Open Lending (LPRO) 424B4Prospectus supplement with pricing info

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4)

Registration No. 333-254839 and 333-254948

OPEN LENDING CORPORATION

9,000,000 Shares of Common Stock

The selling stockholders identified in this prospectus are offering 9,000,000 shares of common stock. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of common stock by the selling stockholders pursuant to this prospectus. However, we will pay the expenses, other than underwriting discounts and commissions and certain expenses incurred by the selling stockholders in disposing of the securities, associated with the sale of securities pursuant to this prospectus.

Subject to the completion of this offering, we have agreed to purchase $20.0 million of common stock from the selling stockholders at the price at which the shares of common stock are sold to the public in this offering, less the underwriting discount and commissions, as described in the section of this prospectus entitled “Prospectus Summary—Recent Developments—Share Repurchase.”

Our common stock is listed on The Nasdaq Stock Market under the symbols “LPRO”. On March 31, 2021, the closing price of our common stock was $35.42 per share.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as that term is defined under the federal securities laws and, as such, are subject to certain reduced public company reporting requirements.

Investing in our securities involves risks that are described in the “Risk Factors” section beginning on page 11 of this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of the securities to be issued under this prospectus or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The selling stockholders have granted the underwriters an option to purchase up to an additional 1,350,000 shares from the selling stockholders at the price to the public less the underwriting discount, at any time within 30 days of the date of this prospectus.

The underwriters expect to delivery the shares against payment in New York, New York on April 6, 2021.

The date of this prospectus is April 1, 2021.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FREQUENTLY USED TERMS

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this prospectus to “Open Lending”, the “Company”, “us”, “we”, “our” and any related terms prior to the closing of the Business Combination are intended to mean Open Lending, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, and its consolidated subsidiaries, and after the closing of the Business Combination, Open Lending Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.

In addition, in this document:

“Active automotive lender” means an automotive lender that issued at least one insured loan in the previous quarter.

“Blocker” means BRP Hold 11, Inc., a Delaware corporation.

“Blocker Holder” means Bregal Sagemount I, L.P., Blocker’s sole stockholder.

“Business Combination Agreement” means the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of January 5, 2020, as may be amended, by and among Nebula, Open Lending, Blocker, Blocker Holder, Open Lending Corporation, Merger Sub LLC, Merger Sub Corp, and Shareholder Representative Services LLC.

“Code” means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

“common stock” means the common stock of Open Lending Corporation, par value $0.01 per share.

“DGCL” means the Delaware General Corporation Law.

“Exchange Act” means the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

“Founder Shares” means the shares of Nebula Class B Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share.

“Founder Support Agreement” means the Founder Support Agreement, dated as of January 5, 2020, by and among Nebula, Open Lending Corporation, Open Lending, and the holders of the Founder Shares, a copy of which is included as Exhibit 10.1 to Nebula’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on January 6, 2020.

“GAAP” means United States generally accepted accounting principles.

“Initial Stockholders” means the holders of shares of Founder Shares.

“Investor Rights Agreement” means the Investor Rights Agreement entered into at the closing of the Business Combination by and among Nebula, Open Lending Corporation, Open Lending, certain persons and entities holding Open Lending Membership Units, and certain persons and entities holding Founder Shares, which is included as Exhibit 10.8 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on June 16, 2020.

“Investor Support Agreement” means the Investor Support Agreement, dated as of January 5, 2020, by and among Nebula and certain Nebula stockholders, a form of which is included as Exhibit 10.2 to Nebula’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC on January 6, 2020.

“IPO” means Nebula’s initial public offering of units, consummated on January 12, 2018.

“Merger Sub Corp” means NBLA Merger Sub Corp., a Delaware corporation.

“Merger Sub LLC” means NBLA Merger Sub LLC, a Texas Limited Liability company.

i

“NASDAQ” means The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC.

“Nebula” refers to Nebula Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware corporation.

“Nebula Class A Common Stock” means Nebula’s common stock, par value $0.0001 per share.

“Nebula Common Stock” means the Nebula Class A Common Stock and the Founder Shares, collectively.

“OEM Captives” means captive finance companies of Original Equipment Manufacturers.

“Open Lending Membership Units” means all issued and outstanding interests of Open Lending.

“Open Lending Unitholders” means the holders of all issued and outstanding interests of Open Lending.

“SEC” means the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“Second Merger” means the merger of Merger Sub LLC with and into Open Lending, with Open Lending surviving the Second Merger as a direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of ParentCo.

“Securities Act” means the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

“Sponsor” means Nebula Holdings, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

“Tax Receivable Agreement” means the Tax Receivable Agreement that was entered into at the closing of the Business Combination, by and among Nebula, ParentCo, Blocker, Blocker Holder, Open Lending, and each beneficiary, the form of which is included as Exhibit F to the Business Combination Agreement.

ii

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

We, the selling stockholders and the underwriters have not authorized anyone to provide any information or to make any representations other than those contained in this prospectus or any free writing prospectus we have prepared. We, the selling stockholders and the underwriters take no responsibility for, and can provide no assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give you. This prospectus is an offer to sell only the securities offered hereby and only under circumstances and in jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. No dealer, salesperson or other person is authorized to give any information or to represent anything not contained in this prospectus or any related free writing prospectus. This prospectus is not an offer to sell securities, and it is not soliciting an offer to buy securities, in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front of those documents only, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or any sale of a security. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since those dates.

For investors outside the United States: None of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters have done anything that would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. Persons outside the United States who come into possession of this prospectus must inform themselves about, and observe any restrictions relating to, the offering of the Class A ordinary shares and the distribution of this prospectus outside the United States. See “Underwriting.”

This prospectus contains summaries of certain provisions contained in some of the documents described herein, but reference is made to the actual documents for complete information. All of the summaries are qualified in their entirety by the actual documents. Copies of some of the documents referred to herein have been filed, will be filed or will be incorporated by reference as exhibits to the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part, and you may obtain copies of those documents as described below under “Where You Can Find More Information.”

On June 10, 2020, Nebula Acquisition Corporation, our predecessor company, consummated the previously announced business combination (the “Business Combination”) with Open Lending, LLC., a Texas limited liability company pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of January 5, 2020 (as amended) and the parties named therein. Immediately upon the completion of the Business Combination and the other transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement, Open Lending became a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of Nebula Parent Corp., a Delaware corporation, changed its name to Open Lending Corporation (“Open Lending” or the “Company”).

iii

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

RISK FACTORS

In addition to the other information contained in this prospectus, including the matters addressed under the heading “Forward-Looking Statements,” you should carefully consider the following risk factors in deciding whether to invest in our securities. The occurrence of one or more of the events or circumstances described in these risk factors, alone or in combination with other events or circumstances, may have a material adverse effect on the our business, reputation, revenue, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects, in which event the market price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment. Unless otherwise indicated, reference in this section and elsewhere in this prospectus to our business being adversely affected, negatively impacted or harmed will include an adverse effect on, or a negative impact or harm to, the business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations, revenue and our future prospects.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our results of operations and continued growth depend on our ability to retain existing, and attract new, automotive lenders.

A substantial majority of Open Lending’s total revenue is generated from the transaction fees that it receives from its automotive lenders and the profit share that it receives from its insurance company partners in connection with loans made by automotive lenders to the owners or purchasers of used and new automobiles (the “Consumers”) using the LPP. Approximately 5% of the average loan balance on each loan originated is collected by Open Lending as revenue in transaction fees, profit-sharing with insurance companies and administrative fees for claims administration services provided to the insurance companies. If automotive lenders cease to use LPP to make loans, Open Lending will fail to generate future revenues. To attract and retain automotive lenders, Open Lending markets LPP to automotive lenders on the basis of a number of factors, including loan analytics, risk-based pricing, risk modeling and automated decision-technology, as well as integration, customer service, brand and reputation. Automotive lenders are able to leverage the geographic diversity of the loans they can originate through LPP with the simplicity of Open Lending’s five-second all-inclusive loan offer generation. Automotive lenders, however, have alternative sources for internal loan generation, and they could elect to originate loans through those alternatives rather than through LPP. There is significant competition for existing automotive lenders. If Open Lending fails to retain any automotive lenders, and does not enroll new automotive lenders of similar size and profitability, it will have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business and future growth. There has been some turnover in automotive lenders, as well as varying activation rates and volatility in usage of the Open Lending platform by automotive lenders, and this may continue or even increase in the future. Agreements with automotive lenders are cancellable on thirty days’ notice and do not require any minimum monthly level of application submissions. If a significant number of existing automotive lenders were to use other competing platforms, thereby reducing their use of LPP, it would have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business and results of operations.

A large percentage of revenue for Open Lending is concentrated with Open Lending’s top ten automotive lenders, and the loss of one or more significant automotive lenders could have a negative impact on operating results.

Open Lending’s top ten automotive lenders (including certain groups of affiliated automotive lenders) accounted for 30% of the total program fee revenue over the past three years. Open Lending expects to have significant concentration in Open Lending’s largest automotive lender relationships for the foreseeable future. In the event that one or more of Open Lending’s significant automotive lenders, or groups of automotive lenders terminate their relationships with Open Lending, the number of loans originated through LPP would decline, which would materially adversely affect Open Lending’s business and, in turn, Open Lending’s revenue.

In 2021, Open Lending anticipates that its business will experience significant concentration as OEM Captives fully ramp and deploy LPP nationally across all of their new and used vehicle channels. The size and loan

11

volume of OEM Captives is materially higher than any of Open Lending’s automotive lenders, which Open Lending believes will result in a high concentration of revenue being derived from a limited number of OEM Captives. As a result, if Open Lending were to lose an OEM Captive as one of its customers, or if an existing or anticipated OEM Captive customer were to delay its adoption or deployment of the LPP, this may have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s future revenues.

Open Lending’s results depend, to a significant extent, on the active and effective adoption of the LPP by automotive lenders.

Open Lending’s success depends on the active and effective adoption of the LPP by automotive lenders in originating loans to near-prime and non-prime borrowers. Open Lending relies on automotive lenders to utilize LPP within their loan origination systems. Although automotive lenders generally are under no obligation to use LPP in generating their loans, the integrated loan and insurance offering by LPP encourages the use of LPP by automotive lenders. Any adverse accounting determinations concerning loans generated by automotive lenders using the LPP could negatively affect further adoption of the LPP. The failure by automotive lenders to effectively adopt LPP would have a material adverse effect on the rate at which they can lend to near-prime and non-prime borrowers and in turn, would have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business, revenues and financial condition.

Open Lending has partnered with two major insurance carriers that underwrite and insure the loans generated using the LPP.

Open Lending relies on AmTrust North America, Inc. and Continental Casualty Company to insure the loans generated by the automotive lenders using LPP. Open Lending has entered into separate producer and claims service agreements with each of these carriers. The producer and claims service agreements with both insurance carriers generally contain customary termination provisions that allow them to terminate the agreement upon written notice after the occurrence of certain events including, among other things, breach of the producer agreement; changes in regulatory requirements making the agreement unenforceable; or for convenience. If either of these insurance carriers were to terminate their agreements with Open Lending and Open Lending is unable to replace the commitments of the terminating insurance carriers, it would have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business, operations and financial condition.

Open Lending’s financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected by the impact of the global outbreak of the coronavirus.

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus and resulting COVID-19 disease (“COVID-19”) a global pandemic. This contagious disease outbreak, which has continued to spread, and the related adverse public health developments, including orders to shelter-in-place, travel restrictions, and mandated business closures, have adversely affected workforces, organizations, customers, economies, and financial markets globally. In light of the uncertain and rapidly evolving situation relating to the spread of COVID-19, we have taken precautionary measures, including imposing travel restrictions for our employees, mandating a global work from home policy, and shifting customer events to virtual-only experiences. Although we continue to monitor the situation and may adjust our current policies as more information and public health guidance become available, precautionary measures that have been adopted could negatively affect our customer success efforts, customer retention, sales and marketing efforts, delay and lengthen our sales cycles, affect our revenue growth rate, or create operational or other challenges, any of which could harm our business and results of operations.

Additionally, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has caused and is likely to continue to cause substantial changes in consumer behavior and has caused restrictions on business and individual activities, which have led to and are likely to continue to lead to reduced economic activity. Extraordinary actions taken by international, federal, state, and local public health and governmental authorities to contain and combat the outbreak and spread of COVID-19 in regions throughout the world, including travel bans, quarantines, “stay-at-home” orders, and

12

similar mandates for many individuals and businesses to substantially restrict daily activities could continue to have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s financial condition and results of operations.

The economic slowdown attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a global decrease in vehicle sales in markets around the world. Any sustained decline in vehicle sales would have a substantial adverse effect on Open Lending’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow. Moreover, as a result of the restrictions described above and consumers’ reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic in general, showroom traffic at car dealers has dropped significantly and many dealers have temporarily ceased operations, thereby reducing the demand for Open Lending’s products and leading dealers to purchase fewer vehicles. In the event there are extended closures of businesses, furloughs or the suspension of employees from businesses or other developments that reduce the earnings of workers, these developments may negatively impact the ability of consumers to pay their automotive loans, which may lead to higher loan defaults and increased losses for Open Lending’s insurance company partners. Increased losses would result in lower profit share earnings on Open Lending’s existing insured loan portfolio.

The extent and duration of the economic slowdown attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain at this time. A continued significant economic slowdown could have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations. If these conditions persist for an extended term, it could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s future revenue and net income.

Open Lending has experienced rapid growth, which may be difficult to sustain and which may place significant demands on its operational, administrative and financial resources.

Open Lending’s revenue growth has caused significant demands on its operational, marketing, compliance and accounting infrastructure, and has resulted in increased expenses, which Open Lending expects to continue as it grows. In addition, Open Lending is required to continuously develop and adapt its systems and infrastructure in response to the increasing sophistication of the consumer finance market and regulatory developments relating to existing and projected business activities and those of automotive lenders. Open Lending’s future growth will depend, among other things, on its ability to maintain an operating platform and management system sufficient to address growth and will require Open Lending to incur significant additional expenses and to commit additional senior management and operational resources.

As a result of Open Lending’s growth, we face significant challenges in:

13

Open Lending may not be able to manage expanding operations effectively, and any failure to do so could adversely affect the ability to generate revenue and control expenses.

If Open Lending experiences negative publicity, it may lose the confidence of automotive lenders and insurance carriers who use or partner with the LPP and Open Lending’s business may suffer.

Reputational risk, or the risk to negative publicity or public opinion, is inherent to Open Lending’s business. Recently, consumer financial services companies have experienced increased reputational harm as consumers and regulators take issue with certain of their practices and judgments, including, for example, fair lending, credit reporting accuracy, lending to members of the military, state licensing (for lenders, servicers and money transmitters) and debt collection. Given that Open Lending’s primary clients are automotive lenders in the customer financial services space, any reputational risk associated with clients is in turn attributable to Open Lending. Maintaining a positive reputation is critical to Open Lending’s ability to attract and retain existing and new automotive lenders, insurance carriers, investors and employees. Negative public opinion can arise from many sources, including actual or alleged misconduct, errors or improper business practices by employees, automotive lenders, insurance carriers, automobile dealers, outsourced service providers or other counterparties; litigation or regulatory actions; failure by Open Lending, automotive lenders, or automobile dealers to meet minimum standards of service and quality; inadequate protection of consumer information; failure of automotive lenders to adhere to the terms of their LPP agreements or other contractual arrangements or standards; failure of insurance carriers and Open Lending’s subsidiary, Insurance Administrative Services LLC, to satisfactorily administer claims; compliance failures; and media coverage, whether accurate or not. Negative public opinion can diminish the value of the Open Lending brand and adversely affect Open Lending’s ability to attract and retain automotive lenders and insurance carriers as a result of which Open Lending’s results of operations may be materially harmed and it could be exposed to litigation and regulatory action.

Privacy concerns or security breaches relating to the LPP could result in economic loss, damage Open Lending’s reputation, deter users from using Open Lending products, and expose Open Lending to legal penalties and liability.

Through the use of LPP, Open Lending gathers and stores personally identifiable information on Consumers such as social security numbers, names and addresses. A cybersecurity breach where this information was stolen or made public would result in negative publicity and additional costs to mitigate the damage to customers. While Open Lending has taken reasonable steps to protect such data, techniques used to gain unauthorized access to data and systems, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems, are constantly evolving, and Open Lending may be unable to anticipate such techniques or implement adequate preventative measures to avoid unauthorized access or other adverse impacts to such data or Open Lending systems.

The LPP is vulnerable to software bugs, computer viruses, internet worms, break-ins, phishing attacks, attempts to overload servers with denial-of-service, or other attacks or similar disruptions, any of which could lead to system interruptions, delays, or shutdowns, causing loss of critical data or the unauthorized access of data. Computer malware, viruses, and computer hacking and phishing attacks have become more prevalent in Open Lending’s industry. Functions that facilitate interactivity with other internet platforms could increase the scope of access of hackers to user accounts. Though it is difficult to determine what, if any, harm may directly result from any specific interruption or attack, any failure to maintain performance, reliability, security and availability of Open Lending products to the satisfaction of Open Lending’s clients and their consumers may harm Open Lending’s reputation and Open Lending’s ability to retain existing clients. Although Open Lending has in place systems and processes that are designed to protect data, prevent data loss, disable undesirable accounts and activities and prevent or detect security breaches, Open Lending cannot assure you that such measures will provide absolute security. If an actual or perceived breach of security occurs to Open Lending’s systems or a third party’s systems, Open Lending could also be required to expend significant resources to mitigate the breach of security and to address matters related to any such breach, including notifying users or regulators.

14

Changes in market interest rates could have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

The fixed interest rates charged on the loans that automotive lenders originate are calculated based upon market benchmarks at the time of origination. Increases in the market benchmark would result in increases in the interest rates on new loans. Increased interest rates may adversely impact the spending levels of Consumers and their ability and willingness to borrow money. Higher interest rates often lead to higher rates charged to the Consumer, which could negatively impact the ability of automotive lenders to generate volume and in turn, Open Lending’s ability to generate revenues on loans originated using the LPP. Higher interest rates may also increase the payment obligations of Consumers, which may reduce the ability of Consumers to remain current on their obligations to automotive lenders and, therefore, lead to increased delinquencies, defaults, Consumer bankruptcies and charge-offs, and decreasing recoveries, all of which could have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

The loss of the services of Open Lending’s senior management could adversely affect Open Lending’s business.

The experience of Open Lending’s senior management is a valuable asset to Open Lending. Open Lending’s management team has significant experience in the consumer loan business, is responsible for many of Open Lending’s core competencies and would be difficult to replace. Competition for senior executives in consumer lending industry is intense, and Open Lending may not be able to attract and retain qualified personnel to replace or succeed members of Open Lending’s senior management team or other key personnel. Failure to retain talented senior leadership could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending’s projections are subject to significant risks, assumptions, estimates and uncertainties. As a result, Open Lending’s projected revenues, market share, expenses and profitability may differ materially from our expectations.

Open Lending operates in a rapidly changing and competitive industry and Open Lending’s projections will be subject to the risks and assumptions made by management with respect to its industry. Operating results are difficult to forecast because they generally depend on a number of factors, including the competition Open Lending faces, its ability to attract and retain automotive lenders, the active and effective adoption of the LPP by automotive lenders in originating loans to near-prime and non-prime borrowers, Open Lending’s profit share assumptions and general industry trends. Additionally, as described herein, Open Lending’s business may be affected by reductions in consumer spending from time to time as a result of a number of factors which may be difficult to predict. This may result in decreased revenue levels, and Open Lending may be unable to adopt measures in a timely manner to compensate for any unexpected shortfall in income. This inability could cause Open Lending’s operating results in a given quarter to be higher or lower than expected. If actual results differ from Open Lending’s estimates, analysts may negatively react and our stock price could be materially impacted.

Open Lending’s vendor relationships subject Open Lending to a variety of risks, and the failure of third parties to comply with legal or regulatory requirements or to provide various services that are important to Open Lending’s operations could have an adverse effect on its business.

Open Lending has significant vendors that, among other things, provide Open Lending with financial, technology, insurance and other services to support its loan protection services, including access to credit reports and information. Under various legal theories and contractual requirements, companies may be held responsible for the actions of their subcontractors. Accordingly, Open Lending could be adversely impacted to the extent that Open Lending’s vendors fail to comply with the legal requirements applicable to the particular products or services being offered.

In some cases, third-party vendors, including resellers and aggregators, are the sole source, or one of a limited number of sources, of the services they provide to Open Lending. Certain of Open Lending’s vendor agreements

15

are terminable on little or no notice, and if current vendors were to stop providing services to Open Lending on acceptable terms, Open Lending may be unable to procure alternatives from other vendors in a timely and efficient manner and on acceptable terms (or at all). For example, Open Lending currently utilizes a single vendor to provide all consumer credit reports that insurance carriers use for insurance underwriting. If this vendor were to stop providing consumer credit report services to Open Lending on acceptable terms, Open Lending would need to procure alternative consumer credit reporting services from another third-party provider in a timely and efficient manner and on acceptable terms. If any third-party vendor fails to provide the services Open Lending requires, fails to meet contractual requirements (including compliance with applicable laws and regulations), fails to maintain adequate data privacy and electronic security systems, or suffers a cyber-attack or other security breach, Open Lending could be subject to regulatory enforcement actions and suffer economic and reputational harm that could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business. Further, Open Lending may incur significant costs to resolve any such disruptions in service, which could adversely affect Open Lending’s business.

Litigation, regulatory actions and compliance issues could subject Open Lending to significant fines, penalties, judgments, remediation costs and/or requirements resulting in increased expenses.

Open Lending’s business is subject to increased risks of litigation and regulatory actions as a result of a number of factors and from various sources, including as a result of the highly regulated nature of the financial services industry, insurance carriers and the focus of state and federal enforcement agencies on the financial services industry and insurance carriers.

From time to time, Open Lending is also involved in, or the subject of, reviews, requests for information, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by state and federal governmental agencies, including insurance regulators and the Department of Insurance of many states, regarding Open Lending’s business activities and Open Lending’s qualifications to conduct its business in certain jurisdictions, which could subject Open Lending to significant fines, penalties, obligations to change its business practices and other requirements resulting in increased expenses and diminished earnings. Open Lending’s involvement in any such matter could also cause significant harm to its reputation and divert management attention from the operation of its business, even if the matters are ultimately determined in Open Lending’s favor. Moreover, any settlement, or any consent order or adverse judgment in connection with any formal or informal proceeding or investigation by a government agency, may prompt litigation or additional investigations or proceedings as other litigants or other government agencies begin independent reviews of the same activities.

In addition, a number of participants in the consumer finance industry have been the subject of putative class action lawsuits; state attorney general actions and other state regulatory actions; federal regulatory enforcement actions, including actions relating to alleged unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices; violations of state licensing and lending laws, including state usury laws; actions alleging discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender or other prohibited bases; and allegations of noncompliance with various state and federal laws and regulations relating to originating and servicing consumer finance loans. The current regulatory environment, increased regulatory compliance efforts and enhanced regulatory enforcement have resulted in significant operational and compliance costs and may prevent Open Lending from providing certain products and services. There is no assurance that these regulatory matters or other factors will not, in the future, affect how Open Lending conducts its business and, in turn, have a material adverse effect on its business. In particular, legal proceedings brought under state consumer protection statutes or under several of the various federal consumer financial services statutes may result in a separate fine for each violation of the statute, which, particularly in the case of class action lawsuits, could result in damages substantially in excess of the amounts Open Lending earned from the underlying activities. Similar risks exist for insurance producing and claims administration services, which are highly regulated.

In addition, from time to time, through Open Lending’s operational and compliance controls, Open Lending identifies compliance issues that require it to make operational changes and, depending on the nature of the issue,

16

result in financial remediation to impacted customers. These self-identified issues and voluntary remediation payments could be significant, depending on the issue and the number of customers impacted, and also could generate litigation or regulatory investigations that subject Open Lending to additional risk.

Fraudulent activity could negatively impact the Open Lending business and could cause automotive lenders to be less willing to originate loans or insurance carriers to be less willing to underwrite policies as part of the Lenders Protection Program.

Fraud is prevalent in the financial services industry and is likely to increase as perpetrators become more sophisticated. Open Lending is subject to the risk of fraudulent activity with respect to the underwriting policies of insurance carriers, automotive lenders, their customers and third parties handling customer information. Open Lending’s resources, technologies and fraud prevention tools may be insufficient to accurately detect and prevent fraud. The level of Open Lending’s fraud charge-offs could increase and results of operations could be materially adversely affected if fraudulent activity were to significantly increase. High profile fraudulent activity also could negatively impact the Open Lending brand and reputation, which could negatively impact the use of Open Lending’s services and products. In addition, significant increases in fraudulent activity could lead to regulatory intervention, which could increase Open Lending’s costs and also negatively impact its business.

Cyber-attacks and other security breaches could have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

In the normal course of Open Lending’s business, Open Lending collects, processes and retains sensitive and confidential information regarding automotive lenders, insurance carriers and Consumers. Open Lending also has arrangements in place with certain third-party service providers that require Open Lending to share Consumer information. Although Open Lending devotes significant resources and management focus to ensuring the integrity of its systems through information security and business continuity programs, the Open Lending facilities and systems, and those of automotive lenders, insurance carriers and third-party service providers, are vulnerable to external or internal security breaches, acts of vandalism, computer viruses, misplaced or lost data, programming or human errors, and other similar events. Open Lending, automotive lenders, insurance carriers and third-party service providers have experienced all of these events in the past and expect to continue to experience them in the future. Open Lending also faces security threats from malicious third parties that could obtain unauthorized access to Open Lending systems and networks, which threats it anticipates will continue to grow in scope and complexity over time. These events could interrupt the Open Lending business or operations, result in significant legal and financial exposure, supervisory liability, damage to its reputation and a loss of confidence in the security of Open Lending’s systems, products and services. Although the impact to date from these events has not had a material adverse effect on Open Lending, no assurance is given that this will be the case in the future.

Information security risks in the financial services industry have increased recently, in part because of new technologies, the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies (including mobile devices) to conduct financial and other business transactions and the increased sophistication and activities of organized criminals, perpetrators of fraud, hackers, terrorists and others. In addition to cyber-attacks and other security breaches involving the theft of sensitive and confidential information, hackers recently have engaged in attacks that are designed to disrupt key business services, such as consumer-facing websites. Open Lending and automotive lenders may not be able to anticipate or implement effective preventive measures against all security breaches of these types, especially because the techniques used change frequently and because attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources. Open Lending employs detection and response mechanisms designed to contain and mitigate security incidents. Nonetheless, early detection efforts may be thwarted by sophisticated attacks and malware designed to avoid detection. Open Lending also may fail to detect the existence of a security breach related to the information of automotive lenders, insurance carriers and Consumers that Open Lending retains as part of its business and may be unable to prevent unauthorized access to that information.

Open Lending also faces risks related to cyber-attacks and other security breaches that typically involve the transmission of sensitive information regarding borrowers through various third parties, including automotive

17

lenders, insurance carriers and data processors. Some of these parties have in the past been the target of security breaches and cyber-attacks. Because Open Lending does not control these third parties or oversee the security of their systems, future security breaches or cyber-attacks affecting any of these third parties could impact Open Lending through no fault of its own, and in some cases Open Lending may have exposure and suffer losses for breaches or attacks relating to them. While Open Lending regularly conducts security assessments of significant third-party service providers, no assurance is given that Open Lending’s third-party information security protocols are sufficient to withstand a cyber-attack or other security breach.

The access by unauthorized persons to, or the improper disclosure by Open Lending of, confidential information regarding LPP customers or Open Lending’s proprietary information, software, methodologies and business secrets could interrupt the Open Lending business or operations, result in significant legal and financial exposure, supervisory liability, damage to its reputation or a loss of confidence in the security of Open Lending’s systems, products and services, all of which could have a material adverse impact on Open Lending’s business. In addition, there recently have been a number of well-publicized attacks or breaches affecting companies in the financial services industry that have heightened concern by consumers, which could also intensify regulatory focus, cause users to lose trust in the security of the industry in general and result in reduced use of Open Lending services and increased costs, all of which could also have a material adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

Disruptions in the operation of Open Lending’s computer systems and third-party data centers could have an adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

Open Lending’s ability to deliver products and services to automotive lenders, service loans made by automotive lenders and otherwise operate Open Lending’s business and comply with applicable laws depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of the Open Lending computer systems and third-party data centers, as well as those of automotive lenders and third-party service providers.

These computer systems and third-party data centers may encounter service interruptions at any time due to system or software failure, natural disasters, severe weather conditions, health pandemics, terrorist attacks, cyber-attacks or other events. Any such catastrophes could have a negative effect on the Open Lending business and technology infrastructure (including its computer network systems), on automotive lenders and insurance carriers and on Consumers. Catastrophic events also could prevent or make it more difficult for Consumers to travel to automobile dealers’ locations to shop, thereby negatively impacting Consumer spending in the affected regions (or in severe cases, nationally), and could interrupt or disable local or national communications networks, including the payment systems network, which could prevent Consumers from making purchases or payments (temporarily or over an extended period). These events also could impair the ability of third parties to provide critical services to Open Lending. All of these adverse effects of catastrophic events could result in a decrease in the use of Open Lending’s solution and payments to Open Lending, which could have a material adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

In addition, the implementation of technology changes and upgrades to maintain current and integrate new systems may cause service interruptions, transaction processing errors or system conversion delays and may cause Open Lending to fail to comply with applicable laws, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the Open Lending business. Open Lending expects that new technologies and business processes applicable to the consumer financial services industry will continue to emerge and that these new technologies and business processes may be better than those Open Lending currently uses. There is no assurance that Open Lending will be able to successfully adopt new technology as critical systems and applications become obsolete and better ones become available. A failure to maintain and/or improve current technology and business processes could cause disruptions in Open Lending’s operations or cause its solution to be less competitive, all of which could have a material adverse effect on its business.

18

If the underwriting models Open Lending uses contain errors or are otherwise ineffective, Open Lending’s reputation and relationships with automotive lenders and insurance carriers could be harmed.

Open Lending’s ability to attract automotive lenders to LPP is significantly dependent on Open Lending’s ability to effectively evaluate a Consumer’s credit profile and likelihood of default and potential loss in accordance with automotive lenders’ and insurance carriers’ underwriting policies. Open Lending’s business depends significantly on the accuracy and success of its underwriting model. To conduct this evaluation, Open Lending uses proprietary credit decisioning and scoring models. If any of the credit decisioning and scoring models Open Lending uses contains programming or other errors, is ineffective or the data provided by Consumers or third parties is incorrect or stale, or if Open Lending is unable to obtain accurate data from Consumers or third parties (such as credit reporting agencies), the Open Lending loan pricing and approval process could be negatively affected, resulting in mispriced or misclassified loans or incorrect approvals or denials of loans. This could damage Open Lending’s reputation and relationships with automotive lenders and insurance carriers, which could have a material adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

Open Lending depends on the accuracy and completeness of information about Consumers, and any misrepresented information could adversely affect Open Lending’s business.

In evaluating loan applicants, Open Lending relies on information furnished to Open Lending by or on behalf of Consumers, including credit, identification, employment and other relevant information. Some of the information regarding Consumers provided to Open Lending is used in its proprietary credit decisioning and scoring models, which Open Lending uses to determine whether an application meets the applicable underwriting criteria. Open Lending relies on the accuracy and completeness of that information.

Not all Consumer information is independently verified. As a result, Open Lending relies on the accuracy and completeness of the information provided by Consumers or indirectly by automotive lenders. If any of the information that is considered in the loan review process is inaccurate, whether intentional or not, and such inaccuracy is not detected prior to loan funding, the loan may have a greater risk of default than expected. Additionally, there is a risk that, following the date of the credit report that Open Lending obtains and reviews, a Consumer may have defaulted on, or become delinquent in the payment of, a pre-existing debt obligation, taken on additional debt, lost his or her job or other sources of income, or experienced other adverse financial events. Any significant increase in inaccuracies or resulting increases in losses would adversely affect Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending relies extensively on models in managing many aspects of Open Lending business. Any inaccuracies or errors in Open Lending’s models could have an adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

In assisting automotive lenders with the design of the products that are offered on LPP, Open Lending makes assumptions about various matters, including repayment timing and default rates, and then utilizes proprietary underwriting modeling to analyze and forecast the performance and profitability of the loans. Open Lending’s assumptions may be inaccurate and models may not be as predictive as expected for many reasons, including that they often involve matters that are inherently difficult to predict and beyond Open Lending’s control (e.g., macroeconomic conditions) and that they often involve complex interactions between a number of dependent and independent variables and factors. Any significant inaccuracies or errors in assumptions could impact the profitability of the products to automotive lenders, as well as the profitability of Open Lending’s business, and could result in Open Lending’s underestimating potential losses and overstating potential automotive lender returns.

If assumptions or estimates Open Lending uses in preparing financial statements are incorrect or are required to change, Open Lending’s reported results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Open Lending is required to make various assumptions and estimates in preparing its financial statements under GAAP, including for purposes of determining finance charge reversals, share-based compensation, asset

19

impairment, reserves related to litigation and other legal matters, and other regulatory exposures and the amounts recorded for certain contractual payments to be paid to, or received from, Open Lending’s merchants and others under contractual arrangements. In addition, significant assumptions and estimates are involved in determining certain disclosures required under GAAP, including those involving fair value measurements. If the assumptions or estimates underlying Open Lending’s financial statements are incorrect, the actual amounts realized on transactions and balances subject to those estimates will be different, which could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

The consumer lending industry is highly competitive and is likely to become more competitive, and Open Lending’s inability to compete successfully or maintain or improve Open Lending’s market share and margins could adversely affect its business.

Open Lending’s success depends on Open Lending’s ability to generate usage of LPP. The consumer lending industry is highly competitive and increasingly dynamic as emerging technologies continue to enter the marketplace. Technological advances and heightened e-commerce activities have increased consumers’ accessibility to products and services, which has intensified the desirability of offering loans to consumers through digital-based solutions. Open Lending faces competition in areas such as compliance capabilities, financing terms, promotional offerings, fees, approval rates, speed and simplicity of loan origination, ease-of-use, marketing expertise, service levels, products and services, technological capabilities and integration, customer service, brand and reputation. Open Lending’s existing and potential competitors may decide to modify their pricing and business models to compete more directly with Open Lending’s model. Any reduction in usage of LPP, or a reduction in the lifetime profitability of loans under LPP in an effort to attract or retain business, could reduce Open Lending’s revenues and earnings. If Open Lending is unable to compete effectively for customer usage, its business could be materially adversely affected.

Open Lending’s revenue is impacted, to a significant extent, by the general economy and the financial performance of automotive lenders.

Open Lending’s business, the consumer financial services industry and automotive lenders’ businesses are sensitive to macroeconomic conditions. Economic factors such as interest rates, changes in monetary and related policies, market volatility, consumer confidence and unemployment rates are among the most significant factors that impact consumer spending behavior. Weak economic conditions or a significant deterioration in economic conditions reduce the amount of disposable income consumers have, which in turn reduces consumer spending and the willingness of qualified borrowers to take out loans. Such conditions are also likely to affect the ability and willingness of borrowers to pay amounts owed to automotive lenders, each of which would have a material adverse effect on its business.

General economic conditions and the willingness of lenders to deploy capital impacts Open Lending’s performance. The generation of new loans through LPP, as well as the transaction fees and other fee income to Open Lending associated with such loans, is dependent upon sales of automobiles by dealers. Dealers’ sales may decrease or fail to increase as a result of factors outside of their control, such as the macroeconomic conditions referenced above, or business conditions affecting a particular automobile dealer, industry vertical or region. Weak economic conditions also could extend the length of dealers’ sales cycle and cause customers to delay making (or not make) purchases of automobiles. The decline of sales by dealers for any reason will generally result in lower credit sales and, therefore, lower loan volume and associated fee income for automotive lenders, and therefore, for us. This risk is particularly acute with respect to the largest automobile dealers associated with automotive lenders that account for a significant amount of Open Lending platform revenue.

In addition, if an automobile dealer or automotive lender closes some or all of its locations or becomes subject to a voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy proceeding (or if there is a perception that it may become subject to a bankruptcy proceeding), LPP borrowers may have less incentive to pay their outstanding balances to automotive lenders, which could result in higher charge-off rates than anticipated.

20

Weakening economic conditions, in particular increases in unemployment, will lead to increased defaults and insurance claim payments, resulting in higher losses for insurance carriers. Increased claim payments may affect the willingness of insurance carriers to provide default insurance. In the event insurer losses cause one of insurance carriers to cease providing insurance, it would have a material adverse effect on Open Lending operations and financial results.

Because Open Lending’s business is heavily concentrated on consumer lending in the U.S. automobile industry, Open Lending’s results are more susceptible to fluctuations in that market than the results of a more diversified company would be.

Open Lending’s business currently is concentrated on supporting consumer lending in the U.S. automobile industry. As a result, Open Lending is more susceptible to fluctuations and risks particular to U.S. consumer credit than a more diversified company would be as well as to factors that may drive the demand for automobiles, such as sales levels of new automobiles and the aging of existing inventory. Open Lending is also more susceptible to the risks of increased regulations and legal and other regulatory actions that are targeted at consumer credit, the specific consumer credit products that automotive lenders offer (including promotional financing). Open Lending’s business concentration could have an adverse effect on its business.

Open Lending is, and intends in the future to continue, expanding into relationships with new lending partners, including the OEM Captive space, and Open Lending’s failure to comply with applicable regulations, or accurately predict demand or growth, in those new industries could have an adverse effect on its business.

Open Lending recently expanded into and is penetrating the OEM Captive space. Open Lending believes that all automobile manufacturers have an OEM Captive or related party finance company relationship. One of the primary goals of an OEM Captive is to support automobile sales of the dealers, particularly with respect to new vehicle sales. Open Lending believes that the OEM Captive is generally the preferred lender of the OEM dealer network. Relative to traditional credit union and bank automotive lenders, OEM Captives represent a larger loan volume and therefore, larger revenue opportunity for Open Lending. Open Lending makes no assurance that it will achieve similar levels of success, if any, with OEM Captives as with other credit unions and regional automotive lenders, and may face unanticipated challenges in its ability to offer LPP to OEM Captives. In addition, the OEM Captive space is highly regulated and Open Lending, OEM Captives and other automotive lenders, as applicable, are subject to substantial regulatory requirements, including privacy laws. Open Lending has limited experience in managing these risks and the compliance requirements attendant to such regulatory requirements. The costs of compliance and any failure by Open Lending, OEM Captives or other automotive lenders, as applicable, to comply with such regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business. Any failure by Open Lending to grow its relationships with these new lending partners could have a materially adverse impact on its business.

Open Lending may in the future expand to new industry verticals outside of the automotive industry, and failure to comply with applicable regulations, or accurately predict demand or growth, in those new industries could have an adverse effect on the Open Lending business.

Open Lending may in the future further expand into other industry verticals. There is no assurance that Open Lending will be able to successfully develop consumer financing products and services for these new industries. Open Lending’s investment of resources to develop consumer financing products and services for the new industries it enters may either be insufficient or result in expenses that are excessive in light of loans actually originated by lenders in those industries. Additionally, Open Lending’s nearly 20 years of experience is in the automotive lending industry and therefore, industry participants in new industry verticals may not be receptive to its financing solutions and Open Lending may face competitors with more experience and resources. The borrower profile of Consumers in new verticals may not be as attractive, in terms of average FICO scores or other attributes, as in current verticals, which may lead to higher levels of delinquencies or defaults than Open

21

Lending has historically experienced. Industries change rapidly, and Open Lending makes no assurance that it will be able to accurately forecast demand (or the lack thereof) for a solution or that those industries will be receptive to Open Lending’s product offerings. Failure to predict demand or growth accurately in new industries could have a materially adverse impact on Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending’s business would suffer if it fails to attract and retain highly skilled employees.

Open Lending’s future success will depend on its ability to identify, hire, develop, motivate and retain highly qualified personnel for all areas of its organization, particularly information technology and sales. Trained and experienced personnel are in high demand and may be in short supply. Many of the companies with which Open Lending competes for experienced employees have greater resources than Open Lending and may be able to offer more attractive terms of employment. In addition, Open Lending invests significant time and expense in training employees, which increases their value to competitors that may seek to recruit them. Open Lending may not be able to attract, develop and maintain the skilled workforce necessary to operate its business, and labor expenses may increase as a result of a shortage in the supply of qualified personnel, which will negatively impact Open Lending’s business.

The New Credit Agreement that governs Open Lending’s credit facility contains various covenants that could limit its ability to engage in activities that may be in Open Lending’s best long-term interests.

Open Lending’s New Credit Agreement provides for Credit Facilities consisting of a senior secured term loan facility of up to $125.0 million along with a senior secured revolving loan facility of up to $50.0 million at any time outstanding, both of which were funded on March 19, 2021. A portion of the proceeds of the Credit Facilities were used to, among other things, refinance existing indebtedness, including the Credit Agreement. Borrowings under the New Credit Agreement bear interest at a variable rate based on the net secured leverage ratio, subject to a floor of 0.0%. The obligations of Open Lending under the New Credit Agreement are guaranteed by all of its subsidiaries and secured by substantially all of the assets of Open Lending and its subsidiaries, in each case, subject to certain customary exceptions. The Credit Facilities mature on of March 19, 2026.

The New Credit Agreement contains affirmative and negative covenants customarily applicable to senior secured credit facilities, including covenants that, among other things, will limit or restrict the ability of the Loan Parties, subject to negotiated exceptions, to incur additional indebtedness and additional liens on their assets, engage in mergers or acquisitions or dispose of assets, pay dividends or make other distributions, voluntarily prepay other indebtedness, enter into transactions with affiliated persons, make investments, and change the nature of their businesses.

The New Credit Agreement also contains customary events of default (subject to thresholds and grace periods), including payment default, covenant default, cross default to other material indebtedness, and judgment defaults.

Open Lending’s ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond its control, such as market fluctuations impacting net income. Breaches of these covenants will result in a default under the New Credit Agreement, subject to any applicable cure rights, in which case the administrative agent may accelerate the outstanding Term Loan.

If such acceleration under the New Credit Agreement occurs, Open Lending’s ability to fund its operations could be seriously harmed.

Open Lending may be unable to sufficiently protect its proprietary rights and may encounter disputes from time to time relating to its use of the intellectual property of third parties.

Open Lending relies on a combination of trademarks, service marks, copyrights, trade secrets, domain names and agreements with employees and third parties to protect its proprietary rights. Open Lending has service mark registrations in the United States. Open Lending also owns the domain name rights for Openlending.com,

22

Openlending.net, Openlending.us, Dev-openlending.com, Lendersprotection.org, Lendersprotection.us, Len-pro.org, Lend-pro.us, Lend-pro.net, Lendpro.net, Lendpro.org, Lendpro.us, Lend-pro.com, Lendersprotection.com, Sayyestomoreloans.com, Sayyestomoreloans.net, as well as other words and phrases important to the Open Lending business. Nonetheless, third parties may challenge, invalidate or circumvent Open Lending’s intellectual property, and Open Lending’s intellectual property may not be sufficient to provide it with a competitive advantage.

Despite Open Lending’s efforts to protect these rights, unauthorized third parties may attempt to duplicate or copy the proprietary aspects of its technology and processes. Open Lending’s competitors and other third parties independently may design around or develop similar technology or otherwise duplicate Open Lending’s services or products such that Open Lending could not assert its intellectual property rights against them. In addition, Open Lending’s contractual arrangements may not effectively prevent disclosure of its intellectual property and confidential and proprietary information or provide an adequate remedy in the event of an unauthorized disclosure. Measures in place may not prevent misappropriation or infringement of Open Lending’s intellectual property or proprietary information and the resulting loss of competitive advantage, and Open Lending may be required to litigate to protect its intellectual property and proprietary information from misappropriation or infringement by others, which is expensive and could cause a diversion of resources and may not be successful.

Open Lending also may encounter disputes from time to time concerning intellectual property rights of others, and it may not prevail in these disputes. Third parties may raise claims against Open Lending alleging that Open Lending, or consultants or other third parties retained or indemnified by Open Lending, infringe on their intellectual property rights. Some third-party intellectual property rights may be extremely broad, and it may not be possible for Open Lending to conduct its operations in such a way as to avoid all alleged violations of such intellectual property rights. Given the complex, rapidly changing and competitive technological and business environment in which Open Lending operates, and the potential risks and uncertainties of intellectual property-related litigation, an assertion of an infringement claim against Open Lending may cause Open Lending to spend significant amounts to defend the claim (even if Open Lending ultimately prevails), pay significant monetary damages, lose significant revenues, be prohibited from using the relevant systems, processes, technologies or other intellectual property (temporarily or permanently), cease offering certain products or services, or incur significant license, royalty or technology development expenses.

Moreover, it has become common in recent years for individuals and groups to purchase intellectual property assets for the sole purpose of making claims of infringement and attempting to extract settlements from companies such as Open Lending. Even in instances where Open Lending believes that claims and allegations of intellectual property infringement against it are without merit, defending against such claims is time consuming and expensive and could result in the diversion of time and attention of Open Lending’s management and employees. In addition, although in some cases a third party may have agreed to indemnify Open Lending for such costs, such indemnifying party may refuse or be unable to uphold its contractual obligations. In other cases, insurance may not cover potential claims of this type adequately or at all, and Open Lending may be required to pay monetary damages, which may be significant.

Open Lending’s risk management processes and procedures may not be effective.

Open Lending’s risk management processes and procedures seek to appropriately balance risk and return and mitigate risks. Open Lending has established processes and procedures intended to identify, measure, monitor and control the types of risk to which Open Lending and automotive lenders are subject, including credit risk, market risk, liquidity risk, strategic risk and operational risk. Credit risk is the risk of loss that arises when an obligor fails to meet the terms of an obligation. Market risk is the risk of loss due to changes in external market factors such as interest rates. Liquidity risk is the risk that financial conditions or overall safety and soundness are adversely affected by an inability, or perceived inability, to meet obligations and support business growth.

Strategic risk is the risk from changes in the business environment, improper implementation of decisions or inadequate responsiveness to changes in the business environment. Operational risk is the risk of loss arising

23

from inadequate or failed processes, people or systems, external events (e.g., natural disasters), compliance, reputational or legal matters and includes those risks as they relate directly to Open Lending as well as to third parties with whom Open Lending contracts or otherwise does business.

Management of Open Lending’s risks depends, in part, upon the use of analytical and forecasting models. If these models are ineffective at predicting future losses or are otherwise inadequate, Open Lending may incur unexpected losses or otherwise be adversely affected. In addition, the information Open Lending uses in managing its credit and other risks may be inaccurate or incomplete as a result of error or fraud, both of which may be difficult to detect and avoid. There also may be risks that exist, or that develop in the future, that Open Lending has not appropriately anticipated, identified or mitigated, including when processes are changed or new products and services are introduced. If Open Lending’s risk management framework does not effectively identify and control its risks, Open Lending could suffer unexpected losses or be adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on its business.

Some aspects of Open Lending’s platform include open source software, and any failure to comply with the terms of one or more of these open source licenses could negatively affect its business.

Aspects of Open Lending’s platform include software covered by open source licenses. The terms of various open source licenses have not been interpreted by United States courts, and there is a risk that such licenses could be construed in a manner that imposes unanticipated conditions or restrictions on Open Lending’s platform. If portions of Open Lending’s proprietary software are determined to be subject to an open source license, Open Lending could be required to publicly release the affected portions of its source code, re-engineer all or a portion of its technologies or otherwise be limited in the licensing of technologies, each of which could reduce or eliminate the value of Open Lending’s technologies and loan products. In addition to risks related to license requirements, usage of open source software can lead to greater risks than use of third-party commercial software because open source licensors generally do not provide warranties or controls on the origin of the software. Many of the risks associated with the use of open source software cannot be eliminated and could adversely affect the Open Lending business.

To the extent that Open Lending seeks to grow through future acquisitions, or other strategic investments or alliances, Open Lending may not be able to do so effectively.

Open Lending may in the future seek to grow its business by exploring potential acquisitions or other strategic investments or alliances. Open Lending may not be successful in identifying businesses or opportunities that meet its acquisition or expansion criteria. In addition, even if a potential acquisition target or other strategic investment is identified, Open Lending may not be successful in completing such acquisition or integrating such new business or other investment. Open Lending may face significant competition for acquisition and other strategic investment opportunities from other well-capitalized companies, many of which have greater financial resources and greater access to debt and equity capital to secure and complete acquisitions or other strategic investments, than Open Lending. As a result of such competition, Open Lending may be unable to acquire certain assets or businesses, or take advantage of other strategic investment opportunities that Open Lending deems attractive; the purchase price for a given strategic opportunity may be significantly elevated; or certain other terms or circumstances may be substantially more onerous. Any delay or failure on Open Lending’s part to identify, negotiate, finance on favorable terms, consummate and integrate any such acquisition, or other strategic investment opportunity could impede Open Lending’s growth.

There is no assurance that Open Lending will be able to manage its expanding operations, including from acquisitions, investments or alliances, effectively or that it will be able to continue to grow, and any failure to do so could adversely affect its ability to generate revenue and control its expenses. Furthermore, Open Lending may be responsible for any legacy liabilities of businesses it acquires or be subject to additional liability in connection with other strategic investments. The existence or amount of these liabilities may not be known at the time of acquisition, or other strategic investment, and may have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

24

The effect of comprehensive U.S. tax reform legislation or challenges to Open Lending’s tax positions could adversely affect its business.

Open Lending operates in multiple jurisdictions and is subject to tax laws and regulations of the United States federal, state and local governments. United States federal, state and local tax laws and regulations are complex and subject to varying interpretations. There is no assurance that Open Lending’s tax positions will not be successfully challenged by relevant tax authorities.

In addition, on December 22, 2017, President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1) (the “Tax Act”). Among a number of significant changes to the U.S. federal income tax rules, the Tax Act reduces the marginal U.S. corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, limits the deduction for net interest expense, and shifts the United States toward a more territorial tax system. While Open Lending’s analysis of the Tax Act’s impact on cash tax liability and financial condition has not identified any overall material adverse effect, Open Lending is still evaluating the effects of the Tax Act and there are a number of uncertainties and ambiguities as to the interpretation and application of many of the provisions in the Tax Act. In the absence of guidance on these issues, Open Lending will use what it believes are reasonable interpretations and assumptions in interpreting and applying the Tax Act for purposes of determining its cash tax liabilities and results of operations, which may change as it receives additional clarification and implementation guidance and as the interpretation of the Tax Act evolves over time. It is possible that the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) could issue subsequent guidance or take positions on audit that differ from the interpretations and assumptions that Open Lending previously made, which could have a material adverse effect on its cash tax liabilities, results of operations and financial condition, or an indirect effect on its business through its impact on automotive lenders, merchants and consumers. You are urged to consult your tax adviser regarding the implications of the Tax Act.

Future changes in financial accounting standards may significantly change Open Lending’s reported results of operations.

GAAP is subject to standard setting or interpretation by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”), the SEC and various bodies formed to promulgate and interpret appropriate accounting principles. A change in these principles or interpretations could have a significant effect on Open Lending’s reported financial results and could affect the reporting of transactions completed before the announcement of a change.

Additionally, Open Lending’s assumptions, estimates and judgments related to complex accounting matters could significantly affect its financial results. GAAP and related accounting pronouncements, implementation guidelines and interpretations with regard to a wide range of matters that are relevant to its business, including revenue recognition, finance charge reversals, and share-based compensation, are highly complex and involve subjective assumptions, estimates and judgments by Open Lending. Changes in these rules or their interpretation or changes in underlying assumptions, estimates or judgments by Open Lending could require Open Lending to make changes to its accounting systems that could increase its operating costs and significantly change its reported or expected financial performance.

Risks Related to Open Lending’s Regulatory Environment

Open Lending is subject to federal and state consumer protection laws.

In connection with administration of LPP, Open Lending must comply with various regulatory regimes, including those applicable to consumer credit transactions, various aspects of which are untested as applied to Open Lending’s business model. Insurance producing and claims administration services subject Open Lending to state regulation on a 50-state basis. The complex regulatory environment of the credit and insurance industries are subject to constant change and modification. While changes to statutes and promulgating new regulations may take a substantial amount of time, issuing regulatory guidance with the force of law in the form of opinions, bulletins, and notices can occur quickly. Also, consumer credit and insurance regulators often initiate inquiries

25

into market participants, which can lead to investigations and, ultimately, enforcement actions. As a result, Open Lending is subject to a constantly evolving regulatory environment that is difficult to predict, which may affect Open Lending’s business. The laws to which Open Lending directly or its services by contract are or may be subject directly or indirectly include:

While Open Lending has developed policies and procedures designed to assist in compliance with these laws and regulations, no assurance is given that its compliance policies and procedures will be effective. Failure to comply

26

with these laws and with regulatory requirements applicable to Open Lending’s business could subject it to damages, revocation of licenses, class action lawsuits, administrative enforcement actions, and civil and criminal liability, which may harm Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending’s industry is highly regulated and is undergoing regulatory transformation, which results in inherent uncertainty. Changing federal, state, and local laws, as well as changing regulatory enforcement policies and priorities, may negatively impact Open Lending’s business.

In connection with Open Lending’s administration of LPP, Open Lending is subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination under United States federal and state laws and regulations. Open Lending is required to comply with numerous federal, state, and local laws and regulations that regulate, among other things, the manner in which Open Lending administers LPP, the terms of the loans that automotive lenders originate, the products of insurance carriers, production of those products, insurance claims administration, and the fees that Open Lending may charge. Any failure to comply with any of these laws or regulations could subject Open Lending to lawsuits or governmental actions and/or damage Open Lending’s reputation, which could materially and adversely affect Open Lending’s business. Regulators have broad discretion with respect to the interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of these laws and regulations, including through enforcement actions that could subject Open Lending to civil money penalties, customer remediations, increased compliance costs, and limits or prohibitions on Open Lending’s ability to offer certain products or services or to engage in certain activities. In addition, to the extent that Open Lending undertakes actions requiring regulatory approval or non-objection, regulators may make their approval or non-objection subject to conditions or restrictions that could have a material adverse effect on its business. Moreover, any competitors subject to different, or in some cases less restrictive, legislative or regulatory regimes may have or obtain a competitive advantage over Open Lending.

Additionally, federal, state, and local governments and regulatory agencies have proposed or enacted numerous new laws, regulations, and rules related to loans. Federal and state consumer credit and insurance regulators are also enforcing existing laws, regulations, and rules more aggressively and enhancing their supervisory expectations regarding the management of legal and regulatory compliance risks. Consumer finance and insurance regulation is constantly changing, and new laws or regulations, or new interpretations of existing laws or regulations, could have a materially adverse impact on Open Lending’s ability to operate as currently intended.

These regulatory changes and uncertainties make Open Lending’s business planning more difficult and could result in changes to its business model and potentially adversely impact its results of operations. New laws or regulations also require Open Lending to incur significant expenses to ensure compliance. As compared to Open Lending’s competitors, Open Lending could be subject to more stringent state or local regulations or could incur marginally greater compliance costs as a result of regulatory changes. In addition, Open Lending’s failure to comply (or to ensure that its agents and third-party service providers comply) with these laws or regulations may result in costly litigation or enforcement actions, the penalties for which could include: revocation of licenses; fines and other monetary penalties; civil and criminal liability; substantially reduced payments by borrowers; modification of the original terms of loans, permanent forgiveness of debt, or inability to, directly or indirectly, collect all or a part of the principal of or interest on loans; and increased purchases of receivables underlying loans originated by automotive lenders and indemnification claims.

Proposals to change the statutes affecting financial services companies are frequently introduced in Congress and state legislatures that, if enacted, may affect its operating environment in substantial and unpredictable ways. In addition, numerous federal and state regulators have the authority to promulgate or change regulations that could have a similar effect on Open Lending’s operating environment. Open Lending cannot determine with any degree of certainty whether any such legislative or regulatory proposals will be enacted and, if enacted, the ultimate impact that any such potential legislation or implementing regulations, or any such potential regulatory actions by federal or state regulators, would have upon Open Lending’s business.

27

With respect to state regulation, although Open Lending seeks to comply with applicable state insurance, insurance brokering, insurance agency regulations, third-party administration company statutes and similar statutes in all U.S. jurisdictions, and with licensing and other requirements that Open Lending believes may be applicable to it, if Open Lending is found to not have complied with applicable laws, Open Lending could lose one or more of its licenses or authorizations or face other sanctions or penalties or be required to obtain a license in one or more such jurisdictions, which may have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s ability to make the LPP available to borrowers in particular states and, thus, adversely impact Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending is also subject to potential enforcement and other actions that may be brought by state attorneys general or other state enforcement authorities and other governmental agencies. Any such actions could subject Open Lending to civil money penalties and fines, customer remediations, and increased compliance costs, damage its reputation and brand and limit or prohibit Open Lending’s ability to offer certain products and services or engage in certain business practices.

New laws, regulations, policy or changes in enforcement of existing laws or regulations applicable to Open Lending’s business, or reexamination of current practices, could adversely impact Open Lending’s profitability, limit its ability to continue existing or pursue new business activities, require it to change certain of its business practices or alter its relationships with LPP customers, affect retention of key personnel, or expose Open Lending to additional costs (including increased compliance costs and/or customer remediation). These changes also may require Open Lending to invest significant resources, and devote significant management attention, to make any necessary changes and could adversely affect its business.

The highly regulated environment in which automotive lenders and insurance carriers operate could have an adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

Automotive lenders and insurance carriers are subject to federal and/or state supervision and regulation. Federal regulation of the banking or insurance industries, along with tax and accounting laws, regulations, rules, and standards, may limit their operations significantly and control the methods by which they conduct business. In addition, compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations can impose additional compliance requirements. For example, the Dodd-Frank Act imposes significant regulatory and compliance obligations on financial institutions. Regulatory requirements affect automotive lenders’ lending and investment practices and insurance carriers’ offerings, among other aspects of their businesses, and restrict transactions between Open Lending and its automotive lenders and insurance carriers. These requirements may constrain the operations of automotive lenders and insurance carriers, and the adoption of new laws and changes to, or repeal of, existing laws may have a further impact on Open Lending’s business.

In choosing whether and how to conduct business with Open Lending, current and prospective automotive lenders and insurance carriers can be expected to take into account the legal, regulatory, and supervisory regimes that apply to them, including potential changes in the application or interpretation of regulatory standards, licensing requirements, or supervisory expectations. Regulators may elect to alter standards or the interpretation of the standards used to measure regulatory compliance or to determine the adequacy of liquidity, certain risk management or other operational practices for financial services companies in a manner that impacts automotive lenders or insurance carriers. Furthermore, the regulatory agencies have extremely broad discretion in their interpretation of the regulations and laws and their interpretation of the quality of automotive lenders’ loan portfolios and other assets. If any regulatory agency’s assessment of the quality of automotive lenders’ assets, operations, lending practices, investment practices or other aspects of their business changes, or those with respect to insurance carriers, it may materially reduce automotive lenders’ or insurance carriers’ earnings, capital ratios and share price in such a way that affects Open Lending’s business.

Bank holding companies, credit unions, financial institutions, automobile lenders, and insurance carriers and producers are extensively regulated and currently face an uncertain regulatory environment. Applicable state and federal laws, regulations and interpretations, including licensing laws and regulations, and enforcement policies

28

and accounting principles have been subject to significant changes in recent years, and may be subject to significant future changes. Open Lending cannot predict with any degree of certainty the substance or effect of pending or future legislation or regulation or the application of laws and regulations to automotive lenders and insurance carriers. Future changes may have a material adverse effect on automotive lenders or insurance carriers and, therefore, on Open Lending.

Open Lending is subject to regulatory examinations and investigations and may incur fines, penalties and increased costs that could negatively impact the Open Lending business.

Federal and state agencies have broad enforcement powers over Open Lending, including powers to investigate Open Lending’s business practices and broad discretion to deem particular practices unfair, deceptive, abusive or otherwise not in accordance with the law. The continued focus of regulators on the consumer financial services industry has resulted, and could continue to result, in new enforcement actions that could, directly or indirectly, affect the manner in which Open Lending conducts its business and increase the costs of defending and settling any such matters, which could negatively impact its business. In some cases, regardless of fault, it may be less time-consuming or costly to settle these matters, which may require Open Lending to implement certain changes to its business practices, provide remediation to certain individuals or make a settlement payment to a given party or regulatory body. There is no assurance that any future settlements will not have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

In addition, the laws and regulations applicable to Open Lending are subject to administrative or judicial interpretation. Some of these laws and regulations have been enacted only recently and may not yet have been interpreted or may be interpreted infrequently. As a result of infrequent or sparse interpretations, ambiguities in these laws and regulations may create uncertainty with respect to what type of conduct is permitted or restricted under such laws and regulations. Any ambiguity under a law or regulation to which Open Lending is subject may lead to regulatory investigations, governmental enforcement actions and private causes of action, such as class action lawsuits, with respect to Open Lending’s compliance with such laws or regulations.

The contours of the Dodd-Frank UDAAP standard remain uncertain, and there is a risk that certain features of the Open Lending business could be deemed to be a UDAAP.

The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits UDAAP and authorizes the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) to enforce that prohibition. The CFPB has filed a large number of UDAAP enforcement actions against consumer lenders for practices that do not appear to violate other consumer finance statutes. There is a risk that the CFPB could determine that certain features of automotive lender loans are unfair, deceptive or abusive, which could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

Regulations relating to privacy, information security, and data protection could increase Open Lending’s costs, affect or limit how Open Lending collects and uses personal information, and adversely affect its business opportunities.

Open Lending is subject to various privacy, information security and data protection laws, including requirements concerning security breach notification, and it could be negatively impacted by them. For example, in connection with Open Lending’s administration of LPP, Open Lending is subject to the GLBA and implementing regulations and guidance. Among other things, the GLBA (i) imposes certain limitations on the ability to share consumers’ nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third parties and (ii) requires certain disclosures to consumers about their information collection, sharing and security practices and their right to “opt out” of the institution’s disclosure of their personal financial information to nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions).

Furthermore, legislators and/or regulators are increasingly adopting or revising privacy, information security and data protection laws that potentially could have a significant impact on Open Lending’s current and planned

29

privacy, data protection and information security-related practices; Open Lending’s collection, use, sharing, retention and safeguarding of consumer and/or employee information; and some of Open Lending’s current or planned business activities. This also could increase Open Lending’s costs of compliance and business operations and could reduce income from certain business initiatives.

Compliance with current or future privacy, information security and data protection laws (including those regarding security breach notification) affecting customer and/or employee data to which Open Lending is subject could result in higher compliance and technology costs and could restrict Open Lending’s ability to provide certain products and services (such as products or services that involve sharing information with third parties or storing sensitive credit card information), which could materially and adversely affect Open Lending’s profitability. Additionally, there is always a danger that regulators can attempt to assert authority over the Open Lending business in the area of privacy, information security and data protection. If Open Lending’s vendors also become subject to laws and regulations in the more stringent and expansive jurisdictions, this could result in increasing costs on Open Lending’s business.

Privacy requirements, including notice and opt-out requirements, under the GLBA and FCRA are enforced by the Federal Trade Commission and by the CFPB through UDAAP and are a standard component of CFPB examinations. State entities also may initiate actions for alleged violations of privacy or security requirements under state law. Open Lending’s failure to comply with privacy, information security and data protection laws could result in potentially significant regulatory investigations and government actions, litigation, fines or sanctions; consumer, automotive lender or merchant actions; and damage to Open Lending’s reputation and brand, all of which could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

If Open Lending was found to be operating without having obtained necessary state or local licenses, it could adversely affect its business.

Certain states have adopted laws regulating and requiring licensing by parties that engage in certain activity regarding consumer finance and insurance transactions, including facilitating and assisting such transactions in certain circumstances. Furthermore, certain states and localities have also adopted laws requiring licensing for consumer debt collection or servicing. While Open Lending believes it has obtained all necessary licenses, the application of some consumer finance or insurance producer and claims administration licensing laws to LPP is unclear. If Open Lending was found to be in violation of applicable state licensing requirements by a court or a state, federal, or local enforcement agency, it could be subject to fines, damages, injunctive relief (including required modification or discontinuation of Open Lending’s business in certain areas), criminal penalties and other penalties or consequences, and the loans originated through LPP could be rendered void or unenforceable in whole or in part, any of which could have a material adverse effect on Open Lending’s business.

Open Lending may in the future be subject to federal or state regulatory inquiries regarding its business.

From time to time, in the normal course of its business, Open Lending may receive or be subject to, inquiries or investigations by state and federal regulatory agencies and bodies, such as the CFPB, state Attorneys General, state financial regulatory agencies, and other state or federal agencies or bodies regarding LPP, including the origination and servicing of consumer loans, practices by merchants or other third parties, production of insurance policies, administration of insurance claims and licensing, and registration requirements. For example, in the future, Open Lending may enter into regulatory agreements with state agencies regarding issues including automotive lender conduct and oversight and loan pricing. Open Lending also may receive inquiries from state regulatory agencies regarding requirements to obtain licenses from or register with those states, including in states where Open Lending has determined that it is not required to obtain such a license or be registered with the state. Any such inquiries or investigations could involve substantial time and expense to analyze and respond to, could divert management’s attention and other resources from running Open Lending’s business, and could lead to public enforcement actions or lawsuits and fines, penalties, injunctive relief, and the need to obtain additional licenses that it does not currently possess. Open Lending’s involvement in any such matters, whether tangential

30

or otherwise, even if the matters are ultimately determined in Open Lending’s favor, could also cause significant harm to its reputation, lead to additional investigations and enforcement actions from other agencies or litigants, and further divert management attention and resources from the operation of Open Lending’s business. As a result, the outcome of legal and regulatory actions arising out of any state or federal inquiries Open Lending receives could be material to its business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks Related to the Business Combination and Integration of Businesses

Open Lending’s management has limited experience in operating a public company.

Open Lending’s executive officers and directors have limited experience in the management of a publicly traded company. Open Lending’s management team may not successfully or effectively manage the ongoing transition to a public company, and the Company will be subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under federal securities laws. Their limited experience in dealing with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies could be a significant disadvantage in that it is likely that an increasing amount of their time may be devoted to these activities which will result in less time being devoted to the management and growth of Open Lending. It is possible that Open Lending will be required to expand its employee base and hire additional employees to support its operations as a public company which will increase our operating costs in future periods.

We will incur significant increased expenses and administrative burdens as a public company, which could have an adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a public company, we will continue to face increased legal, accounting, administrative and other costs and expenses as a public company that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), including the requirements of Section 404, as well as rules and regulations subsequently implemented by the SEC, the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 and the rules and regulations promulgated and to be promulgated thereunder, the PCAOB and the securities exchanges, impose additional reporting and other obligations on public companies. Compliance with public company requirements will increase costs and make certain activities more time-consuming. A number of those requirements will require us to carry out activities we have not done previously. In addition, additional expenses associated with SEC reporting requirements will be incurred. Furthermore, if any issues in complying with those requirements are identified (for example, if the auditors identify a material weakness or significant deficiency in the internal control over financial reporting), we could incur additional costs rectifying those issues, and the existence of those issues could adversely affect our reputation or investor perceptions of it. It may also be more expensive to obtain director and officer liability insurance. Risks associated with our status as a public company may make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on the board of directors or as executive officers. The additional reporting and other obligations imposed by these rules and regulations will increase legal and financial compliance costs and the costs of related legal, accounting and administrative activities. These increased costs will require us to divert a significant amount of money that could otherwise be used to expand the business and achieve strategic objectives. Advocacy efforts by stockholders and third parties may also prompt additional changes in governance and reporting requirements, which could further increase costs.

We qualify as an emerging growth company within the meaning of the Securities Act, and if we take advantage of certain exemptions from disclosure requirements available to emerging growth companies this could make our securities less attractive to investors and may make it more difficult to compare our performance to the performance of other public companies.

We qualify as an “emerging growth company” as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the Securities Act, as modified by the JOBS Act. As such, we are eligible for and intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies for as long

31

as it continues to be an emerging growth company, including (i) the exemption from the auditor attestation requirements with respect to internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) the exemptions from say-on-pay, say-on-frequency and say-on-golden parachute voting requirements and (iii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in its periodic reports and proxy statements. we will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (i) we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” as defined in the Exchange Act, (ii) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of $1.07 billion or more during such fiscal year, (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt in the prior three-year period or (iv) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of our common stock in our initial public offering. In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the exemption from complying with new or revised accounting standards provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act as long as we are an emerging growth company. An emerging growth company can therefore delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We may elect not to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards and, therefore, we may not be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. Investors may find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions, which may result in a less active trading market for our common stock and its stock price may be more volatile.

We may from time to time be subject to litigation and other claims.

We may from time to time become subject to litigation claims in the operation of our business, including, but not limited to, with respect to employee matters and contract matters. From time to time, we may also face intellectual property infringement, misappropriation, or invalidity/non-infringement claims from third parties, and some of these claims may lead to litigation. We may initiate claims to assert or defend our intellectual property against third parties. Any litigation may be expensive and time-consuming and could divert management’s attention from our business and negatively affect its operating results or financial condition. The outcome of any litigation cannot be guaranteed, and adverse outcomes can affect us negatively.

Our ability to successfully operate the business will largely depend upon the efforts of certain of our key personnel. The loss of such key personnel could negatively impact our operations and financial results.

Our ability to successfully operate the business is dependent upon the efforts of certain of our key personnel. It is possible that we will lose some key personnel, the loss of which could negatively impact our operations and profitability. Furthermore, certain of our key personnel may be unfamiliar with the requirements of operating a company regulated by the SEC, which could cause us to have to expend time and resources helping them become familiar with such requirements.

Our principal stockholders and management control us and their interests may conflict with yours in the future.

Our executive officers and directors and significant affiliated stockholders currently own nearly 30% of the outstanding voting stock of the Company. Each share of our common stock initially entitles its holders to one vote on all matters presented to stockholders generally. Accordingly, those owners, if voting in the same manner, will be able to control the election and removal of our directors and thereby determine corporate and management policies, including potential mergers or acquisitions, payment of dividends, asset sales, amendments of the certificate of incorporation and bylaws and other significant corporate transactions for so long as they retain significant ownership. This concentration of ownership may delay or deter possible changes in control of Open Lending, which may reduce the value of an investment in our common stock. So long as they continue to own a significant amount of the combined voting power, even if such amount is less than 50%, they will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control decisions of the Company.

32

We will be required to make payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement for certain tax benefits we may claim, and the amounts of such payments could be significant.

In connection with the closing of the Business Combination, Open Lending entered into the Tax Receivable Agreement with Nebula, the Blocker, the Blocker Holder, and Open Lending. Prior to the closing of the Business Combination, (i) 100% of the interest in Open Lending was held by the Blocker and the Company Unit Sellers, and (ii) 100% of the Blocker was held by the Blocker Holder. The Tax Receivable Agreement generally provides for the payment by Open Lending to the Company Unit Sellers and Blocker Holder, as applicable, of 85% of the net cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal, state and local income tax that Open Lending actually realizes (or is deemed to realize in certain circumstances) in periods after the closing of the Business Combination as a result of: (i) certain tax attributes of Blocker and/or Open Lending that existed prior to the Business Combination and were attributable to the Blocker; (ii) certain increases in the tax basis of Open Lending’s assets resulting from the Second Merger; (iii) imputed interest deemed to be paid by Open Lending as a result of payments made under the Tax Receivable Agreement; and (iv) certain increases in tax basis resulting from payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement. Open Lending will retain the benefit of the remaining 15% of these cash savings. The amount of the cash payments that Open Lending may be required to make under the Tax Receivable Agreement could be significant and is dependent upon future events and assumptions, including the amount and timing of taxable income Open Lending generates in the future, the U.S. federal income tax rate then applicable and the portion of Open Lending’s payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement that constitute interest or give rise to depreciable or amortizable tax basis. Moreover, payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement will be based on the tax reporting positions that Open Lending determines, which tax reporting positions are subject to challenge by taxing authorities. Open Lending will be dependent on distributions from the Blocker to make payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement, and we cannot guarantee that such distributions will be made in sufficient amounts or at the times needed to enable Open Lending to make its required payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement, or at all. Any payments made by Open Lending to the Company Unit Sellers or Blocker Holder under the Tax Receivable Agreement will generally reduce the amount of overall cash flow that might have otherwise been available to Open Lending. To the extent that Open Lending is unable to make timely payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement for any reason, the unpaid amounts will be deferred and will accrue interest until paid. Nonpayment for a specified period may constitute a breach of a material obligation under the Tax Receivable Agreement, and therefore, may accelerate payments due under the Tax Receivable Agreement. The payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement are also not conditioned upon the Company Unit Sellers or Blocker Holder maintaining a continued ownership interest in us.

In certain cases, payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement may be accelerated and/or significantly exceed the actual benefits, if any, we realize in respect of the tax attributes subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement.

The Tax Receivable Agreement provides that if we breach any of our material obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement, if we undergo a change of control or if, at any time, we elect an early termination of the Tax Receivable Agreement, then the Tax Receivable Agreement will terminate and our obligations, or our successor’s obligations, to make payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement would accelerate and become immediately due and payable. The amount due and payable in those circumstances is determined based on certain assumptions, including an assumption that we would have sufficient taxable income to fully utilize all potential future tax benefits that are subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement. We may need to incur debt to finance payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement to the extent our cash resources are insufficient to meet our obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement as a result of timing discrepancies or otherwise.

As a result of the foregoing, (i) we could be required to make cash payments to the Company Unit Sellers or Blocker Holder that are greater than the specified percentage of the actual benefits we ultimately realize in respect of the tax benefits that are subject to the Tax Receivable Agreement, and (ii) we could be required to make a cash payment equal to the present value of the anticipated future tax benefits that are the subject of the Tax Receivable Agreement, which payment may be made significantly in advance of the actual realization, if

33

any, of such future tax benefits. In these situations, our obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity and could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing certain mergers, asset sales, other forms of business combination, or other changes of control due to the additional transaction costs a potential acquirer may attribute to satisfying such obligations. There can be no assurance that we will be able to finance our obligations under the Tax Receivable Agreement.

We will not be reimbursed for any payments made to the Company Unit Sellers or Blocker Holder under the Tax Receivable Agreement in the event that any tax benefits are disallowed.

We will not be reimbursed for any cash payments previously made to the Company Unit Sellers or Blocker Holder pursuant to the Tax Receivable Agreement if any tax benefits initially claimed by us are subsequently challenged by a taxing authority and are ultimately disallowed. Instead, any excess cash payments made by us to a Company Unit Seller or Blocker Holder will be netted against any future cash payments that we might otherwise be required to make under the terms of the Tax Receivable Agreement. However, a challenge to any tax benefits initially claimed by us may not arise for a number of years following the initial time of such payment or, even if challenged early, such excess cash payment may be greater than the amount of future cash payments that we might otherwise be required to make under the terms of the Tax Receivable Agreement and, as a result, there might not be future cash payments from which to net against. The applicable U.S. federal income tax rules are complex and factual in nature, and there can be no assurance that the IRS or a court will not disagree with our tax reporting positions. As a result, it is possible that we could make cash payments under the Tax Receivable Agreement that are substantially greater than our actual cash tax savings.

Our amended and restated bylaws designate specific courts as the exclusive forum for certain litigation that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit its stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us.

Pursuant to our amended and restated bylaws, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claim for (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a claim of or based on a breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of ours to us or our stockholders; (3) any action asserting a claim pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; or (4) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine, or the Delaware Forum Provision. The Delaware Forum Provision will not apply to any causes of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. Our amended and restated bylaws further provide that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision. In addition, our amended and restated bylaws provide that any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our common stock is deemed to have notice of and consented to the Delaware Forum Provision and the Federal Forum Provision; provided, however, that stockholders cannot and will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

We recognize that the Delaware Forum Provision and the Federal Forum Provision in our amended and restated bylaws may impose additional litigation costs on stockholders in pursuing any such claims, particularly if the stockholders do not reside in or near the State of Delaware or the State of Texas. Additionally, the forum selection clauses in our amended and restated bylaws may limit our stockholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees, which may discourage the filing of lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees, even though an action, if successful, might benefit our stockholders. In addition, while the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in March 2020 that federal forum selection provisions purporting to require claims under the Securities Act be brought in federal court were “facially valid” under Delaware law, there is uncertainty as to whether other courts will enforce our Federal Forum Provision. If the Federal Forum Provision is found to be unenforceable, we may incur additional

34

costs associated with resolving such matters. The Federal Forum Provision may also impose additional litigation costs on stockholders who assert that the provision is not enforceable or invalid. The Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas may also reach different judgments or results than would other courts, including courts where a stockholder considering an action may be located or would otherwise choose to bring the action, and such judgments may be more or less favorable to us than our stockholders.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

An active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained, which may make it difficult to sell the shares of our common stock you purchase.

An active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained, which would make it difficult for you to sell your shares of our common stock at an attractive price (or at all). The market price of our common stock may decline below your purchase price, and you may not be able to sell your shares of our common stock at or above the price you paid for such shares (or at all).

There can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with the continued listing standards of NASDAQ.

If NASDAQ delists our shares of common stock from trading on its exchange for failure to meet Nasdaq’s listing standards, we and our stockholders could face significant material adverse consequences including:

The market price of our common stock may be volatile, which could cause the value of your investment to decline.

Even if a trading market develops, the market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. Securities markets worldwide experience significant price and volume fluctuations. This market volatility, as well as general economic, market and political conditions, could reduce the market price of shares of our common stock in spite of our operating performance. In addition, our results of operations could be below the expectations of public market analysts and investors due to a number of potential factors, including variations in our quarterly or annual results of operations, additions or departures of key management personnel, the loss of key automotive lenders, changes in our earnings estimates (if provided) or failure to meet analysts’ earnings estimates, publication of research reports about our industry, litigation and government investigations, changes or proposed changes in laws or regulations or differing interpretations or enforcement thereof affecting our business, adverse market reaction to any indebtedness we may incur or securities we may issue in the future, changes in market valuations of similar companies or speculation in the press or the investment community with respect to us or our industry, adverse announcements by us or others and developments affecting us, announcements by our competitors of significant contracts, acquisitions, dispositions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments, actions by institutional stockholders, and increases in market interest rates that may lead investors in our shares to demand a higher yield, and in response the market price of shares of our common stock could decrease significantly.

35

These broad market and industry factors may decrease the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. The stock market in general has, from time to time, experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

Our issuance of additional capital stock in connection with financings, acquisitions, investments, our stock incentive plans or otherwise will dilute all other stockholders.

We expect to issue additional capital stock in the future that will result in dilution to all other stockholders. We expect to grant equity awards to employees, directors, and consultants under our stock incentive plans. We may also raise capital through equity financings in the future. As part of our business strategy, we may acquire or make investments in complementary companies, products, or technologies and issue equity securities to pay for any such acquisition or investment. Any such issuances of additional capital stock may cause stockholders to experience significant dilution of their ownership interests and the per share value of our common stock to decline.

Sales of a substantial amount of our common stock could cause the price of our securities to fall.

Following this offering, nearly 30% of the outstanding shares of our common stock is held by entities affiliated with us and our executive officers and directors. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that such sales will occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and make it difficult for us to raise funds through securities offerings in the future. In addition, we, all of our directors, our executive officers and the selling stockholders have each agreed, subject to certain exceptions, to be subject to a 60-day lock-up restriction in connection with this offering. The market price of our common stock may decline when this lock-up restriction lapses.

The exercise of registration rights may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

In connection with the consummation of the Business Combination, Open Lending, LLC, Open Lending Corporation, Nebula, certain persons and entities holding membership units of Open Lending and certain persons and entities holding Founder Shares (collectively, the “Holders”) entered into the Investor Rights Agreement. Pursuant to the terms of the Investor Rights Agreement, we are obligated to file a registration statement to register the resale of certain of our securities held by the Holders. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the Investor Rights Agreement and subject to certain requirements and customary conditions, including with regard to the number of demand rights that may be exercised, the Holders may demand at any time or from time to time, that we file a registration statement on Form S-1, or any similar long-form registration statement, or if available, on Form S-3 to register the shares of our common stock held by such Holders. The Investor Rights Agreement also provides the Holders with “piggy-back” registration rights, subject to certain requirements and customary conditions. The Investor Rights Agreement further provides for our shares of common stock held by the Holders to be locked-up for 180 days after the closing of the Business Combination. The registration and availability of such a significant number of securities for trading in the public market may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Because we have no current plans to pay cash dividends on our common stock, you may not receive any return on investment unless you sell your common stock for a price greater than that which you paid for it.

We have no current plans to pay cash dividends on our common stock. The declaration, amount and payment of any future dividends will be at the sole discretion of our board of directors. Our board of directors may take into account general and economic conditions, our financial condition and operating results, our available cash, current and anticipated cash needs, capital requirements, contractual, legal, tax and regulatory restrictions,

36

implications on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiary to us and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, the terms of our existing financing arrangements restrict or limit our ability to pay cash dividends. Accordingly, we may not pay any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

Future offerings of debt or equity securities by us may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

In the future, we may attempt to obtain financing or to further increase our capital resources by issuing additional shares of our common stock or offering debt or other equity securities, including commercial paper, medium-term notes, senior or subordinated notes, debt securities convertible into equity or shares of preferred stock. Future acquisitions could require substantial additional capital in excess of cash from operations. We would expect to obtain the capital required for acquisitions through a combination of additional issuances of equity, corporate indebtedness and/or cash from operations.

Issuing additional shares of our common stock or other equity securities or securities convertible into equity may dilute the economic and voting rights of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock or both. Upon liquidation, holders of such debt securities and preferred shares, if issued, and lenders with respect to other borrowings would receive a distribution of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Debt securities convertible into equity could be subject to adjustments in the conversion ratio pursuant to which certain events may increase the number of equity securities issuable upon conversion. Preferred shares, if issued, could have a preference with respect to liquidating distributions or a preference with respect to dividend payments that could limit our ability to pay dividends to the holders of our common stock. Our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, which may adversely affect the amount, timing and nature of our future offerings.

Certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could hinder, delay or prevent a change in control of us, which could adversely affect the price of our common stock.

Certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us without the consent of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:

In addition, these provisions may make it difficult and expensive for a third party to pursue a tender offer, change in control or takeover attempt that is opposed by our management or our board of directors. Stockholders who might desire to participate in these types of transactions may not have an opportunity to do so, even if the transaction is favorable to them. These anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede your ability to benefit from a change in control or change our management and board of directors and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and your ability to realize any potential change of control premium.

37

If securities and industry analysts publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will depend, in part, on the research and reports that securities and industry analysts publish about us and our business. Securities and industry analysts do not currently, and may never, cover the Company. If securities and industry analysts do not commence coverage of the Company, the trading price of our stock would likely be negatively impacted. If one or more of the securities or industry analysts who cover us downgrade our stock or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of the Company or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which might cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.

38

USE OF PROCEEDS

All of the shares of common stock offered by the selling stockholders pursuant to this prospectus will be sold by the selling stockholders for their respective amounts. We will not receive any of the proceeds from these sales. We will, however, bear the costs associated with the sale of shares by the selling stockholders, other than underwriting discounts and commissions.

39

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets forth the cash and cash equivalents and capitalization as of December 31, 2020:

40

MARKET PRICE, TICKER SYMBOL AND DIVIDEND INFORMATION

Market Price and Ticker Symbol

Our common stock is currently listed on Nasdaq under the symbol “LPRO”.

The closing price of the common stock on March 31, 2021, was $35.42.

Holders

As of March 12, 2021, there were 44 registered holders of record of our common stock. Such numbers do not include beneficial owners holding our securities through nominee names.

Dividend Policy

We have no current plans to pay cash dividends on our common stock. The declaration, amount and payment of any future dividends will be at the sole discretion of our board of directors. Our board of directors may take into account general and economic conditions, our financial condition and operating results, our available cash, current and anticipated cash needs, capital requirements, contractual, legal, tax and regulatory restrictions, implications on the payment of dividends by us to our stockholders or by our subsidiary to us and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, the terms of our existing financing arrangements restrict or limit our ability to pay cash dividends. Accordingly, we may not pay any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

41

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion and analysis provides information which management believes is relevant to an assessment and understanding of Open Lending’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition. The discussion should be read in conjunction with Open Lending’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus. This discussion contains forward-looking statements and involves numerous risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, those described under the heading “Risk Factors”. Actual results may differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements.

Business Overview

We are a leading provider of lending enablement and risk analytics to credit unions, regional banks and OEM Captives. Our clients, collectively referred to herein as automotive lenders, make automotive consumer loans to underserved near- prime and non-prime borrowers by harnessing our risk-based pricing models, powered by our proprietary data and real-time underwriting of automotive loan default insurance coverage from insurers. Since our inception in 2000, we have facilitated over $9.2 billion in automotive loans, accumulating over 20 years of proprietary data and developing over two million unique risk profiles. As of February 2021, We cater to approximately 360 active automotive lenders.

We specialize in risk-based pricing and modeling and provide automated decision-technology for automotive lenders throughout the United States. We believe that we address the financing needs of near-prime and non-prime borrowers, or borrowers with a credit bureau score between 560 and 699, who are underserved in the automotive finance industry. Traditional lenders focus on prime borrowers, where an efficient market has developed with interest rate competition that benefits borrowers. Independent finance companies focus on sub-prime borrowers. Borrowers that utilize the near-prime and non-prime automotive lending market have fewer lenders focused on loans with longer terms or higher advance rates. As a result, many near-prime and non-prime borrowers turn to sub-prime lenders, resulting in higher interest rate loan offerings than such borrower’s credit profile often merits or warrants. We seek to make this market more competitive, resulting in more attractive loan terms.

Our flagship product, LPP, enables automotive lenders to make loans that are largely insured against losses from defaults. We have been developing and advancing the proprietary underwriting models used by LPP for approximately 20 years. We believe LPP provides significant benefits to our growing ecosystem of automotive lenders, automobile dealers and insurers.

A key element of LPP is the ability to facilitate risk-based interest rates that are appropriate for each loan and lender and electronically submitted to our automotive lenders within approximately five seconds after we receive a loan application. Our interest rate pricing is customized to each automotive lender, reflecting the cost of capital, loan servicing costs, loan acquisition costs, expected recovery rates and target return on assets of each automotive lender. Using our risk models, we project monthly loan performance results, including expected losses and prepayments for automotive lenders that use LPP. The product of this process is a risk-based interest rate, inclusive of elements to recover all projected costs, program fees and insurance premiums, given the risk of the loan, to return a targeted return on asset goal.

We believe that our market opportunity is significant. The near-prime and non-prime automotive loan market is $250 billion annually, resulting in an approximately $14.4 billion annual revenue opportunity. We are currently serving less than 1% of this market, providing a significant growth opportunity.

Executive Overview

We facilitate certified loans and have achieved financial success by increasing our penetration of the near-prime and non-prime automotive loan market while diversifying our customer base and refining our data analysis capabilities.

42

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we facilitated 94,226 certified loans, representing an increase of 20.1% from 78,434 in the year ended December 31, 2019, which in turn increased by 38.3% from 56,705 in the year ended December 31, 2018.

Total revenue was $108.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, representing an increase of 17.3% from $92.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2019, which in turn increased by 77.9% from $52.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2018. Revenue increased by $19.2 million as a result of the adoption of ASC 606 for the year ended December 31, 2019. Prior period annual results have not been restated so this lack of comparability should be considered in reviewing this discussion and analysis.

Operating income was $56.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, representing a decline of 9.4% from $62.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2019, which in turn increased by 119.9% from $28.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2018.

Net loss was $(97.6) million for the year ended December 31, 2020, representing a decrease of (256.0)% from net income of $62.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2019, which in turn increased by 121.2% from $28.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2018.

Adjusted EBITDA was $69.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, representing an increase of 7.1% from $64.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2019, which in turn increased by 107.4% from $31.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2018.

Information regarding use of Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income, the most comparable GAAP measure, is included in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.

Highlights

The table below summarizes the total dollar-value of insured loans we facilitated, the number of new contracts we signed with automotive lenders and the number of OEM Captive relationships we entered into for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:

Key Performance Measures

We review several key performance measures, discussed below, to evaluate business and results, measure performance, identify trends, formulate plans and make strategic decisions. We believe that the presentation of such metrics is useful to our investors and counterparties because they are used to measure and model the performance of companies such as Open Lending, with recurring revenue streams.

Automotive Loans

We refer to “automotive loans” as the number of loans facilitated through LPP during a given period. Additionally, we refer to loans with a one-time upfront payment as “single-pay” loans and those paid over twelve months in monthly installments as “monthly-pay” loans.

43

Average Program Fee

We define “average program fee” as the total program fee billed for a period divided by the number of certified loans in that period.

Insurers’ Aggregate Underwriting Profit

We define “insurers’ aggregate underwriting profit” as the total underwriting profit expected to be received by insurers over the expected life of the insured loans.

Insurers’ Annual Earned Premium

We define “insurers’ annual earned premium” as the total insurance premium earned by insurers in a given period.

Insurers’ Average Earned Premium Per Loan

We define “insurers’ average earned premium per loan” as the total single premium equivalent insurance premium written in a period by insurers divided by the number of certified loans in that period.

Recent Developments

New Credit Agreement

On March 19, 2021, we, along with certain of our subsidiaries, entered into a credit agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as administrative agent, and the other lenders from time to time party thereto (the “New Credit Agreement”). The New Credit Agreement provides for a senior secured term loan facility of up to $125.0 million that was funded on the closing date (the “Term A Loans”) along with a senior secured revolving loan facility of up to $50.0 million at any time outstanding (the “Revolving Facility, and, together with the Term A Loans, the “Credit Facilities”).

The proceeds of the Credit Facilities were used to, among other things, refinance existing indebtedness, including the credit agreement, dated March 11, 2020 among UBS AG Stamford Branch, and the lenders party thereto (the “Credit Agreement”) and for working capital and other general corporate purposes.

Borrowings under the New Credit Agreement bear interest at a variable rate based on the net secured leverage ratio, subject to a floor of 0.0%. The anticipated opening interest rate of the Credit Facilities is L + 2.00%, which represents a significantly lower rate than we paid on our previous indebtedness. The Credit Facilities mature on March 19, 2026 (the “Maturity Date”). Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the New Credit Agreement, we may be required to make certain mandatory prepayments prior to the Maturity Date. All obligations under the New Credit Agreement will be secured, subject to certain exceptions, by a security interest in substantially all assets of the Company and its subsidiaries.

The New Credit Agreement contains affirmative and negative covenants customarily applicable to senior secured credit facilities, including covenants that, among other things, will limit or restrict the ability of the Loan Parties, subject to negotiated exceptions, to incur additional indebtedness and additional liens on their assets, engage in mergers or acquisitions or dispose of assets, pay dividends or make other distributions, voluntarily prepay other indebtedness, enter into transactions with affiliated persons, make investments, and change the nature of their businesses.

The New Credit Agreement also contains customary events of default, including, subject to thresholds and grace periods, among others, payment default, covenant default, cross default to other material indebtedness, and judgment default.

44

Share Repurchase

On March 29, 2021, we entered into the Repurchase Agreement with the selling stockholders pursuant to which we have agreed to purchase $20.0 million of common stock from the selling stockholders at the price at which the shares of common stock are sold to the public in this offering, less the underwriting discount and commissions (the “Repurchase”). Closing of the Repurchase is conditioned on, and is expected to occur immediately after, the completion of this offering and is subject to other customary closing conditions. Any shares bought in the Repurchase will thereafter be cancelled. We currently intend to use cash on hand to fund the Repurchase.

Amendment No. 1 to Tax Receivable Agreement

We expect to enter into Amendment No. 1 to the TRA that provides for the payment by the Company of $36.9 million to terminate and settle all present and future obligations under the TRA that was established at the time of Business Combination with Nebula Acquisition Corp. At December 31, 2020, we carried a TRA liability of $92.4 million. A special committee of the Board of Directors, consisting solely of independent directors, negotiated and is expected to approve Amendment No. 1. Absent Amendment No 1., we anticipated making TRA payments totaling $92.4 million, undiscounted, over the life of the TRA.

Coronavirus Outbreak

The recent outbreak of the novel coronavirus COVID-19, which was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020 and declared a National Emergency by the President of the United States on March 13, 2020, has led to adverse impacts on the U.S. and global economies and created uncertainty regarding potential impacts on our operating results, financial condition and cash flows. The extent of the impact of COVID 19 on our operational and financial performance will depend on certain developments, including the duration and continued spread of the disease, the impact on our revenues which are generated with automobile lenders and insurance company partners and driven by consumer demand for automobiles and automotive loans, extended closures of businesses, continued high unemployment and the overall impact on our customer behavior, all of which are uncertain and cannot be predicted. We have seen a reduction in loan applications and certified loans throughout most of 2020. As consumers and lenders have adjusted to the pandemic, application and certification levels have increased, but are not back to pre-pandemic levels when comparing existing lending institutions to the same lending institution’s prior year performance. Lenders’ forbearance programs, government stimulus packages, extended unemployment benefits and other government assistance via the Cares Act passed on March 27, 2020 have resulted in a reduction in expected defaults since the onset of the pandemic. As these programs’ accessibility diminishes, defaults may increase. The potential increase in defaults may impact our revenues and subsequent recovery as the automotive finance industry and overall economy recover. We continue to closely monitor the current macro environment, particularly the impact of the recent COVID-19 pandemic on monetary and fiscal policies.

Key Factors Affecting Operating Results

Our future operating results and cash flows are dependent upon a number of opportunities, challenges and other factors, including the growth in the number of financial institutions and transaction volume, competition, profit share assumptions and industry trends and general economic conditions.

Key factors affecting our operating results include the following:

Growth in the Number of Financial Institutions

The growth trend in active automotive lenders using LPP is a critical variable directly affecting revenue and financial results. It influences the number of loans funded on LPP and, therefore, the fees that we earn and the cost of the services that we provide. Growth in our active automotive lender relationships will depend on our ability to retain existing automotive lenders, add new automotive lenders and expand to new industry verticals.

45

Competition

We face competition to enroll and maintain automotive lenders as well as competition to fund near-prime and non-prime auto loans. For LPP, which combines lending enablement, risk analytics, near-prime and non-prime auto loan performance data, real-time loan decisioning, risk-based pricing and auto loan default insurance, we do not believe there are any direct competitors. The emergence of direct competitors, providing risk, analytics and loss mitigation, which are core elements of our business, could materially impact our ability to sign and maintain automotive lenders customers. The near-prime and non-prime lending market is highly fragmented and competitive. We face competition from a diverse landscape of consumer lenders, including traditional banks and credit unions, as well as alternative technology-enabled lenders. The emergence of other insurers, in competition with our insurers, could materially impact our business. Increased competition for loans, which reduce the ability of our automotive lenders to source loan application flow and or capture loans, could materially adversely impact our business.

Profit Share Assumptions

We rely on assumptions to calculate the value of profit share revenue, which is our share of insurance partners’ underwriting profit. To the extent these assumptions change, our profit share revenue will be adjusted. Please refer to “Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” for more information on these assumptions.

Industry Trends and General Economic Conditions

Our results of operations have in the past been fairly resilient to economic downturns but in the future may be impacted by the relative strength of the overall economy and its effect on unemployment, consumer spending and consumer demand for automotive products. As general economic conditions improve or deteriorate, the amount of disposable income consumers have tends to fluctuate, which in turn impacts consumer spending levels and the willingness of consumers to take out loans to finance purchases. Specific economic factors such as interest rate levels, changes in monetary and related policies, market volatility, consumer confidence, the impact of the pandemic crisis and, particularly, the unemployment rate also influence consumer spending and borrowing patterns. At the end of first quarter 2020, changes in facts and circumstances and general market conditions from the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in lower expectations of future operating results, and in response, we lowered our initial anticipated revenue and profit share on historic business. In the following quarters of 2020, we have adopted a more favorable near-term outlook as a result of better than anticipated performance through the year-end.

Concentration

We have not historically had significant concentration risk in our client base, given that our lending clients are distributed across the country with our top ten clients accounting for approximately 30% of total program fees over the last three years. Going forward, however, we expect significant growth in loan volume from OEM Captives relative to that of other automotive lenders. Therefore, we anticipate concentrated risk for some period of time. Additionally, our largest insurance partner accounted for the vast majority of our profit share and claims administration service fee revenue during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018. Termination or disruption of this relationship could materially adversely impact our revenue.

Basis of Presentation

We conduct business through one operating segment, and we operate in one geographic region, the United States. See Note 2 “Summary of Significant Accounting and Reporting Policies” of the accompanying consolidated financial statements for more information.

Components of Results of Operations

Total Revenues

Revenue. Our revenue is generated through three streams: program fees paid to us by lenders, profit share and claims administration service fees paid to us by insurance partners.

46

Program fees. Program fees are paid by automotive lenders for use of our LPP and analytics. These fees are based on a percentage of each certified loan’s original principal balance and are recognized as revenue by us upfront upon receipt of the loan by the consumer. The fee percentage rate varies by type of loan. For loans with a one-time upfront payment, there is a sliding scale of rates representing volume discounts to the lender with fees capped at $600 per loan. This cap may vary for certain large volume lenders. For loans with 12 monthly equal installments, the fee paid by the lender is a flat 3.0% of the total amount of the loan and is not capped.

Profit share. Profit share represents our participation in the underwriting profit of our third-party insurance partners who provide lenders with credit default insurance on loans the lenders make using LPP. We receive a percentage of the aggregate monthly insurance underwriting profit. Monthly insurance underwriting profit is calculated as the monthly earned premium less expenses and losses (including reserves for incurred but not reported losses), with losses accrued and carried forward for future profit share calculations.

Claims administration service fees. Claims administration service fees are paid to us by third-party insurers for credit default insurance claims adjudication services performed by our subsidiary IAS on its insured servicing portfolio. The administration fee is equal to 3.0% of the monthly insurance premium for as long as the loan remains outstanding.

Cost of Services and Operating Expenses

Cost of services. Cost of services primarily consists of fees paid to third party resellers for lead-generation efforts, compensation and benefits expense relating to employees engaged in lenders’ services and claims administration activities, fees paid for actuarial services related to the development of the monthly premium program and fees for integration with loan origination systems of automotive lenders. We generally expect cost of services to increase in absolute dollars as the total number of certified loans continues to grow, but remain relatively constant in the near to immediate term as a percentage of our program fee revenue.

General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses are comprised primarily of expenses relating to employee compensation and benefits, share-based compensation, travel, meals and entertainment expenses, IT expenses and professional and consulting fees. In the near term we expect our general and administrative expenses to increase in absolute dollar terms and as a percentage of revenue as we implement the internal control and compliance procedures required of public companies. In the intermediate term, we expect our general and administrative expenses to continue to increase in absolute dollars as the total number of certified loans continues to grow.

Selling and marketing expenses. Selling and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and benefits of employees engaged in selling and marketing activities. We generally expect our selling and marketing expenses to increase in absolute dollars as the total number of certified loans continues to grow, but remain constant in the near to immediate term as a percentage of our program fee revenue.

Research and development expenses. Research and development expenses consist of employee compensation and benefits expenses for employees engaged in ongoing development of its software technology platform. We generally expect our research and development expenses to increase in absolute dollars as our business continues to grow.

Other Income (Expense)

Change in fair value of contingent consideration. Change in fair value of contingent consideration reflects the non-cash impact of changes in the fair value of Company common stock issued as contingent consideration in connection with our Business Combination on June 10, 2020. The fair value of contingent consideration is based on a Monte Carlo simulation of the Company’s common stock as compared to certain market share price milestones, and is primarily based on our peer group due to our limited history, as well as our future implied

47

volatility, a significant unobservable input. The change in the fair value of contingent consideration during the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 was driven by the change in fair value from June 10, 2020 through the date immediately before each tranche of contingent consideration shares vested.

Interest expense. Interest expense includes interest payments and the amortization of the debt issuance costs in connection with the notes payable.

Other Income (Expense). For the year ending December 31, 2020, other income (expense) includes a $(4.3) million non-cash charge related to a change in the measurement of our Tax Receivable Agreement liability as a result of changes in our blended state tax rate. Please see Note 18 “Income Taxes”. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, other income (expense) primarily consists of sponsorship and registration fees for our annual Executive Leadership Conference.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth selected consolidated statements of income data for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:

48

Key Performance Measures

The following table set forth key performance measures for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018:

Year Ended December 31, 2020 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2019

Revenue

Total revenue increased by $16.0 million, or 17.3%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in total revenue was driven by an increase in anticipated profit share, program fees and claims administration service fee revenues on new originations.

Program fee revenue increased by $7.3 million, or 20.0%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. Despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, certified loan volume was up by 20.1% for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to the prior year.

Profit share revenue increased by $7.4 million, or 13.9%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. This increase in profit share revenue was driven primarily by a $13.9 million increase in anticipated profit share from new originations during the current year as compared to 2019. Despite this increase in new business, our year to date results were negatively impacted by a $(1.6) million reduction in estimated future underwriting profit share for claims and premiums associated with business written in historic periods, primarily as a result of the economic slowdown attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic. This reduction in future profit share is a change in estimated variable consideration in accordance with ASC 606.

Revenue from claims administration service fees, which represents 3.0% of our insurance partners’ annual earned premium, increased by $1.4 million, or 43.4% for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to 2019 due to a 44.2% increase in total earned premium.

49

Cost of Services, Gross Profit and Gross Margin

Costs of services increased by $2.0 million, or 25.4%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 compared to the year ended December 31, 2019 primarily driven by an increase in fees paid to resellers, an increase in employee compensation and benefits expense and an increase in costs for actuarial services.

Gross profit increased by $14.1 million, or 16.5%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019, driven by an increase in anticipated profit share, programs fees and claims administration revenues on new originations.

Operating Expenses, Operating Income and Operating Margin

General and administrative expenses increased by $18.8 million, or 136.6%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. The year ended December 31, 2020 includes $9.1 million in transaction bonuses awarded to key employees and directors of Open Lending, LLC and $2.2 million of non-cash charges incurred in connection with the accelerated vesting of share-based awards, which were incurred during the second quarter 2020, as a result of the Business Combination. In connection with the underwritten public offering by the selling stockholders during the fourth quarter, we incurred approximately $0.7 million in legal and professional fees. General and administrative expenses also reflect an increase of $2.1 million in employee compensation and benefits and $2.4 million in directors and officers liability insurance, in addition to $2.7 million in professional service fees associated with public filings and our implementation of enhanced internal control and compliance procedures required of public companies; offset by a decline of $1.2 million in travel expenses due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Selling and marketing expenses increased by $0.4 million, or 4.8%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019 primarily due to an increase of $0.6 million in employee compensation and benefits expense to sales and account management employees, driven by increased sales; partially offset by a $0.2 million decrease in marketing and promotion expenses.

50

Research and development expenses increased by $0.8 million, or 67.9%, for the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019 due to an increase in headcount costs driven by an increase in engineering personnel to support LPP.

Operating income for the year ended December 31, 2020, declined by $5.9 million, or 9.4%, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019, which was primarily attributable to the increase in operating expenses associated with the Business Combination including, the $9.1 million transaction bonuses, $4.0 million in employee compensation and benefits related to increased headcount as we expand our business, $2.4 million for directors and officers liability insurance, $2.2 million due to the accelerated recognition of share-based compensation, and $3.4 million in professional service fees. The increase in operating expenses was partially offset by the increase of $14.1 million in gross profit as discussed above, and a $1.2 million decrease in travel expenses.

Contingent Consideration

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded $131.9 million in non-cash charges for the change in the fair value of contingent consideration from June 10, 2020 through the vesting of the contingent consideration.

Interest Expense

Interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2020, increased by $11.3 million as compared to the prior year, as a result of entering into our term loan agreement in first quarter 2020.

Other Income (Expense)

For the year ending December 31, 2020, other income (expense) includes a $(4.3) million non-cash charge related to a change in the measurement of our Tax Receivable Agreement liability as a result of changes in our blended state tax rate. Please see Note 18 “Income Taxes”. During the twelve months ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, other income (expense) primarily consists of sponsorship and registration fees for our annual Executive Leadership Conference.

Income Taxes

Our effective tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2020 was (7.2)%, as compared to an effective tax rate of (0.1)% for the year ended December 31, 2019. The change in the effective tax rate for both comparative periods is due primarily to the taxable entity structure adopted in connection with the Business Combination that was consummated on June 10, 2020. Also, in relation to the Business Combination, we incurred significant non-deductible expenses including, but not limited to, the change in fair value of contingent consideration.

Net Income (Loss)

For the reasons discussed above, we recorded a net loss of $(97.6) million during the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to a net income of $62.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2019.

Adjusted EBITDA

For the year ended December 31, 2020, Adjusted EBITDA increased by $4.6 million, or 7.1%, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019. Adjusted EBITDA margin for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased to 63.8% as compared to 69.9% for the year ended December 31, 2019. The decline in Adjusted EBITDA during the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the previous year reflects a $(1.6) million reduction in estimated future underwriting profits primarily as a result of the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our 2020 results were also impacted by an increase in general and administrative expenses as we implement the internal control and compliance procedures required of public companies.

51

Year Ended December 31, 2019 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2018

Revenue

Results presented for the year ended December 31, 2019 reflect the impact of our adoption of Accounting Standards Update 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (Topic 606) (“ASC 606”) and related cost capitalization guidance, which was adopted by us on January 1, 2019, using the modified retrospective transition method. The adoption of ASC 606 resulted in our recognizing as revenue the share of our insurance partners’ aggregate underwriting profit to which we expect to be entitled in the future. We therefore makes assumptions about future premiums and claims to be experienced on our insurance partner’s portfolios. Were these assumptions to differ from actual premium and claims, we would revise our expectations relating to business underwritten by our insurance partners in historic periods. These revisions, if positive, are also booked as revenue or, if negative, are netted against revenue. In application of the modified retrospective transition method, our prior period results have not been restated to reflect the impact of ASC 606. This lack of comparability should be considered in reviewing this discussion and analysis. Refer to Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the impact of the adoption of ASC 606.

The following table provides the components of our total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Total revenue increased by $40.7 million or 77.9% for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 due to a 38.3% increase in certified loans, along with an overall 1.8% increase in average loan amount and a $19.2 million increase in profit share revenue that resulted from the adoption of ASC 606. As our prior period results have not been restated, the comparability to the year ended December 31, 2018 is impacted.

Program fees revenue increased by $11.6 million, or 46.4%, for the year ended December 31, 2019 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, primarily driven by a 38.3% increase in certified loans. Program fee revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019 also benefited from higher average program fees earned on single-pay certified loans, which increased by 5.2% as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, and a 68.3% increase in monthly-pay certified loans, which have higher average program fees per loan. As a result, program fee revenue from monthly-pay certified loans increased to represent 29.4% of total program fee revenue in the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to 25.5% for the year ended December 31, 2018. In future periods we expect a significant increase in certified loans from OEM Captives, which would increase the proportion of single-pay certified loans.

Profit share revenue increased by $28.2 million, or 113.6%, for the year ended December 31, 2019 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 due to 38.3% growth in certified loans, which translated into 35.8% growth in our insurance partners’ annual earned premium, and $19.2 million, or 77.4%, due to the adoption of ASC 606. Of the $19.2 million increase resulting from the adoption of ASC 606, $14.4 million relates to the recognition of the share of our insurance partners’ aggregate underwriting profit to which we expect to be entitled. The remaining $4.9 million relates to the revision of our expectations for claims and premiums related to business written in historic periods.

52

Revenue from claims administration service fees, which represents 3.0% of our insurance partners’ annual earned premium, increased by $0.8 million, or 35.8% for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 due to a 35.8% increase in total earned premium and a 663.5% increase in earned premium from CNA pursuant to the CNA Agreement.

Cost of Services, Gross Profit and Gross Margin

The following table shows our revenue, cost of services, gross profit and gross margin for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Costs of services increased by $3.2 million, or 69.6%, for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 primarily driven by an increase in fees paid to resellers, first-time costs associated with credit risk evaluation, an increase in employee compensation and benefits expense and an increase in costs for actuarial services.

Gross profit increased by $37.5 million, or 78.7% for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, due to organic revenue growth and the impact of adopting ASC 606; offset by the 69.6% increase in cost of services. For the same reasons, gross margin increased to 91.6% for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to 91.2% for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Operating Expenses, Operating Income and Operating Margin

The following table shows revenue, the components of our operating expenses, operating income and operating margin for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

General and administrative expenses increased by $1.6 million, or 13.6% for the year ended December 31, 2019 when compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 primarily due to an increase in employee compensation and benefits expenses, driven by an increase in headcount, an increase in travel, meals and entertainment costs, an increase in IT costs, and an increase in professional and consulting fees. These increases were partially offset by a decline in share-based compensation expense and a decline in business development expenses. In the short

53

term, we expect to experience an increase in its general & administrative expenses as we implement the internal control and compliance procedures required of public companies.

Selling and marketing expenses increased by $1.3 million, or 20.9%, for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 primarily due to an increase in employee compensation and benefits expense due to increased sales activity, partially offset by a decline in share-based compensation and a decline in marketing expenses.

Research and development expenses increased by $0.4 million, or 45.9%, for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 due to an increase in headcount costs related to an increase in engineering personnel.

Operating income for the year ended December 31, 2019, increased by $34.1 million, or 119.9% as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 primarily due to the aforementioned 78.7% increase in gross profit, offset primarily by the 13.6% increase in general administrative expenses and the 20.9% increase in selling and marketing expenses. As a result of the above, operating margin increased from 54.6% for the year ended December 31, 2018 to 67.4% for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Net Income

For the reasons discussed above and considering the immaterial impact of other expenses and income tax for the year, our net income for the year ended December 31, 2019 increased by $34.3 million or 121.2% as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018.

Adjusted EBITDA

For the year ended December 31, 2019, Adjusted EBITDA increased by $33.6 million or 107.4% as compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, as a result of the 121.2% increase in net income, offset by a smaller adjustment for share-based compensation, which decreased by 22.9%. For the same reasons, Adjusted EBITDA margin for the year ended December 31, 2019 increased to 69.9% as compared to 60.0% in the year ended December 31, 2018. Please see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow and Liquidity Analysis

We assesses liquidity primarily in terms of our ability to generate cash to fund operating and financing activities. A significant portion of our cash from operating activities are derived from our profit share arrangements with our insurance partners, which are subject to judgements and assumptions and are, therefore, subject to variability. Refer to “Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” and “Risk Factors” for a full description of the related estimates, assumptions, and judgments.

The following table provides a summary of cash flow data:

54

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

Our cash flows provided by operating activities primarily consists of operating income and adjustments for net changes in operating assets and liabilities, primarily changes in our accounts receivable, prepaid expenses, contract assets, accounts payable and accrued expenses.

Our net cash from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $24.6 million. For the year ended December 31, 2020, net cash provided by operating activities was primarily attributable to income excluding the impact of fair value adjustment of contingent consideration as well as increased payments collected from customers on account receivables; partially offset by a $26.4 million increase in contract assets.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, net cash provided by operating activities was $41.8 million. This cash provided was primarily from an increase in net income. Cash provided by operating activities also resulted from $2.0 million in share-based compensation, which was offset by a $21.7 million increase in contract assets due to the ASC 606 adoption, $1.8 million increase in accounts receivable, and a $0.8 million increase in prepaid expenses.

For the year ended December 31, 2018, net cash provided by operating activities was $28.6 million. This cash provided was primarily from an increase in net income. Cash provided by operating activities also resulted from $2.5 million in share-based compensation, which was offset by a $2.6 million change in unbilled revenue, a $0.4 million change in accounts receivable, and a $0.5 million change in prepaid expenses.

Net cash payments on notes payable for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018 related to our indebtedness totaled $6.5 million, $2.5 million and $2.5 million, respectively. Our net cash from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018 was $24.6 million, $41.8 million and $28.6 million, respectively. Accordingly, our net cash from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018 was sufficient to cover these payments.

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, net cash used in investing activities was $1.2 million, $0.1 million and $0.1 million, respectively. This cash was used primarily for purchases of furniture and equipment.

Cash Flows from Financing Activities.

Our cash flows provided by and used in financing activities primarily consists of proceeds from the issuance of long term debt and the associated debt issuance cost, repayment of notes payable, distributions to Open Lending, LLC’s unitholders, share repurchases, proceeds from stock warrant exercise transactions and our equity recapitalization.

For the year ended December 31, 2020, net cash provided by financing activities was $70.8 million. The cash inflow includes $159.9 million in net proceeds associated with our term loan secured through a credit agreement entered into March 11, 2020, and $105.3 million in proceeds received in connection with stock warrant exercise transactions. The cash used primarily consisted of a $135.6 million distribution to Open Lending, LLC’s unitholders, $37.5 million related to our repurchase of 1,395,089 shares of our common stock held in treasury stock on December 14, 2020, $14.9 million in connection with our recapitalization, net of transaction costs, and $6.5 million of debt principal repayments.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, net cash used in financing activities was $44.9 million. This cash used primarily consisted of a $2.5 million debt principal repayment and a $42.4 million distribution to Open Lending, LLC’s unitholders.

55

For the year ended December 31, 2018, net cash used in financing activities was $21.4 million. This cash used primarily consisted of a $2.5 million debt principal repayment and a $18.9 million distribution to Open Lending, LLC’s unitholders.

Long-Term Debt

Our long-term debt consists of a $170.0 million Term Loan under the Credit Agreement that we entered into on March 11, 2020. The Term Loan in a principal amount of $170.0 million was funded on March 12, 2020. The proceeds of the Term Loan, together with cash on hand, was used (i) to make investor loans, (ii) to finance a distribution to equity investors prior to the consummation of the Business Combination, (iii) to pay transaction expenses and (iv) for other general corporate purposes and working capital.

Tax Receivable Agreement

In connection with the Closing, the Company entered into a Tax Receivable Agreement with Nebula, the Blocker, Blocker’s sole shareholder, and Open Lending LLC. The Tax Receivable Agreement generally provides for the payment by the Company to the TRA holders, as applicable, of 85% of the net cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal, state and local income tax that the Company actually realizes (or are deemed to realize in certain circumstances) in periods after the Closing as a result of: (i) certain tax attributes of Blocker and/or Open Lending LLC that existed prior to the Business Combination and were attributable to the Blocker; (ii) certain increases in the tax basis of Open Lending LLC’s assets resulting from the Transactions; (iii) imputed interest deemed to be paid by the Company as a result of payments the Company makes under the Tax Receivable Agreement; and (iv) certain increases in tax basis resulting from payments the Company makes under the Tax Receivable Agreement. The Company will retain the benefit of the remaining 15% of these cash savings. As of December 31, 2020, the liability recognized for the Tax Receivable Agreement was $92.4 million. There was a $(4.3) million non-cash charge related to a change in the measurement of our Tax Receivable Agreement liability as a result of changes in our blended state tax rate. Please see Note 18 Income Taxes.

The actual increases in tax basis, as well as the amount and timing of any payments under the Tax Receivable Agreements, will vary depending upon a number of factors, including the amount and timing of the taxable income the Company generates in the future, the U.S. federal income tax rates then applicable and the portion of the payments under the Tax Receivable Agreements that constitute imputed interest or give rise to depreciable or amortizable tax basis. The foregoing amount of expected future payments to TRA holders is merely an estimate and the actual payments could differ materially. It is possible that future transactions or events could increase or decrease the actual tax benefits realized and the corresponding Tax Receivable Agreements payments as compared to the foregoing estimates.

Unitholders’ Distribution

On March 24, 2020, Open Lending, LLC’s Board of Managers approved a non-liquidating cash distribution to its Members in the amount of $135.0 million and retained cash reserves of $35.0 million in light of recent events, including the uncertainties created by the occurrence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The cash reserve is in excess of the minimum requirements under the Company’s Credit Agreement.

As of December 31, 2020, our cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash was $104.1 million. Projected operating cash flows and available cash on hand is expected to support our business operations for the foreseeable future. Given the uncertainty in market and economic conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, we will continue to evaluate the nature and extent of the impact to its business and financial position.

Our liquidity and ability to fund its capital requirements is dependent on our future financial performance, which is subject to general economic, financial and other factors that are beyond our control and many of which are described under “Risk Factors.” If those factors significantly change or other unexpected factors adversely affect us, our business may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations, or it may not be able to obtain future financings to meet its liquidity needs.

56

Other Factors Affecting Liquidity and Capital Resources

Operating Lease Obligations. Our operating lease obligation consists of a lease of real property under a non-cancellable operating lease executed on June 17, 2019 (the “G&I Lease”), with G&I VII Barton Skyway LP, a Delaware limited partnership, to lease an office space located at 1501 South MoPac Expressway, Austin, TX 78746 (Suite 450) for a period of 100 months commencing on October 1, 2020. The lease agreement provides an extension option for a period of 60 months beyond the end of the initial term, subject to specific conditions. Under the G&I Lease, there are $0.8 million of operating lease obligations due within the next twelve months.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Adjusted EBITDA

Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure used by management to evaluate its operating performance, generate future operating plans, and make strategic decisions, including those relating to operating expenses and the allocation of internal resources. Accordingly, we believe these measures provide useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our operating results in the same manner as our management and Board of Directors. In addition, they provide useful measures for period-to-period comparisons of our business, as they remove the effect of certain non-cash items and certain variable charges. Adjusted EBITDA is defined as GAAP net income (loss) excluding interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization expense, share-based compensation expense, change in fair value of contingent consideration, change in measurement—Tax Receivable Agreement and transaction bonuses as a result of the Business Combination.

The following table presents a reconciliation of net income to Adjusted EBITDA for each of the periods indicated:

For the year ended December 31, 2020, Adjusted EBITDA increased by $4.6 million, or 7.1%, as compared to year ended December 31, 2019. Adjusted EBITDA margin for the year ended December 31, 2020 decreased to 63.8% as compared to 69.9% for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in Adjusted EBITDA during the year ended December 31, 2020 reflects our revenue growth driven by an increase in certified loan volume, year over year, partially offset by an increase in the cost of sales and operating expenses during the current year. The decline in Adjusted EBITDA margin during the year ended December 31, 2020 as compared to the previous year reflects a $(1.6) million reduction in estimated future underwriting profits primarily as a result of the

57

economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our current year margin was also affected by an increase in general and administrative expenses as we implement the internal control and compliance procedures required of public companies.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, Adjusted EBITDA increased by $33.6 million, or 107.4%, as compared to year ended December 31, 2018. Adjusted EBITDA margin for the year ended December 31, 2019 increased to 69.9% as compared to 60.0% for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in Adjusted EBITDA during the year ended December 31, 2019 reflects organic revenue growth and the impact of adopting ASC 606; partially offset by an increase in the cost of sales and operating expenses.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

In preparing our consolidated financial statements, we make assumptions, judgments and estimates that can have a significant impact on our revenue, loss from operations and net loss, as well as on the value of certain assets and liabilities on its consolidated balance sheets. We bases our assumptions, judgments and estimates on historical experience and various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To prepare these financial statements, we makes estimates, assumption, and judgments that affect what we reports as our assets and liabilities, what we disclose as contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the periods presented.

In accordance with our policies, we regularly evaluate our estimates, assumptions, and judgments, including, but not limited to, those concerning revenue recognition, depreciation and amortization, contingencies, share-based compensation, and income taxes, and bases its estimates, assumptions, and judgments on its historical experience and on factors we believe reasonable under the circumstances. The results involve judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities not readily apparent from other sources. If our assumptions or conditions change, the actual results we report may differ from these estimates. We believe the following critical accounting policies affect the more significant estimates, assumptions, and judgments we use to prepare these consolidated financial statements. See Note 2 “Summary of Significant Accounting and Reporting Policies” in the notes accompanying our financial statements for a summary of our significant accounting policies, and discussion of recent accounting pronouncements.

Profit Share Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenues in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board, Accounting Standards Codification Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Application of ASC 606 requires us to make judgments and estimates related to the classification, measurement and recognition of revenue. Our revenue primarily consists of program fees derived from contracts with lending institutions, and profit share and claims administration service fees from contracts with insurance carriers, and is recognized when the contractual performance obligation is satisfied. See Note 11 “Revenue”, of the accompanying consolidated financial statements for more information.

The primary judgment relating to the recognition of revenue is the estimation of our profit share with our insurance partners, which relies on market rate assumptions and our proprietary database, which has been accumulated over the last 20 years, and market rate assumptions. To determine the profit share revenue, we use forecasts of loan-level earned premium and insurance claim payments. These forecasts are driven by the projection of loan defaults, prepayments and severity rates. These assumptions are based on our observations of the historical behavior for loans with similar risk characteristics. The assumptions also take consideration of the forecast adjustments under various macroeconomic conditions and the current mix of the underlying portfolio of our insurance partners. To the extent these assumptions change, our profit share revenue will be adjusted.

58

For profit share revenue recognition purposes, particularly to measure the profit share variable consideration, we update our forecast of loan default and prepayment assumptions on a quarterly basis. The loan default rate also incorporates multiple macro-economic scenarios with conservatism embedded in a stressed scenario to ensure a representation of an economic recession.

When we deem it necessary, we back-test the major estimate assumptions to ensure the accuracy of the revenue recognition model. We also benchmark back-testing results of our forecast defaults rates against those reported by auto lenders. We update our profit-share forecasting model on an annual basis, resulting in a forecasted prepayment rate consistent with actual prepayment rates.

The impact on profit share revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 resulting from our sensitivity analysis is summarized below:

Federal and State Income Taxes

Prior to closing of the Business Combination, Open Lending, LLC, the sole owner of Lenders Protection, LLC and Open Lending Services, Inc., was a treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Therefore, no provision had historically been made for federal income tax purposes prior to the closing.

Subsequent to closing, Open Lending, LLC became a disregarded entity, wholly owned by the Company by and through its wholly owned subsidiaries. As of the close of the Business Combination, the Company has been subject to U.S. federal income tax on a consolidated basis.

Our effective tax rate is based on income at statutory tax rates, adjusted for non-taxable and non-deductible items and tax credits. Management’s best estimate of future events and their impact is included in our effective tax rate. Certain changes or future events, such as changes in tax legislation, could have an impact on our estimates and effective tax rate. Audit periods remain open for review until the statute of limitations has passed.

The calculation of income taxes involves estimating the actual current tax liability together with assessing temporary differences in recognition of income (loss) for tax and accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. We record a valuation allowance when it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we are required to develop estimates of the anticipated timing of the reversal of existing deferred tax liabilities, as well as estimates of future taxable income in some instances. Judgment is inherent in this process and differences between the estimated and actual amounts could result in a material impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.

We recognize liabilities for uncertain tax positions based on a two-step process. The first step requires us to determine whether the weight of available evidence indicates that the tax position has met the threshold for recognition. Therefore, we must evaluate whether it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes. The second step requires us to measure the tax benefit of the tax position taken, or expected to be taken, in an income tax return as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. This measurement step is inherently complex and requires subjective estimations of such amounts to determine the probability of various possible outcomes. We re-evaluate the uncertain tax positions each quarter based on factors including, but not limited to, changes in facts or circumstances, changes in tax law, expirations of statutes of limitation, effectively settled issues under audit, and new audit activity. Such a change in recognition or measurement would result in the recognition of a tax benefit or an additional charge to the tax provision in the period.

59

Although we believe the Company has no material uncertain tax positions as of December 31, 2020 or December 31, 2019, no assurance can be given that the final outcome of these matters will align with the positions reflected within these financial statements.

Share-Based Compensation Awards

We measure and recognize compensation expense for all share-based awards made to employees based on estimated fair values on the date of grant. The compensation expense is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period. Forfeitures are recognized as occurred. To determine the fair value of the share-based awards, we use the closing price of our common stock publicly traded on NASDAQ on the date of grant for RSU awards, we utilize a waterfall model set-up using the Monte-Carlo simulation framework for profit interests, and we utilize the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value stock options, both of which models involve inputs for the share value of Open Lending, expected share volatility, expected term of the awards, risk-free interest rate and expected dividend.

This determination of fair value is affected by assumptions regarding a number of highly complex and subjective variables. Changes in the subjective assumptions can materially affect the estimate of their fair value. See Note 12 “Share-Based Compensation”, of the accompanying consolidated financial statements for more information.

Emerging Growth Company

Pursuant to the JOBS Act, an emerging growth company may adopt new or revised accounting standards that may be issued by FASB or the SEC either (i) within the same periods as those otherwise applicable to non-emerging growth companies or (ii) within the same time periods as private companies. We intend to take advantage of the exemption for complying with new or revised accounting standards within the same time periods as private companies. Accordingly, the information contained herein may be different than the information provided by other public companies.

We also intend to take advantage of some of the reduced regulatory and reporting requirements of emerging growth companies pursuant to the JOBS Act so long as we qualify as an emerging growth company, including, but not limited to, an exemption from the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation, and exemptions from the requirements of holding non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation and golden parachute payments.

New Accounting Standards Issued But Not Yet Adopted

See Note 2 “Summary of Significant Accounting and Reporting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements for our discussion about new accounting pronouncements adopted and those pending.

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have not engaged in off-balance sheet financing arrangements, as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of Regulation S-K.

Related Party Transactions

Pursuant to a Stock Repurchase Agreement, dated as of December 7, 2020, between Open Lending and the selling stockholders, as part of the underwritten public offering as described above, we repurchased from the selling stockholders an aggregate number of 1,395,089 shares of our common stock totaling $37.5 million at the same per share price paid by the underwriters to the selling stockholders in the offering.

60

On March 25, 2020, Mr. Jessup borrowed $6.0 million from Open Lending in accordance with the promissory note in place and the loan was paid in full by Mr. Jessup on March 30, 2020, with proceeds received as a result of the non-liquidating distribution paid by Open Lending to its members.

We incurred consulting expenses of approximately $0.7 million and $0.6 million in the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, with entities owned by members of our management team and board of directors. These expenses include consulting fees paid to EWMW, LP, owned by Sandy Watkins, former Chairman of our board of directors, fees related to marketing services provided by Objective Advisors, Inc., owned by the wife of John Flynn, CEO of our company, and human resource services rendered by HireBetter, LLC, which is owned by Kurt Wilkin, a former member of our board of directors.

We believe the terms obtained or consideration that it paid, as applicable, in connection with the transactions described above were comparable to terms available or the amounts that would be paid, as applicable, in arm’s-length transactions.

Contractual Obligations

As of December 31, 2020, our principal commitments consisted of obligations under the Credit Agreement and operating lease obligations. The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2020:

Please see “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a discussion of our debt and operating lease obligations. Our operations include activities in the United States. These operations expose us to a variety of market risks, including the effects of changes in interest rates and changes in consumer attitudes toward vehicle ownership. We monitor and manage these financial exposures as an integral part of its overall risk management program.

Market Risk

In the normal course of business, we are exposed to market risk and have established policies designed to protect against the adverse effects of this exposure. We are exposed to risks associated with general economic conditions and the impact of the economic environment on the willingness of consumers to finance auto purchases. Specifically, economic factors such as interest rate levels, changes in monetary and related policies, market volatility, consumer confidence and, unemployment rates in particular also influence consumer spending and borrowing patterns. We also face risk from competition to sign, maintain and develop new relationships with auto lenders as well as competition from a wide variety of auto lenders who are (or are affiliated) with financial institutions and have capacity to hold loans on their balance sheets.

Concentration Risk

Historically, we have not had significant concentration risk in our client base. However, for some period of time in the future, we expect a significant portion of certified loan volume to come from OEM Captives. Additionally, we rely on our largest insurance partner for a significant portion of our profit share and claims administration service fee revenue. Termination or disruption of this relationship could materially adversely impact our revenue.

61

Interest Rate Risk

We entered into the Credit Agreement providing for the Term Loan on March 11, 2020, requiring us to make monthly principal and interest payments based on a rate of LIBOR plus 6.50% (subject to a 1% LIBOR floor) or the base rate plus 5.50%. We had $166.8 million of borrowings outstanding under the Term Loan as of December 31, 2020.

62

BUSINESS

Company Overview

We are a leading provider of lending enablement and risk analytics to credit unions, regional banks and the captive finance companies of Original Equipment Manufacturers (“OEM Captives”). Open Lending’s clients, collectively referred to herein as automotive lenders, make automotive loans to underserved non-prime and near-prime borrowers by harnessing our risk-based pricing models, powered by Open Lending’s proprietary data and real-time underwriting of automotive loan default insurance coverage from insurers. Since Open Lending’s inception in 2000, we have facilitated over $9.2 billion in automotive loans, accumulating over 20 years of proprietary data and developing over two million unique risk profiles. As of February 2021, We cater to approximately 360 active automotive lenders.

Open Lending specializes in risk-based pricing and modeling and provides automated decision-technology for automotive lenders throughout the United States. We believe that we address the financing needs of near-prime and non-prime borrowers, or borrowers with a credit score between 560 and 699, who are underserved in the automotive finance industry. Traditional lenders focus on prime borrowers, where an efficient market has developed with interest rate competition that benefits borrowers. Independent finance companies focus on sub-prime borrowers. Borrowers that utilize the near-prime and non-prime automotive lending market have fewer lenders focused on loans with longer terms or higher advance rates. As a result, near-prime and non-prime borrowers often turn to sub-prime lenders, resulting in higher interest rate loan offerings than the consumers’ credit profile often merits or warrants. Open Lending seeks to make this market more competitive, resulting in more attractive loan terms.

We believe that Open Lending’s market opportunity is significant. The near-prime and non-prime automotive loan market in the U.S. is $250 billion annually, resulting in an approximate $14.4 billion annual revenue opportunity for Open Lending. Open Lending is currently serving less than 1% of this market, providing a significant opportunity for Open Lending to continue to grow. Open Lending addresses this market through the LPP.

Open Lending’s LPP enables automotive lenders to make loans that are insured against losses from defaults. Open Lending has been developing and advancing the proprietary underwriting models used by LPP for approximately 20 years. LPP provides significant benefits to Open Lending’s growing ecosystem of automotive lenders, automobile dealers and insurers.

A key element of LPP is the ability to facilitate risk-based interest rates that are appropriate for each loan and lender. Open Lending’s interest rate pricing is customized to each automotive lender, reflecting the cost of capital, loan servicing costs, loan acquisition costs, expected recovery rates and target return on assets of each. Using Open Lending’s risk models, Open Lending projects monthly loan performance results, including expected losses and prepayments for automotive lenders that use LPP. The product of this process is a risk-based interest rate, inclusive of elements to recover all projected costs, program fees and insurance premiums, given the risk of the loan, to return a targeted return on asset goal. For the fiscal year 2020, LPP generated, on average, approximately $1,155 in revenue per loan, inclusive of the program fee, administrative fee and profit share.

Automotive Lenders and Dealers. Open Lending’s customers for its LPP are automotive lenders who rely on Open Lending to help them make more loans, by assessing the risk of the loan. Open Lending’s customers also rely on Open Lending to assist in insuring against the default of these loans by helping pair these customers with highly-rated insurance companies that mitigate the added risk associated with lending to near-prime and non-prime borrowers. The LPP enables lenders to expand their lending guidelines to offer loans to borrowers with lower credit scores, potentially leading to higher loan advance rates and increased loan volumes. LPP is designed to provide a seamless, real-time experience for automotive lenders that is intuitive and easy to use. LPP integrates directly with lenders’ existing loan origination systems (“LOS”), while also allowing the dealers and automotive lenders to electronically receive all-inclusive loan rates in real-time with no manual intervention.

63

Open Lending’s business model is a B2B2C model. Open Lending’s customers are automotive lenders, who serve millions of borrowers, who in turn are the customers of the automotive lenders. Open Lending gets access to loan application information from the automotive lenders. Open Lending supports loans originated through a number of channels, including direct loans where the customer interfaces directly with the lender, indirect loans through networks of auto dealers who work with Open Lending’s automotive lenders, and in targeted refinance programs implemented by Open Lending’s automotive lenders.

Insurers. The insurance carriers are required to maintain an “A” rating by A.M. Best insurance rating company. Open Lending partners with insurance carriers who provide default insurance to automotive lenders on individual automotive loans made by their lenders and LPP underwrites the risk on each loan application. The insurance carriers issue default insurance to Open Lending’s automotive lending customers that cover the loans generated through LPP. The default insurance is “first loss” insurance with limits on coverage tied to vehicle recovery rates, which encourages Open Lending’s automotive lenders to maximize recoveries on repossessed automobiles and creates a strong alignment of interest. As part of the insurance policy, the automotive lender is listed as the named insured under the policy representing a direct contractual relationship between the automotive lender and the insurer.

The insurance carriers contract with Open Lending’s indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, Insurance Administrative Services LLC (“IAS”), to perform claims administration and in turn pay Open Lending administrative fees representing a portion of the insurance premiums paid by the automotive lenders. As Open Lending’s subsidiary, IAS provides continuity of customer service and allows for a seamless experience between LPP and the automotive lenders. Open Lending has one-way exclusivity agreements with AmTrust North America, Inc. and CNA Financial Corp. through December 31, 2023, which are described below.

LPP is powered by its proprietary technology that delivers speed, scalability and decision-making support for the automotive lenders. It supports the full transaction lifecycle, including credit application, underwriting, real-time insurance approval, settlement, servicing, invoicing of insurance premiums and fees, and advance data analytics of automotive lender’s portfolio under the program. Through data derived at loan origination and the data collected by IAS, Open Lending has loan life performance data on each loan in its portfolio insured to date.

Open Lending’s ecosystem of lenders and insurance carriers allows Open Lending to generate revenues with minimal customer acquisition, marketing and distribution costs, resulting in attractive unit economics and strong margins. When Open Lending signs a new automotive lender to LPP, the lender brings with them an aggregated customer base and access to an indirect auto lending dealer network.

Open Lending believes that it has a strong revenue model built upon repeat and growing usage by automotive lenders. Open Lending’s profitability is strongly correlated with transaction volume. In addition, Open Lending collects an administrative fee on the total earned monthly insurance premium on the insurance policies IAS services. The insurance premium for Open Lending’s insurers and its revenue streams are collected monthly by a surplus lines insurance broker, through automated clearing house transfers. Open Lending receives a profit share of the total monthly insurance underwriting profit earned by its insurers.

AmTrust Agreement

On October 22, 2013 Lenders Protection, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Open Lending (“Lenders Protection”), entered into a producer agreement (the “AmTrust Agreement”), as may be amended from time to time, with Amtrust North America, Inc. (“AmTrust”), through which Lenders Protection earns claims administration service fees and profit share revenue. Under the AmTrust Agreement, AmTrust facilitates the issuance of credit default insurance in connection with loans closed through the LPP. The AmTrust Agreement currently terminates on December 31, 2023, and thereafter automatically renews for two-year terms unless either party provides the other with written notice of termination at least 180 days prior to expiration. The AmTrust Agreement contains a non-competition provision in favor of Lenders Protection.

64

Under the AmTrust Agreement, early termination is permitted by either party at any time, upon mutual written consent; by either party upon a delivery of notice of termination in connection with certain specified bankruptcy events with respect to the other party; by AmTrust upon notice to Lenders Protection in the event that the surplus line broker fails to make payment to AmTrust; by either party upon 30 days’ written notice in the event of a material breach by the other party that is not cured; by either party immediately upon notice to the other due to any “problematic change of control” of the other party without prior written approval; by either party immediately if a governmental authority finds the AmTrust Agreement to be unenforceable; by Lenders Protection immediately in the event any carrier issuing policies fails to maintain an A.M. Best rating of at least “A-”; by Lenders Protection if AmTrust breaches the non-competition commitment; and by Lenders Protection within 90 days if AmTrust provides the Lenders Protection notice of its intent to compete.

Neither party may assign the AmTrust Agreement or any of its rights or delegate any of its duties or obligations thereunder in any transaction that does not constitute a change of control, without the prior written consent of the other party.

A “change of control” is defined under the AmTrust Agreement as: the sale of all or substantially all the assets of either party; the issuance, sale, or transfer of equity interests of either party following which the equity holders that hold a majority of the economic and voting interests of either party cease to own a majority of the equity interests of such entity; or any dissolution, winding up, cessation of business or liquidation of either party other than in connection with an event of bankruptcy. The Business Combination did not qualify as a change of control under the AmTrust Agreement.

A “problematic change of control” is defined as any change of control wherein the acquirer engages in a directly competitive business with Lenders Protection or AmTrust; or the acquiring party maintains, or is generally regarded as maintaining, creditworthiness less than that maintained by the party being acquired.

CNA Agreement

On October 1, 2017 Lenders Protection entered into a producer agreement (the “CNA Agreement”), as may be amended from time to time, with Continental Casualty Company (“CNA”), through which Lenders Protection earns claims administration service fees and profit share revenue. Under the CNA Agreement, CNA facilitates the issuance of credit default insurance policies to financial institutions that enter into a program agreement with Lenders Protection for use of its proprietary software platform. The CNA Agreement terminates on December 31, 2023, and automatically renews for one-year terms unless either party provides the other with written notice of termination at least 180 days prior to expiration. The CNA Agreement contains non-competition provision in favor of Lenders Protection.

Under the CNA Agreement, early termination is permitted by either party at any time, upon mutual written consent; by either party upon a delivery of notice of termination in connection with certain specified bankruptcy events with respect to the other party; by CNA upon notice to Lenders Protection in the event that the surplus line broker fails to make payment to CNA; by either party upon 30 days’ written notice and cure-period in the event of a material breach by the other party; by either party immediately upon notice to the other due to any “problematic change of control” of the other party without prior written approval; by either party immediately if a governmental authority finds the CNA Agreement to be unenforceable; by Lenders Protection immediately in the event any carrier issuing policies fails to maintain an “A” or “A.M. Best” rating; by Lenders Protection if CNA breaches the non-competition commitment; by Lenders Protection if CNA provides notice to Lenders Protection of its intent to compete; and by either party for fraud or willful misconduct.

Neither party may assign the CNA Agreement or any of its rights or delegate any of its duties or obligations thereunder in any transaction that does not constitute a change of control, without the prior written consent of the other party.

65

A “change of control” is defined under the CNA Agreement as: the sale of all or substantially all the assets of either party; the issuance, sale, or transfer of equity interests of either party following which the equityholders that hold a majority of the economic and voting interests of either party cease to own a majority of the equity interests of such entity; or any dissolution, winding up, cessation of business or liquidation of either party other than in connection with an event of bankruptcy. The Business Combination did not qualify as a change of control under the CNA Agreement.

A “problematic change of control” is defined under the producer agreement as any change of control of Lenders Protection wherein the acquirer is an insurance company engaged in a directly competitive business of CNA.

Open Lending’s Market Opportunity

Automotive loans for many near-prime and non-prime borrowers have been historically referred by the automotive lenders to third-party subprime financing companies. Open Lending’s proprietary technology enables automotive lenders to assess the creditworthiness of borrowers and mitigate credit risk through Open Lending’s unique insurance solution without losing the opportunity to such third-party finance companies. This helps Open Lending’s automotive lenders maintain their consumer relationships instead of turning their clients over to third-parties.

The automotive industry is still seeking solutions to address the near-prime and non-prime borrower market. The near-prime and non-prime automotive loan market is a large, underserved sector with an approximate $14.4 billion revenue opportunity from an annual $250.0 billion underlying near-prime and non-prime auto loan market in the U.S. Open Lending is currently engaged with less than 1% of this market. Open Lending presents a compelling value proposition to the national network of OEM Captives, credit unions, banks and other automotive lenders by expanding the range of credit scores and loan-to-values where lenders can safely and profitably lend. Through the use of LPP, Open Lending believes it allows automotive lenders to increase application flow from near-prime and non-prime borrowers and help them broaden credit appetite with limited incremental risk. The insurance protection against default of these loans increases the ability for the automotive lenders to enter into these lending transactions with minimal additional risk. Additionally, Open Lending has solidified its channel partner relationships with fintech online lending partners, who source auto loan applications off the internet and offer refinance opportunities to near-prime and non-prime borrowers who have been mispriced by sub-prime auto lenders. Presently, Open Lending also has relationships with two OEM Captives, as described below.

OEM #1

On July 12, 2019, Lenders Protection entered into a Master Services Agreement (the “MSA”) and a Program Agreement (the “Program Agreement”), and together with the MSA, the “FinCo Agreement”), with an auto finance company (“Auto FinCo”), through which Lenders Protection provides Auto FinCo access to and use of the LPP in exchange for compensation. Under the FinCo Agreement, Auto FinCo uses the LPP to make credit available for purchases of motor vehicles by customers who do not qualify for financing under Auto FinCo’s standard terms. The term of the Program Agreement continues until July 12, 2021, and automatically renews for one-year periods unless notice of non-renewal is given by either party to the other at least sixty days prior to the expiration date of the Program Agreement. Auto FinCo may terminate the MSA and/or the Program Agreement without cause upon one day prior written notice to Lenders Protection, and Lenders Protection may terminate the MSA and/or the Program Agreement without cause upon 180 days prior written notice to Auto FinCo. Either party may terminate the MSA and/or the Program Agreement for default as set forth in the MSA.

OEM #2

On October 1, 2019, Lenders Protection entered into an agreement with another auto finance company through which Lenders Protection provides access to and use of the LPP in exchange for program fees. Under the

66

agreement, the auto finance company utilizes the LPP to make credit available to borrowers. The term of this agreement continues until all insured loans are no longer covered under the program insurance defined in the agreement. For purposes of any future originations, either party may terminate this agreement upon breach by the other party of any of the sections of the agreement. So long as the underlying loans remain outstanding, the agreement will remain in place with respect to those loans.

Key Product

Lenders Protection Program, Open Lending’s flagship product, is an automotive lending program designed to underwrite default insurance on loans made to near-prime and non-prime borrowers. The program uses proprietary risk-based pricing models combined with loan default insurance provided by highly-rated third-party insurers. LPP links automotive lenders, LOS and insurance companies. LPP enables automotive lenders to assess the credit risk of a potential borrower within five seconds using data driven analysis, enabling the lender to generate an all-inclusive, insured, interest rate for a loan for the borrower.

The technology backing LPP is comprised of two primary elements. The first primary element is Open Lending’s proprietary, multi-tenant software technology platform, which functions to fulfill the needs of all constituents in Open Lending’s ecosystem. This software technology delivers underwriting results, loan-life reporting, consultative analyses and invoicing to Open Lending’s automotive lenders. This technology also fulfills the invoicing, reporting and collection needs of Open Lending’s insurers. Through electronic system integration, Open Lending’s software technology connects Open Lending to all parties in its ecosystem. Open Lending believes that its ability to perform these tasks in various work streams electronically provides it with the ability to rapidly scale at minimum cost.

The second primary element of the LPP is its unique database that drives risk decisioning, with proprietary data accumulated in the last 20 years. At origination when a loan is insured, all attributes of the transaction are stored in the database. Through IAS, Open Lending ultimately gets loan life performance data on each insured loan. Having extremely granular origination and performance data allows Open Lending’s data scientists and actuaries to constantly evolve and refine its risk models, based on actual experience and new third-party information sources. Open Lending’s dataset is more comprehensive than automotive lenders data regarding near-prime and non-prime auto loans (e.g. our data points include higher loan advance rates in lower credit scores, older model used cars, higher mileage vehicles, longer loan terms with lower credit score and higher loan-to-value borrowers). This allows Open Lending’s automotive lenders to make more loans to near-prime and non-prime borrowers that they might otherwise decline.

LPP risk models use a proprietary score in assessing and pricing risk on automotive loan applications. This proprietary score combines credit bureau data and alternative consumer data to more effectively assess risk and determine the appropriate insurance premium for any given loan application.

Open Lending is currently integrated with approximately twenty third-party LOS, allowing it to electronically accept, underwrite, price, and process loan applications and respond in real-time to the automotive lenders. Some of these third-party LOS also act as resellers for Open Lending, which lowers Open Lending’s customer acquisition costs.

Open Lending’s Ecosystem

Open Lending has built a robust ecosystem of automotive lenders, insurers and borrowers. LPP enables automotive lenders directly and borrowers indirectly to benefit from enhanced access to each other and to Open Lending’s technology, resulting in increased loan generation and access to the automotive market for a larger population.

67

Value Proposition to Lenders and Dealers

Increased sales volume. LPP allows automotive lenders to add financing solutions and increase underwriting and credit protection solutions that we believe enable such automotive lenders to make more near-prime and non-prime loans with attractive risk return profiles. We believe LPP also allows dealers to sell more vehicles to near-prime and non-prime borrowers by enabling them to make loans to borrowers with additional risk profiles. LPP also helps automotive lenders and dealers make loans on additional vehicles, including financing on older model vehicles, higher mileage used vehicles and on after-market product sales. Used vehicle sales increased in the United States for five consecutive years from 2016 to 2020.

Higher risk-adjusted return on assets. In an effort to manage risk, most automotive lenders concentrate their loan portfolios in super prime and prime auto loans. Automotive lenders’ appetite for these loans results in a very efficient market where competition is expressed through interest rates. For automotive lenders that do not have size and scale, the result is a compressed return on assets on their super prime and prime loan portfolios. The near-prime and non-prime segment is much less efficient and consumer behavior is driven more by monthly loan payments than interest rates. Consequently, LPP attempts to enable automotive lenders to generate higher returns on assets and equity than traditional prime and super prime portfolios with a risk profile buttressed by credit protection from highly rated insurers. Additionally, many of the loans generated using LPP have already been processed and denied through the automotive lender’s LOS. The automotive lenders already incur costs for processing such loans and LPP enables such lenders to convert the loss on a denied loan into an earning asset on its books.

Loss mitigation on near-prime and non-prime loans. Near-prime and non-prime auto loans carry more risk and higher losses than super prime and prime auto loans. The default insurance coverage offered to Open Lending’s customers transfers the vast majority of the risk and increased losses to the insurers.

Higher loan advance rates. LPP may enable higher loan advances relative to vehicle value on auto loans. This allows automotive dealers and lenders to get internal approvals more often on requested loan structures instead of receiving counter-offers at lower loan advance rates.

Seamless integration. Open Lending designs its LPP to be easily integrated into the LOS of the financial institutions and existing automotive lenders to enable its customers to facilitate loans and sales using the LPP. This frictionless onboarding makes consumer point-of-sale financing available for dealers and automotive lenders of all sizes.

68

Enhanced borrower experience. Utilizing LPP, automotive lenders can serve more borrowers and meet a broader range of their financing needs.

Value Proposition to Insurers

Access to our proprietary technology and merchant network. Over the past two decades, Open Lending has built and refined its technology to deliver significant value to automotive lenders and dealers. Open Lending believes its insurer partners would require significant time and investment to build such a technology solution and lender network themselves.

No customer acquisition cost and limited operating expenses. LPP alleviates the need for its insurance carriers to bear any marketing, software development or technology infrastructure costs to insure loans. In addition, by providing claims administration services to the carriers, the insurers have far less administrative burden in servicing the policies.

Unique risk with significant underwriting profitability. Auto loan default coverage is a relatively unique line of insurance for insurers and, historically, Open Lending’s insurers have experienced significant underwriting profitability.

Value Proposition for Borrowers

Lower interest rates. Given the costs and financial goals Open Lending’s automotive lenders target and the specific risk posed by each loan, the goal of LPP is to find the lowest interest rate possible for the borrowers. LPP finds the appropriate risk-based interest rate for each loan application.

Lower payments. Near-prime and non-prime borrowers are more sensitive to monthly payment requirements than interest rates. By allowing longer loan terms, LPP may lead to lower monthly payments for consumers. By eliminating or reducing down payments and lower monthly payments, LPP lowers borrowing costs and gives borrowers more disposable income.

Reduction or elimination of loan down payments. Automotive lenders that use LPP typically have higher loan advance rates relative to vehicle value than most other automotive lenders that do not use LPP, which Open Lending believes eliminates or materially reduces the down payment required of borrowers.

Our Business Model

Open Lending generates revenue of approximately 5% of the balance on each loan originated. Revenue is comprised of fees paid by automotive lenders for the use of LPP to underwrite loans; fees paid by Open Lending’s insurers for claim administration services; and, profit-sharing with insurers providing insurance protection to automotive lenders. Therefore, revenue is comprised of three streams: program fee, administration fee and insurance profit participation. The first two streams provide a fee-based revenue for the loans processed through LPP and the third stream is based on an underwriting profit share paid over the term of the loan. Nearly 70% of the expected revenue is collected by Open Lending in the first 12 months after loan origination, with the balance comprised of administration fees and underwriting profit share that are realized over the remaining life of the loan.

LPP fees vary as a percentage of the loan amount and average approximately $470 per loan, and are recognized upfront upon receipt of the loan by the consumer. The program fee is either paid in one single payment in the month following the month of certification of the loan or in equal monthly payments over the first 12 months following loan certification. Administration fees are collected for claims management performed by Open Lending’s subsidiary, IAS. Administration fees are 3% of monthly insurance premium for as long as a loan remains outstanding. The administration fee is recognized monthly as received and decreases over time as the

69

loan amortizes. The profit share represents Open Lending’s participation in the underwriting profit of the Lenders Protection Program. Open Lending receives 72% of the aggregate monthly insurance underwriting profit on each insurer’s portfolio, calculated as the monthly premium earned by the carrier less the carrier’s expenses and incurred losses. The underwriting profit on each loan is earned or received over its life with the majority earned in the first twelve months of the loan.

Open Lending’s flagship product has been tested through various economic cycles, including the economic downturn in 2008, enabling highly accurate risk pricing and credit decision-making with minimized loss ratios. Open Lending’s proprietary risk models have predicted the probability of default with greater than 99% accuracy for all loan applications submitted since 2010.

In addition, Open Lending has not historically had concentration risk in its client base, given that its lending clients are distributed across the country with Open Lending’s top 10 clients consistently accounting for approximately 30% of total program fees over the last three years. With the future certified loan volume Open Lending anticipates from OEM Captives, Open Lending does anticipate concentration risk for some period into the future. Open Lending expects to have significant concentration in its largest automotive lender relationships for the foreseeable future and anticipates that its business will experience significant concentration with OEM Captives throughout 2021.

Open Lending’s digital, success-based offering enables an efficient, low-cost distribution model and offers frictionless setup with minimal startup costs to automotive lenders. Compensation to Open Lending’s distribution partners is based on a percentage of the program fees it actually collects and, therefore, is entirely success based. For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, the aggregate compensation paid by Open Lending to its distribution partners was $3.0 million, $2.4 million and $1.4 million, respectively. Open Lending’s integration with many LOS systems, some of which also act as resellers, further helps drive client generation and recruitment at minimal additional costs. Open Lending focuses on lenders with over $100 million in automotive loan assets and Open Lending has more than tripled its client base since 2013.

Open Lending’s Partners

Open Lending’s lending partners include credit unions, regional banks, automotive OEM Captives and non-bank auto finance companies. Open Lending has additional partners that provide auto loan sourcing and loan fulfillment services to its automotive lenders. These companies obtain a substantial proportion of their auto purchase or auto refinance applications from internet-based auto selling, buying or consumer credit management sites. Open Lending is also in discussions with additional banks and OEM Captives, with which Open Lending may partner in the future. Open Lending currently partners with AmTrust and CNA as its two insurance carriers.

Competition

Competition for Open Lending occurs at two levels: (1) competition to sign and maintain automotive lenders; and (2) competition to fund near-prime and non-prime auto loans.

Competition to enroll and maintain automotive lenders. For LPP, which combines lending enablement, risk analytics, near-prime and non-prime auto loan performance data, real-time loan decisioning, risk-based pricing and auto loan default insurance, Open Lending does not believe there are any direct competitors. The credit bureaus provide customized risk models for underwriting and most LOS provide for custom underwriting rules and loan underwriting, while third-party lending-as-a-service companies provide turn-key LOS. Most automotive lenders have some minority portion of their auto loan portfolios in near-prime and non-prime loans, however, these near-prime and non-prime loans are generally at lower loan advance rates, shorter loan terms, limited to newer model years of vehicles and lower mileage maximums. A very limited number of national banks and sub-prime lenders underwrite and originate near-prime and non-prime loans with the characteristics of the LPP portfolio.

70

Competition to fund near-prime and non-prime auto loans. The near-prime and non-prime lending market is highly fragmented and competitive. Open Lending faces competition from a diverse landscape of consumer lenders, including traditional banks and credit unions, as well as alternative technology-enabled lenders like LendingClub Corporation, Square, Inc., Social Finance, Inc., Avant, LLC, Prosper Funding LLC and Credit Acceptance Corporation, among others. Many of Open Lending’s competitors are (or are affiliated with) financial institutions with the capacity to hold loans on their balance sheets. These would include money center banks, super-regional banks, regional banks, OEM Captives, finance companies and sub-prime lenders. Some of these competitors offer a broader suite of products and services than Open Lending does, including retail banking solutions, credit and debit cards and loyalty programs.

Government Regulation

Open Lending operates in a heavily regulated industry that is highly focused on consumer protection. Statutes, regulations and practices that have been in place for many years may be changed, and new laws have been, and may continue to be, introduced to address real and perceived problems in the financial services industry in general and automotive lending in particular. These laws and how they are interpreted continue to evolve.

The regulatory framework to which Open Lending is subject includes U.S. federal, state and local laws, regulations and rules. U.S. federal, state and local governmental authorities, including state financial services and insurance agencies, have broad oversight and supervisory authority over Open Lending’s business. Federal and state agencies also have broad enforcement powers over Open Lending, including powers to investigate Open Lending’s business practices and broad discretion to deem particular practices unfair, deceptive, abusive or otherwise not in accordance with the law.

Open Lending’s business requires compliance with several regulatory regimes, including some applicable to consumer lending. In particular, the laws which Open Lending may be subject to directly or indirectly include:

71

Open Lending is also subject to state insurance, insurance brokering, insurance agency regulations, third-party administration company statutes and similar statutes.

The number and complexity of these laws, and vagaries in their interpretations, present compliance and litigation risks from inadvertent error and omissions which Open Lending may not be able to eliminate from its operation or activities. The laws, regulations and rules described above are subject to legislative, administrative and judicial interpretation, and some of these laws and regulations have been infrequently interpreted or only recently enacted. Infrequent interpretations of these laws and regulations or an insignificant number of interpretations of recently-enacted laws and regulations can result in ambiguity with respect to permitted conduct under these laws and regulations. Any ambiguity under the laws and regulations to which Open Lending is subject may lead to regulatory investigations or enforcement actions and private causes of action, such as class-action lawsuits, with respect to Open Lending’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Certain states have adopted laws regulating and requiring licensing by parties that engage in certain activity regarding consumer finance and insurance transactions, including facilitating and assisting such transactions in certain circumstances. Furthermore, certain states and localities have also adopted laws requiring licensing for consumer debt collection or servicing. Open Lending must comply with state licensing requirements to conduct its business. LPP is licensed as a property and casualty insurance agency and regulated by the insurance regulator in each state in which Open Lending operates. All Lenders Protection sales personnel are individually licensed as property and casualty insurance agents in each state in which they operate. In those states where it is required, IAS is licensed as a third-party administration agent and is regulated by the insurance regulator in each state in which Open Lending operates.

Open Lending is also supervised by regulatory agencies under U.S. law. From time to time, Open Lending may receive examination requests that require Open Lending to provide records, documents and information relating to its business operations. State attorneys general, state licensing regulators, and state and local consumer protection offices have authority to investigate consumer complaints and to commence investigations and other formal and informal proceedings regarding Open Lending’s operations and activities.

72

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2020, Open Lending employed approximately 104 employees, with substantially all located in Texas. None of Open Lending’s employees is currently represented by a labor union or has terms of employment that are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Open Lending considers its relationships with its employees to be good and has not experienced any work stoppages.

We encourage and support the growth and development of our employees. Continual learning and career development is advanced through ongoing performance and development conversations with employees, internally developed training programs, customized corporate training engagements and educational reimbursement programs.

The safety, health and wellness of our employees is a top priority. The COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique challenge with regard to maintaining employee safety while continuing successful operations. Through teamwork and the adaptability of our management and staff, we were able to transition, over a short period of time, approximately 95% of our employees to effectively working from remote locations and ensure a safely-distanced working environment for employees performing customer facing activities at branches and operations centers. All employees are asked to not come to work when they experience signs or symptoms of a possible COVID-19 illness and have been provided additional paid time off to cover compensation during such absences. On an ongoing basis, we further promote the health and wellness of our employees by strongly encouraging work-life balance, offering flexible work schedules, reimbursing certain childcare costs, keeping the employee portion of health care premiums to a minimum and sponsoring various wellness programs.

73

MANAGEMENT

Management and Board of Directors

The following persons serve as our executive officers, key management members and directors.

Executive Officers

John Flynn serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Open Lending. Mr. Flynn served as President of Open Lending from April 2000 to August 2020 and as a member of its Board of Managers since 2000. Mr. Flynn also currently serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of Lenders Protection, LLC since 2003 and as President of Insurance Administrative Services, LLC since 2011, each a wholly owned subsidiary of Open Lending. Mr. Flynn previously served as Chief Executive Officer at Washington Gas Light Federal Credit Union in Springfield, VA from 1983 to 1994, and as Senior Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Good2cu.com, LLC from 1999 to 2000. In addition, Mr. Flynn formerly led marketing at The Equitable (Equitable Holdings, Inc.) from 1997 to 1999, where he spearheaded the design and execution of the firm’s national marketing program for the credit union industry. Mr. Flynn is the Co-founder of Objective Advisors, Inc., a registered investment advisory firm dedicated to providing objective financial management services exclusively to credit unions and banks nationwide, where he served as a Board Member from 1995 to 2018; Co-founder of The Finest Federal Credit Union, which serves the police and law enforcement agencies of New York City, where he served as Advisor from 2014 to 2019. Mr. Flynn holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Accounting from Bloomsburg University. We believe Mr. Flynn is qualified to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of our Board of Managers due to his more than forty years of experience working in the credit union, banking and financial services industry.

Ross Jessup serves as the President and Chief Operating Officer of Open Lending. Mr. Jessup has served as Chief Financial Officer of Open Lending from April 2000 until August 2020 and as a member of its Board of Managers since 2000. Mr. Jessup also serves as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operations Officer of Lenders Protection, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Open Lending since April 2000. Prior to Open Lending, Mr. Jessup worked at the Jessup Group from 1998-2000, Montgomery Jessup & Co. from 1991-1998 and in public accounting at Arthur Anderson LLP from 1985-1991. Mr. Jessup is a Certified Public Accountant licensed in the state of Texas and a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Jessup holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Accounting from the University of Mississippi. We believe Mr. Jessup is qualified to serve as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operations Officer and a member of our Board of Managers due to his over thirty years of experience in corporate finance, accounting, leadership and operations.

74

Charles D. Jehl has served as the Chief Financial Officer of Open Lending since August 28, 2020. Prior to his appointment, Mr. Jehl served as a consultant to the Company since April 2020. From 2015 through 2019, Mr. Jehl served as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Forestar Group Inc., a New York Stock Exchange listed company (“Forestar Group”). Prior to that, Mr. Jehl served in other executive positions with Forestar Group, including Chief Accounting Officer from 2005—2013. Jehl is a Certified Public Accountant licensed in the state of Texas and a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Accounting from Concordia University at Austin.

Key Management

Sarah Lackey has served as the Chief Technology Officer since August 28, 2020. Prior to her appointment as Chief Technology Officer, Ms. Lackey served as the Company’s Senior Vice President of IT Operations since November 2019, and in various other roles in the Company’s technology department since 2016. Prior to Open Lending, Ms. Lackey served as Vice President and co-owner of SJB Industries DBA Bates Painting. Previously, she spent over 10 years at Hewlett-Packard in software engineering. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science from Texas A&M University.

Matt Roe has served as the Chief Revenue Officer of Open Lending since October 2019 and serves as the Chief Revenue Officer of the Company. Mr. Roe has been with Open Lending since 2007, and has worked in a variety of roles across the marketing, implementation, operations, finance and IT systems divisions, including as Marketing Manager from September 2010 to April 2016, National Accounts Manager from January 2013 to December 2016, Regional Vice President of Sales from April 2016 to October 2017 and Senior Vice President from October 2017 to October 2019. Mr. Roe has more than ten years of experience working with the Open Lending marketing, account management, sales and product teams. Mr. Roe holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Texas State University.

Matthew S. Stark has served as the General Counsel of Open Lending since January 2021. Prior to his appointment, Mr. Stark served as General Counsel and Senior Vice President of Forestar Group Inc., a New York Stock Exchange listed company. Prior to that, Mr. Stark served as the Assistant General Counsel of David Weekley Homes and as the Senior Regional Counsel of KB Home, a publicly-traded national homebuilder. Mr. Stark holds a B.A. in History from the University of Utah and a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law.

Kenneth Wardle has served as the Chief Risk Officer of Open Lending since July 2019 and serves as the Chief Risk Officer of the Company. Mr. Wardle previously worked as Chief Operating Officer for Horizon Digital Finance Holdings, Inc. from May 2018 to July 2019; Chief Executive Officer of Jet Business Loans, LLC from July 2015 to June 2017; Co-founder and Executive Vice President of Exeter Finance Corporation, a company that specializes in subprime auto financing, from August 2006 to December 2014; and in leadership roles at AmeriCredit Corporation (now GM Financial) from November 2005 to August 2006 and Drive Financial, LP (now Santander Consumer, USA) from October 2004 to November 2005. Mr. Wardle’s experience spans key functions within the lending industry including portfolio and risk management, financial operations, research analytics, credit analysis, information technology, compliance and corporate reporting. Mr. Wardle holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Texas Wesleyan University and an MBA from Texas Christian University.

Non-Employee Directors

Adam H. Clammer has been Nebula’s Co-Chairman, Co-Chief Executive Officer, and a Director since inception. Mr. Clammer is a Founding Partner of True Wind Capital, a private equity fund manager focused on the technology industry, where he serves on the Investment Committee and is responsible for all aspects of managing the firm. Prior to founding True Wind Capital in 2015, Mr. Clammer was with KKR, a global investment manager, which he joined in 1995. At KKR, Mr. Clammer co-founded and led the Global Technology Group from 2004 to 2013, was a senior member of the Healthcare Group, and participated in investments across multiple industries. He served on public company boards as a director of AEP Industries (NASDAQ: AEPI), a manufacturer of flexible plastic packaging films, from 1999 to 2004, a director of Zhone Technologies

75

(NASDAQ: ZHNE), a provider of communications network equipment, from 2002 to 2006, a director of MedCath (NASDAQ: MDTH), a cardiovascular services provider, from 2002 to 2008, a director of Jazz Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: JAZZ), a biopharmaceutical company, from 2004 to 2007, a director of Avago, now Broadcom (NASDAQ: AVGO), a designer of analog semiconductors, from 2005 to 2013, a director of NXP (NASDAQ: NXPI), a manufacturer of semiconductor chips, from 2007 to 2010, and a director of Eastman Kodak (NYSE: KODK), a provider of imaging products and services, from 2009 to 2011. Mr. Clammer served on several private company boards including Aricent, GoDaddy, and TASC among others, as well as a member of the operating committee of SunGard Data Systems. Mr. Clammer currently serves as Chairman of the Board of The Switch, a video solutions service provider, since 2016, as Chairman of the Board of ARI Network Services, a sales-focused software and marketing services provider, since 2017 and as a director of Pegasus Transtech (“Transflo”), a software and solutions provider to the transportation industry, since 2017. Prior to joining KKR, Mr. Clammer worked in the Mergers & Acquisitions group at Morgan Stanley in New York and Hong Kong from 1992 to 1995. He holds a B.S. in Business Administration from the University of California, Berkeley and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School, where he was a Baker Scholar. We believe Mr. Clammer is qualified to serve as a member of the board of directors because of his experience in the financial sector.

Eric A. Feldstein has served on our board of directors since August 28, 2020. Prior to joining New York Life Insurance Company, Mr. Feldstein served as the Chief Financial Officer of Health Care Service Corporation from 2016 to 2019. From 2010 to 2016, he served as an Executive Vice President with American Express. Mr. Feldstein began his career in finance with General Motors where he held a variety of roles with increasing responsibility. He served as Treasurer from 1997 to 2002, and subsequently served as CEO of GMAC Financial Services from 2002-2008. Mr. Feldstein holds a Bachelor of Arts from Columbia University and Master of Business Administration from Harvard University. We believe Mr. Feldstein is qualified to serve as a member of the board of directors because of his extensive public company experience.

Blair Greenberg has served as a member on the Board of Managers of Open Lending since March 2016 until June 2020 and is now a member of our board of directors. Mr. Greenberg is also a partner at Bregal Sagemount (Bregal Investments, Inc.) and has been with the fund since January 2013. Prior to Bregal Sagemount, Mr. Greenberg worked at Technology Crossover Ventures (TCMI, Inc.) (“TCV”) from July 2006 to January 2013, where he focused on investing in technology and financial services companies. Prior to TCV, Mr. Greenberg worked for UBS Investment Bank (UBS Group AG) (“UBS”) in the Financial Institutions Group from July 2004 to June 2006. At UBS, Mr. Greenberg focused on mergers & acquisitions and capital raising transactions for financial technology, asset management, and specialty finance companies. Mr. Greenberg received a Bachelor of Sciences in Business Administration with a concentration in Finance from the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University Bloomington, and an MBA with concentrations in Finance, Management & Strategy, and Marketing from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. We believe that Mr. Greenberg is qualified to serve as a member of our Board of Managers based on his extensive experience in the technology and financial services industry.

Shubhi Rao has served on our board of directors since August 5, 2020. She was vice president, treasurer and officer of Alphabet from 2016 to 2018 and group treasurer of Tesco PLC in London from 2014 to 2016. Ms. Rao began her career in finance at Ford Motor Company. She held several leadership roles within the Treasurer’s office including assistant treasurer of Ford of Europe. Shubhi is a mother, wife, fundraiser and serves on the boards of think tanks—International Center for Research on Women and Center for Global Development. She is also the honorary member of the executive advisory council for the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Shubhi earned her B.S. in Computer Science Engineering from Michigan State University and a MBA from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. We believe Ms. Rao is qualified to serve as a member of the board of directors because of her extensive public company experience.

Jessica Snyder has served on our board of directors since August 5, 2020. Ms. Snyder is the president and chief executive officer of GuideOne Insurance Company. Previously, she was senior vice president—Commercial and Specialty Lines at State Auto Insurance Companies. Jessica held several other positions during her tenure at State

76

Auto, including chief operating officer and chief financial officer of the company’s specialty subsidiary, and senior vice president of Specialty. Prior to joining State Auto, Jessica was a member of a three-person team that raised the capital for the formation and start-up operations of Rockhill Holdings, a niche property and casualty business that was purchased by State Auto in 2009. She was also the chief financial officer for Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. In 2016, Jessica was named one of Insurance Business’ Elite Women of the Year.

Ms. Snyder earned her bachelor’s degree in accounting from the University of Wisconsin and her Master of Business Administration from the University of Florida. We believe Ms. Snyder is qualified to serve as a member of the board of directors because of her extensive experience in the financial services sector.

Gene Yoon has been the Managing Partner of Bregal Sagemount since 2012 as a member on the Board of Managers of Open Lending since 2016 to June 2020 and is now a member of our board of directors. Prior to founding Bregal Sagemount in 2012, he was the Head of Private Equity for the Americas Special Situations Group at Goldman Sachs from 2007 to 2012, where he focused on middle market growth equity investing. Before Goldman Sachs, Mr. Yoon served as a Partner at Great Hill Partners, a private equity firm specializing in the media, communications, technology, and business services sectors from 2001 to 2007. Earlier in his career, Mr. Yoon was Director of Corporate Development at Geocast Network Systems, Inc., a venture-backed technology infrastructure provider from 1999 to 2001. Mr. Yoon began his career at Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette in investment banking from 1997 to 1999. Mr. Yoon holds both a Bachelors in Economics and an MBA from The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. We believe that Mr. Yoon is qualified to serve as a member of our Board of Managers based on his extensive experience in the financial sector.

Brandon Van Buren is a Partner at True Wind Capital and has been with the fund since October 2017 and has served as a member of our board of directors since June 2020. From August 2014 to September 2017, Mr. Van Buren was a Principal at Google Capital, Alphabet Inc.’s private investment arm, where he led growth equity investments within the technology, media, and telecommunications sectors. Prior to joining Google, Mr. Van Buren was with Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., a global investment manager, from 2010 to 2012 where he executed leveraged buyout transactions within the technology space. Mr. Van Buren has served as a director of Zix Corporation (NASDAQ: ZIXI) since February 2019. Mr. Van Buren holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration with concentrations in Finance and Accounting from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and a Masters of Business Administration from Harvard Business School where he was a Baker Scholar. We believe Mr. Van Buren is qualified to serve as a member of the board of directors because of his experience in the financial sector.

Corporate Governance

We have structured our corporate governance in a manner we believe closely aligns our interests with those of our stockholders following the Business Combination. Notable features of this corporate governance include:

Election of Officers

Each executive officer serves at the discretion of our board of directors and holds office until his or her successor is duly appointed or until his or her earlier resignation or removal. There are no family relationships among any of our directors or executive officers.

77

Board Composition

Our board of directors consists of nine directors. Each of our directors will continue to serve as a director until the election and qualification of his or her successor or until his or her earlier death, resignation or removal. The authorized number of directors may be changed by resolution of our board of directors. Vacancies on our board of directors can be filled by resolution of our board of directors.

Our board of directors is divided into three classes, each serving staggered, three-year terms:

Each of Nebula, Bregal Sagemount I, L.P.and Open Lending are entitled to designate certain number of directors for five years following the Closing subject to certain stock ownership requirements. Open Lending will have the right to appoint one additional director to each of the classes set forth above.

As a result of the staggered board, only one class of directors will be elected at each annual meeting of stockholders, with the other classes continuing for the remainder of their respective terms.

Independence of our Board of Directors

Our board of directors has undertaken a review of the independence of each director. Based on information provided by each director concerning his or her background, employment, and affiliations, our board of directors has determined that the board of directors will meet independence standards under the applicable rules and regulations of the SEC and the listing standards of NASDAQ. In making these determinations, our board of directors considered the current and prior relationships that each non-employee director has with our company and all other facts and circumstances our board of directors deemed relevant in determining their independence, including the beneficial ownership of our capital stock by each non-employee director, and the transactions involving them described in the sections titled “Certain Open Lending Relationships and Related Party Transactions” and “Certain Nebula Relationships and Related Person Transactions.”

Board Committees

Our board of directors has three standing committees: an audit committee; a compensation committee; and a nominating and corporate governance committee. Each of the committees will report to the board of directors as it deems appropriate and as the board of directors may request. The expected composition, duties and responsibilities of these committees are set forth below. In the future, our board of directors may establish other committees, as it deems appropriate, to assist it with its responsibilities. For so long as Nebula has a right to nominate a director to our board of directors, each of our compensation committee and the nominating and corporate governance committee shall include one of the directors nominated by Nebula.

Audit Committee

Eric A. Feldstein, Shubhi Rao, and Jessica Snyder serve as members of the audit committee, with Ms. Snyder serving as the chair. The audit committee provides assistance to our board of directors in fulfilling its legal and

78

fiduciary obligations in matters involving our accounting, auditing, financial reporting, internal control and legal compliance functions by approving the services performed by our independent registered public accounting firm and reviewing their reports regarding our accounting practices and systems of internal accounting controls. The audit committee also oversees the audit efforts of our independent registered public accounting firm and takes those actions as it deems necessary to satisfy itself that the independent registered public accounting firm is independent of management. Subject to phase-in rules and a limited exception, the rules of NASDAQ and Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act require that the audit committee of a listed company be comprised solely of independent directors. Our audit committee will meet the requirements for independence of audit committee members under applicable SEC and NASDAQ rules. All of the members of our audit committee meet the requirements for financial literacy under the applicable rules and regulations of the SEC and NASDAQ. In addition, Mr. Greenberg qualifies as our “audit committee financial expert,” as such term is defined in Item 407 of Regulation S-K.

Our board of directors has adopted a new written charter for the audit committee, which is available on our website. The information on our website is not intended to form a part of or be incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

Compensation Committee

Adam H. Clammer, Blair J. Greenberg, and Shubhi Rao on the Company’s compensation committee, with Mr. Greenberg serving as the chair. The compensation committee will determine our general compensation policies and the compensation provided to our officers. The compensation committee will also make recommendations to our board of directors regarding director compensation. In addition, the compensation committee will review and determine unit-based compensation for our directors, officers, employees and consultants and will administer our equity incentive plans. Our compensation committee will also oversee our corporate compensation programs. Each member of our compensation committee will be independent, as defined under the NASDAQ listing rules, and satisfies NASDAQ’s additional independence standards for compensation committee members. Each member of our compensation committee is a non-employee director (within the meaning of Rule 16b-3 under the Exchange Act).

Our board of directors has adopted a new written charter for the compensation committee, which is available on our website. The information on our website is not intended to form a part of or be incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Adam H. Clammer, Jessica Snyder and Gene Yoon serve on the Company’s nominating and corporate governance committee, with Mr. Yoon serving as the chair. The nominating and corporate governance committee is responsible for making recommendations to our board of directors regarding candidates for directorships and the size and composition of the board. In addition, the nominating and corporate governance committee will be responsible for overseeing our corporate governance guidelines and reporting and making recommendations to the board of directors concerning corporate governance matters. Each member of our nominating and corporate governance committee will be independent as defined under the NASDAQ listing rules.

Our board of directors has adopted a new written charter for the nominating and corporate governance committee, which is available on our website. The information on our website is not intended to form a part of or be incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

Role of Our Board of Directors in Risk Oversight

One of the key functions of our board of directors is informed oversight of our risk management process. Our board of directors administers this oversight function directly through our board of directors as a whole, as well

79

as through various standing committees of our board of directors that address risks inherent in their respective areas of oversight. In particular, our board of directors is responsible for monitoring and assessing strategic risk exposure, and our audit committee will have the responsibility to consider and discuss our major financial risk exposures and the steps our management has taken to monitor and control these exposures. The audit committee will also have the responsibility to review with management the process by which risk assessment and management is undertaken, monitor compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, and review the adequacy and effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. Our nominating and corporate governance committee will be responsible for periodically evaluating our company’s corporate governance policies and systems in light of the governance risks that our company faces and the adequacy of our company’s policies and procedures designed to address such risks. Our compensation committee will assess and monitor whether any of our compensation policies and programs is reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our company.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

No interlocking relationship exists between our board of directors or compensation committee and the board of directors or compensation committee of any other entity, nor has any interlocking relationship existed in the past. None of the members of our compensation committee has at any time during the prior three years been one of our officers or employees.

Code of Ethics

Our board of directors has adopted a code of ethics that applies to all of our employees, officers and directors, including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and other executive and senior financial officers. The full text of our code of ethics is available on our website.

We intend to disclose future amendments to certain provisions of our code of ethics, or waivers of certain provisions as they relate to our directors and executive officers, at the same location on our website or in public filings. The information on our website is not intended to form a part of or be incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

80

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As an emerging growth company, we have opted to comply with the executive compensation disclosure rules applicable to “smaller reporting companies” as such term is defined in the rules promulgated under the Securities Act, which requires compensation disclosure for its principal executive officer and its two other most highly compensated executive officers.

This section discusses the material components of the executive compensation program offered to the executive officers of the Company who are our “named executive officers” for 2020. Such executive officers consist of the following persons, referred to herein as our named executive officers, or the NEOs:

This discussion may contain forward-looking statements that are based on our current plans, considerations, expectations and determinations regarding future compensation programs. Actual compensation programs that we adopt could vary significantly from our historical practices and currently planned programs summarized in this discussion.

2020 Summary Compensation Table

The following table presents information regarding the compensation awarded to, earned by, or paid to our named executive officers for services rendered to us, in all capacities, during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, as applicable.