the 55th percentile of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index

40% in restricted stock units, which we refer to as RSUs, that cliff vest at the end of a3-year period

Shareholder Outreach on Our Executive Compensation Program

For the past several years, we have actively engaged with our shareholders in order to obtain their feedback on our executive compensation program. While investors holding over 98% of the Common Shares voting approved our say-on-pay proposal at our Annual General Meeting in three out of the last four years, after negative recommendations from the two leading proxy advisory firms last year, 60% approved.

As part of our continuing dialogue with our shareholders, we contacted shareholders at the end of 2017 and, after the negative recommendations from the proxy advisory firms, engaged with shareholders in the spring of 2018 before the vote on the say-on-pay proposal at our Annual General Meeting. We sought to understand our shareholders’ viewpoints and to gather input on our executive compensation program; we also discussed the structure and design of the program and the targets within that program.

In addition, following the say-on-pay vote, we again sought to engage with our shareholders. We contacted holders of an aggregate of over 77% of our Common Shares (which comprised every shareholder holding more than 0.16% of our outstanding shares) with respect to the changes we proposed to make to the executive compensation program in response to the recommendations from the two leading proxy advisory firms and the say-on-pay result and based on advice from Cook. The holders of approximately 26% of our Common Shares provided us with specific feedback on aspects of our executive compensation program, while the holders of another

28


approximately 11% of our Common Shares specifically responded that they did not need to speak with us because they were comfortable with the proposed changes to the executive compensation program. While we sought dialogue with shareholders who had voted against our say-on-pay proposal, only one such shareholder responded, and that shareholder indicated that they typically follow the recommendation of one of the proxy advisory firms. Although most of the shareholders who provided us with feedback after the vote on the say-on-pay proposal were generally supportive of our previous executive compensation program and had supported our say-on-pay proposal last year, they did provide us with feedback on how to further improve our executive compensation program in response to the say-on-pay result. We believe that most of our shareholders who voted against our say-on-pay proposal and did not respond to our invitation to share their concerns and recommendations typically follow the recommendation of one of the leading proxy advisory firms. In fact, we believe that nearly 40% of the 40% of our shareholders we contacted who did not respond are passive investors that generally do not engage with issuers.

Changes This Year

In response to oursay-on-pay result and based in part on the shareholder feedback just described along with advice from Cook, our Compensation Committee determined to make several changes in our executive compensation program:

Changes in Our Executive Compensation Program

Cash Incentive Compensation (effective beginning with payment determined in February 2019 for the 2018 performance year)

•   The CEO’s target individual target cash incentive multiple was reduced from 2.5x to 2.0x

•   Negative discretion was introduced for scoring the achievement of financial performance goals that were set below prior year actual results; the Compensation Committee exercised that negative discretion for 2018 performance related to the two financial performance goals where performance was above 2018 goals but below 2017 actual results

Equity Compensation (effective beginning with the February 2019 awards)

•   The portion of equity compensation dependent on performance measures was increased from 50% to 60%

•   Half of this amount, or 30% of equity compensation, was tied to growth in Core ABV per share, over three years, with a target of 15% growth over three years

•   The other half of this amount, or 30% of the equity compensation, was tied to the performance of our TSR relative to the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index over three years with a target of the 55th percentile of that Index and a cap of 100% on the award if our TSR is negative, even if above the the 55th percentile of that Index

Perquisites (effective beginning in 2019)

•   We no longer reimburse our executives for the costs of financial planning

The Decision-Making Process

The Compensation Committee, composed solely of independent directors, is responsible for all decisions about our executive officer compensation. The Compensation Committee works closely with Cook, the Chairman of the Board and management to examine pay and performance matters throughout the year, and consults with the Board prior to making final compensation decisions.

The Compensation Committee conductsin-depth reviews of performance and then applies judgment to make compensation decisions. The Compensation Committee believes its process, described below, is an effective way to assess the quality of performance, risk management and leadership demonstrated by Mr. Frederico and the senior management team.

In August and November, the Compensation Committee reviews our corporate performance for the year to date, as well as progress of each executive officer against individual performance goals. The chairman of the Compensation Committee seeks feedback from our shareholders on our executive compensation program.

In November, the Compensation Committee reviews and approves the metrics and goals in our performance framework and reviews certain of the executive officer performance goals for the upcoming year, and begins to formulate its compensation decisions with respect to current year performance.

In February, the Compensation Committee meets twice. It first meets in early February to receive and review our final results and evaluate executive performance for the previous calendar year, which we refer to as the performance year, against that performance year’s goals. The Compensation Committee formulates its preliminary compensation decisions with respect to that year’s executive performance, along with the executive officer performance goals for the coming year. Later in February, the Compensation Committee discusses its preliminary compensation decisions for the previous year and the executive officer performance goals for the coming year with other Board members, and then makes its final decisions with respect to those matters. The CEO is not present when the Compensation Committee meets to evaluate his performance and determine his compensation.

29


In making its compensation decisions, the Compensation Committee follows a five-step approach:

Step 5:

Seek input from the independent consultant concerning CEO pay.

The Compensation Committee considers Cook’s analysis of the compensation paid to executive officers in our executive compensation comparison group when evaluating the compensation of our executive officers. The role of Cook is described in more detail under “Compensation Governance—the Role of the Independent Consultants” below.

Step 4:

Analyze trends
among comparison companies.

The Compensation Committee considers market pay levels and trends based on information Cook provides about comparison companies.

Step 3:

Review each executive’s individual performance and contributions.

The Compensation Committee reviews the individual performance objectives for our CEO and the other executive officers, and assesses each person’s performance and contributions. For the executive officers other than our CEO, the Compensation Committee considers individual performance assessments and compensation recommendations from our CEO, as well as succession planning and retention issues in this unique segment of the insurance industry.

Step 2:

Assess Company Performance.

The Compensation Committee reviews the corporate financial performance goals for the performance year and discusses the full-year financial and strategic performance at length, seeking to understand what was accomplished relative to established objectives, how it was accomplished, and the quality of the financial results.

Step 1:

Establishment of financial performance goals andnon-financial

objectives.

At or prior to the beginning of each performance year, the Compensation Committee discusses the Company’s business plan at length and establishes corporate financial goals for the upcoming performance year. The Compensation Committee also discusses the strategic direction of the Company andestablishes non-financial objectives it expects to drive our growth over the moderate to long term.

Components of Our Executive Compensation Program

For the 2018 performance year, the compensation package for the executive officers consists of three principal elements: base salary, cash incentive compensation and long-term equity incentives. Our practice is to review the components of our executive officer compensation separately and monitor the total of the various components. We consider each component and the total against our compensation objectives described in “Overview of Philosophy and Design.” Decisions related to one compensation component (e.g., cash incentive compensation) generally do not materially affect decisions regarding any other component (e.g., long-term equity incentives) because the objectives of each element differ. Positions at higher levels generally have a greater emphasis on variable pay elements, although no specific formula, schedule or structure is currently applied in establishing the percentage of total compensation delivered through any compensation element.

Base Salary

The Compensation Committee establishes each executive officer’s base salary in consultation with Cook. We believe base salary is necessary to attract and retain key executives by providing appropriate compensation that is based on position, experience, scope of responsibility and performance. Base salary provides liquidity to our executive officers and balances the levels of guaranteed pay withat-risk pay to properly manage our compensation-related risk. The amount is based on the executive officer’s responsibilities, skills and experience, as well as market measures. The level of an executive officer’s base salary reflects the Compensation Committee’s view of the contribution that executive officer has consistently made to our Company’s success over several years, the continuing importance of that executive officer to our Company’s future, and the difficulty and expense of replacing the executive officer with one of a similar caliber. The Compensation Committee does not guarantee salary adjustments on an annual basis; in fact, our CEO’s base salary was last adjusted in February 2017 and, before that, in February 2015. Base salary is set toward the beginning of the year and is paid to the executive officers for ongoing performance throughout the year. For the 2018 performance year, the Compensation Committee established the base salary in February 2018.

30


Cash Incentive Compensation

Unlike base salary, which is set at the beginning of the year in which it is paid, cash incentive compensation is determined after the end of the performance year to which such compensation relates. For the 2018 performance year, the Compensation Committee determined the amount of the cash incentive compensation in February 2019.

The Compensation Committee uses a formula to award cash incentive compensation in order to enhance the transparency of our process. The amount of cash incentive compensation is determined based on the extent to which the executives achieve certainpre-established performance targets, 67% is tied to the achievement of financial performance goals and 33% is tied to the achievement ofnon-financial objectives. The Compensation Committee considers the five financial performance goals to be important in assessing our Company and our executive officers’ performance; each goal has a weighting of 13.4% (for a total of 67%) and constitutes anon-GAAP financial measure that is described on pages 47 to 48 under“Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” Similar to the financial performance goals, thenon-financial objectives also relate to matters that are important to our business. The Compensation Committee believes the qualitative objectives are necessary to fully evaluate the annual achievements that benefit our shareholders, and it does not individually weight thenon-financial objectives because it believes it is more appropriate to evaluate the level of achievement of all of the objectives in their totality.

We provide a diagram of our formula for awarding our annual cash incentive compensation below:

LOGO

The financial performance goals for 2018 for all the executive officers including Mr. Frederico, our CEO, are set out below. Thenon-financial objectives for Mr. Frederico are set out on pages 40 to 41 under “CEO Performance Review—Cash Incentive—Mr. Frederico’sNon-Financial Objectives”, while thenon-financial objectives for the executive officers other than Mr. Frederico are discussed on pages 43 to 44 under “Compensation Decisions of Other Executive Officers.” For the 2018 performance year, the financial performance goals and thenon-financial objectives for the named executive officers were established in February 2018 and the Compensation Committee determined the extent to which they had been satisfied in February 2019.

The financial performance goals that the Compensation Committee uses to assess our Company’s performance are described in greater detail below. The financial goals are based onnon-GAAP financial measures and four are labeled “core” to distinguish them from similarnon-GAAP financial measures that have not been adjusted to exclude the impact of consolidating variable interest entities,

31


which we refer to as FG VIEs. The four “core” measures have been adjusted to exclude the impact of consolidating FG VIEs. We include on pages 50 to 51 under“Non-GAAP Financial Measures” a description of the adjustments we make to the most comparable GAAP financial measures to arrive at these measures.

PVP

represents our estimated gross future revenue stream from new business production. Specifically, PVP enables us to evaluate the value of our new business production during the year by taking into account the value of upfront and estimated future installment premiums, using a consistent discount rate, on all new contracts underwritten in a reporting period.

Core operating

income per

diluted share

enables us to evaluate the amount of income we are generating in our business without certain items, primarilynon-economic fluctuations and movements in fair value, foreign exchange movements related to long dated receivables and payables, and other adjustments, as well as removing the impact of consolidating FG VIEs.

Core operating

shareholders’

equity per

share

presents our equity excludingnon-economic fair value adjustments as well as the impact of consolidating FG VIEs. Core operating shareholders’ equity per share is the basis of the calculation of core adjusted book value, which we refer to as Core ABV, per share, as described below.

Core operating

ROE

represents core operating income for a specified period divided by the average of core operating shareholders’ equity at the beginning and the end of that period. This measure enables us to evaluate our return on the capital invested in our company.

Core ABV

per share

reflects our core operating shareholders’ equity, plus unearned premiums in excess of expected losses, plus revenues from contracts other than financial guaranty insurance contracts (such asnon-financial guaranty insurance contracts and credit derivatives), less deferred acquisition costs. This measure enables us to measure our intrinsic value, excluding our franchise value.

The Compensation Committee assigns each executive an Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount, which is calculated as a multiple, which we refer to as the Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple, of the executive officer’s base salary. The amounts of the base salary and Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiples are set based on the executive officer’s position and level of responsibility, historic pay level, importance to the future strategic direction of our Company and Cook’s advice about the compensation practices of companies in our comparison group.

All of the Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiples assigned by the Compensation Committee for the 2018 performance year were the same as it had assigned the previous year, except that the Compensation Committee reduced Mr. Frederico’s multiple from 2.5x to 2.0x in response to last year’ssay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, despite Mr. Frederico’s extraordinary 2018 contributions. The Compensation Committee assigned the named executive officers the following Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiples for the 2018 performance year:

    Executive Officer

2018 Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple    

(of Base Salary)    

    Dominic Frederico, Chief Executive Officer

2.00x*    

    Robert A. Bailenson, Chief Financial Officer

2.00x     

    Russell B. Brewer, II, Chief Surveillance Officer

2.00x     

    Ling Chow, General Counsel and Secretary

2.00x     

    Bruce E. Stern, Executive Officer

2.00x     

*

Reduced from 2.50x in response to last year’ssay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook.

Then, for each executive officer, the Compensation Committee calculates and aggregates the weighted achievement scores for the financial performance goals and the individualnon-financial objectives. When assessing the level of achievement and assigning scores for the year, the Compensation Committee takes into account the difficulty of achieving particular goals or objectives. The Compensation Committee has discretion to assign achievement scores of up to 200% for outstanding performance and achievement scores of down to 0% for performance below target, based on its view of the level of achievement attained for each financial performance goal and each individualnon-financial objective.

Beginning with the awards for the 2018 performance year and in response to last year’ssay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee may exercise negative discretion where the financial performance goal

32


result, while above the target established by the Compensation Committee, is less than the prior year result. For the 2018 performance year, the Compensation Committee exercised this negative discretion with respect to both financial performance goals where the 2018 results were above 2018 targets but below 2017 actual results.

Setting Financial Performance Goals

The Compensation Committee selected the five financial performance goal measurements in 2015 when, in consultation with Cook, it redesigned our process and formula for determining the amount of short-term cash incentive to award to our executives. At the time, the Compensation Committee considered the measures of value creation used by our then executive compensation comparison group and also the unique earnings model of the financial guaranty industry. The Compensation Committee reconsiders each year whether these measures are the appropriate ones to use in light of our Company’s business. The Compensation Committee believes our progress measured against these goals will, in the end, result in optimal total shareholder return.

Each year the Compensation Committee sets our five financial performance goals at levels it views as challenging based on the projected operating results in our annual business plan. The goals and our business plan acknowledge the unique long-term nature of our financial guaranty insurance business and that the required accounting treatment and operations of a financial guaranty insurer are distinct from other insurance product lines.

PVP. Our annual business plan for 2018 challenged our executives to originate more financial guaranty business in 2018 than we originated in 2017. Our most direct measurement of new business origination is PVP, and we set our 2018 PVP performance goal more than 7% higher than our 2017 actual PVP, despite our expectation that the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act would reduce the volume of new issue public finance bonds (which it did) and the expectation that interest rates and credit spreads were likely to remain low (which they did). Given this expectation of a challenging business environment, the Compensation Committee viewed the increased PVP goal as challenging.

Core Operating Income per Diluted Share and Core Operating Return on Equity. The financial performance goals the Compensation Committee set for core operating income per diluted share and core operating return on equity, based on the same annual business plan that challenged us to originate more business in 2018 than in 2017 despite the challenging business environment, were set lower than the actual results for these measures in 2017. Why would the Compensation Committee set these financial performance goals at levels that were below our prior year actual results, and still view those goals as challenging?

The answer to that question follows from the unique earnings model of the financial guaranty insurance industry. When a financial guarantor writes a new financial guaranty policy, it does not earn the full amount of the premium immediately; rather, it earns the premium for the policy over the term of the policy, often as long as twenty or thirty years. In 2018, for example, only approximately 3% of the premiums we earned in 2018 related to new financial guaranty policies (excluding the SGI transaction) we wrote in 2018. The premiums a financial guarantor earns in a year are primarily related to business it wrote some time ago, in our case over decades, rather than its originations in that year. Because the volume and pricing of new business written in a year has only a small impact on premium earnings for that year, most of our net income from our core financial guaranty business may be reliably forecasted based on projections with respect to the very significant unearned premium that we earn as our insured portfolio amortizes, the income we earn on our sizable investment portfolio, and our operating expenses, all of which are reasonably predictable.

Despite the predictability of the contribution of our primary financial guaranty business to our core operating income per diluted share and core operating return on equity, we consider the financial performance goals we set for these measures to be challenging due to potential uncertainties in the broader market and environment. Those uncertainties include unexpected changes to investment rates, level of refunding activity and unexpected loss development. In addition, variability of our share price and availability of funds for share repurchases may add to the challenges of reaching these goals.

Our earnings in a particular year may also be impacted by, among other things, strategic activities such as acquisitions, reinsurance transactions, loss mitigation activities and share repurchases, some of which activities may not be available to be repeated in the future. For example, our 2017 commutations of previously ceded insured portfolios and our 2017 acquisition of the European operating subsidiary of MBIA Insurance Corporation, which we refer to as MBIA UK, contributed $2.59 to our $5.31 core operating income per diluted share in 2017 and 4.8 percentage points to our 10.1% core operating return on equity in 2017.

When the Compensation Committee sets the financial performance goals for a year, it typically does not consider significant contributions from potential or theoretical strategic activities that have not been finalized or share repurchases the funding of which require regulatory approvals that have not yet been obtained, when the conditions for success are highly contingent and outside of the executive officers’ control, although it will consider such contributions in setting financial performance goals when it deems success more likely. Given the outsize positive impact on our Company of the successful achievement of at least some such endeavors, the Compensation Committee believes it is appropriate for its executive officers to be encouraged to pursue success in these areas by the cash incentive formula. Our string of successful transactions with legacy insurance companies and our success in our capital management program since 2013 attest to the effectiveness of the incentives this approach provides. Consistent with that approach, when the Compensation Committee set the financial performance goals for core operating income per diluted share

33


and core operating return on equity for 2018, it did not assume that in 2018 there would be sizable reinsurance reassumptions or a transaction similar to the MBIA UK acquisition. This resulted in the 2018 goals being below the 2017 actual results for these two measures.

Core Operating Shareholders’ Equity Per Share and Core Adjusted Book Value Per Share. The Compensation Committee also wants to encourage our executives to build intrinsic value in our Company over time for our shareholders, so the Compensation Committee sets targets for core operating shareholder’s equity per share and core adjusted book value per share. The Compensation Committee believes these measures best capture the long-term value we are building for our shareholders and that growth in these measures will eventually result in growth in the price of our Common Shares. The Compensation Committee believes that core adjusted book value per share, in particular, is such an important measure of the intrinsic value we are building for our shareholders that the Compensation Committee has made this measure a component of both our short-term and long-term incentive programs. The Compensation Committee believes that this will motivate our executives to focus on growth in this measure in both the short and long term, and that eventually growth in the price of our Common Shares will follow.

Calculating Cash Incentive Compensation

Based on an executive officer’s weighted achievement scores for the financial performance goals and the individualnon-financial objectives, the individual payouts of the cash incentive for 2018 were calculated as follows:

Annual Individual Target Cash

Incentive Amount

X

Annual Achievement Score

(a percentage from 0% to 200%)

=

Annual Cash  

Incentive

Payout

(

2018

Base

Salary

X

2018

Individual Target

Cash Incentive

Multiple

)

X

(

2018

Financial Goal

Achievement

Score

(weighted 67%)

+

2018

Individual Non-

Financial Objective

Achievement Score

(weighted 33%)

)=

2018 Cash

Incentive

Payout

The basic formula for determining cash incentive compensation has remained the same since the Compensation Committee developed the approach to calculating such amount, together with Cook, at the beginning of 2015. Our Company’s share price performance and performance on other key financial measures has improved greatly since the approach was developed at the beginning of 2015. At year end 2014, the price of our Common Shares closed at $25.99, compared to $38.28 at year end 2018. Our performance in respect of four out of five of the financial performance goals most important to our Company has also improved, as reflected in the table below.

   

  FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

 

    

2014
Results

 

     

2018
Results

 

 

 

  PVP

    

 

$

 

168 million

 

 

    

 

$

 

663 million

 

 

 

  Core Operating Income per Diluted Share

 

    

 

 

 

 

$2.83

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$4.37

 

 

 

 

 

  Core Operating Shareholders’ Equity per Share

 

    

 

 

 

 

$37.48

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$61.14

 

 

 

 

 

  Core Operating Return on Equity

 

    

 

 

 

 

8.1

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

7.6

 

 

 

 

  Core Adjusted Book Value per Share

 

    

 

 

 

 

$53.66

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

$86.21

 

 

 

 

The progress we have made on these fronts is the result of the leadership of Mr. Frederico and the efforts of his management team. As a result, the Compensation Committee has maintained the approach and the formulas put in place for the cash incentive compensation for Mr. Frederico and the other named executive officers in 2015, except for the changes introduced this year in response to thesay-on-pay result, based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook.

Long-Term Equity Incentives

In addition to the cash incentive compensation, the Compensation Committee awards long-term incentive compensation in the form of our Common Shares.

Like cash incentive compensation, equity incentive compensation is awarded after the end of the performance year to which such compensation relates. For the 2018 performance year, the Compensation Committee determined the amount of equity incentive compensation in February 2019.

A portion of the nominal value of the award is in the form of performance share units (which we refer to as PSUs) that may be earned over a3-year performance period based on performance targets, and are paid at the end of the3-year performance period if particular performance targets are achieved, and the other portion is in the form of RSUs that cliff vest at the end of a3-year period. Details about the individual awards are set out in “CEO Performance Review” and “Other Named Executive Officer Compensation Decisions.”

34


For the 2019 grant with respect to the 2018 performance year, and in response to thesay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee changed its long-term equity incentive program by increasing the proportion of long-term equity comprising PSUs and by changing the performance measures upon which the PSUs are based:

LOGO

Performance Share Units.Each performance share unit, or PSU, represents a contingent right to receive up to a certain number of our Common Shares as described under “Incentive Plans—Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan” on page 61. The Compensation Committee awards PSUs with the intent of aligning executive pay with our Company’s performance.

Prior to the grants made in February 2019 for the 2018 performance year, the number of our Common Shares executive officers could earn for each PSU was based on the price of our Common Shares over a3-year performance period in relation to price hurdles established by the Compensation Committee at the time of grant. Since the prices of our Common Shares may be influenced by many factors, including factors that may not be highly correlated to the long-term value of our Common Shares, the Compensation Committee believes that share price hurdles may no longer be the most appropriate performance measure for our performance share units. Based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee chose to establish two new types of replacement PSUs for the February 2019 grant:

PSUs tied to growth in our core adjusted book value per share over a three-year period, which we refer to as ABV PSUs; and

PSUs tied to our TSR over a three-year period relative to the TSR of the 55th percentile of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, which we refer to as Relative TSR PSUs.

ABV PSUs

The Compensation Committee believes that Core ABV per share is the best measure of the intrinsic value of our Common Shares, and that growth in Core ABV per share will eventually result in growth in the price of our Common Shares. The Compensation believes that this measure is so important that it has incorporated the measure into both its short-term cash incentive program and its long-term equity compensation program, so that the executives are motivated to grow Core ABV per share on both a short-term and long-term basis.

Each ABV PSU represents the right to receive up to two of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year performance period, which runs from January 1 of the year of the grant to December 31 three years later, depending on the growth in Core ABV per share over the three-year performance period.

The target growth rate is an aggregate of 15% over that three-year period, for which the executive officer earns one Common Share for each ABV PSU.

At 80% of the target growth (or 12%), which we refer to as the threshold, the executive officer earnsone-half share for each ABV PSU; for growth rates below that amount, the executive officer earns no Common Shares.

At 120% of the target growth (or 18%) or above, which we refer to as the maximum, the executive officer earns two of our Common Shares for each ABV PSU.

For Core ABV per share growth rates between the threshold and the target and between the target and the maximum, the amount of our Common Shares earned for each ABV PSU is based on straight-line interpolation.

35


The Compensation Committee set the ABV PSU target growth rate based on the projected operating results in our annual business plan and after consulting with Cook. In setting the ABV PSU target, the Compensation Committee did not consider significant potential or theoretical strategic activities that had not been finalized or share repurchases the funding of which require regulatory approvals that have not yet been obtained, because the conditions for success are highly contingent and outside of the executive officers’ control. Given the outsize positive impact on our Company of the successful achievement of at least some such endeavors, the Compensation Committee believes it is appropriate for its executive officers to be encouraged to pursue success in these areas through the ABV PSUs.

Relative TSR PSUs

Since our ultimate goal is to create as much shareholder value as possible, the Compensation Committee believes that our long-term equity incentive compensation should also be based on our TSR. However, recognizing that share prices may be influenced by a number of factors, the Compensation Committee decided that a relative measure of TSR was most appropriate.

Each Relative TSR PSU represents the right to receive up to 2.5 (for extraordinary performance at the 95th percentile) of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year performance period, which runs from January 1 of the grant year to December 31 three years later, depending on the performance of our TSR over that three-year period relative to the TSR of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, which we refer to as the Index.

The target Company TSR for that period is the 55th percentile of the Index, for which the executive officer earns one Common Share for each Relative TSR PSU.

At the 25th percentile of the Index, which we refer to as the threshold, the executive officer earnsone-half share for each Relative TSR PSU; for Company TSRs below that level, the executive officer earns no Common Shares.

A Company TSR at the 95th percentile of the Index, which we refer to as the maximum, or above earns the executive officer 2.5 of our Common Shares for each Relative TSR PSU.

For Company TSRs between the threshold and the target and between the target and the maximum, the amount of our Common Shares earned for each Relative TSR PSU is based on straight-line interpolation.

The Compensation Committee adopted the following additional restrictions on the Relative TSR PSUs:

The number of Common Shares that can be earned is capped at one share per Relative TSR PSU if the Company TSR is negative, even if above the 55th percentile.

Common Shares earned pursuant to the Relative TSR PSUs remain restricted until one year after they vest.

The Compensation Committee sought advice from Cook in selecting an index for a target TSR and in establishing the target, threshold and maximum TSR levels and the number of our Common Shares awarded for each Relative TSR PSU.

The Compensation Committee considered establishing a peer group of companies against which to measure our Company’s TSR, but only one other financial guarantor continues to write new business, and that company is not publicly traded. Consequently, the Compensation Committee explored whether a peer group of companies other than financial guaranty companies would provide an appropriate benchmark for our TSR.

The Compensation Committee considered establishing a peer group of property and casualty insurance companies, an industry in which we are sometimes grouped by analysts, but determined that factors impacting the performance of property and casualty insurance companies are unlikely to impact our business in the same way. The Compensation Committee believes that, as a result of the unique long-term nature of our financial guaranty insurance business and the fact that the required accounting treatment and operations of a financial guaranty insurer are distinct from property and casualty and other insurance product lines, measurement of our TSR relative to a group ofsimilarly-sized property and casualty insurance companies would be inappropriate. The Compensation Committee believes that a peer group comprising life insurance companies would be similarly inappropriate, but even more so given their exposure to mortality risk. While we are a financial services company impacted by developments in the credit and interest rate markets, the financial guaranty business model is distinct from banking, investment banking or investment advisory businesses, so the Compensation Committee also did not view a peer group of such companies to be an appropriate benchmark.

The Compensation Committee also considered using the executive compensation comparison group it uses to evaluate the level and mix of compensation it pays its executives. See the discussion under “Compensation Governance—Executive Compensation Comparison Group” at page 47 below. While the executive compensation comparison group comprisessimilarly-sized companies in businesses somewhat similar to our business, most of the companies in that group are mortgage finance and property and casualty insurance and reinsurance companies and the Compensation Committee did not believe that group was an appropriate benchmark for our TSR.

36


The Compensation Committee believed that aspects of our business are comparable to aspects of various financial services companies, and so determined that the best benchmark for our TSR was a broad index of somewhatsimilarly-sized financial services companies, and selected the Russell Midcap Financial Services as the best available measure.

In addition, the Compensation Committee considered setting the maximum award at 2.0 of our Common Shares per Relative TSR PSU for performance at the 75th percentile of the Index, but chose to further motivate the executives to achieve an extraordinary relative TSR at the 95th percentile. As a result, should the executives achieve a relative TSR at the 75th percentile of the Index, the executives will be awarded approximately 1.75 of our Common Shares for each Relative TSR PSU, an amount below the amount that would have been earned under the other structure considered by the Compensation Committee. The structure of the Relative TSR PSU provides the executives with superior awards only for truly extraordinary results relative to the Index.

We consulted with Aon plc, which we refer to as Aon, to advise us on establishing the mechanics of our Relative TSR PSUs. We also engaged Aon to model the grant date valuation of the Relative TSR PSUs and to track the Relative TSR PSUs in the future.

Restricted Stock Units

Each restricted stock unit represents a right to receive one of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year vesting period as described under “Incentive Plans—Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan” on page 61.

The Compensation Committee awards RSUs with the intent of providing executives with long-term incentive compensation that increases in value as our Company achieves its strategies. The Compensation Committee believes this incentivizes executives to remain with the Company and help build shareholder value over the long term. The Compensation Committee has been awarding RSUs to our executives for a number of years now. For the 2019 grant for the 2018 performance year, the Compensation Committee allocated 40% of the long-term equity incentive to RSUs, down from 50% the prior year.

CEO PERFORMANCE REVIEW

Overview

In light of Mr. Frederico’s significant accomplishments in the 2018 performance year, as detailed below, but also considering last year’ssay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico total compensation of $11,062,000, a 4.0% decrease from his total compensation for the 2017 performance year.

Most of the decline in compensation is attributable to the Compensation Committee’s decrease of Mr. Frederico’s Individual Cash Incentive Target Multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x in response to thesay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook. In fact, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico a total achievement score of 152% in recognition of his extraordinary contributions in 2018, an increase from his total achievement score of 144.8% for 2017. In recognition of Mr. Frederico’s 2018 accomplishments and to incentivize him over the long term, the Compensation Committee granted Mr. Frederico long-term equity compensation with a target nominal value of $6,000,000, an increase of $250,000 from his grant for the 2017 performance year. Mr. Frederico’s total compensation for the 2018 performance year was composed of the following:

    
    

2018 Performance Year

Compensation

   

2017 Performance Year

Compensation

   Change
from 2017 to
2018
 

  Fixed Compensation—Base Salary(1)

 

   

 

$1,250,000

 

 

 

   

 

$1,250,000

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

  Incentive Compensation

      

  Cash Incentive Compensation

   $3,812,000    $4,525,000    (15.8)% 

  Long-Term Performance-Based Equity

   $3,600,000(2)     $2,875,000(2)     25.2

  Long-Term Time-Based Equity

 

  

 

 

$2,400,000

 

(2) 

 

 
   

 

$2,875,000

 

(2) 

 

 
   

 

(16.5

 

)% 

 

  Total Direct Compensation

 

   

 

$11,062,000

 

 

 

   

 

$11,525,000

 

 

 

   

 

(4.0

 

)% 

 

(1)

Mr. Frederico’s base salary for each of the 2018 and 2017 performance years was established at the beginning of such performance year, in February. Accordingly, Mr. Frederico’s 2018 base salary was established in February 2018 based on Mr. Frederico’s accomplishments in the 2017 performance year.

(2)

Represents the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value for the relevant performance year, using the average stock price over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the date of grant.

The compensation package presented in the table above is different from theSEC-required disclosure in the Summary Compensation Table on page 53 and is not a substitute for the information in that table. Rather, it is intended to show how the Compensation Committee linked Mr. Frederico’s compensation and its components to our performance results and his achievements for the prior year. The base salary is paid during the performance year, while all of the components of the incentive compensation is based on achievements during the performance year and so is awarded in the first quarter of the following year.

37


Base Salary

In February 2018, in light of Mr. Frederico’s accomplishments in 2017 and the importance of maintaining his strategic leadership in the future, particularly in respect of managing our capital, mitigating the risks in our insured portfolio, and deciding upon appropriate alternative investments that complement our financial guaranty business and core competencies, but also considering the increase he had received in February 2017, the Compensation Committee maintained Mr. Frederico’s base salary at $1,250,000 for the 2018 performance year.

In February 2019, given the continued importance of maintaining Mr. Frederico’s strategic leadership, but also considering the result of oursay-on-pay vote and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, the Compensation Committee chose to again maintain Mr. Frederico’s salary at $1,250,000 for the 2019 performance year.

Cash Incentive

To determine Mr. Frederico’s cash incentive, as discussed above, the Compensation Committee used a formula that involved aggregating the weighted achievement scores for certain financial performance goals and individualnon-financial objectives, and multiplying the result by Mr. Frederico’s Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount. Please refer to the diagram and discussion found above under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation.”

Setting Mr. Frederico’s 2018 Financial Performance Goals

In February 2018, the Compensation Committee established targets for five financial performance goals for Mr. Frederico (and for our other executive officers) for the 2018 performance year. The financial performance goals were based on the business plan that the Board of Directors reviewed and approved in November 2017 and were designed to measure our progress in creating value for our shareholders. We include on pages 31 to 32 under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process” a detailed description of the financial performance goals, and why the Compensation Committee considers them to be important in assessing our Company and our executive officers’ performance. All of these arenon-GAAP financial measures.

The Compensation Committee viewed all of the 2018 targets for the financial performance goals as challenging in light of current market conditions and the reasons for our 2017 results, which were driven in part by our acquisition of MBIA UK in 2017. In recognition of the extraordinary impact of the acquisition of MBIA UK on some of our financial measures, the Compensation Committee set two of the 2018 targets (core operating income per diluted share and core operating ROE) at levels it viewed as challenging but that were below 2017 comparable results. The Compensation Committee was aware that, given the anticipated decline of earned premium and the uncertainty of acquisition and other strategic transactions, the executive officers also would be required to manage losses and make strategic moves to meet all of the targets except for PVP. We include on pages 33 to 34 under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process” a more detailed explanation of the Compensation Committee’s process for setting our financial performance goals and why the Compensation Committee may view as challenging financial performance goals set below prior year actual results.

Mr. Frederico’s 2018 Financial Performance Goal Scores

In 2018, we exceeded all of the 2018 targets for the financial performance goals, in some instances substantially.

We generated more than double our PVP financial performance goal, exceeding the goal by nearly 114%. More than half of that PVP was created in our reinsurance transaction with SGI. In the U.S. public finance market, we estimate we wrote approximately 57% of the total insured par in 2018. The achievement is significant in light of our maintaining our underwriting and pricing principles despite the challenging business environment we continue to face.

We exceeded our goal for core operating income per diluted share by 47%. Premium earnings came in stronger than planned as a result of the SGI reinsurance transaction and higher than expected refunding activity. Losses were also lower than planned, and we had lower weighted average diluted shares outstanding.

Core operating shareholders’ equity per share reached its highest level in our history, increasing 8.9% fromyear-end 2017 and exceeding our goal by 1.6%.

We exceeded our goal for core operating ROE by 43%. Core operating ROE was higher than target due primarily to higher core operating income, which was higher for the reasons described above.

Core adjusted book value, which we refer to as Core ABV, per share reached its highest level in our history, propelled by our efficient management of capital and the generation of PVP.

38


We achieved these results despite a persistently challenging business environment.

Over the last several years, municipal bond yields have been at historically low levels and credit spreads have been tight, making our product less attractive to issuers. Interest rates remained low in 2018 by historical standards, although modestly higher than in the previous year, but credit spreads were virtually unchanged.

New Issuance in the U.S. public finance market declined sharply in response to tax law changes, particularly restrictions on advance refundings.

We continued to face competition in an already tight market from a second financial guaranty insurer that focuses on a smaller portion of the market than we do and provides price competition in those markets where we overlap.

The Compensation Committee assigned Mr. Frederico achievement scores for his achievements against each individual financial performance goal. In two instances, we achieved results substantially in excess of the 2018 financial performance goals established by the Compensation Committee in November 2017, but below the actual results for 2017. In both of these instances, the Compensation Committee exercised its negative discretion to reduce how it would have scored the 2018 result if the 2018 result had not been lower than the 2017 result.

Our core operating income per diluted share exceeded the 2018 goal by nearly 50%, so probably would have been scored between 140% and 160%, depending on the circumstances; the Compensation Committee exercised its negative discretion to reduce the score to 100% in light of the actual 2017 Core operating income per diluted share of $5.31.

Similarly, our Core operating ROE exceeded the 2018 goal by nearly 45%, so probably would have been scored between 135% and 155%, depending on the circumstances; the Compensation Committee exercised its negative discretion to reduce the score to 110% in light of the actual 2017 core Operating ROE of 10.1% and circumstances surrounding the amount of capital we believe prudent to retain.

The Compensation Committee weighted Mr. Frederico’s financial performance goal scores in accordance with the cash incentive formula, which resulted in a weighted financial performance goal score of 89.8%:

      
   2018 Targets  2018 Results  Weighting  2018
Achievement
Score
(0%-200%)
  Weighted
Achievement
Score
 

 Financial Performance Goals*

                    

 PVP

  $ 310 million   $663 million   13.4%   200  26.8% 

 Core operating income per diluted share

  $2.97   $4.37   13.4%   100%**   13.4% 

 Core operating shareholders’ equity per share

  $60.19   $61.14   13.4%   120  16.1% 

 Core operating ROE

  5.3%   7.6%   13.4%   110%**   14.7% 

 Core ABV per share

 

  

 

$83.47

 

 

 

  

 

$86.21

 

 

 

  

 

13.4%

 

 

 

  

 

140

 

 

  

 

18.8%

 

 

 

 Total Financial Performance Goal Score

 

          

 

67%

 

 

 

      

 

89.8%

 

 

 

*

All of the financial performance goals are based onnon-GAAP financial measures, which are described on pages 47 to 48 under“Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

**

The Compensation Committee exercised its negative discretion with respect to these two achievement scores.

39


Mr. Frederico’sNon-Financial Objectives

The Compensation Committee also evaluated Mr. Frederico’s 2018 achievements against his 2018non-financial objectives. Highlights of those achievements include the positive financial impact from our reinsurance transaction with SGI; achievement of the highest level of PVP since the financial crisis; and the prominent role our Company continues to assume in the restructuring of the debt of Puerto Rico and its related authorities and public corporations. The details of Mr. Frederico’s 2018 achievements against his 2018non-financial objectives are set out in the pages that follow.

Non-Financial Objectives2018 Results

 Strategy and leadership - Articulate clear strategy and lead effective  implementation of business plan to grow direct business and take advantage  of reinsurance opportunities

 •    Leverage the Company’s rating and financial strength to expand public finance (municipal and infrastructure) bond insurance market; continue to market the value of bond insurance to existing and new distribution channels; write budgeted PVP in the US and UK

 •    Attempt to purchase available bond insurance portfolios if they come on the market; recapture previously ceded portfolios

 •    Maintain regulatory status to write infrastructure and structured finance bond insurance in US and internationally

 •    Accumulate capital at AGL for corporate purposes, including stock repurchases

 •    Complete consolidation of UK entities to streamline international operations

•     Wrote a total of $663 million of PVP, more than in any year since the financial crisis, despite the persistently challenging business environment

   US public finance PVP of $206 million

   In the UK, wrote first post-crisis Australian transaction and generated $44 million of PVP

   In structured finance, wrote first post-crisis CLO transaction and established aircraft residual value insurance and reinsurance as a flow business

   In the US, expanded our activity in the healthcare sector, where we insured three new issue transactions, each of which involved more than $100 million of par insured

•     Our financial guarantee facilitated access by a large UK housing association to the Asian investor market, opening up a new universe of potential investors for UK social housing transactions

•     Completed SGI reinsurance transaction, generating $391 million of PVP and $35 million of earned premiums in 2018

•     Contingency planning for Brexit: began process of establishing a post-Brexit subsidiary and applying for a license for it to underwrite business in anon-UK EU country and eventually to passport to other EU jurisdictions

•     Completed $500 million of share repurchases

•     Successfully addressed all of the hurdles set by the UK regulators to the combination of our European insurance subsidiaries into Assured Guaranty (Europe) plc (AGE)

   UK business combination was completed effective November 2018, simplifying our capital structure, reducing our regulatory and financial reporting burden in Europe, and creating a surviving entity with significant capital

40


Non-Financial Objectives2018 Results

Continue diversification strategy to integrate fee based business in financial services to complement financial guaranty business

•  Closed on minority investment in the parent of Rubicon Infrastructure Advisors

•  Investigated several other possible investments, in some instances involving substantial negotiation and diligence

Active management of all potential loss transactions, including proactive minimization of losses from Puerto Rico exposure

Puerto Rico:

•  Achieved the resolution of the insured debt of our first major Puerto Rico credit, the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation (COFINA); that resolution was incorporated into the COFINA plan of adjustment approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico in February 2019, and will result in recoveries to us approaching 60% for our insurance of the subordinate bonds

•  Successfully opposed a $1 billiondebtor-in-possession loan for PREPA that would have been secured by a senior, priming lien on PREPA’s revenues

•  Successfully appealed to the First Circuit to overturn the District Court’s decision denying the Company’s motion for relief from stay to appoint a receiver for PREPA, and reinstituted the action for the appointment of a receiver

•  Successfully appealed to the First Circuit to challenge the membership of the Oversight Board based on the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution

•  Initiated an action challenging the fiscal plans of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico certified by the Oversight Board

Outside Puerto Rico:

•  Working with our financial advisor, lobbyists and consultants, we were able to help persuade the State of Connecticut to effectively assume the public debt of Hartford

•  Working with a special servicer, increased recoveries in our home equity residential mortgage transactions

Financial strength ratings—Maintain strong financial strength ratings in order to facilitate implementation of business plan. Periodically assesses the value of each rating assigned to each of the companies within the group and determine whether to request that a rating agency add or drop a rating from certain companies

•  All financial strength ratings maintained

•  Obtained AA+ Kroll Bond Rating Agency rating for AGE

Ensure AGL has comprehensive, best-practice risk management with respect to all of its activities, emphasizing the credit quality of risks insured; compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements; and enterprise risk management. All credit underwriting consistent with risk/appetite statement

•  Our enterprise risk management has consistently been commended, including by rating agencies

•  Successfully concluded a periodically scheduled examination by the New York and Maryland regulators of AGM, MAC and AGC; clean reports were issued for all three insurers

•  Addressed requirements under EU General Data Protection Regulation

•  All new business within risk limits and risk appetite statement

Management development and succession planning—Attract and retain top quality senior management; develop succession plan for critical positions, including assisting the Board in further development of a CEO succession plan

•  Reviewed CEO succession plan with Board of Directors

•  Hired additional U.S. public finance marketing staff

41


Based on Mr. Frederico’s 2018 achievements against his 2018non-financial objectives, the Compensation Committee awarded him an achievement score of 190% against those objectives. Applying that score to the cash incentive formula resultedQualifications:

Ms. Shea’s expertise in a weightednon-financial objective score of 62.7%.

The Compensation Committee then added the weightednon-financial objective score of 62.7% to the weighted financial performance goal score of 89.8% achieved by Mr. Frederico, to derive a total achievement score of 152.5% in accordance with the cash incentive formula, as follows:

      
   

2018 Targets

 

  

2018 Results

 

  

Weighting

 

  

2018
Achievement
Score
(0%-200%)

 

  

Weighted
Achievement
Score

 

 

Financial Performance Goals*

 

PVP

 $ 310 million  $663 million  13.4%    200%    26.8% 

 

Core operating income per diluted share

 $2.97  $4.37  13.4%    100%    13.4% 

 

Core operating shareholders’ equity per share

 $60.19  $61.14  13.4%    120%    16.1% 

 

Core operating ROE

 5.3%  7.6%  13.4%    110%    14.7% 

 

Core ABV per share

 $83.47  $86.21  13.4%    140%    18.8% 

 

Total Financial Goal Score

       67%       89.8% 
               

 

Non-Financial Objectives

 

Strategy and leadership

 Described in detail in the preceding table  Described in detail in the preceding table  33%    190%    62.7% 

 

Active management of all potential
loss transactions

 

Maintain current ratings for operating insurance company subsidiaries

 

Best practice risk management

 

Management development and
succession planning

 

Non-Financial Objective Score

       33%       62.7% 
               

 

Achievement Score

             152.5% 

*

All of the financial performance goals are based onnon-GAAP financial measures, which are described on page 47 under“Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

In reviewing Mr. Frederico’s 2018 performance scorecard, the Compensation Committee determined that he had a very strong year. In particular, the Compensation Committee found that Mr. Frederico should be recognized for our success in exceeding all of the targets for the financial performance goals established by the Compensation Committee, in certain cases substantially. Mr. Frederico’s very strong performance was demonstrated by our $663 million of PVP production, our highest since prior to the financial crisis. Mr. Frederico’s leadership was also credited for progress in resolving our insured exposure to Puerto Rico credits. Importantly, our TSR has reflected these strides: ourone-year TSR for 2018 was nearly 15%audit, risk and our three-year TSR for 2016 through 2018 was over 52%.

Based on Mr. Frederico’s achievements, the Compensation Committee gave him a total achievement score of 152.5% for the 2018 performance year, above his 144.8% total achievement score for the 2017 performance year. Applying this achievement score to his Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount resulted in a cash incentive award of $3,812,000. This was $713,000 (or more than 15%) less than the $4,525,000 awarded to Mr. Frederico for the 2017 performance year as a result of the reduction of his individual target cash incentive multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x in response to last year’ssay-on-pay results and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook.

Equity Compensation

The Compensation Committee awarded all of Mr. Frederico’s long-term incentive compensation in the form of PSUs and RSUs. The $6,000,000 target nominal amount of long-term equity constituted a 4.3% increase over the target nominal amount for the prior year. The Compensation Committee believed it was very important to reward Mr. Frederico for his and for our Company’s very strong performance during 2018. It also reflected the Compensation Committee’s desire that Mr. Frederico have a strong incentive to continue his valued leadership of our Company and to generate long-term, sustained growth that will enhance shareholder value.

The following table sets forth the target nominal amount the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico on February 27, 2019, the grant date. The Compensation Committee determined the number of PSUs and RSUs to award Mr. Frederico by converting the

42


target nominal amount of the award using $40.10, which was the average price of our Common Shares over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on February 27, 2019.

When we prepare the Summary Compensation Table, we report the value of the grants using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (which we refer to as U.S. GAAP), in accordance with the SEC’s rules.

Under U.S. GAAP, the value of an ABV PSU as of February 27, 2019 was determined to be $41.34. This valueinvestment management is based on the closing price of our Common Shares on that date, which U.S. GAAP allows as a practical expedient to value grants with complicated features, such as in this case the estimated growth rate of the Company’s Core ABV per share.

Under U.S. GAAP, the value of a Relative TSR PSU on February 27, 2019 was $46.66. This value was computed using a Monte-Carlo simulation model taking into account the historical relationship of our TSR and the TSR of the Index, including for the period from the beginning of the Relative TSR PSU performance period to February 27, 2019, the grant date. We engaged Aon to provide this computation for us.

Under U.S. GAAP, the value of an RSU was $41.34, based our Common Share closing price on February 27, 2019.

The aggregate value of Mr. Frederico’s February 2019 long-term equity incentive grants under U.S. GAAP is set forth below.

    
      

Compensation Committee Target
Nominal Value

 

     

Equity
Granted
(Shares)

 

   

U.S. GAAP
Value

 

 

 

  ABV PSUs

     $1,800,000        44,888     $1,855,670 

 

  Relative TSR PSUs

     $1,800,000        44,888     $2,094,474 

 

  RSUs

     $2,400,000        59,850     $2,474,199 

 

  TOTAL

     $6,000,000        149,626     $6,424,343 

CEO Compensation Conclusion

The Compensation Committee considered the total compensation it was awarding to Mr. Frederico pursuant to its formulas and methodologies in light of Mr. Frederico’s considerable accomplishments with respect to the financial performance goals as well as hisnon-financial objectives, but also taking into account last year’ssay-on-pay results, shareholder feedback and advice from Cook.

The Compensation Committee concluded that it was appropriate that Mr. Frederico’s individual target cash incentive multiple be reduced to 2.0x from 2.5x, which resulted in a decrease in his individual cash incentive by $713,000 (or over 15%) to $3,812,000 for the 2018 performance year despite the increase in Mr. Frederico’s total achievement score.

The Compensation Committee also considered the importance of maintaining Mr. Frederico’s leadership of our Company in the years ahead, as we seek to continue developing our financial guaranty business, to diversify into areas that complement our core credit experience and risk appetite, to manage our insured exposure and mitigate any losses in the insured portfolio, and to manage our capital, and so increased Mr. Frederico’s long-term equity compensation by $250,000 in targeted nominal value.

Taking these various factors into account, the Compensation Committee believed it was also appropriate for Mr. Frederico’s total 2018 compensation, which it determined in accordance with its formulas and methodologies, to be 4.0% lower than his total 2017 compensation.

OTHER NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION DECISIONS

Non-Financial Objectives and Achievements of the Other Named Executive Officers

The Compensation Committee made compensation awards to the other executive officers for the 2018 performance year based on its assessment of their achievements and Mr. Frederico’s review of their performance, as well as Mr. Frederico’s compensation recommendations. The other named executive officers’ achievements were evaluated based on their contributions to our achievement of our financial goals, their contributions to the achievement of Mr. Frederico’snon-financial objectives, and their own achievements of the individualnon-financial objectives Mr. Frederico had assigned to them, as described below.

Robert A. Bailenson, Chief Financial Officer

Mr. Bailenson was responsible in the 2018 performance year for meeting all internal and external financial requirements, managing our capital efficiently, meeting with investors, and participating on earnings calls. Mr. Bailenson takes an enterprise view on all issues and involves himself in issues beyond accounting and treasury functions. More specifically, Mr. Bailenson:

Managed the successful combination of our European insurance subsidiaries, simplifying our capital structure, reducing our regulatory and financial reporting burden in Europe, and creating a surviving entity with significant capital;

43


Successfully completed the SGI reinsurance transaction;

Managed our response to the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act;

Provided significant analysis of alternative investments we made as well as potential alternative investments;

Provided strategic analysis in the formulation and execution of our business plan; and

Was responsible for the timely and accurate filing of all financial statements.

Russell B. Brewer II, Chief Surveillance Officer

Mr. Brewer was responsible in the 2018 performance year for ensuring that all of our insured exposures are reviewed annually and assigned appropriate internal ratings, for managing loss mitigation strategies for our troubled credits, and for overseeing our information technology department. Mr. Brewer also manages our rating agency relationships. More specifically, Mr. Brewer:

Led the surveillance process for our $242 billion net par insured portfolio and the timely review and update of internal ratings for our insured portfolio, helping to identify and intervene in deteriorating situations before losses developed to avoid losses altogether or mitigate them if they cannot be avoided;

Oversaw the successful integration of the data for our European insurance subsidiaries;

Oversaw the successful defense of our systems from cyberattacks and our compliance with new cybersecurity regulations;

Developed and implemented strategies on a number of transactions where we are experiencing or could possibly experience loss;

Was active in our discussions with the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and its advisors and was instrumental in helping the Company come to a resolution of our insured COFINA obligations; and

Led the smooth integration into our Company of surveillance oversight and information systems of the insurance portfolio of SGI in connection with our reinsurance transaction and related administrative services agreement.

Ling Chow, General Counsel

Ms. Chow ably stepped up to the general counsel role in the 2018 performance year, providing leadership for our corporate, regulatory and disclosure efforts and leading a number of important initiatives, including supervising our litigation strategies and workout activities relating to distressed credits; developing the optimal structure from a regulatory perspective of a number of alternative investment opportunities; and overseeing the legal and regulatory aspects of our reinsurance transaction with SGI. She also oversaw all of our human resource matters. More specifically, Ms. Chow:

Oversaw litigation strategy relating to our Puerto Rico exposure;

Oversaw the successful combination of the European insurance subsidiaries, simplifying our capital structure, reducing our regulatory and financial reporting burden in Europe, and creating a surviving entity with significant capital;

Was instrumental in our contingency planning for Brexit;

Led the legal aspect of the consummation of our SGI reinsurance transaction;

Supervised the legal and regulatory aspects of our purchase of a minority interest in Rubicon Infrastructure Advisors as well as other potential alternative investments;

Oversaw legal support and analysis for all underwriting activity;

Oversaw all disclosure activities; and

Supervised our response to various legal and regulatory issues, including those related to cybersecurity and privacy as well as the rising prominence of environmental, social and governance issues.

Bruce E. Stern, Executive Officer

Mr. Stern was responsible in the 2018 performance year for workouts of troubled transactions and the extraction of significant value from our insured portfolio and other relationships. Mr. Stern applied creative approaches to troubled transactions to mitigate losses. Mr. Stern is also responsible for governmental affairs and our participation in an industry group. More specifically, Mr. Stern:

Was deeply involved in our efforts to mitigate losses in Puerto Rico, playing a particularly valuable role in advocating our viewpoint to various government officials;

Made significant progress in resolving two distressed insurance transactions; and

Identified and realized opportunities in our insured portfolio by purchasing insured bonds in the open market, procuring the termination of financial guaranty insurance executed in credit default swap form and executing reinsurance commutations.

44


Compensation Decisions for the Other Named Executive Officers

In the case of the other named executive officers, for the 2018 performance year the Compensation Committee calculated and aggregated the weighted achievement scores for the financial performance goals (which were the same as Mr. Frederico’s) and theirnon-financial objectives (which were a combination of their contribution to Mr. Frederico’snon-financial objectives and their achievement of their own individualnon-financial objectives), taking into account the level of difficulty of achieving particular goals or objectives. Based on their achievements, after applying the formula, the Compensation Committee awarded them the cash incentives calculated as shown in the table below.

   

(

 

 

 

2018
Base

Salary

 

  

X

 

 

 

2018

Individual

Target
Cash

Incentive

Multiple

 

  

)

 

 

  

X

 

 

 

(

 

 

 

Financial
Goal

Achievement

Score

(weighted

67%)

 

  

+

 

 

 

Individual
Non-

Financial
Objective

Achievement
Score

(weighted

33%)

 

  

)

 

 

 

=

 

 

 

2018 Cash

Incentive

Payout

 

 

 

Robert A. Bailenson

   $700,000     2.00x             89.8%     49.5%      $1,949,920 

 

Russell B. Brewer II

   $525,000     2.00x             89.8%     61.1%      $1,583,715 

 

Ling Chow

   $500,000     2.00x             89.8%     36.3%      $1,260,800 

 

Bruce E. Stern

   $500,000     2.00x             89.8%     33.0%      $1,227,800 

The Compensation Committee awarded all of the other named executive officers’ long-term incentive compensation in the form of PSUs and RSUs with the same terms and in the same proportion as the PSUs and RSUs awarded to Mr. Frederico. The target nominal amount of long-term equity reflected the Compensation Committee’s desire that each of the other named executive officers have a strong incentive to help generate long-term, sustained growth for our Company. The amounts of PSUs and RSUs awarded to each other named executive officer vary by individual and are based on their respective positions and levels of responsibility, historic compensation levels and Cook’s advice about the compensation practices of companies in our comparison group.

The Compensation Committee considered Cook’s analysis of the compensation paid to named executive officers in our previous comparison group when evaluating the compensation of our executive officers. (We revised our comparison group after this analysis was completed.) According to Cook, for the 2017 performance year, which is the most recent data available, on average, the target total direct compensation for our named executive officers ranked above the 75th percentile amounts for the named executive officers of our previous comparison group, reflecting the experience, leadership, specialized skill sets and sustained performance of our senior executive team. Actual total direct compensation for our named executive officers as a group paid for the 2017 performance year was also above the 75th percentile of our previous comparison group, reflecting our above target bonus payouts for 2017 performance, which were aligned with our 2017 performance relative to our key business goals and strategies, as well as our strong financial performance for that period and our three-year total shareholder returns relative to our previous comparison group. For the 2017 performance year, ourone-year growth in operating income, net income, diluted earnings per share and book value, as well asone-year return on average equity, were all above the 75th percentile of the previous comparison group, consistent with the ranking of our actual total direct compensation. Also, despite the apparent impact on our the price of our Common Shares of the landfall of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico in late 2017, our three-year TSR at the end of 2017 was still above the median of our previous comparison group.

In summary, the Compensation Committee approved the following compensation decisions for the named executive officers other than Mr. Frederico for the 2018 performance year:

     
    Robert A.
Bailenson
   Russell B.
Brewer II
   Ling
Chow
   Bruce E.
Stern
 

 

  Fixed Compensation—Base Salary(1)

   $700,000    $525,000    $500,000    $500,000 

 

  Incentive Compensation

                    

 

  Cash Incentive Compensation

  $1,949,920   $1,583,715   $1,260,800   $1,227,800 

 

  Long-Term Equity Incentive Target Values(2)

  $1,500,000   $1,100,000   $1,000,000   $700,000 

 

  Total Direct Compensation

  $4,149,920   $3,208,715   $2,760,800   $2,427,800 

(1)

These base salaries were set by the Compensation Committee in February 2018.

(2)

The long-term equity incentive awards were allocated similarly to Mr. Frederico’s, and comprised 30% ABV PSUs, 30% Relative TSR PSUs and 40% RSUs. The U.S. GAAP values of the awards are: Mr. Bailenson, $1,606,106; Mr. Brewer, $1,177,776; Ms. Chow, $1,070,695 and Mr. Stern, $749,533.

45


The Compensation Committee also decided to increase the base salary of Ms. Chow to $525,000 in 2019 from $500,000 in 2018 in recognition of her successful transition to general counsel in 2018 and her contributions to our strategic initiatives. The Compensation Committee believes that it is critical for Ms. Chow to remain highly motivated in 2019, especially in light of demands it anticipates will be made on her in connection with our continued focus on developments in and litigation regarding Puerto Rico and our many corporate initiatives, including potential additional alternative investment activity.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION CONCLUSION

We received advisory shareholder approval of over 98% with respect to the compensation we paid to our named executive officers in the three years after we last made changes to our executive compensation program in 2015, until last year. After last year’s lowersay-on-pay approval percentage, we sought feedback from our shareholders and advice from Cook. In response, the Compensation Committee determined to make a number of additional changes in our executive compensation program in 2019.

Despite Mr. Frederico’s achievements during the 2018 performance year, which the Compensation Committee scored higher than his achievements during the 2017 performance year, the Compensation Committee determined to respond to thesay-on-pay result, based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, by reducing Mr. Frederico’s individual cash target multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x. The Compensation Committee also introduced negative discretion in its scoring of financial performance goals that were exceeded but where the results were still below the prior year, and exercised that negative discretion in February 2019 for both financial performance measures where it was relevant. As a consequence, despite Mr. Frederico’s 2018 achievements, his cash incentive payment of $3,812,000 this year reflected a reduction of $713,000 (more than 15%) from his cash incentive payment of $4,525,000 last year.

The Compensation Committee also redesigned its long-term equity incentive program in response to thesay-on-pay result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook, increasing the portion of the award linked to performance and redesigning the PSUs to be linked to the growth in our Core ABV per share and our TSR relative to the 55th percentile of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, in each case over a three-year period. The Compensation Committee believes these new PSUs link our executive officers’ interests even more closely to those of our shareholders than the old PSUs did.

The Compensation Committee believes that our executive compensation program rewards performance and motivates the officers to increase shareholder value, and that it is therefore appropriate and in the best interests of our Company and our shareholders. Our strategy requires exceptionally qualified and experienced management in senior financial guaranty executive, finance and legal positions, including personnel with skills and experience in reinsurance, acquisitions and corporate integration as well as asset management, and the ability to deal with adverse market conditions and take advantage of market opportunities. During this critical period in our Company’s history, the Compensation Committee believes that retaining and motivating our executive officers and staff is essential, and that the various elements of total compensation have worked well to attract, retain and properly reward management for their performance.

PAYOUT UNDER PERFORMANCE RETENTION PLAN

The Performance Retention Plan, which we refer to as the PRP, had been utilized as a form of incentive compensation for the executive officers until 2015. Its focus on adjusted book value and operating return on equity over a multi-year performance period reduced the incentive to concentrate on short-term gain and fostered a long-term view that minimized unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

In response to shareholder feedback that we should simplify our executive compensation program and emphasize equity rather than cash for incentive compensation, the Compensation Committee stopped granting our then executive officers new PRP awards beginning in 2015. We continued to grant PRP awards to employees other than our executive officers. Ms. Chow, who was not an executive officer until 2018, continued to receive PRP awards through February 2017, so she also received a cash distribution in March 2018 resulting from her PRP awards in February 2015, 2016 and 2017.

The principal amount of each PRP award is divided into three installments. The portion of principal associated with each installment and the performance period relating to such installment are set out in the terms of the award.

The award payment for each installment is the product of:

Principal amount of award

Portion of principal associated with installment

50% of the sum of 1 and the percentage change in the core ABV per share for the relevant performance period

50% of the sum of 1 and the core operating ROE for the relevant performance period

The individual PRP payouts for amounts that vested on December 31, 2018 are set forth in footnote 2 to the Summary Compensation Table. Those PRP payouts were a function of decisions made in February 2015, 2016 and 2017 regarding the amount of PRP to award relating to the Ms. Chow’s achievements before she became an executive officer and during the 2014, 2015 and 2016 performance years, as well as growth in core ABV per share and the core operating ROE during the relevant performance periods.

46


COMPENSATION GOVERNANCE

The Role of the Board’s Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee oversees all aspects of our executive compensation program. The Compensation Committee has responsibility for:

Establishing executive compensation policies

Determining the compensation of our CEO

Reviewing our CEO’s compensation recommendations regarding other senior officers and determining appropriate compensation for such officers

Our Board has adopted a Compensation Committee Charter to govern the Compensation Committee’s activities. The charter, which may be found on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance, is reviewed annually by the Compensation Committee. Under its charter, the Compensation Committee is authorized to retain compensation, legal, accounting and other expert consultants at our expense.

The Role of the Independent Consultants

For more than ten years, including in 2018, the Compensation Committee has engaged Cook as its independent compensation consultant and considered advice and information from that firm in determining the amount and form of compensation for the executive officers. Every two years, the Nominating and Governance Committee also engages Cook to conduct a comprehensive review of the compensation package for the independent directors; Cook last undertook such a comprehensive review in 2017 and updated that review in 2018.

In 2018, Cook’s work for the Compensation Committee included analyzing our compensation practices in light of best practices, providing a compensation risk assessment, reviewing our comparison group of companies, collecting and providing relevant market data, reviewing data and analyses provided by other consultants, and updating the Compensation Committee with respect to evolving governance trends.

The Compensation Committee has considered the independence of Cook in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. It has requested and received a letter from Cook in 2018 affirming factors relevant to assessing Cook’s independence. The Compensation Committee discussed the content of the letter and concluded that Cook’s work did not raise any independence or conflict of interest issues.

When the Compensation Committee began to seriously contemplate amending the long term equity incentive program to include performance share units based on relative TSR performance, we engaged Aon to model the the grant date fair value and ultimate performance and payout of hypothetical Relative TSR PSUs with various characteristics and, once the characteristics of the Relative TSR PSUs were settled, to provide grant date valuation of the Relative TSR PSUs and to provide Relative TSR PSU value tracking over the life of the Relative TSR PSUs. Aon’s work began in 2018 and continued into 2019.

The Compensation Committee has considered the independence of Aon in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. It has requested and received a letter from Aon in early 2019 affirming factors relevant to assessing Aon’s independence. The Compensation Committee discussed the content of the letter and concluded that Aon’s work did not raise any independence or conflict of interest issues.

Executive Compensation Comparison Group

The Compensation Committee examines pay data for the following 16 companies to review pay practices, identify compensation trends, and benchmark its executive compensation decisions:

  Alleghany CorporationEnstar Group LimitedRadian Group
Arch Capital GroupEssent Group, Ltd.RenaissanceRe Holdings
  Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd.Everest Re Group, Ltd.Selective Insurance Group, Inc
  Assurant, Inc.First American Financial CorporationThe Hanover Insurance Group, Inc.
AXIS Capital Holdings LimitedMGIC Investment CorporationWhite Mountains Insurance Group, Inc.
Eaton Vance Corp.

Companies new to the comparison group this year are indicated inbold.

47


The Compensation Committee has long recognized that the comparison group has limitations. Our company is the only publicly-traded financial guarantor writing new business in today’s markets. Notably, the comparison group consists primarily of mortgage finance and property and casualty insurance and reinsurance companies. Despite the specialized nature of our business, our Compensation Committee looks for companies domiciled in Bermuda or with a similar size, global business model and compensation mix to ours. Although the factors the Compensation Committee considers for its compensation decisions and the level of compensation may differ from those for the comparison group, the Compensation Committee finds it useful to consider the pay practices at these companies.

This differs from the approach of some analysts, who may construct a compensation comparison group based on companies that fall within the same Standard & Poor’s GICS code with somewhat similar revenue and market capitalization as ours but with business models and leadership needs quite different than ours. Such an approach has resulted in one organization developing a compensation comparison group for use in analyzing our compensation practices that includes two small regional property and casualty companies and a small southern insurer that sells liability insurance to doctors and health facilities; these companies, their business models and their leadership needs are not comparable to those of a global leader in specialty financial guaranty products, as we are.

In November 2018, Cook met with members of the Compensation Committee to review the comparison group from the prior year, and to discuss whether other companies should be considered for inclusion in the group, which in the prior year comprised 12 companies. Cook reminded the Compensation Committee that no changes had been made in the comparison group in November 2017 when it was last considered, but that since that time one of the 12 companies, Validius Holdings, had been acquired and removed from the comparison group. Cook performed an independent review to determine whether to change or add to the remaining 11 companies in the comparison group. Based on that review, Cook recommended making several changes to the comparison group.

Cook informed the Compensation Committee that it recommended removing three companies from the comparison group. Two of the companies, Ambac Financial Group and MBIA, while also in the financial guaranty business, are inrun-off and have market capitalization much lower than ours. The third, Aspen Insurance Holdings, was being acquired by Apollo. Cook observed that, without these companies, the comparison group would be down to eight companies, and that a larger comparison group would provide a more statistically reliable data set. Cook looked for companies that were similar to us, screening for size, business model and presence in a peer network, and recommended adding to our comparison group the eight insurance companies indicated inbold in the above list.

Cook advised the Compensation Committee that, as of September 30, 2018, ourone-year TSR ranked in the 71st percentile of the revised comparison group and our three-year TSR was in the 93rd percentile. Cook also informed the Compensation Committee that, as of September 30, 2018, our latest four quarters of revenue and market capitalization fall between the 25th percentile and median of the revised comparison group; our latest total assets were near the median; and our latest four quarters of net income is near the revised comparison group’s “high” number.

The revised comparison group consists of companies that, like our Company, have a business model that involves underwriting risk, a holding company structure, and similar size as measured by revenues, assets and market capitalization. Based on Cook’s recommendation, the Compensation Committee agreed that the 16 companies listed above would constitute the Company’s comparison group for 2018.

Executive Officer Recoupment Policy

Our Board of Directors adopted a recoupment (or clawback) policy in February 2009 pursuant to which the Compensation Committee may rescind or recoup certain of the compensation of an executive officer if such person engages in misconduct related to a restatement of our financial results or of objectively quantifiable performance goals, and the achievement of those goals is later determined to have been overstated.

In connection withRule 10D-1 proposed by the SEC, the Compensation Committee amended the recoupment policy in November 2015 so that it would apply, to the extent required by law, to incentive compensation received in the three year period before a determination that a material restatement is required. The amended recoupment policy allows the Company to recoup incentive compensation which is granted before the adoption and effectiveness of a finalRule 10D-1, but which may be subject to the three year look-back period of any such final rule.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

To demonstrate our commitment to building shareholder value, the Board of Directors adopted management stock ownership guidelines. Our guidelines do not mandate a time frame by which this ownership must be attained, but each executive officer must retain 100% of hisafter-tax receipt of Company stock until he reaches his ownership goal. Please see “Information About Our Common Share Ownership—How Much Stock is Owned by Directors and Executive Officers” for detailed information on the executive officers’ stock ownership.

48


The chart below shows the guideline for each of our named executive officers and each executive’s stock ownership as of March 14, 2019, the record date, using $44.79, the closing price of one of our Common Shares on the NYSE on such date.

  Named Executive OfficerGuidelineCurrent Ownership

  Dominic J. Frederico

7 × Salary

52.1 × Salary

  Robert A. Bailenson

5 × Salary

13.9 × Salary

  Russell B. Brewer II

5 × Salary

13.8 × Salary

  Ling Chow*

5 × Salary

3.7 × Salary

  Bruce E. Stern

5 × Salary

12.4 × Salary

*

Ms. Chow became an executive officer in 2018.

These ownership levels include shares owned and, in the case of Mr. Bailenson, vested share units credited to hisnon-qualified retirement plan. Unvested RSUs, unvested performance share units and unexercised options do not count towards the guidelines. Some of the executive officers who have reached their share ownership goals have made gifts of shares to family or to charitable or educational institutions.

Anti-Hedging Policy

We adopted an anti-hedging policy in 2013 that explicitly prohibits employees and directors from hedging our Common Shares.

Anti-Pledging Policy

Our stock trading policy prohibits employees and directors from pledging our Common Shares without approval of both our General Counsel and the Nominating and Governance Committee. There have been no such transactions to date.

Award Timing

The Compensation Committee meets during our February board meeting to make executive compensation decisions with respect to the previous year’s performance and to make its compensation recommendations to the other directors. After consulting with the Board, the Compensation Committee approves executive officer salary increases (if any), cash incentive compensation, and long-term equity incentive awards. Payments under existing PRP awards (if any) and cash incentives are not paid until after we file with the SEC our Annual Report onForm 10-K for the previous calendar year.

POST-EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

Retirement Benefits

We maintaintax-qualified andnon-qualified defined contribution retirement plans for our executive officers and other eligible employees. We do not maintain any defined benefit pension plans. The Compensation Committee and our management believe that it is important to provide retirement benefits to employees who reach retirement in order to attract and retain key employees. All retirement benefits are more fully described on page 59 under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”

  Benefit Under Defined Contribution Plans

Description

  Core contribution

We contribute 6% of each employee’s salary and cash bonus compensation, which we refer to as eligible compensation

  Company match

We match 100% of each employee’s contribution, up to 6% of eligible compensation

Severance

Under our severance policy for executive officers, following the executive’s involuntary termination without cause or voluntary termination for good reason and subject to the executive signing a release of claims, the executive will receive alump-sum payment in an amount equal to one year’s salary plus his average cash incentive amount over the preceding three-year period, plus apro-rata annual cash incentive amount for the year of termination and an amount equal to one year of medical and dental premiums. The executive officer’s receipt of severance benefits is subject to his compliance withnon-competition,non-solicitation, and confidentiality restrictions during his employment and for a period of one year following termination of employment. We, in our discretion, may choose to pay one year of base salary to an executive who terminates employment for a reason other than involuntary termination without cause or voluntary termination for good reason, in which case the executive will also be subject tonon-competition,non-solicitation, and confidentiality restrictions following his termination of employment.

49


Change In Control Benefits

We provide change in control benefits to encourage executives to consider the best interests of shareholders by mitigating any concerns about their own personal financial well-being in the face of a change in control of our Company. Based on shareholder input and changing market trends, since 2011, in the event of a change in control:

Long-term incentive awards will vest only upon certain terminations of employment following a change in control (double-trigger)

Such awards will vest upon a change in control (single-trigger) if the acquirer does not assume the awards

We do not provide excise tax reimbursements andgross-up payments in the case of a change in control

Detailed information is provided on page 60 under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”

TAX TREATMENT

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits the deductibility of annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to “covered employees” of the Company, unless the compensation satisfied an exception, such as the exception for performance-based compensation. On December 22, 2017, the 2017 Tax Act was enacted, which, among other things, repealed the performance-based compensation exception and expanded the definition of covered employee. The changes to Section 162(m) are effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017. The 2017 Tax Act includes a transition rule so that these changes do not apply to compensation paid pursuant to a “binding written contract” that was in effect on November 2, 2017 and that was not materially modified on or after such date.

Because of the performance-based compensation exception repeal, amounts paid pursuant to a contract effective after November 2, 2017 will not be deductible as performance-based compensation, and the Compensation Committee will not need to consider the requirements of the performance-based compensation exception when considering the design of any such future contracts as part of our compensation program. For amounts paid under contracts in effect on November 2, 2017 that were intended to constitute performance-based compensation, the Compensation Committee will continue to consider the performance-based compensation exception when making determinations of performance under those contracts.

The 2017 Tax Act also expands the definition of covered employee. For 2017, our covered employees included our CEO and other named executive officers (but not the chief financial officer) who were executive officers as of the last day of our fiscal year. For 2018 and thereafter, our covered employees will generally include anyone who (i) was our CEO or chief financial officer at any time during the year, (ii) was one of the other named executive officers who was an executive officer as of the last day of the fiscal year, and (iii) was a covered employee for any previous year after 2016.

As with prior years, although the Compensation Committee will consider deductibility under Section 162(m) with respect to the compensation arrangements for executive officers, deductibility will not be the sole factor used in determining appropriate levels or methods of compensation. The Compensation Committee considers many factors when designing its compensation arrangements in addition to the deductibility of the compensation, and maintains the flexibility to grant awards or pay compensation amounts that arenon-deductible if they believe it is in the best interest of our Company and our shareholders.

In addition, Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code imposes restrictions on nonqualified deferred compensation plans. We maintain deferred compensation plans for the benefit of our employees, including nonqualified deferred compensation plans that provide for employee and employer contributions in excess of the IRS defined contribution plan limits. The deferred compensation plans we maintain are intended to be exempt from the requirements of Section 409A or, if not exempt, to satisfy the requirements of Section 409A, and we have reviewed and, where appropriate, have amended each of our deferred compensation plans to meet the requirements.

Finally, Section 457A of the Internal Revenue Code imposes restrictions on nonqualified deferred compensation plans maintained by a nonqualified entity (which generally includes an entity in a jurisdiction that is not subject to U.S. income tax or a comprehensive foreign income tax). The deferred compensation plans we maintain are intended to be exempt from the requirements of Section 457A.

NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

This proxy statement references financial measures that are not determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and are identified as core, operating, PVP ornon-GAAP. Although thesenon-GAAP financial measures should not be considered substitutes for U.S. GAAP measures, our management and Board consider them important performance indicators and have employed them as well as other factors in determining senior management incentive compensation.

We referenced in theManagement’s Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018 certain of thenon-GAAP financial measures we use in this proxy statement. The definitions for thosenon-GAAP

50


financial measures, which are listed below, and how they may be calculated from the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, may be found on pages 92 to 97 of our Annual Report onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

non-GAAP operating income

non-GAAP operating shareholders’ equity

non-GAAP adjusted book value (ABV)

PVP or present value of new business production

This proxy also references certainnon-GAAP financial measures, which are identified as “core”, that our management and Board also consider important performance indicators and have employed, as well as other factors, in determining senior management incentive compensation. These “core” measures, and how they are calculated from our GAAP financial statements, are as follows:

Core operating income per diluted share. After making the adjustments to net income described on pages 93 to 94 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K,Management’s Discussion and Analysis,Non-GAAP Financial Measuresto arrive atnon-GAAP operating income, the Company subtracts the gain (or loss) included in net income related to FG VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, also disclosed in such section of the Form10-K, and to calculate the per diluted share amount divides the result by the weighted average diluted Common Shares during the period.

Core operating shareholders’ equity per share.After making the adjustments to shareholders’ equity described on pages 94 to 96 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K,Management’s Discussion and Analysis,Non-GAAP Financial Measuresto arrive atnon-GAAP operating shareholders’ equity, the Company subtracts the gain (or loss) related to FG VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, also disclosed in such section of the Form10-K, and to calculate the per share amount divides by the number of Common Shares outstanding.

Core ABV. After making the adjustments to shareholders’ equity described on pages 94 to 96 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K,Management’s Discussion and Analysis,Non-GAAP Financial Measuresto arrive atnon-GAAP adjusted book value (ABV), the Company subtracts the gain (or loss) related to FG VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, also disclosed in such section of theForm 10-K, and to calculate the per share amount divides by the number of Common Shares outstanding.

Core operating ROE. Core operating ROE is calculated as core operating income divided by the average of core operating shareholders’ equity at the beginning and end of the period.

51


COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained in this proxy statement with management and, based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board and its committees. In addition, her experience with state and local governments has given her valuable insight into the U.S. public finance market.

Biography:
Ms. Shea, age 61, has had a 35 year career in U.S. public finance in which she has served as both a municipal advisor and investment banker working with state and local governments, not for profits and universities, in their issuance of Directors thatmunicipal bonds. Ms. Shea has served as the Compensation DiscussionManaging Member of Columbia Capital Management, a national municipal advisory firm, since September 2013 and Analysis be includedretired in our Company’s Annual ReportApril 2021. Prior to her tenure at Columbia Capital Management, Ms. Shea was an investment banker with several Wall Street firms, including serving as National Head of Public Finance at a division of ABN AMRO for five years.
Ms. Shea is an independent director and Audit Committee chair of the Professional Diversity Network. Additionally she serves onForm 10-K several not–for–profit boards, including the Joffrey Ballet of Chicago and the Milken Institute Center for the year ended December 31, 2018Financial Markets Public Finance Advisory Council. Ms. Shea was a founding member of Women in Public Finance, a women’s professional organization founded in 1996, and this proxy statement. The foregoing report has been approveddesignated a Board Leadership Fellow by the Compensation Committee.

Patrick W. Kenny, Chairman

G. Lawrence Buhl

Simon W. Leathes

52


2018 SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

The following table provides compensation information for 2018, 2017 and 2016 for our named executive officers.

  Name and Principal
  Position

 

  

Year

 

   

Salary

 

   

Stock

Awards(1)

 

   

 

Non-Equity

Incentive

Plan

Compen-

sation(2)

 

   

All Other

Compen-

sation(3)

 

   

Total

 

 

 

  Dominic J. Frederico,

  

 

 

 

2018

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,250,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$6,865,967

 

 

  

 

 

 

$3,812,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$843,935

 

 

  

 

 

 

$12,771,902

 

 

  President and Chief

   2017    $1,250,000    $6,588,270    $4,862,500    $826,014    $13,526,784 

  Executive Officer

 

   

 

2016

 

 

 

   

 

$1,150,000

 

 

 

   

 

$5,090,589

 

 

 

   

 

$5,717,851

 

 

 

   

 

$768,875

 

 

 

   

 

$12,727,315

 

 

 

 

  Robert A. Bailenson,

  

 

 

 

2018

 

 

  

 

 

 

$700,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,791,111

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,949,920

 

 

  

 

 

 

$314,899

 

 

  

 

 

 

$4,755,930

 

 

  Chief Financial

   2017    $625,000    $1,557,236    $1,953,125    $286,085    $4,421,446 

  Officer

 

   

 

2016

 

 

 

   

 

$600,000

 

 

 

   

 

$1,119,915

 

 

 

   

 

$2,207,475

 

 

 

   

 

$230,530

 

 

 

   

 

$4,157,920

 

 

 

 

  Russell B. Brewer II,

  

 

 

 

2018

 

 

  

 

 

 

$525,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,313,465

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,583,715

 

 

  

 

 

 

$286,076

 

 

  

 

 

 

$3,708,256

 

 

  Chief Surveillance

   2017    $500,000    $1,317,654    $1,734,250    $253,803    $3,805,707 

  Officer

 

   

 

2016

 

 

 

   

 

$450,000

 

 

 

   

 

$1,119,915

 

 

 

   

 

$1,762,939

 

 

 

   

 

$223,481

 

 

 

   

 

$3,556,335

 

 

 

 

  Ling Chow

  

 

 

 

2018

 

 

  

 

 

 

$500,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,275,345

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,631,350

 

 

  

 

 

 

$195,344

 

 

  

 

 

 

$3,602,039

 

 

  General Counsel

 

                              

 

  Bruce E. Stern,

  

 

 

 

2018

 

 

  

 

 

 

$500,000

 

 

  

 

 

 

$955,293

 

 

  

 

 

 

$1,227,800

 

 

  

 

 

 

$207,800

 

 

  

 

 

 

$2,890,893

 

 

  Executive Officer

   2017    $470,000    $838,490    $1,255,420    $192,864    $2,756,774 

  

 

   

 

2016

 

 

 

   

 

$450,000

 

 

 

   

 

$712,678

 

 

 

   

 

$1,274,087

 

 

 

   

 

$184,236

 

 

 

   

 

$2,621,001

 

 

 

(1)

This column represents the grant date value of performance share unit awards and restricted share unit awards granted in 2018, 2017 and 2016 for 2017, 2016 and 2015 performance, respectively.

(2)

This column represents cash incentive compensation for 2018, 2017 and 2016 paid in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively and the vesting date value of awards under our Performance Retention Plan (PRP) granted in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 and 2013 that vested on December 31 of 2018, 2017 and 2016 and were paid in March 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively, as further described in the table below. As discussed in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Payout Under Performance Retention Plan” above, beginning in February 2015, executive officers no longer receive grants of PRP awards. The last PRP award to most of the executive officers was granted in February 2014 for the 2013 performance year and the last installment of that award vested on December 31, 2017. However, Ms. Chow became an executive officer in 2018 and was granted PRP awards through February 2017. She had PRP awards vest on December 31, 2018, and is expected to have awards continue to vest through December 31, 2020.

   

 

D. Frederico

 

  

 

R. Bailenson

 

  

 

R. Brewer

 

  

 

L. Chow

 

  

 

B. Stern

 

 

 

 

  2018 Cash Incentive Compensation

 

 

 

 

 

 

$3,812,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,949,920

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,583,715

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,260,800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,227,800

 

 

 

 

 

  2018 PRP Payout

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$370,550

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Total

 

 

 

 

$3,812,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,949,920

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,583,715

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,631,350

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,227,800

 

 

(3)

All Other Compensation for 2018 consists of the benefits set forth in the table below. Contributions to defined contribution retirement plans include contributions with respect to salary and cash incentive compensation. The Miscellaneous category within All Other Compensation includes Bermuda club fees, Bermuda health insurance, gym fees, and executive physicals.

   

 

D. Frederico

 

  

 

R. Bailenson

 

  

 

R. Brewer

 

  

 

L. Chow

 

  

 

B. Stern

 

 

 

  Employer Contribution to Retirement Plans

 

 

 

 

 

 

$693,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$291,375

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$242,760

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$180,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$191,750

 

 

 

 

 

  Bermuda Housing Allowance

 

 

 

 

 

 

$22,043

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Bermuda Car Allowance

 

 

 

 

 

 

$20,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Bermuda Travel Allowance

 

 

 

 

 

 

$15,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Tax Preparation/Financial Planning

 

 

 

 

 

 

$37,217

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$1,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$21,280

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$75

 

 

 

 

 

  Matching Gift Donations

 

 

 

 

 

 

$15,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$15,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$15,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$8,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$8,550

 

 

 

 

 

  Business-Related Spousal Travel

 

 

 

 

 

 

$20,163

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$7,424

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$7,036

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$7,044

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$3,387

 

 

 

 

 

  Miscellaneous

 

 

 

 

 

 

$21,512

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$4,038

 

 

 

 

 

  Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

$843,935

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$314,899

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$286,076

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$195,344

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$207,800

 

 

 

 

53


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS

NoneNational Association of our named executive officers currently have any employment agreements with the Company.

PERQUISITE POLICY

Our Company has established a perquisite policy pursuant to which we provide executive officers certain perquisites that are not available to employees generally. We believe that perquisites we provide to our named executive officers meet certain business objectives and that the benefit our Company receives from providing these perquisites significantly outweighs the cost of providing them. We feel these perquisites minimize distractions to our named executive officers, thereby enabling them to perform their responsibilities more efficiently. These include tax preparation, financial planning (until 2019, when it was eliminated), annual executive medical exams (for persons who became executive officers prior to December 31, 2017) and, for our executive officers located in Bermuda, housing and car allowances, Bermuda club memberships, and family travel stipend. In light of the challenges of the Bermuda market, including travel to and from the island, and the cost of living and maintaining a residence, the Bermuda perquisites are consistent with competitive practices in the Bermuda market and have been necessary for recruitment and retention purposes. Any of these perquisites may be modified by the Compensation Committee without the consent of the executive officers.

Prior to January 1, 2019, we provided tax preparation and financial planning services to maximize the value of Company-provided compensation and to assist our named executive officers with tax compliance in various jurisdictions, especially since some of our named executive officers fulfill their responsibilities to the Company by working outside their home country for a portion of their time. Beginning January 1, 2019, we no longer provide financial planning services.

In determining the total compensation payable to our named executive officers, the Compensation Committee considers perquisites in the context of the total compensation which our named executive officers are eligible to receive. However, given the fact that perquisites represent a relatively small portion of the executive’s total compensation, the availability of these perquisites does not materially influence the decisions made by the Compensation Committee with respect to other elements of the total compensation to which our named executive officers are entitled to or which they are awarded.

SEVERANCE POLICY

Our Company has adopted a severance policy for executive officers. For further detail, see the discussion in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Post-Employment Compensation—Severance” and “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change ofControl—Change-in-Control Severance”. A severance policy enables us to attract and retain top candidates for our executive positions and enables us to have good relations with those executives.

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

We maintain a broad based employee stock purchase plan that gives our eligible employees the right to purchase our Common Shares through payroll deductions at a purchase price that reflects a 15% discount to the market price of our Common Shares on the first or last day of the relevant subscription period, whichever is lower. No participant may purchase more than $25,000 worth of Common Shares under this plan in any calendar year. In 2018, Mr. Frederico, Mr. Stern and two other executive officers participated in the employee stock purchase plan; Mr. Frederico and Mr. Stern participated to the maximum extent possible.

As discussed in “Proposal No. 3: Approval of Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as Amended” on pages 68 to 71, we are presenting a proposal at the Annual General Meeting to amend this plan to increase the number of Common Shares available for delivery.

INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS

We enter into indemnification agreements with our directors and executive officers. These agreements are in furtherance of ourBye-Laws which require us to indemnify our directors and officers for acts done, concurred in or omitted in or about the execution of their duties in their respective offices.

Corporate Directors.

The indemnification agreements provide for indemnification arising out of specified indemnifiable events, such as events relating to the fact that the indemnitee is or was one of our directors or officers or is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of another entity at our request or relating to anything done or not done by the indemnitee in such a capacity.

The indemnification agreements provide for advancement of expenses.

These agreements provide for mandatory indemnification to the extent an indemnitee is successful on the merits. To the extent that indemnification is unavailable, the agreements provide for contribution.

The indemnification agreements set forth procedures relating to indemnification claims.

The agreements also provide for maintenance of directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.

54


2018 GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS

The following table sets forth information concerning grants of plan-based awards for our named executive officers made during 2018.

    
    

Estimated Future

Payouts Under

Non-Equity Incentive

Plan Awards

  

Estimated

Future Payouts

Under Equity Incentive

Plan Awards

     

Name

  Grant Date   Target   Maximum   Threshold    Target   Maximum   


All Other

Stock Awards:

Number of

Shares of
Stock or Units

 

 

 


 

  




Grant
Date Fair
Value of
Stock and
Option
Awards(5)





 

Dominic J. Frederico

  Feb. 21, 2018(1)   $2,500,000   $5,000,000                 
  Feb. 21, 2018(2)         41,118.5    82,237   164,474      $3,753,297 
   Feb. 21, 2018(3)                   82,237   $3,112,670 

Robert A. Bailenson

  Feb. 21, 2018(1)   $1,400,000   $2,800,000                 
  Feb. 21, 2018(2)         10,726.5    21,453   42,906      $979,115 
   Feb. 21, 2018(3)                   21,453   $811,996 

Russell B. Brewer II

  Feb. 21, 2018(1)   $1,050,000   $2,100,000                 
  Feb. 21, 2018(2)         7,866    15,732   31,464      $718,008 
   Feb. 21, 2018(3)                   15,732   $595,456 

Ling Chow

  Feb. 21, 2018(1)   $1,000,000   $2,000,000                 
  Feb. 21, 2018(2)         4,648    9,296   18,592      $424,269 
  Feb. 21, 2018(3)                   9,296   $351,854 
   Feb. 21, 2018(4)                   13,186   $499,222 

Bruce E. Stern

  Feb. 21, 2018(1)   $1,000,000   $2,000,000                 
  Feb. 21, 2018(2)         5,721    11,442   22,884      $522,213 
   Feb. 21, 2018(3)                   11,442   $433,080 

(1)

Represents a grant of anon-equity incentive compensation award. As described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation”, the Compensation Committee uses atwo-step process for granting and paying annualnon-equity incentive compensation awards to executive officers. On the February 21, 2018 grant date, the Compensation Committee granted suchnon-equity incentive compensation awards to the executive officers pursuant to the LTIP with such awards subject to the satisfaction of a performance goal related to certain performance metrics of the Company. Assuming that such performance goal was met, the second step consists of the Compensation Committee using negative discretion to determine the actual amount of the cash payment. On the grant date, the Compensation Committee adopted the target and maximum payment amounts listed in the table above for any payments pursuant to such awards, as well as a formula for using negative discretion to determine the actual amount of payment. Following certification that the adjusted income goal was met and the application of the formula to each of the executive officers, the Compensation Committee approved the payments described in the Summary Compensation Table for payment of suchnon-equity incentive compensation awards.

(2)

Represents a performance share unit award. The performance share units will vest at the end of a three-year vesting period based on the highest40-day average share price during the last eighteen months of such period and continued employment through the end of the applicable three-year period, with limited exceptions. The number of performance share units listed in the Threshold column represents the number of performance share units which shall become vested based on achievement of 50% of the performance target (a40-day average share price of $42 during the last eighteen months of the performance period); the number of performance share units listed in the Target column represents the number of performance share units which shall become vested based on achievement of 100% of the performance target (a40-day average share price of $46 during the last eighteen months of the performance period); and the number of performance share units listed in the Maximum column represents the number of performance share units which shall become vested based on achievement of 200% of the performance target (a40-day average share price of $50 during the last eighteen months of the performance period). If at least 50% of the performance target is not achieved during the performance period, all of the performance share units will be forfeited.

(3)

Represents a time-based RSU award. Restrictions lapse on the third anniversary of the grant date of the award, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(4)

Represents a time-based RSU award. Restrictions lapse over a four year period on a pro rata basis on each anniversary of the grant date of the award, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(5)

This column discloses the aggregate grant date fair market value computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which is $45.64 per target share for performance share units, $37.85 per share for the RSUs vesting after three years and $37.86 per share for the RSUs vesting over four years. For the assumptions used in the valuation, see note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

55


OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS

The following table sets forth the outstanding equity awards held by our named executive officers as of December 31, 2018.

   
    Option Awards   Stock Awards 

Name

  Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
   Option
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Option
Expiration
Date
   Number
of
Shares
or
Units of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
        Market
Value
of Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not Vested
   Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That Have
Not
Vested
        Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That Have
Not Vested
 

Dominic J.

   100,000    $19.79    2/24/2020                     

Frederico

               102,965    (1)    $3,941,500           
               205,930    (2)    $7,883,000           
               69,270    (3)    $2,651,656           
                         34,635    (4)    $1,325,828 
               82,237    (5)    $3,148,032           
                             41,119    (6)    $1,574,035 

Robert A.

   20,000    $19.79    2/24/2020                     

Bailenson

   6,835    $19.24    2/7/2020                     
               22,652    (1)    $867,119           
               45,304    (2)    $1,734,237           
               16,373    (3)    $626,758           
                         8,187    (4)    $313,398 
               21,453    (5)    $821,221           
                             10,727    (6)    $410,630 

Russell B.

               22,652    (1)    $867,119           

Brewer II

               45,304    (2)    $1,734,237           
               13,854    (3)    $530,331           
                         6,927    (4)    $265,166 
               15,732    (5)    $602,221           
                             7,866    (6)    $301,110 

Ling

   2,500    $19.79    2/24/2020                     

Chow

   6,200    $19.24    2/7/2020                     
   3,898    $21.88    2/5/2021                     
               9,296    (5)    $355,851           
                         4,648    (6)    $177,925.44 
               1,981    (7)    $75,833           
               5,119    (8)    $195,955           
               7,243    (9)    $277,262           
                13,186    (10)    $504,760              

56


   
    Option Awards   Stock Awards 

Name

  Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
   Option
Exercise
Price
(per
share)
   Option
Expiration
Date
   Number
of
Shares
or
Units of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
        Market
Value
of Shares or
Units of
Stock
That Have
Not Vested
   Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That Have
Not
Vested
        Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That Have
Not Vested
 

Bruce E.

   10,000    $19.79    2/24/2020                     

Stern

   8,202    $19.24    2/7/2020                     
               14,415    (1)    $551,806           
               28,830    (2)    $1,103,612           
               8,816    (3)    $337,476           
                         4,408    (4)    $168,738 
               11,442    (5)    $438,000           
                             5,721    (6)    $219,000 

(1)

These units were granted on February 24, 2016, and vested on February 24, 2019.

(2)

These units were granted on February 24, 2016, and vested on February 24, 2019. Vesting was based on the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the three year performance period. As of December 31, 2018, the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the performance period was $43.85. Accordingly, 200% of the units vested.

(3)

These units were granted on February 22, 2017, and will vest on February 22, 2020, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(4)

These units were granted on February 22, 2017, and will vest on February 22, 2020, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions and achievement of performance goals, as defined. These units will vest based on the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the three year performance period. As of December 31, 2018, the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the performance period was $41.55. Accordingly, none of the units will vest unless the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the three year performance period exceeds $42, subject to the other conditions of the performance equity and not before the end of the three-year performance period.

(5)

These units were granted on February 21, 2018, and will vest on February 21, 2021, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(6)

These units were granted on February 21, 2018, and will vest on February 21, 2021, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions and achievement of performance goals, as defined. These units will vest based on the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the three year performance period. Accordingly, none of the units will vest unless the highest40-day average price of our Common Shares during the last eighteen months of the three year performance period exceeds $42, subject to the other conditions of the performance equity and not before the end of the three-year performance period.

(7)

These units were granted on February 4, 2015, and vested on February 4, 2019.

(8)

These units were granted on February 24, 2016. One half of these units vested on February 24, 2019. The remaining half of these units will vest on February 24, 2020, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(9)

These units were granted on February 22, 2017. One third of these units vested on February 22, 2019. One third of these units will vest on February 22, 2020, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions. The remaining one third of these units will vest on February 22, 2021, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

(10)

These units were granted on February 21, 2018. One fourth of these units vested on February 21, 2019. One fourth of these units will vest on February 21, 2020, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions. One fourth of these units will vest on February 21, 2021, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions. The remaining one fourth of these units will vest on February 21, 2022, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.

57


2018 OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED

The following table provides information concerning option exercises by, and vesting of restricted stock awards of, our named executive officers during 2018.

   
    Option Awards   Stock Awards 
     Name  

    Number of Shares    

Acquired on
Exercise(1)

   

    Value Realized    

on Exercise(2)

   

    Number of Shares    

Acquired on
Vesting(3)

   

    Value Realized    

on Vesting(4)

 

Dominic J. Frederico

   412,055    $8,332,930    263,877    $9,285,832 

Robert A. Bailenson

   16,723    $484,221    58,641    $2,063,577 

Russell B. Brewer II

   29,362    $689,374    52,776    $1,857,187 

Ling Chow

   6,241    $195,026    7,434    $270,310 

Bruce E. Stern

   6,723    $141,183    35,184    $1,238,125 

(1)

This column represents gross shares exercised, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax and not reduced by shares swapped to pay for the option price.

(2)

The value realized on exercise represents the value of gross shares received, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax, but reduced by shares swapped to pay for the option price.

(3)

This column represents gross shares vesting, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax.

(4)

The value of a restricted share upon vesting is the fair market value of the stock on the vesting date. This column represents the value of gross shares vesting, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax.

NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION

The following table sets forth information concerning nonqualified deferred compensation of our named executive officers. The amounts set forth in this table include only contributions made and earnings received during 2018 and do not include contributions and earnings with respect to the 2018non-equity incentive compensation paid in 2019.

     Name Executive
Contributions
in Last FY
(1)
  Registrant
Contributions
in Last FY
(2)
  Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
  Aggregate
Earnings
in Last FY
  Aggregate
Balance
at Last FYE
(3)
 

Dominic J. Frederico

  $330,000   $660,000      -$841,878   $8,198,857(4)  

Robert A. Bailenson

  $129,188   $258,375      $58,858   $4,251,324 

Russell B. Brewer II

  $104,880   $209,760      $122,607   $4,430,727 

Ling Chow

  $73,500   $147,000      -$88,665   $1,754,661 

Bruce E. Stern

  $79,375   $158,750      $30,986   $2,576,665 

(1)

The amounts in this column are also included in the Summary Compensation Table, in the Salary column and in theNon-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column.

(2)

The amounts in this column are included in the Summary Compensation Table, in the All Other Compensation column as the employer contribution to the retirement plans.

(3)

Of the totals in this column plus, for Mr. Frederico $12,577,909 distributed on January 6, 2017, the following totals have been previously reported in the Summary Compensation Table for previous years:

   
     Name    2018 Amount  2017 Amount 

     Dominic J. Frederico

     $9,458,049   $8,472,020 

     Robert A. Bailenson

     $2,005,511   $1,639,319 

     Russell B. Brewer II

     $1,139,127   $876,354 

     Ling Chow

         

     Bruce E. Stern

     $555,429   $344,439 

(4)

$1,612,387 was assumed from the ACE Limited Supplemental Retirement Plan at our 2004 initial public offering.

POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

The following tables quantify the potential payments upon termination that our named executive officers would receive assuming that the relevant termination event had occurred on December 31, 2018. The last table quantifies the potential payments upon an involuntary termination without cause and a change of control that our named executive officers would receive assuming that both the termination without cause and change in control had occurred on December 31, 2018.

58


TERMINATION DUE TO DEATH OR DISABILITY

     
     Name  Unvested
PRP
   Unvested
RSUs
   Unvested
PSUs
(1)
   Total 

Dominic J. Frederico

       $9,741,188    $10,026,686    $19,767,874 

Robert A. Bailenson

       $2,315,098    $2,269,453    $4,584,551 

Russell B. Brewer II

       $1,999,671    $2,147,236    $4,146,907 

Ling Chow

   $337,500    $1,409,661    $101,718    $1,848,879 

Bruce E. Stern

       $1,327,282    $1,382,080    $2,709,362 

(1)

The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2018. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.

TERMINATION DUE TO RETIREMENT

     
     Name  Unvested
PRP
   Unvested
RSUs
   Unvested
PSUs
(1)
   Total 

Dominic J. Frederico

       $6,282,980    $10,026,686    $16,309,666 

Robert A. Bailenson(2)

                

Russell B. Brewer II

       $1,323,631    $2,147,236    $3,470,867 

Ling Chow(3)

                

Bruce E. Stern

       $857,965    $1,382,080    $2,240,045 

(1)

The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2018. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.

(2)

Mr. Bailenson had not reached retirement age by December 31, 2018. Upon retirement, Mr. Bailenson will becomepro-rata vested in respect of his unvested RSUs and PSUs.

(3)

Ms. Chow had not reached retirement age by December 31, 2018. Upon retirement, Ms. Chow will become fully vested in respect of her unvested PRP, partially vested in respect of her unvested RSUs andpro-rata vested in respect of her unvested PSUs.

TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE PAYMENTS(1)

     Name Salary
Continuation
  Cash Incentive
Compensation
  Benefits  Unvested
RSUs
  Unvested
PSUs
(2)
  Total 

Dominic J. Frederico

  $1,250,000   $4,341,646   $45,354   $9,741,188   $10,026,686   $25,404,874 

Robert A. Bailenson

  $700,000   $1,549,442   $35,298   $2,315,098   $2,269,453   $6,869,291 

Russell B. Brewer II

  $525,000   $1,276,217   $35,298   $1,999,671   $2,147,236   $5,983,422 

Ling Chow

  $500,000   $758,333   $35,298   $355,851   $101,718   $1,751,200 

Bruce E. Stern

  $500,000   $987,880   $24,237   $1,327,282   $1,382,080   $4,221,479 

(1)

No unvested PRP payments are payable upon a termination without cause.

(2)

The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2018. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.

59


CHANGE-IN-CONTROL SEVERANCE (1)

     Name Salary
Continuation
  Cash Incentive
Compensation
  Benefits  Unvested
RSUs
  Unvested
PSUs
(2)
  Total 

Dominic J. Frederico

  $1,250,000   $4,341,646   $45,354   $9,741,188   $9,818,709   $25,196,897 

Robert A. Bailenson

  $700,000   $1,549,442   $35,298   $2,315,098   $2,191,771   $6,791,609 

Russell B. Brewer II

  $525,000   $1,276,217   $35,298   $1,999,671   $2,121,379   $5,957,565 

Ling Chow

  $500,000   $758,333   $35,298   $1,409,661      $2,703,292 

Bruce E. Stern

  $500,000   $987,880   $24,237   $1,327,282   $1,349,970   $4,189,369 

(1)

No unvested PRP payments are payable upon a change in control.

(2)

For PSUs, the applicable performance period would end on the date of a change in control and the amount which would become vested would be determined based on the performance through such date.

The salary continuation, cash incentive compensation and benefits columns in the Termination Without Cause Payments table and theChange-in-Control Severance table represent amounts that would be payable to each executive officer under the terms of the severance policy for executive officers. Under the terms of the policy, each named executive officer receives one year of salary, the average of the last three annual cash incentive compensation amounts, apro-rata annual cash incentive compensation payment for the year of termination and one year of benefits which represent medical plan and dental plan premiums paid by our Company at the same level as was paid just prior to termination.

For the purpose of these tables, the value of RSUs and PSUs has been determined by multiplying the number of shares of that would have become vested on December 31, 2018 based on each applicable termination described above and based on target performance or the actual performance determined as if the performance period ended on such date by the closing price of our Common Shares on December 31, 2018, which was $38.28.

In addition to the amounts listed in the tables, upon a termination of employment for any of the reasons described above, the executives would be entitled to distributions from the qualified andnon-qualified defined contribution retirement plans maintained by the Company and affiliates. For the named executive officers, the aggregate qualified andnon-qualified defined contribution retirement account balances as of December 31, 2018 for Mr. Frederico, Mr. Bailenson, Mr. Brewer, Ms. Chow and Mr. Stern are as follows, respectively: $8,944,188, $6,416,742, $7,633,346, $3,071,904 and $4,020,789. Retirement account balances will be paid upon termination in accordance with the terms of the plans, as described below.

If an executive officer had been terminated for cause on December 31, 2018, he or she would not have received any severance payments and would have forfeited all unvested PRP, RSUs and PSUs, receiving only salary payments through the termination date and vested retirement benefits under our Company’s retirement plans.

Severance payments, restricted stock vesting and retirement plan contributions assume no subsequent employment after termination. Certain rights to vesting and distributions following retirement or a termination without cause are subject to continued compliance with applicable restrictive covenants and may be forfeited by the executive in the event of a violation of such covenants (and in certain circumstances, the executive may be required to repay certain amounts in the event of a violation of such covenants).

CEO PAY RATIO

In 2018, the annual total compensation of Dominic J. Frederico, our President and Chief Executive Officer was $12,771,902. The annual total compensation of our median employee was $250,144. As a result, the ratio of the annual total compensation of our CEO to our median employee was 51.1 to 1.

We identified the median employee by examining the 2018 annual total compensation for all individuals, excluding our CEO, who were employed by us on December 31, 2018. We included all employees, whether employed on a full-time or part-time basis, and including all employees resident outside of the U.S. We did not make any assumptions, adjustments or estimates with respect to annual total compensation. We annualized the compensation for any full-time employees who were not employed by us for all of 2018. We calculated the total compensation for our CEO and all of our employees excluding our CEO using the same methodology we use to calculate Total Annual Compensation for our named executive officers as set forth in the 2018 Summary Compensation table on page 53 earlier in this proxy statement.

NON-QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLANS

All the executive officers participate in anon-qualified defined contribution retirement plan through an26 Assured Guaranty employer. These plans generally permit distributions only following a participant’s termination of employment, and each of the plans imposes some additional restrictions on distributions as described below. A change in control under the current provisions of these plans does not entitle a participant to payment. Below is an overview of each plan.

60

2022 Proxy Statement


AG US GROUP SERVICES INC. SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN (AGUS SERP)

The AG US Group Services Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which we refer to as the AGUS SERP, is a

non-qualified
retirement plan for higher-paid employees. Internal Revenue Code provisions, such as the annual limit on employee deferrals, limit the amount of contributions that these employees may make or have made on their behalf to the qualified AG US Group Services Inc. Employee Retirement Plan. Contributions credited to this supplemental plan mirror the employee contributions, employer matching contributions, and 6% employer contributions that would have been made under the AG US Group Services Inc. Employee Retirement Plan had the Internal Revenue Code provisions not limited the contributions. The plan also permits discretionary employer contributions.

A participant does not vest in employer contributions until he or she has completed one year of service, but the participant will vest earlier if he or she dies or attains age 65 while employed by a specified Assured Guaranty employer.


Distribution of a participant’s account balances will be made as a lump sum. However, a participant may elect to receive payment of his or her account balances in annual installments over a period not exceeding five years, but only if, at the time of termination, the participant has attained age 55 and completed at least five years of service, and the amount of the participant’s account balances is at least $50,000.

A participant who is considered to be a specified employee as defined in Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and whose payment of benefits begins by reason of termination of employment may not begin to receive such payment until six months after termination of employment.

INCENTIVE PLANS

All the executive officers have previously received awards pursuant to our Company’s long-term incentive plan and in prior years received awards under our Company’s PRP. For the 2018 performance year, in 2019, the executive officers received a grant of performance share units and RSUs as described below, but did not receive a grant of PRP. Below is an overview of the plans.

ASSURED GUARANTY LTD. 2004 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

The 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended, provides for the grant ofnon-qualified and incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, full value awards, which include awards such as restricted shares, RSUs or performance share units, and cash incentive awards to employees selected by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee specifies the terms of the award, including the vesting period applicable to the award, at the time it grants the award to the employee, and includes the terms in an award agreement between the employee and our Company.

Performance share units were granted in 2015 through 2019 that will vest at the end of a three-year performance period if certain performance conditions are satisfied (for PSUs granted through 2018, based on the highest40-day average share price during the last eighteen months of such period exceeding certain share price hurdles, and for PSUs granted in 2019, based on growth in core adjusted book value per share relative to a target and on TSR relative to the Index) and if the participant continues to be employed through the end of such three-year period, with limited exceptions as described below.

The participant is entitled topro-rata vesting of the performance share units in the event of termination prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability, an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or, a voluntary termination due to retirement, if certain requirements are met and if, and only to the extent that, the performance conditions are satisfied at the end of the applicable performance period. In the event of a change in control, the performance share units vest only to the extent that the performance conditions are satisfied at the time of the change in control and only if the participant remains employed through the end of the three-year performance period, provided, however that the vesting of the performance share units shall be accelerated following such change in control in the event of termination following the change in control but prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability, an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or in the event that the acquirer does not agree to continue such award following the change in control.

RSUs were granted from 2016 through 2019 that will vest at the end of a three-year vesting period if the participant remains employed through the end of such period. Such vesting may be accelerated in the event of termination prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability or in the event of a change in control where the acquirer does not agree to continue such award following the change in control. Additionally, the participant may remain entitled to continued vesting of such RSUs following an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or a voluntary termination due to retirement during the vesting period if certain requirements are met, including the participant signing of a release of claims against our Company and continuing to comply with applicable restrictive covenants.

ASSURED GUARANTY LTD. PERFORMANCE RETENTION PLAN

The Performance Retention Plan was established in 2006 to permit the grant of cash-based awards to selected employees and give to the Compensation Committee greater flexibility in establishing the terms of performance retention awards, including the ability to establish different performance periods and performance objectives. PRP awards may be treated as nonqualified deferred

61


compensation subject to the rules of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code. The PRP is asub-plan under our Company’s Long-Term Incentive Plan (enabling awards under the plan to be performance based compensation exempt from the $1 million limit on tax deductible compensation).

From 2008 through 2014, our Company integrated PRP awards into its long-term incentive compensation program for the executive officers and certain selected employees. The executive officers stopped receiving PRP awards beginning in 2015 and the last outstanding PRP award to anyone who was an executive officer as of December 31, 2017 vested on December 31, 2017. However, Ms. Chow was granted PRP awards before becoming an executive officer, including in February 2017, so her last PRP award is expected to vest on December 31, 2020. Generally, each PRP award is divided into three installments, with 25% of the award allocated to a performance period that includes the year of the award and the next year, 25% of the award allocated to a performance period that includes the year of the award and the next two years, and 50% of the award allocated to a performance period that includes the year of the award and the next three years. Each installment of an award vests if the participant remains employed through the end of the performance period for that installment (or vests on the date of the participant’s death, disability, or retirement if that occurs during the performance period). Payment for each performance period is made at the end of that performance period. One half of each installment is increased or decreased in proportion to the increase or decrease of core ABV per share during the performance period, and one half of each installment is increased or decreased in proportion to the core operating ROE during the performance period. However, if, during the performance period, a participant dies or becomes permanently disabled while employed, the amount for any such incomplete performance period shall equal the portion of the award allocated to such performance period. Core operating ROE and core ABV are defined in each PRP award agreement.

62


EQUITY COMPENSATION PLANS INFORMATION

The following table summarizes our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2018:

  Plan category

 

 

Number of
securities to be
issued upon

exercise of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(a)

 

  

Weighted
average
exercise price
of outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(b)

 

  

Number of
securities
remaining
available
for future
issuance
under equity
compensation
plans
(excluding
securities
reflected in
column (a))
(c)

 

 

  Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

 

 

 

 

401,180(1)

 

 

 

 

$

 

18.80

 

 

 

 

 

 

9,828,933(2)

 

 

 

  Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

 

 

 

 

N/A   

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A   

 

 

 

 

  TOTAL

 

 

 

 

401,180   

 

 

 

 

 

$

 

 

18.80

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9,828,933   

 

 

 

 

(1)

Includes Common Shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding stock options and performance stock options granted under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan. Does not include purchase rights currently accruing under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan because the purchase price (and therefore the number of shares to be purchased) will not be determined until the end of the purchase period, which is June 30, 2019. The purchase price under such plan is generally 85% of the lower of the fair market value of a Common Share on the first day of the subscription period or on the exercise date.

(2)

Includes 49,639 Common Shares reserved for issuance under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Includes 9,779,294 Common Shares available for stock options, restricted stock awards, RSUs, performance stock options and performance share units reserved for future issuance under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan. The grants of dividend equivalents of RSUs have reduced the number of shares available for future issuance.

63


AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

The Audit Committee consists of foursix members of the Board of Directors. After reviewing the qualifications of the current members of the Audit Committee and any relationships they may have with our Company that might affect their independence from our Company, the Board of Directors has determined that:

each Audit Committee member is independent, as that concept is defined in Section 10A of the Exchange Act, the SEC rules promulgated thereunder, and the NYSE listing standards, of our Company and our management;

each Audit Committee member is financially literate, as contemplated by the NYSE listing standards; and

Mr.five Audit Committee members, Mss. Howard and Shea and Messrs. Buhl, Mr. Jones and Mr. O’KaneO'Kane, are audit committee financial experts, as that term is defined under Item 407(d) ofRegulation S-K.

The Audit Committee operates under a written charter approved by the Board of Directors, a copy of which is available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance. Each year, the Audit Committee reviews the charter and reports to the Board of Directors on its adequacy. As more fully described in the charter, the primary purpose of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board of Directors in its oversight of the integrity of our financial statements and financial reporting process; our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements and ethics programs as established by management; the system of internal accounting and financial controls; the audit process; the role and performance of our internal audit process; and the performance, qualification and independence of our independent auditor.

The Audit Committee annually evaluates the performance of our Company’s independent auditor and provides assistance to the members of the Board of Directors in fulfilling their oversight of the financial reporting practices, including satisfying obligations imposed by Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, and the financial statements of our Company. The Audit Committee selects the independent auditor for the Board of Directors to recommend to the shareholders to appoint. Our Company’s current independent auditor is PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, which we refer to as PwC.

PwC has served as our independent auditor since 2003. The Audit Committee believes there are significant benefits to having an independent auditor with an extensive history with the Company, including higher quality audit work and accounting advice, due to PwC’s institutional knowledge of our business and operations, accounting policies and financial systems, and internal control framework and operational efficiencies.

Subject to our Company’s shareholders’ statutory right to set the terms of engagement for our independent auditor, including setting the remuneration of the independent auditor and authorizing the Board of Directors, through the Audit Committee, annually to set such terms of engagement, the Audit Committee contracts with and sets the fees paid to our independent auditor. The fees for services for PwC’s audit services the past two fiscal years are set forth under Proposal No. 3: Appointment of Independent Auditor. Audit fees relate to professional services rendered for the audit of our consolidated financial statements, audits of the U.S. GAAP and statutory financial statements of certain subsidiaries, review of quarterly consolidated financial statements and U.S. GAAP and statutory financial statements of certain subsidiaries and audit of internal control over financial reporting as required under Sarbanes Oxley Section 404.

The Audit Committee also determines that thenon-audit services provided to our Company by the independent auditor are compatible with maintaining the independence of the independent auditor. The Audit Committee’spre-approval policies and procedures are discussed under Proposal No. 3: Appointment of Independent Auditor.

The Audit Committee annually conducts an evaluation of the independent auditor to determine if it will recommend the retention of the independent auditor. The Audit Committee is also involved in evaluating the qualifications and performance of the engagement team and lead partner. As part of the evaluation of the independent auditor, the engagement team and lead partner, the Audit Committee surveys select Company management and all members of the Audit Committee to evaluate the historical and recent performance of the independent auditor and to determine if the independent auditor is meeting our Company’s expectations. Among other things, the Audit Committee considers PwC’s independence, professional skepticism and objectivity, the quality and candor of PwC’s communications with the Audit Committee and management, the quality and efficiency of the services provided by PwC, and the depth of PwC’s understanding of the Company’s business, operations and systems, including the potential effect on the financial statements of major risk and exposures facing the Company. In addition, the Audit Committee obtains and reviews, at least annually, a report by the independent auditor describing:

the firm’s internal quality-control procedures;

any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the firm, or by any inquiry or investigation of the firm by governmental or professional authorities, within the preceding five years, and any steps taken to deal with any such issues; and

64


to assessan assessment of the independent auditors’ independence alland relationships between the independent auditor and the Company.

27 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The Audit Committee is also involved in evaluating the qualifications and performance of the engagement team and the lead partner. The Audit Committee considers the experience of the independent auditor in auditing companies in the financial guaranty insurance industry and considers the effect of changing independent auditors when assessing whether to retain the current independent auditor. Based upon the foregoing, and in light of the quality of audit services and sufficiency of resources provided, the Audit Committee believes choosing PwC as our Company’s independent auditor would be in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders and recommends the retention of PwC as our Company’s independent auditor for 2019.

2022.

Our Company’s management prepares our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP and is responsible for the financial reporting process that generates these statements. Management is also responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal controls over financial reporting and for performing an assessment of the effectiveness of these controls. PwC audits ouryear-end financial statements and reviews interim financial statements. PwC also audits the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. The Audit Committee, on behalf of the Board of Directors, monitors and reviews these processes, acting in an oversight capacity relying on the information provided to it and on the representations made to it by our management, PwC and other advisors. We have also retained Ernst & Young LLP, which we refer to as E&Y,EY, to provide services to support our Company’s internal audit program and compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002.

During the last year, and earlier this year in preparation for the filing with the SEC of the Company’sForm 10-K, the Audit Committee:

reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements contained in theForm 10-K with management and PwC;

reviewed and discussed our quarterly earnings press releases and related materials;

reviewed the overall scope and plans for the internal and independent audits and the results of such audits;

reviewed critical accounting estimates and policies and the status of our loss reserves;

reviewed and discussed our compliance with our conflict of interest, regulatory compliance and global code of conductethics policies with the General Counsel, or Chief Compliance Officer and/or Deputy Compliance Officer;

reviewed and discussed our underwritingenterprise risk management and risk managementinsurance underwriting with the Chief Risk Officer, the Chief Surveillance Officer and the Chief Credit Officer, coordinating the oversight of underwritingenterprise risk management and risk managementinsurance underwriting with the Risk Oversight Committee;

reviewed and discussed cybersecurity and privacy matters with our Chief Information Security Officer;

reviewed and discussed the impact of the continuing COVID-19 pandemic on our insurance segment and our asset management segment;
reviewed and discussed the impact on IT resources, cybersecurity, audit procedures and our internal controls of the remote work environment resulting from the continuing COVID-19 pandemic as well as the hybrid office / work-from-home environment adopted by the Company upon the return of its employees to the office;
reviewed our compliance with the requirements of Sarbanes Oxley Section 404 and our internal controls over financial reporting, including controls to prevent and detect fraud;

reviewed our whistleblower policy and its application;

discussed with PwC all the matters required to be discussed by U.S. GAAP, including those described in Auditing Standard No. 1301, Communications with Audit Committees,the matters required to be discussed by the applicable requirements of the Public Accounting Oversight Board and the SEC, such as:

PwC’s judgments about the quality, not just the acceptability, of our Company’s accounting principles as applied in our financial reporting;

methods used to account for significant unusual transactions;

the effect of significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus;

the process used by management in formulating particularly sensitive accounting estimates and the basis for PwC’s conclusions regarding the reasonableness of those estimates;

disagreements with management (of which there were none) over the application of accounting principles, the basis for management’s accounting estimates, and disclosures in the financial statements; and

any significant audit adjustments and any significant deficiencies in internal control;

PwC’s judgments about the quality, not just the acceptability, of our Company’s accounting principles as applied in our financial reporting;

methods used to account for significant unusual transactions;
the effect of significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus;
the process used by management in formulating particularly sensitive accounting estimates and the basis for PwC’s conclusions regarding the reasonableness of those estimates;
disagreements with management (of which there were none) over the application of accounting principles, the basis for management’s accounting estimates, and disclosures in the financial statements; and
any significant audit adjustments and any significant deficiencies in internal control;
reviewed and discussed with PwC the critical audit matter (CAM) as disclosed in their audit report on our consolidated financial statements;
reviewed all other material written communications between PwC and management; and

28 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


discussed with PwC their independence from our Company and management, including a review of audit andnon-audit fees, and reviewed in that context the written disclosures and the letter required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent auditor’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence.

At each quarterly meeting, E&YEY has the opportunity to address pending issues with the Audit Committee and semi-annually specifically reviews the results of internal audits and the overall internal audit program.

65


At each meeting, the Audit Committee meets in executive session (i.e.(i.e., without management present) with representatives of PwC to discuss the results of their examinations and their evaluations of our internal controls and overall financial reporting. Similar executive sessions are held at least semi-annually with representatives of E&Y.EY. In addition, the Audit Committee meets regularly with certain members of senior management in separate sessions.

Based on the review and discussions referred to above, and in reliance on the information, opinions, reports or statements presented to the Audit Committee by our Company’s management and PwC, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the December 31, 20182021 audited consolidated financial statements be included in our Company’s Annual Report onForm 10-K.

The foregoing report has been approved by the Audit Committee.

Bonnie L. Howard, Chair
G. Lawrence Buhl Chairman

Thomas W. Jones

Alan J. Kreczko

Michelle McCloskey
Michael T. O’Kane

O'Kane

Courtney C. Shea
29 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
CD&A ROADMAP

Summary _______________________________
31
2021 Achievements Highlights _____________31
Our Total Shareholder Return _____________33
2021 Results Against Financial Performance Targets _____________________________35
Snapshot of Our CEO’s 2021 Compensation _35
Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process __________________________
36
Overview of Philosophy and Design ________36
Shareholder Outreach on Our Executive Compensation Program ________________38
The Decision-Making Process _____________39
Components of Our Executive Compensation Program ____________________________40
CEO Performance Review _________________
48
Overview ______________________________48
Base Salary ___________________________49
Cash Incentive _________________________49
Equity Compensation ____________________55
Perquisites ____________________________56
Other Named Executive Officer Compensation Decisions ____________________________
56
Non-Financial Objectives and Achievements of the Other Named Executive Officers ____56






Compensation Decisions for the Other Named Executive Officers _______________________58
Separation Agreement ______________________
59
2021 Executive Compensation Conclusion______
60
Compensation Governance __________________
60
The Role of the Board’s Compensation Committee _____________________________60
The Role of the Independent Consultants ______60
Executive Compensation Comparison Group ___61
Executive Officer Recoupment Policy and Related Forfeiture and Termination for Cause Provisions _____________________________61
Share Ownership Guidelines ________________62
Anti-Hedging Policy _______________________63
Anti-Pledging Policy _______________________63
Award Timing ____________________________63
Post-Employment Compensation _____________
64
Retirement Benefits _______________________64
Severance ______________________________64
Change in Control Benefits _________________64
Tax Treatment _____________________________
64
Non-GAAP Financial Measures _______________
65

30 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



SUMMARY
Our executive compensation program is designed to attract and retain talented and experienced business leaders who drive our corporate strategies and build long-term shareholder value.
The Compensation Committee assesses performance using pre-established measures of success that are tied to our key business strategies. This approach encourages balanced performance, measured relative to financial and non-financial goals as well as measures of shareholder value, and discourages excessive risk taking or undue leverage by avoiding too much emphasis on any one metric, or on short-term results.
In 2021 we exceeded all but one of the six financial performance targets set by our Compensation Committee at the beginning of the year, in each case also exceeding prior year performance. We also enjoyed substantial success in achieving the non-financial goals set by our Compensation Committee at the beginning of the year.
2021 Achievement Highlights
More than five years of difficult and complex negotiation and litigation over defaulted insured Puerto Rico exposures finally bore fruit in 2021. We completed two plan support agreements with the Federal Oversight Management Board for Puerto Rico and other important stakeholders in 2021, covering 74% of the Puerto Rico debt outstanding on December 31, 2021. This led directly to to the resolution just last week of a significant portion of our insurance exposure to Puerto Rico -- approximately $1.3 billion of net par outstanding at December 31, 2021. With the resolution of our Puerto Rico exposures so much more likely when we closed our books for the year, we were able to take a benefit against our expected losses related to Puerto Rico that was the primary driver of the $204 million economic benefit against our expected losses in the public finance sector.
Similarly, more than a decade of hard work with servicers in our legacy residential mortgage backed securities (which we refer to as RMBS) portfolio to encourage the servicers to keep borrowers in their homes through modifications and forbearances and to maintain liens on the homes continued to pay off in 2021 as ongoing home price appreciation improved expected recoveries and performance of our insured RMBS portfolio, which, over the year, resulted in an economic benefit against our expected losses of $100 million.
Together, the many-years-long loss mitigation efforts for our Puerto Rico and legacy RMBS exposures contributed substantially to our 2021 net income of $389 million and our 2021 adjusted operating income* of $470 million, or $5.23 and $6.32 per share, respectively. Our 2021 net income per share increased by nearly 25% from 2020, and our 2021 adjusted operating income per share more than doubled from 2020. By year-end 2021, our shareholders’ equity attributable to Assured Guaranty Ltd. per share, adjusted operating shareholder’s equity* per share and adjusted book value* per share all reached record levels, at $93.19, $88.73 and $130.67, respectively. Our share price rose 59.4% from $31.49 at year-end 2020 to $50.20 at year-end 2021.
These results were driven in part by our successful pursuit of all of our primary business strategies:
We achieved robust new business production in our insurance segment despite historically low interest rates, with contributions from our U.S. public finance, non-U.S. public finance (including infrastructure) and global structured finance business.
Gross written premiums were $377 million, while our new business production in the insurance segment, a non-GAAP financial measure we refer to as PVP,* was $366 million.
In U.S. public finance, our primary insurance market, we insured 5.0% of par issued out of the entire U.S. new issue municipal market, up substantially from 4.4% in 2020, and the most since 2011. With a more than 60% share of new-issue insured par, we led the municipal bond insurance industry to its highest market penetration in a dozen years.
Also in the U.S. public finance market, we insured 48 transactions with over $100 million of par, more than in any full year over the past decade and a nearly 25% increase from the 39 such transactions we insured in 2020. (We focus on such transactions as a good barometer of institutional demand for our product.)
In the non-U.S. public finance market, we generated $79 million of PVP.
In the structured finance market, we produced nearly $47 million of PVP, the second-highest PVP in over a decade (excluding a portfolio reinsurance transaction).
*    Adjusted operating shareholder’s equity, adjusted book value, adjusted operating income and PVP are non-GAAP financial measures. An explanation of these measures, which are considered when setting compensation for our senior leadership team, and a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP measures, may be found on pages 102 to 106 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.
31 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


We continued to develop our Assured Investment Management (AssuredIM) brand.
Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, we raised $3.0 billion of inflows of third-party AUM.
We issued $2.6 billion in new collateralized loan obligations, which we refer to as CLOs.
As a result of both inflows of third-party AUM and ending certain rebates, we increased our fee-earning assets under management by 28%.
In addition, we are using the knowledge base and experience of AssuredIM to expand the categories and types of investments included in our investment portfolio. Capital invested in AssuredIM funds generated $80 million in pretax equity in earnings, nearly double the $42 million generated in 2020, and representing a blended return of 20.8% in 2021.
We further managed our capital, by returning excess capital to our shareholders and by reducing the average coupon on $600 million of long-dated debt by issuing new debt.
We returned approximately $562 million during 2021 through repurchasing Common Shares ($496 million) and distributing dividends ($66 million).
Over the last nine years, we have distributed approximately $4.8 billion to our shareholders through Common Share repurchases and dividends; and we have repurchased approximately 68% of our Common Shares outstanding at December 31, 2012, which was just before we began our Common Share repurchase program. In 2021 alone, we repurchased approximately 14% of the Common Shares we had outstanding at the beginning of 2021.
We issued $500 million of 10-year Senior Notes at a rate of 3.15% in May and issued $400 million of 30-year Senior Notes at a rate of 3.6% in August. Most of the proceeds of these debt offerings were used to redeem $600 million of long-dated debt obligations, and the remaining proceeds were used primarily for share repurchases. We reduced the average coupon on $600 million of our debt from 5.89% to 3.35%.
We achieved these results despite a persistently challenging business environment.
The uncertainty and travel and face-to-face meeting restrictions caused by the continuing COVID-19 pandemic made it more difficult to conduct business in some of our markets.
Over the last several years, municipal bond yields have been at historically low levels, making our insurance product less attractive to issuers. The 30-year AAA Municipal Market Data (MMD) rate is a measure of interest rates in the Company’s largest financial guaranty insurance market, U.S. public finance. The 30-year AAA MMD rate started 2021 at 1.39% and remained mostly steady ending the year at 1.49%. The average rate for the year was 1.54%, below the 1.71% average for the prior year and a new historical low. The level of interest rates influences how high a premium our Company can charge for our financial guaranty insurance product, with lower interest rates generally lowering the premium rates we may charge.
The difference, or credit spread, between the 30-year A-rated General Obligation (GO) relative to the 30-year AAA MMD averaged 33 basis points, which we refer to as bps, in 2021--down from 42 bps in 2020. BBB credit spreads measured on the same basis averaged 70 bps in 2021, significantly tighter than the 121 bps average in 2020. Both the A and BBB credit spreads are at their narrowest levels in over a decade. A narrower credit spread is one factor that may restrict the level of premiums our Company can charge for our financial guaranty insurance product.
We also continued to face pricing competition in certain segments of the financial guaranty market from another financial guaranty insurer that serves a smaller portion of the market than we serve.
The achievements described in this section even in the face of this environment were important considerations for the Compensation Committee in determining the compensation of our named executive officers for the 2021 performance year.
32 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Our Total Shareholder Return
The table and chart below depict the cumulative TSR in dollars on our Common Shares from December 31, 2016 through February 28, 2022, relative to the cumulative TSR of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, S&P 500 Stock Index, S&P 500 Financials Index and our current executive compensation comparison group over the same period. (Our current executive compensation comparison group is described below under “Compensation Governance—Executive Compensation Comparison Group.”) The table and chart depict the value on December 31 of each year from 2016 through 2021, and on February 28, 2022, of a $100 investment made on December 31, 2016, with all dividends reinvested.
Our Compensation Committee has long recognized that, as the only public company still writing financial guaranty business, it is difficult for us to identify companies or indices with companies that experience business environments similar to ours, and to which we can compare our performance, including our TSR. For example, developments related to Puerto Rico appear to have had a much larger influence on our TSR than on that of any of the indices or groups to which we compare ourselves. We have substantial insured exposure to general obligation bonds of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and various obligations of its related authorities and public corporations. Many of these entities have defaulted on their payment obligations, and we are paying claims related to such payment defaults. We believe that developments relating to our Puerto Rico exposure have had a strong influence on the price of our shares. This appears to have contributed to volatility of our share price. On January 18, 2022, the plan of adjustment covering $1.2 billion, or 34% of our insured net par outstanding of Puerto Rico exposures as of December 31, 2021, was approved. Then, on January 20, 2022, orders were entered finalizing the consensual modification for another $168 million of our insured Puerto Rico exposure outstanding as of December 31, 2021. On February 24, 2022, we announced in our earnings release the impact of these developments on our 2021 consolidated financial statements. We believe it is instructive to look at the TSR measurements not only at December 31 of each year, but also at February 28, 2022 (the last trading day in February), when the price of our shares reflected the impact of 2021 developments related to Puerto Rico announced on February 25, 2022. As can be seen, when measured through February 28, 2022, our TSR essentially kept pace with most of the financial indices to which we compare ourselves, and exceeded our current executive compensation comparison group by nearly 50%.

  chart-bf69ed066bd04acf991.jpg
Calculated from total returns published by Bloomberg.

33 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Cumulative TSR 
from 12/31/16
Assured 
Guaranty
Executive Compensation Comparison GroupS&P 500 
Index
S&P 500 
Financials Index
 Russell MidCap 
Financial
Services Index
12/31/2016100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00
12/31/201790.96114.10121.82122.14116.62
12/31/2018104.5697.49116.47106.21104.91
12/31/2019136.07130.66153.13140.30140.11
12/31/202089.89129.22181.29137.83147.03
12/31/2021145.94160.02233.28185.90199.75
02/28/2022180.15153.76214.58183.48194.82
Calculated from total returns published by Bloomberg.

The chart and table above compare our TSR based on a start date of December 31, 2016. Another way to compare our TSR to our current executive compensation comparison group is to examine how our TSR compares over various periods ending on February 28, 2022, after the price of our shares reflected the impact on our financial statements of our 2021 accomplishments. (Our current executive compensation comparison group is described below under “Compensation Governance—Executive Compensation Comparison Group.”) The chart and table below show our cumulative TSR over the previous 14 months, 38 months and 62 months, with an end date of February 28, 2022, compared to that of our current executive compensation comparison group. On this basis, our TSR is more than five times that of our current executive compensation comparison group over the previous 14 months, and materially exceeds that of our current executive compensation comparison group over 38 months and 62 months.
chart-5640f975504b4bdcb4f.jpg

Total Shareholder Return Comparison
  Period Ending 02/28/2022
Executive Compensation Comparison Group
Average TSR
  Assured Guaranty TSR  
14 months18.99%100.42%
38 months57.72%72.29%
62 months53.76%80.15%
Calculated from total returns published by Bloomberg.
34 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



2021 Results Against Financial Performance Targets
We exceeded all but one of the six 2021 financial performance targets set by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the year, and in each of those instances exceeded the 2020 actual results. The table below summarizes our 2021 results against the 2021 targets for the financial performance measures. The financial performance measurements are explained in more detail below under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation”.
 
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES2021 TARGETS 2021 RESULTSBELOW  TARGETABOVE TARGET
Core Operating Income per Diluted Share*$3.62$5.91
Core Operating Return on Equity*4.6%7.3%
Core Operating Shareholders’ Equity per Share*$82.90$88.26
Core Adjusted Book Value per Share*$122.60$130.33
PVP$475 million$361 million
Gross Third-Party Assets Raised$2.7 billion$3.0 billion

*    Five of the six financial targets are based on non-GAAP financial measures and four of the six are labeled “core” to distinguish them from similar non-GAAP financial measures. The four “core” measures have been adjusted to exclude the impact of consolidating certain variable interest entities and similar entities, which we refer to as VIEs, while the similar non-core measures have not been so adjusted. We include below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” a description of the adjustments we make to the most comparable GAAP financial measures to arrive at these measures.
Snapshot of Our CEO’s 2021 Compensation
For 2021, 89.5% of Mr. Frederico’s compensation constituted incentive compensation: 28.9% of his compensation was in the form of a performance-based cash incentive that was awarded based on measuring his performance against financial performance targets and non-financial objectives set at the beginning of the year, and 60.6% was in the form of a long-term equity-based incentive, with 60% of that equity award dependent on performance relative to our pre-established objectives for 2022 to 2024. The allocation between his fixed and incentive compensation for the 2021 performance year increased to 89.5% incentive compensation from 88.9% for the 2020 performance year.
Mr. Frederico received a compensation package for the 2021 performance year that was 6.5% higher than the one he received for the 2020 performance year, reflecting our strong financial and share price performance and the achievement of non-financial strategic objectives that position us for future growth and our successful transformation into a financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty and asset management. The increase should also be viewed in the context of Mr. Frederico's compensation package for the 2020 performance year being 4.2% lower than the one he received for the 2019 performance year, and his 2021 compensation package being only 1.9% higher than his 2019 compensation package.
Mr. Frederico’s cash incentive compensation increased by 16.0% from the prior year, largely as a function of the financial performance goal scores awarded by the Compensation Committee. As a result of meeting all but one of the six financial performance targets set by the Compensation Committee, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico a weighted score on his financial performance targets of 82.1%, considerably above his score of 61.4% for 2020, when only three of the six financial performance targets were met. The Compensation Committee awarded him a similar weighted score on his non-financial objectives for 2021, 56.1% for 2021 compared to 57.8% for 2020. Mr. Frederico’s total achievement score for 2021 was 138.2%, substantially above his score of 119.2% for 2020, but still below his total achievement score of 149.1% for 2019.
The Compensation Committee considered the appropriate amount of long-term incentive equity compensation to award Mr. Frederico in recognition of our significant achievements despite the continued disruption of COVID-19 and the extraordinarily low interest rates of 2021. In recognition of these accomplishments and the Compensation Committee’s strong desire that Mr. Frederico continue his leadership as we transform our Company into a more diversified financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty insurance and asset management, the Compensation Committee granted Mr. Frederico long-term equity compensation with a target nominal value of $7,250,000, an increase of $250,000 from his grant for the 2020 performance year.
35 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Mr. Frederico’s compensation package for 2021, 2020 and 2019 were composed of the following:
chart-934808386f38454aac0.jpg
chart-44b35837f11044fe9d1.jpg
chart-9f0cdabf3d4b4d11baa.jpg

n
Performance-Based Equity1
n
Time-Based Equity1
nPerformance-Based Cash Incentive
nFixed Compensation-Base Salary

 
 
2021 Performance Year
Compensation
2020 Performance Year
Compensation
Change from
2020 to 2021
Perf. Year
Fixed Compensation—Base Salary (1)
$ 1,250,000$ 1,250,000 %
Incentive Compensation  
Cash Incentive Compensation$ 3,454,988$ 2,979,625 16.0%
Long-Term Performance-Based Equity$ 4,350,000(2)$ 4,200,000(2)3.6%
Long-Term Time-Based Equity$ 2,900,000(2)$ 2,800,000(2)3.6%
Total Direct Compensation$11,954,988$11,229,625 6.5%
(1)    Mr. Frederico’s base salary for each of the 2021 and 2020 performance years was established at the beginning of such performance year, in February. Accordingly, Mr. Frederico’s 2021 base salary was established in February 2021.
(2)    Represents the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value for the relevant performance year. The number of units granted is calculated by dividing such value by the average closing price on the NYSE of a Common Share over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the date of grant.
The compensation package presented in the table above is different from the SEC-required disclosure in the Summary Compensation Table below and is not a substitute for the information in that table. Rather, it is intended to show how the Compensation Committee linked Mr. Frederico’s compensation and its components to our performance results and his achievements for the prior year.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND PROCESS
Overview of Philosophy and Design
Our executive compensation program applies to our CEO, each of our other executive officers, and our other senior managers reporting directly to our CEO, all of whom together we refer to as our senior leadership team. Our executive compensation program is designed to recognize and reward outstanding achievement and to attract, retain and motivate the talented individuals needed to lead and grow our Company’s business. We maintain an ongoing dialog with our shareholders and incorporate their feedback into our program so that the program is aligned with their interests.
36 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The guiding principles of our program are:
Pay for PerformanceAccountabilityAlignmentRetention
by providing an incentive for exceptional
performance and the possibility of reduced
compensation if executives are unable to
successfully execute our strategies
for short-
 and long-
term performance
with
shareholder
interests
of highly
qualified executives
with financial guaranty
and asset management
experience
We Align Pay With Performance
Our program rewards the performance of our senior leadership team, who are directly responsible for our operational results, with a higher proportion of variable and performance-based compensation than it rewards lower level executives. We use a mix of variable at-risk compensation with different time horizons and payout forms to provide an incentive for both annual and long-term sustained performance, in order to maximize shareholder value in a manner consistent with our Company’s risk parameters. The Compensation Committee assesses the performance of our senior leadership team from both a financial and a non-financial perspective, using pre-established goals.
Members of our senior leadership team are eligible to receive an annual cash incentive, which is based on their performance against pre-established goals over the previous year. They may also receive a long-term equity incentive, the majority of which is performance-based and cliff vests at the end of a three-year performance period, and the remainder of which is time-based and cliff vests at the end of a three-year period. The long-term equity incentive is structured to encourage retention and a long-range mindset.
Executive Compensation Is Closely Tied To Long-Term Performance
The compensation program is structured with upside potential for superior executive achievements, but also the possibility of reduced compensation if members of our senior leadership team do not successfully execute our Company’s strategies. By increasing our senior leadership team’s motivation to enhance shareholder value over the long term, our compensation program aligns their incentives and shareholder interests.
37 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


For the 2021 performance year, we maintained the same structure for the compensation package for our senior leadership team as we did for the 2020 performance year:
Principal Elements of Executive Compensation PackagePurpose
Base SalaryBased on responsibilities, skill set and experience, and market measures
Cash Incentive CompensationCash reward for performance against annual financial performance targets and progress against strategic non-financial objectives that we expect to drive our growth over the medium to long term
Equity Incentives
60% in performance restricted share units, which we refer to as PSUs, that may be earned over a 3-year performance period based on performance targets, and are paid at the end of the 3-year performance period if particular performance targets are achieved, with half of the PSUs (or 30% of the long-term equity incentive) being based on growth in our Core Adjusted Book Value per share, and half of the PSUs (or 30% of the long-term equity incentive) being based on
our TSR, relative to the 55th percentile of the Russell
Midcap Financial Services Index
40% in restricted share units, which we refer to as RSUs,
that cliff vest at the end of a 3-year period
Shareholder Outreach on Our Executive Compensation Program
For the past several years, we have actively engaged with our shareholders in order to obtain their feedback on our executive compensation program. In May 2018, after negative recommendations from the two leading proxy advisory firms, only 60% of the Common Shares voting approved our say-on-pay proposal. Following that 2018 say-on-pay vote, we sought to engage with our shareholders with respect to the changes we proposed to make to the executive compensation program in response to the recommendations from the two leading proxy advisory firms and the say-on-pay result, and based on advice from FW Cook. As part of that process and our continued dialogue with shareholders, we contacted holders of an aggregate of over 77% of our Common Shares (which comprised every shareholder holding more than 0.16% of our outstanding shares). Based on the feedback from our shareholders and advice from FW Cook, we made a number of structural changes to our executive compensation program in 2019:
With respect to the short-term cash incentive compensation, we reduced the CEO’s target individual cash multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x and introduced negative discretion for scoring the achievement of financial performance targets that were set below prior year actual results.
With respect to the long-term equity compensation, we increased the amount dependent on performance measures from 50% to 60% and introduced the two new types of PSUs described above.
We also ended our reimbursement of executives for the cost of financial planning.
In May 2019, after we made these structural changes to our executive compensation program based on discussions with our shareholders and advice from FW Cook, investors holding over 93% of the Common Shares voting approved our say-on-pay proposal at our Annual General Meeting. Then, in May 2020, and with respect to an unchanged executive compensation program, investors holding over 93% of the Common Shares voting once again approved our say-on-pay proposal at our Annual General Meeting. In light of this positive feedback, we made only one change to our compensation program for the 2020 performance year, adding a new financial performance measure related to our asset management business.
In late 2021 and into early 2022, we again sought to engage with our shareholders with respect to compensation matters. We contacted holders of an aggregate of nearly 85% of our outstanding Common Shares (which comprised every shareholder holding more than 0.1% of our outstanding Common Shares) and offered to discuss our executive compensation program. The holders of approximately 24% of our outstanding Common Shares specifically responded that they did not need to speak with us because they had no concerns about our executive compensation program, which we have not changed from last year except to expand our recoupment policy.


38 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The Decision-Making Process
Our Compensation Committee, composed solely of independent directors, is responsible for all decisions regarding the compensation of our senior leadership team, including our CEO. Our Compensation Committee works closely with FW Cook, the Chair of our Board and management to examine pay and performance matters throughout the year, and consults with our Board prior to making final compensation decisions.
Our Compensation Committee conducts in-depth reviews of performance and then applies judgment to make compensation decisions. Our Compensation Committee believes its process, described below, is an effective way to assess the performance, risk management and leadership demonstrated by Mr. Frederico and other members of our senior leadership team.
In August and November, our Compensation Committee reviews our year-to-date performance against our business plan, our financial performance, and the progress of each member of our senior leadership team against individual performance goals.
In November, our Compensation Committee reviews and approves the metrics and goals in our performance framework and reviews certain performance goals of each member of our senior leadership team for the upcoming year, and begins to formulate its compensation decisions with respect to current year performance. The metrics and goals our Compensation Committee sets in November for the upcoming year are based in part on estimates of the full year performance.
In February, our Compensation Committee meets twice. It first meets in early February to receive and review our final results and to evaluate the performance of members of our senior leadership team for the previous calendar year, which we refer to as the performance year, against that performance year’s goals. Our Compensation Committee formulates its preliminary compensation decisions for members of the senior leadership team with respect to that year’s performance, along with the performance goals for each member of our senior leadership team for the coming year. Later in February, our Compensation Committee discusses with other Board members its preliminary compensation decisions for the previous year and the performance goals for each member of our senior leadership team for the coming year, and then makes its final decisions with respect to those matters. Our CEO is not present when our Compensation Committee goes into executive session to evaluate his performance and determine his compensation.
39 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


In making its compensation decisions, our Compensation Committee follows a five-step approach:
Step 5:
Seek input from the independent consultant
concerning CEO pay.
Our Compensation Committee considers FW Cook’s analysis of the compensation paid to executive officers in our executive compensation comparison group when evaluating the compensation of our senior leadership team. The role of FW Cook is described in more detail below under “Compensation Governance—the Role of the Independent Consultants.”
Step 4:
Analyze trends
among comparison companies.
Our Compensation Committee considers market pay levels and trends based on information FW Cook provides about comparison companies.
Step 3:
Review the individual performance and contributions of each member of our senior leadership team.
Our Compensation Committee reviews the individual performance objectives for our CEO and each other member of our senior leadership team, and assesses each person’s performance and contributions. For the members of our senior leadership team other than our CEO, our Compensation Committee considers individual performance assessments and compensation recommendations from our CEO, as well as succession planning and retention issues in this unique segment of the financial services industry.
Step 2:
Assess Company Performance.
Our Compensation Committee reviews our corporate financial performance targets for the performance year and discusses our full-year financial and strategic performance at length, seeking to understand what was accomplished relative to established objectives, how it was accomplished, and the quality of the financial results.
Step 1:
Establishment of financial performance goalsand
non-financial objectives.
At or prior to the beginning of each performance year, our Compensation Committee discusses our Company’s business plan at length and establishes corporate financial goals for the upcoming performance year. Our Compensation Committee also discusses the strategic direction of our Company and establishes non-financial objectives it expects to drive our growth over the medium to long term.
Components of Our Executive Compensation Program
For the 2021 performance year, the compensation package for our senior leadership team again consists of three principal elements: base salary, cash incentive compensation and long-term equity incentives. Our practice is to review the components of our executive compensation package separately and monitor the total of the various components. We consider each component and the total against our compensation objectives described in “Overview of Philosophy and Design.” Decisions related to one compensation component (e.g., cash incentive compensation) generally do not materially affect decisions regarding any other component (e.g., long-term equity incentives) because the objectives of each element differ. Due to the seniority of the members of our senior leadership team, variable pay elements are emphasized, but no specific formula, schedule or structure is currently applied in establishing the percentage of total compensation delivered to the members of our senior leadership team through any particular compensation element.
Base Salary
Our Compensation Committee establishes the base salary of each member of our senior leadership team in consultation with FW Cook. We believe base salary is necessary to attract and retain key executives by providing appropriate compensation that is based on position, experience, scope of responsibility and performance. Base salary provides liquidity to our each member of our senior leadership team and balances the levels of guaranteed pay with at-risk pay to properly manage our compensation-related risk. The amount is based on the responsibilities, skills and experience of each member of our senior leadership team, as well as market measures. The level of the base salary of each member of our senior leadership team reflects our Compensation Committee’s view of the contribution that executive has consistently made to our Company’s success over several years, the continuing importance of that executive to our Company’s future, and the difficulty and expense of replacing that executive with one of a similar caliber. Our Compensation Committee does not guarantee salary adjustments on an annual basis; in fact, our CEO’s base salary was last adjusted in February 2017. Base salary is set toward the beginning of the year and is paid to each member of our senior leadership team for ongoing performance throughout the year. For the 2021 performance year, our Compensation Committee established the base salaries of our senior leadership team in February 2021.
40 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Cash Incentive Compensation
Unlike base salary, which is set at the beginning of the year in which it is paid, cash incentive compensation is determined after the end of the performance year to which such compensation relates. For the 2021 performance year, our Compensation Committee determined the amount of the cash incentive compensation in February 2022.
Our Compensation Committee uses a formula to award cash incentive compensation in order to enhance the transparency of our process. The amount of cash incentive compensation is determined based on the extent to which the members of the senior leadership team achieve certain pre-established performance targets; 67% is tied to the achievement of six financial performance targets and 33% is tied to the achievement of non-financial objectives.
Our Compensation Committee considers the six financial performance targets to be important in assessing our Company and the performance of our senior leadership team; for all but one of our named executive officers, each target has a weighting of 11.17% (for a total of 67%). Five of the financial performance targets are based on non-GAAP financial measures that are described below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Similar to the financial performance goals, the non-financial objectives also relate to matters that are important to our business. Our Compensation Committee believes the qualitative objectives are necessary to fully evaluate the annual achievements that benefit our shareholders, and it does not individually weight the non-financial objectives because it believes it is more appropriate to evaluate the level of achievement of all of the non-financial objectives in their totality.
We provide a diagram of our formula for awarding our annual cash incentive compensation below:
charts3-01.jpg

The financial performance targets for 2021 for all the members of our senior leadership team, including Mr. Frederico, our CEO, are set out below. The non-financial objectives for Mr. Frederico are set out below under “CEO Performance Review—Cash Incentive—Mr. Frederico’s Non-Financial Objectives”, while certain of the non-financial objectives for the named executive officers other than Mr. Frederico are discussed below under “Compensation Decisions of Other Named Executive Officers.” For the 2021 performance year, the financial performance targets and the non-financial objectives for the named executive officers were established in February 2021, and the Compensation Committee determined the extent to which they had been satisfied in February 2022.
Five of the six financial goals are based on non-GAAP financial measures and four of those five are labeled “core” to distinguish them from similar non-GAAP financial measures. The four “core” measures have been adjusted to exclude the impact of consolidating certain variable interest entities and similar entities, which we refer to as VIEs, while the similar non-core measures have not been so adjusted. We include below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” a description of the adjustments we make to the most comparable GAAP financial measures to arrive at these measures.
41 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


2021 Financial Performance Measures
Core operating
income per
diluted share
enables us to evaluate the amount of income we are generating in our business without certain items, primarily non-economic fluctuations and movements in fair value, foreign exchange movements related to long dated receivables and payables, and other adjustments, as well as removing the impact of consolidating VIEs.
Core operating
ROE
represents core operating income for a specified period divided by the average of core operating shareholders’ equity at the beginning and the end of that period. This measure enables us to evaluate our return on equity.
Core operating
shareholders’
equity per
share
presents our equity excluding non-economic fair value adjustments as well as the impact of consolidating VIEs. Core operating shareholders’ equity per share is the basis of the calculation of core adjusted book value, which we refer to as Core ABV, per share, as described below.
Core ABV
per share
reflects our core operating shareholders’ equity, plus unearned premiums in excess of expected losses, plus future estimated revenues from contracts other than financial guaranty insurance contracts (such as specialty insurance contracts and credit derivatives), less deferred acquisition costs. This measure enables us to measure our intrinsic value, excluding our franchise value.
PVPrepresents the estimated value of new business production in our insurance segment. PVP takes into account upfront premiums and the present value of estimated future installment premiums using a consistent discount rate on all new contracts written in a reporting period.
Gross third-party
assets raised
represents the gross increase in AUM, from sources other than our subsidiaries (but includes assets from employees and former employees). It represents sales of CLOs, as well as gross increases in funded and unfunded commitments in funds managed by AssuredIM, which we refer to as AssuredIM Funds, during the year. Gross third-party assets raised would also include gross third-party assets obtained in strategic transactions. Gross third-party assets raised increases the total AUM on which we earn recurring asset management fees. We also sometimes refer to this measure as inflows of third-party AUM.

At the beginning of a performance year, our Compensation Committee assigns each member of our senior leadership team an Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount, which is calculated as a multiple of that executive’s base salary, and which we refer to as the Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple. The amounts of the base salary and Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiples are set based on the executive’s position and level of responsibility, historic pay level, importance to the future strategic direction of our Company and FW Cook’s advice about the compensation practices of companies in our comparison group.
For the 2021 performance year, our Compensation Committee assigned each of the named executive officers an Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple of 2.0x, the same as last year.
Then, at the end of a performance year, for each member of our senior leadership team, our Compensation Committee calculates and aggregates the weighted achievement scores for the financial performance measures and the individual non-financial objectives. When assessing the level of achievement and assigning scores for the year, our Compensation Committee takes into account the difficulty of achieving particular targets or objectives. Our Compensation Committee has discretion to assign achievement scores of up to 200% for outstanding performance and achievement scores of down to 0% for performance below target, based on its view of the level of achievement attained for each financial performance target, and for the non-financial objectives taken as a whole. With the weightings the Compensation Committee has established for each component of the calculation aggregating 100% overall, the maximum total overall weighted score achievable is 200%, and since the Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple for each of our named executive officers is 2.0x, the maximum short-term incentive opportunity for each of our named executive officers is 4x their base salary. For the 2018 performance year, in response to the previous year's say-on-pay vote result, shareholder feedback and the advice of FW Cook, the Compensation Committee reduced Mr. Frederico's Individual Target Cash Incentive Multiple to 2.0x from 2.5x, thereby reducing his maximum short-term incentive opportunity to 4x his base salary from 5x his base salary. The Compensation Committee has maintained Mr. Frederico's Individual Target Cash Multiple at 2.0x since then, and Mr. Frederico has not received an increase in his base salary since 2017.
Our Compensation Committee may exercise negative discretion where the financial performance measure result, while above the target established by our Compensation Committee, is less than the prior year result. The Compensation Committee has exercised its negative discretion in this area most recently for the 2019 performance year. For the 2021 performance year, there was no instance
42 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


where the 2021 performance measure result was above the target established by our Compensation Committee but below the prior year result, so the Compensation Committee had no occasion to consider exercising its negative discretion.
Setting Financial Performance Targets
The Compensation Committee selected five of the financial performance measures in 2015 based on the unique earnings model of the financial guaranty industry. The Compensation Committee reconsiders each year whether these measures are the appropriate ones to use in light of our Company’s business. For the 2020 performance year, the Compensation Committee added a sixth financial performance measure, based on gross third-party assets, to appropriately incentivize our executives to develop and grow our asset management business. All six financial performance measures receive an equal weighting of 11.17% (so adding to 67% in total) for most of our senior leadership team. For those members of our senior leadership team with responsibility for particular aspects of our business, financial performance measures related to their areas of responsibility are weighted more heavily than the other measures. Among our named executive officers, only one has financial performance measures with unequal weighting: for Mr. Buzen, gross third party assets raised are weighted 33.5% while the other measures are weighted 6.7% (so again adding to 67% in total). The Compensation Committee believes our progress measured against the financial performance measures it established will, over the long term, result in optimal total shareholder return.
Each year the Compensation Committee sets our financial performance targets at levels it views as challenging based on the projected operating results in our annual business plan. The goals and our business plan acknowledge the unique long-term nature of our financial guaranty insurance business and that the required accounting treatment and operations of a financial guaranty insurer are distinct from other insurance product lines.

Core Operating Income per Diluted Share and Core Operating Return on Equity. Our Compensation Committee set the financial performance targets for core operating income per diluted share and core operating return on equity for the 2021 performance year materially higher than the 2020 actual results. These targets were particularly challenging when considering the unique earnings model of the financial guaranty insurance industry.
When a financial guarantor writes a new financial guaranty policy, it does not earn the full amount of the premium immediately; rather, when a policy is written, the upfront premium it receives (plus the present value of future premiums) is recorded on its balance sheet as the unearned premium reserve, which we refer to as the UPR. This UPR is earned over the term of the insured obligation, often as long as 20, 30 or even 40 years. For example, only approximately 3% of the premiums we earned in 2021 related to new financial guaranty policies we wrote in 2021, and the rest was earned from our previously established UPR. Because the volume and pricing of new financial guaranty business written in a particular year has only a small impact on premium earnings for that year, most of our operating income from our core financial guaranty business may be forecast based on projections with respect to the very significant UPR that we earn as our insured portfolio amortizes.
Despite the relative predictability of the contribution of our primary financial guaranty business to our core operating income per diluted share and core operating return on equity, we consider the financial performance goals we set for these measures to be challenging due to potential uncertainties in the broader market and environment. Those uncertainties include unexpected loss development, level of refunding activity, unexpected mark-to-market movements of investments in alternative investments, and unexpected changes to investment rates. In addition, variability of our share price and availability of funds for share repurchases may add to the challenges of reaching these goals.
Our core operating ROE is also negatively impacted by the amount of excess capital we continue to have. Despite the strides we have made in managing our capital (see “Summary – 2021 Achievement Highlights” above), we believe we still have excess capital that we need regulatory approval to deploy, and therefore are constrained in our ability to improve our capital efficiency and our core operating ROE.

43 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Core Operating Shareholders’ Equity Per Share and Core Adjusted Book Value Per Share. Our Compensation Committee also wants to encourage our senior leadership team to build intrinsic value in our Company over time for our shareholders, so our Compensation Committee sets targets for core operating shareholders’ equity per share and core adjusted book value per share. Our Compensation Committee believes these measures best capture the long-term value we are building for our shareholders and that growth in these measures will eventually result in growth in the price of our Common Shares. Our Compensation Committee believes that core adjusted book value per share, in particular, is such an important measure of the intrinsic value we are building for our shareholders that our Compensation Committee has made this measure a component of both our short-term and long-term incentive programs. Our Compensation Committee believes that this will motivate our senior leadership team to focus on growth in this measure in both the short and long term, and that eventually growth in the price of our Common Shares will follow.

PVP. Our annual business plan for 2021 challenged our senior leadership team to originate more financial guaranty business in 2021 than the financial guaranty business we originated in 2020. Our most direct measurement of new insurance business origination is PVP. We set our 2021 PVP target nearly 22% higher than our our 2020 actual results.

Gross Third-Party Assets Raised. Our Compensation Committee set this target nearly 69% higher than 2020 actual results. Our Compensation Committee believes that gross third-party assets raised eliminates the “noise” of the reduction of AUM attributable to the wind-down business and is an appropriate metric against which to weigh the success of management’s efforts to grow our asset management business.
Calculating Cash Incentive Compensation
Based on weighted achievement scores for the financial performance targets and the individual non-financial objectives for each member of the senior leadership team, the individual payouts of the cash incentive for 2021 were calculated as follows:
Annual Individual Target Cash
Incentive Amount
X
Annual Achievement Score
(a percentage from 0% to 200%)
=
Annual Cash  
Incentive
Payout
(
2021
Base
Salary
X
2021
Individual Target
Cash Incentive
Multiple
)
X
(
2021
Financial Target
Achievement
Score
(weighted 67%)
+
2021
Non-Financial
Objective
Achievement Score
(weighted 33%)
)=
2021 Cash
Incentive
Payout
The basic formula for determining cash incentive compensation has remained the same since our Compensation Committee developed the methodology, together with FW Cook, at the beginning of 2015, and our Company’s performance on key financial measures has improved greatly since that time. Four out of five of the financial performance measurements applicable in both periods have improved, as reflected in the table below.
  FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
 
2014
Results
2021
Results
Core Operating Income per Diluted Share$2.83$5.91
Core Operating Return on Equity8.1%7.3%
  Core Operating Shareholders’ Equity per Share$37.48 $88.26 
Core Adjusted Book Value per Share$53.78$130.33
PVP$172 million$361 million
  Gross Third-Party Assets RaisedNA $3.0 billion 
The progress we have made on these fronts is the result of the leadership of Mr. Frederico and the efforts of our senior leadership team. As a result, our Compensation Committee retained the same general methodology and formulas for cash incentive compensation implemented in 2015 for Mr. Frederico and other members of our senior leadership team, although it has fine-tuned its methodology since then, with the addition of a new financial performance measure beginning in the 2020 performance year being the most recent change.
44 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Long-Term Equity Incentives
In addition to the cash incentive compensation, our Compensation Committee awards long-term incentive compensation in the form of our Common Shares.
Like cash incentive compensation, equity incentive compensation is awarded after the end of the performance year to which such compensation relates. For the 2021 performance year, our Compensation Committee determined the amount of equity incentive compensation in February 2022.
Sixty percent of the nominal value of the award is in the form of PSUs that may be earned over a 3-year performance period based on pre-established performance targets, and are paid at the end of the 3-year performance period if particular performance targets are achieved, and the remaining forty percent is in the form of restricted share units (which we refer to as RSUs) that cliff vest at the end of a 3-year period. Details about the individual awards are set out in “CEO Performance Review” and “Other Named Executive Officer Compensation Decisions.”
For the 2022 grant with respect to the 2021 performance year, the proportion of the long-term equity incentive comprising performance-based PSUs was again 60%, with the remainder in time-based RSUs.

charts3-02.jpg

Performance Share Units. Each performance restricted share unit, or PSU, represents a contingent right to receive up to a certain number of our Common Shares as described below under “Incentive Plans—Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan”. The Compensation Committee awards PSUs with the intent of aligning executive pay with our Company’s performance.
PSUs tied to growth in our core adjusted book value per share over a three-year period, which we refer to as ABV PSUs; and
PSUs tied to our TSR over a three-year period relative to the TSR of the 55th percentile of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, which we refer to as Relative TSR PSUs.
This structure has been in place since 2019 and the Compensation Committee maintained the same structure for the February 2022 grants.
ABV PSUs
Our Compensation Committee believes that Core ABV per share is the best measure of the intrinsic value of our Common Shares, and that growth in Core ABV per share will eventually result in growth in the price of our Common Shares. Our Compensation Committee believes that this measure is so important that it has incorporated the measure into both its short-term cash incentive program and its long-term equity compensation program, so that the senior leadership team is motivated to grow Core ABV per share on both a short-term and long-term basis.
45 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Each ABV PSU represents the right to receive up to two of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year performance period, which runs from January 1 of the year of the grant to December 31 three years later, depending on the growth in Core ABV per share over the three-year performance period.
The target growth rate is an aggregate of 15% over that three-year period, for which the recipient earns one Common Share for each ABV PSU.
At 80% of the target growth (or 12%), which we refer to as the threshold, the recipient earns one-half share for each ABV PSU; for growth rates below that amount, the recipient earns no Common Shares.
At 120% of the target growth (or 18%) or above, which we refer to as the maximum, the recipient earns two of our Common Shares for each ABV PSU.
For Core ABV per share growth rates between the threshold and the target and between the target and the maximum, the amount of our Common Shares earned for each ABV PSU is based on straight-line interpolation.
Our Compensation Committee set the ABV PSU target growth rate based on the projected operating results in our annual business plan and after consulting with FW Cook. In setting the ABV PSU target, our Compensation Committee did not consider significant potential or theoretical strategic activities that had not been finalized or share repurchases the funding of which require regulatory approvals that have not yet been obtained, because the conditions for success are highly contingent and outside of the control of our senior leadership team. Given the outsize positive impact on our Company of the successful achievement of at least some such endeavors, our Compensation Committee believes it is appropriate for its senior leadership team to be encouraged to pursue success in these areas through the ABV PSUs. The ABV PSU performance targets remain aligned with our long range plan and are unchanged from last year.
Relative TSR PSUs
Since our ultimate goal is to provide growing shareholder value, our Compensation Committee believes that our long-term equity incentive compensation should also be based on our TSR. However, recognizing that share prices may be influenced by a number of factors, the Compensation Committee decided that a relative measure of TSR was most appropriate.
Each Relative TSR PSU represents the right to receive up to 2.5 (for extraordinary performance at the 95th percentile) of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year performance period, which runs from January 1 of the grant year to December 31 three years later, depending on the performance of our TSR over that three-year period relative to the TSR of the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index, which we refer to as the Index.
The target Company TSR for that period is the 55th percentile of the Index, for which the recipient earns one Common Share for each Relative TSR PSU.
At the 25th percentile of the Index, which we refer to as the threshold, the recipient earns one-half share for each Relative TSR PSU; for Company TSRs below that level, the recipient earns no Common Shares.
A Company TSR at the 95th percentile of the Index, which we refer to as the maximum, or above earns the recipient 2.5 of our Common Shares for each Relative TSR PSU.
For Company TSRs between the threshold and the target and between the target and the maximum, the amount of our Common Shares earned for each Relative TSR PSU is based on straight-line interpolation.
The Compensation Committee adopted the following additional restrictions on the Relative TSR PSUs:
The number of Common Shares that can be earned is capped at one share per Relative TSR PSU if the Company TSR is negative, even if above the 55th percentile.
Common Shares earned pursuant to the Relative TSR PSUs remain restricted until one year after they vest.
Our Compensation Committee selected the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index as the best available measure when it established the TSR PSUs in February 2019. Our Compensation Committee believed that aspects of our business are comparable to aspects of various financial services companies, and so determined that the best benchmark for our TSR was a broad index of somewhat similarly-sized financial services companies. The Compensation Committee made this determination after considering and rejecting a number of other options:
Only one other financial guarantor continues to write new business, and that company is not publicly traded, so a peer group of financial guarantors is not available.
While analysts sometimes categorize us with property and casualty insurance companies, the Compensation Committee believes that factors impacting the performance of property and casualty insurance companies are unlikely to impact our business in the same way, particularly given the unique long-term nature of our financial guaranty insurance business and the fact that the required
46 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


accounting treatment and operations of a financial guaranty insurer are distinct from property and casualty and other insurance product lines.
While the current executive compensation comparison group comprises similarly-sized companies in businesses somewhat similar to our business, many of the companies in that group are mortgage finance and property and casualty insurance and reinsurance companies and our Compensation Committee does not believe that group is an appropriate benchmark for our TSR.
In late 2021, the Compensation Committee considered whether, given changes in the Russell Midcap Financial Services Index since 2019, it should change the reference index used for the TSR PSUs. It chose not to make any changes.
Restricted Share Units
Each restricted share unit represents a right to receive one of our Common Shares at the end of a three-year vesting period as described below under “Incentive Plans—Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan”.
Our Compensation Committee awards RSUs with the intent of providing members of the senior leadership team with long-term incentive compensation that increases in value as our Company achieves its strategies. Our Compensation Committee believes this incentivizes members of the senior leadership team to remain with the Company and help build shareholder value over the long term.
47 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



CEO PERFORMANCE REVIEW
Overview
In light of Mr. Frederico’s significant accomplishments in the 2021 performance year and the importance of his continued leadership as we work to transform ourselves into a diversified financial services company, the price performance of our shares over the last year and that we achieved five of our six financial performance targets, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico total compensation of $11,954,988, a 6.5% increase from his total compensation for the 2020 performance year. That increase reflects our strong financial and share price performance and the achievement of non-financial strategic objectives that position us for future growth and our successful transformation into a financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty and asset management. The increase should also be viewed in the context of Mr. Frederico's compensation package for the 2020 performance year being 4.2% lower than the one he received for the 2019 performance year, and his 2021 compensation package being only 1.9% higher than his 2019 compensation package.
Mr. Frederico’s short-term cash incentive compensation increased by 16.0% from the prior year, largely as a function of the financial performance target scores awarded by the Compensation Committee. Our performance exceeded all but one of the six of the financial performance targets set by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the year. As a result, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico a weighted score on his financial performance targets of 82.1%, considerably above his score of 61.4% for 2020, when only three of the six financial performance targets were met. The Compensation Committee also awarded him a similar weighted score on his non-financial objectives for 2021, 56.1% for 2021 compared to 57.8% for 2020. Mr. Frederico’s total achievement score for 2021 was 138.2%, substantially above his score of 119.2% for 2020, but still below his total achievement score of 149.1% for 2019.
The Compensation Committee also considered the appropriate amount of long-term incentive equity compensation to award Mr. Frederico in recognition of our significant achievements despite the continued disruption of COVID-19 and the extraordinarily low interest rates of 2021. In recognition of these accomplishments and the Compensation Committee’s strong desire that Mr. Frederico continue his leadership as we execute on our multi-year strategy to transform our Company into a diversified financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty and asset management, the Compensation Committee granted Mr. Frederico long-term equity compensation with a target nominal value of $7,250,000, an increase of $250,000 from his grant for the 2020 performance year. Mr. Frederico’s total compensation for the 2021 performance year was composed of the following:
 
 
2021
Performance Year
 Compensation
2020
Performance Year Compensation
2019
Performance Year Compensation
Change
from
2020 to 2021
  Fixed Compensation—Base Salary (1)
$1,250,000$1,250,000 $1,250,000%
  Incentive Compensation   
  Cash Incentive Compensation$3,454,988 $2,979,625 $3,727,00016.0%
  Long-Term Performance-Based Equity$4,350,000(2)$4,200,000(2)$4,050,000(2)3.6%
  Long-Term Time-Based Equity$2,900,000(2)$2,800,000(2)$2,700,000(2)3.6%
Total Direct Compensation$11,954,988 $11,229,625 $11,727,0006.5%
(1)     Mr. Frederico’s base salary for each of the 2021, 2020 and 2019 performance years was established at the beginning of such performance year, in February. Accordingly, Mr. Frederico’s 2021 base salary was established in February 2021.
(2)     Represents the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value for the relevant performance year. The number of units granted is calculated by dividing such value by the average stock price over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the date of grant.
]

48 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The compensation package presented in the table above is different from the SEC-required disclosure in the Summary Compensation Table below and is not a substitute for the information in that table. Rather, it is intended to show how the Compensation Committee linked Mr. Frederico’s compensation and its components to our performance results and his achievements for the prior year. The base salary is paid during the performance year, while all of the components of the incentive compensation is based on achievements during the performance year and so is awarded in the first quarter of the following year.
Base Salary
Each February the Compensation Committee determines Mr. Frederico's base salary for that performance year. Consistent with the Compensation Committee's pay-for-performance philosophy, it has since 2017 chosen to maintain Mr. Frederico’s base salary at $1,250,000 and to use incentive compensation to reward him for his performance, experience and contributions and to motivate him to continue his leadership.
Cash Incentive
To determine Mr. Frederico’s cash incentive, as discussed above, the Compensation Committee used a formula that involved aggregating the weighted achievement scores for certain financial performance targets and individual non-financial objectives, and multiplying the result by Mr. Frederico’s Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount. Please refer to the diagram and discussion found above under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation.”
Setting Mr. Frederico’s 2021 Financial Performance Targets
In February 2021, the Compensation Committee established targets for six financial performance measurements for Mr. Frederico (and for each other member of our senior leadership team) for the 2021 performance year. The financial performance targets were based on the business plan that the Board of Directors reviewed and approved in November 2020, and were designed to measure our progress in creating value for our shareholders. We include above under “Executive Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program” a detailed description of the financial performance measurements, and why the Compensation Committee considers them to be important in assessing our Company and the performance of each member of our senior leadership team. Five of the six targets are based on non-GAAP financial measures.
The Compensation Committee set all of the 2021 targets for the financial performance measurements above the 2020 actual results, some substantially, and viewed all of the 2021 targets as challenging in light of then current market conditions and the nature of our business model.
Mr. Frederico’s 2021 Financial Performance Target Scores
In 2021, we exceeded all but one of the six 2021 targets for the financial performance measures.
Core operating income per share of $5.91 was nearly 63% above our target and 90% above our actual 2020 results.
Core operating ROE was nearly 60% above our target and more than 65% above our actual 2020 results.
Core operating shareholders’ equity per share reached its highest level in our history, increasing nearly 13% from year-end 2020 and exceeding our goal by nearly 7%.
Core adjusted book value, which we refer to as Core ABV, per share increased by more than 13%, exceeded our goal by more than 6% and reached its highest level in our history.
The $361 million of PVP we produced was nearly 25% below our goal and also 7% below our achievement in 2020. Some of this shortfall can be attributed to the interest rate environment — the average 30-year AAA Municipal Market Data (MMD) rate (a measure of interest rates in our largest financial guaranty insurance market, U.S. public finance) for 2021 was 1.54%, below the 1.71% average for the prior year and a new historical low.
Our gross third-party gross assets raised were nearly 85% above our actual 2020 results and nearly 9% above our goal.
We achieved these results despite a persistently challenging business environment.
Financial services is a “people business”, and the travel and gathering restrictions tied to the COVID-19 pandemic were substantial obstacles to building new relationships.
Over the last several years, municipal bond yields have been at historically low levels, making our financial guaranty product less attractive to issuers and generally lowering the premium rate we may charge. As noted above, the average 30-year AAA MMD rate for 2021 was 1.54%, below the 1.71% average for the prior year and a new historical low.
The difference, or credit spread, between the 30-year A-rated general obligation relative to the 30-year AAA MMD averaged 33 bps in 2021, down from 42 bps in 2020. BBB credit spreads measured on the same basis averaged at 70 bps in 2021, significantly
49 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


tighter than the 121 bps average in 2020. Both the A and BBB credit spreads are at their narrowest levels in over a decade. Tighter credit spreads generally lower the premium rates the Company may charge.
We continued to face competition in an already tight market from a second financial guaranty insurer that focuses on a smaller portion of the market than we do and provides price competition in those markets where we overlap.
Despite the strides we have made in managing our capital, we believe we still have excess capital that we need regulatory approval to deploy, and therefore are constrained in our ability to improve our capital efficiency and core operating ROE.
The Compensation Committee assigned Mr. Frederico achievement scores for his achievements against each individual financial performance target, and then weighted his financial performance measurement scores in accordance with the cash incentive formula, which resulted in a weighted financial performance goal score of 82.1%:
2021 CEO Financial Performance Scorecard
 
 
2021 Targets2021 ResultsWeighting2021
Achievement
Score
(0%-200%)
Weighted
Achievement
Score
 Financial Performance Measurements*
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Core operating income per diluted share$3.62$5.9111.17%165%18.4%
Core operating ROE4.6%7.3%11.17%170%19.0%
Core operating shareholders’ equity per share$82.90$88.2611.17%110%12.3%
Core ABV per share$122.60$130.3311.17%110%12.3%
PVP$475 million$361 million11.17%75%8.4%
Gross third-party assets raised$2.7 billion$3.0 billion11.17%105%11.7%
Total Financial Performance Measurement Achievement Score
 
 
 
 
67.0%
 
 
82.1%













*    Five of the six financial performance measurements are based on non-GAAP financial measures, which are described on page __ under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
50 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Mr. Frederico’s Non-Financial Objectives
The Compensation Committee also evaluated Mr. Frederico’s 2021 achievements against his 2021 non-financial objectives. Highlights of those achievements include completing two plan support agreements in 2021, covering 74% of the Puerto Rico debt outstanding on December 31, 2021, and enabling a benefit against our expected losses related to Puerto Rico that was the primary driver of the $204 million economic benefit against our expected losses in the public finance sector; improved expected recoveries and performance of our insured RMBS portfolio; and successful management of capital by issuing new public debt and retiring higher interest debt, and by returning $562 million to shareholders while building our core businesses. This was accomplished while successfully navigating COVID-19 restrictions and taking important steps in environmental and social responsibility areas.
Non-Financial  Objectives2021 Results
Insurance Growth—Articulate clear strategy and lead effective implementation of business plan to grow financial guaranty and related business globally
Expand U.S. public finance financial guaranty business
Expand global infrastructure financial guaranty business

Expand global structured finance financial guaranty business

Attempt to purchase bond insurance portfolios if they become available for purchase

Maintain strong financial strength ratings at insurance companies to facilitate articulated business strategies and periodically assess the financial strength ratings of each insurance company to determine whether to request that a
rating agency add or drop a rating from that company

Underwrote a total of $361 million of PVP despite continued low interest rates and credit spreads, as follows:
$235 million of U.S. Public Finance PVP
$79 million of International PVP
$47 million of Global Structured Finance PVP

U.S. Public Finance:
As a result of increased institutional demand for our insurance, in 2021, we insured $22.6 billion of new issue par on 1,076 individual transactions (including the Citi Field and Miami Seaport transactions, where we insured $609 million and $800 million of gross par, respectively)
Industry insured penetration rose to 8.2% of municipal par insured for 2021 in the primary market, the highest in a dozen years
The $22.6 billion that we insured in the primary market in 2021 was 15% higher than 2020, and 62% higher than 2019 (the last year not affected by the pandemic), and our highest insured par in a decade

International Public Finance:
Wrote $79 million of PVP, representing the third largest amount in over a decade, including the guarantee of a student housing transaction with University of Essex ($156 million par)
Sustained trend started in the fourth quarter of 2015 of writing new business in each quarter; opportunities continue to support our targets
Global Structured Finance:

Wrote $47 million of PVP, representing the second largest amount in over a decade (excluding a portfolio reinsurance transaction)

51 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Non-Financial  Objectives2021 Results
Insurance Loss Mitigation and Avoidance—Proactively manage financial guaranty portfolio to identify and avoid losses when stress develops and minimize losses when losses cannot be avoided
Use all available levers to creatively resolve Puerto Rico credits while minimizing losses to the Company
Completed two plan support agreements with the Federal Oversight Management Board for Puerto Rico and other important stakeholders in 2021, covering 74% of the insured Puerto Rico debt outstanding on December 31, 2021
Significantly improved expected recoveries and performance of RMBS portfolio
Asset Management and Alternative Investments—Lead effective implementation of asset management and alternative investment strategies
Grow assets under management (AUM) organically and/or through acquisitions
Improve yield on investment portfolio by investing a portion of excess capital in alternative investments
Raised $3.0 billion of inflows of third-party AUM, and now manage $16.1 billion in third-party AUM
Reduced AUM of wind down funds by 64% from $1,623 million to $582 million

Increased CLO fee-earning AUM and the recovery of previously deferred CLO fees, resulting in a 109% increase in CLO fees

Committed $209 million in additional insurance company capital into AssuredIM funds, bringing total committed capital in AssuredIM funds to $702 million

Capital invested in AssuredIM Funds generated $80 million in pretax equity in earnings, representing a blended return of 20.8%

Other alternative investments (not AssuredIM Funds) contributed $64 million in pretax equity in earnings
Capital Management—Articulate clear strategy to maintain optimal capital structure, considering internal risk measures and rating agency and regulatory requirements
Accumulate capital outside of insurance companies to support asset management and other strategies
Return excess capital to shareholders
Returned $562 million to our shareholders — $496 million by repurchasing 10.5 million of our Common Shares and $66 million through dividends
Issued $500 million of 10-year Senior Notes at an attractive rate of 3.15% in May and issued $400 million of 30-year Senior Notes at an attractive rate of 3.6% in August, benefiting the Company by (i) reducing the average coupon on $600 million of our debt from 5.89% to 3.35%, resulting in a $5.2 million annual debt service savings until the next debt maturity date; (ii) reducing the amount of debt coming due in 2024; and (iii) using some of the debt proceeds for share repurchases, all without significantly affecting leverage or interest coverage ratios
52 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Non-Financial  Objectives2021 Results
Regulatory—Maintain optimal corporate and regulatory structure and good standing to pursue the articulated business strategies
Completed merger of Municipal Assurance Corp. into Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. on April 1, 2021, which simplified corporate structure and increased dividend capacity
Obtained approval for $250 million of insurance company assets to be drawn over a two-year period into AssuredIM Funds
Obtained approval for new Assured Guaranty Municipal and Assured Guaranty Corp. quota share reinsurance agreement
Obtained approval for arrangements supporting renewed European structured finance underwriting
Risk Management—Ensure that the Company has comprehensive, best-practice risk management with respect to all of its activities
Insure credits of good quality consistent with underwriting guidelines and consistent with risk appetite statement

Articulate and execute thorough enterprise risk management program
No unanticipated risk issues
Enhanced underwriting procedures to identify insurable credits with ample financial strength to withstand crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic; all new business within risk limits and risk appetite statement

Updated stress analysis of the pandemic’s impact on the insured portfolio; liquidity claims for 2021 remained nominal
Participated in periodic conference calls with regulators to focus on (i) Assured Guaranty’s processes for monitoring and reevaluating its exposure in light of changing economic conditions, (ii) any changes in the ability of obligors, especially municipal obligors, to make scheduled debt payments, and (iii) Assured Guaranty’s liquidity and solvency position under adverse stress scenario

Successful testing of Business Continuity Plan in 2021, as employees have been able to effectively work remotely since mid-March of 2020
Operations—Establish an environment of excellence in all areas of operations, including investment management, accounting and financial reporting, and legal and compliance, and provide a secure information technology environment

All financial statements and regulatory reports completed successfully and filed on time
Transitioned IT team to our new CTO while pivoting to a hybrid work schedule and layering pandemic response atop existing IT mandates
Successful Annual General Meeting, with shareholders supporting all proposals, including over 92% support of compensation paid to named executive officers

Extensive support and collaboration with IT Security to identify, analyze and address issues related to cybersecurity events

Successfully passed IT penetration testing

Successfully avoided ransomware and security attacks

Successful integration of AssuredIM IT systems, compliance regime, and office space

Successfully automated legacy accounting and investment accounting and reporting systems
53 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Non-Financial  Objectives2021 Results
Human Capital Management – Attract and retain talented employees, invest in the development of our people and strive for a diverse work force and an inclusive culture
Expanded recruiting process in an effort to reach a more diverse slate of candidates

Created and funded a strategic initiative to enhance educational opportunities for underserved populations in the New York City area as just one part of our philanthropic activities in support of our communities

Established Employee Resource Groups for Black / African American employees, women, and working parents

Issued statements (i) condemning religious hate crimes and discrimination, and (ii) opposing violence and discrimination against Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, and made contributions to various organizations that work to promote a more equitable society
Environmental and Social Responsibility – Pursue clear strategies for assessing and mitigating the long-term impact of climate change on the Company’s businesses, and pursue opportunities to be a good corporate citizen
Measured and disclosed greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions; GhG methodology and results are independently verified
Developed new underwriting criteria to address climate change risk

Created AssuredIM and Assured Healthcare Partners Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) statements; conducted annual ESG review of investment portfolio

Developing an analysis of risk aggregation of the insured portfolio along the coastline for rising sea levels and hurricane 5 risks

Created employee-led Diversity and Inclusion (D+I) Committee

Held bias awareness training sessions for entire firm and continued work with D+I committee to expand employee diversity and provide for an inclusive corporate culture
Held D+I hosted events throughout the year
Based on Mr. Frederico’s 2021 achievements against his 2021 non-financial objectives, the Compensation Committee awarded him an achievement score of 170% against those objectives. Applying that score to the cash incentive formula resulted in a weighted non-financial objective score of 56.1%.
The Compensation Committee then added that weighted non-financial objective score of 56.1% to the weighted financial performance target score of 82.1% achieved by Mr. Frederico as described earlier, to derive a total achievement score of 138.2% in accordance with the cash incentive formula, as follows:
Summary 2021 CEO Performance Scorecard
Weighting2021
Achievement
Score
(0%-200%)
Weighted Achievement
Score
Total Financial Performance Measurement Achievement Score (Summarized
 on page 50 above.)
67%122.5%82.1%
Non-Financial Objective Score33%170%56.1%
Achievement Score138.2%
In reviewing Mr. Frederico’s 2021 performance scorecard as a whole, the Compensation Committee determined that he had very strong performance. In particular, the Compensation Committee found that Mr. Frederico should be recognized for us exceeding all but one of our six financial performance targets set by the Compensation Committee for 2021, some of them by a very significant amount. The
54 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Compensation Committee also deemed it to be important to recognize that our share price of $50.20 at December 31, 2021, had increased 59.4% from our share price of $31.49 on December 31, 2020. The Compensation Committee also considered the scorecard as a whole in light of the 20.1% reduction in Mr. Frederico's cash incentive compensation for the 2020 performance year, when we met only three of our six financial performance targets for 2020, versus the 2019 performance year. Given this very significant reduction for the prior performance year and the substantial outperformance of most of the six financial performance targets for the 2021 performance year, the Compensation Committee concluded that it was appropriate that Mr. Frederico’s short-term cash incentive payment increase appreciably.
Based on Mr. Frederico’s achievements, the Compensation Committee awarded him a total achievement score of 138.2% for the 2021 performance year, 15.9% above his achievement score of 119.2% for the 2020 performance year but still below the 149.1% achieved for the 2019 performance year. Applying this achievement score to his Individual Target Cash Incentive Amount resulted in a cash incentive award of $3,454,988. This was $457,363 (or 16%) more than the $2,979,625 awarded to Mr. Frederico for the 2020 performance year, but still $272,012 (or 7.3%) less than the $3,727,000 awarded to him for the 2019 performance year.
Equity Compensation
The Compensation Committee awarded all of Mr. Frederico’s long-term incentive compensation in the form of PSUs and RSUs. The $7,250,000 target nominal amount of long-term equity constituted less than a 4% increase over the target nominal amount for the prior year. The Compensation Committee wished to provide Mr. Frederico with a strong incentive to continue his valued leadership of our Company and to generate long-term, sustained growth that will enhance shareholder value as we continue our multi-year effort to establish AssuredIM in the asset management business while growing our insurance business, and so become the diversified dual-focused financial services company that we envision.
The following table sets forth the target nominal amount of long-term incentive compensation the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Frederico on February 23, 2022, the grant date. The Compensation Committee determined the number of PSUs and RSUs to award Mr. Frederico by converting the target nominal amount of the award using $54.30, which was the average price of our Common Shares over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on February 23, 2022.
When we prepare the Summary Compensation Table, we report the value of the grants using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (which we refer to as U.S. GAAP), in accordance with the SEC’s rules.
Under U.S. GAAP, the value of an ABV PSU as of February 23, 2022 was determined to be $56.69. This value is based on the closing price of our Common Shares on that date, which U.S. GAAP allows as a practical expedient to value grants with complicated features, such as in this case the estimated growth rate of the Company’s Core ABV per share.
Under U.S. GAAP, the value of a Relative TSR PSU on February 23, 2022 was $83.97. This value was computed using a Monte-Carlo simulation model taking into account the historical relationship of our TSR and the TSR of the Index, including for the period from the beginning of the Relative TSR PSU performance period to February 23, 2022, the grant date. We engaged Aon to provide this computation for us.
Under U.S. GAAP, the value of an RSU was $56.69, based our Common Share closing price on February 23, 2022.
Because the price of our Common Shares can be volatile, our Compensation Committee since 2012 has determined the number of shares to be granted to members of our senior leadership team by dividing the target nominal value of the equity it wished to award by the average price of our Common Shares over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the grant date. As described above, U.S. GAAP valuations are based on the price of our Common Shares on the grant date.So, when the price of our Common Shares is higher on the grant date than the average price over the 40 previous consecutive trading days, the U.S. GAAP value will exceed our Compensation Committee’s target nominal value, as was the case this year, as well as last year.Similarly, when the price of our Common Shares is lower on the grant date than the average price over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the grant date, the U.S. GAAP value will be less than our Compensation Committee’s target nominal value, as was the case in 2020.Our adoption of a Relative TSR PSU has exacerbated this effect, since price movements of our Common Shares from the beginning of the measurement period (the beginning of the year) to the grant date compared to the price movements of the Index have a material impact on the U.S. GAAP value of the TSR PSUs.Last year, the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value of the total long-term equity incentive grants was $7,000,000,while the U.S. GAAP value was $9,239,643, or nearly 32% more.This year, the movement of the price of our Common Shares was less dramatic during the relevant period than last year, so the difference between the Compensation Committee’s target nominal value and the U.S. GAAP value was not as large as last year. The Compensation Committee believes solely using the average over 40 consecutive trading days approach to sizing its long-term equity incentive grants is the fairest approach to use in light of the volatility of the price of our Common Shares.



55 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


The aggregate value of Mr. Frederico’s February 2022 long-term equity incentive grants under U.S. GAAP is set forth below.
Compensation Committee Target
Nominal Value
Equity
Granted
(Shares)
U.S. GAAP
Value
ABV PSUs$2,175,000  40,055$2,270,718
Relative TSR PSUs$2,175,000  40,055$3,363,418
RSUs$2,900,000  53,407$3,027,643
TOTAL$7,250,000  133,517$8,661,779
Perquisites
The Compensation Committee reviewed the executive perquisites provided to Mr. Frederico in 2021. The Compensation Committee noted the cost and personal inconvenience entailed in leading a Bermuda-based company with substantial operations in the U.S., U.K. and Europe, and evaluated the value of perquisites provided to Mr. Frederico against the values of perquisites provided to the chief executive officers of the six other Bermuda-based companies in our current executive compensation comparison group. Based on information in the 2021 proxy statements of those six companies, in 2020 Mr. Frederico received the lowest value of perquisites of the chief executive officers of Bermuda-based companies in our current executive compensation comparison group, and in 2021 he received less value than he received in 2020. On this basis, the Compensation Committee concluded that the value of perquisites provided to Mr. Frederico under our existing policies is reasonable.
OTHER NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION DECISIONS
Non-Financial Objectives and Achievements of the Other Named Executive Officers
The Compensation Committee made compensation awards to the other named executive officers for the 2021 performance year based on its assessment of their achievements and Mr. Frederico’s review of their performance, as well as Mr. Frederico’s compensation recommendations. The other named executive officers’ achievements were evaluated based on their contributions to our achievement of our financial measurement targets, their contributions to the achievement of Mr. Frederico’s non-financial objectives, and their own achievements of the individual non-financial objectives Mr. Frederico had assigned to them, as described below.
Robert A. Bailenson, Chief Financial Officer
Mr. Bailenson was responsible in the 2021 performance year for meeting all internal and external financial requirements, managing our capital efficiently, meeting with investors, and participating on earnings calls. Mr. Bailenson has involved himself in all aspects of our business and leads the financial team in addressing market and regulatory changes. More specifically, Mr. Bailenson:
Successfully refinanced our $430 million of 100-year debt with interest rates ranging from 6 7/8% to 5.6%, plus $170 million of the $500 million of 5% senior notes we had due in 2024, with an issuance in May of $500 million of 3.15% senior notes due 2031 and an issuance in August of $400 million of 3.6% senior notes due 2051; also used some of the debt-issuance proceeds for general corporate purposes, primarily to fund our share repurchase program;
Successfully oversaw the automation of legacy accounting and investment accounting and reporting systems;
Held various meetings with rating agencies, which resulted in an upgrade of Assured Guaranty Corp., which we refer to as AGC, by Kroll Bond Rating Agency, Inc. to AA+ from AA;
Worked with Mr. Buzen to increase the efficiency and efficacy of our investment activities;
Actively participated in loss mitigation and settlement activities relating to Puerto Rico, as well as ensuring that the accounting reporting was appropriate;
Was responsible for the timely and accurate filing of all financial statements and tax returns; and
Acts as executive sponsor for our Working Parent Employee Resource Group.
Ling Chow, General Counsel
Ms. Chow is an effective leader of legal resources for our Company. Her work managing corporate governance and other issues before our Board was exemplary. Under Ms. Chow’s direction, we were able to navigate the complex compliance and regulatory environments of both the insurance and asset management segments of our business to accomplish our corporate objectives. More specifically, Ms. Chow:
Supervised the Legal department’s contribution to our efforts to mitigate losses on our insured Puerto Rico exposure, including negotiating support agreements, pursuing legal proceedings, and developing a short-term financing structure to facilitate anticipated claim payments;
56 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Supervised the legal analysis and support for all our underwriting activity, including developing criteria to underwrite several new Structured Finance asset classes;
Managed litigation matters involving our financial guaranty business as well as our asset management business;
Provided legal advice on the various initiatives of our employee-led D+I Committee; and
Headed a Legal and HR team responsible for keeping abreast of COVID-19 developments and regulations in each of our offices around the world, in an effort to maintain the health and safety of all staff.
Russell B. Brewer II, Chief Surveillance Officer
Mr. Brewer was responsible in the 2021 performance year for ensuring that all of our insured exposures are reviewed annually and assigned appropriate internal ratings, for managing loss mitigation strategies for our troubled credits, and for overseeing our IT department. Mr. Brewer has been a major contributor to the successful operations of our company and has been a thought leader in our relationships with our rating agencies. (Effective December 31, 2021, Mr. Brewer resigned as Chief Surveillance Officer and became, effective January 1, 2022, Senior Advisor to Chief Executive Officer.) More specifically, Mr. Brewer:
Led the surveillance process for our $236 billion net par insured portfolio and the timely review and updating of internal ratings for our insured portfolio, helping to identify and intervene in deteriorating situations to avoid or mitigate losses;
Actively participated in periodic rating agency meetings including annual rating reviews and discussions to describe the risks faced from COVID-19 and strategies to address such risks while working in a full remote environment;
Oversaw and participated in many of our risk mitigation activities, including making major contributions to our effort in Puerto Rico;
Oversaw the automation of our legacy accounting and investment accounting and reporting systems;
Oversaw the successful transition of the IT team to our new Chief Technology Officer while pivoting to a hybrid work schedule and layering pandemic response atop existing IT mandates; and
Oversaw the effective defense of our systems from cyberattacks and our compliance with evolving cybersecurity regulations.
David A. Buzen, Chief Investment Officer and Head of Asset Management
Mr. Buzen was responsible in the 2021 performance year for guiding investment decisions for our investment portfolio and building our asset management business. More specifically, Mr. Buzen:
Oversaw the raising of $3.0 billion in gross third-party assets;
Successfully increased CLO fee-earning AUM and the recovery of previously deferred CLO fees, resulting in a 109% increase in CLO fees;
Used the knowledge base and experience of AssuredIM to expand the categories and types of investments included in our investment portfolio — capital invested in AssuredIM Funds generated $80 million in pretax equity in earnings in 2021, nearly double the $42 million generated in 2020, and representing a blended return of 20.8% in 2021; and
Convened a team of Finance, Investment, Workout and Legal personnel to develop a funding plan for anticipated Puerto Rico claim payments.
57 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Compensation Decisions for the Other Named Executive Officers
The 2021 base salaries of our other named executive officers were set by the Compensation Committee in February 2021. Consistent with the Compensation Committee's pay-for-performance philosophy, it chose to set Mr. Bailenson's 2021 salary at the same level as 2020, and Mr. Buzen's 2021 salary at the same level as it had been set in August 2020 when he became Chief Investment Officer and Head of Asset Management, and to use incentive compensation to reward each of them for their performance, experience and contributions, and to motivate them to continue their leadership of their respective functions. In light of Ms. Chow’s achievements for the 2020 performance year and the complexity of the issues handled by the legal department, the Compensation Committee supported Mr. Frederico's recommendation to increase her salary to $600,000 from $550,000 for the 2021 performance year. In recognition of the steadiness with which Mr. Brewer manages both the surveillance and the information technology departments, the efforts of the surveillance department in analyzing the potential impact of COVID-19 on the insured portfolio, and Mr. Brewer’s recruitment of a new chief technology officer during the year, the Compensation Committee also supported Mr. Frederico's recommendation to increase Mr. Brewer's salary to $550,000 from $525,000 for the 2021 performance year. In February 2022 the Compensation Committee decided to maintain the 2022 salaries of all of the other named executive officers at their 2021 levels.
In the case of the other named executive officers, for the 2021 performance year the Compensation Committee calculated and aggregated the weighted achievement scores for the financial performance targets (which were the same as Mr. Frederico’s except in the case of Mr. Buzen, whose financial performance measures were more heavily weighted to gross third-party assets raised) and their non-financial objectives (which were a combination of their contribution to Mr. Frederico’s non-financial objectives and their achievement of their own individual non-financial objectives), taking into account the level of difficulty of achieving particular targets or objectives. Based on their achievements, after applying the formula, the Compensation Committee awarded them the cash incentives calculated as shown in the table below.
 
 
(
 
 
2021
Base
Salary
X
 
 
2021
Individual
Target
Cash
Incentive
Multiple
)
 
 
 
X
 
 
(
 
 
Financial
Performance
Measurement
Achievement
Score
(weighted
67%)
+
 
 
Individual
Non-
Financial
Objective
Achievement
Score
(weighted
33%)
)
 
 






=
2021 Cash
Incentive
Payout
 
 Robert A. Bailenson
 
 
 
$800,000
 
 
 
2.00x
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
82.1%
 
 
 
46.2%
 
 
 
 
 
 
$2,052,792
 David A. Buzen
 
 
 
$800,000
 
 
 
2.00x
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
73.1%
 
 
 
33.0%
 
 
 
 
 
 
$1,696,480
 Ling Chow
 
 
 
$600,000
 
 
 
2.00x
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
82.1%
 
 
 
42.9%
 
 
 
 
 
 
$1,499,994
 Russell B. Brewer II
 
 
 
$550,000
 
 
 
2.00x
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
82.1%
 
 
 
42.9%
 
 
 
 
 
 
$1,374,995
The Compensation Committee awarded all of the other named executive officers long-term incentive compensation in the form of PSUs and RSUs with the same terms and in the same proportion as the PSUs and RSUs awarded to Mr. Frederico. The target nominal amount of long-term equity reflected the Compensation Committee’s desire that each of the other named executive officers have a strong incentive to help generate long-term, sustained growth for our Company. The amounts of PSUs and RSUs awarded to each other named executive officer vary by individual and are based on their respective positions and levels of responsibility, historic compensation levels and FW Cook’s advice about the compensation practices of companies in our comparison group.
The Compensation Committee considered FW Cook’s analysis of the compensation paid to named executive officers in the 21-company executive compensation comparison group constituted by FW Cook in 2021, which we refer to here as our current executive compensation comparison group, when evaluating the compensation of our named executive officers. (Our current executive compensation comparison group, and how it changed from our 2020 executive compensation comparison group, is described under “Compensation Governance—Executive Compensation Comparison Group” below). According to FW Cook, for the 2020 performance year, which is the most recent data available, the target total direct compensation for our named executive officers (excluding Mr. Frederico) ranked at the 63rd percentile on average, ranging from below median to above the 75th percentile, of amounts for the named executive officers of our current executive compensation comparison group, reflecting the experience, leadership, specialized skill sets and sustained performance of our senior leadership team. Actual total direct compensation for all our named executive officers as a group (excluding Mr. Frederico) paid for the 2020 performance year ranked at the 64th percentile of our current executive compensation comparison group, reflecting our non-equity incentive payouts for 2020 performance, which were aligned with our 2020 performance relative to our key business goals and strategies, as well as our strong financial performance for that period. For the 2021 performance year, our one-year TSR was 62.35%, the highest of our current executive compensation comparison group, and our three-year TSR at the end of 2021 was in the 43rd percentile of our current executive compensation comparison group. Our long-term incentive equity awards generally remain unchanged and continue to align with our current executive compensation comparison group.

58 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


In summary, the Compensation Committee approved the following compensation decisions for the named executive officers other than Mr. Frederico for the 2021 performance year:
 
 
Robert A.
Bailenson
David A.
Buzen
Ling
Chow
Russell B.
Brewer II
  Fixed Compensation—Base Salary(1)
$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 600,000$ 550,000
  Incentive Compensation
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Cash Incentive Compensation$2,052,792$1,696,480$1,499,994$1,374,995
  Long-Term Equity Incentive Target Values(2)
$1,575,000$770,000$1,200,000$1,250,000
  Total Direct Compensation$4,427,792$3,266,480$3,299,994$3,174,995
(1)    These base salaries were set by the Compensation Committee in February 2021.
(2)    Except in the case of Mr. Brewer, the long-term equity incentive awards were allocated similarly to Mr. Frederico’s, and comprised 30% ABV PSUs, 30% Relative TSR PSUs and 40% RSUs. Mr. Brewer's long-term equity incentive award was paid as restricted share units with one-third vesting on the first, second and third anniversaries of the grant. The U.S. GAAP values of the awards are: Mr. Bailenson, $1,881,704; Mr. Buzen, $919,944; Ms. Chow, $1,433,680; and Mr. Brewer, $1,250,000.
SEPARATION AGREEMENT
As previously disclosed in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 4, 2022, Mr. Brewer resigned as Chief Surveillance Officer and as an executive officer of AGL, effective December 31, 2021, in accordance with a separation and release agreement, which we refer to as the Separation Agreement, between Mr. Brewer and us. We entered into the Separation Agreement with Mr. Brewer in recognition of his successful years at our Company and to encourage him to work through December 31, 2022, in order to facilitate the transition of his duties to other persons in our company.
Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, Mr. Brewer remains employed by us in a non-executive officer position, serving as Senior Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, for a transition period, which we refer to as the Transition Period, from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022, which we refer to as the Retirement Date.
The Separation Agreement provides for the following payments to Mr. Brewer:
A non-equity incentive payment for the 2021 performance year in March 2022 as determined by the Compensation Committee based on his contributions to our achievement of our financial measurement targets, his contributions to the achievement of Mr. Frederico’s non-financial objectives, and his own achievement of the individual non-financial objectives Mr. Frederico had assigned to him, which payment was $1,374,995.
An equity incentive payment for the 2021 performance year in March 2022 as determined by the Compensation Committee, which was $1,250,000. The Separation Agreement provided that, rather than being paid as RSUs and PSUs, Mr. Brewer's long-term equity incentive for the 2021 performance year would be paid as restricted share units with one-third vesting on each of the first, second and third anniversaries of the grant.
If Mr. Brewer remains employed through the Retirement Date, he will continue to receive his base salary of $550,000 per annum through the Retirement Date.
If Mr. Brewer remains employed through the Retirement Date, in recognition of his work through the Transition Period he will be granted a non-equity incentive payment with a target amount equal to one-quarter of his March 2022 payment for the 2021 performance year, or $343,749.
Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, if Mr. Brewer remains employed through the Retirement Date, any unvested equity awards that he holds on the Retirement Date will vest in accordance with the terms that the applicable award agreement provides upon retirement. However, any previously granted equity awards that include Company performance-based vesting conditions remain subject to satisfaction of such applicable performance conditions following the Retirement Date. In addition, Mr. Brewer will be reimbursed for expenses incurred in the preparation of his tax returns through the 2022 tax year.
The Separation Agreement contains covenants by Mr. Brewer relating to protection of our confidential information, cooperation, non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disparagement and other standard provisions. Mr. Brewer executed a release of claims as part of the Separation Agreement and the Separation Agreement provides that Mr. Brewer will execute another release of claims after his retirement such that the second release becomes effective within 60 days following his retirement. Payments pursuant to the Separation Agreement are subject to forfeiture and/or clawback in the event of violation of these covenants.

59 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


2021 EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION CONCLUSION
Our Compensation Committee wished to recognize the considerable accomplishments of Mr. Frederico and our other named executive officers in leading our Company through another challenging year brought on by the continued combination of the COVID-19 pandemic and historically low interest rates. As such, our Compensation Committee determined that it was appropriate that Mr. Frederico and the other named executive officers experience an increase in their short term cash incentive payments consistent with exceeding all but one of the six financial performance targets set by our Compensation Committee last year, particularly in a year in which the price of our shares increased as much as it did. The Compensation Committee also believes the contributions of each of these individuals is critical to successfully accomplish our multi-year transformation into a diversified financial services company with a dual focus on financial guaranty insurance and asset management. The Compensation Committee addressed these objectives by granting these individuals long-term equity awards that the Compensation Committee believes will provide appropriate motivation for them to see the transformation through.
The Compensation Committee believes that our executive compensation program rewards performance and motivates each member of our senior leadership team to increase shareholder value, and that it is therefore appropriate and in the best interests of our Company and our shareholders. Our strategy requires exceptionally qualified and experienced management in senior financial guaranty executive, finance and legal positions, including personnel with skills and experience in reinsurance, acquisitions and corporate integration as well as asset management, and the ability to deal with adverse market conditions and take advantage of market opportunities. During this critical period in our Company’s history, the Compensation Committee believes that retaining and motivating each member of our senior leadership team and staff is essential, and that the various elements of total compensation have worked well to attract, retain and properly reward management for their performance.
COMPENSATION GOVERNANCE
The Role of the Board’s Compensation Committee
The Compensation Committee oversees all aspects of our executive compensation program. The Compensation Committee has responsibility for:
Establishing compensation policies for our senior leadership team
Determining the compensation of our CEO
Reviewing our CEO’s compensation recommendations regarding other members of the senior leadership team and determining appropriate compensation for such persons
Our Board has adopted a Compensation Committee Charter to govern the Compensation Committee’s activities. The charter, which may be found on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/governance, is reviewed annually by the Compensation Committee. Under its charter, the Compensation Committee is authorized to retain compensation, legal, accounting and other expert consultants at our expense.
The Role of the Independent Consultants
For more than ten years, including in 2021, the Compensation Committee has engaged FW Cook as its independent compensation consultant and considered advice and information from that firm in determining the amount and form of compensation for each member of our senior leadership team. Periodically, the Nominating and Governance Committee also engages FW Cook to conduct a comprehensive review of the compensation package for the independent directors; FW Cook last undertook such a comprehensive review in 2021.
In 2021, FW Cook’s work for the Compensation Committee included analyzing our compensation practices in light of best practices, providing a compensation risk assessment, reviewing and advising us on changes to our comparison group of companies, collecting and providing relevant market data, reviewing data and analyses provided by other consultants, and updating the Compensation Committee with respect to evolving governance trends.
The Compensation Committee has considered the independence of FW Cook in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. It requested and received a letter from FW Cook in 2021 affirming factors relevant to assessing FW Cook’s independence. The Compensation Committee discussed the content of the letter and concluded that FW Cook’s work did not raise any independence or conflict of interest issues.
When the Compensation Committee began to contemplate amending the long-term equity incentive program to include performance restricted share units based on relative TSR performance in 2018, we engaged Aon to model the grant date fair value and ultimate performance and payout of hypothetical Relative TSR PSUs with various characteristics and, once the characteristics of the Relative TSR PSUs were settled, to provide grant date valuation of the Relative TSR PSUs and to provide Relative TSR PSU value tracking over the life of the Relative TSR PSUs. The Compensation Committee engaged Aon as a compensation consultant beginning in 2018 when it established the TSR PSUs in February 2019, and again in 2021 when it considered whether, given changes in the Russell Midcap
60 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Financial Services Index since 2019, it should change the reference index used for the TSR PSUs (it chose not to make any changes). We also engage Aon to calculate and report on the value of the TSR PSUs on an ongoing basis.
The Compensation Committee has considered the independence of Aon in light of SEC rules and NYSE listing standards. It requested and received a letter from Aon in 2021 affirming factors relevant to assessing Aon's independence. The Compensation Committee discussed the content of the letter and concluded that Aon's work did not raise any independence or conflict of interest issues.
Executive Compensation Comparison Group
The Compensation Committee examines pay data for the following 21 companies to review pay practices, identify compensation trends, and benchmark its executive compensation decisions:
Affilated Managers GroupEnstar Group LimitedRadian Group
AlleghanyEssent Group, Ltd.RenaissanceRe Holdings
AllianceBernsteinEverest Re Group, Ltd.Sculptor Capital
Arch Capital GroupFederated HermesSelective Insurance Group, Inc
Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd.First American Financial CorporationThe Hanover Insurance Group, Inc.
Assurant, Inc.Janus Henderson GroupVirtus Investment Partners
AXIS Capital Holdings LimitedMGIC Investment CorporationWhite Mountains Insurance Group, Inc.
The Compensation Committee has long recognized that the comparison group has limitations. Our company is the only publicly-traded financial services company primarily writing new financial guaranty business in today’s markets.
Notably, the comparison group consists primarily of mortgage finance and property and casualty insurance and reinsurance companies, along with the six asset managers (reflecting our expansion into asset management). Despite the specialized nature of our primary financial guaranty business, our Compensation Committee looks for companies domiciled in Bermuda or with a similar size, global business model and compensation mix to ours, along with publicly traded asset management companies to reflect the establishment of AssuredIM. Although the factors the Compensation Committee considers for its compensation decisions and the level of compensation may differ from those for the comparison group, the Compensation Committee finds it useful to consider the pay practices at these companies.
In October 2021, FW Cook met with the Compensation Committee to review the comparison group and to discuss whether other companies should be considered for inclusion in the group. Based on FW Cook’s review and the continued importance of the asset management business to our strategic vision, and due to the acquisition of Eaton Vance (which had been one of the 21 companies in the group) by Morgan Stanley on March 1, 2021, FW Cook recommended to the Compensation Committee that it revise the comparison group by replacing Eaton Vance with another asset management company.
In locating a replacement for Eaton Vance, FW Cook searched for an asset manager that was similar to our asset management business, screening for size, business model and presence in a peer network. FW Cook’s recommendation to add AllianceBernstein was accepted by the Compensation Committee. It is indicated in bold in the above list.
FW Cook advised the Compensation Committee that, as of December 31, 2021, our one-year TSR was the highest of the revised comparison group and our three-year TSR ranked somewhat below the median of the revised comparison group. FW Cook also informed the Compensation Committee that, as of September 30, 2021, our latest four quarters of net income was near the 25th percentile of the revised comparison group and our total assets were between the median and the 75th percentile.
The revised comparison group consists of companies that, like our Company, have a business model that involves underwriting or credit risk, a holding company structure, and similar size as measured by revenues, assets and market capitalization.
Executive Officer Recoupment Policy and Related Forfeiture and Termination for Cause Provisions
Our Board of Directors adopted a recoupment (or clawback) policy in February 2009 pursuant to which the Compensation Committee was permitted to rescind or recoup certain compensation awards to an executive officer in the event of a material restatement of our financial results (or for stock options, if such person engaged in misconduct related to a restatement of our financial results), or if that person was awarded or paid certain compensation based on objectively quantifiable performance goals that were later determined to have been overstated. In November 2015, the Compensation Committee amended the recoupment policy so that it would apply, to the extent required by law, to incentive compensation received in the three-year period before a determination that a material restatement of our financial results is required.
In 2021, the Compensation Committee initiated a comprehensive review not only of our recoupment policy, but also the forfeiture and recoupment provisions in the grant agreements for our equity incentive awards (RSUs and PSUs) and non-equity incentive awards, and the definition of cause used in those grant agreements and our executive severance plan. After considering a report from FW Cook on best practices, the Compensation Committee determined that it was in the best interest of our Company to expand and harmonize the circumstances under which the Compensation Committee has discretionary authority to impose forfeiture, recoupment and / or
61 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


termination for cause. In February 2022, the Compensation Committee adopted a revised recoupment policy that expands the circumstances that can trigger recoupment pursuant to the policy to now include misconduct by the executive (now broader than just misconduct related to restatement of financial statements) and that expands the types of compensation awards that are subject to the recoupment policy, and adopted updated grant agreements for equity awards and an updated executive severance plan that now include an expanded definition of cause and that contain provisions requiring recipients to agree that all previously granted awards to such recipient are subject to the updated terms of the amended recoupment policy. The updated definition of cause expands the circumstances that constitute cause, including any acts or omissions by the executive that are likely to injure the operations or reputation of the Company.
The table below presents a simplified summary of selected provisions of the current recoupment policy, severance plan and grant agreements as approved February 2022, and is modified in its entirety by the detailed provisions of such documents, which are or will be filed with the SEC. The provisions summarized below are applicable to each member of our senior leadership team. Conduct, activity or events may fall into more than one category in the table.
Forfeit Unpaid Incentive Compensation*Recoup Already Paid Incentive Compensation*Termination
for Cause
Misconduct: (a) felony; (b) other crime involving moral turpitude in certain circumstances; and (c) other serious misconduct that may cause material harm to our employees or material reputational harm to the Company or may expose the Company to material regulatory, legal or financial risküüü
Any act or omission likely to injure our operations or reputation or to prevent such executive from being able to perform their dutiesüü
Material restatement of financial statements (regardless of misconduct)üü
Overstatement of objectively quantifiable performance objectivesüü
Violation of specified covenants (non-compete, non-solicitation, breach of confidentiality)üüü
Failure to follow directions of the Board or supervisor or any willful, serious and continued failure to perform their dutiesüü
* The covered incentive compensation consists of RSUs, ABV PSUs, TSR PSUs and non-equity incentive compensation (cash).
Share Ownership Guidelines
To demonstrate our commitment to building shareholder value, the Board of Directors adopted management share ownership guidelines. Our guidelines do not mandate a time frame by which this ownership must be attained, but each member of our senior leadership team must retain 100% of their after-tax receipt of our Common Shares until they reach their ownership goal. Please see “Information About Our Common Share Ownership—How Much Stock is Owned by Directors and Executive Officers” for detailed information on the executive officers’ stock ownership.
The chart below shows the guideline for each of our named executive officers and each executive’s stock ownership as of March 11, 2022, the record date, using $57.41, the closing price of one of our Common Shares on the NYSE on such date.
  Named Executive OfficerGuidelineCurrent Ownership
  Dominic J. Frederico7 × Salary70.2 × Salary
(1)
  Robert A. Bailenson5 × Salary17.9 × Salary
  David A. Buzen(2)
5 × Salary5.8 × Salary
  Ling Chow (3)
5 × Salary7.4 × Salary
  Russell B. Brewer II5 × Salary20.5 × Salary
(1)    Common shares beneficially owned by Mr. Frederico include 300,000 shares pledged in accordance with our stock trading policy.
(2)    Mr. Buzen became an executive officer in 2020.
(3)    Ms. Chow became an executive officer in 2018.
62 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


These ownership levels include shares owned and, in the case of Mr. Bailenson, vested share units credited to his non-qualified retirement plan. Unvested RSUs and unvested PSUs do not count towards the guidelines. Some of the executive officers who have reached their share ownership goals have made gifts of shares to family or to charitable or educational institutions.
Anti-Hedging Policy
We adopted an anti-hedging policy in 2013 that explicitly prohibits employees and directors from hedging our Common Shares.
Anti-Pledging Policy
Our stock trading policy prohibits employees and directors from pledging our Common Shares without the approval of both our General Counsel and the Nominating and Governance Committee. Our stock trading policy requires that, in order to grant such approval, our Nominating and Governance Committee determine that the person making the pledge demonstrates the financial capacity to repay the loan (which does not constitute margin debt) without resorting to the pledged securities. Mr. Frederico has pledged 300,000 of our Common Shares. Even if such shares are excluded from his total, on March 11, 2022, Mr. Frederico owned Common Shares in an amount equal to 56.4x his salary, more than eight times his guideline of 7x his salary. No other director or executive officer has pledged Common Shares.
Award Timing
The Compensation Committee meets during our February board meeting to make executive compensation decisions with respect to the previous year’s performance and to make its compensation recommendations to the other directors. After consulting with the Board, the Compensation Committee approves salary increases (if any), cash incentive compensation, and long-term equity incentive awards for each member of our senior leadership team. Calculations of the number of PSUs and RSUs awarded to each member of our senior leadership team are made as of the date of the decision, which occurs several days prior to the day we file with the SEC our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the previous calendar year. We have consistently followed this timing for many years. The number of units granted is calculated by dividing such value by the average closing price on the NYSE of a Common Share over the 40 consecutive trading days ending on the date of grant. Payments of cash incentives are not made until after we file with the SEC our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the previous calendar year.
63 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


POST-EMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
Retirement Benefits
We maintain tax-qualified and non-qualified defined contribution retirement plans for each member of our senior leadership team and other eligible employees. We do not maintain any defined benefit pension plans. The Compensation Committee and our management believe that it is important to provide retirement benefits to employees who reach retirement in order to attract and retain key employees. All retirement benefits are more fully described below under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”
  Benefit Under Defined Contribution Plans
Description
  Core contribution
We contribute 7% of each employee’s salary and non-equity incentive payment or cash bonus compensation, which we refer to as eligible compensation, on the portion made to our tax-qualified plan, and 6% on the portion made to our nonqualified supplemental employee retirement plans.
  Company match
We match 100% of each employee’s contribution, up to 7% of eligible compensation on the portion made to our tax-qualified plan, and 6% on the portion made to our nonqualified supplemental employee retirement plans.
Severance
Under our severance plan for members of our senior leadership team, following the executive’s involuntary termination without cause or voluntary termination for good reason and subject to the executive signing a release of claims, the executive will receive a lump-sum payment in an amount equal to one year’s salary plus their average cash incentive amount over the preceding three-year period, plus a pro-rata annual cash incentive amount for the year of termination, and an amount equal to one year of medical and dental premiums. The executive’s receipt of severance benefits is subject to their compliance with non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality restrictions during their employment and for a period of one year following termination of employment. We, in our discretion, may choose to pay one year of base salary to an executive who terminates employment for a reason other than involuntary termination without cause or voluntary termination for good reason, in which case the executive will also be subject to non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality restrictions following their termination of employment.
Change In Control Benefits
We provide change in control benefits to encourage members of our senior leadership team to consider the best interests of shareholders by mitigating any concerns about their own personal financial well-being in the face of a change in control of our Company. Based on shareholder input and changing market trends, since 2011, in the event of a change in control:
Long-term incentive awards will vest only upon certain terminations of employment following a change in control (double-trigger)
Such awards will vest upon a change in control (single-trigger) if the acquirer does not assume the awards
We do not provide excise tax reimbursements and gross-up payments in the case of a change in control
Detailed information is provided below under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”
TAX TREATMENT
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits the deductibility of annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to “covered employees” of the Company, with some limited exceptions for compensation paid pursuant to certain arrangements in place on November 2, 2017. Our covered employees generally include anyone who (i) was the CEO or CFO at any time during the year, (ii) was one of the other NEOs who was an executive officer as of the last day of the fiscal year, and (iii) was a covered employee for any previous year after 2016.
As with prior years, although the Compensation Committee will consider deductibility under Section 162(m) with respect to the compensation arrangements for executive officers, deductibility will not be the sole factor used in determining levels or methods of compensation. The Compensation Committee considers many factors when designing its compensation arrangements in addition to the deductibility of the compensation, and maintains the flexibility to grant awards or pay compensation amounts that are non-deductible if they believe it is in the best interest of our Company and our shareholders.
Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code imposes restrictions on nonqualified deferred compensation plans. We maintain deferred compensation plans for the benefit of our employees, including nonqualified deferred compensation plans that provide for employee
64 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


and employer contributions in excess of the IRS defined contribution plan limits. The deferred compensation plans we maintain are intended to be exempt from the requirements of Section 409A or, if not exempt, to satisfy the requirements of Section 409A, and we have reviewed and, where appropriate, have amended each of our deferred compensation plans to meet the requirements.
Finally, Section 457A of the Internal Revenue Code imposes restrictions on nonqualified deferred compensation plans maintained by a nonqualified entity (which generally includes an entity in a jurisdiction that is not subject to U.S. income tax or a comprehensive foreign income tax). The deferred compensation plans we maintain are intended to be exempt from the requirements of Section 457A.
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
This proxy statement references financial measures that are not determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and are identified as core, operating, PVP or non-GAAP. Although these non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered substitutes for U.S. GAAP measures, our management and Board consider them important performance indicators and have employed them as well as other factors in determining senior leadership incentive compensation.
We referenced in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 certain of the non-GAAP financial measures we use in this proxy statement. The definitions for those non-GAAP financial measures, which are listed below, and how they may be calculated from the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, may be found on pages 102 to 106 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December  31, 2021, which is available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com.
adjusted operating income
adjusted operating shareholders’ equity
adjusted book value (ABV)
PVP or present value of new business production
This proxy also references certain non-GAAP financial measures, which are identified as “core”, that our management and Board also consider important performance indicators and have employed, as well as other factors, in determining the incentive compensation of our senior leadership team. These “core” measures, and how they are calculated from our GAAP financial statements, are as follows:
Core operating income per diluted share. After making the adjustments to net income attributable to Assured Guaranty Ltd. described on pages 103 to 104 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, Non-GAAP Financial Measures to arrive at adjusted operating income, we subtract the gain (or loss) included in net income related to VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, and to calculate the per diluted share amount divides the result by the weighted average diluted Common Shares during the period. Our adjusted operating income is shown in the table on page 80 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Executive Summary, Financial Performance of Assured Guaranty, and the gain (or loss) included in net income related to VIE consolidation is shown in the same table as “Other.”
Core operating shareholders’ equity per share. After making the adjustments to shareholders’ equity attributable to Assured Guaranty Ltd. described on pages 104 to 105 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, Non-GAAP Financial Measures to arrive at non-GAAP operating shareholders’ equity, we subtract the gain (or loss) related to VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, also disclosed in such section of the Form 10-K, and to calculate the per share amount divide by the number of Common Shares outstanding.
Core ABV. After making the adjustments to shareholders’ equity attributable to Assured Guaranty Ltd. described on pages 104 to 105 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Management’s Discussion and Analysis, Non-GAAP Financial Measures to arrive at adjusted book value (ABV), we subtract the gain (or loss) related to VIE consolidation, net of the tax provision, also disclosed in such section of the Form 10-K, and to calculate the per share amount divide by the number of Common Shares outstanding.
Core operating ROE. Core operating ROE is calculated as core operating income divided by the average of core operating shareholders’ equity at the beginning and end of the period.
65 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT
The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained in this proxy statement with management and, based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in our Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, and this proxy statement. The foregoing report has been approved by the Compensation Committee.
Thomas W. Jones, Chair
G. Lawrence Buhl
Bonnie L. Howard
Patrick W. Kenny
66

Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement




SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE
The following table provides compensation information for 2021, 2020 and 2019 for our named executive officers.
  Name and Principal
  Position
YearSalary
Stock
Awards(1)

Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compen-
sation(2)
All Other
Compen-
sation(3)
Total
  Dominic J. Frederico,2021$1,250,000$9,239,643$3,454,988$591,431$14,536,062
  President and2020$1,250,000$5,964,855$2,979,625$682,044$10,876,524
  Chief Executive Officer2019$1,250,000$6,424,343$3,727,000$752,127$12,153,470
  Robert A. Bailenson,2021$800,000$2,078,969$2,052,792$316,847$5,248,608
  Chief Financial Officer2020$800,000$1,325,546$1,669,360$367,904$4,162,810
 
 
2019$700,000$1,606,106$1,994,720$364,809$4,665,635
David A. Buzen(4),
2021$800,000$1,319,932$1,696,480$273,314$4,089,726
Chief Investment Officer and2020$612,500$662,752$1,306,585$235,131$2,816,968
  Head of Asset Management
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Ling Chow,2021$600,000$1,583,883$1,499,994$251,905$3,935,782
  General Counsel2020$550,000$1,016,267$1,481,135$264,960$3,312,362
 
 
2019$525,000$1,070,695$1,769,140$236,317$3,601,152
  Russell B. Brewer II,2021$550,000$1,649,945$1,374,995$259,055$3,833,995
  Chief Surveillance Officer2020$525,000$1,016,267$1,286,093$268,315$3,095,675
 
 
2019$525,000$1,177,776$1,548,015$284,043$3,534,834
(1)    This column represents the grant date value of performance share unit awards and restricted share unit awards granted in 2021, 2020 and 2019 for 2020, 2019 and 2018 performance, respectively.
(2)    This column represents cash incentive compensation for 2021, 2020 and 2019 performance paid in 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively, plus, in the case of Ms. Chow, the vesting date value of Performance Retention Awards (PRA) granted in 2017 and 2016 that vested on December 31 of 2020 and 2019, respectively, as further described in the table below. Beginning in February 2015, executive officers no longer receive grants of PRA. However, Ms. Chow became an executive officer in 2018 and was granted PRA through February 2017. Her last PRA installment vested on December 31, 2020.
 
 
20202019
  Cash Incentive Compensation$1,292,885$1,461,390
  PRA Payout$188,250$307,750
  Total$1,481,135$1,769,140
(3)    All Other Compensation for 2021 consists of the benefits set forth in the table below. Contributions to defined contribution retirement plans include contributions with respect to salary and cash incentive compensation. The Miscellaneous category within All Other Compensation includes Bermuda club fees, Bermuda health insurance and anniversary awards.
 
 
D. FredericoR. BailensonD. BuzenL. ChowR. Brewer
  Employer Contribution to Retirement Plans$513,079$301,847$258,314$232,670$225,855
  Bermuda Car Allowance$20,000— — — — 
  Tax Return Preparation$20,208— — $4,235$11,000
  Matching Gift Donations$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$14,700
  Miscellaneous$23,144— — — $7,500
  Total$591,431$316,847$273,314$251,905$259,055
(4)    Mr. Buzen’s 2020 salary was raised from $500,000 to $800,000 in August 2020 in recognition of the substantially increased responsibility he was assuming when he assumed the role of Chief Investment Officer and Head of Asset Management; his 2020 blended salary is shown here.
67 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS
None of our named executive officers currently have any employment agreements with the Company. However, as discussed in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Separation Agreement,” Mr. Brewer has entered into a separation agreement with the Company pursuant to which he remains employed by the Company in a non-executive officer position, serving as Senior Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer, for a transition period through December 31, 2022.
PERQUISITE POLICY
Our Company has established a perquisite policy pursuant to which we provide members of the senior leadership team certain perquisites that are not available to employees generally. We believe that perquisites we provide to our senior leadership team, including our named executive officers, meet certain business objectives and that the benefit our Company receives from providing these perquisites significantly outweighs the cost of providing them. We feel these perquisites minimize distractions to members of our senior leadership team, thereby enabling them to perform their responsibilities more efficiently. These include tax preparation, annual executive medical exams (for persons who became executive officers prior to December 31, 2017) and, for members of our senior leadership team located in Bermuda, housing and car allowances, Bermuda club memberships, and family travel stipend. In light of the challenges of the Bermuda market, including travel to and from the island, and the cost of living and maintaining a residence, the Bermuda perquisites are consistent with competitive practices in the Bermuda market and have been necessary for recruitment and retention purposes. Any of these perquisites may be modified by the Compensation Committee without the consent of the executives.
In determining the total compensation payable to our senior leadership team, the Compensation Committee considers perquisites in the context of the total compensation which each member of our senior leadership team is eligible to receive. However, given the fact that perquisites represent a relatively small portion of the total compensation of members of the senior leadership team, the availability of these perquisites does not materially influence the decisions made by the Compensation Committee with respect to other elements of the total compensation to which the members of our senior leadership team are entitled or which they are awarded.
SEVERANCE POLICY
Our Company has adopted a severance plan for our senior leadership team. For further detail, see the discussion in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Post-Employment Compensation—Severance” and “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control—Change-in-Control Severance”. A severance plan enables us to attract and retain top candidates for positions on our senior leadership team and enables us to have good relations with those executives.
EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
We maintain a broad based employee stock purchase plan that gives our eligible employees the right to purchase our Common Shares through payroll deductions at a purchase price that reflects a 15% discount to the market price of our Common Shares on the first or last day of the relevant subscription period, whichever is lower. No participant may purchase more than $25,000 worth of Common Shares under this plan in any calendar year. In 2021, Mr. Frederico, Mr. Buzen and two other executive officers participated in the employee stock purchase plan; Mr. Frederico and Mr. Buzen participated to the maximum extent possible.
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS
We enter into indemnification agreements with our directors and executive officers. These agreements are in furtherance of our Bye-Laws which require us to indemnify our directors and officers for acts done, concurred in or omitted in or about the execution of their duties in their respective offices.
The indemnification agreements provide for indemnification arising out of specified indemnifiable events, such as events relating to the fact that the indemnitee is or was one of our directors or officers or is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of another entity at our request or relating to anything done or not done by the indemnitee in such a capacity.
The indemnification agreements provide for advancement of expenses.
These agreements provide for mandatory indemnification to the extent an indemnitee is successful on the merits. To the extent that indemnification is unavailable, the agreements provide for contribution.
The indemnification agreements set forth procedures relating to indemnification claims.
The agreements also provide for maintenance of directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.
68 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


2021 GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS
The following table sets forth information concerning grants of plan-based awards for our named executive officers made during 2021.
 
 
Estimated Future
Payouts Under
Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards
Estimated
Future Payouts
Under Equity Incentive
Plan Awards
NameGrant DateTargetMaximumThresholdTargetMaximum
All Other
Stock 
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock or 
Units
Grant
Date Fair
Value of
Stock and
Option
Awards(5)
Dominic J. Frederico
Feb. 24, 2021(1)
$2,500,000$5,000,000
 
Feb. 24, 2021(2)
28,386 56,772 141,930 $3,409,726
 
Feb. 24, 2021(3)
28,386 56,772 113,544 $2,498,536
 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(4)
— — 75,696 $3,331,381
Robert A. Bailenson
Feb. 24, 2021(1)
$1,600,000$3,200,000— — 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(2)
6,387 12,774 31,935 — $767,206
 
Feb. 24, 2021(3)
6,387 12,774 25,548 — $562,184
 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(4)
— — — 17,032 $749,578
David A. Buzen
Feb. 24, 2021(1)
$1,600,000$3,200,000— — — — — 
Feb. 24, 2021(2)
4,055 8,110 20,275 — $487,087
Feb. 24, 2021(3)
4,055 8,110 16,220 — $356,921
 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(4)
— — — 10,814 $475,924
Ling Chow
Feb. 24, 2021(1)
$1,200,000$2,400,000— — — — — 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(2)
4,866 9,732 24,330 — $584,504
 
Feb. 24, 2021(3)
4,866 9,732 19,464 — $428,305
 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(4)
— — — 12,976 $571,074
Russell B. Brewer II
Feb. 24, 2021(1)
$1,100,000$2,200,000— — — — — 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(2)
5,069 10,138 25,345 — $608,888
 
Feb. 24, 2021(3)
5,069 10,138 20,276 — $446,173
 
 
Feb. 24, 2021(4)
— — 13,517 $594,883
(1)    Represents a grant of a non-equity incentive compensation award. As described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Executive --Compensation Program Structure and Process—Components of Our Executive Compensation Program—Cash Incentive Compensation”, our Compensation Committee uses a formula to award cash incentive compensation in order to enhance the transparency of our process. The amount of cash incentive compensation awarded to each executive is determined based on the extent to which that executive achieves certain pre-established performance targets; 67% is tied to the achievement of six financial performance targets and 33% is tied to the achievement of non-financial objectives. On the February 24, 2021 grant date, our Compensation Committee established a target and maximum cash incentive award for each of our named executive officers, as well as the formula for determining the actual amount of payment to each named executive officer, which may range from zero to such executive’s maximum amount. The target for each of our named executive officers is two times their salary, and each would achieve their maximum amount listed (equal to two times their target) upon receiving the maximum score under our formula of 200%. In February 2022, after applying the formula to each of the named executive officers, the Compensation Committee approved the payments described in the Summary Compensation Table for payment of such non-equity incentive compensation awards.
(2)    Represents a TSR performance share unit award. The TSR PSUs will vest at the end of a three-year vesting period based on the company’s total shareholder return compared to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index, with limited exceptions. The number of TSR PSUs listed in the Threshold column represents the number of TSR PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 50% of the performance target (a Company total shareholder return at the 25th percentile relative to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index); the number of TSR PSUs listed in the Target column represents the number of PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 100% of the performance target (a company total shareholder return at the 55th percentile relative to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index); and the
69 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


number of PSUs listed in the Maximum column represents the number of TSR PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 250% of the performance target (a Company total shareholder return at the 95th percentile relative to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index). If at least 50% of the performance target is not achieved during the performance period, all of the TSR PSUs will be forfeited.
(3)    Represents an ABV performance share unit award. The ABV PSUs will vest at the end of a three-year vesting period based on the Company’s growth in core adjusted book value, with limited exceptions. The number of ABV PSUs listed in the Threshold column represents the number of ABV PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 50% of the performance target (growth in core adjusted book value of 12%); the number of ABV PSUs listed in the Target column represents the number of ABV PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 100% of the performance target (growth in core adjusted book value of 15%); and the number of ABV PSUs listed in the Maximum column represents the number of ABV PSUs which shall become vested based on achievement of 200% of the performance target (growth in core adjusted book value of 18%). If at least 50% of the ABV performance target is not achieved during the performance period, all of the ABV PSUts will be forfeited.
(4)    Represents a time-based RSU award. Restrictions lapse on the third anniversary of the grant date of the award, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.
(5)    This column discloses the aggregate grant date fair market value computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which is $60.06 per target share for TSR PSUs, $44.01 per target share for ABV PSUs, and $44.01 per share for the RSUs. For the assumptions used in the valuation, see note 14 to our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021.

70 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS
The following table sets forth the outstanding equity awards held by our named executive officers as of December 31, 2021.
 
 
Stock Awards
NameNumber of
Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
Market Value
of Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights
That Have
Not Vested
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or
Payout Value of
Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights
That Have
Not Vested
Dominic J. Frederico59,850(1)$3,004,470
 
 

57,010(2)$2,861,902
 
 
75,696(3)$3,799,939
 
 
35,749(4)$1,794,600
 
 
89,776(5)$4,506,755
 
 
 
 
21,379(6)$1,073,226
 
 
21,379(7)$1,073,226
 
 
28,386(8)$1,424,977
 
 
 
28,386(9)$1,424,977
Robert A. Bailenson14,963(1)$751,143
 
 
12,669(2)$635,984
 
 
17,032(3)$855,006
 
 
8,937(4)$448,637
 
 
22,444(5)$1,126,689
 
 
 
 
4,751(6)$238,500
 
 
4,751(7)$238,500
 
 
6,387(8)$320,627
 
 
 
6,387(9)$320,627
David A. Buzen7,481(1)$375,546
 
 
 
 
6,334(2)$317,967
 
 
 
 
10,814(3)$542,863
 
 
 
 
4,469(4)$224,344
 
 
 
 
11,222(5)$563,344
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,376(6)$119,275
 
 
 
 
2,376(7)$119,275
 
 
 
 
4,055(8)$203,561
 
 
 
 
 
 
4,055(9)$203,561
Ling Chow9,975(1)$500,745
 
 
 
 
9,713(2)$487,593
 
 
 
 
12,976(3)$651,395
 
 
 
 
5,958(4)$299,092
 
 
 
 
14,962(5)$751,092
 
 
 
 
 
 
3,643(6)$182,879
 
 
 
 
3,643(7)$182,879
 
 
 
 
4,866(8)$244,273
 
 
 
 
4,866(9)$244,273
 
 
 
3,297(10)$165,509
 
 
 
Russell B. Brewer II10,973(1)$550,845
 
 
 
 
9,713(2)$487,593
 
 
 
 
13,517(3)$678,553
 
 
 
 
6,554(4)$329,011
 
 
 
 
16,458(5)$826,192
 
 
 
 
 
 
3,643(6)$182,879
 
 
 
 
3,643(7)$182,879
 
 
 
 
5,069(8)$254,464
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,069(9)$254,464

71 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


(1)    Represents a time-based RSU award. These units were granted on February 27, 2019, and vested on February 27, 2022.
(2)    Represents a time-based RSU award. These units were granted on February 26, 2020, and will vest on February 26, 2023, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.
(3)    Represents a time-based RSU award. These units were granted on February 24, 2021, and will vest on February 24, 2024, subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions.
(4)    Represents a TSR performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 27, 2019, and vested on February 27, 2022, and are based on the Company’s total shareholder return compared to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index over a three-year period, with limited exceptions.
(5)    Represents an ABV performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 27, 2019, and vested on February 27, 2022, and are based on the Company’s growth in core adjusted book value over a three-year period, with limited exceptions.
(6)    Represents a TSR performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 26, 2020, and will vest on February 26, 2023 subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions, and achievement of defined performance goals based on the Company’s total shareholder return compared to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index.
(7)    Represents an ABV performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 26, 2020, and will vest on February 26, 2023 subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions, and achievement of defined performance goals based on the Company’s growth in core adjusted book value.
(8)    Represents a TSR performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 24, 2021, and will vest on February 24, 2024 subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions, and achievement of defined performance goals based on the Company’s total shareholder return compared to the total shareholder return of all companies in the Russell Mid-Cap Financial Services Index.
(9)    Represents an ABV performance share unit award. These units were granted on February 24, 2021, and will vest on February 24, 2024 subject to continued employment, with limited exceptions, and achievement of defined performance goals based on the company’s growth in core adjusted book value.
(10)    Represents a time-based RSU award. These units were granted on February 21, 2018, and vested on February 21, 2022.
2021 STOCK VESTED
The following table provides information concerning the vesting of restricted share units granted to our named executive officers during 2021.
 
 
 
Stock Awards
Name
   Number of Shares
Acquired on
Vesting(1)
Value Realized 
on Vesting(2)
Dominic J. Frederico230,058$9,087,291
Robert A. Bailenson60,015$2,370,593
David A. Buzen30,009$1,185,356
Ling Chow31,717$1,253,087
Russell B. Brewer II44,010$1,738,395
(1)    This column represents gross shares vesting, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax.
(2)    The value of a restricted share upon vesting is the fair market value of the stock on the vesting date. This column represents the value of gross shares vesting, not reduced by shares withheld to pay for personal income tax.



72 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION
The following table sets forth information concerning non-qualified deferred compensation of our named executive officers. The amounts set forth in this table include only contributions made and earnings received during 2021 and do not include contributions and earnings with respect to the 2021 non-equity incentive compensation paid in 2022.
Name
Executive
Contributions
in Last FY(1)
Registrant
Contributions
in Last FY(2)
Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
Aggregate
Earnings
in Last  FY
Aggregate
Balance
at Last FYE(3)
Dominic J. Frederico$237,206$474,412$3,444,816$18,518,759(4)
Robert A. Bailenson$131,590$263,180$1,897,277$8,536,206 
David A. Buzen$109,824$219,647$185,001$1,564,660
Ling Chow$97,002$194,003$558,644$3,813,629 
Russell B. Brewer II$93,594$187,188$170,952$6,015,684 
(1)    The amounts in this column are also included in the Summary Compensation Table, in the Salary column and in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column.
(2)    The amounts in this column are included in the Summary Compensation Table, in the All Other Compensation column as the employer contribution to the retirement plans.
(3)    Of the totals in this column plus, for Mr. Frederico, $12,577,909 distributed on January 6, 2017, the following totals have been previously reported in the Summary Compensation Table for previous years:
Name2021 Amount2020 Amount
Dominic J. Frederico$12,155,812$11,308,809
Robert A. Bailenson$3,273,851$2,819,659
David A. Buzen$258,196
Ling Chow$804,737$491,544
Russell B. Brewer II$2,107,221$1,782,936
(4)    $1,612,387 was assumed from the ACE Limited Supplemental Retirement Plan at our 2004 initial public offering.
POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL
The following tables quantify the potential payments upon termination that our named executive officers would receive assuming that the relevant termination event had occurred on December 31, 2021. The last table quantifies the potential payments upon an involuntary termination without cause and a change of control that our named executive officers would receive assuming that both the termination without cause and change in control had occurred on December 31, 2021.
TERMINATION DUE TO DEATH OR DISABILITY
NameUnvested
RSUs
Unvested
PSUs(1)
Total
Dominic J. Frederico$9,666,311$12,396,767$22,063,078
Robert A. Bailenson$2,242,133$2,927,503$5,169,636
David A. Buzen$1,236,376$1,538,682$2,775,058
Ling Chow$1,805,242$2,092,520$3,897,762
Russell B. Brewer II$1,716,991$2,209,623$3,926,614
(1)    The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2021. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.
73 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


TERMINATION DUE TO RETIREMENT
NameUnvested
RSUs
Unvested
PSUs(1)
Total
Dominic J. Frederico$9,507,316$21,128,095$30,635,411
Robert A. Bailenson(2)
David A. Buzen$786,087$1,726,632$2,512,719
Ling Chow(3)
Russell B. Brewer II$1,687,840$3,748,489$5,436,329
(1)    The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2021. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.
(2)    Mr. Bailenson had not reached retirement age by December 31, 2021. Upon retirement, Mr. Bailenson will become partially or fully vested in respect of his unvested RSUs and PSUs.
(3)    Ms. Chow had not reached retirement age by December 31, 2021. Upon retirement, Ms. Chow will become partially or fully vested in respect of her unvested RSUs and PSUs.
TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE PAYMENTS
NameSalary
Continuation
Cash  Incentive
Compensation
BenefitsUnvested
RSUs
Unvested
PSUs(1)
Total
Dominic J. Frederico$1,250,000$3,506,208$53,979$9,666,311$12,396,767$26,873,265
Robert A. Bailenson$800,000$1,871,333$36,082$2,242,133$2,927,503$7,877,051
David A. Buzen$800,000$1,106,928$36,082$1,236,376$1,538,682$4,718,068
Ling Chow$600,000$1,338,358$36,082$1,639,733$2,092,520$5,706,693
Russell B. Brewer II$550,000$1,472,608$24,699$1,716,991$2,209,623$5,973,921
(1)        The value of the PSUs for this table was determined as if the applicable performance period ended on December 31, 2021. The portion of the PSUs which ultimately would become vested may vary from this assumed amount depending on the actual price of our Common Shares through the remainder of the actual performance period and the value of our Common Share on the date of distribution.
CHANGE-IN-CONTROL SEVERANCE
NameSalary
Continuation
Cash  Incentive
Compensation
BenefitsUnvested
RSUs
Unvested
PSUs(1)
Total
Dominic J. Frederico$1,250,000$3,506,208$53,979$9,666,311$19,845,552$34,322,050
Robert A. Bailenson$800,000$1,871,333$36,082$2,242,133$4,607,292$9,556,840
David A. Buzen$800,000$1,106,928$36,082$1,236,376$2,544,681$5,724,067
Ling Chow$600,000$1,338,358$36,082$1,805,242$3,366,105$7,145,787
Russell B. Brewer II$550,000$1,472,608$24,699$1,716,991$3,527,905$7,292,203
(1)        For PSUs, the applicable performance period would end on the date of a change in control and the amount which would become vested would be determined based on the performance through such date.
The salary continuation, cash incentive compensation and benefits columns in the Termination Without Cause Payments table and the Change-in-Control Severance table represent amounts that would be payable to each named executive officer under the terms of the severance policy for named executive officers. Under the terms of the policy, each named executive officer receives one year of salary, the average of the last three annual cash incentive compensation amounts, a pro-rata annual cash incentive compensation payment for the year of termination and one year of benefits which represent medical plan and dental plan premiums paid by our Company at the same level as was paid just prior to termination.
For the purpose of these tables, the value of RSUs and PSUs has been determined by multiplying the number of shares that would have become vested on December 31, 2021 based on each applicable termination described above and based on target performance or the actual performance determined as if the performance period ended on such date by the closing price of our Common Shares on December 31, 2021, which was $50.20.
74 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


In addition to the amounts listed in the tables, upon a termination of employment for any of the reasons described above, the executives would be entitled to distributions from the qualified and non-qualified defined contribution retirement plans maintained by the Company and affiliates. For the named executive officers, the aggregate qualified and non-qualified defined contribution retirement account balances as of December 31, 2021 for Mr. Frederico, Mr. Bailenson, Mr. Buzen, Ms. Chow and Mr. Brewer are as follows, respectively: $20,113,506, $12,502,528, $1,969,918, $6,183,358 and $10,155,872. Retirement account balances will be paid upon termination in accordance with the terms of the plans, as described below.
If a named executive officer had been terminated for cause on December 31, 2021, he or she would not have received any severance payments and would have forfeited all unvested RSUs and PSUs, receiving only salary payments through the termination date and vested retirement benefits under our Company’s retirement plans.
Severance payments, vesting of restricted share units and retirement plan contributions assume no subsequent employment after termination. Certain rights to vesting and distributions following retirement or a termination without cause are subject to continued compliance with applicable restrictive covenants and may be forfeited by the executive in the event of a violation of such covenants (and in certain circumstances, the executive may be required to repay certain amounts in the event of a violation of such covenants).
CEO PAY RATIO
In 2021, the annual total compensation of Dominic J. Frederico, our President and Chief Executive Officer was $14,536,062. The annual total compensation of our median employee was $294,410. As a result, the ratio of the annual total compensation of our CEO to our median employee was 49.4 to 1.
We identified the median employee by examining the 2021 annual total compensation for all individuals, excluding our CEO, who were employed by us on December 31, 2021. We included all employees, whether employed on a full-time or part-time basis, and including all employees resident outside of the U.S. We did not make any assumptions, adjustments or estimates with respect to annual total compensation. We annualized the compensation for any full-time employees who were not employed by us for all of 2021. We calculated the total compensation for our CEO and all of our employees excluding our CEO using the same methodology we use to calculate Total Annual Compensation for our named executive officers as set forth in the 2021 Summary Compensation table appearing earlier in this proxy statement.
NON-QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLANS
All the named executive officers participate in a non-qualified defined contribution retirement plan through an Assured Guaranty employer. These plans generally permit distributions only following a participant’s termination of employment, and each of the plans imposes some additional restrictions on distributions as described below. A change in control under the current provisions of these plans does not entitle a participant to payment. Below is an overview of each plan.
AG US GROUP SERVICES INC. SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN (AGUS SERP)
The AG US Group Services Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which we refer to as the AGUS SERP, is a non-qualified retirement plan for higher-paid employees. Internal Revenue Code provisions, such as the annual limit on employee deferrals, limit the amount of contributions that these employees may make or have made on their behalf to the qualified AG US Group Services Inc. Employee Retirement Plan. Upon reaching the limits imposed by Internal Revenue Code provisions, these employees may contribute up to 6% of eligible compensation to the AGUS SERP. The plan also permits discretionary employer contributions (with the employer matching and core contributions to the AGUS SERP capped at a limit of 6% of eligible compensation).
A participant does not vest in employer contributions until he or she has completed one year of service, but the participant will vest earlier if he or she dies or attains age 65 while employed by a specified Assured Guaranty employer.
Distribution of a participant’s account balances will be made as a lump sum. However, a participant may elect to receive payment of their account balances in annual installments over a period not exceeding five years, but only if, at the time of termination, the participant has attained age 55 and completed at least five years of service, and the amount of the participant’s account balances is at least $50,000.
A participant who is considered to be a specified employee as defined in Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and whose payment of benefits begins by reason of termination of employment may not begin to receive such payment until six months after termination of employment.


75 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


INCENTIVE PLANS
All the named executive officers have previously received awards pursuant to our Company’s long-term incentive plan. In 2022, the named executive officers received a grant of PSUs and RSUs for the 2021 performance year as described below. Below is an overview of the plans.
ASSURED GUARANTY LTD. 2004 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
The 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended, provides for the grant of non-qualified and incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, full value awards, which include awards such as restricted shares, RSUs or PSUs, and cash incentive awards to employees selected by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee specifies the terms of the award, including the vesting period applicable to the award, at the time it grants the award to the employee, and includes the terms in an award agreement between the employee and our Company.
PSUs were granted in 2019 through 2022 that will vest at the end of a three-year performance period if certain performance conditions are satisfied (based on growth in core adjusted book value per share relative to a target and on TSR relative to the Index) and if the participant continues to be employed through the end of such three-year period, with limited exceptions as described below.
The participant is entitled to pro-rata vesting of the PSUs in the event of termination prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability, an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or, a voluntary termination due to retirement, if certain requirements are met and if, and only to the extent that, the performance conditions are satisfied at the end of the applicable performance period. In the event of a change in control, the PSUs vest only to the extent that the performance conditions are satisfied at the time of the change in control and only if the participant remains employed through the end of the three-year performance period, provided, however that the vesting of the PSUs shall be accelerated following such change in control in the event of termination following the change in control but prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability, an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or in the event that the acquirer does not agree to continue such award following the change in control.
RSUs were granted from 2019 through 2022 that will vest at the end of a three-year vesting period if the participant remains employed through the end of such period. Such vesting may be accelerated in the event of termination prior to the end of the vesting period due to death or disability or in the event of a change in control where the acquirer does not agree to continue such award following the change in control. Additionally, the participant may remain entitled to continued vesting of such RSUs following an involuntary termination without cause, a voluntary termination for good reason or a voluntary termination due to retirement during the vesting period if certain requirements are met, including the participant signing of a release of claims against our Company and continuing to comply with applicable restrictive covenants.
76 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



EQUITY COMPENSATION PLANS INFORMATION
The following table summarizes our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2021:
 Plan category
Number of
securities to be
issued upon
exercise of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights
(a)
Weighted average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants
and rights
(b)
Number of
securities
remaining
available
for future
issuance
under equity
compensation
plans
(excluding
securities
reflected in
column (a))
(c)
 Equity compensation plans approved by security holders— — 
8,567,790 (1)
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holdersN/A   N/AN/A
TOTAL— — 8,567,790
(1)        Includes 118,495 Common Shares reserved for issuance under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Includes 8,449,295 Common Shares available for stock options, restricted stock awards, RSUs, performance stock options and PSUs reserved for future issuance under the Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan. The grants of dividend equivalents of RSUs have reduced the number of shares available for future issuance.
77 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



PROPOSAL NO. 2:

ADVISORY APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Our shareholders have the opportunity to cast an advisory (nonbinding) vote to approve the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with the SEC’s compensation disclosure rules. This vote is being conducted in accordance with the requirements of Section 14A of the Exchange Act and the related rules of the SEC. Proposal No. 2 is Item 2 on the proxy card.

As described in detail under the heading “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” our executive compensation program is designed to attract, motivate, and retain talented executives who possess the skills required to formulate and drive our Company’s strategic direction and achieve annual and long-term performance goals necessary to create shareholder value. The program seeks to align executive compensation with shareholder value on an annual and long-term basis through a combination of base pay, annual incentives and long-term incentives. The Compensation Committee continually reviews the compensation programs for our named executive officers to ensure they achieve the desired goals of aligning our executive compensation structure with our shareholders’ interests and current market practices. Please read the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” discussion for additional details about our executive compensation programs, including information about the fiscal year 20182021 compensation of our named executive officers.

We believe that our executive compensation programs are structured in the best manner possible to support our Company and our business objectives. We are asking our shareholders to indicate their support for our named executive officer compensation as described on pages 1930 to 5965 of this proxy statement, which include the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section and the compensation tables and related narrative disclosure. This proposal, commonly known as a“say-on-pay” “say-on-pay” proposal, gives our shareholders the opportunity to express their views on our named executive officers’ compensation. This vote is not intended to address any specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers and the philosophy, policies and practices described in this proxy statement.

image_47.jpg
  The board of directors recommends that you vote “FOR” the following resolution at the Annual General Meeting:

“RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC, including the compensation discussion and analysis, the compensation tables and any related material disclosed in this proxy statement, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and narrative discussion is hereby APPROVED.”

Thesay-on-pay vote is advisory, and therefore not binding on our Company, the Compensation Committee or the Board of Directors. However, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our shareholders and will review the voting results carefully. To the extent there is any significant vote against the named executive officer compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement, we will consider our shareholders’ concerns and the Compensation Committee will evaluate whether any actions are necessary to address those concerns. As described in the preceding Compensation Discussion and Analysis, this year the Compensation Committee made changes to the named executive officer compensation program in response to last year’s
78 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

say-on-pay
result and based on shareholder feedback and advice from Cook.

67



PROPOSAL NO. 3:

APPROVAL OF EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN AS AMENDED

We will present a proposal at the Annual General Meeting to approve the Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan (which, as amended from time to time, we refer to as the ESPP), as amended through the third amendment to the ESPP, which we refer to as the Third Amendment. Proposal No. 3 is Item 3 on the Proxy Card.

On February 27, 2019, the Board of Directors adopted the Third Amendment, subject to our shareholders’ approval. The Third Amendment will increase the number of Assured Guaranty Ltd. Common Shares reserved for delivery under the ESPP by 250,000 Common Shares, for a total of 850,000 Common Shares, and will become effective if the shareholders approve it. A summary of the material provisions of the ESPP is set forth below. A copy of the ESPP, as amended through the Third Amendment, is set forth in Exhibit A.

The ESPP became effective as of November 4, 2004. As of February 28, 2019, under the current plan limit of 600,000 Common Shares, 49,639 shares remained available for future issuance under the ESPP.

The ESPP is a broad-based plan that gives our eligible employees who elect to participate the right to purchase our Common Shares using amounts deducted from their pay during consecutive “subscription periods.” The ESPP is intended to qualify as an “employee stock purchase plan” under IRC Section 423, and therefore offers favorable tax treatment for certain purchases of our Common Shares made under the ESPP. For more information, see “United States Income Tax Considerations” below in this section. The first subscription period began January 1, 2005.

If our shareholders do not approve the ESPP as amended through the Third Amendment, the increase in shares will not take effect, and only a limited number of our Common Shares will be available for purchase under the ESPP in 2019 and beyond.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the ESPP is to provide our eligible employees with an opportunity to purchase our Common Shares through accumulated payroll deductions. Because the Board of Directors believes it is important for our employees to have an equity interest in our Company, the Board of Directors has approved the Third Amendment in order to increase the number of our Common Shares available for purchase under the ESPP, and is recommending it to shareholders for approval.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The ESPP provides that it will be administered by a committee of two or more members of the Board of Directors of the Company who are selected by the Board. The Board has designated the Compensation Committee to serve as the committee administering the ESPP. The Compensation Committee has the authority to manage and control the operation and administration of the ESPP, including the authority to interpret the ESPP and to establish, amend and rescind rules and regulations relating to the ESPP. The Compensation Committee may allocate all or any portion of its responsibilities and powers to any one or more of its members and may delegate all or any part of its responsibilities and powers under the ESPP to any person or persons selected by it, subject to certain limitations. Any such allocation or delegation may be revoked by the Compensation Committee at any time.

If our shareholders approve the Third Amendment, the maximum number of our Common Shares available for sale under the ESPP will be 850,000. The Common Shares with respect to which awards may be made under the ESPP will be:

shares currently authorized but unissued or

shares purchased in the open market by one of our direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries (as determined by the President, Chief Financial Officer or General Counsel of our Company). We may contribute to the subsidiary an amount sufficient to accomplish the purchase in the open market of the Common Shares to be acquired (as determined by the Chairman or any Executive Vice President of the Company).

Subject to the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 423, the Compensation Committee will adjust the number of shares available under the ESPP for any subdivision or consolidation of shares or other capital readjustment, payment of stock dividend, stock split, combination of shares or recapitalization or any other increase or reduction of the number of Common Shares outstanding that is effected without receiving compensation therefor in money, services or property.

68


If our shareholders receive any Common Shares or other securities or property pursuant to any reorganization, merger, consolidation or plan of exchange with another corporation, or if we distribute securities of another corporation to our shareholders, then, subject to the requirements of IRC Section 423, an appropriate number of shares of each class of stock or amount of other securities or property which were distributed to our shareholders in respect of such shares will be substituted for the shares subject to outstanding rights to purchase Common Shares under the ESPP.

Except as otherwise permitted under IRC Section 424 and SEC Rule16b-3, neither the amount of any payroll deductions made with respect to a participant’s compensation nor any participant’s rights to purchase Common Shares under the ESPP may be pledged or hypothecated, nor may they be assigned or transferred other than by will and the laws of descent and distribution. During the lifetime of the participant, the rights provided to the participant under the ESPP may be exercised only by the participant.

The ESPP is not subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended or qualified under IRC Section 401(a).

DURATION, AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION

The ESPP will be unlimited in duration unless it is terminated pursuant to its provisions, which provide that the Board may amend or terminate the ESPP at any time. With limited exceptions specified in the ESPP, no amendment or termination of the ESPP may adversely affect the rights of a participant with respect to Common Shares that have been purchased before such amendment is adopted by the Board. No amendment of the ESPP may be made without approval of the shareholders of the Company to the extent that such approval is required to maintain compliance with the requirements of Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code.

ELIGIBILITY

All employees of our Company and each of our subsidiaries which, with our consent, adopts the ESPP for the benefit of its eligible employees (which we refer to collectively as the Employers) who have been employed for more than 500 hours and for longer than six months, and whose customary employment is greater than 20 hours per week and more than five months in any calendar year, are eligible to participate in the ESPP. However, only those individuals employed by the Employers on the first day of a subscription period may participate in the ESPP during that subscription period. In addition, certain restrictions apply to employees who own, or who would own upon the exercise of any rights extended under the ESPP and the exercise of any other options (whether qualified ornon-qualified), shares possessing 5% or more of the total combined voting power or value of all classes of our stock or of any parent or subsidiary corporation. Certain restrictions also apply to employees whose rights to purchase Common Shares under all employee stock purchase programs the Employers maintain would accrue at a rate that exceeds $25,000 of fair market value (determined at the time the purchase rights are granted) for each calendar year in which the purchase rights are outstanding. As of February 28, 2019, our Company and our subsidiaries had approximately 306 employees eligible to participate in the ESPP.

PARTICIPATION

The ESPP gives participants the right to purchase our Common Shares using amounts deducted from their pay during consecutive “subscription periods.” The Compensation Committee, with the approval of the Board, has establishedsix-month subscription periods that will begin on January 1 and July 1 of each year. The Compensation Committee has the authority to change the length and/or frequency of the subscription periods, but the periods may not extend beyond one year.

Eligible employees can become participants in the ESPP for any subscription period by filing a written payroll deduction authorization (referred to as a “subscription agreement” or an “enrollment form”) with the Compensation Committee. The subscription agreements authorize payroll deductions from the employees’ pay for contributions to the ESPP for that subscription period.

When participants file subscription agreements, their participation in the ESPP generally begins on the first day of the subscription period to which their subscription agreements relate and continues until the end of the subscription period or, if earlier, until the participants elect to terminate participation as described below or until the ESPP is terminated. At the time participation begins for a subscription period, participants are granted an “option” to purchase our Common Shares on the exercise date for that subscription period. The amount of Common Shares to be purchased is determined based on the accumulated payroll deductions and the purchase price applicable to the option. The participants have no interest in the Common Shares covered by the subscription agreement until the shares are delivered. Neither the ESPP nor any contract in connection with the ESPP gives any person a right to a lien on the funds deducted from participants’ pay pursuant to the ESPP.

PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS

At the time participants file subscription agreements, they elect to have payroll deductions made on each pay day during the applicable subscription period. Participants may choose a reduction of either a full percentage of their compensation or a specified whole dollar amount. Whether they elect a dollar amount or a percentage, the total amount of the payroll deductions for the subscription period

69


cannot exceed 10% of their compensation for that subscription period. For this purpose, “compensation” means salary, except that if a participant does not receive salary, compensation is based on such other amount of basic compensation as determined by the Compensation Committee. Participants do not earn interest on amounts deducted from their paychecks and, prior to the time they are used to buy Common Shares under the ESPP, the funds are available for general use by the Employers and may be subject to the claims of the Employers’ creditors.

After the subscription period begins, participants may not increase or decrease the rate of their payroll deductions for that subscription period, unless their participation terminates, as described below.

TERMINATION OF PARTICIPATION

Participants may discontinue participation in the ESPP for any subscription period. If a participant chooses to terminate participation, the total amount that has been deducted during that subscription period will be returned, without interest (to the extent the amount has not been used to exercise options under the ESPP). If deductions are withdrawn, the option for that subscription period will be terminated and no further payroll deductions will be made for that subscription period.

If a participant’s employment with the Employers terminates, the total amount that has been deducted during that subscription period will be returned, without interest (to the extent the amount has not been used to exercise options under the ESPP), and the option will be terminated.

PURCHASE OF SHARES

The amounts that have been deducted from participants’ paychecks during a Subscription Period will be used on the “exercise date” to purchase full Common Shares. An exercise date is generally the last trading day of a subscription period. The number of shares purchased will be equal to the total amount, as of the exercise date, that has been deducted from the participants’ paychecks for that subscription period, divided by the purchase price, rounded down to the next full share (subject to any limits on the number of Common Shares that may be purchased with respect to a subscription period as may be imposed by the Compensation Committee).

The “purchase price” is 85% of the lower of

the fair market value of a Common Share on the first day of the subscription period or

the fair market value of a Common Share on the exercise date (or such higher price as the Compensation Committee may determine from time to time).

The closing price with respect to a Common Share on March 14, 2019 was $44.79 per share. In no event will the purchase price be less than the par value of a Common Share. Limitations may apply with respect to the amount and value of Common Shares that a participant may purchase under the ESPP for any subscription period. No participant may purchase Common Shares with a value in excess of $25,000 under the ESPP (and any other employee stock purchase plan) in any calendar year.

If a participant decides he or she does not wish to purchase Common Shares during a subscription period, the participant may notify us prior to the exercise date (or at such other time as the Compensation Committee may establish) that the participant elects not to purchase the Common Shares he or she is entitled to purchase. To the extent the amounts deducted from the participant’s paychecks are not used to purchase full Common Shares, those amounts will be returned without interest. The options expire on the last day of the subscription period.

UNITED STATES INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS

The following is a brief description of the U.S. federal income tax treatment that will generally apply with respect to purchases under the ESPP by participants who are subject to U.S. income tax. This discussion is based on U.S. federal tax laws and regulations presently in effect, which are subject to change, and the discussion does not purport to be a complete description of the U.S. federal income tax aspects of the ESPP. Participants may also be subject to foreign, state and/or local taxes in connection with purchases under the ESPP, which could differ significantly from U.S. federal tax consequences. The Company suggests that participants consult with their individual tax advisors to determine the applicability of the tax aspects of purchases to their personal circumstances.

The ESPP is intended to qualify under IRC Section 423. Under this section, a participant will not be required to recognize taxable income at the time shares are purchased under the ESPP. The participant may, however, become liable for tax upon the disposition of the Common Shares acquired, as described below.

70


In the event that shares acquired pursuant to the ESPP are not sold or disposed of (including by way of gift) prior to two years after the first day of a subscription period or one year after the relevant exercise date, the lesser of

the excess of the fair market value of the shares at the time of such disposition over the purchase price or

the excess of the fair market value of the shares at the date of grant over an amount equal to what the purchase price would have been if it had been computed as of the date of the grant

will be treated as ordinary income to the participant. Any further gain on disposition will be treated as long-term capital gain and any loss will be treated as a capital loss.

In the event the participant sells or disposes of the shares before the expiration of the holding periods described above, the excess of the fair market value of the shares on the exercise date over the purchase price will be treated as ordinary income to the participant. This excess will constitute ordinary income in the year of sale or other disposition even if no gain is realized on the sale or a gratuitous transfer of the shares is made. The balance of any gain will be treated as a capital gain and will be treated as a long-term capital gain if the shares have been held for more than one year. If the shares are sold for less than their fair market value on the exercise date, the participant may recognize a capital loss equal to the difference between the sales price and the value of the shares on the exercise date.

Our Company is not currently subject to U.S. corporate income taxes. However, if a sale or disposition is made before the expiration of the holding periods described above, by a participant employed by a subsidiary that is a U.S. taxpayer, the subsidiary will be entitled to a deduction for its taxable year in which such sale or disposition occurs equal to the amount of income includible in the participant’s gross income as ordinary income.

ESPP BENEFITS

The benefits to be derived under the ESPP by any individual are currently undeterminable. Participation in the ESPP is entirely voluntary and benefits will only be realized for those employees who choose to allocate a portion of their compensation to the purchase of our Common Shares. The total number of shares to be purchased during each subscription period cannot be determined in advance, as it will vary based on individual elections and the price of the Common Shares at the exercise date.

  Name and Principal Position

Number of Common Shares

Purchased during 2018

  Dominic J. Frederico, President and Chief Executive Officer

730

  Robert A. Bailenson, Chief Financial Officer

  Russell B. Brewer, II,Chief Surveillance Officer

  Ling Chow, General Counsel

  Bruce E. Stern, Executive Officer

734

  Executive Officers as a group (7 persons)

2,661

  Non-Executive Directors as a group

  Non-Executive Employees as a group

36,871

LOGOThe board of directors recommends approval of the Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan as amended through the Third Amendment.

71


PROPOSAL NO. 4:

APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR

The appointment of our independent auditor is approved annually by our shareholders, who also annually authorize the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the remuneration for our independent auditor. Proposal No. 43 is Item 43 on the proxy card.

At the recommendation of the Audit Committee, the Board of Directors recommends that shareholders appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 20192022, and that shareholders authorize the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for our independent auditor. In making its recommendation with respect to the engagement of our independent auditor, the Audit Committee reviewed both the audit scope and estimated fees for professional services for the coming year.

PwC served as our independent auditor for the year ended December 31, 2018.2021. Our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 20182021 will be presented at the Annual General Meeting. Representatives of PwC will attend the Annual General Meeting and will have an opportunity to make a statement if they wish. They will also be available to answer questions at the meeting.

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR FEE INFORMATION

The following table presents fees for professional audit services rendered by PwC for the audit of our annual consolidated financial statements for 20182021 and 20172020 and fees for other services rendered by PwC in 20182021 and 2017.

   
      2018     2017 

  Audit fees(1)

    $        6,610,000     $        8,353,000 

  Audit-related fees(2)

    $678,000     $553,000 

  Tax fees(3)

    $165,000     $169,500 

  All other fees(4)

    $35,000     $4,000 

(1)

We paid audit fees, including costs, for the years ended December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017 for professional services rendered in connection with:

2020.

 
 
 
20212020
  Audit fees(1)
       $9,064,000        $9,212,000
  Audit-related fees(2)
$855,000$1,428,000
  Tax fees(3)
$332,000$250,000
  All other fees$4,000$4,000

(1)        We paid audit fees, including costs, for the years ended December 31, 2021, and December 31, 2020, for professional services rendered in connection with:
the audits of our consolidated financial statements, of management’s assessment of internal controls over financial reporting and of the effectiveness of these controls

the statutory and GAAP audits of various subsidiaries

review of quarterly financial statements

(2)

Audit-related fees for the year ended December 31, 2018 related to audits of our employee benefit plans, agreed upon procedures related to our proxy statement, due diligence services for potential acquisitions, consultations for proposed accounting standards and audit procedures not required by statute or regulation.

Audit-related fees for the year ended December 31, 2017 related to audits of our employee benefit plans, agreed upon procedures related to our proxy statement, due diligence services for potential acquisitions and attestation procedures on Solvency II calculations of our U.K. subsidiaries.

(3)

Of the total amount of tax fees for 2018, $165,000 related to tax compliance. Of the total amount of tax fees for 2017, $146,500 related to tax compliance and $23,000 related to tax advice.

Compliance-related tax fees for 2018 and 2017 were for professional services rendered in connection with the preparation of the 2017 and 2016 federal tax returns.    

(4)

Fees for 2018 primarily related to advice and consultations regarding laws, rules and regulations in global jurisdictions.

72

SEC registration statements

(2)        Audit-related fees for the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020 related to due diligence services for potential acquisitions and potential investments by funds managed by the Company, audits of our employee benefit plans, audit procedures not required by statute or regulation, agreed upon procedures related to our proxy statement, and agreed upon procedures related to collateralized loan obligations.
(3)        Of the total amount of tax fees for 2020, all fees related to tax compliance, while fees for 2021 related to both tax compliance and tax consulting. Compliance-related tax fees for 2021 and 2020 were for professional services rendered in connection with the preparation of the 2020 and 2019 federal tax returns. Tax consulting fees for 2021 were for transfer pricing services and other professional services.
PwC also provides audit services to certain unconsolidated funds managed and advised by Assured Guaranty Ltd. subsidiaries. Fees related to these audits were $4.5 million in 2021 and are not reflected in the table above.

79 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


PRE-APPROVAL POLICY OF AUDIT ANDNON-AUDIT SERVICES

The Audit Committeepre-approved all of the fees described above. The Audit Committee has adopted policies and procedures for thepre-approval of all audit and permissiblenon-audit services provided by our independent auditor, PwC. The Audit Committee provides a generalpre-approval of certain audit andnon-audit services on an annual basis. The types of services that may be covered by a generalpre-approval include other audit services, audit-related services and permissiblenon-audit services. If a type of service is not covered by the Audit Committee’s generalpre-approval, the Audit Committee must review the service on a specific case by case basis andpre-approve it if such service is to be provided by the independent auditor. Annual audit services engagement terms and fees require specificpre-approval of the Audit Committee and management and the auditor will report actual fees versus the budget periodically throughout the year by category of service. Any proposed services exceedingpre-approved costs also require specificpre-approval by the Audit Committee. For both types ofpre-approval, the Audit Committee will consider whether such services are consistent with the SEC’s rules on auditor independence. Either the Audit Committee ChairmanChair or the entire Audit Committee mustpre-approve the provision of any significant additional audit fees in excess of the budgeted amount and/or any excess related tonon-audit fees over the budgeted amount. All fees related to internal control work arepre-approved by the Audit Committee before such services are rendered. The Audit Committeepre-approved all of the fees described above pursuant to itspre-approval policies and procedures.

image_47.jpg
  The Boardboard of Directorsdirectors and the Audit Committee recommendsrecommend that you vote “FOR” the appointment of PwC as the Company’s independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 20192022, and the authorization of the Boardboard of Directors,directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor.

73

80 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement



PROPOSAL NO. 5:

4:

PROPOSALS CONCERNING OUR SUBSIDIARY, ASSURED GUARANTY RE LTD.

In accordance with AGL’sBye-Laws, if AGL is required or entitled to vote at a general meeting of any directnon-United States subsidiary of AGL, AGL’s directors must refer the matter to the shareholders of AGL and seek authority from AGL’s shareholders for AGL’s representative or proxy to vote in favor of the resolution proposed by the subsidiary. AGL’s directors must cause AGL’s representative or proxy to vote AGL’s shares in the subsidiary pro rata to the votes received at the general meeting of AGL. In addition, AGL’s Board of Directors, in its discretion, may require that the organizational documents of each subsidiary of AGL organized under the laws of a jurisdiction outside the United States contain provisions substantially similar to these provisions. As a consequence, we are proposing that our shareholders authorize AGL to vote in favor of the following matters to be presented at the next annual general meeting of our subsidiary, Assured Guaranty Re Ltd., which we refer to as AG Re.

PROPOSAL 5.1—4.1—ELECTION OF AG RE DIRECTORS

We propose that AGL be directed to elect the following eightnine directors of AG Re: Howard W. Albert, Robert A. Bailenson, Russell B. Brewer, II, Gary Burnet, Ling Chow, Stephen Donnarumma, Dominic J. Frederico, Darrin Futter, Jorge Gana, Holly L. Horn and Walter A. Scott, with such persons constituting the entire board of directors of AG Re, to serve for one year terms commencing at the annual general meeting of AG Re. Other than Mr. Scott, each nominee is an officer of AGL or one of its subsidiaries and each, including Mr. Scott, has consented to serve as a director of AG Re without fee if elected. Mr. Scott was entitled to a director’s fee of $5,000 for his service in 2018,2021, but declined.declined the fee. We do not expect that any of the nominees will become unavailable for election as a director of AG Re, but if any nominees should become unavailable prior to the meeting, proxy cards, whether submitted by telephone, via the Internet or by mail, authorizing the proxies to vote for the nominees will instead be voted for substitute nominees recommended by AG Re’s board of directors. Proposal 5.14.1 is Item 5A4A on the proxy card.

image_47.jpg
The board of directors recommends that you direct AGL to vote “FOR” each of the nominees.
The biographies for these nominees are set forth below:

HowardW. Albert,, age 59,62, has been Chief Risk Officer of AGL since May 2011. Prior to that, he was Chief Credit Officer of AGL from 2004 to April 2011. Mr. Albert joined Assured Guaranty in September 1999 as Chief Underwriting Officer of Capital Re Company, the predecessor to AGC. Before joining Assured Guaranty, he was a Senior Vice President with Rothschild Inc. from February 1997 to August 1999. Prior to that, he spent eight years at Financial Guaranty Insurance Company from May 1989 to February 1997, where he was responsible for underwriting guaranties of asset-backed securities and international infrastructure transactions. Prior to that, he was employed by Prudential Capital, an investment arm of The Prudential Insurance Company of America, from September 1984 to April 1989, where he underwrote investments in asset-backed securities, corporate loans and project financings.

Mr. Albert’s experience in risk management, underwriting and credit and his position as the Chief Risk Officer of AGL make him valuable to the Board of Directors of AG Re.

RobertA. Bailenson,, age 52,55, has been the Chief Financial Officer of AGL since June 2011. Mr. Bailenson has been with Assured Guaranty and its predecessor companies since 1990. Mr. Bailenson became Chief Accounting Officer of AGC in 2003, of AGL in May 2005, and of Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., which we refer to as AGM, in July 2009, and has been Chief Accounting Officer of AGL sinceserved in such capacities until May 2005 and Chief Accounting Officer of AGC since 2003.2019. He was Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of AG Re from 1999 until 2003 and was previously the Assistant Controller of Capital Re Corp., the Company’s predecessor.

Mr. Bailenson’s background as the Chief Financial Officer of AGL and as an accountant provides an important perspective to the Board of Directors of AG Re.

Russell B. Brewer II, age 62, has been Chief Surveillance Officer of AGL since November 2009 and Chief Surveillance Officer of AGC and AGM since July 2009 and has also been responsible for information technology at AGL since April 2015. Mr. Brewer has been with AGM since 1986. Mr. Brewer was Chief Risk Management Officer of AGM from September 2003 until July 2009 and Chief Underwriting Officer of AGM from September 1990 until September 2003. Mr. Brewer was also a member of the Executive Management Committee

74


of AGM. He was a Managing Director of

81 Assured Guaranty Municipal Holdings Inc. from May 1999 until July 2009. From March 1989 to August 1990, Mr. Brewer was Managing Director, Asset Finance Group, of AGM. Prior to joining AGM, Mr. Brewer was an Associate Director of Moody’s Investors Service, Inc.

Mr. Brewer’s risk management and surveillance expertise and his position as the Chief Surveillance Officer of AGL enhance the deliberations of the Board of Directors of AG Re.

2022 Proxy Statement



Gary Burnet,age 48,51, has been President of AG Re since August 2012, and prior to that he served as the Managing Director—Chief Credit Officer of AG Re from 2006 until his appointment as President. Mr. Burnet also served as the Vice President—Risk Management and Operations of AG Re from 2002 to 2005. Prior to joining our Company, Mr. Burnet’s previous experience included two years at ACE Asset Management, where he was Investment Officer with responsibility for developing and modeling the ACE group’s consolidated investment and insurance credit risk. Prior to ACE Asset Management, he was an Assistant Vice President—Investments at ACE Bermuda. Mr. Burnet trained as a Chartered Accountant with Geoghegan & Co. CA from 1993 to 1996 in Edinburgh Scotland and also worked as an audit senior for Coopers & Lybrand from 1996 to 1998 in Bermuda.

As the President of AG Re, Mr. Burnet has the most comprehensive knowledge of its operations, including the key areas of underwriting credit risk, accounting and risk management.

Ling Chow, age 48,51, has been General Counsel and Secretary of AGL since January 1, 2018. She is responsible for legal affairs and corporate governance at the Company, including its litigation and other legal strategies relating to distressed credits, and its corporate, compliance, regulatory and disclosure efforts. She is also responsible for the Company’s human resources function. Ms. Chow began her tenure at the Company in 2002 as a transactional attorney, working on the insurance of structured finance and derivative transactions. She previously served as Deputy General Counsel and Assistant Secretary of AGL from May 2015 and as Assured Guaranty’s U.S. General Counsel from June 2016. Prior to that, Ms. Chow served as Deputy General Counsel of Assured Guaranty’s U.S. subsidiaries in several capacities from 2004. Before joining Assured Guaranty, in 2002, Ms. Chow was an associate at various law firms, most recently Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLP, Cahill Gordon & Reindelwhere she was a senior associate responsible for transactional work associated with public and LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P.

private mergers and acquisitions, venture capital investments and private and public securities offerings.

Ms. Chow’s experience as an attorney and her position as the General Counsel of AGL enable her to make valuable contributions as a member of the Board of Directors of AG Re.

Stephen Donnarumma, age 56,59, was appointed as a director of AG Re on September 11, 2012. Mr. Donnarumma has been the Chief Credit Officer of AGC since 2007, of AGM since its 2009 acquisition, and of MAC since its 2012 capitalization. Mr. Donnarumma has been with Assured Guaranty since 1993. Over the past 25 years, Mr. Donnarumma has held a number of positions at Assured Guaranty, including Deputy Chief Credit Officer of AGL, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Underwriting Officer of AG Re, Chief Risk Officer of AGC, and Senior Managing Director, Head of Mortgage and Asset-backed Securities of AGC. Prior to joining Assured Guaranty, Mr. Donnarumma was with Financial Guaranty Insurance Company from 1989 until 1993, where his responsibilities included underwriting domestic and international financial guaranty transactions. Prior to that, he served as a Director of Credit Risk Analysis at Fannie Mae from 1987 until 1989. Mr. Donnarumma was also an analyst with Moody’s Investors Services from 1985 until 1987.

Mr. Donnarumma’s experience with credit analysis and risk management, and his position as the Chief Credit Officer of AGM MAC and AGC, provide important perspective to the Board of Directors of AG Re.

Dominic J. Frederico—See Mr. Frederico’s biography in “Election of Directors—Nominees for Director.” The benefits of his experience described therein with respect to the Board of Directors of AGL also make him valuable as a director of AG Re.

Darrin Futter, age 47, was elected Financial Controller of AG Re and AGRO in 2007, prior to which he worked for Deloitte Ltd. in the Bermuda office and worked as a consultant to AG Re. Mr. Futter has worked in various senior audit roles with Ernst and Young LLP in the U.S. and KPMG in Zimbabwe, where he completed his Articles of Clerkship in 2000. He holds a Bachelor of Accounting Science (Hon.) degree from the University of South Africa and is also a Chartered Accountant and a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Zimbabwe.
Mr. Futter’s extensive audit experience provides an important perspective to the Board of Directors of AG Re.
Jorge Gana, age 51, has been Deputy Chief Risk Officer of AGM and AGC since January 2022, where he is the deputy chair of their Risk Management Committees. Mr. Gana joined Assured Guaranty in 2005 as a Director in structured finance. Over the years, Mr. Gana has held a number of positions at Assured Guaranty, including Managing Director, Structured Finance at AGC, Senior Managing Director of Workouts and Government & Corporate Affairs at AGM and AGC, and chair of AGM's and AGC's Workout Committees. Mr. Gana continues to serve as a voting member of AGM's and AGC's Credit and Workout Committees. Prior to joining Assured Guaranty, Mr. Gana served as a Director of Global Commercial Asset Securitization for XLCA (now Syncora). Prior to XLCA, Mr. Gana worked at Natexis Banques Populaires (now Natixis) and at Banco Santander in global capacities dealing with credit & risk, managing investment portfolios, originating complex transactions, and issuing repackaged debt. Mr. Gana also worked for the Chile Economic Development Agency, NY Office, and as Editor of the Chile Economic Report until 1996.
Mr. Gana’s experience in risk management, credit analysis and workouts and his position as Deputy Chief Risk Officer of AGL provides an important perspective to the Board of Directors of AG Re.
Holly L. Horn, age 61, has been Chief Surveillance Officer of AGM and AGC since January 2022. Prior to that, Ms. Horn served as Chief Surveillance Officer, Public Finance of AGM and AGC, where she was responsible for ongoing surveillance, monitoring and loss mitigation of municipal risks insured by Assured Guaranty across all sectors of the municipal market. She joined AGM in 2003 as a director in the health care underwriting group, where she was responsible for analyzing and recommending the insurability of health care credits. She also served as a director in AGM's health care surveillance group. Ms. Horn began her public finance career at Inova
82 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


Health System, a nationally ranked integrated health care delivery system and subsequently served as a senior manager for the national health care strategy practice at Ernst & Young.
Ms. Horn’s surveillance expertise and her position as the Chief Surveillance Officer of AGM and AGC enhance the deliberations of the Board of Directors of AG Re.
Walter A. Scott, age 81,84, was the ChairmanChair of the AGL Board of Directors from May 2005 until his retirement in May 2013, and a director of AGL from 2004 through 2013. Mr. Scott was Chairman,Chair, President and Chief Executive Officer of ACE from 1991 until his retirement in 1994, and President and Chief Executive Officer of ACE from 1989 to 1991. Subsequent to his retirement he served as a consultant to ACE until 1996. Mr. Scott was a director of ACE from 1989 through May 2005. Prior to joining ACE, Mr. Scott was President and Chief Executive Officer of Primerica’s financial services operations. Mr. Scott currently serves as the Chair of the Board of Wachusett Brewing Company, Inc. and was also the ChairmanChair of Vermont Hard Cider Company, LLC from 2003 until 2012, when that company was sold. Mr. Scott is an Emeritus Trustee of Lafayette College and a founding trustee of the Bermuda Foundation for Insurance Studies.

Mr. Scott’s tenure on the AGL Board of Directors and lengthy experience at senior levels in the financial services industry allow him to provide valuable perspective to the Board of Directors of AG Re.

PROPOSAL 5.2—4.2—APPOINTMENT OF AG RE AUDITOR

We propose that AGL be directed to appoint PwC as the independent auditor of AG Re for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019,2022, subject to PwC being appointed as our Company’s independent auditor. We expect representatives of PwC to be present at AGL’s Annual General Meeting with an opportunity to make a statement if they wish and to be available to respond to appropriate questions. Proposal 5.24.2 is Item 5B4B on the proxy card.

75


The following table presents fees for professional audit services rendered by PwC for the audit of AG Re’s financial statements for 20182021 and 2017.

   
      2018     2017 

  Audit fees

    $        89,900     $        89,900 

  Audit—related fees

            

  Tax fees

            

  All other fees

            

2020.


20212020
Audit fees$89,900$89,900
Audit—related fees
Tax fees
All other fees
The above audit fees are also included in the audit fees shown in “Proposal No. 5:3: Appointment of Independent Auditor.”

Other Matters.The Board of Directors of AGL does not know of any matter to be brought before the annual general meeting of AG Re that we have not described in this proxy statement. If any other matter properly comes before the annual general meeting of AG Re, AGL’s representative or proxy will vote in accordance with his or hertheir judgment on such matter.

image_47.jpg
  The board of directors recommends that you direct AGL to vote “FOR” each of the proposals concerning AGL’s subsidiary, AG Re.

76

83 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement




SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS FOR 20202023 ANNUAL MEETING

HOW DO I SUBMIT A PROPOSAL FOR INCLUSION IN NEXT YEAR’S PROXY MATERIAL?

If you wish to submit a proposal to be considered for inclusion in the proxy material for the next Annual General Meeting, please send it to the Secretary, Assured Guaranty Ltd., 30 Woodbourne Avenue, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda. Under the rules of the SEC, proposals must be received no later than November 28, 201923, 2022, and otherwise comply with the requirements of the SEC to be eligible for inclusion in AGL’s 20202023 Annual General Meeting proxy statement and form of proxy.

HOW DO I SUBMIT A PROPOSAL OR MAKE A NOMINATION AT AN ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING?

OurBye-Laws provide that if a shareholder desires to submit a proposal for consideration at an Annual General Meeting, or to nominate persons for election as directors, the shareholder must provide written notice of an intent to make such a proposal or nomination which the Secretary of the Company must receive at our principal executive offices no later than 90 days prior to the anniversary date of the immediately preceding Annual General Meeting. With respect to the 20202023 Annual General Meeting, such written notice must be received on or prior to February 8, 2020.3, 2023. The notice must meet the requirements set forth in ourBye-Laws. Under the circumstances described in, and upon compliance with,Rule 14a-4(c) under the Exchange Act, management proxies would be allowed to use their discretionary voting authority to vote on any proposal with respect to which the foregoing requirements have been met.


77


84 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING AND VOTING

WHY DID I RECEIVE A NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS IN THE MAIL INSTEAD OF A FULL SET OF PROXY MATERIALS?

In accordance with the rules of the SEC, instead of mailing a printed copy of the proxy statement, annual report and other materials (which we refer to as proxy materials) for our Annual General Meeting, we are furnishing proxy materials to shareholders on the Internet by providing a Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials (which we refer to as a Notice) to inform shareholders when the materials are available on the Internet.

If you receive the Notice by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials unless you specifically request one. Instead, the Notice instructs you on how you may access and review all of our proxy materials, as well as how to submit your proxy, over the Internet.

We will first make available the proxy statement, form of proxy card and 20182021 annual report to shareholders atwww.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting. The proxy materials will also be available atwww.proxyvote.com on or about March 27, 201923, 2022 to all shareholders entitled to vote at the Annual General Meeting. You may also request a printed copy of the proxy solicitation materials by any of the following methods: via Internet at www.proxyvote.com; www.proxyvote.com; by telephone at1-800-579-1639; or by sending an e-mail to e-mailsendmaterial@proxyvote.com tosendmaterial@proxyvote.com. Our 20182021 annual report to shareholders will be made available at the same time and by the same methods. If requesting materials bye-mail, please send a blanke-mail with the information that is printed in your Notice in the box marked by the arrow in the subject line.

g

  XXXX    XXXX    XXXX    XXXX 

We elected to use electronic notice and access for our proxy materials because we believe it will reduce our printing and mailing costs related to our Annual General Meeting.

Meeting and because it is an environmentally friendly practice.

WHY HAS THIS PROXY STATEMENT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE?

Our Board of Directors is soliciting proxies for use at our Annual General Meeting to be held on May 8, 2019,4, 2022, and any adjournments or postponements of the meeting. The meeting will be held at 8:00 a.m. London Time at 6 Bevis Marks, London, EC3A 7BA, United Kingdom.

At this writing, governments continue to adjust various travel and gathering

restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the event we postpone or change the date, time or location of our
Annual General Meeting as a result of COVID-19, we will post the revised meeting information on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting as soon as possible after changing the date, time and location for the postponed meeting. We will also promptly issue a press release that we will make available on our website at www.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting and file with the SEC as definitive additional proxy material. Therefore, prior to and on the date of the Annual General Meeting, please visit our website or the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov) to determine if there has been any changes to the date, time or location of our Annual General Meeting. If you wish to receive a physical copy of any such press release, please contact our Secretary at generalcounsel@agltd.com or (441) 279-5725.
This proxy statement summarizes the information you need to vote at the Annual General Meeting. You do not need to attend the Annual General Meeting to vote your shares.

WHAT PROPOSALS WILL BE VOTED ON AT THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING?

The following proposals are scheduled to be voted on at the Annual General Meeting:

The election of directors

An advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to our named executive officers

The approval of our employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment; this will increase by 250,000 the number of common shares that our employees may purchase under this plan

The appointment of PwC as our independent auditor for 20192022 and the authorization of our Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor

The direction of AGL to vote for the election of the directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor for, our subsidiary AG Re

Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote your shares “FOR” each of the nominees and each of the foregoing proposals.

ARE PROXY MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET?

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual General Meeting to be Held on Wednesday, May 8, 2019

4, 2022

Yes. Our proxy statement for the 20192022 Annual General Meeting, form of proxy card and 20182021 annual report to shareholders are available atwww.assuredguaranty.com/annualmeeting. The proxy materials will also be available atwww.proxyvote.com on or about March 27, 201923, 2022, to all shareholders entitled to vote at the Annual General Meeting.

85 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


You can obtain directions to attend the 20192022 Annual General Meeting by contacting Virginia Reynolds at + 44 020 7562 1920 or atvreynolds@agltd.com.

vreynolds@agltd.com.

WHO IS ENTITLED TO VOTE?

March 14, 201911, 2022 is the record date for the Annual General Meeting. If you owned our Common Shares at the close of business on March 14, 2019,11, 2022, you are entitled to vote. On that date, 102,699,91765,691,443 of our Common Shares were outstanding and entitled to vote at the Annual General Meeting, including 67,319

78


44,797 unvested restricted Common Shares. Our Common Shares are our only class of voting stock. On March 14, 2019,11, 2022, the closing price of our Common Shares on the New York Stock Exchange, which we refer to as the NYSE, was $44.79.

$57.41.

HOW MANY VOTES DO I HAVE?

You have one vote for each of our Common Shares that you owned at the close of business on March 14, 2019.

11, 2022.

However, if your shares are considered “controlled shares,” which ourBye-Laws define generally to include all of our Common Shares directly, indirectly or constructively owned by any person or group of persons, or owned by any “United States person,” as defined in the Internal Revenue Code, and such shares constitute 9.5% or more of our issued Common Shares, the voting rights with respect to your controlled shares will be limited, in the aggregate, to a voting power of approximately 9.5%, pursuant to a formula specified in ourBye-Laws.

The Notice indicates the number of Common Shares you are entitled to vote, without giving effect to the controlled share rule described above.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HOLDING SHARES AS A SHAREHOLDER OF RECORD AND AS A BENEFICIAL OWNER?

Many

While some of our shareholders are shareholders of record, many are beneficial owners since theywho hold their shares through a stockbroker, bank or other nominee rather than as shareholders of record when they own shares directly in their own name.nominee. As summarized below, there are some differences between shares held of record and those owned beneficially.

Shareholder of Record.If your shares are held directly, or if your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Computershare, because you participate in the Assured Guaranty Employee Stock Purchase Plan, you are the shareholder of record of those shares, and these proxy materials are being sent to you directly. As the shareholder of record, you have the right to grant your voting proxy directly to AGL or to vote in person at the Annual General Meeting. You may vote by telephone or via the Internet as described below under the


heading “Information About the Annual General Meeting and Voting—May I Vote by Telephone or via the Internet?” or you may request a paper copy of the proxy materials and vote your proxy card by mail.

Beneficial Owner.If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name” and our proxy materials are being forwarded to you by your broker, bank or other nominee who is considered, with respect to those shares, the shareholder of record. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or other nominee on how to vote your shares and are also invited to attend the Annual General Meeting. However, since you are not the shareholder of record, you may only vote these shares in person at the Annual General
Meeting if you follow the instructions described below under the heading “How do I Vote in Person at the Annual General Meeting?” Your broker, bank or other nominee has provided a voting instruction form for you to use in directing your broker, bank or other nominee as to how to vote your shares. You may also vote by telephone or on the Internet as described below under the heading “May I Vote by Telephone or via the Internet?”

Meeting if you follow the instructions described below under the heading “How do I Vote in Person at the Annual General Meeting?” Your broker, bank or other nominee has provided a voting instruction form for you to use in directing your broker, bank or other nominee as to how to vote your shares. You may also vote by telephone or on the Internet as described below under the heading “May I Vote by Telephone or via the Internet?”

HOW DO I VOTE BY PROXY IF I AM A SHAREHOLDER OF RECORD?

If you are a shareholder of record and you properly submit your proxy card (by telephone, via the Internet or by mail) so that it is received by us in time to vote, your “proxy” (one of the individuals named on your proxy card) will vote your shares as you have directed. If you sign the proxy card (including electronic signatures in the case of Internet or telephonic voting) but do not make specific choices, your proxy will vote your shares as recommended by our Board of Directors (also referred to as our Board or the Board):

FOR each nominee for election of directors

FOR approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation paid to our named executive officers

FOR approval of our employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment; this will increase by 250,000 the number of common shares that our employees may purchase under such plan

FOR the appointment of PwC as our independent auditor for 20192022 and the authorization of our Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor

FOR directing AGL to vote for each nominee for election of directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor for, our subsidiary, AG Re

If any other matter is presented, your proxy will vote in accordance with the best judgment of the individuals named on the proxy card. As of the date of printingfiling this proxy statement, we knew of no matters that needed to be acted on at the Annual General Meeting other than those discussed in this proxy statement.



86 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


HOW DO I GIVE VOTING INSTRUCTIONS IF I AM A BENEFICIAL OWNER?

If you are a beneficial owner of shares, your broker, bank or other nominee will ask you how you want your shares to be voted. If you give the broker, bank or other nominee instructions, the broker, bank or other nominee will vote your shares as you direct. If your broker, bank or other nominee does not receive instructions from you about how your shares are to be voted, one of two things can happen, depending on the type of proposal. According to rules of the NYSE:

Brokers, banks and other nominees have discretionary power to vote your shares with respect to “routine” matters

79


Brokers, banks and other nominees do not have discretionary power to vote your shares on“non-routine” “non-routine” matters (such as the elections of directors or the advisory vote on executive compensation, or the amendment of our employee stock purchase plan)compensation) unless they have received instructions from the beneficial owner of the shares

It is therefore important that you provide instructions to your broker, bank or other nominee if your shares are held by a broker, bank or other nominee so that your shares can be voted with respect to directors and executive compensation, and any other matters treated asnon-routine by the NYSE.

MAY I VOTE BY TELEPHONE OR VIA THE INTERNET?

Yes. If you are a shareholder of record, you have a choice of voting over the Internet, voting by telephone using a toll-free telephone number or voting by requesting and completing a proxy card and mailing it in the return envelope provided. We encourage you to vote by telephone or over the Internet because your vote is then tabulated faster than if you mailed it. There are separate telephone and Internet arrangements depending on whether you are a shareholder of record (that is, if you hold your stock in your own name), or whether you are a beneficial owner and hold your shares in “street name” (that is, if your stock is held in the name of your broker, bank or other nominee).

If you are a shareholder of record, you may vote by telephone using the telephone number on the proxy card, or electronically through the Internet, by following the instructions provided on the Notice

If you are a beneficial owner and hold your shares in “street name,” you may need to contact your broker, bank or other nominee to determine whether you will be able to vote by telephone or electronically through the Internet

The telephone and Internet voting procedures are designed to authenticate shareholders’ identities, to allow shareholders to give their voting instructions and to confirm that shareholders’ instructions have been recorded properly. If you vote via telephone or the Internet, you may incur costs, such as usage charges from Internet access providers and telephone companies. You will be responsible for those costs.

Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual General Meeting, we urge you to vote. Voting by telephone or over the Internet or by returning your proxy card by mail will not affect your right to attend the Annual General Meeting and vote. In order to assure that your votes, as a record holder,registered shareholder who holds our shares directly, are tabulated in time to be voted at the Annual General Meeting, you must complete your voting over the Internet or by telephone or submit your proxy card so that it is received by 12:00 noonNoon Eastern Daylight Time on May 7, 2019. Similarly, in3, 2022. In order to assure that your votes, as a beneficial holder,owner, are tabulated in time to be voted at the Annual General Meeting, you must submit your voting instructions so that your broker will be able to vote by 11:59 a.m.p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on May 6, 2019.

2, 2022. In order to assure that your votes, as an employee shareholder who participates in the Assured Guaranty Employee Stock Purchase Plan, are tabulated in time to be voted at the Annual General Meeting, you must complete your voting over the Internet or by telephone or submit your proxy card so that it is received by 11:59 p.m. Easter Daylight Savings Time on April 29, 2022.

MAY I REVOKE MY PROXY?

Yes. If you change your mind after you vote, you may revoke your proxy by following any of the procedures described below. If you are a shareholder of record, to revoke your proxy:

���Send in another signed proxy with a later date or resubmit your vote by telephone or the Internet,

Send in another signed proxy with a later date or resubmit your vote by telephone or the Internet,
Send a letter revoking your proxy to our Secretary at our principal executive offices, Assured Guaranty Ltd., 30 Woodbourne Avenue, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda, or

Attend the Annual General Meeting and vote in person.

Beneficial owners who wish to change the votes submitted on their voting instruction cards should contact their respective broker, bank or other nominee to determine how and when changes must be submitted so that the nominee can revoke and change their votes on their behalf.

If you wish to revoke your proxy or make changes to your voting instruction card, as applicable, you must do so in sufficient time to permit the necessary examination and tabulation of the subsequent proxy or revocation before the vote is taken.

HOW DO I VOTE IN PERSON AT THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING?

You may vote shares held directly in your name as the shareholder of record in person at the Annual General Meeting. If you choose to vote your shares in person at the Annual General Meeting, please bring the Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials containing your control number or proof of identification. Shares held in “street name” through your broker, bank or other nominee may be voted in person by you only if you obtain a signed proxy from the shareholder of record giving you the right to vote the shares. You must bring such signed proxy to the Annual General Meeting, along with
87 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement


an account statement or letter from the broker, bank or other nominee indicating that you are the beneficial owner of the shares and that you were the beneficial owner of the shares on March 14, 2019.

11, 2022.

Even if you plan to attend the Annual General Meeting, we recommend that you vote your shares in advance as described above so that your vote will be counted if you later decide not to attend the Annual General Meeting. However, while proxy voting is subject to the time deadlines described above, shareholders attending the meeting in person may vote during the Annual General Meeting as long as they satisfy the requirements described in this section.

WHAT VOTES NEED TO BE PRESENT TO HOLD THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING?

To have a quorum for our Annual General Meeting, two or more persons must be present, in person or by proxy, representing more than 50% of the Common Shares that were outstanding on March 14, 2019.

11, 2022.

80


WHAT VOTE IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE EACH PROPOSAL?

The affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on such proposal at the Annual General Meeting is required for each of:

The election of each nominee for director

The approval of our employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment

The appointment of PwC as our independent auditor for 20192022 and the authorization of our Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees for the independent auditor

Directing AGL to vote for the election of directors of, and the appointment of the independent auditor for, our subsidiary, AG Re

The vote on the compensation paid to our named executive officers is advisory in nature so there is no specified requirement

for approval. However, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our shareholders and will review the voting results carefully. To the extent there is any significant vote against the named executive officers’ compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement, we will consider our shareholders’ concerns and the Compensation Committee will evaluate whether any actions are necessary to address those concerns. In addition, the Compensation Committee and the Board of Directors will consider the outcome of the most recent vote on the frequency of the vote on named executive officer compensation when determining how frequently such vote will be submitted to shareholders.

HOW ARE VOTES COUNTED?

Your vote may be cast “FOR” or “AGAINST”, or you may “ABSTAIN”, with respect to each of the nominees for AGL director, with respect to directing AGL to vote for each of the nominees for director of its subsidiary AG Re, and with respect to each of the other proposals on the agenda.

If you sign (including electronic signatures in the case of Internet or telephonic voting) your proxy card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted in accordance with the recommendations of the Board. If you sign (including electronic signatures in the case of Internet or telephonic voting) your broker, bank or other nominee voting instruction card with no further instructions, your shares will be voted in the broker’s, bank’s or nominee’s discretion with respect to routine matters but will not be voted with respect tonon-routine matters. As described in “How do I Give Voting Instructions if I am a Beneficial Owner?”, elections of directors and the advisory vote on executive compensation are considerednon-routine matters. We will appoint one or more inspectors of election to count votes cast in person or by proxy.

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF BROKERNON-VOTES AND ABSTENTIONS?

A broker“non-vote” “non-vote” occurs when a broker, bank or other nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner does not vote on a particular proposal because the broker, bank or other nominee does not have discretionary voting power for that particular item and has not received instructions from the beneficial owner.

Common Shares that are beneficially owned and are voted by the beneficiary through a broker, bank or other nominee will be counted towards the presence of a quorum, even if there are brokernon-votes with respect to some proposals, as long as the broker, bank or nominee votes on at least one proposal. Common Shares owned by shareholders electing to abstain from voting with respect to any proposal also will be counted towards the presence of a quorum.

Although brokernon-votes will be counted towards the presence of a quorum, brokernon-votes will not be included in the tabulation of the shares voting with respect to elections of directors or other matters to be voted upon at the Annual General Meeting. Therefore, “brokernon-votes” will have no direct effect on the outcome of any proposal to be voted upon at the Annual General Meeting.

While abstentions will be counted towards the presence of a quorum, abstentions will not be included in the tabulation of the shares voting with respect to elections of directors or other matters to be voted upon at the Annual General Meeting. Therefore, abstentions will have no direct effect on the outcome of any proposal to be voted upon at the Annual General Meeting. Under NYSE rules, however, approval of the employee stock purchase plan as amended through the third amendment requires an affirmative of the majority of votes cast which for this purpose includes votes “For”, “Against” and abstentions, but not broker
88 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

non-votes.
Therefore, abstentions will affect whether approval of the employee stock purchase plan, as amended through the third amendment, has been approved in compliance with NYSE rules.

WHAT ARE THE COSTS OF SOLICITING THESE PROXIES AND WHO WILL PAY THEM?

We will pay all the costs of soliciting these proxies. Our directors and employees may also solicit proxies by telephone, by faxe-mail or other electronic means of communication, or in person. We will reimburse banks, brokers, nominees and other fiduciaries for the expenses they incur in forwarding the proxy materials to you. Alliance Advisors, 200 Broadacres Drive, Bloomfield, New Jersey 07003, is assisting us with the solicitation of proxies for a fee of $16,500 plusout-of-pocket expenses.

WHERE CAN I FIND THE VOTING RESULTS?

We will publish the voting results in aForm 8-K that we will file with the SEC by May 14, 2019.10, 2022. You will also be able to find thisForm 8-K on our website atwww.assuredguaranty.com/sec-filings by May 14, 2019.

10, 2022.

81


DO DIRECTORS ATTEND THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING?

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that directors are expected to attend our Annual General Meeting and any special meeting of shareholders we call to consider extraordinary business transactions, unless they are unable to do so as a result of special circumstances. All of our directors then in office attended the Annual General Meeting that was held on May 2, 2018.

5, 2021.

CAN A SHAREHOLDER, EMPLOYEE OR OTHER INTERESTED PARTY COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH OUR BOARD? IF SO, HOW?

Our Board provides a process for shareholders, employees or other interested parties to send communications to our Board.

Shareholders, employees or other interested parties wanting to contact the Board concerning accounting or auditing matters may send ane-mail to the ChairmanChair of the Audit Committee at chmaudit@agltd.com

Shareholders, employees or other interested parties wanting to contact the Board, the independent directors, the ChairmanChair of the Board, the chairmanchair of any Board committee or any other director, as to other matters may send ane-mail to corpsecy@agltd.com. The Secretary has access to both of these e-mail addresses
e-mail
addresses




Shareholders, employees or other interested parties may send written communications to the Board c/o Secretary, 30 Woodbourne Avenue, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda. Mail to Bermuda is not as prompt ase-mail

Communication with the Board may be anonymous. The Secretary will forward all communications to the Board to the ChairmanChair of the Audit Committee or the ChairmanChair of the Nominating and Governance Committee, who will determine when it is appropriate to distribute such communications to other members of the Board or to management.

WHOM SHOULD I CALL IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

If you have any questions about the Annual General Meeting or voting, please contact Ling Chow, our Secretary, at(441) 279-5725 or at generalcounsel@agltd.com. If you have any questions about your ownership of our Common Shares, please contact Robert Tucker, our Senior Managing Director, Investor Relations and Corporate Communications, at(212) 339-0861 or at rtucker@agltd.com.

HOW DOES “HOUSEHOLDING” WORK?

Please note we may deliver a single copy of the Notice and, if applicable, a single set of our 20182021 annual report to shareholders and our proxy statement, to households at which two or more shareholders reside, unless an affected shareholder has provided contrary instructions. Individual proxy cards or voting instruction forms (or electronic voting facilities), as applicable, will, however, continue to be provided for each shareholder account. This procedure, referred to as “householding,” reduces the volume of duplicate information received by shareholders, as well as our expenses.expenses, and is an environmentally friendly practice. Upon written or oral request, we will promptly deliver, or arrange for delivery, of a separate copy of the Notice and, if applicable, a separate set of our annual report and other proxy materials to any shareholder at a shared address to which a single copy of any of those documents was delivered. To receive a separate copy of the Notice and, if applicable, a separate set of our annual report and proxy materials, you may write or call Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717, Attention: Householding Department, telephone(866) 540-7095. Shareholders currently sharing an address with another shareholder who wish to have only one copy of our Notice or annual report and other proxy materials delivered to the household in the future should also contact Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717, Attention: Householding Department, telephone(866) 540-7095.

89 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

82




OTHER MATTERS

The Board of Directors of AGL does not know of any matters which may be presented at the Annual General Meeting other than those specifically set forth in the Notice of Annual General Meeting. If any other matters properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof, the persons named in the accompanying form of proxy and acting thereunder will vote in accordance with their best judgment with respect to such matters.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

Ling Chow

Secretary

83


EXHIBIT A: EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN AS AMENDED THROUGH THE THIRD AMENDMENT

ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

(Effective as of November 4, 2004 and as amended through the Third Amendment)

A-1


ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

(Effective as of November 4, 2004 and as amended through the Third Amendment)

SECTION 1

GENERAL

1.1.Purpose. The Assured Guaranty Ltd. Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”) has been established by Assured Guaranty Ltd. (the “Company”) to provide eligible employees of the Company and the Related Companies with an opportunity to acquire a proprietary interest in the Company through the purchase of common shares of the Company (“Stock”). The Plan is intended to qualify as an employee stock purchase plan under section 423 of the Code, and the provisions of the Plan are to be construed in a manner consistent with the requirements of that section.

1.2.Operation and Administration. The operation and administration of the Plan shall be subject to the provisions of Section 3. Capitalized terms in the Plan shall be defined as set forth in Section 6 or elsewhere in the Plan.

SECTION 2

METHOD OF PURCHASE

2.1.Eligibility. Plan participation shall be available to (and shall be limited to) all persons who are employees of the Employers, except that the following persons shall not be eligible to participate in the Plan:

(a)

An employee who has been employed less than 500 hours and less than six months.

(b)

An employee whose customary employment is 20 hours or less per week.

(c)

An employee whose customary employment is for not more than five months in any calendar year.

(d)

An employee who owns, or who would own upon the exercise of any rights extended under the Plan and the exercise of any other option held by the employee (whether qualified ornon-qualified), shares possessing 5% or more of the total combined voting power or value of all classes of stock of the Company or of any parent or subsidiary corporation.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this subsection 2.1, an individual may participate in the Plan for any Subscription Period only if he is employed by an Employer on the first day of that period.

2.2.Participation Election. The Committee shall establish “Subscription Periods” of not longer than one year for the accumulation of funds necessary for payment of the Purchase Price (as defined in subsection 2.3) of Stock under the Plan. For any Subscription Period, an eligible employee shall become a Plan ‘Participant’ by filing, with the Committee, a written payroll deduction authorization with respect to Compensation otherwise payable to the Participant during the period. Such payroll deductions shall be any full percentage of the Compensation of the Participant, or any specified whole dollar amount, up to but not more than 10% of his Compensation in either case. After the beginning of the Subscription Period, and except as otherwise provided in subsection 2.4, a Participant may not alter the rate of his payroll deductions for that period. Subject to the limitations of subsection 2.3, each eligible employee who has elected to become a Participant for a Subscription Period in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this subsection 2.2 shall be granted on the first day of such Subscription Period an option to purchase (at the applicable Purchase Price) on the Exercise Date (as defined in subsection 2.3) for such Subscription Period up to a number of whole shares of Stock determined by dividing such Participant’s accumulated payroll deductions as of such Exercise Date by the applicable Purchase Price, subject to such limits on the number of shares that may be purchased with respect to any Subscription Period as may be imposed by the Committee. Exercise of the option shall occur as provided in subsection 2.3, unless the Participant has terminated participation in the Plan prior to the Exercise Date as provided in subsection 2.4 or the Participant elects not to exercise the option as provided in subsection 2.3(b). The option shall expire on the last day of the Subscription Period.

2.3.Purchase of Stock. On the last day of each Subscription Period (the “Exercise Date”), a Participant shall become eligible to exercise his option to purchase the number of whole shares of Stock as his accumulated payroll deductions for the Subscription Period will purchase, subject to the following:

(a)

The “Purchase Price” per share shall be equal to 85% of the lesser of (i) the fair market value of Stock on the first day of the Subscription Period; or (ii) the fair market value of Stock on the Exercise Date (or such higher price as may be determined by the Committee from time to time). In no event shall the Purchase Price be less than the par value of the Stock.

(b)

A Participant shall be deemed to have elected to purchase the shares of Stock which he became entitled to purchase on the Exercise Date unless he shall notify the Company prior to the Exercise Date, or such other time as the Committee may establish, that the Participant he elects not to make such purchase.

A-2


(c)

Any accumulated payroll deductions that are not used to purchase full shares of Stock under the Plan shall be paid to the Participant without interest.

(d)

No employee shall have the right to purchase more than $25,000 in value of Stock under the Plan (and any other employee stock purchase plan described in Code section 423 and maintained by the Company or any Related Company) in any calendar year, such value being based on the fair market value of Stock as of the date on which the option to purchase the Stock is granted, as determined in accordance with subsection 2.2 of the Plan.

2.4.Termination of Participation. A Participant may discontinue his participation in the Plan for any Subscription Period, whereupon all of the Participant’s payroll deductions for the Subscription Period will be promptly paid to him without interest, and no further payroll deductions will be made from his pay for that period. If a Participant’s employment with the Employers terminates during a Subscription Period for any reason, all payroll deductions accumulated by the Participant under the Plan for the period shall be paid to the Participant without interest.

SECTION 3

OPERATION AND ADMINISTRATION

3.1.Effective Date. Subject to the approval of the shareholders of the Company at the Company’s 2005 annual meeting of its shareholders, the Plan shall be effective as of the date on which it is adopted by the Board; provided, however, that to the extent that rights are granted under the Plan prior to its approval by shareholders, they shall be contingent on approval of the Plan by the shareholders of the Company. The Plan shall be unlimited in duration and, in the event of Plan termination, shall remain in effect as long as any rights granted under the Plan are outstanding.

3.2.Shares Subject to Plan. Shares of Stock to be purchased under the Plan shall be subject to the following:

(a)

The shares of Stock which may be purchased under the Plan shall be currently authorized but unissued shares, or shares purchased in the open market by a direct or indirect wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (as determined by the President, Chief Financial Officer or General Counsel of the Company). The Company may contribute to the subsidiary an amount sufficient to accomplish the purchase in the open market of the shares of Stock to be so acquired (as determined by the Chairman or any Executive Vice President of the Company).

(b)

Subject to the provisions of subsection 3.3 and the following provisions of this paragraph (b), the number of shares of Stock which may be purchased under the Plan shall not exceed 600,000 shares of Stock; provided that, contingent on approval by the Company’s shareholders at the Company’s 2019 annual meeting of the increase in the number of shares reserved for purchase as set forth below, the number of shares of Stock that may be purchased under the Plan shall not exceed 850,000 shares of Stock (which number includes all shares available for delivery under this paragraph (b) since the establishment of the Plan in 2004, determined in accordance with the terms of the Plan).

(c)

A Participant will have no interest in shares of Stock covered by his Subscription Agreement until the shares are delivered to him.

3.3.Adjustments to Shares.

(a)

If the Company shall effect any subdivision or consolidation of shares of Stock or other capital readjustment, payment of stock dividend, stock split, combination of shares or recapitalization or other increase or reduction of the number of shares of Stock outstanding without receiving compensation therefor in money, services or property, then, subject to the requirements of Code section 423, the Committee shall adjust the number of shares of Stock available under the Plan.

(b)

If the Company is reorganized, merged or consolidated or is party to a plan of exchange with another corporation, pursuant to which reorganization, merger, consolidation or plan of exchange the shareholders of the Company receive any shares of stock or other securities or property, or the Company shall distribute securities of another corporation to its shareholders, then, subject to the requirements of Code section 423, there shall be substituted for the shares subject to outstanding rights to purchase Stock under the Plan an appropriate number of shares of each class of stock or amount of other securities or property which were distributed to the shareholders of the Company in respect of such shares.

3.4.Limit on Distribution. Distribution of shares of Stock or other amounts under the Plan shall be subject to the following:

(a)

Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan, the Company shall have no liability to issue any shares of Stock under the Plan unless such delivery or distribution would comply with all applicable laws and the applicable requirements of any securities exchange or similar entity.

(b)

In the case of a Participant who is subject to Section 16(a) and 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Committee may, at any time, add such conditions and limitations with respect to such Participant as the Committee, in its sole discretion, deems necessary or desirable to comply with Section 16(a) or 16(b) and the rules and regulations thereunder or to obtain any exemption therefrom.

(c)

To the extent that the Plan provides for issuance of certificates to reflect the transfer of shares of Stock, the transfer of such shares may, at the direction of the Committee, be effected on anon-certificated basis, to the extent not prohibited by the provisions of Rule16b-3, applicable local law, the applicable rules of any stock exchange, or any other applicable rules.

A-3


3.5.Withholding. All benefits under the Plan are subject to withholding of all applicable taxes.

3.6.Transferability. Except as otherwise permitted under Code section 424 and SEC Rule16b-3, neither the amount of any payroll deductions made with respect to a Participant’s compensation nor any Participant’s rights to purchase shares of Stock under the Plan may be pledged or hypothecated, nor may they be assigned or transferred other than by will and the laws of descent and distribution. During the lifetime of the Participant, the rights provided to the Participant under the Plan may be exercised only by him.

3.7.Limitation of Implied Rights.

(a)

Neither a Participant nor any other person shall, by reason of the Plan, acquire any right in or title to any assets, funds or property of the Employers whatsoever, including, without limitation, any specific funds, assets, or other property which the Employers, in their sole discretion, may set aside in anticipation of a liability under the Plan. A Participant shall have only a contractual right to the amounts, if any, payable under the Plan, unsecured by any assets of the Employers. Nothing contained in the Plan shall constitute a guarantee by any of the Employers that the assets of the Employers shall be sufficient to pay any benefits to any person.

(b)

The Plan does not constitute a contract of employment, and participation in the Plan will not give any employee the right to be retained in the employ of an Employer or any Related Company, nor any right or claim to any benefit under the Plan, unless such right or claim has specifically accrued under the terms of the Plan. Except as otherwise provided in the Plan, no right to purchase shares under the Plan shall confer upon the holder thereof any right as a shareholder of the Company prior to the date on which he fulfills all service requirements and other conditions for receipt of such rights.

3.8.Evidence. Evidence required of anyone under the Plan may be by certificate, affidavit, document or other information which the person acting on it considers pertinent and reliable, and signed, made or presented by the proper party or parties.

3.9.Action by Employers. Any action required or permitted to be taken by any Employer shall be by resolution of its board of directors, or by action of one or more members of the board (including a committee of the board) who are duly authorized to act for the board, or (except to the extent prohibited by the provisions of Rule16b-3, applicable local law, the applicable rules of any stock exchange, or any other applicable rules) by a duly authorized officer of the Employer.

3.10.Gender and Number. Where the context admits, words in any gender shall include any other gender, words in the singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular.

SECTION 4

COMMITTEE

4.1.Administration. The authority to control and manage the operation and administration of the Plan shall be vested in a committee (the “Committee”) in accordance with this Section 4.

4.2.Selection of Committee. The Committee shall be selected by the Board, and shall consist of not less than two members of the Board, or such greater number as may be required for compliance with SEC Rule16b-3.

4.3.Powers of Committee. The authority to manage and control the operation and administration of the Plan shall be vested in the Committee, subject to the following:

(a)

Subject to the provisions of the Plan, the Committee will have the authority and discretion to establish the terms, conditions, restrictions, and other provisions applicable to the right to purchase shares of Stock under the Plan.

(b)

The Committee will have the authority and discretion to interpret the Plan, to establish, amend, and rescind any rules and regulations relating to the Plan, to determine the terms and provisions of any agreements made pursuant to the Plan, and to make all other determinations that may be necessary or advisable for the administration of the Plan.

(c)

Any interpretation of the Plan by the Committee and any decision made by it under the Plan is final and binding on all persons.

4.4.Delegation by Committee. Except to the extent prohibited by the provisions of Rule16b-3, applicable local law, the applicable rules of any stock exchange, or any other applicable rules, the Committee may allocate all or any portion of its responsibilities and powers to any one or more of its members and may delegate all or any part of its responsibilities and powers to any person or persons selected by it. Any such allocation or delegation may be revoked by the Committee at any time.

4.5.Information to be Furnished to Committee. The Employers and Related Companies shall furnish the Committee with such data and information as may be required for it to discharge its duties. The records of the Employers and Related Companies as to an employee’s or Participant’s employment, termination of employment, leave of absence, reemployment and compensation shall be conclusive on all persons unless determined to be incorrect. Participants and other persons entitled to benefits under the Plan must furnish the Committee such evidence, data or information as the Committee considers desirable to carry out the terms of the Plan.

A-4


4.6.Liability and Indemnification of Committee. No member or authorized delegate of the Committee shall be liable to any person for any action taken or omitted in connection with the administration of the Plan unless attributable to his own fraud or willful misconduct; nor shall the Employers be liable to any person for any such action unless attributable to fraud or willful misconduct on the part of a director or employee of the Employers. The Committee, the individual members thereof, and persons acting as the authorized delegates of the Committee under the Plan, shall be indemnified by the Employers, to the fullest extent permitted by law, against any and all liabilities, losses, costs and expenses (including legal fees and expenses) of whatsoever kind and nature which may be imposed on, incurred by or asserted against the Committee or its members or authorized delegates by reason of the performance of a Committee function if the Committee or its members or authorized delegates did not act dishonestly or in willful violation of the law or regulation under which such liability, loss, cost or expense arises. This indemnification shall not duplicate but may supplement any coverage available under any applicable insurance.

SECTION 5

AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION

The Board may, at any time, amend or terminate the Plan, provided that, subject to subsection 3.3 (relating to certain adjustments to shares), no amendment or termination may adversely affect the rights of any Participant or beneficiary with respect to shares that have been purchased prior to the date such amendment is adopted by the Board. No amendment of the Plan may be made without approval of the Company’s shareholders to the extent that such approval is required to maintain compliance with the requirements of Code section 423.

SECTION 6

DEFINED TERMS

For purposes of the Plan, the terms listed below shall be defined as follows:

(a)

Board. The term “Board” shall mean the Board of Directors, of the Company.

image_4.jpg
Ling Chow
Secretary

(b)

Code. The term “Code” means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. A reference to any provision of the Code shall include reference to any successor provision of the Code.

(c)

Compensation. The term “Compensation” means total compensation paid by the Employers for the applicable period specified in Section 2.2, exclusive of any bonus payment, payment in cash or kind under any stock option plan, deferred compensation plan, or other employee benefit plan or program of the Employers.

(d)

Dollars. As used in the Plan, the term “dollars” or numbers preceded by the symbol “$” shall mean amounts in United States Dollars.

(e)

Effective Date. The “Effective Date” shall be the date on which the Plan is adopted by the Board.

(f)

Employer. The Company and each Related Company which, with the consent of the Company, adopts the Plan for the benefit of its eligible employees are referred to collectively as the “Employers” and individually as an “Employer”.

(g)

Fair Market Value. The “Fair Market Value” of a share of Stock of the Company as of any date shall be the closing market composite price for such Stock as reported for the New York Stock Exchange—Composite Transactions on that date or, if Stock is not traded on that date, on the next preceding date on which Stock was traded.

(h)

Participant. The term “Participant” means any employee of the Company who is eligible and elects to participate pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.

(i)

Related Companies. The term “Related Company” means any company during any period in which it is a “subsidiary corporation” (as that term is defined in Code section 424(f)) with respect to the Company.

A-5


LOGO


ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.

30 WOODBOURNE AVENUE

HAMILTON, HM 08 BERMUDA

90 Assured Guaranty 2022 Proxy Statement

VOTE BY INTERNET -www.proxyvote.com

Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information. Shareholders of record may vote up until 12:00 noon Eastern Daylight Time on May 7, 2019. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE PROXY MATERIALS

If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by our company in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via


e-mail
or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions above to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access proxy materials electronically in future years.

VOTE BY PHONE -1-800-690-6903

Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions. Shareholders of record may vote up until 12:00 noon Eastern Daylight Time on May 7, 2019. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.

VOTE BY MAIL

Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:

E58763-P17604                     KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS

— — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.             DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY

ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.

NYSE : AGO
The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR each of the following nominees:
1.Election of Directors of Assured Guaranty Ltd. (the “Company”):
30 Woodbourne Ave
Hamilton HM 08
Bermuda
www.agltd.com

Nominees:ForAgainstAbstain
1a.Francisco L. Borges
1b.G. Lawrence Buhl
1c.Dominic J. Frederico
1d.Bonnie L. Howard
1e.Thomas W. Jones
1f.Patrick W. Kenny
1g.Alan J. Kreczko
1h.Simon W. Leathes
1i.Michael T. O’Kane
1j.Yukiko Omura
The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following proposals:ForAgainstAbstain
2.To approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers.
3.To approve our employee stock purchase plan as amended through the third amendment.
Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by authorized officer.

 Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX]Date

ForAgainstAbstain
4.To appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) as the Company’s independent auditor for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019, and to authorize the Board of Directors, acting through its Audit Committee, to set the fees of the independent auditor.
5A.To authorize the Company to vote for directors of the Company’s subsidiary, Assured Guaranty Re Ltd. (“AG Re”):
Nominees:ForAgainstAbstain
5aa.Howard W. Albert
5ab.Robert A. Bailenson
5ac.Russell B. Brewer II
5ad.Gary Burnet
5ae.Ling Chow
5af.Stephen Donnarumma
5ag.Dominic J. Frederico
5ah.Walter A. Scott
5B.To authorize the Company to appoint PwC as AG Re’s independent auditor for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019.
NOTE: Such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof.

Signature (Joint Owners)  Date


Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual General Meeting:

The Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com.

— — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

E58764-P17604

PROXY

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE DIRECTORS

OF ASSURED GUARANTY LTD.

The undersigned hereby appoints Dominic J. Frederico and Ling Chow, and each of them, with power to act without the other and with power of substitution, as proxies andattorneys-in-fact
and hereby authorizes them to represent and vote, as provided on the other side, all the common shares of Assured Guaranty Ltd. which the undersigned is entitled to vote and, in their discretion, to vote upon such other business as may properly come before the Annual General Meeting of shareholders of the Company to be held May 8, 2019 or any adjournment thereof, with all powers which the undersigned would possess if present at the meeting.

THIS PROXY CARD, WHEN PROPERLY EXECUTED, WILL BE VOTED IN THE MANNER DIRECTED HEREIN BY THE UNDERSIGNED. IF NO DIRECTION IS MADE BUT THE CARD IS SIGNED, THIS PROXY CARD WILL BE VOTED FOR THE ELECTION OF ALL NOMINEES UNDER PROPOSALS 1 AND 5A, FOR PROPOSALS 2, 3, 4 AND 5B AND IN THE DISCRETION OF THE PROXIES WITH RESPECT TO SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY PROPERLY COME BEFORE THE MEETING.

Continued and to be signed on reverse side

assuredguarantyltd_prxyxp6a.jpg



assuredguarantyltd_prxyxp6.jpg