Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Our estimated fair value measurements are intended to reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability based on the best information reasonably available. Assumptions include the risks inherent in a particular valuation technique (such as a pricing model) and the risks inherent in the inputs to the model. Changes in economic conditions and capital market conditions, including but not limited to, changes in credit spreads and benchmark interest rates, market volatility and declines in the value of underlying collateral, could cause actual results to differ materially from our estimated fair value measurements. Fair value is defined as the current amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In the event that our investments or derivative contracts were sold, commuted, terminated or settled with a counterparty, or transferred in a forced liquidation, the amounts received or paid may be materially different from those determined in accordance with the accounting standard regarding fair value measurements. Differences may arise between our recorded fair value and the settlement or termination value with a counterparty based upon consideration of information that may not be available to another market participant. Those differences, which may be material, are recorded as transaction realized gains/(losses) in our condensed consolidated statements of operations in the period in which the transaction occurs. There were no significant changes to our fair value methodologies during the nine months ended September 30, 2012.

When determining the fair value of our liabilities, we are required to incorporate into the fair value of those liabilities an adjustment that reflects our own non-performance risk. Our CDS spread is an observable quantitative measure of our non-performance risk and is used by typical market participants to determine the likelihood of our default. As our CDS spread tightens or widens, it has the effect of increasing or decreasing, respectively, the fair value of our liabilities.

The following table quantifies the impact of our non-performance risk on our derivative assets and liabilities (in aggregate by type, excluding assumed financial guaranty derivatives) and VIE liabilities presented in our condensed consolidated balance sheets. Radian Group’s five-year CDS spread is presented as an illustration of the market’s view of our non-performance risk; the CDS spread actually used in the valuation of specific fair value liabilities is typically based on the remaining term of the instrument.



(In basis points)	September 30, 2012	December 31, 2011	September 30, 2011	December 31, 2010
Radian Group’s five-year CDS spread	1,089	2,732	2,238	465



(In millions)	Fair Value Liability before Consideration of Radian Non-Performance Risk September 30, 2012		Impact of Radian Non-Performance Risk September 30, 2012		Fair Value (Asset) Liability Recorded September 30, 2012
Product
Corporate CDOs	$	136.4	$	137.5	$	(1.1	)
Non-Corporate CDO-related (1)	803.3		633.0		170.3
NIMS-related (2)	13.0		5.3		7.7
Total	$	952.7	$	775.8	$	176.9



(In millions)	Fair Value Liability before Consideration of Radian Non-Performance Risk December 31, 2011		Impact of Radian Non-Performance Risk December 31, 2011		Fair Value Liability Recorded December 31, 2011
Product
Corporate CDOs	$	463.1	$	458.0	$	5.1
Non-Corporate CDO-related (1)	1,520.2		1,405.3		114.9
NIMS-related (2)	17.4		9.6		7.8
Total	$	2,000.7	$	1,872.9	$	127.8

________________


(1)	Includes the net fair value liability recorded within derivative assets and derivative liabilities, and the net fair value liabilities included in our consolidated VIEs.


(2)	Includes NIMS VIE debt and NIMS derivative assets.

Radian Group’s five-year CDS spread at September 30, 2012, implies a market view that there is a 54.3% probability that Radian Group will default in the next five years, as compared to an 83.5% implied probability of default at December 31, 2011. The cumulative impact attributable to the market’s perception of our non-performance risk decreased by $1.1 billion during the first nine months of 2012, as presented in the table above. This decrease was primarily the result of the tightening of Radian Group’s CDS spreads during this period.

We established a fair value hierarchy by prioritizing the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level I measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level III measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under this standard are described below:


Level I	— Unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;


Level II	— Prices or valuations based on observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities; and


Level III	— Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.

The level of market activity used to determine the fair value hierarchy is based on the availability of observable inputs market participants would use to price an asset or a liability, including market value price observations. We provide a qualitative description of the valuation technique(s) and inputs used for Level II recurring and non-recurring fair value measurements in our audited annual financial statements as of December 31, 2011. For a complete understanding of those valuation techniques and inputs used as of September 30, 2012, these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto included in our 2011 Form 10-K.

For markets in which inputs are not observable or limited, we use significant judgment and assumptions that a typical market participant would use to evaluate the market price of an asset or liability. Given the level of judgment necessary, another market participant may derive a materially different estimate of fair value. These assets and liabilities are classified in Level III of our fair value hierarchy. For fair value measurements categorized within Level III of the fair value hierarchy, we use certain significant unobservable inputs in estimating fair value. Those inputs primarily relate to the probability of default, the expected loss upon default, and our own non-performance risk as it relates to our liabilities. The following table summarizes the significant unobservable inputs used in our recurring Level III fair value measurements as of September 30, 2012:



(In millions)	Fair Value September 30, 2012 (1)		Valuation Technique	Unobservable Input	Range/ Weighted Average
Level III Investments:
State and municipal obligations	$	18.8	Discounted cash flow	Discount rate				8.5	%
				Expected loss				19.0	%
Other investments	75.6		Discounted cash flow	Discount rate				2.6	%
Level III Derivative Assets:
Corporate CDOs	9.7		Base correlation model	Radian correlation to corporate index				85.0	%
				Average credit spread	<0.1%		-	2.9	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
CDOs of CMBS	1.6		Discounted cash flow	Radian correlation to CMBS transaction index	72.0	%	-	85.0	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
TruPs CDOs	1.6		Discounted cash flow	Principal recovery				60.0	%
				Principal recovery (stressed)				55.0	%
				Probability of conditional liquidity payment	0.8	%	-	32.0	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
NIMS derivative assets	1.8		Discounted cash flow	NIMS credit spread				43.6	%
				Own credit spread				10.9	%
Level III Derivative Liabilities:
Corporate CDOs	8.6		Base correlation model	Radian correlation to corporate index				85.0	%
				Average credit spread	<0.1%		-	2.9	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
CDOs of CMBS	81.5		Discounted cash flow	Radian correlation to CMBS transaction index	72.0	%	-	85.0	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
TruPs CDOs and TruPs-related VIE liabilities	12.9		Discounted cash flow	Principal recovery				60.0	%
				Principal recovery (stressed)				55.0	%
				Probability of conditional liquidity payment	0.8	%	-	32.0	%
				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
Other non-corporate CDOs and derivative transactions	164.2		Risk-based model	Average life (in years)	<1		-	20
Other non-corporate CDOs and derivative transactions				Own credit spread (2)	8.5	%	-	11.5	%
Level III VIE Liabilities:
NIMS VIE	9.5		Discounted cash flow	NIMS credit spread				43.6	%
				Own credit spread (2)	11.0	%	-	11.3	%

____________


(1)	Excludes certain assets and liabilities for which we do not develop quantitative unobservable inputs. The fair value estimates for these assets and liabilities are developed using third-party pricing information, generally without adjustment.


(2)	Represents the range of our CDS spread that a typical market participant might use in the valuation analysis based on the remaining term of the investment.

The significant unobservable inputs in the fair value measurement of our investment securities noted above include an interest rate used to discount the projected cash flows and an expected loss assumption. This expected loss assumption generally represents the principal shortfall we expect on our security as a result of the obligor’s failure to pay. In addition, our other invested assets include a guaranteed investment contract for which the Counterparty’s non-performance risk is considered in the discount rate. Significant increases (decreases) in either the discount rates or loss estimates in isolation would result in a lower (higher) fair value measurement. Changes in these assumptions are independent and may move in either similar or opposite directions.

The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of our derivative assets, derivative liabilities and VIE debt relate primarily to projected losses. In addition, when determining the fair value of our liabilities, we are required to incorporate into the fair value of those liabilities an adjustment that reflects our own non-performance risk, if applicable, as discussed below.

For our corporate CDOs, we estimate the correlation of the default probability between the corporate entities and Radian—the higher the correlation percentage, the higher the probability that both the corporate entities and Radian will default together. In addition, a widening of the average credit spread increases the expected loss for our transactions, and therefore, increases the related liability.

For our CDOs of CMBS transactions, we use the CMBX index that most directly correlates to our transaction with respect to vintage and credit rating, and then we estimate losses by applying a correlation factor. Because we own the senior tranche, an increase in this factor generally increases the expected loss for our transactions, and therefore increases our related liability.

For our TruPs CDOs, the performance of each underlying reference obligation is measured by a standard and distressed pricing, which indicates the expected principal recovery. An increase in the standard and stressed principal recovery decreases the loss severity of the transaction, and therefore, in isolation, decreases the related liability. We also assign these transactions a probability that we will be required to pay a conditional liquidity claim, which generally would increase our related liability. For our TruPs-related VIE liabilities, the fair value is estimated using similar inputs as in the estimated fair value of our TruPs CDOs, except there is no non-performance risk adjustment as the derivative liability is limited to the segregated assets already held by the VIE.

For our other non-corporate CDOs, we utilize the internal credit rating, average remaining life, and current par outstanding for each transaction to project both expected losses and an internally developed risk-based capital amount. An increase in the average remaining life typically increases the expected loss of the transactions, and therefore, increases our related liability. An upgrade (downgrade) in the internal credit rating typically decreases (increases) the expected loss of the transactions, and therefore, decreases (increases) our related liability.

For all fair value measurements where we project our non-performance risk, including VIE debt, we utilize a market observed credit spread for Radian, which we believe is the best available indicator of the market’s perception of our non-performance risk. In isolation, a widening (tightening) of this credit spread typically decreases (increases) our related liability. The assumption used to project our own non-performance risk is independent from the other unobservable inputs used in our fair value measurements. The net impact on our reported assets and liabilities from increases or decreases in our own credit spread and from increases or decreases in other unobservable inputs depends upon the magnitude and direction of the changes in each input; such changes may result in offsetting effects to our recorded fair value measurements, or they may result in directionally similar impacts, which may be material.

A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. At September 30, 2012, our total Level III assets were approximately 4.0% of total assets measured at fair value and total Level III liabilities accounted for 100% of total liabilities measured at fair value.

Available for sale securities, trading securities, VIE debt, derivative instruments, and certain other assets are recorded at fair value. All derivative instruments and contracts are recognized in our condensed consolidated balance sheets as either derivative assets or derivative liabilities. All changes in fair value of trading securities, VIE debt, derivative instruments, and certain other assets are included in our condensed consolidated statements of operations. All changes in the fair value of available for sale securities are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

The following is a list of those assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value by hierarchy level as of September 30, 2012:



(In millions)	Level I		Level II		Level III		Total
Assets and Liabilities at Fair Value
Investment Portfolio:
U.S. government and agency securities	$	286.8	$	780.7	$	—	$	1,067.5
State and municipal obligations	—		622.2		18.8		641.0
Money market instruments	491.7		—		—		491.7
Corporate bonds and notes	—		821.1		—		821.1
Residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”)	—		931.8		—		931.8
CMBS	—		190.3		—		190.3
Other ABS	—		220.1		—		220.1
Foreign government securities	—		115.6		—		115.6
Hybrid securities	—		359.8		—		359.8
Equity securities (1)	100.0		160.9		1.6		262.5
Other investments (2)	—		2.4		76.7		79.1
Total Investments at Fair Value (3)	878.5		4,204.9		97.1		5,180.5
Derivative Assets	—		—		14.8		14.8
Other Assets (4)	—		—		100.6		100.6
Total Assets at Fair Value	$	878.5	$	4,204.9	$	212.5	$	5,295.9
Derivative Liabilities	$	—	$	—	$	267.3	$	267.3
VIE debt (5)	—		—		109.7		109.7
Total Liabilities at Fair Value	$	—	$	—	$	377.0	$	377.0

______________________


(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds included within Level I and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries included within Levels II and III.


(2)	Comprising TruPs ($0.8 million) and short-term CDs ($1.6 million) included within Level II, and lottery annuities ($1.1 million) and a guaranteed investment contract held by a consolidated VIE ($75.6 million) within Level III.


(3)	Does not include fixed-maturities held to maturity ($1.2 million) and certain other invested assets ($57.4 million), primarily invested in limited partnerships, accounted for as cost-method investments and not measured at fair value.


(4)	Primarily comprising manufactured housing loan collateral related to two consolidated financial guaranty VIEs.


(5)	Comprising consolidated debt related to NIMS VIEs ($9.5 million) and amounts related to financial guaranty VIEs ($100.2 million).

The following is a list of those assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value by hierarchy level as of December 31, 2011:



(In millions)	Level I		Level II		Level III		Total
Assets and Liabilities at Fair Value
Investment Portfolio:
U.S. government and agency securities	$	386.9	$	723.6	$	—	$	1,110.5
State and municipal obligations	—		985.0		62.5		1,047.5
Money market instruments	723.2		—		—		723.2
Corporate bonds and notes	—		700.5		—		700.5
RMBS	—		884.7		45.5		930.2
CMBS	—		190.4		35.4		225.8
CDO	—		—		5.5		5.5
Other ABS	—		97.0		2.9		99.9
Foreign government securities	—		102.9		—		102.9
Hybrid securities	—		341.5		4.8		346.3
Equity securities (1)	116.0		152.4		0.8		269.2
Other investments (2)	—		151.6		6.8		158.4
Total Investments at Fair Value (3)	1,226.1		4,329.6		164.2		5,719.9
Derivative Assets	—		0.2		17.0		17.2
Other Assets (4)	—		—		104.0		104.0
Total Assets at Fair Value	$	1,226.1	$	4,329.8	$	285.2	$	5,841.1
Derivative Liabilities	$	—	$	—	$	126.0	$	126.0
VIE debt (5)	—		—		228.2		228.2
Total Liabilities at Fair Value	$	—	$	—	$	354.2	$	354.2

______________________


(1)	Comprising broadly diversified domestic equity mutual funds included within Level I and various preferred and common stocks invested across numerous companies and industries included within Levels II and III.


(2)	Comprising short-term commercial paper within Committed Preferred Custodial Trust Securities (“CPS”) trusts ($150.0 million) and short-term CDs ($1.6 million) included within Level II, and lottery annuities ($1.6 million) and TruPs held by consolidated VIEs ($5.2 million) included within Level III.


(3)	Does not include fixed-maturities held to maturity ($2.6 million) and other invested assets ($61.0 million), primarily invested in limited partnerships, accounted for as cost-method investments and not measured at fair value.


(4)	Comprising manufactured housing loan collateral related to two consolidated financial guaranty VIEs.


(5)	Comprising consolidated debt related to NIMS VIEs ($9.4 million) and amounts related to financial guaranty VIEs ($218.8 million).

The following is a rollforward of Level III assets and liabilities measured at fair value for the quarter ended September 30, 2012:



(In millions)	Beginning Balance at July 1, 2012		Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Earnings (1)			Purchases		Sales		Issuances		Settlements			Transfers Into (Out of) Level III (2)			Ending Balance at September 30, 2012
Investments:
State and municipal obligations	$	19.6	$	0.4		$	—	$	—	$	—	$	1.2		$	—		$	18.8
Other ABS	4.8		—			—		—		—		0.5			(4.3		)	—
Equity securities	2.0		(0.4		)	—		0.1		—		—			0.1			1.6
Other investments	76.5		(0.6		)	0.9		0.1		—		—			—			76.7
Total Level III Investments	102.9		(0.6		)	0.9		0.2		—		1.7			(4.2		)	97.1
NIMS derivative assets	1.7		—			0.1		—		—		—			—			1.8
Other assets	100.7		6.1			—		—		—		6.2			—			100.6
Total Level III Assets	$	205.3	$	5.5		$	1.0	$	0.2	$	—	$	7.9		$	(4.2	)	$	199.5
Derivative liabilities, net	$	207.5	$	(41.0	)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	(5.8	)	$	—		$	254.3
VIE debt	107.8		(6.8		)	—		—		—		4.9			—			109.7
Total Level III Liabilities, net	$	315.3	$	(47.8	)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	(0.9	)	$	—		$	364.0

_______________________


(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2012, as follows: $(1.1) million for investments, $3.5 million for other assets, $(48.0) million for derivative liabilities, and $(5.8) million for VIE debt.


(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period. During the period, pricing from a third-party pricing source became available for one bond, accounting for a majority of the transfer out of Level III and into Level II.

The following is a rollforward of Level III assets and liabilities measured at fair value for the nine months ended September 30, 2012:



(In millions)	Beginning Balance at January 1, 2012		Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Earnings (1)			Purchases		Sales		Issuances		Settlements			Transfers Into (Out of) Level III (2)			Ending Balance at September 30, 2012
Investments:
State and municipal obligations	$	62.5	$	(3.6	)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	12.3		$	(27.8	)	$	18.8
RMBS	45.5		6.1			—		—		—		51.6			—			—
CMBS	35.4		(11.4		)	—		—		—		24.0			—			—
CDO	5.5		0.8			—		—		—		6.3			—			—
Other ABS	2.9		0.8			5.2		—		—		4.6			(4.3		)	—
Hybrid securities	4.8		0.1			0.1		4.9		—		—			(0.1		)	—
Equity securities	0.8		0.1			—		0.1		—		—			0.8			1.6
Other investments	6.8		0.6			75.9		0.6		—		6.0			—			76.7
Total Level III Investments	164.2		(6.5		)	81.2		5.6		—		104.8			(31.4		)	97.1
NIMS derivative assets	1.6		—			0.2		—		—		—			—			1.8
Other assets	104.0		15.4			—		—		—		18.8			—			100.6
Total Level III Assets	$	269.8	$	8.9		$	81.4	$	5.6	$	—	$	123.6		$	(31.4	)	$	199.5
Derivative liabilities, net	$	110.6	$	(146.9	)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	3.2		$	—		$	254.3
VIE debt	228.2		(111.2		)	—		—		—		229.7		(3)	—			109.7
Total Level III Liabilities, net	$	338.8	$	(258.1	)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	232.9		$	—		$	364.0

_______________________


(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2012, as follows: $(0.1) million for investments, $7.3 million for other assets, $(188.3) million for derivative liabilities, and $(12.9) million for VIE debt.


(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period. During the period, pricing from a third-party pricing source became available for two bonds, accounting for a majority of the transfers out of Level III and into Level II.


(3)	Primarily represents the settlement of our CDO of ABS.

The following is a rollforward of Level III assets and liabilities measured at fair value for the quarter ended September 30, 2011:



(In millions)	Balance at July 1, 2011		Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Earnings (1)			Purchases		Sales			Issuances		Settlements			Transfers Into (Out of) Level III (2)			Ending Balance at September 30, 2011
Investments:
State and municipal obligations	$	23.6	$	0.2		$	39.1	$	—		$	—	$	0.3		$	—		$	62.6
RMBS	61.4		(12.0		)	—		(1.6		)	—		2.2			—			48.8
CMBS	29.4		8.6			—		—			—		—			—			38.0
CDO	3.9		1.4			—		0.1			—		(0.2		)	—			5.4
Other ABS	2.0		0.7			—		—			—		—			—			2.7
Equity securities	5.6		(0.9		)	0.5		0.4			—		—			(2.0		)	2.8
Other investments	5.8		0.6			—		0.1			—		0.1			—			6.2
Total Level III Investments	131.7		(1.4		)	39.6		(1.0		)	—		2.4			(2.0		)	166.5
NIMS derivative assets	4.7		0.1			0.1		—			—		—			—			4.9
Other assets	113.7		(10.3		)	—		—			—		6.6			—			96.8
Total Level III Assets	$	250.1	$	(11.6	)	$	39.7	$	(1.0	)	$	—	$	9.0		$	(2.0	)	$	268.2
Derivative liabilities, net	$	291.5	$	125.8		$	—	$	—		$	—	$	(8.1	)	$	—		$	173.8
VIE debt	393.7		92.2			—		—			—		28.1			—			273.4
Total Level III Liabilities, net	$	685.2	$	218.0		$	—	$	—		$	—	$	20.0		$	—		$	447.2

_______________________


(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the quarter ended September 30, 2011, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2011, as follows: $(1.5) million for investments, $0.2 million for NIMS derivative assets, $(13.3) million for other assets, $117.1 million for derivative liabilities, and $92.3 million for VIE debt.


(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

The following is a rollforward of Level III assets and liabilities measured at fair value for the nine months ended September 30, 2011:



(In millions)	Beginning Balance at January 1, 2011		Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Earnings (1)			Purchases		Sales		Issuances		Settlements			Transfers Into (Out of) Level III (2)			Ending Balance at September 30, 2011
Investments:
State and municipal obligations	$	23.2	$	0.6		$	39.1	$	—	$	—	$	0.3		$	—		$	62.6
RMBS	52.5		(0.4		)	—		—		—		3.3			—			48.8
CMBS	23.0		15.0			—		—		—		—			—			38.0
CDO	2.4		2.7			—		—		—		(0.3		)	—			5.4
Other ABS	3.3		(0.6		)	—		—		—		—			—			2.7
Hybrid securities	—		(0.1		)	0.7		—		—		—			(0.6		)	—
Equity securities	2.9		(1.2		)	3.7		0.6		—		—			(2.0		)	2.8
Other investments	4.6		2.6			—		0.6		—		0.4			—			6.2
Total Level III Investments	111.9		18.6			43.5		1.2		—		3.7			(2.6		)	166.5
NIMS derivative assets	11.7		(1.9		)	0.2		—		—		4.7			(0.4		)	4.9
Other assets	109.7		8.0			—		—		—		20.9			—			96.8
Total Level III Assets	$	233.3	$	24.7		$	43.7	$	1.2	$	—	$	29.3		$	(3.0	)	$	268.2
Derivative liabilities, net	$	709.1	$	558.8		$	—	$	—	$	—	$	(23.5	)	$	—		$	173.8
VIE debt	520.1		121.1			—		—		—		125.6			—			273.4
Total Level III Liabilities, net	$	1,229.2	$	679.9		$	—	$	—	$	—	$	102.1		$	—		$	447.2

_______________________


(1)	Includes unrealized gains (losses) for the nine months ended September 30, 2011, relating to assets and liabilities still held at September 30, 2011, as follows: $17.1 million for investments, $(1.8) million for NIMS derivative assets, $(1.3) million for other assets, $515.9 million for derivative liabilities, and $144.6 million for VIE debt.


(2)	Transfers are recognized at the end of the period as the availability of market observed inputs change from period to period.

There were no investment transfers between Level I and Level II during the first nine months of 2012 or 2011.

Other Fair Value Disclosure

The carrying value and estimated fair value of other selected assets and liabilities not carried at fair value on our condensed consolidated balance sheets were as follows as of the dates indicated:



	September 30, 2012				December 31, 2011
(In millions)	Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value
Assets:
Fixed-maturities held to maturity (1)	$	1.2	$	1.3	$	2.6	$	2.7
Other invested assets (1)	57.4		65.2		61.0		62.8
Liabilities:
Long-term debt (1)	659.1		613.5		818.6		471.3
Non-derivative financial guaranty liabilities (2)	250.2		312.1		342.3		425.7

______________________


(1)	These estimated fair values would be classified in Level II of the fair value hierarchy.


(2)	These estimated fair values would be classified in Level III of the fair value hierarchy.