Loans generally are funded at a fixed interest rate with a loan term of up to five years. Loans acquired between related mortgage funds are generally done so within the first six months of origination and are purchased at par value, which approximates fair value. See Note 3 (Manager and Other Related Parties) for a description of loans transferred by executed assignments between the related mortgage funds.

The company’s loans are primarily secured by real estate in coastal California metropolitan areas. The portfolio segments are first and second trust deeds mortgages and the key credit quality indicator is the LTV. First mortgages are predominant, but second lien deeds of trust are not infrequent nor insignificant. First-mortgage loans comprised 88% of the portfolio at June 30, 2025 (88% at December 31, 2024).

Secured loan transactions for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 are summarized in the following table ($ in thousands).


	2025									2025
	Three Months Ended June 30, 2025									Six Months Ended June 30, 2025
	Total			First Trust Deeds			Second Trust Deeds			Total			First Trust Deeds			Second Trust Deeds
Principal, beginning of period	$	48,652		$	43,060		$	5,592		$	53,475		$	46,945		$	6,530
Loans funded		11,021			10,050			971			15,002			14,031			971
Principal collected(1)		(14,488	)		(13,331	)		(1,157	)		(23,292	)		(21,197	)		(2,095	)
Loans transferred from held for sale		—			—			—			1,065			1,065			—
Loans sold to non-affiliate		—			—			—			(1,065	)		(1,065	)		—
Principal, end of period	$	45,185		$	39,779		$	5,406		$	45,185		$	39,779		$	5,406

(1)

Includes principal collected and held in trust at June 30, 2025 of $0, offset by principal collected and held in trust at December 31, 2024 of approximately $1 thousand which was disbursed to the company in January 2025.

During the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, the company renewed one and three maturing (or matured) loans with aggregate principal of approximately $241 thousand and $4.0 million, respectively, which are not included in the activity shown in the table above. The one loan extended in the three months ended June 30, 2025 was extended for 36 months and the three loans extended in the six months ended June 30, 2025 have an average extension period of approximately 17 months and each was current and deemed well collateralized (i.e., the current LTV for the collateral was within lending guidelines as discussed in Note 2 to these financial statements). Interest rates charged to borrowers may be adjusted in conjunction with the loan extensions to reflect current market conditions (in the six months ended June 30, 2025, one extension included a rate increase).

In the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, one loan with principal of approximately $1.1 million was sold to an unaffiliated third party. The company recognized a gain of approximately $8 thousand, net of a commission.

As of June 30, 2025, there were no commitments to lend outstanding and no construction or rehabilitation loans outstanding.

Secured loans had the characteristics presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	June 30,			December 31,
	2025			2024
Number of secured loans		29			36
First trust deeds		23			27
Second trust deeds		6			9

Secured loans – principal	$	45,185		$	53,475
First trust deeds	$	39,779		$	46,945
Second trust deeds	$	5,406		$	6,530

Secured loans – lowest interest rate (fixed)		7.8	%		7.8	%
Secured loans – highest interest rate (fixed)		12.5	%		12.5	%

Average secured loan – principal	$	1,558		$	1,485
Average principal as percent of total principal		3.4	%		2.8	%
Average principal as percent of members’ and manager’s capital, net		2.5	%		2.3	%
Average principal as percent of total assets		2.6	%		2.2	%

Largest secured loan – principal	$	7,400		$	8,106
Largest principal as percent of total principal		16.4	%		15.2	%
Largest principal as percent of members’ and manager’s capital, net		11.7	%		12.4	%
Largest principal as percent of total assets		12.2	%		12.1	%

Smallest secured loan – principal	$	200		$	185
Smallest principal as percent of total principal		0.4	%		0.3	%
Smallest principal as percent of members’ and manager’s capital, net		0.3	%		0.3	%
Smallest principal as percent of total assets		0.3	%		0.3	%

Number of California counties where security is located		12			13
Largest percentage of principal in one California county		23.4	%		19.7	%

Number of secured loans with prepaid interest		—			1
Prepaid interest	$	—		$	11

As of June 30, 2025, 21 loans with an aggregate principal of approximately $39.3 million provide for monthly payments of interest only, with the principal due at maturity, and 8 loans with an aggregate principal of approximately $5.9 million (representing 13% of the aggregate principal of the company’s loan portfolio) provide for monthly payments of principal and interest, typically calculated on a 30-year amortization, with the remaining principal due at maturity.

As of June 30, 2025, RMI IX’s largest loan with principal of $7.4 million, has an LTV at origination (OLTV) of 59%, and is in first lien position. The loan is secured by an industrial property located in San Diego County, with an interest rate of 12.50% and is scheduled to mature on March 1, 2026.

As of June 30, 2025, there were 6 loans in second lien position. The aggregate principal of these loans is approximately $5.4 million and the weighted average OLTV is 54%. There were three loans in second lien position which were delinquent as of June 30, 2025. One of the three delinquent loans has principal outstanding of $760 thousand (OLTV 70%), is secured by an industrial property located in Santa Clara County, bears interest at a rate of 8.88%, and matured on August 1, 2023. The borrower included this note/debt in a bankruptcy estate in December 2023 (notification received in March 2024) and continues to make monthly payments. Another one of the three delinquent loans has principal outstanding of $1.9 million (OLTV 47%), is secured by an industrial property located in Riverside County, bears interest at a rate of 11.25% and matured on June 1, 2025. The last one of the three delinquent loans has principal outstanding of $600 thousand (OLTV 71%), is secured by a multi-family property located in Los Angeles County, bears interest at a rate of 8.99% and matured on April 1, 2025.

At funding, secured loans had the lien positions presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	June 30, 2025								December 31, 2024
	Loans		Principal			Percent			Loans		Principal			Percent
First trust deeds		23	$	39,779			88	%		27	$	46,945			88	%
Second trust deeds		6		5,406			12			9		6,530			12
Total principal, secured loans		29		45,185			100	%		36		53,475			100	%
Liens due other lenders at loan closing				15,812								19,442
Total debt			$	60,997							$	72,917
Appraised property value at loan closing			$	117,347							$	132,521
OLTV (weighted average)				55.6	%							58.9	%

At the time a loan is funded, the LTV is such that the protective equity in the collateral securing the loan is sufficient to preclude any expected credit losses – principal unless there is a forward period adverse event that is uninsured and/or there are market conditions so adverse (and are other-than-temporary) that the protective equity is reduced to an amount not sufficient to recover the principal owed.

Secured loans, principal by OLTV and lien position at June 30, 2025 are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	Secured loans, principal
LTV(2)	First trust deeds		Percent			Count		Second trust deeds		Percent			Count		Total principal		Percent
<40%	$	2,355		5.2	%		6	$	550		1.2	%		1	$	2,905		6.4	%
40-49%		6,450		14.3			2		1,900		4.2			1		8,350		18.5
50-59%		16,866		37.3			6		971		2.2			1		17,837		39.5
60-69%		6,721		14.9			5		—		0.0			0		6,721		14.9
Subtotal <70%		32,392		71.7			19		3,421		7.6			3		35,813		79.3

70-79%		7,387		16.3			4		1,985		4.4			3		9,372		20.7
Subtotal <80%		39,779		88.0			23		5,406		12.0			6		45,185		100.0

≥80%(3)		—		0.0			—		—		0.0			—		—		0.0

Total	$	39,779		88.0	%		23	$	5,406		12.0	%		6	$	45,185		100.0	%

(2)

LTV classifications in the table above are based on principal, advances and interest unpaid at June 30, 2025.

Secured loans summarized by property type are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	June 30, 2025							December 31, 2024
	Loans		Principal		Percent			Loans		Principal		Percent
Single family(3)		9	$	8,722		19	%		15	$	15,081		28	%
Commercial
Office		2		5,540		12			3		5,725		11
Retail		3		3,606		8			3		2,512		5
Industrial		5		11,661		26			5		10,463		20
Commercial – Other		5		12,710		29			5		14,972		27
Commercial Total		15		33,517		75			16		33,672		63
Multi-family		5		2,946		6			5		4,722		9
Total principal, secured loans		29	$	45,185		100	%		36	$	53,475		100	%

The distribution of secured loans within California by counties – and for one loan secured by a property in Illinois – is presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	June 30, 2025					December 31, 2024
	Principal		Percent			Principal		Percent
San Francisco Bay Area(4)
San Francisco	$	2,398		5.3	%	$	8,377		15.7	%
San Mateo		5,455		12.1			8,305		15.5
Santa Clara		6,542		14.5			10,074		18.8
Alameda		6,372		14.1			2,021		3.8
Contra Costa		319		0.7			1,220		2.3
Napa		634		1.4			636		1.2
Solano		—		0.0			185		0.3
Marin		400		0.9			400		0.8
		22,120		49.0			31,218		58.4
Other Northern California
Butte		—		0.0			1,203		2.2
Santa Cruz		1,410		3.1			—		0.0
		1,410		3.1			1,203		2.2
Northern California total		23,530		52.1			32,421		60.6

Southern California Coastal
Los Angeles		10,570		23.4			10,533		19.7
Orange		800		1.8			1,675		3.1
San Diego		8,144		18.0			6,946		13.0
		19,514		43.2			19,154		35.8
Other Southern California
Riverside		1,900		4.2			1,900		3.6
		1,900		4.2			1,900		3.6
Southern California total		21,414		47.4			21,054		39.4
California total		44,944		99.5			53,475		100.0
Illinois		241		0.5			—		0.0
Total principal, secured loans	$	45,185		100.0	%	$	53,475		100.0	%

(4)

Includes Silicon Valley

Secured loans scheduled to mature in periods as of and after June 30, 2025, are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	First Trust Deeds				Second Trust Deeds				Total
	Loans		Principal		Loans		Principal		Loans		Principal		Percent
2025		3	$	2,760		2	$	1,175		5	$	3,935		9	%
2026		7		14,509		1		971		8		15,480		33
2027		4		8,236		—		—		4		8,236		18
2028		1		241		—		—		1		241		1
2029		2		5,244		—		—		2		5,244		12
Thereafter		4		3,215		—		—		4		3,215		7
Total scheduled maturities		21		34,205		3		2,146		24		36,351		80
Matured(5)		2		5,574		3		3,260		5		8,834		20
Total principal, secured loans		23	$	39,779		6	$	5,406		29	$	45,185		100	%

Scheduled maturities are presented based on the most recent in-effect agreement with the borrower, including forbearance agreements, if any. As a result, matured loans at June 30, 2025, for the scheduled maturities table above may differ from the same captions in the tables of delinquencies and payment in arrears presented below that do not consider forbearance agreements. For matured loans, the company may continue to accept payments while pursuing collection of principal or while negotiating an extension of the maturity date. Loans are written without a prepayment penalty causing an uncertainty/a lack of predictability as to the expected duration versus the scheduled maturity.

One loan included above with principal of $5.8 million ($9.1 million at funding) at June 30, 2025, has payment terms that provide for principal reductions upon the sale of the office condominiums. Sales commenced in 2024 and continue in 2025. The maturity table above does not reflect these periodic principal payments, which will result in an acceleration of the payoff of the loan as or if they continue to occur.

Secured loans principal summarized by payment-delinquency status are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	June 30, 2025				December 31, 2024
	Loans		Principal		Loans		Principal
Current		21	$	33,563		30	$	42,309
Past Due
30-89 days		2		2,742		3		4,476
90-179 days		1		600		—		—
180 or more days		5		8,280		3		6,690
Total past due		8		11,622		6		11,166
Total principal, secured loans		29	$	45,185		36	$	53,475

At June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, there was one loan in first lien position with a forbearance agreement in effect with principal of $990 thousand, included in the table above as 180 or more days delinquent. Five loans past due at June 30, 2025, were in first lien position and had principal payments in arrears of approximately $5.6 million. Three loans past due at June 30, 2025, were in second lien position and had principal payments in arrears of approximately $3.2 million.

Secured loans with payments in arrears (eight loans), principal by OLTV and lien position at June 30, 2025 are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	Secured loans with payments in arrears, principal
LTV(7)	First trust deeds		Percent(8)			Second trust deeds		Percent(8)			Total principal		Percent(8)
<40%	$	—		0.0	%	$	—		0.0	%	$	—		0.0	%
40-49%		—		0.0			1,900		4.2			1,900		4.2
50-59%		842		1.9			—		0.0			842		1.9
60-69%		990		2.2			—		0.0			990		2.2
Subtotal <70%		1,832		4.1			1,900		4.2			3,732		8.3

70-79%		6,530		14.5			1,360	3				7,890		17.5
Subtotal <80%		8,362		18.6			3,260		7.2			11,622		25.8

≥80%		—		0.0			—		0.0			—		0.0

Total	$	8,362		18.6	%	$	3,260		7.2	%	$	11,622		25.8	%

(7)

LTV classifications in the table above are based on principal, advances and interest unpaid at June 30, 2025.

(8)

Percent of total principal, secured loans ($45.2 million) at June 30, 2025.

Payments in arrears for secured loans at June 30, 2025 are presented in the following tables ($ in thousands).


	Loans				Principal				Interest(9)
At June 30, 2025	Past maturity		Monthly payments		Past maturity		Monthly payments		Past maturity		Monthly payments		Total payments in arrears
Past due
30-89 days (1-3 payments)		1		1	$	1,900	$	—	$	—	$	7	$	1,907
90-179 days (4-6 payments)		1		—		600		—		—		—		600
180 or more days (more than 6 payments)		3		2		6,334		5		534		102		6,975
Total past due		5		3	$	8,834	$	5	$	534	$	109	$	9,482

(9)

June 2025 interest is due July 1, 2025 and is not included in the payments in arrears at June 30, 2025.

One loan included above was delinquent on monthly payments, with a principal of approximately $842 thousand having been paid off in full.

Matured loans, principal by OLTV and lien position at June 30, 2025 are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	Secured loans past maturity, principal
LTV(10)	First trust deeds		Percent(11)			Second trust deeds		Percent(11)			Total principal		Percent(11)
<40%	$	—		0.0	%	$	—		0.0	%	$	—		0.0	%
40-49%		—		0.0			1,900		4.2			1,900		4.2
50-59%		—		0.0			—		0.0			—		0.0
60-69%		—		0.0			—		0.0			—		0.0
Subtotal <70%		—		0.0			1,900		4.2			1,900		4.2

70-79%		5,574		12.3			1,360		3.0			6,934		15.3
Subtotal <80%		5,574		12.3			3,260		7.2			8,834		19.5

≥80%		—		0.0			—		0.0			—		0.0

Total	$	5,574		12.3	%	$	3,260		7.2	%	$	8,834		19.5	%

(10)

LTV classifications in the table above are based on principal, advances and interest unpaid at June 30, 2025.

(11)

Percent of total principal of secured loans (totaling $45.2 million) at June 30, 2025.

Activity in the allowance for credit losses for the six months ended June 30 are presented in the following table ($ in thousands).


	2025						2024
	Principal and Advances		Interest		Total		Principal and Advances		Interest		Total
Balance, January 1	$	150	$	60	$	210	$	60	$	60	$	120
Provision for loan losses		110		—		110		—		—		—
Charge-offs		—		—		—		—		—		—
Balance, June 30	$	260	$	60	$	320	$	60	$	60	$	120

Each secured loan is reviewed quarterly for its delinquency, LTV adjusted for the most recent valuation of the underlying collateral, remaining term to maturity, borrower’s payment history and other factors.


								First Trust Deeds							Second Trust Deeds
	Loans		Principal		OLTV			Loans		Principal		OLTV			Loans		Principal		OLTV
June 30, 2025		29	$	45,185		55.6	%		23	$	39,779		55.9	%		6	$	5,406		53.9	%

December 31,
2025		19		32,416		53.7			18		31,445		53.8			1		971		52.5
2026		11		16,936		50.3			11		16,936		50.3			—		—		0.0
2027		7		8,700		50.7			7		8,700		50.7			—		—		0.0
2028		6		8,459		52.0			6		8,459		52.0			—		—		0.0
2029		4		3,215		44.3			4		3,215		44.3			—		—		0.0
2030		2		595		23.5			2		595		23.5			—		—		0.0
2033		1		200		33.9			1		200		33.9			—		—		0.0
2035		—		—		0.0			—		—		0.0			—		—		0.0

The above analysis does not include any forward period extensions, renewals or modifications that the company may undertake at its sole and unconditional discretion, which could extend the contractual maturities.

The following methods and assumptions are used when estimating fair value (Level 3 inputs).

The fair value of the company’s secured loan balances is deemed to approximate the amortized cost, net of the allowance for credit losses.

The following methods and assumptions are used to determine the fair value of the collateral securing a loan.

Single family — Management’s preferred method for determining the fair market value of its single-family residential assets is the sale comparison method. Management primarily obtains sales comparables (comps) via its subscription to the RealQuest service, but also uses free online services such as Zillow.com and other available resources to supplement this data. Sale comps are reviewed and adjusted for similarity to the subject property, examining features such as proximity to subject, number of bedrooms and bathrooms, square footage, sale date, condition and year built.

If applicable sale comps are not available or deemed unreliable, management will seek additional information in the form of brokers’ opinions of value or appraisals.

Multi-family residential — Management’s preferred method for determining the aggregate retail value of its multifamily units is the sale comparison method. Sale comps are typically provided in appraisals, or by realtors who specialize in multi-family residential properties. Sales comps are reviewed for similarity to the subject property, examining features such as proximity to subject, rental income, number of units, composition of units by the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, square footage, condition, amenities and year built.

Management’s secondary method for valuing its multifamily assets as income-producing rental operations is the direct capitalization method. In order to determine market cap rates for properties of the same class and location as the subject, management refers to published data from reliable third-party sources such as the CBRE Cap Rate Survey. Management applies the appropriate cap rate to the subject’s most recent available annual net operating income to determine the property’s value as an income-producing project. When adequate sale comps are not available or reliable net operating income information is not available or the project is under development or is under-performing to market, management will seek additional information and analysis to determine the cost to improve and the intrinsic fair value and/or management will seek additional information in the form of brokers’ opinion of value or appraisals.

Commercial — Management’s preferred method for determining the fair value of its commercial buildings is the sale comparison method. Sale comps are typically provided in appraisals, or by realtors who specialize in commercial properties. Sale comps are reviewed for similarity to the subject property, examining features such as proximity to subject, rental income, number of units, composition of units, common areas, and year built.

Management’s secondary method for valuing its commercial buildings is the direct capitalization method. In order to determine market cap rates for properties of the same class and location as the subject, management refers to reputable third-party sources such as the CBRE Cap Rate Survey. Management then applies the appropriate cap rate to the subject’s most recent available annual net operating income to determine the property’s value as an income-producing commercial rental project.

When adequate sale comps are not available or reliable net operating income information is not available or the project is under development or is under-performing to market, management will seek additional information and analysis to determine the cost to improve and the intrinsic fair value and/or management will seek additional information in the form of brokers’ opinion of value or appraisals.

Commercial land — Commercial land has many variations/uses, thus requiring management to employ a variety of methods depending upon the unique characteristics of the subject land, including a determination of its highest and best use. Management may rely on information in the form of a sale comparison analysis (where adequate sale comps are available), brokers’ opinion of value, or appraisal.