Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED March 31, 2010
Commission File Number 1-34073
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated
|
|
|
Maryland
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
31-0724920
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
41 South High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43287
Registrants telephone number (614) 480-8300
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months and (2)
has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. þ Yes o No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). o Yes o No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). o Yes þ No
There were 716,575,382 shares of Registrants common stock ($0.01 par value) outstanding on April
30, 2010.
HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED
INDEX
2
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 2. |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
INTRODUCTION
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (we or our) is a multi-state diversified regional bank
holding company headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. We have more than 144 years of serving the
financial needs of our customers. Through our subsidiaries, including our banking subsidiary, The
Huntington National Bank (the Bank), we provide full-service commercial and consumer banking
services, mortgage banking services, equipment leasing, investment management, trust services,
brokerage services, customized insurance service program, and other financial products and
services. Our over 600 banking offices are located in Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. We also offer retail and commercial financial services online at
huntington.com; through our technologically advanced, 24-hour telephone bank; and through our
network of over 1,300 ATMs. The Auto Finance and Dealer Services (AFDS) group offers automobile
loans to consumers and commercial loans to automobile dealers within our six-state banking
franchise area. Selected financial service activities are also conducted in other states
including: Private Financial Group (PFG) offices in Florida, Massachusetts, and New York, and
Mortgage Banking offices in Maryland and New Jersey. International banking services are available
through the headquarters office in Columbus and a limited purpose office located in the Cayman
Islands and another in Hong Kong.
The following Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations (MD&A) provides information we believe necessary for understanding our financial
condition, changes in financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. This MD&A
provides updates to the discussion and analysis included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2009 (2009 Form 10-K). This MD&A should be read in conjunction with our
2009 Form 10-K, as well as the financial statements, notes, and other information contained in this
report.
Our discussion is divided into key segments:
|
|
|
Introduction Provides overview comments on important matters including risk factors,
acquisitions, and other items. These are essential for understanding our performance and
prospects. |
|
|
|
Discussion of Results of Operations Reviews financial performance from a consolidated
company perspective. It also includes a Significant Items section that summarizes key
issues helpful for understanding performance trends. Key consolidated average balance sheet
and income statement trends are also discussed in this section. |
|
|
|
Risk Management and Capital Discusses credit, market, liquidity, and operational
risks, including how these are managed, as well as performance trends. It also includes a
discussion of liquidity policies, how we obtain funding, and related performance. In
addition, there is a discussion of guarantees and/or commitments made for items such as
standby letters of credit and commitments to sell loans, and a discussion that reviews the
adequacy of capital, including regulatory capital requirements. |
|
|
|
Business Segment Discussion Provides an overview of financial performance for each of
our major business segments and provides additional discussion of trends underlying
consolidated financial performance. |
A reading of each section is important to understand fully the nature of our financial performance
and prospects.
Forward-Looking Statements
This report, including MD&A, contains certain forward-looking statements, including certain
plans, expectations, goals, projections, and statements, which are subject to numerous assumptions,
risks, and uncertainties. Statements that do not describe historical or current facts, including
statements about beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking
statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities
Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Actual results could differ materially from those contained or implied by such statements for
a variety of factors including: (1) deterioration in the loan portfolio could be worse than
expected due to a number of factors such as the underlying value of the collateral could prove less
valuable than otherwise assumed and assumed cash flows may be worse than expected; (2) changes in
economic conditions; (3) movements in interest rates; (4) competitive pressures on product pricing
and services; (5) success and timing of other business strategies; (6) extended disruption of vital
infrastructure; and (7) the nature, extent, and timing of governmental actions and reforms.
Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described above can be
found in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K, and documents subsequently filed by us with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
3
All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and are based on
information available at that time. We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements to
reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made
or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by federal securities laws.
As forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, caution should be
exercised against placing undue reliance on such statements.
Risk Factors
We, like other financial companies, are subject to a number of risks that may adversely affect
our financial condition or results of operation, many of which are outside of our direct control,
though efforts are made to manage those risks while optimizing returns. Among the risks assumed
are: (1) credit risk, which is the risk of loss due to loan and lease customers or other
counterparties not being able to meet their financial obligations under agreed upon terms, (2)
market risk, which is the risk of loss due to changes in the market value of assets and
liabilities due to changes in market interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equity prices, and
credit spreads, (3) liquidity risk, which is the risk of loss due to the possibility that
funds may not be available to satisfy current or future obligations resulting from external macro
market issues, investor and customer perception of financial strength, and events unrelated to the
company such as war, terrorism, or financial institution market specific issues, and (4)
operational risk, which is the risk of loss due to human error, inadequate or failed
internal systems and controls, violations of, or noncompliance with, laws, rules, regulations,
prescribed practices, or ethical standards, external influences, fraudulent activities, disasters,
and security risks.
More information on risk is set forth under the heading Risk Factors included in Item 1A of
our 2009 Form 10-K. Additional information regarding risk factors can also be found in the Risk
Management and Capital discussion.
Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Significant Estimates
Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States (GAAP). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
GAAP requires us to establish critical accounting policies and make accounting estimates,
assumptions, and judgments that affect amounts recorded and reported in our financial statements.
Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in our 2009 Form 10-K as
supplemented by this report lists significant accounting policies we use in the development and
presentation of our financial statements. This MD&A, the significant accounting policies, and other
financial statement disclosures identify and address key variables and other qualitative and
quantitative factors necessary for an understanding and evaluation of our company, financial
position, results of operations, and cash flows.
An accounting estimate requires assumptions about uncertain matters that could have a material
effect on the financial statements if a different amount within a range of estimates were used or
if estimates changed from period to period. Estimates are made under facts and circumstances at a
point in time, and changes in those facts and circumstances could produce results that
significantly differ from when those estimates were made.
Our most significant accounting estimates relate to our allowance for credit losses (ACL),
fair value measurements, and income taxes and deferred tax assets. These significant accounting
estimates and their related application are discussed in our 2009 Form 10-K, and the discussion
below provides pertinent updates to those accounting estimates.
Total Allowances for Credit Losses
The ACL is the sum of the allowance for loan and lease losses (ALLL) and the allowance for
unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit (AULC), and represents the estimate of the level of
reserves appropriate to absorb inherent credit losses. The amount of the ACL was determined by
judgments regarding the quality of each individual loan portfolio and loan commitments. All known
relevant internal and external factors that affected loan collectibility were considered, including
analysis of historical charge-off experience, migration patterns, changes in economic conditions,
and changes in loan collateral values. Such factors are subject to regular review and may change
to reflect updated performance trends and expectations, particularly in times of severe stress such
as were experienced throughout 2009, and have continued into 2010. We believe the process for
determining the ACL considers all of the potential factors that could result in credit losses.
However, the process includes judgmental and quantitative elements that may be subject to
significant change. There is no certainty that the ACL will be adequate over time to cover credit
losses in the portfolio because of continued adverse changes in the economy, market conditions, or
events adversely affecting specific customers, industries or markets. To the extent actual
outcomes differ from our estimates, the credit quality of our customer base materially decreases,
the risk profile of a market, industry, or group of customers changes materially, or if the ACL is
determined to not be adequate, additional provision for credit losses could be required, which
could adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, capital, and results of
operations in future periods.
At March 31, 2010, the ACL was $1,527.9 million, or 4.14% of total loans and leases. To
illustrate the potential effect on the financial statements of our estimates of the ACL, a 50 basis
point increase in the ACL would have required $184.7 million in additional reserves (funded by
additional provision for credit losses), which would have negatively impacted net income for the
first three-month period of 2010 by approximately $120.0 million after-tax, or $0.17 per common
share.
4
Fair Value Measurements
The fair value of a financial instrument is defined as the amount at which the instrument
could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or
liquidation sale. Assets and liabilities carried at fair value inherently result in a higher
degree of financial statement volatility. We estimate the fair value of a financial instrument
using a variety of valuation methods. Where financial instruments are actively traded and have
quoted market prices, quoted market prices are used for fair value. We characterize active markets
as those where transaction volumes are sufficient to provide objective pricing information, with
reasonably narrow bid/ask spreads, and where received quoted prices do not vary widely. When the
financial instruments are not actively traded, other observable market inputs, such as quoted
prices of securities with similar characteristics, may be used, if available, to determine fair
value. Inactive markets are characterized by low transaction volumes, price quotations that vary
substantially among market participants, or in which minimal information is released publicly.
When observable market prices do not exist, we estimate fair value primarily by using cash flow and
other financial modeling methods. Our valuation methods consider factors such as liquidity and
concentration concerns and, for the derivatives portfolio, counterparty credit risk. Other factors
such as model assumptions, market dislocations, and unexpected correlations can affect estimates of
fair value. Changes in these underlying factors, assumptions, or estimates in any of these areas
could materially impact the amount of revenue or loss recorded.
The Financial Accounting Standard Boards (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic
820, Fair Value Measurements, establishes a framework for measuring the fair value of financial
instruments that considers the attributes specific to particular assets or liabilities and
establishes a three-level hierarchy for determining fair value based on the transparency of inputs
to each valuation as of the fair value measurement date. The three levels are defined as follows:
|
|
|
Level 1 quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in
active markets. |
|
|
|
Level 2 inputs include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in
active markets, quoted prices of identical or similar assets or liabilities in
markets that are not active, and inputs that are observable for the asset or
liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the
financial instrument. |
|
|
|
Level 3 inputs that are unobservable and significant to the fair value
measurement. Financial instruments are considered Level 3 when values are
determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar
techniques, and at least one significant model assumption or input is
unoberservable. |
At the end of each quarter, we assess the valuation hierarchy for each asset or liability
measured. Occasionally, assets or liabilities may be transferred within hierarchy levels due to
changes in availability of observable market inputs at the measurement date. The fair values
measured at each level of the fair value hierarchy, as well as additional discussion regarding fair
value measurements, can be found in Note 13 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements.
AUTOMOBILE LOAN SECURITIZATION
Effective January 1, 2010, we consolidated an automobile loan securitization that previously
had been accounted for as an off-balance sheet transaction. We elected to account for the
automobile loan receivables and the associated notes payable at fair value per guidance supplied in
ASC 810, Consolidation.
The key assumptions used to determine the fair value of the automobile loan receivables
included a projection of expected losses and prepayment of the underlying loans in the portfolio
and a market assumption of interest rate spreads. Certain interest rates are available from
similarly traded securities while other interest rates are developed internally based on similar
asset-backed security transactions in the market. The associated notes payable are valued based
upon Level 1 prices because they are actively traded in the market.
INVESTMENT SECURITIES
(This section should be read in conjunction with the Investment Securities Portfolio discussion
and Note 4 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
5
Level 3 Analysis on Certain Securities Portfolios
Our Alt-A, collateralized mortgage obligation (CMO), and pooled-trust-preferred securities
portfolios are classified as Level 3, and as such, the significant estimates used to determine the
fair value of these securities have greater subjectivity. The Alt-A and CMO securities portfolios
are subjected to a monthly review of the projected cash flows, while the cash flows of our
pooled-trust-preferred securities portfolio are reviewed quarterly. These reviews are supported
with analysis from independent third parties, and are used as a basis for impairment analysis.
These three portfolios, and the results of our impairment analysis for each portfolio, are
discussed in further detail below:
Alt-A mortgage-backed / Private-label CMO securities represent securities
collateralized by first-lien residential mortgage loans. At March 31, 2010, our Alt-A securities
portfolio had a fair value of $113.7 million, and our CMO securities portfolio had a fair value of
$462.7 million. As the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of
these securities in its entirety was a Level 3 input, we classified all securities within these
portfolios as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. The securities were priced with the assistance
of an outside third-party specialist using a discounted cash flow approach and the independent
third-partys proprietary pricing model. The model used inputs such as estimated prepayment
speeds, losses, recoveries, default rates that were implied by the underlying performance of
collateral in the structure or similar structures, discount rates that were implied by market
prices for similar securities, collateral structure types, and house price
depreciation/appreciation rates that were based upon macroeconomic forecasts.
We analyzed both our Alt-A mortgage-backed and private-label CMO securities portfolios to
determine if the securities in these portfolios were other-than-temporarily impaired. We used the
analysis to determine whether we believed it is probable that all contractual cash flows would not
be collected. All securities in these portfolios remained current with respect to interest and
principal at March 31, 2010.
Our analysis indicated, as of March 31, 2010, a total of 4 Alt-A mortgage-backed securities
and 10 private-label CMO securities could experience a loss of principal in the future. The future
expected losses of principal on these other-than-temporarily impaired securities ranged from 1.33%
to 88.79% of their par value. These losses were projected to occur beginning anywhere from 6
months to 21 months in the future. We measured the amount of credit impairment on these securities
using the cash flows discounted at each securitys effective rate. As a result, during the 2010
first quarter, we recorded $0.6 million of other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI) in our Alt-A
mortgage-backed securities portfolio and $2.6 million of OTTI in our private-label CMO securities
portfolio. These OTTI adjustments negatively impacted our earnings.
Pooled-trust-preferred securities represent collateralized debt obligations (CDOs)
backed by a pool of debt securities issued by financial institutions. At March 31, 2010, our
pooled-trust-preferred securities portfolio had a fair value of $105.4 million. As the lowest
level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of these securities in its entirety
was a Level 3 input, we classified all securities within this portfolio as Level 3 in the fair
value hierarchy. The collateral generally consisted of trust-preferred securities and subordinated
debt securities issued by banks, bank holding companies, and insurance companies. A full cash
flow analysis was used to estimate fair values and assess impairment for each security within this
portfolio. Impairment was calculated as the difference between the carrying amount and the amount
of cash flows discounted at each securitys effective rate. We engaged a third-party specialist
with direct industry experience in pooled-trust-preferred securities valuations to provide
assistance in estimating the fair value and expected cash flows for each security in this
portfolio. Relying on cash flows was necessary because there was a lack of observable transactions
in the market and many of the original sponsors or dealers for these securities were no longer able
to provide a fair value that was compliant with ASC 820, Fair
Value Measurements and Disclosures.
The analysis was completed by evaluating the relevant credit and structural aspects of each
pooled-trust-preferred security in the portfolio, including collateral performance projections for
each piece of collateral in each security and terms of each securitys structure. The credit
review included analysis of profitability, credit quality, operating efficiency, leverage, and
liquidity using the most recently available financial and regulatory information for each
underlying collateral issuer. We also reviewed historical industry default data and current/near
term operating conditions. Using the results of our analysis, we estimated appropriate default and
recovery probabilities for each piece of collateral and then estimated the expected cash flows for
each security. No recoveries were assumed on issuers who are in default. The recovery assumptions
on issuers who are deferring interest ranged from 10% to 55% with a cure assumed after the maximum
deferral period. As a result of this testing, we believe we will experience a loss of principal or
interest on 11 securities; and as such, recorded OTTI of $3.2 million in the 2010 first quarter
relating to these securities. These OTTI adjustments negatively impacted our earnings.
Certain other assets and liabilities which are not financial instruments also involve fair
value measurements, and were discussed in our 2009 Form 10-K. Pertinent updates regarding these
assets and liabilities are discussed below:
6
GOODWILL
Goodwill is tested for impairment annually, as of October 1, using a two-step process that
begins with an estimation of the fair value of a reporting unit. Goodwill impairment exists when a
reporting units carrying value of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. Goodwill is also tested
for impairment on an interim basis, using the same two-step process as the annual testing, if an
event occurs or circumstances change between annual tests that would more likely than not reduce
the fair value of the reporting unit below its carrying amount. Impairment losses, if any, are
reflected in noninterest expense.
Significant judgment is applied when goodwill is assessed for impairment. This judgment
includes developing cash flow projections, selecting appropriate discount rates, identifying
relevant market comparables, incorporating general economic and market conditions, and selecting an
appropriate control premium. The selection and weighting of the various fair value techniques may
result in a higher or lower fair value. Judgment is applied in determining the weightings that are
most representative of fair value. Changes in market capitalization, certain judgments, and
projections could result in a significantly different estimate of the fair value of the reporting
units and could result in an impairment of goodwill.
We concluded that no goodwill impairment was required or existed during the 2010 first quarter.
OTHER REAL ESTATE OWNED (OREO)
OREO property obtained in satisfaction of a loan is recorded at its estimated fair value less
anticipated selling costs based upon the propertys appraised value at the date of transfer, with
any difference between the fair value of the property, less anticipated selling costs, and the
carrying value of the loan charged to the ALLL. Subsequent declines in value are reported as
adjustments to the carrying amount, and are charged to noninterest expense. Gains or losses not
previously recognized resulting from the sale of OREO are recognized in noninterest expense on the
date of sale. At March 31, 2010, OREO totaled $152.3 million, representing a 9% increase compared
with $140.1 million at December 31, 2009.
Income Taxes and Deferred Tax Assets
DEFERRED TAX ASSETS
At March 31, 2010, we had a net deferred tax asset of $557.2 million. Based on our ability to
offset the net deferred tax asset against our forecast of future taxable income, there was no
impairment of the deferred tax asset at March 31, 2010. All available evidence, both positive and
negative, was considered to determine whether, based on the weight of that evidence, impairment
should be recognized. However, our forecast process includes judgmental and quantitative elements
that may be subject to significant change. If our forecast of taxable income within the
carryforward periods available under applicable law is not sufficient to cover the amount of net
deferred tax assets, such assets may be impaired.
On March 31, 2010, the net deferred tax asset relating to the assets acquired from Franklin
Credit Management Corporation (Franklin) on March 31, 2009 (see Significant Items discussion)
increased by $43.6 million relating to the expiration of the 12-month recognition period under
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (IRC) Section 382. In general, IRC Section 382 imposes a one-year
limitation on bad debt deductions allowed for tax purposes under IRC section 166. Any bad debt
deductions recognized after March 31, 2010, would not be limited by IRC Section 382.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements and Developments
Note 2 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements discusses new accounting
pronouncements adopted during 2010 and the expected impact of accounting pronouncements recently
issued but not yet required to be adopted. To the extent the adoption of new accounting standards
materially affect financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity, the impacts are
discussed in the applicable section of this MD&A and the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
7
Table 1 Selected Quarterly Income Statement Data
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
|
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
$ |
546,779 |
|
|
$ |
551,335 |
|
|
$ |
553,846 |
|
|
$ |
563,004 |
|
|
$ |
569,957 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
152,886 |
|
|
|
177,271 |
|
|
|
191,027 |
|
|
|
213,105 |
|
|
|
232,452 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
|
393,893 |
|
|
|
374,064 |
|
|
|
362,819 |
|
|
|
349,899 |
|
|
|
337,505 |
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
|
|
235,008 |
|
|
|
893,991 |
|
|
|
475,136 |
|
|
|
413,707 |
|
|
|
291,837 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (loss) after provision for credit losses |
|
|
|
|
158,885 |
|
|
|
(519,927 |
) |
|
|
(112,317 |
) |
|
|
(63,808 |
) |
|
|
45,668 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
|
|
|
69,339 |
|
|
|
76,757 |
|
|
|
80,811 |
|
|
|
75,353 |
|
|
|
69,878 |
|
Brokerage and insurance income |
|
|
|
|
35,762 |
|
|
|
32,173 |
|
|
|
33,996 |
|
|
|
32,052 |
|
|
|
39,948 |
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
|
|
25,038 |
|
|
|
24,618 |
|
|
|
21,435 |
|
|
|
30,827 |
|
|
|
35,418 |
|
Trust services |
|
|
|
|
27,765 |
|
|
|
27,275 |
|
|
|
25,832 |
|
|
|
25,722 |
|
|
|
24,810 |
|
Electronic banking |
|
|
|
|
25,137 |
|
|
|
25,173 |
|
|
|
28,017 |
|
|
|
24,479 |
|
|
|
22,482 |
|
Bank owned life insurance income |
|
|
|
|
16,470 |
|
|
|
14,055 |
|
|
|
13,639 |
|
|
|
14,266 |
|
|
|
12,912 |
|
Automobile operating lease income |
|
|
|
|
12,303 |
|
|
|
12,671 |
|
|
|
12,795 |
|
|
|
13,116 |
|
|
|
13,228 |
|
Securities (losses) gains |
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(2,602 |
) |
|
|
(2,374 |
) |
|
|
(7,340 |
) |
|
|
2,067 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
34,426 |
|
|
|
41,901 |
|
|
|
57,470 |
|
|
|
18,359 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
|
|
240,852 |
|
|
|
244,546 |
|
|
|
256,052 |
|
|
|
265,945 |
|
|
|
239,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
|
|
|
183,642 |
|
|
|
180,663 |
|
|
|
172,152 |
|
|
|
171,735 |
|
|
|
175,932 |
|
Outside data processing and other services |
|
|
|
|
39,082 |
|
|
|
36,812 |
|
|
|
38,285 |
|
|
|
40,006 |
|
|
|
32,992 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
|
|
24,755 |
|
|
|
24,420 |
|
|
|
23,851 |
|
|
|
48,138 |
|
|
|
17,421 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
|
|
29,086 |
|
|
|
26,273 |
|
|
|
25,382 |
|
|
|
24,430 |
|
|
|
29,188 |
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
18,520 |
|
|
|
38,968 |
|
|
|
26,524 |
|
|
|
9,887 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
|
|
20,624 |
|
|
|
20,454 |
|
|
|
20,967 |
|
|
|
21,286 |
|
|
|
20,410 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
25,146 |
|
|
|
18,108 |
|
|
|
16,658 |
|
|
|
16,454 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
17,060 |
|
|
|
16,995 |
|
|
|
17,117 |
|
|
|
17,135 |
|
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
|
10,440 |
|
|
|
10,589 |
|
|
|
11,400 |
|
|
|
10,931 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
|
|
11,153 |
|
|
|
9,074 |
|
|
|
8,259 |
|
|
|
7,491 |
|
|
|
8,225 |
|
Telecommunications |
|
|
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
6,099 |
|
|
|
5,902 |
|
|
|
6,088 |
|
|
|
5,890 |
|
Printing and supplies |
|
|
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
|
3,807 |
|
|
|
3,950 |
|
|
|
4,151 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,231 |
|
|
|
2,602,713 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,615 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(73,038 |
) |
|
|
(729 |
) |
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
|
|
20,468 |
|
|
|
17,443 |
|
|
|
17,749 |
|
|
|
13,765 |
|
|
|
19,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
|
|
398,093 |
|
|
|
322,596 |
|
|
|
401,097 |
|
|
|
339,982 |
|
|
|
2,969,769 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) before income taxes |
|
|
|
|
1,644 |
|
|
|
(597,977 |
) |
|
|
(257,362 |
) |
|
|
(137,845 |
) |
|
|
(2,684,999 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
|
|
(38,093 |
) |
|
|
(228,290 |
) |
|
|
(91,172 |
) |
|
|
(12,750 |
) |
|
|
(251,792 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
|
$ |
39,737 |
|
|
$ |
(369,687 |
) |
|
$ |
(166,190 |
) |
|
$ |
(125,095 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,433,207 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on preferred shares |
|
|
|
|
29,357 |
|
|
|
29,289 |
|
|
|
29,223 |
|
|
|
57,451 |
|
|
|
58,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) applicable to common shares |
|
|
|
$ |
10,380 |
|
|
$ |
(398,976 |
) |
|
$ |
(195,413 |
) |
|
$ |
(182,546 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,492,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average common shares basic |
|
|
|
|
716,320 |
|
|
|
715,336 |
|
|
|
589,708 |
|
|
|
459,246 |
|
|
|
366,919 |
|
Average common shares diluted
(3) |
|
|
|
|
718,593 |
|
|
|
715,336 |
|
|
|
589,708 |
|
|
|
459,246 |
|
|
|
366,919 |
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share basic |
|
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.56 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.33 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
|
$ |
(6.79 |
) |
Net income (loss) per common share diluted |
|
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
(0.56 |
) |
|
|
(0.33 |
) |
|
|
(0.40 |
) |
|
|
(6.79 |
) |
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
Return on average total assets |
|
|
|
|
0.31 |
% |
|
|
(2.80 |
)% |
|
|
(1.28 |
)% |
|
|
(0.97 |
)% |
|
|
(18.22 |
)% |
Return on average total shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
(25.6 |
) |
|
|
(12.5 |
) |
|
|
(10.2 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
Return on average tangible shareholders equity
(4) |
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
(27.9 |
) |
|
|
(13.3 |
) |
|
|
(10.3 |
) |
|
|
18.4 |
|
Net interest margin
(5) |
|
|
|
|
3.47 |
|
|
|
3.19 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
2.97 |
|
Efficiency ratio
(6) |
|
|
|
|
60.1 |
|
|
|
49.0 |
|
|
|
61.4 |
|
|
|
51.0 |
|
|
|
60.5 |
|
Effective tax rate (benefit) |
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
(38.2 |
) |
|
|
(35.4 |
) |
|
|
(9.2 |
) |
|
|
(9.4 |
) |
|
Revenue fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
$ |
393,893 |
|
|
$ |
374,064 |
|
|
$ |
362,819 |
|
|
$ |
349,899 |
|
|
$ |
337,505 |
|
FTE adjustment |
|
|
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,497 |
|
|
|
4,177 |
|
|
|
1,216 |
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income
(5) |
|
|
|
|
396,141 |
|
|
|
376,561 |
|
|
|
366,996 |
|
|
|
351,115 |
|
|
|
341,087 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
|
|
240,852 |
|
|
|
244,546 |
|
|
|
256,052 |
|
|
|
265,945 |
|
|
|
239,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
(5) |
|
|
|
$ |
636,993 |
|
|
$ |
621,107 |
|
|
$ |
623,048 |
|
|
$ |
617,060 |
|
|
$ |
580,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M., not a meaningful value.
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Comparisons for presented periods are impacted by a number of factors. Refer to
Significant Items for additional discussion regarding these key factors. |
8
|
|
|
(2) |
|
The 2009 fourth quarter gain related to the purchase of certain subordinated bank
notes. The 2009 second quarter gain included $67.4 million related to the purchase of certain trust preferred securities. |
|
(3) |
|
For all the quarterly periods presented above, the impact of the convertible
preferred stock issued in 2008 was excluded from the diluted share calculation. It was
excluded because the result would have been higher than basic earnings per common share (anti-dilutive) for the periods. |
|
(4) |
|
Net income (loss) excluding expense for amortization of intangibles for the period
divided by average tangible shareholders equity. Average tangible shareholders equity
equals average total shareholders equity less average intangible assets and goodwill.
Expense for amortization of intangibles and average intangible assets are net of deferred tax
liability, and calculated assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(5) |
|
On a fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) basis assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(6) |
|
Noninterest expense less amortization of intangibles and goodwill impairment divided
by the sum of FTE net interest income and noninterest income excluding securities gains (losses). |
9
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section provides a review of financial performance from a consolidated perspective. It
also includes a Significant Items section that summarizes key issues important for a complete
understanding of performance trends. Key condensed consolidated balance sheet and income statement
trends are discussed. All earnings per share data are reported on a diluted basis. For additional
insight on financial performance, please read this section in conjunction with the Business
Segment Discussion.
Summary
We reported net income of $39.7 million in the 2010 first quarter, representing net income per
common share of $0.01. These results compared favorably with a net loss of $369.7 million, or
$0.56 per common share in the prior quarter. Comparisons with the prior quarter were impacted by
factors that are discussed later in the Significant Items section (see Significant Items
discussion).
The return to profitability was a significant step forward and represents a resetting of our
expectations, as we now expect to report a profit for the full-year of 2010. While this is
positive, the economic environment remains challenging and we still do not believe there will be
any significant economic turnaround in 2010, although there were signs of stabilization.
Credit quality performance in the 2010 first quarter continued to improve. Net charge-offs
(NCOs) declined 46% from the prior quarter and represented the lowest level since the third quarter
of 2008. Nonperforming assets (NPAs) decreased 7% during the quarter, partially as a result of a
52% decline in new NPAs to $237.9 million in the current quarter from $494.6 million in the prior
quarter. Early stage delinquencies in both the commercial and consumer loan portfolios also
declined. Despite these improved asset quality measures, and given the current challenging
economic environment, we believed it was prudent to maintain our period end allowance for credit
losses at 4.14% of total loans and leases, essentially unchanged from the end of the prior quarter.
For the remainder of 2010, we expect that the level of NCOs and provision expense will continue to
be below 2009 levels.
At the beginning of 2010, we viewed our commercial real estate (CRE) portfolio as our
highest-risk loan portfolio. Total average CRE balances declined $0.8 billion as a result of our
overall strategy to reduce the level of CRE exposure. The majority of the decline occurred within
the noncore portfolio, consistent with our strategy to exit these noncore relationships.
Fully-taxable net interest income in the 2010 first quarter increased $19.6 million, or 5%,
compared with the prior quarter, and primarily reflected a 28 basis point increase in the net
interest margin. The increase in the net margin reflected a combination of factors including
better pricing on deposits and loans, as well as a shift in our deposit mix to lower cost demand
deposit and money market accounts. We are continuing to make progress in increasing our net
interest income. We expect net interest income to continue to increase throughout 2010. This
growth is expected to reflect a combination of factors, but primarily: (a) continued growth in
lower-cost core deposits, (b) slightly higher loan and investment securities balances, and (c) a
slightly higher net interest margin, reflecting improved loan and deposit spreads, as well as the
benefit of continuing to shift our deposit mix to a higher concentration in noninterest-bearing
accounts.
Noninterest income in the 2010 first quarter decreased $3.7 million, or 2%, compared with the
prior quarter, primarily due to seasonal factors. We expect noninterest income to increase
slightly from the current quarter level for the remainder of 2010. While we expect growth in asset
management, as well as brokerage and insurance income, we expect those increases to be offset by
declines in deposit service charge fees as the changes in related Federal Reserves regulations are
implemented.
Noninterest expense in the 2010 first quarter increased $75.5 million, or 23%, compared with
the prior quarter, primarily resulting from a $73.6 million gain on early extinguishment of debt
that lowered the prior quarters noninterest expense. For the remainder of 2010, expenses will
remain well-controlled, but are expected to increase slightly from the current quarter level,
reflecting investments for growth and the continued implementation of key strategic initiatives.
Both liquidity and capital remained strong. Average total core deposits grew at a 5%
annualized rate and our period-end loan-to-deposit ratio was 92%. Our
tangible-common-equity-to-tangible-asset (TCE) ratio improved to 5.96% from 5.92%, and our
regulatory capital ratios remain well above the regulatory well-capitalized thresholds. We are
comfortable with our current level of capital. We do not have any current plans to issue additional capital.
10
Significant Items
Definition of Significant Items
From time-to-time, revenue, expenses, or taxes, are impacted by items judged by us to be
outside of ordinary banking activities and/or by items that, while they may be associated with
ordinary banking activities, are so unusually large that their outsized impact is believed by us at
that time to be infrequent or short-term in nature, or otherwise make period-to-period comparisons
less meaningful. We refer to such items as Significant Items. Most often, these Significant
Items result from factors originating outside the company; e.g., regulatory actions/assessments,
windfall gains, changes in accounting principles, one-time tax assessments/refunds, etc. In other
cases they may result from our decisions associated with significant corporate actions out of the
ordinary course of business; e.g., merger/restructuring charges, recapitalization actions, goodwill
impairment, etc.
Even though certain revenue and expense items are naturally subject to more volatility than
others due to changes in market and economic environment conditions, as a general rule volatility
alone does not define a Significant Item. For example, changes in the provision for credit
losses, gains/losses from investment activities, asset valuation writedowns, etc., reflect ordinary
banking activities and are, therefore, typically excluded from consideration as a Significant
Item.
We believe the disclosure of Significant Items in current and prior period results aids in
better understanding our performance and trends to ascertain which of such items, if any, to
include or exclude from an analysis of our performance; i.e., within the context of determining how
that performance differed from expectations, as well as how, if at all, to adjust estimates of
future performance accordingly. To this end, we adopted a practice of listing Significant Items
in our external disclosure documents (e.g., earnings press releases, investor presentations, Forms
10-Q and 10-K).
Significant Items for any particular period are not intended to be a complete list of items
that may materially impact current or future period performance. A number of items could
materially impact these periods, including those described in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K
and other factors described from time-to-time in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Significant Items Influencing Financial Performance Comparisons
Earnings comparisons were impacted by a number of Significant Items summarized below.
|
1. |
|
Goodwill Impairment. The impacts of goodwill impairment on our reported results were as
follows: |
|
|
|
During the 2009 first quarter, bank stock prices continued to decline significantly.
Our stock price declined 78% from $7.66 per share at December 31, 2008 to $1.66 per
share at March 31, 2009. Given this significant decline, we conducted an interim test
for goodwill impairment. As a result, we recorded a noncash $2,602.7 million ($7.09 per
common share) pretax charge to noninterest expense. |
|
|
|
During the 2009 second quarter, a pretax goodwill impairment of $4.2 million ($0.01
per common share) was recorded to noninterest expense relating to the sale of a small
payments-related business. |
|
2. |
|
Franklin Relationship. Our relationship with Franklin was acquired in the Sky
Financial Group, Inc. (Sky Financial) acquisition in 2007. On March 31, 2009, we
restructured our relationship with Franklin. The impacts of this restructuring on our
reported results were as follows: |
|
|
|
During the 2009 first quarter, a nonrecurring net tax benefit of $159.9 million
($0.44 per common share) was recorded. Also, and although earnings were not
significantly impacted, commercial NCOs increased $128.3 million as the previously
established $130.0 million Franklin-specific ALLL was utilized to writedown the
acquired mortgages and OREO collateral to fair value. |
|
|
|
During the 2010 first quarter, a $38.2 million ($0.05 per common share) net tax
benefit was recognized, primarily reflecting the increase in the net deferred tax asset
relating to the assets acquired from the restructuring. |
|
3. |
|
Early Extinguishment of Debt. The positive impacts relating to the early
extinguishment of debt on our reported results were: $73.6 million ($0.07 per common
share) in the 2009 fourth quarter and $67.4 million ($0.10 per common share) in the 2009
second quarter. These amounts were recorded to noninterest expense. |
|
4. |
|
Preferred Stock Conversion. During the 2009 first and second quarters, we
converted 114,109 and 92,384 shares, respectively, of Series A 8.50% Non-cumulative
Perpetual Preferred (Series A Preferred Stock) stock into common stock. As part of these
transactions, there was a deemed dividend that did not impact net income, but resulted in a
negative impact of $0.08 per common share for the 2009 first quarter and $0.06 per common
share for the 2009 second quarter. (See Capital discussion located within the Risk
Management and Capital section for additional information.) |
|
5. |
|
Visa®. Prior to the Visa® initial public offering (IPO) occurring
in March 2008, Visa® was owned by its member banks, which included the Bank. As
a result of this ownership, we received shares of Visa® stock at the time of the IPO. In
the 2009 second quarter, we sold these Visa® stock shares, resulting in a $31.4
million pretax gain ($0.04 per common share). This amount was recorded to noninterest
income. |
11
|
6. |
|
Other Significant Items Influencing Earnings Performance Comparisons. In addition to the
items discussed separately in this section, a number of other items impacted financial
results. These included: |
2009 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
$11.3 million ($0.02 per common share) benefit to provision for income taxes,
representing a reduction to the previously established capital loss carry-forward
valuation allowance. |
2009 Second Quarter
|
|
|
$23.6 million ($0.03 per common share) negative impact due to a special Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance premium assessment. This amount was
recorded to noninterest expense. |
The following table reflects the earnings impact of the above-mentioned significant items for
periods affected by this Results of Operations discussion:
Table 2 Significant Items Influencing Earnings Performance Comparison (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
Net income GAAP |
|
$ |
39,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(369,687 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2,433,207 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share, after-tax |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.56 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(6.79 |
) |
Change from prior quarter $ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.23 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.59 |
) |
Change from prior quarter % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(69.7 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
% |
|
Change from year-ago $ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(7.14 |
) |
Change from year-ago % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (2) |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
Earnings (2) |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
Earnings (2) |
|
|
EPS |
|
Significant items favorable (unfavorable) impact: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net tax benefit recognized (3) |
|
$ |
38,222 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Franklin relationship restructuring (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,895 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
Net gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,615 |
|
|
|
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax valuation allowance
benefit (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,341 |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,602,713 |
) |
|
|
7.09 |
|
Preferred stock conversion deemed
dividend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.08 |
) |
|
|
|
N.M., not a meaningful value. |
|
(1) |
|
See Significant Items discussion. |
|
(2) |
|
Pretax unless otherwise noted. |
|
(3) |
|
After-tax. |
Pretax, Pre-provision Income Trends
One non-GAAP performance measurement that we believe is useful in analyzing underlying
performance trends is pretax, pre-provision income. This is the level of earnings adjusted to
exclude the impact of: (a) provision expense, which is excluded because its absolute level is
elevated and volatile, (b) investment securities gains/losses, which are excluded because
securities market valuations may also become particularly volatile in times of economic stress, (c)
amortization of intangibles expense, which is excluded because the return on tangible common equity
is a key measurement that we use to gauge performance trends, and (d) certain other items
identified by us (see Significant Items above) that we believe may distort our underlying
performance trends.
12
The following table reflects pretax, pre-provision income for the each of the past five
quarters:
Table 3 Pretax, Pre-provision Income (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes |
|
$ |
1,644 |
|
|
$ |
(597,977 |
) |
|
$ |
(257,362 |
) |
|
$ |
(137,845 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,684,999 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add: Provision for credit losses |
|
|
235,008 |
|
|
|
893,991 |
|
|
|
475,136 |
|
|
|
413,707 |
|
|
|
291,837 |
|
Less: Securities (losses) gains |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(2,602 |
) |
|
|
(2,374 |
) |
|
|
(7,340 |
) |
|
|
2,067 |
|
Add: Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
17,060 |
|
|
|
16,995 |
|
|
|
17,117 |
|
|
|
17,135 |
|
Less: Significant Items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,231 |
) |
|
|
(2,602,713 |
) |
Gain related to Visa stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
FDIC special assessment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,555 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total pretax, pre-provision income |
|
$ |
251,829 |
|
|
$ |
242,061 |
|
|
$ |
237,143 |
|
|
$ |
229,334 |
|
|
$ |
224,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in total pretax, pre-provision income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior quarter change amount |
|
$ |
9,768 |
|
|
$ |
4,918 |
|
|
$ |
7,809 |
|
|
$ |
4,715 |
|
|
$ |
29,540 |
|
Prior quarter change percent |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Pretax, pre-provision income is a non-GAAP financial measure. Any ratio utilizing this
financial measure is also non-GAAP. This financial measure has been included as it is
considered to be a critical metric with which to analyze and evaluate our results of
operations and financial strength. Other companies may calculate this financial measure
differently. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes only transactions deemed significant. |
Net Interest Income / Average Balance Sheet
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 1.)
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 First Quarter
Fully-taxable equivalent net interest income increased $55.1 million, or 16%, from the
year-ago quarter. This reflected the favorable impact of the significant increase in the net
interest margin to 3.47% from 2.97%. The net interest margin increase reflected a combination of
factors including better pricing on both deposits and loans. It also reflected the benefits of
asset and liability management strategies to adjust the asset sensitivity of the balance sheet over
the next year while maintaining the flexibility to be prepared for a rising interest rate
environment. Although average total earning assets were little changed from the year-ago quarter,
this reflected a $4.0 billion, or 91%, increase in average total investment securities, mostly
offset by a $3.9 billion, or 10%, decline in average total loans and leases.
13
The following table details the change in our reported loans and deposits:
Table 4 Average Loans/Leases and Deposits 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Loans/Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
12,314 |
|
|
$ |
13,541 |
|
|
$ |
(1,227 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
)% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
10,112 |
|
|
|
(2,435 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,991 |
|
|
|
23,653 |
|
|
|
(3,662 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
4,354 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
7,577 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
4,611 |
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Other consumer |
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
16,989 |
|
|
|
17,213 |
|
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
$ |
36,980 |
|
|
$ |
40,866 |
|
|
$ |
(3,886 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
6,627 |
|
|
$ |
5,544 |
|
|
$ |
1,083 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
|
4,076 |
|
|
|
1,640 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
10,340 |
|
|
|
5,593 |
|
|
|
4,747 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
Savings and other domestic time deposits |
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
5,041 |
|
|
|
(428 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
12,784 |
|
|
|
(2,808 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
37,272 |
|
|
|
33,038 |
|
|
|
4,234 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
2,951 |
|
|
|
5,151 |
|
|
|
(2,200 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
40,223 |
|
|
$ |
38,189 |
|
|
$ |
2,034 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $3.9 billion, or 10%, decrease in average total loans and leases primarily reflected:
|
|
|
$3.7 billion, or 15%, decrease in average total commercial loans. The $1.2 billion, or
9%, decline in average commercial and industrial (C&I) loans reflected a general decrease
in borrowing as reflected in a decline in line-of-credit utilization, including significant
reductions in our automobile dealer floorplan portfolio, charge-off activity, the 2009
first quarter Franklin restructuring, and the reclassification in the current quarter of
variable rate demand notes to municipal securities. These negatives were partially offset
by the impact of the reclassifications in 2009 of certain CRE loans, primarily representing
owner occupied properties, to C&I loans. The $2.4 billion, or 24%, decrease in average CRE
loans reflected our ongoing commitment to reduce balance sheet risk. We are executing
several initiatives, which have resulted in portfolio reductions through payoffs and
pay-downs, as well as the impact of charge-offs. |
|
|
|
$0.2 billion, or 1%, decrease in average total consumer loans. This decrease primarily
reflected a $0.3 billion decline in average automobile leases due to the continued run-off
of that portfolio, partially offset by a $0.2 billion increase in average automobile loans.
The increase in average automobile loans reflected a 70% increase in loan originations
from the year-ago quarter. The decline in average residential mortgages reflected the
impact of loan sales, as well as the continued refinancing of portfolio loans and the
related increased sale of fixed-rate originations, partially offset by additions related to
the 2009 first quarter Franklin restructuring. Average home equity loans were little
changed as lower origination volume was offset by slower runoff experience and slightly
higher line utilization. Increased line usage continued to be associated with higher
quality customers taking advantage of the low interest rate environment. |
Offsetting the decline in average total loans and leases was a $4.0 billion, or 91%, increase
in average total investment securities, reflecting the deployment of the cash from core deposit
growth and loan runoff over this period, as well as the proceeds from 2009 capital actions.
The $2.0 billion, or 5%, increase in average total deposits reflected:
|
|
|
$4.2 billion, or 13%, growth in average total core deposits, primarily reflecting
increased sales efforts and initiatives for deposit accounts. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
A $1.6 billion, or 47%, decline in brokered deposits and negotiable CDs and a $0.4
billion, or 35%, decrease in average other domestic deposits over $250,000, primarily
reflecting the reduction of noncore funding sources. |
14
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 Fourth Quarter
Fully-taxable equivalent net interest income increased $19.6 million, or 5%, from the prior
quarter. This reflected an increase in the net interest margin to 3.47% from 3.19%, as average
earnings assets declined $0.6 billion, or 1%. The decrease in average earning assets primarily
reflected a $0.4 billion, or 4%, decrease in average investment securities, as average total loans
and leases were down only $0.1 billion, or less than 1%.
The net interest margin increase reflected a combination of factors including better pricing
on both deposits and loans. It also reflected the benefits of asset and liability management
strategies to reduce the asset sensitivity of the balance sheet over the next year while
maintaining the flexibility to be prepared for a rising rate environment.
The following table details the change in our reported loans and deposits:
Table 5 Average Loans/Leases and Deposits 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Loans/Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
12,314 |
|
|
$ |
12,570 |
|
|
$ |
(256 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
8,458 |
|
|
|
(781 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,991 |
|
|
|
21,028 |
|
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
3,326 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
7,561 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
4,417 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
16,989 |
|
|
|
16,061 |
|
|
|
928 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
$ |
36,980 |
|
|
$ |
37,089 |
|
|
$ |
(109 |
) |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
6,627 |
|
|
$ |
6,466 |
|
|
$ |
161 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
|
5,482 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
10,340 |
|
|
|
9,271 |
|
|
|
1,069 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Savings and other domestic time deposits |
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
4,686 |
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
10,867 |
|
|
|
(891 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
37,272 |
|
|
|
36,772 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
2,951 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
|
(491 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
40,223 |
|
|
$ |
40,214 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $0.1 billion decrease in average total loans and leases primarily reflected:
|
|
|
$0.8 billion, or 9%, decline in CRE loans, primarily resulting from the pay-down and
charge-off activity in the current quarter. While charge-offs remain a significant
contributor to the decline in balances, we also continued to see substantial net
pay-downs totaling $135 million in the current quarter. The pay-down activity was a
result of our portfolio management and loan workout strategies, and some very early
stage improvements in some of our markets. |
|
|
|
$0.3 billion, or 2%, decline in average C&I loans, reflecting a reclassification of
$0.3 billion of variable rate demand notes to municipal securities. Underlying growth
was more than offset by a combination of continued lower line-of-credit utilization and
pay-downs on term debt as the economic environment has caused many customers to actively
reduce their leverage position. Our line-of-credit utilization percentage was 42%,
consistent with that of the prior quarter. |
15
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.9 billion, or 28%, increase in average automobile loans and leases, of which $0.8
billion was the result of adopting a new accounting standard to consolidate a previously
off-balance sheet automobile loan securitization transaction. At the end of the 2009
first quarter, we transferred $1.0 billion of automobile loans to a trust in a
securitization transaction as part of a funding strategy. Upon adoption of the new
accounting standard, the trust was consolidated as of January 1, 2010, and at March 31,
2010, the loans had a remaining balance of $0.7 billion. |
In addition to the decline in average total loans and leases, average total investment
securities decreased $0.4 billion, or 4%, primarily reflecting normal maturities.
Average total deposits were essentially unchanged from the prior quarter reflecting:
|
|
|
$0.5 billion, or 1%, growth in average total core deposits reflecting our focus on
growing money market and transaction accounts. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.5 billion, or 22%, decline in brokered deposits and negotiable CDs, reflecting the
intentional reduction in noncore funding sources given the growth in core deposits. |
Tables 6 and 7 reflect quarterly average balance sheets and rates earned and paid on
interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.
16
Table 6 Consolidated Quarterly Average Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Balances |
|
|
Change |
|
Fully-taxable equivalent basis |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
1Q10 vs. 1Q09 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits in banks |
|
$ |
348 |
|
|
$ |
329 |
|
|
$ |
393 |
|
|
$ |
369 |
|
|
$ |
355 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
Trading account securities |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
resale agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
) |
Loans held for sale |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
709 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
(281 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Investment securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
8,025 |
|
|
|
8,695 |
|
|
|
6,510 |
|
|
|
5,181 |
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
4,064 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
Tax-exempt |
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
465 |
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities |
|
|
8,470 |
|
|
|
8,834 |
|
|
|
6,639 |
|
|
|
5,307 |
|
|
|
4,426 |
|
|
|
4,044 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Loans and leases: (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
12,314 |
|
|
|
12,570 |
|
|
|
12,922 |
|
|
|
13,523 |
|
|
|
13,541 |
|
|
|
(1,227 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Construction |
|
|
1,409 |
|
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
1,808 |
|
|
|
1,946 |
|
|
|
2,033 |
|
|
|
(624 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
Commercial |
|
|
6,268 |
|
|
|
6,807 |
|
|
|
7,071 |
|
|
|
7,253 |
|
|
|
8,079 |
|
|
|
(1,811 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
8,458 |
|
|
|
8,879 |
|
|
|
9,199 |
|
|
|
10,112 |
|
|
|
(2,435 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,991 |
|
|
|
21,028 |
|
|
|
21,801 |
|
|
|
22,722 |
|
|
|
23,653 |
|
|
|
(3,662 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
4,031 |
|
|
|
3,050 |
|
|
|
2,886 |
|
|
|
2,867 |
|
|
|
3,837 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
(298 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
3,326 |
|
|
|
3,230 |
|
|
|
3,290 |
|
|
|
4,354 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
7,561 |
|
|
|
7,581 |
|
|
|
7,640 |
|
|
|
7,577 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
4,417 |
|
|
|
4,487 |
|
|
|
4,657 |
|
|
|
4,611 |
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Other loans |
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
756 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
16,989 |
|
|
|
16,061 |
|
|
|
16,054 |
|
|
|
16,285 |
|
|
|
17,213 |
|
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
36,980 |
|
|
|
37,089 |
|
|
|
37,855 |
|
|
|
39,007 |
|
|
|
40,866 |
|
|
|
(3,886 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(1,510 |
) |
|
|
(1,029 |
) |
|
|
(950 |
) |
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
(913 |
) |
|
|
(597 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans and leases |
|
|
35,470 |
|
|
|
36,060 |
|
|
|
36,905 |
|
|
|
38,077 |
|
|
|
39,953 |
|
|
|
(4,483 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
46,240 |
|
|
|
46,847 |
|
|
|
45,525 |
|
|
|
45,480 |
|
|
|
46,571 |
|
|
|
(331 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
|
1,761 |
|
|
|
1,947 |
|
|
|
2,553 |
|
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
1,553 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
755 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
3,371 |
|
|
|
(2,646 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
All other assets |
|
|
4,486 |
|
|
|
3,956 |
|
|
|
3,797 |
|
|
|
3,701 |
|
|
|
3,571 |
|
|
|
915 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
51,702 |
|
|
$ |
52,458 |
|
|
$ |
51,680 |
|
|
$ |
51,497 |
|
|
$ |
54,153 |
|
|
$ |
(2,451 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
6,627 |
|
|
$ |
6,466 |
|
|
$ |
6,186 |
|
|
$ |
6,021 |
|
|
$ |
5,544 |
|
|
$ |
1,083 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
|
5,482 |
|
|
|
5,140 |
|
|
|
4,547 |
|
|
|
4,076 |
|
|
|
1,640 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
10,340 |
|
|
|
9,271 |
|
|
|
7,601 |
|
|
|
6,355 |
|
|
|
5,593 |
|
|
|
4,747 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
Savings and other domestic time deposits |
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
4,686 |
|
|
|
4,771 |
|
|
|
5,031 |
|
|
|
5,041 |
|
|
|
(428 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
10,867 |
|
|
|
11,646 |
|
|
|
12,501 |
|
|
|
12,784 |
|
|
|
(2,808 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
37,272 |
|
|
|
36,772 |
|
|
|
35,344 |
|
|
|
34,455 |
|
|
|
33,038 |
|
|
|
4,234 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more |
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
667 |
|
|
|
747 |
|
|
|
886 |
|
|
|
1,069 |
|
|
|
(371 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
Brokered time deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
|
|
3,058 |
|
|
|
3,740 |
|
|
|
3,449 |
|
|
|
(1,606 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
40,223 |
|
|
|
40,214 |
|
|
|
39,593 |
|
|
|
39,534 |
|
|
|
38,189 |
|
|
|
2,034 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
|
879 |
|
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
2,414 |
|
|
|
(2,235 |
) |
|
|
(93 |
) |
Subordinated notes and other long-term debt |
|
|
4,062 |
|
|
|
3,908 |
|
|
|
4,136 |
|
|
|
4,640 |
|
|
|
4,612 |
|
|
|
(550 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
38,764 |
|
|
|
39,216 |
|
|
|
39,346 |
|
|
|
39,979 |
|
|
|
40,770 |
|
|
|
(2,006 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other liabilities |
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
1,042 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
569 |
|
|
|
614 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
5,734 |
|
|
|
5,285 |
|
|
|
4,928 |
|
|
|
7,225 |
|
|
|
(1,861 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
$ |
51,702 |
|
|
$ |
52,458 |
|
|
$ |
51,680 |
|
|
$ |
51,497 |
|
|
$ |
54,153 |
|
|
$ |
(2,451 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For purposes of this analysis, nonaccrual loans are reflected in the average balances of
loans. |
17
Table 7 Consolidated Quarterly Net Interest Margin Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Rates (2) |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Fully-taxable equivalent basis (1) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits in banks |
|
|
0.18 |
% |
|
|
0.16 |
% |
|
|
0.28 |
% |
|
|
0.37 |
% |
|
|
0.45 |
% |
Trading account securities |
|
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
1.89 |
|
|
|
1.96 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
|
|
4.04 |
|
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
resale agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.82 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
4.98 |
|
|
|
5.13 |
|
|
|
5.20 |
|
|
|
5.19 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
Investment securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
3.99 |
|
|
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
5.60 |
|
Tax-exempt |
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
6.31 |
|
|
|
6.77 |
|
|
|
6.83 |
|
|
|
6.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities |
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
4.04 |
|
|
|
4.69 |
|
|
|
5.71 |
|
Loans and leases: (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
5.60 |
|
|
|
5.20 |
|
|
|
5.19 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
2.66 |
|
|
|
2.63 |
|
|
|
2.61 |
|
|
|
2.78 |
|
|
|
2.76 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
3.60 |
|
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.43 |
|
|
|
3.56 |
|
|
|
3.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
3.43 |
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
3.26 |
|
|
|
3.39 |
|
|
|
3.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
4.76 |
|
|
|
4.41 |
|
|
|
4.40 |
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
4.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
6.64 |
|
|
|
7.15 |
|
|
|
7.34 |
|
|
|
7.28 |
|
|
|
7.20 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
6.41 |
|
|
|
6.40 |
|
|
|
6.25 |
|
|
|
6.12 |
|
|
|
6.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
6.63 |
|
|
|
7.09 |
|
|
|
7.22 |
|
|
|
7.13 |
|
|
|
7.06 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
5.59 |
|
|
|
5.82 |
|
|
|
5.75 |
|
|
|
5.75 |
|
|
|
5.13 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4.89 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
5.03 |
|
|
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
5.71 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
6.90 |
|
|
|
7.21 |
|
|
|
8.22 |
|
|
|
8.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
5.73 |
|
|
|
5.92 |
|
|
|
5.91 |
|
|
|
5.95 |
|
|
|
5.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
5.21 |
|
|
|
5.07 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
5.02 |
|
|
|
4.90 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
4.82 |
% |
|
|
4.70 |
% |
|
|
4.86 |
% |
|
|
4.99 |
% |
|
|
4.99 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
1.00 |
|
|
|
1.21 |
|
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
|
|
1.02 |
|
Savings and other domestic time deposits |
|
|
1.19 |
|
|
|
1.27 |
|
|
|
1.33 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.50 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
2.93 |
|
|
|
3.07 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
|
3.50 |
|
|
|
3.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
1.71 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.06 |
|
|
|
2.28 |
|
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more |
|
|
1.44 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.24 |
|
|
|
2.61 |
|
|
|
2.92 |
|
Brokered time deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
2.49 |
|
|
|
2.52 |
|
|
|
2.49 |
|
|
|
2.54 |
|
|
|
2.97 |
|
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
1.55 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
1.92 |
|
|
|
2.11 |
|
|
|
2.33 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
0.24 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
2.71 |
|
|
|
1.01 |
|
|
|
0.92 |
|
|
|
1.13 |
|
|
|
1.03 |
|
Subordinated notes and other long-term debt |
|
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
2.67 |
|
|
|
2.58 |
|
|
|
2.91 |
|
|
|
3.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
1.60 |
% |
|
|
1.80 |
% |
|
|
1.93 |
% |
|
|
2.14 |
% |
|
|
2.31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest rate spread |
|
|
3.22 |
% |
|
|
2.90 |
% |
|
|
2.93 |
% |
|
|
2.85 |
% |
|
|
2.68 |
% |
Impact of noninterest-bearing funds on margin |
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.29 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Interest Margin |
|
|
3.47 |
% |
|
|
3.19 |
% |
|
|
3.20 |
% |
|
|
3.10 |
% |
|
|
2.97 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) yields are calculated assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(2) |
|
Loan and lease and deposit average rates include impact of applicable derivatives and
non-deferrable fees. |
|
(3) |
|
For purposes of this analysis, nonaccrual loans are reflected in the average balances of loans. |
18
Provision for Credit Losses
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2 and the Credit Risk section.)
The provision for credit losses is the expense necessary to maintain the ALLL and the AULC at
levels adequate to absorb our estimate of inherent credit losses in the loan and lease portfolio
and the portfolio of unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit.
The provision for credit losses for the 2010 first quarter was $235.0 million, down $659.0
million, or 74%, from the prior quarter and down $56.8 million, or 19%, from the year-ago quarter.
The current quarters provision for credit losses essentially matched the $238.5 million of NCOs
(see Credit Quality discussion).
The following table details the Franklin-related impact to the provision for credit losses for
each of the past five quarters.
Table 8 Provision for Credit Losses Franklin-Related Impact
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for (reduction to) credit losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
11.5 |
|
|
$ |
1.2 |
|
|
$ |
(3.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(10.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.7 |
) |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
223.5 |
|
|
|
892.8 |
|
|
|
478.6 |
|
|
|
423.8 |
|
|
|
293.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
235.0 |
|
|
$ |
894.0 |
|
|
$ |
475.1 |
|
|
$ |
413.7 |
|
|
$ |
291.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs (recoveries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
11.5 |
|
|
$ |
1.2 |
|
|
$ |
(3.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(10.1 |
) |
|
$ |
128.3 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
227.0 |
|
|
|
443.5 |
|
|
|
359.4 |
|
|
|
344.5 |
|
|
|
213.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
238.5 |
|
|
$ |
444.7 |
|
|
$ |
355.9 |
|
|
$ |
334.4 |
|
|
$ |
341.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for (reduction to) credit losses in
excess of net charge-offs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(130.0 |
) |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
(3.5 |
) |
|
|
449.3 |
|
|
|
119.2 |
|
|
|
79.3 |
|
|
|
80.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(3.5 |
) |
|
$ |
449.3 |
|
|
$ |
119.2 |
|
|
$ |
79.3 |
|
|
$ |
(49.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest Income
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 5.)
The following table reflects noninterest income for each of the past five quarters:
Table 9 Noninterest Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
$ |
69,339 |
|
|
$ |
76,757 |
|
|
$ |
80,811 |
|
|
$ |
75,353 |
|
|
$ |
69,878 |
|
Brokerage and insurance income |
|
|
35,762 |
|
|
|
32,173 |
|
|
|
33,996 |
|
|
|
32,052 |
|
|
|
39,948 |
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
25,038 |
|
|
|
24,618 |
|
|
|
21,435 |
|
|
|
30,827 |
|
|
|
35,418 |
|
Trust services |
|
|
27,765 |
|
|
|
27,275 |
|
|
|
25,832 |
|
|
|
25,722 |
|
|
|
24,810 |
|
Electronic banking |
|
|
25,137 |
|
|
|
25,173 |
|
|
|
28,017 |
|
|
|
24,479 |
|
|
|
22,482 |
|
Bank owned life insurance income |
|
|
16,470 |
|
|
|
14,055 |
|
|
|
13,639 |
|
|
|
14,266 |
|
|
|
12,912 |
|
Automobile operating lease income |
|
|
12,303 |
|
|
|
12,671 |
|
|
|
12,795 |
|
|
|
13,116 |
|
|
|
13,228 |
|
Securities (losses) gains |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(2,602 |
) |
|
|
(2,374 |
) |
|
|
(7,340 |
) |
|
|
2,067 |
|
Other income |
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
34,426 |
|
|
|
41,901 |
|
|
|
57,470 |
|
|
|
18,359 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
240,852 |
|
|
$ |
244,546 |
|
|
$ |
256,052 |
|
|
$ |
265,945 |
|
|
$ |
239,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
The following table details mortgage banking income and the net impact of mortgage servicing
rights (MSR) hedging activity for each of the past five quarters:
Table 10 Mortgage Banking Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage Banking Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Origination and secondary marketing |
|
$ |
13,586 |
|
|
$ |
16,473 |
|
|
$ |
16,491 |
|
|
$ |
31,782 |
|
|
$ |
29,965 |
|
Servicing fees |
|
|
12,418 |
|
|
|
12,289 |
|
|
|
12,320 |
|
|
|
12,045 |
|
|
|
11,840 |
|
Amortization of capitalized servicing(1) |
|
|
(10,065 |
) |
|
|
(10,791 |
) |
|
|
(10,050 |
) |
|
|
(14,445 |
) |
|
|
(12,285 |
) |
Other mortgage banking income |
|
|
3,210 |
|
|
|
4,466 |
|
|
|
4,109 |
|
|
|
5,381 |
|
|
|
9,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-total |
|
|
19,149 |
|
|
|
22,437 |
|
|
|
22,870 |
|
|
|
34,763 |
|
|
|
38,924 |
|
MSR valuation adjustment(1) |
|
|
(5,772 |
) |
|
|
15,491 |
|
|
|
(17,348 |
) |
|
|
46,551 |
|
|
|
(10,389 |
) |
Net trading gain (loss) related to MSR hedging |
|
|
11,661 |
|
|
|
(13,310 |
) |
|
|
15,913 |
|
|
|
(50,487 |
) |
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage banking income |
|
$ |
25,038 |
|
|
$ |
24,618 |
|
|
$ |
21,435 |
|
|
$ |
30,827 |
|
|
$ |
35,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage originations (in millions) |
|
$ |
869 |
|
|
$ |
1,131 |
|
|
$ |
998 |
|
|
$ |
1,587 |
|
|
$ |
1,546 |
|
Average trading account securities used to hedge
MSRs (in millions) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
Capitalized mortgage servicing rights(2) |
|
|
207,552 |
|
|
|
214,592 |
|
|
|
200,969 |
|
|
|
219,282 |
|
|
|
167,838 |
|
Total mortgages serviced for others (in millions)(2) |
|
|
15,968 |
|
|
|
16,010 |
|
|
|
16,145 |
|
|
|
16,246 |
|
|
|
16,315 |
|
MSR % of investor servicing portfolio |
|
|
1.30 |
% |
|
|
1.34 |
% |
|
|
1.24 |
% |
|
|
1.35 |
% |
|
|
1.03 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Impact of MSR Hedging |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MSR valuation adjustment(1) |
|
$ |
(5,772 |
) |
|
$ |
15,491 |
|
|
$ |
(17,348 |
) |
|
$ |
46,551 |
|
|
$ |
(10,389 |
) |
Net trading gain (loss) related to MSR hedging |
|
|
11,661 |
|
|
|
(13,310 |
) |
|
|
15,913 |
|
|
|
(50,487 |
) |
|
|
6,883 |
|
Net interest income related to MSR hedging |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
2,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impact of MSR hedging |
|
$ |
6,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,349 |
|
|
$ |
(1,244 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,737 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,065 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The change in fair value for the period represents the MSR valuation adjustment, net of
amortization of capitalized servicing.
|
|
(2) |
|
At period end. |
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 First Quarter
Noninterest income increased $1.8 million, or 1%, from the year-ago quarter.
Table 11 Noninterest Income 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposit
accounts |
|
$ |
69,339 |
|
|
$ |
69,878 |
|
|
$ |
(539 |
) |
|
|
(1) |
% |
Brokerage and insurance income |
|
|
35,762 |
|
|
|
39,948 |
|
|
|
(4,186 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
25,038 |
|
|
|
35,418 |
|
|
|
(10,380 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
Trust services |
|
|
27,765 |
|
|
|
24,810 |
|
|
|
2,955 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Electronic banking |
|
|
25,137 |
|
|
|
22,482 |
|
|
|
2,655 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Bank owned life insurance
income |
|
|
16,470 |
|
|
|
12,912 |
|
|
|
3,558 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Automobile operating lease
income |
|
|
12,303 |
|
|
|
13,228 |
|
|
|
(925 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Securities (losses) gains |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
2,067 |
|
|
|
(2,098 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
Other income |
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
18,359 |
|
|
|
10,710 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
240,852 |
|
|
$ |
239,102 |
|
|
$ |
1,750 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.M., not a meaningful value.
20
The $1.8 million increase in total noninterest income from the year-ago quarter reflected:
|
|
|
$10.7 million, or 58%, increase in other income, as the year-ago quarter included a $5.9
million automobile loan securitization loss. The improvement also reflected growth in
standby letter of credit fees and trading income. |
|
|
|
$3.6 million, or 28%, increase in bank owned life insurance income, reflecting $2.6
million in realized policy benefits. |
|
|
|
$3.0 million, or 12%, increase in trust services income, primarily reflecting the
positive impact of higher asset market values. |
|
|
|
$2.7 million, or 12%, increase in electronic banking income, reflecting higher debit
card transaction volumes. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$10.4 million, or 29%, decline in mortgage banking income, reflecting a $16.4 million,
or 55%, decline in origination and secondary marketing income as originations in the
current quarter were down 44% from the year-ago quarter, partially offset by a net benefit
from MSR valuation and hedging activity (see Table 10). |
|
|
|
$4.2 million, or 10%, decline in brokerage and insurance income, reflecting a $1.4
million, or 8%, decline in investment product income, primarily due to a 21% decline in
annuity sales volume, as well as a $2.8 million, or 13%, decline in insurance income,
primarily due to lower contingent fees. |
|
|
|
$2.1 million of securities gains in the year-ago quarter. |
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 Fourth Quarter
Noninterest income decreased $3.7 million, or 2%, from the prior quarter.
Table 12 Noninterest Income 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposit
accounts |
|
$ |
69,339 |
|
|
$ |
76,757 |
|
|
$ |
(7,418 |
) |
|
|
(10) |
% |
Brokerage and insurance income |
|
|
35,762 |
|
|
|
32,173 |
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
25,038 |
|
|
|
24,618 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Trust services |
|
|
27,765 |
|
|
|
27,275 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Electronic banking |
|
|
25,137 |
|
|
|
25,173 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(0 |
) |
Bank owned life insurance
income |
|
|
16,470 |
|
|
|
14,055 |
|
|
|
2,415 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Automobile operating lease
income |
|
|
12,303 |
|
|
|
12,671 |
|
|
|
(368 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Securities losses |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(2,602 |
) |
|
|
2,571 |
|
|
|
(99 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
34,426 |
|
|
|
(5,357 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
240,852 |
|
|
$ |
244,546 |
|
|
$ |
(3,694 |
) |
|
|
(2) |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $3.7 million, or 2%, decrease in total noninterest income from the prior quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$7.4 million, or 10%, decline in service charges on deposit accounts, reflecting
seasonally lower personal service charges, mostly related to nonsufficient
funds/overdrafts. |
|
|
|
$5.4 million, or 16%, decline in other income, as the prior quarter included a benefit
from the change in fair value of our derivatives that did not qualify for hedge accounting. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$3.6 million, or 11%, increase in brokerage and insurance income, including a 17%
increase in insurance income, reflecting improved sales and seasonal factors. |
|
|
|
$2.6 million improvement in securities losses as the prior quarter reflected $2.6
million in securities losses. |
|
|
|
$2.4 million, or 17%, increase in bank owned life insurance income, reflecting $2.1
million in realized policy benefits. |
21
Noninterest Expense
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Items 1, 3, and 6.)
The following table reflects noninterest expense for each of the past five quarters:
Table 13 Noninterest Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
183,642 |
|
|
$ |
180,663 |
|
|
$ |
172,152 |
|
|
$ |
171,735 |
|
|
$ |
175,932 |
|
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
39,082 |
|
|
|
36,812 |
|
|
|
38,285 |
|
|
|
40,006 |
|
|
|
32,992 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
24,755 |
|
|
|
24,420 |
|
|
|
23,851 |
|
|
|
48,138 |
|
|
|
17,421 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
29,086 |
|
|
|
26,273 |
|
|
|
25,382 |
|
|
|
24,430 |
|
|
|
29,188 |
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
18,520 |
|
|
|
38,968 |
|
|
|
26,524 |
|
|
|
9,887 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
20,624 |
|
|
|
20,454 |
|
|
|
20,967 |
|
|
|
21,286 |
|
|
|
20,410 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
25,146 |
|
|
|
18,108 |
|
|
|
16,658 |
|
|
|
16,454 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
17,060 |
|
|
|
16,995 |
|
|
|
17,117 |
|
|
|
17,135 |
|
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
|
10,440 |
|
|
|
10,589 |
|
|
|
11,400 |
|
|
|
10,931 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
11,153 |
|
|
|
9,074 |
|
|
|
8,259 |
|
|
|
7,491 |
|
|
|
8,225 |
|
Telecommunications |
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
6,099 |
|
|
|
5,902 |
|
|
|
6,088 |
|
|
|
5,890 |
|
Printing and supplies |
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
|
3,807 |
|
|
|
3,950 |
|
|
|
4,151 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,231 |
|
|
|
2,602,713 |
|
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,615 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(73,038 |
) |
|
|
(729 |
) |
Other |
|
|
20,468 |
|
|
|
17,443 |
|
|
|
17,749 |
|
|
|
13,765 |
|
|
|
19,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
398,093 |
|
|
$ |
322,596 |
|
|
$ |
401,097 |
|
|
$ |
339,982 |
|
|
$ |
2,969,769 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 First Quarter
Noninterest expense decreased $2,571.7 million, or 87%, from the year-ago quarter.
Table 14 Noninterest Expense 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
183,642 |
|
|
$ |
175,932 |
|
|
$ |
7,710 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
39,082 |
|
|
|
32,992 |
|
|
|
6,090 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
24,755 |
|
|
|
17,421 |
|
|
|
7,334 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
29,086 |
|
|
|
29,188 |
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
|
|
|
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
9,887 |
|
|
|
1,643 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
20,624 |
|
|
|
20,410 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
16,454 |
|
|
|
6,243 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
17,135 |
|
|
|
(1,989 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
|
10,931 |
|
|
|
(865 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Marketing |
|
|
11,153 |
|
|
|
8,225 |
|
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Telecommunications |
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
5,890 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Printing and supplies |
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,602,713 |
|
|
|
(2,602,713 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
) |
Gain on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(729 |
) |
|
|
729 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
Other expense |
|
|
20,468 |
|
|
|
19,748 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
398,093 |
|
|
$ |
2,969,769 |
|
|
$ |
(2,571,676 |
) |
|
|
(87 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $2,571.7 million, or 87%, decrease in total noninterest expense from the year-ago quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$2,602.7 million of goodwill impairment in the year-ago quarter. |
|
|
|
$2.0 million, or 12%, decline in amortization of intangibles. |
22
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$7.7 million, or 4%, increase in personnel costs, reflecting a 1% increase in full-time
equivalent staff, which contributed to higher salaries and sales commission expense in the
current period, as well as lower benefits expense in the year-ago period. |
|
|
|
$7.3 million, or 42%, increase in deposit and other insurance expense primarily due to
higher FDIC insurance costs as premiums rates increased and the level of deposits grew. |
|
|
|
$6.2 million, or 38%, increase in professional services, reflecting higher commercial
loan collection-related expenses, as well as an increase in consulting expenses. |
|
|
|
$6.1 million, or 18%, increase in outside data processing and other services, primarily
reflecting portfolio servicing fees now paid to Franklin as a result of the 2009 first
quarter restructuring of this relationship, as well as higher outside appraisal costs. |
|
|
|
$2.9 million, or 36%, increase in marketing expense, reflecting an increase in product
advertising activities. |
2010 First Quarter versus 2009 Fourth Quarter
Noninterest expense increased $75.5 million, or 23%, from the prior quarter.
Table 15 Noninterest Expense 2010 First Quarter vs. 2009 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
183,642 |
|
|
$ |
180,663 |
|
|
$ |
2,979 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
39,082 |
|
|
|
36,812 |
|
|
|
2,270 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
24,755 |
|
|
|
24,420 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
29,086 |
|
|
|
26,273 |
|
|
|
2,813 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
18,520 |
|
|
|
(6,990 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
Equipment |
|
|
20,624 |
|
|
|
20,454 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
25,146 |
|
|
|
(2,449 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
17,060 |
|
|
|
(1,914 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
|
10,440 |
|
|
|
(374 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Marketing |
|
|
11,153 |
|
|
|
9,074 |
|
|
|
2,079 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Telecommunications |
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
6,099 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Printing and supplies |
|
|
3,673 |
|
|
|
3,807 |
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Gain on early extinguishment of
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,615 |
) |
|
|
73,615 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
Other expense |
|
|
20,468 |
|
|
|
17,443 |
|
|
|
3,025 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
398,093 |
|
|
$ |
322,596 |
|
|
$ |
75,497 |
|
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $75.5 million, or 23%, increase in total noninterest expense from the prior quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$73.6 million gain on the early extinguishment of debt that lowered the prior quarters
noninterest expense. |
|
|
|
$3.0 million, or 17%, increase in other expenses, primarily reflecting higher franchise
and other taxes. |
|
|
|
$3.0 million, or 2%, increase in personnel costs, reflecting higher salaries due to a 4%
increase in full-time equivalent staff as well as a seasonal increase in FICA-related
benefits expense, partially offset by lower commission expense. The increase in full-time
equivalent staff was related to our strategic initiatives. |
|
|
|
$2.8 million, or 11%, increase in net occupancy expense, primarily reflecting higher
seasonal snow removal expense. |
|
|
|
$2.3 million, or 6%, increase in outside data processing and other services expense,
primarily reflecting an increase in outside computer expenses. |
|
|
|
$2.1 million, or 23%, increase in marketing expense, reflecting an increase in product
advertising activities. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$7.0 million, or 38%, decrease in OREO and foreclosure expense. |
|
|
|
$2.4 million, or 10%, decrease in professional services, reflecting lower commercial
loan collection-related expenses. |
23
Provision for Income Taxes
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Items 2 and 6.)
The provision for income taxes in the 2010 first quarter was a benefit of $38.1 million. This
compared with a tax benefit of $228.3 million in the 2009 fourth quarter and a tax benefit of
$251.8 million in the 2009 first quarter. As of March 31, 2010, a net deferred tax asset of $557.2
million was recorded. There was no impairment to the deferred tax asset as a result of projected
taxable income.
In the ordinary course of business, we operate in various taxing jurisdictions and are subject
to income and nonincome taxes. Also, we are subject to ongoing tax examinations in various
jurisdictions. Federal income tax audits have been completed through 2005. In 2009, the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) began the audit of our consolidated federal income tax returns for tax years
2006 and 2007. Various state and other jurisdictions remain open to examination for tax years 2000
and forward. In addition, we are subject to ongoing tax examinations in various other state and
local jurisdictions. The IRS as well as state tax officials from Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky have
proposed adjustments to our previously filed tax returns. We believe that the tax positions taken
by us related to such proposed adjustments were correct and are supported by applicable statutes,
regulations, and judicial authority, and we intend to vigorously defend them. It is possible that
the ultimate resolution of the proposed adjustments, if unfavorable, may be material to the results
of operations in the period it occurs. However, although no assurances can be given, we believe
that the resolution of these examinations will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a
material adverse impact on our consolidated financial position. (See Note 16 of the Notes to the
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding
unrecognized tax benefits.)
24
RISK MANAGEMENT AND CAPITAL
Risk identification and monitoring are key elements in overall risk management. We believe our
primary risk exposures are credit, market, liquidity, and operational risk. We hold capital
proportionately against these risks. More information on risk can be found under the heading Risk
Factors included in Item 1A of our 2009 Form 10-K, and subsequent filings with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. Additionally, the MD&A included in our 2009 Form 10-K, should be read in
conjunction with the MD&A as this report provides only material updates to the 2009 Form 10-K. Our
definition, philosophy, and approach to risk management have not materially changed from the
discussion presented in the 2009 Form 10-K.
Credit Risk
Credit risk is the risk of loss due to our counterparties not being able to meet their
financial obligations under agreed upon terms. The majority of our credit risk is associated with
lending activities, as the acceptance and management of credit risk is central to profitable
lending. We also have credit risk associated with our investment and derivatives activities.
Credit risk is incidental to trading activities and represents a significant risk that is
associated with our investment securities portfolio (see Investment Securities Portfolio
discussion). Credit risk is mitigated through a combination of credit policies and processes,
market risk management activities, and portfolio diversification.
Credit Exposure Mix
At March 31, 2010, commercial loans totaled $19.7 billion, and represented 53% of our total
credit exposure. Our commercial loan portfolio is diversified along product type, size, and
geography within our footprint, and is comprised of the following (see Commercial Credit
discussion):
Commercial and Industrial (C&I) loans - C&I loans represent loans to commercial customers for
use in normal business operations to finance working capital needs, equipment purchases, or other
projects. The vast majority of these borrowers are commercial customers doing business within our
geographic regions. C&I loans are generally underwritten individually and usually secured with the
assets of the company and/or the personal guarantee of the business owners. The financing of
owner-occupied facilities is considered a C&I loan even though there is improved real estate as
collateral. This treatment is a function of the underwriting process, which focuses on cash flow
from operations to repay the debt. The sale of the real estate is not considered either a primary
or secondary repayment source for the loan.
Commercial real estate (CRE) loans - CRE loans consist of loans for income producing real
estate properties and real estate developers. We mitigate our risk on these loans by requiring
collateral values that exceed the loan amount and underwriting the loan with cash flow
substantially in excess of the debt service requirement. These loans are made to finance
properties such as apartment buildings, office and industrial buildings, and retail shopping
centers; and are repaid through cash flows related to the operation, sale, or refinance of the
property.
Construction CRE loans - Construction CRE loans are loans to individuals, companies, or
developers used for the construction of a commercial or residential property for which repayment
will be generated by the sale or permanent financing of the property. Our construction CRE
portfolio primarily consists of retail, residential (land, single family, condominiums), office,
and warehouse product types. Generally, these loans are for construction projects that have been
presold, preleased, or otherwise have secured permanent financing, as well as loans to real estate
companies that have significant equity invested in each project. These loans are generally
underwritten and managed by a specialized real estate group that actively monitors the construction
phase and manages the loan disbursements according to the predetermined construction schedule.
Total consumer loans were $17.2 billion at March 31, 2010, and represented 47% of our total
credit exposure. The consumer portfolio was diversified among home equity loans, residential
mortgages, and automobile loans and leases (see Consumer Credit discussion).
Home equity - Home equity lending includes both home equity loans and lines-of-credit. This
type of lending, which is secured by a first- or second- mortgage on the borrowers residence,
allows customers to borrow against the equity in their home. Real estate market values as of the
time the loan or line is granted directly affect the amount of credit extended and, in addition,
changes in these values impact the severity of losses.
Residential mortgages - Residential mortgage loans represent loans to consumers for the
purchase or refinance of a residence. These loans are generally financed over a 15- to 30- year
term, and in most cases, are extended to borrowers to finance their primary residence. In some
cases, government agencies or private mortgage insurers guarantee the loan. Generally speaking,
our practice is to sell a significant majority of our fixed-rate originations in the secondary
market.
25
Automobile loans/leases - Automobile loans/leases is primarily comprised of loans made through
automotive dealerships, and includes exposure in selected out-of-market states. However, no
out-of-market state represented more than 10% of our total automobile loan and lease portfolio, and
we expect to see further reductions in these exposures as we ceased automobile loan originations in
out-of-market states during the 2009 first quarter. Our automobile lease portfolio will continue
to decline as we exited the automobile leasing business during the 2008 fourth quarter.
Table 16 Loan and Lease Portfolio Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial(2) |
|
$ |
12,245 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
$ |
12,888 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
12,547 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
13,320 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
13,768 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
Construction |
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,469 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,815 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,857 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Commercial(2) |
|
|
6,013 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6,220 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
6,900 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
7,089 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
7,187 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial real estate |
|
|
7,456 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,689 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
8,715 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
8,946 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
9,261 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,701 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
20,577 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
21,262 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
22,266 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
23,029 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans(3) |
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
3,144 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
2,939 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,855 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2,894 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
468 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,514 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,563 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
7,576 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,631 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,663 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,614 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,510 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,468 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,646 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,837 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
657 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
17,231 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
16,214 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
16,042 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
16,229 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
16,519 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
36,932 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,791 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,304 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
38,495 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,548 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
There were no commercial loans outstanding that would be considered a concentration of
lending to a particular industry or group of industries. |
|
(2) |
|
The 2009 first quarter and 2009 fourth quarter reflected net reclassifications from
commercial real estate loans to commercial and industrial loans of $782.2 million and $589.0
million, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
The 2010 first quarter included an increase of $730.5 million resulting from the adoption of
a new accounting standard to consolidate a previously off-balance automobile loan
securitization transaction. |
Commercial Credit
The primary factors considered in commercial credit approvals are the financial strength of
the borrower, assessment of the borrowers management capabilities, industry sector trends, type of
exposure, transaction structure, and the general economic outlook.
In commercial lending, ongoing credit management is dependent on the type and nature of the
loan. We monitor all significant exposures on an on-going basis. All commercial credit extensions
are assigned internal risk ratings reflecting the borrowers probability-of-default and
loss-given-default. This two-dimensional rating methodology, which results in 192 individual loan
grades, provides granularity in the portfolio management process. The probability-of-default is
rated on a scale of 1-12 and is applied at the borrower level. The loss-given-default is rated on a
1-16 scale and is applied based on the type of credit extension and the underlying collateral. The
internal risk ratings are assessed and updated with each periodic monitoring event. There is also
extensive macro portfolio management analysis on an ongoing basis. The retail projects portfolio
is an example of a segment of the portfolio that has received more frequent evaluation at the loan
level as a result of the economic environment and performance trends (Retail Properties
discussion). We continually review and adjust our risk-rating criteria based on actual experience.
The continuous analysis and review process results in a determination of an appropriate ALLL
amount for our commercial loan portfolio.
Credit exposures may be designated as monitored credits when warranted by individual borrower
performance, or by industry and environmental factors. Monitored credits are subjected to
additional monthly reviews in order to adequately assess the borrowers credit status and to take
appropriate action.
The Special Assets Division (SAD) is a specialized credit group that handles workouts,
commercial recoveries, and problem loan sales. This group is involved in the day-to-day management
of relationships rated substandard or lower. Its responsibilities include developing an action
plan, assessing the risk rating, and determining the adequacy of the reserve, the accrual status,
and the ultimate collectibility of the managed monitored credits.
26
Our commercial loan portfolio, including CRE loans, is diversified by customer size, as well
as throughout our geographic footprint. Throughout 2009, we engaged in a large number of enhanced
portfolio management initiatives, including a review to ensure the appropriate classification of
CRE loans. The results of this initiative included reclassifications totaling $1.4 billion that
increased C&I loan balances, and correspondingly decreased CRE loan balances. We believe that the
changes provide improved visibility and clarity to us and our investors.
Certain segments of our commercial loan portfolio are discussed in further detail below:
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE (CRE) PORTFOLIO
As shown in the following table, CRE loans totaled $7.5 billion and represented 20% of our
total loan exposure at March 31, 2010.
Table 17 Commercial Real Estate Loans by Property Type and Property Location
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Ohio |
|
|
Michigan |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
Indiana |
|
|
Kentucky |
|
|
Florida |
|
|
Virginia |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total Amount |
|
|
% |
|
|
Retail properties |
|
$ |
834 |
|
|
$ |
199 |
|
|
$ |
157 |
|
|
$ |
209 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
47 |
|
|
$ |
540 |
|
|
$ |
2,064 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
Multi family |
|
|
794 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Office |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
1,145 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Industrial and warehouse |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Single
family home builders |
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Lines to
real estate companies |
|
|
485 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Hotel |
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Raw land and other land
uses |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Health care |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,894 |
|
|
$ |
971 |
|
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
$ |
262 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
$ |
7,456 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of total portfolio |
|
|
52 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs (for the first three-month
period of 2010) |
|
$ |
34.5 |
|
|
$ |
18.9 |
|
|
$ |
3.9 |
|
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
|
$ |
1.5 |
|
|
$ |
5.5 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
19.1 |
|
|
$ |
85.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs -
annualized % |
|
|
3.44 |
% |
|
|
7.57 |
% |
|
|
2.99 |
% |
|
|
1.49 |
% |
|
|
5.19 |
% |
|
|
10.38 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
7.41 |
% |
|
|
4.44 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual loans |
|
$ |
424.5 |
|
|
$ |
97.6 |
|
|
$ |
39.7 |
|
|
$ |
30.1 |
|
|
$ |
9.3 |
|
|
$ |
35.2 |
|
|
$ |
18.2 |
|
|
$ |
172.2 |
|
|
$ |
826.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
% of related outstandings |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
CRE loan credit quality data regarding NCOs, nonaccrual loans (NALs), and accruing loans
90-days past due or more by industry classification code are presented in the following table:
27
Table 18 Commercial Real Estate Loans Credit Quality Data by Property Type
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
|
Nonaccrual Loans |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent (1) |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail properties |
|
$ |
26.0 |
|
|
|
4.94 |
% |
|
$ |
25.3 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
$ |
250.8 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
% |
|
$ |
253.6 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
Industrial and warehouse |
|
|
19.3 |
|
|
|
8.48 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
0.39 |
|
|
|
99.0 |
|
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
|
120.8 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Single family home builder |
|
|
18.4 |
|
|
|
8.78 |
|
|
|
29.6 |
|
|
|
8.16 |
|
|
|
218.4 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
|
|
|
262.4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Multi family |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
2.69 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
104.3 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
129.0 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Lines to real estate
companies |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
3.35 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
2.45 |
|
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
22.7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Office |
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
1.08 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
1.05 |
|
|
|
75.1 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
87.3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Hotel |
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Raw land and other land
uses |
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
5.18 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
5.32 |
|
|
|
42.7 |
|
|
|
31.0 |
|
|
|
42.4 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Health care |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
85.3 |
|
|
|
4.44 |
% |
|
$ |
82.8 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
% |
|
$ |
826.8 |
|
|
|
11.0 |
% |
|
$ |
935.8 |
|
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents percentage of related outstanding loans. |
We manage the risks inherent in this portfolio through origination policies, concentration
limits, ongoing loan level reviews, recourse requirements, and continuous portfolio risk management
activities. Our origination policies for this portfolio include loan product-type specific
policies such as loan-to-value (LTV), debt service coverage ratios, and pre-leasing requirements,
as applicable. Generally, we: (a) limit our loans to 80% of the appraised value of the commercial
real estate, (b) require net operating cash flows to be 125% of required interest and principal
payments, and (c) if the commercial real estate is non-owner occupied, require that at least 50% of
the space of the project be pre-leased.
Dedicated real estate professionals within our Commercial Real Estate business segment team
originated the majority of the portfolio, with the remainder obtained from prior acquisitions.
Appraisals from approved vendors are reviewed by an internal appraisal review group to ensure the
quality of the valuation used in the underwriting process. The portfolio is diversified by project
type and loan size, and represents a significant piece of the credit risk management strategies
employed for this portfolio. Our loan review staff provides an assessment of the quality of the
underwriting and structure and validates the risk rating assigned to the loan.
Appraisal values are obtained in conjunction with all originations and renewals, and on an as
needed basis, in compliance with regulatory requirements. Given the stressed environment for some
loan types, we have initiated ongoing portfolio level reviews of certain segments such as the
retail properties segment (see Retail Properties discussion). These reviews generate action
plans based on occupancy levels or sales volume associated with the projects being reviewed. The
results of these actions indicated that additional stress is likely due to the current economic
conditions. Property values are updated using appraisals on a regular basis to ensure that
appropriate decisions regarding the ongoing management of the portfolio reflect the changing market
conditions. This highly individualized process requires working closely with all of our borrowers
as well as an in-depth knowledge of CRE project lending and the market environment.
At the portfolio level, we actively monitor the concentrations and performance metrics of all
loan types, with a focus on higher risk segments. Macro-level stress-test scenarios based on
retail sales and home-price depreciation trends for the segments are embedded in our performance
expectations, and lease-up and absorption scenarios are assessed. We anticipate the current stress
within this portfolio will continue for the foreseeable future, resulting in elevated NCOs, NALs,
and ALLL levels.
Within the CRE portfolio, the retail properties segment continued to be stressed as a result
of the continued decline in the housing markets and general economic conditions, and is discussed
further below.
Retail Properties
Our portfolio of CRE loans secured by retail properties totaled $2,064 million, or
approximately 6% of total loans and leases, at March 31, 2010. Loans within this portfolio segment
declined $51 million, or 2%, from December 31, 2009. Credit approval in this portfolio segment is
generally dependent on pre-leasing requirements, and net operating income from the project must
cover debt service by specified percentages when the loan is fully funded.
28
The weakness of the economic environment in our geographic regions significantly impacted the
projects that secure the loans in this portfolio segment. Lower occupancy rates, reduced rental
rates, increased unemployment levels compared with recent years, and the expectation that these
levels will continue to increase for the foreseeable future are expected to adversely affect our
borrowers ability to repay these loans. We have increased the level of credit risk management
activity to this portfolio segment, and we analyze our retail property loans in detail by combining
property type, geographic location, tenants, and other data, to assess and manage our credit
concentration risks.
Single Family Home Builders
At March 31, 2010, we had $805 million of CRE loans to single family home builders. Such
loans represented 2% of total loans and leases. Of this portfolio segment, 69% were to finance
projects currently under construction, 14% to finance land under development, and 17% to finance
land held for development. The $805 million represented a $52 million, or 6%, decrease compared
with $857 million at December 31, 2009. The decrease primarily reflected run-off activity as no
new loans have been originated since 2008, property sale activity, and charge-offs. Based on
portfolio management processes, including charge-off activity, over the past 30 months, we believe
that we have substantially addressed the credit issues in this portfolio. We do not anticipate any
future significant credit impact from this portfolio segment.
Core and Noncore portfolios
Each CRE loan is classified as either core or noncore. We segmented the CRE portfolio into
these designations in order to provide more clarity around our portfolio management strategies and
to provide additional clarity for us and our investors. A CRE loan is generally considered core
when the borrower is an experienced, well-capitalized developer in our Midwest footprint, and has
either an established meaningful relationship or the prospective of establishing one, that
generates an acceptable return on capital. The core CRE portfolio was $4.0 billion at March 31,
2010, representing 53% of total CRE loans. Based on the extensive project level assessment
process, including forward-looking collateral valuations, we are comfortable with the credit
quality of the core portfolio at this time.
A CRE loan is generally considered noncore based on a lack of a substantive relationship
outside of the credit product, with no immediate prospects for improvement. The noncore CRE
portfolio declined from $3.7 billion at December 31, 2009, to $3.5 billion at March 31, 2010, and
represented 47% of total CRE loans. It is within the noncore segment where most of the credit
quality challenges exist. For example, $810.6 million, or 23%, of related outstanding balances,
are classified as NALs. The Special Assets Division (SAD) administered $1.7 billion, or 49%, of
total noncore CRE loans at March 31, 2010. It is expected that we will exit the majority of
noncore CRE relationships over time. This would reflect normal repayments, possible sales should
economically attractive opportunities arise, or the reclassification as a core CRE relationship if
it expands to meet the core requirements.
29
The table below provides the segregation of the CRE portfolio into core and noncore segments
as of March 31, 2010.
Table 19 Core Commercial Real Estate Loans by Property Type and Property Location
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Ohio |
|
|
Michigan |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
Indiana |
|
|
Kentucky |
|
|
Florida |
|
|
Virginia |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total Amount |
|
|
% |
|
|
Core portfolio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail properties |
|
$ |
471 |
|
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
89 |
|
|
$ |
91 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
375 |
|
|
$ |
1,205 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
Office |
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
670 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Multi family |
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Industrial and warehouse |
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Lines to real estate
companies |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Hotel |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Single family home
builders |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Raw land and other land
uses |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Health care |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core portfolio |
|
|
1,961 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
3,970 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Total noncore portfolio |
|
|
1,933 |
|
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
3,486 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,894 |
|
|
$ |
971 |
|
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
$ |
262 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
$ |
7,456 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit quality data regarding the ACL and NALs, segregated by core CRE loans and noncore CRE
loans, is presented in the following table.
Table 20 Commercial Real Estate Core vs. Noncore portfolios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Ending |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Balance |
|
|
Prior NCOs |
|
|
ACL $ |
|
|
ACL % |
|
|
Credit Mark (1) |
|
|
Loans |
|
Core Total |
|
$ |
3,970 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
|
4.16 |
% |
|
|
4.16 |
% |
|
$ |
16.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore
Special Assets Division (2) |
|
|
1,702 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
24.27 |
|
|
|
41.96 |
|
|
|
732.9 |
|
Noncore Other |
|
|
1,784 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
9.87 |
|
|
|
11.31 |
|
|
|
77.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore Total |
|
|
3,486 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
589 |
|
|
|
16.90 |
|
|
|
28.19 |
|
|
|
810.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Real Estate Total |
|
$ |
7,456 |
|
|
$ |
548 |
|
|
$ |
754 |
|
|
|
10.11 |
% |
|
|
16.27 |
% |
|
$ |
826.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2009 |
|
Core Total |
|
$ |
4,038 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
168 |
|
|
|
4.16 |
% |
|
|
4.16 |
% |
|
$ |
3.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore Special
Assets Division (2) |
|
|
1,809 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
22.66 |
|
|
|
39.70 |
|
|
|
861.0 |
|
Noncore Other |
|
|
1,842 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
10.10 |
|
|
|
11.35 |
|
|
|
71.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore Total |
|
|
3,651 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
16.32 |
|
|
|
27.05 |
|
|
|
932.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Real Estate Total |
|
$ |
7,689 |
|
|
$ |
537 |
|
|
$ |
764 |
|
|
|
9.94 |
% |
|
|
15.82 |
% |
|
$ |
935.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Calculated as (Prior NCOs + ACL $) / (Ending Balance + Prior NCOs) |
|
(2) |
|
Noncore loans managed by our Special Assets Division, the area responsible for managing loans
and relationships designated as monitored credits. |
As shown in the above table, substantial reserves for the noncore portfolio have been
established. At March 31, 2010, the ACL of related total loans and leases for the noncore
portfolio was 16.90%. We believe segregating the noncore CRE from core CRE improves our ability to
understanding the nature, performance prospects, and problem resolution opportunities of this
segment, thus allowing us to continue to deal proactively with future credit issues.
The combination of prior NCOs and the existing ACL represents the total credit actions taken
on each segment of the portfolio. From this data, we calculate a measurement, called a Credit
Mark, that provides a consistent measurement of the cumulative credit actions taken against a
specific portfolio segment. We believe that the combined credit activity is appropriate for each
of the CRE segments.
30
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL (C&I) PORTFOLIO
The C&I portfolio is comprised of loans to businesses where the source of repayment is
associated with the ongoing operations of the business. Generally, the loans are secured with the
financing of the borrowers assets, such as equipment, accounts receivable, or inventory. In many
cases, the loans are secured by real estate, although the sale of the real estate is not a primary
source of repayment for the loan. For loans secured by real estate, appropriate appraisals are
obtained at origination, and updated on an as needed basis, in compliance with regulatory
requirements.
There were no outstanding commercial loans that would be considered an unwarranted industry or
geographic concentration of lending. Currently, higher-risk segments of the C&I portfolio include
loans to borrowers supporting the home building industry, contractors, and automotive suppliers.
However, the combined total of these segments represent less than 10% of the total C&I portfolio.
We manage the risks inherent in this portfolio through origination policies, concentration limits,
ongoing loan level reviews, recourse requirements, and continuous portfolio risk management
activities. Our origination policies for this portfolio include loan product-type specific
policies such as LTV, and debt service coverage ratios, as applicable.
C&I borrowers have been challenged by the weak economy for consecutive years, and some
borrowers may no longer have sufficient capital to withstand the protracted stress and, as a
result, may not be able to comply with the original terms of their credit agreements. We continue
to focus ongoing attention on the portfolio management process to proactively identify borrowers
that may be facing financial difficulty.
As shown in the following table, C&I loans totaled $12.2 billion at March 31, 2010.
Table 21 Commercial and Industrial Loans and Leases by Industry Classification
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Commitments |
|
|
Loans Outstanding |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
Industry Classification: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services |
|
$ |
4,954 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
$ |
3,706 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
Manufacturing |
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
2,029 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Finance, insurance, and real estate |
|
|
2,564 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2,134 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Retail trade auto dealers |
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Retail trade other than auto dealers |
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
965 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Wholesale trade |
|
|
1,238 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Transportation, communications, and utilities |
|
|
1,169 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Contractors and construction |
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Energy |
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Agriculture and forestry |
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Public administration |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
17,909 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
12,245 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
C&I loan credit quality data regarding NCOs and NALs by industry classification are presented
in the table below:
Table 22 Commercial and Industrial Credit Quality Data by Industry Classification
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
|
Nonaccrual Loans |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
At December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Annualized % |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Annualized % |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percentage (1) |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percentage (1) |
|
|
Industry Classification: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing |
|
$ |
26.6 |
|
|
|
5.16 |
% |
|
$ |
19.8 |
|
|
|
3.41 |
% |
|
$ |
133.4 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
$ |
136.8 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Services |
|
|
26.1 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
14.9 |
|
|
|
1.60 |
|
|
|
135.0 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
163.9 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Contractors and construction |
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
7.30 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
2.88 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
41.6 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Finance, insurance, and real estate
(2) |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
0.84 |
|
|
|
138.2 |
|
|
|
24.62 |
|
|
|
80.2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
98.0 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Transportation, communications, and
utilities |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
2.36 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
33.5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
30.6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Retail trade other than auto dealers |
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
18.8 |
|
|
|
7.95 |
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
58.5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Energy |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Retail trade auto dealers |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.08 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Public administration |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Agriculture and forestry |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Wholesale trade |
|
|
(0.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
|
3.12 |
|
|
|
27.3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
29.5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Other |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
28.18 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
12.02 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (2) |
|
$ |
75.4 |
|
|
|
2.45 |
% |
|
$ |
210.6 |
|
|
|
6.22 |
% |
|
$ |
511.6 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
$ |
578.4 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents percentage of total related outstanding loans. |
|
(2) |
|
The first-three month period of 2009 included charge-offs totaling $128.3 million associated
with the Franklin restructuring. |
FRANKLIN RELATIONSHIP
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2.)
As a result of the March 31, 2009, restructuring, we report the loans secured by first- and
second- mortgages on residential properties and OREO properties, both of which had previously been
assets of Franklin or its subsidiaries and were pledged to secure our loan to Franklin. At the
time of the restructuring, the loans had a fair value of $493.6 million and the OREO properties had
a fair value of $79.6 million. As of March 31, 2010, the balances had reduced to $418.9 million
and $24.4 million, respectively, as a result of paydowns. There is not a specific ALLL for the
Franklin portfolio, as these loans are carried at their fair values.
The following table summarizes the Franklin-related balances for accruing loans, NALs, and
OREO since the restructuring:
Table 23 Franklin-related Loan and OREO Balances
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
Total accruing loans |
|
$ |
89.9 |
|
|
$ |
129.2 |
|
|
$ |
126.7 |
|
|
$ |
127.4 |
|
|
$ |
127.5 |
|
Total nonaccrual loans |
|
|
329.0 |
|
|
|
314.7 |
|
|
|
338.5 |
|
|
|
344.6 |
|
|
|
366.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Loans |
|
|
418.9 |
|
|
|
443.9 |
|
|
|
465.2 |
|
|
|
472.0 |
|
|
|
493.6 |
|
OREO |
|
|
24.4 |
|
|
|
23.8 |
|
|
|
31.0 |
|
|
|
43.6 |
|
|
|
79.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Franklin loans and OREO |
|
$ |
443.3 |
|
|
$ |
467.7 |
|
|
$ |
496.2 |
|
|
$ |
515.6 |
|
|
$ |
573.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The changes in the Franklin-related balances since the restructuring have been consistent with
our expectations based on the restructuring agreement. Collection strategies were designed to
generate cash flow with the intention of reducing our exposure associated with these loans.
Consumer Credit
Consumer credit approvals are based on, among other factors, the financial strength and
payment history of the borrower, type of exposure, and the transaction structure. We make
extensive use of portfolio assessment models to continuously monitor the quality of the portfolio,
which may result in changes to future origination strategies. The continuous analysis and review
process results in a determination of an appropriate ALLL amount for our consumer loan portfolio.
32
The residential mortgage and home equity portfolios are primarily located throughout our
geographic footprint. The general slowdown in the housing market has impacted the performance of
our residential mortgage and home equity portfolios. While the degree of price depreciation varies
across our markets, all regions throughout our footprint have been affected. Given the continued
economic weaknesses in our markets, the home equity and residential mortgage portfolios are
particularly noteworthy, and are discussed in greater detail below:
Table 24 Selected Home Equity and Residential Mortgage Portfolio Data (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home Equity Loans |
|
|
Home Equity Lines of Credit |
|
|
Residential Mortgages |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
03/31/10 |
|
|
12/31/09 |
|
|
03/31/10 |
|
|
12/31/09 |
|
|
03/31/10 |
|
|
12/31/09 |
|
Ending Balance |
|
$ |
2,532 |
|
|
$ |
2,616 |
|
|
$ |
4,982 |
|
|
$ |
4,946 |
|
|
$ |
4,614 |
|
|
$ |
4,510 |
|
Portfolio Weighted Average LTV
ratio(2) |
|
|
71 |
% |
|
|
71 |
% |
|
|
77 |
% |
|
|
77 |
% |
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
76 |
% |
Portfolio Weighted Average FICO(3) |
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Home Equity Loans |
|
|
Home Equity Lines of Credit |
|
|
Residential Mortgages (4) |
|
Originations |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
242 |
|
Origination Weighted Average LTV
ratio(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
% |
Origination Weighted Average FICO(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
763 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
766 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes Franklin loans. |
|
(2) |
|
The loan-to-value (LTV) ratios for home equity loans and home equity lines of credit are
cumulative LTVs reflecting the balance of any senior loans. |
|
(3) |
|
Portfolio Weighted Average FICO reflects currently updated customer credit scores whereas
Origination Weighted Average FICO reflects the customer credit scores at the time of loan
origination. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents only owned-portfolio originations. |
HOME EQUITY PORTFOLIO
Our home equity portfolio (loans and lines-of-credit) consists of both first and second
mortgage loans with underwriting criteria based on minimum credit scores, debt-to-income ratios,
and LTV ratios. We offer closed-end home equity loans with a fixed interest rate and level monthly
payments and a variable-rate, interest-only home equity line-of-credit. Home equity loans are
generally fixed-rate with periodic principal and interest payments. Home equity lines-of-credit are
generally variable-rate and do not require payment of principal during the 10-year revolving period
of the line.
We focus on high-quality borrowers primarily located within our geographic footprint.
Borrower FICO scores at loan origination for this portfolio have consistently increased, and loan
originations to borrowers with lower FICO scores have consistently decreased. The majority of our
home equity borrowers consistently pay more than the required amount. Additionally, since we focus
on developing complete relationships with our customers, many of our home equity borrowers have
utilized other products and services.
We believe we have granted credit conservatively within this portfolio. We have not
originated stated income home equity loans or lines-of-credit that allow negative amortization.
Also, we have not originated home equity loans or lines-of-credit with an LTV ratio at origination
greater than 100%, except for infrequent situations with high-quality borrowers. However,
continued declines in housing prices have likely eliminated a portion of the collateral for this
portfolio as some loans with an original LTV ratio of less than 100% currently have an LTV ratio
above 100%. At March 31, 2010, 46% of our home equity loan portfolio, and 27% of our home equity
line-of-credit portfolio were secured by a first-mortgage lien on the property. The risk profile
is substantially improved when we hold a first-mortgage lien position. In the 2010 first quarter,
over 50% of our home equity portfolio originations (both loans and lines-of-credit) were loans
where the loan was secured by a first-mortgage lien.
For certain home equity loans and lines-of-credit, we may utilize Automated Valuation
Methodology (AVM) or other model-driven value estimates during the credit underwriting process.
Regardless of the estimate methodology, we supplement our underwriting with a third-party fraud
detection system to limit our exposure to flipping, and outright fraudulent transactions. We
update values, as we believe appropriate, and in compliance with applicable regulations, for loans
identified as higher risk, based on performance indicators to facilitate our workout and loss
mitigation functions.
33
We continue to make appropriate origination policy adjustments based on our assessment of an
appropriate risk profile as well as industry actions. In addition to origination policy
adjustments, we take appropriate actions, as necessary, to manage the risk profile of this
portfolio. We focus production primarily within our banking footprint or to existing customers.
RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGES
We focus on higher quality borrowers, and underwrite all applications centrally, often through
the use of an automated underwriting system. We do not originate residential mortgage loans that
allow negative amortization or are payment option adjustable-rate mortgages.
All residential mortgage loans are originated based on a full appraisal during the credit
underwriting process. Additionally, we supplement our underwriting with a third-party fraud
detection system to limit our exposure to flipping, and outright fraudulent transactions. We
update values, as we believe appropriate, and in compliance with applicable regulations, for loans
identified as higher risk, based on performance indicators to facilitate our workout and loss
mitigation functions.
A majority of the loans in our loan portfolio have adjustable rates. Our adjustable-rate
mortgages (ARMs) are primarily residential mortgages that have a fixed-rate for the first 3 to 5
years and then adjust annually. These loans comprised approximately 54% of our total residential
mortgage loan portfolio at March 31, 2010. At March 31, 2010, ARM loans that were expected to
have rates reset totaled $700.1 million for 2010, and $591.2 million for 2011. Given the quality
of our borrowers and the relatively low current interest rates, we believe that we have a
relatively limited exposure to ARM reset risk. Nonetheless, we have taken actions to mitigate our
risk exposure. We initiate borrower contact at least six months prior to the interest rate
resetting, and have been successful in converting many ARMs to fixed-rate loans through this
process. Additionally, where borrowers are experiencing payment difficulties, loans may be
reunderwritten based on the borrowers ability to repay the loan.
We had $352.3 million of Alt-A mortgage loans in the residential mortgage loan portfolio at
March 31, 2010, compared with $363.3 million at December 31, 2009. These loans have a higher risk
profile than the rest of the portfolio as a result of origination policies for this limited segment
including reliance on stated income, stated assets, or higher acceptable LTV ratios. Our
exposure related to this product will continue to decline in the future as we stopped originating
these loans in 2007. At March 31, 2010, borrowers for Alt-A mortgages had an average current FICO
score of 677 and the loans had an average LTV ratio of 87%, compared with 662 and 87%,
respectively, at December 31, 2009. Total Alt-A NCOs during the first three-month period of 2010
were $4.5 million, or an annualized 5.07%, compared with $2.7 million, or an annualized 2.51%, in
the first three-month period of 2009. As with the entire residential mortgage portfolio, the
increase in NCOs reflected, among other actions, a more conservative position on the timing of loss
recognition. At March 31, 2010, $15.4 million of the ALLL was allocated to the Alt-A mortgage
portfolio, representing 4.37% of period-end related loans and leases.
Interest-only loans comprised $568.0 million of residential real estate loans at March 31,
2010, compared with $576.7 million at December 31, 2009. Interest-only loans are underwritten to
specific standards including minimum credit scores, stressed debt-to-income ratios, and extensive
collateral evaluation. At March 31, 2010, borrowers for interest-only loans had an average
current FICO score of 730 and the loans had an average LTV ratio of 77%, compared with 718 and 77%,
respectively, at December 31, 2009. Total interest-only NCOs during the first three-month period
of 2010 were $1.5 million, or an annualized 1.06%, compared with $0.1 million, or an annualized
0.06%, in the first three-month period of 2009. As with the entire residential mortgage portfolio,
the increase in NCOs reflected, among other actions, a more conservative position on the timing of
loss recognition. At March 31, 2010, $8.4 million of the ALLL was allocated to the interest-only
loan portfolio, representing 1.48% of period-end related loans and leases.
Several recent government actions have been enacted that have affected the residential
mortgage portfolio and MSRs in particular. Various refinance programs positively affected the
availability of credit for the industry. We are utilizing these programs to enhance our existing
strategies of working closely with our customers.
Credit Quality
We believe the most meaningful way to assess overall credit quality performance for 2010 is
through an analysis of credit quality performance ratios. This approach forms the basis of most of
the discussion in the three sections immediately following: NALs and NPAs, ACL, and NCOs. In
addition, we utilize delinquency rates, risk distribution and migration patterns, and product
segmentation in the analysis of our credit quality performance.
34
Credit quality performance in the 2010 first quarter continued to improve. NCOs declined 46%
from the prior quarter and represented the lowest level since the third quarter of 2008. NPAs
decreased 7% during the quarter, partially as a result of a 52% decline in new NPAs to $237.9
million in the current quarter from $494.6 million in the prior quarter. Consistent with seasonal
trends, early stage delinquency rates declined across all of our products. In addition, we saw a
reduction in both the absolute level and the rate of inflow of criticized loans. The 2010 first
quarter represented the first decline in the level of criticized loans since the first quarter of
2009. In the consumer portfolio, we continued to originate higher quality loans as measured by the
average FICO score at origination. In addition, we observed a decline in the negative migration
toward lower updated FICO scores in the existing portfolio. Despite these improved asset quality
measures, the economic environment remains challenging. As such, we believe it was prudent to
maintain our period end allowance at 4.14% of total loans and leases, essentially unchanged from
the end of the prior quarter.
NONACCRUAL LOANS (NALs) AND NONPERFORMING ASSETS (NPAs)
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2.)
NPAs consist of (a) NALs, which represent loans and leases that are no longer accruing
interest, (b) impaired held-for-sale loans, (c) OREO, and (d) other NPAs. A C&I or CRE loan is
generally placed on nonaccrual status when collection of principal or interest is in doubt or when
the loan is 90-days past due. Residential mortgage loans are placed on nonaccrual status at
180-days past due, and a charge-off recorded if it is determined that insufficient equity exists in
the property to support the entire outstanding loan amount. A home equity loan is placed on
nonaccrual status at 120-days past due, and a charge-off recorded if it is determined that there is
not sufficient equity in the loan to cover our position. In all instances associated with
residential real estate loans, our equity position is determined by a current property valuation
based on an expected marketing time period. When interest accruals are suspended, accrued interest
income is reversed with current year accruals charged to earnings and prior-year amounts generally
charged-off as a credit loss. When, in our judgment, the borrowers ability to make required
interest and principal payments has resumed and collectiblity is no longer in doubt, the loan or
lease is returned to accrual status.
Accruing restructured loans (ARLs) consists of accruing loans that have been reunderwritten,
modified, or restructured when borrowers are experiencing payment difficulties. ARLs are excluded
from NALs because the borrower remains contractually current. These loan restructurings are one
component of the loss mitigation process, and are made to increase the likelihood of repayment, and
include, but are not limited to, changes to any of the following: interest rate, maturity,
principal, payment amount, or a combination of each.
Table 25 reflects period-end NALs and NPAs detail for each of the last five quarters, and
Table 26 reflects period-end ARLs and past due loans and leases detail for each of the last five
quarters.
35
Table 25 Nonaccrual Loans (NALs) and Nonperforming Assets (NPAs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual loans and leases (NALs) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
511,588 |
|
|
$ |
578,414 |
|
|
$ |
612,701 |
|
|
$ |
456,734 |
|
|
$ |
398,286 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
826,781 |
|
|
|
935,812 |
|
|
|
1,133,661 |
|
|
|
850,846 |
|
|
|
629,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alt-A mortgages |
|
|
13,368 |
|
|
|
11,362 |
|
|
|
9,810 |
|
|
|
25,861 |
|
|
|
25,175 |
|
Interest-only mortgages |
|
|
8,193 |
|
|
|
7,445 |
|
|
|
8,336 |
|
|
|
17,428 |
|
|
|
20,580 |
|
Franklin residential mortgages |
|
|
297,967 |
|
|
|
299,670 |
|
|
|
322,796 |
|
|
|
342,207 |
|
|
|
360,106 |
|
Other residential mortgages |
|
|
53,422 |
|
|
|
44,153 |
|
|
|
49,579 |
|
|
|
89,992 |
|
|
|
81,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgages |
|
|
372,950 |
|
|
|
362,630 |
|
|
|
390,521 |
|
|
|
475,488 |
|
|
|
486,955 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
54,789 |
|
|
|
40,122 |
|
|
|
44,182 |
|
|
|
35,299 |
|
|
|
37,967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
1,766,108 |
|
|
|
1,916,978 |
|
|
|
2,181,065 |
|
|
|
1,818,367 |
|
|
|
1,553,094 |
|
Other real estate owned (OREO), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
68,289 |
|
|
|
71,427 |
|
|
|
81,807 |
|
|
|
107,954 |
|
|
|
143,856 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
83,971 |
|
|
|
68,717 |
|
|
|
60,784 |
|
|
|
64,976 |
|
|
|
66,906 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other real estate, net |
|
|
152,260 |
|
|
|
140,144 |
|
|
|
142,591 |
|
|
|
172,930 |
|
|
|
210,762 |
|
Impaired loans held for sale(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
969 |
|
|
|
20,386 |
|
|
|
11,287 |
|
|
|
11,887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets (NPAs) |
|
$ |
1,918,368 |
|
|
$ |
2,058,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,344,042 |
|
|
$ |
2,002,584 |
|
|
$ |
1,775,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NALs as a % of total loans and leases |
|
|
4.78 |
% |
|
|
5.21 |
% |
|
|
5.85 |
% |
|
|
4.72 |
% |
|
|
3.93 |
% |
NPA ratio(2) |
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
5.57 |
|
|
|
6.26 |
|
|
|
5.18 |
|
|
|
4.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming Franklin assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
297,967 |
|
|
$ |
299,670 |
|
|
$ |
322,796 |
|
|
$ |
342,207 |
|
|
$ |
360,106 |
|
OREO |
|
|
24,423 |
|
|
|
23,826 |
|
|
|
30,996 |
|
|
|
43,623 |
|
|
|
79,596 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
31,067 |
|
|
|
15,004 |
|
|
|
15,704 |
|
|
|
2,437 |
|
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Nonperforming Franklin assets |
|
$ |
353,457 |
|
|
$ |
338,500 |
|
|
$ |
369,496 |
|
|
$ |
388,267 |
|
|
$ |
445,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The September 30, 2009, amount primarily represented impaired residential mortgage loans held for sale. All
other presented amounts represented impaired loans obtained from the Sky Financial acquisition. Held for sale
loans are carried at the lower of cost or fair value less costs to sell. |
|
(2) |
|
NPAs divided by the sum of loans and leases, impaired loans held-for-sale, net other real estate, and other NPAs. |
36
Table 26 Accruing Past Due Loans and Leases and Accruing Restructured Loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accruing loans and leases past due 90 days or more |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
475 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage (excluding loans guaranteed
by the U.S. government |
|
|
72,702 |
|
|
|
78,915 |
|
|
|
65,716 |
|
|
|
97,937 |
|
|
|
88,381 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
29,438 |
|
|
|
53,343 |
|
|
|
45,334 |
|
|
|
35,328 |
|
|
|
35,717 |
|
Other loans and leases |
|
|
10,598 |
|
|
|
13,400 |
|
|
|
14,175 |
|
|
|
13,474 |
|
|
|
15,611 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total, excl. loans guaranteed by the U.S. government |
|
|
113,213 |
|
|
|
145,658 |
|
|
|
127,771 |
|
|
|
146,739 |
|
|
|
139,709 |
|
Add: loans guaranteed by the U.S. government |
|
|
96,814 |
|
|
|
101,616 |
|
|
|
102,895 |
|
|
|
99,379 |
|
|
|
88,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accruing loans and leases past due 90 days
or more, including loans guaranteed by the U.S.
government |
|
$ |
210,027 |
|
|
$ |
247,274 |
|
|
$ |
230,666 |
|
|
$ |
246,118 |
|
|
$ |
228,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding loans guaranteed by the U.S. government,
as a percent of total loans and leases |
|
|
0.31 |
% |
|
|
0.40 |
% |
|
|
0.34 |
% |
|
|
0.38 |
% |
|
|
0.35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guaranteed by the U.S. government, as a percent of
total loans and leases |
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Including loans guaranteed by the U.S. government,
as a percent of total loans and leases |
|
|
0.57 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
0.62 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accruing restructured loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
117,667 |
|
|
$ |
157,049 |
|
|
$ |
153,010 |
|
|
$ |
267,975 |
|
|
$ |
201,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alt-A mortgages |
|
|
57,897 |
|
|
|
57,278 |
|
|
|
58,367 |
|
|
|
46,657 |
|
|
|
36,642 |
|
Interest-only mortgages |
|
|
8,413 |
|
|
|
7,890 |
|
|
|
10,072 |
|
|
|
12,147 |
|
|
|
8,500 |
|
Other residential mortgages |
|
|
176,560 |
|
|
|
154,471 |
|
|
|
136,024 |
|
|
|
99,764 |
|
|
|
62,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgages |
|
|
242,870 |
|
|
|
219,639 |
|
|
|
204,463 |
|
|
|
158,568 |
|
|
|
108,011 |
|
Other |
|
|
62,148 |
|
|
|
52,871 |
|
|
|
42,406 |
|
|
|
35,720 |
|
|
|
27,014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accruing restructured loans |
|
$ |
422,685 |
|
|
$ |
429,559 |
|
|
$ |
399,879 |
|
|
$ |
462,263 |
|
|
$ |
336,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NALs were $1,766.1 million at March 31, 2010, and represented 4.78% of related loans.
This compared with $1,917.0 million, or 5.21% of related loans, at December 31, 2009. The decrease
of $150.9 million, or 8%, primarily reflected:
|
|
|
$109.0 million, or 12%, decrease in CRE NALs, reflecting both charge-off activity, as
well as problem credit resolutions, including pay-offs. The payment category was
substantial and is a direct result of our commitment to the ongoing proactive management of
these credits by our Special Assets department. |
|
|
|
|
$66.8 million, or 12%, decrease in C&I NALs, also reflecting both charge-off
activity, as well as problem credit resolutions, including pay-offs, and was associated
with loans throughout our footprint, with no specific geographic concentration. From an
industry perspective, improvement in the manufacturing-related segment accounted for a
significant portion of the decrease. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$14.7 million, or 37%, increase in home equity NALs, reflecting activity in the Franklin
portfolio, and the continued stress in some of our markets. All home equity NALs have been
written down to current value less selling costs, and as such, we do not expect any
significant amount of additional losses from these loans. |
|
|
|
$10.3 million, or 3%, increase in residential mortgage NALs, also reflected activity in
the Franklin portfolio, and the continued stress in some of our markets. Our efforts to
proactively address existing issues with loss mitigation and loan modification transactions
have helped to minimize the inflow of new NALs. As with home equity NALs, all residential
mortgage NALs have been written down to current value less selling costs. |
37
NPAs, which include NALs, were $1,918.4 million at March 31, 2010, and represented 5.17% of
related assets. This compared with $2,058.1 million, or 5.57% of related assets, at December 31,
2009. The $139.7 million decrease reflected:
|
|
|
$150.9 million decrease to NALs, discussed above. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$12.1 million, or 9%, increase to OREO. |
The over 90-day delinquent, but still accruing, ratio excluding loans guaranteed by the U.S.
Government, was 0.31% at March 31, 2010, representing a 9 basis points decline compared with
December 31, 2009. On this same basis, the over 90-day delinquency ratio for total consumer loans
was 0.65% at March 31, 2010, representing a 25 basis point decline compared with December 31, 2009.
As part of our loss mitigation process, we reunderwrite, modify, or restructure loans when
borrowers are experiencing payment difficulties, and these loan restructurings are based on the
borrowers ability to repay the loan.
NPA activity for each of the past five quarters was as follows:
Table 27 Nonperforming Asset Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming assets, beginning of year |
|
$ |
2,058,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,344,042 |
|
|
$ |
2,002,584 |
|
|
$ |
1,775,743 |
|
|
$ |
1,636,646 |
|
New nonperforming assets |
|
|
237,914 |
|
|
|
494,607 |
|
|
|
899,855 |
|
|
|
750,318 |
|
|
|
622,515 |
|
Franklin impact, net |
|
|
14,957 |
|
|
|
(30,996 |
) |
|
|
(18,771 |
) |
|
|
(57,436 |
) |
|
|
(204,523 |
) |
Returns to accruing status |
|
|
(80,840 |
) |
|
|
(85,867 |
) |
|
|
(52,498 |
) |
|
|
(40,915 |
) |
|
|
(36,056 |
) |
Loan and lease losses |
|
|
(185,387 |
) |
|
|
(391,635 |
) |
|
|
(305,405 |
) |
|
|
(282,713 |
) |
|
|
(168,382 |
) |
OREO losses |
|
|
(4,160 |
) |
|
|
(7,394 |
) |
|
|
(30,623 |
) |
|
|
(20,614 |
) |
|
|
(4,034 |
) |
Payments |
|
|
(107,640 |
) |
|
|
(222,790 |
) |
|
|
(117,710 |
) |
|
|
(95,124 |
) |
|
|
(61,452 |
) |
Sales |
|
|
(14,567 |
) |
|
|
(41,876 |
) |
|
|
(33,390 |
) |
|
|
(26,675 |
) |
|
|
(8,971 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming assets, end of period |
|
$ |
1,918,368 |
|
|
$ |
2,058,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,344,042 |
|
|
$ |
2,002,584 |
|
|
$ |
1,775,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ALLOWANCES FOR CREDIT LOSSES (ACL)
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2, and the Critical Accounting
Policies and Use of Significant Estimates discussion.)
We maintain two reserves, both of which are available to absorb credit losses: the ALLL and
the AULC. When summed together, these reserves comprise the total ACL. Our credit administration
group is responsible for developing methodology assumptions and estimates, as well as determining
the adequacy of the ACL. The ALLL represents the estimate of probable losses inherent in the loan
portfolio at the balance sheet date. Additions to the ALLL result from recording provision expense
for loan losses or recoveries, while reductions reflect charge-offs, net of recoveries, or the sale
of loans. The AULC is determined by applying the transaction reserve process to the unfunded
portion of the portfolio adjusted by an applicable funding expectation.
Table 28 reflects activity in the ALLL and ACL for each of the last five quarters.
38
Table 28 Quarterly Credit Reserves Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses,
beginning of period |
|
$ |
1,482,479 |
|
|
$ |
1,031,971 |
|
|
$ |
917,680 |
|
|
$ |
838,549 |
|
|
$ |
900,227 |
|
Loan and lease losses |
|
|
(264,222 |
) |
|
|
(471,486 |
) |
|
|
(377,443 |
) |
|
|
(359,444 |
) |
|
|
(353,005 |
) |
Recoveries of loans previously charged off |
|
|
25,741 |
|
|
|
26,739 |
|
|
|
21,501 |
|
|
|
25,037 |
|
|
|
11,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan and lease losses |
|
|
(238,481 |
) |
|
|
(444,747 |
) |
|
|
(355,942 |
) |
|
|
(334,407 |
) |
|
|
(341,491 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
233,971 |
|
|
|
895,255 |
|
|
|
472,137 |
|
|
|
413,538 |
|
|
|
289,001 |
|
Allowance for loans transferred to held-for-sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,904 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance of assets sold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,188 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, end of period |
|
$ |
1,477,969 |
|
|
$ |
1,482,479 |
|
|
$ |
1,031,971 |
|
|
$ |
917,680 |
|
|
$ |
838,549 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for unfunded loan commitments
and letters of credit, beginning of period |
|
$ |
48,879 |
|
|
$ |
50,143 |
|
|
$ |
47,144 |
|
|
$ |
46,975 |
|
|
$ |
44,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for (reduction in) unfunded loan
commitments and letters of credit losses |
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
(1,264 |
) |
|
|
2,999 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
2,836 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for unfunded loan commitments
and letters of credit, end of period |
|
$ |
49,916 |
|
|
$ |
48,879 |
|
|
$ |
50,143 |
|
|
$ |
47,144 |
|
|
$ |
46,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowances for credit losses |
|
$ |
1,527,885 |
|
|
$ |
1,531,358 |
|
|
$ |
1,082,115 |
|
|
$ |
964,824 |
|
|
$ |
885,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses (ALLL) as % of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.03 |
% |
|
|
1.75 |
% |
|
|
2.38 |
% |
|
|
2.12 |
% |
Nonaccrual loans and leases (NALs) |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Nonperforming assets (NPAs) |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowances for credit losses (ACL) as % of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
4.14 |
% |
|
|
4.16 |
% |
|
|
1.90 |
% |
|
|
2.51 |
% |
|
|
2.24 |
% |
NALs |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
NPAs |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
As shown in the tables above, the ALLL decreased to $1,478.0 million at March 31, 2010,
compared with $1,482.5 million at December 31, 2009. Expressed as a percent of period-end loans
and leases, the ALLL ratio decreased to 4.00% at March 31, 2010, compared with 4.03% at December
31, 2009.
On a combined basis, the ACL as a percent of total loans and leases at March 31, 2010, was
4.14% compared with 4.16% at December 31, 2009.
While there have been signs of increasing economic stability in some of our markets, we
believed that it was important to maintain our reserve levels essentially unchanged from December
31, 2009.
39
The table below reflects how our ACL was allocated among our various loan categories during
each of the past five quarters:
Table 29 Allocation of Allowances for Credit Losses (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
459,011 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
$ |
492,205 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
381,912 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
347,339 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
309,465 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
741,669 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
751,875 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
436,661 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
368,464 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
349,750 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
1,200,680 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
1,244,080 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
818,573 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
715,803 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
659,215 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and
leases |
|
|
56,111 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
57,951 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
59,134 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
60,995 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
51,235 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
127,970 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
102,039 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
86,989 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
76,653 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
67,510 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
60,295 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
55,903 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
50,177 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
48,093 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
45,138 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
32,913 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
22,506 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
17,098 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
16,136 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15,451 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
277,289 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
238,399 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
213,398 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
201,877 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
179,334 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ALLL |
|
|
1,477,969 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,482,479 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,031,971 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
917,680 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
838,549 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AULC |
|
|
49,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ACL |
|
$ |
1,527,885 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,531,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,082,114 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
964,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
885,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Percentages represent the percentage of each loan and lease category to total loans and leases. |
The following table provides additional detail regarding the ACL coverage ratio
for NALs.
Table 30 ACL/NAL Coverage Ratios Analysis
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
Franklin |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Nonaccrual Loans (NALs) |
|
$ |
329,034 |
|
|
$ |
1,437,074 |
|
|
$ |
1,766,108 |
|
|
Allowance for Credit Losses (ACL) |
|
NA (1) |
|
|
1,527,885 |
|
|
|
1,527,885 |
|
|
ACL as a % of NALs (coverage
ratio) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
106 |
% |
|
|
87 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Not applicable. Franklin loans were acquired at fair value on March
31, 2009. Under guidance provided by the FASB regarding acquired
impaired loans, a nonaccretable discount was recorded to reduce the
carrying value of the loans to the amount of future cash flows we
expect to receive. |
We believe that the total ACL/NAL coverage ratio of 87% at March 31, 2010, represented an
appropriate level of reserves for the remaining inherent risk in the portfolio. The Franklin NAL
balance of $329.0 million does not have reserves assigned as those loans were written down to fair
value as a part of the restructuring agreement on March 31, 2009. Eliminating the impact of the
Franklin loans, the ACL/NAL coverage ratio was 106% as of March 31, 2010.
NET CHARGE-OFFS (NCOs)
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2.)
Table 31 reflects NCO detail for each of the last five quarters. Table 32 displays the
Franklin-related impacts for each of the last five quarters.
40
Table 31 Net Loan and Lease Charge-offs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Net charge-offs by loan and lease type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
75,439 |
|
|
$ |
109,816 |
|
|
$ |
68,842 |
|
|
$ |
98,300 |
|
|
$ |
210,648 |
|
Construction |
|
|
34,426 |
|
|
|
85,345 |
|
|
|
50,359 |
|
|
|
31,360 |
|
|
|
25,642 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
50,873 |
|
|
|
172,759 |
|
|
|
118,866 |
|
|
|
141,261 |
|
|
|
57,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
85,299 |
|
|
|
258,104 |
|
|
|
169,225 |
|
|
|
172,621 |
|
|
|
82,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
160,738 |
|
|
|
367,920 |
|
|
|
238,067 |
|
|
|
270,921 |
|
|
|
293,429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
7,666 |
|
|
|
11,374 |
|
|
|
8,988 |
|
|
|
12,379 |
|
|
|
14,971 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
|
2,227 |
|
|
|
3,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
8,531 |
|
|
|
12,928 |
|
|
|
10,741 |
|
|
|
14,606 |
|
|
|
18,057 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
37,901 |
|
|
|
35,764 |
|
|
|
28,045 |
|
|
|
24,687 |
|
|
|
17,680 |
|
Residential mortgage(1) |
|
|
24,311 |
|
|
|
17,789 |
|
|
|
68,955 |
|
|
|
17,160 |
|
|
|
6,298 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
10,346 |
|
|
|
10,134 |
|
|
|
7,033 |
|
|
|
6,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
77,743 |
|
|
|
76,827 |
|
|
|
117,875 |
|
|
|
63,486 |
|
|
|
48,062 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs |
|
$ |
238,481 |
|
|
$ |
444,747 |
|
|
$ |
355,942 |
|
|
$ |
334,407 |
|
|
$ |
341,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs annualized percentages |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
2.45 |
% |
|
|
3.49 |
% |
|
|
2.13 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
6.22 |
% |
Construction |
|
|
9.77 |
|
|
|
20.68 |
|
|
|
11.14 |
|
|
|
6.45 |
|
|
|
5.05 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
10.15 |
|
|
|
6.72 |
|
|
|
7.79 |
|
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
4.44 |
|
|
|
12.21 |
|
|
|
7.62 |
|
|
|
7.51 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
3.22 |
|
|
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
4.77 |
|
|
|
4.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
0.76 |
|
|
|
1.49 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
1.73 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
1.58 |
|
|
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
2.04 |
|
|
|
2.11 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
0.80 |
|
|
|
1.55 |
|
|
|
1.33 |
|
|
|
1.78 |
|
|
|
1.66 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
2.01 |
|
|
|
1.89 |
|
|
|
1.48 |
|
|
|
1.29 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
|
Residential mortgage(1) |
|
|
2.17 |
|
|
|
1.61 |
|
|
|
6.15 |
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
3.87 |
|
|
|
5.47 |
|
|
|
5.36 |
|
|
|
4.03 |
|
|
|
3.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
1.91 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
|
|
1.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs as a % of average loans |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
4.80 |
% |
|
|
3.76 |
% |
|
|
3.43 |
% |
|
|
3.34 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Effective with the 2009
third quarter, a change to
accelerate the timing for
when a partial charge-off is
recognized was made. This
change resulted in $31,952
thousand of charge-offs in
the 2009 third quarter. |
41
Table 32 NCOs Franklin-Related Impact
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Commercial and industrial net charge-offs
(recoveries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
(4.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(9.9 |
) |
|
$ |
128.3 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
75.7 |
|
|
|
109.7 |
|
|
|
72.9 |
|
|
|
108.2 |
|
|
|
82.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
75.4 |
|
|
$ |
109.8 |
|
|
$ |
68.8 |
|
|
$ |
98.3 |
|
|
$ |
210.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial average loan balances |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
628.0 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
12,314.4 |
|
|
|
12,570.3 |
|
|
|
12,922.4 |
|
|
|
13,523.0 |
|
|
|
12,913.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
12,314.4 |
|
|
$ |
12,570.3 |
|
|
$ |
12,922.4 |
|
|
$ |
13,523.0 |
|
|
$ |
13,541.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial net charge-offs -
annualized percentages |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2.45 |
% |
|
|
3.49 |
% |
|
|
2.13 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
6.22 |
% |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
2.46 |
|
|
|
3.49 |
|
|
|
2.26 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Total net charge-offs (recoveries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
11.5 |
|
|
$ |
1.2 |
|
|
$ |
(3.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(10.1 |
) |
|
$ |
128.3 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
227.0 |
|
|
|
443.5 |
|
|
|
359.4 |
|
|
|
344.5 |
|
|
|
213.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
238.5 |
|
|
$ |
444.7 |
|
|
$ |
355.9 |
|
|
$ |
334.4 |
|
|
$ |
341.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total average loan balances |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
431.4 |
|
|
$ |
454.5 |
|
|
$ |
470.5 |
|
|
$ |
489.0 |
|
|
$ |
630.0 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
36,548.6 |
|
|
|
36,634.7 |
|
|
|
37,384.7 |
|
|
|
38,518.0 |
|
|
|
40,236.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
36,980.0 |
|
|
$ |
37,089.2 |
|
|
$ |
37,855.2 |
|
|
$ |
39,007.0 |
|
|
$ |
40,866.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs annualized percentages |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
4.80 |
% |
|
|
3.76 |
% |
|
|
3.43 |
% |
|
|
3.34 |
% |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
2.48 |
|
|
|
4.84 |
|
|
|
3.85 |
|
|
|
3.58 |
|
|
|
2.12 |
|
Total NCOs during the 2010 first quarter were $238.5 million, or an annualized 2.58% of
average related balances, compared with $444.7 million, or annualized 4.80%, of average related
balances in 2009 fourth quarter. We anticipate NCOs for the remainder of 2010 to show improvement
from 2010 first quarter levels.
Total commercial NCOs during 2010 first quarter were $160.7 million, or an annualized 3.22% of
average related balances, compared with $367.9 million, or an annualized 7.00% in 2009 fourth
quarter.
C&I NCOs in the 2010 first quarter were $75.4 million, or an annualized 2.45%, compared with
$109.8 million, or an annualized 3.49%, in the 2009 fourth quarter. The decrease of $34.4 million
reflected a reduced level of large dollar charge-offs. Also, there continued to be improvement in
delinquencies, as early stage delinquencies declined from the prior quarter, and represented the
first quarterly decline since 2008. While there continued to be concern regarding the impact of
the economic conditions on our commercial customers, the lower inflow of new nonaccruals, the
reduction in criticized loans, and the significant decline in early stage delinquencies supports
our outlook for improved credit quality performance for the remainder of 2010.
CRE NCOs in the 2010 first quarter were $85.3 million, or an annualized 4.44%, compared with
$258.1 million, or an annualized 12.21%, in the 2009 fourth quarter. The $172.8 million decrease
reflected a reduced level of large-dollar charge-offs. In the prior quarter, $82.8 million of
charge-offs were associated with the activity of nine relationships. In the current quarter, there
was only one loss in excess of $5 million. Retail projects continued to represent a significant
portion, or 30%, of the losses. The improvement was evident across all of our regions. The retail
property portfolio remains susceptible to the ongoing market disruption, but we also
believe that the combination of prior charge-offs and existing reserve balances positions us
well to make effective credit decisions in the future. We continued our ongoing portfolio
management efforts during the current quarter, including obtaining updated appraisals on properties
and assessing a project status within the context of market environment expectations.
42
In assessing commercial NCOs trends, it is helpful to understand the process of how these
loans are treated as they deteriorate over time. Reserves for loans are established at origination
consistent with the level of risk associated with the original underwriting. If the quality of a
commercial loan deteriorates, it migrates to a lower quality risk rating as a result of our normal
portfolio management process, and a higher reserve amount is assigned. As a part of our normal
portfolio management process, the loan is reviewed and reserves are increased as warranted.
Charge-offs, if necessary, are generally recognized in a period after the reserves were
established. If the previously established reserves exceed that needed to satisfactorily resolve
the problem credit, a reduction in the overall level of the reserve could be recognized. In
summary, if loan quality deteriorates, the typical credit sequence for commercial loans are periods
of reserve building, followed by periods of higher NCOs as previously established reserves are
utilized. Additionally, it is helpful to understand that increases in reserves either precede or
are in conjunction with increases in NALs. When a credit is classified as NAL, it is evaluated
for specific reserves or charge-off. As a result, an increase in NALs does not necessarily result
in an increase in reserves or an expectation of higher future NCOs.
Total consumer NCOs during the 2010 first quarter were $77.7 million, or an annualized 1.83%,
compared with $76.8 million, or an annualized 1.91%, in 2009 fourth quarter. The decline in the
annualized NCO rate despite a higher level of absolute charge-offs reflected an increase in average
consumer loans during the 2010 first quarter.
Automobile loan and lease NCOs in the 2010 first quarter were $8.5 million, or an annualized
0.80%, compared with $12.9 million, or an annualized 1.55%, in 2009 fourth quarter. The decline in
the annualized NCO percentage reflected in part the increase in average automobile balances
resulting from the previously discussed consolidation of the automobile securitization trust
effective January 1, 2010. Underlying performance of this portfolio on both an absolute and
relative basis continued to be consistent with our views regarding the quality of the portfolio.
The level of delinquencies continued to decline from recent prior periods, further supporting our
view of improved performance going forward.
Home equity NCOs in the 2010 first quarter were $37.9 million, or an annualized 2.01%,
compared with $35.8 million, or an annualized 1.89%, in 2009 fourth quarter. Although NCOs were
higher than prior quarters, there continued to be a declining trend in the early-stage delinquency
level in the home equity line of credit portfolio, supporting our longer-term positive view for
home equity portfolio performance. The performance continued to be impacted by borrowers
defaulting with no available equity. We continue to focus on loss mitigation activity and short
sales, as we believe that our more proactive loss mitigation strategies are in the best interest of
both the company and our customers. While losses have increased over the past several quarters,
given the market conditions, performance remained within expectations.
Residential mortgage NCOs in the 2010 first quarter were $24.3 million, or an annualized
2.17%, compared with $17.8 million, or an annualized 1.61%, in 2009 fourth quarter. The increase
from the prior quarter represents a return to a more consistent level after the impact of the 2009
third quarter nonaccrual loan sale on 2009 fourth quarter performance. The 2009 third quarter sale
had the effect of pulling some 2009 fourth quarter losses into the 2009 third quarter. We
continued to see positive trends in early-stage delinquencies, although there continues to be
valuation pressure.
The table below reflects NCO activity for the first three-month period of 2010 and the first
three-month period of 2009.
43
Table 33 2010 First Quarter versus 2009 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Net charge-offs by loan and lease type: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial(1) |
|
$ |
75,439 |
|
|
$ |
210,648 |
|
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
34,426 |
|
|
|
25,642 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
50,873 |
|
|
|
57,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
85,299 |
|
|
|
82,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
160,738 |
|
|
|
293,429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
7,666 |
|
|
|
14,971 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
3,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
8,531 |
|
|
|
18,057 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
37,901 |
|
|
|
17,680 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
24,311 |
|
|
|
6,298 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
6,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
77,743 |
|
|
|
48,062 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs |
|
$ |
238,481 |
|
|
$ |
341,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs annualized percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial(1) |
|
|
2.45 |
% |
|
|
6.22 |
% |
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
9.77 |
|
|
|
5.05 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
4.44 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
3.22 |
|
|
|
4.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
0.76 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
Automobile leases |
|
|
1.58 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loans and leases |
|
|
0.80 |
|
|
|
1.66 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
2.01 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
2.17 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
Other loans |
|
|
3.87 |
|
|
|
3.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
1.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs as a % of average loans |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
3.34 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The first three-month period of 2009 included net charge-offs totaling
$128,338 thousand associated with the Franklin restructuring. |
Total NCOs during the first three-month period of 2010 were $238.5 million, or an
annualized 2.58% of average related balances, compared with $341.5 million, or annualized 3.34% of
average related balances in the first three-month period of 2009.
Total commercial NCOs during first three-month period of 2010 were $160.7 million, or an
annualized 3.22% of average related balances, compared with $293.4 million, or an annualized 4.96%
in first three-month period of 2009. The decreases were almost entirely in the C&I portfolio, as
CRE NCOs declined only slightly.
C&I NCOs in the first three-month period of 2010 decreased $135.2 million compared with the
first three-month period of 2009, reflecting $128.3 million of Franklin-related NCOs during the
first three-month period of 2009. Non-Franklin related C&I NCOs decreased $6.9 million.
44
CRE NCOs in the first three-month period of 2010 decreased $2.5 million compared with the
first three-month period of 2009, however the annualized percentage of related balances increased
to 4.44% from 3.27%. The increase in the annualized percentage reflected a $2.5 billion, or 24%,
decline in total average CRE loans resulting from our planned efforts to shrink this portfolio
through pay-offs and paydowns, as well as the impact of charge-offs and the 2009 reclassifications
of CRE loans to C&I loans. This substantial decline in CRE exposure with relatively consistent
loss levels resulted in the significantly higher charge-off ratio.
Total consumer NCOs during the first three-month period of 2010 were $77.7 million, or an
annualized 1.83%, compared with $48.1 million, or an annualized 1.12%, in first three-month period
of 2009. The increases were largely centered in the residential mortgage and home equity
portfolios reflecting the continued stress in our markets, and a more aggressive loss recognition
policy implemented during the 2009 third quarter.
Automobile loan and lease NCOs in the first three-month period of 2010 decreased $9.5 million,
or 53%, compared with the first three-month period of 2009, reflecting the expected decline based
on our consistent high quality origination profile over the past 24 months. This focus on quality
associated with the 2008 and 2009 originations was the primary driver for the improvement in this
portfolio in the current quarter compared with the year-ago period.
Home equity NCOs in the first three-month period of 2010 increased $20.2 million compared with
the first three-month period of 2009. This increase reflected the impact of declining housing
prices throughout 2009. While NCOs were higher compared with prior quarters, there continued to be
a declining trend in the early-stage delinquency level in the home equity line-of-credit portfolio,
supporting our longer-term positive view for home equity portfolio performance. The performance
also continued to be impacted by borrowers defaulting with no available equity. We continue to
focus on loss mitigation activity and short sales, as we believe that our more proactive loss
mitigation strategies are in the best interest of both us and our customers. Although NCOs
increased, given the market conditions, performance remained within expectations.
Residential mortgage NCOs in the first three-month period of 2010 increased $18.0 million
compared with the first three-month period of 2009. This increase reflected continued
housing-related pressures. The increased NCOs were a direct result of our continued emphasis on
loss mitigation strategies, an increased number of short sales, and a more conservative position
regarding the timing of loss recognition. We continued to see some positive trends in early-stage
delinquencies, indicating that even with the economic stress on our borrowers, losses are expected
to remain manageable.
INVESTMENT SECURITIES PORTFOLIO
(This section should be read in conjunction with the Critical Accounting Policies and Use of
Significant Estimates discussion, and Note 4 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements.)
We routinely review our investment securities portfolio, and recognize impairment writedowns
based primarily on fair value, issuer-specific factors and results, and our intent and ability to
hold such investments. Our investment securities portfolio is evaluated in light of established
asset/liability management objectives, and changing market conditions that could affect the
profitability of the portfolio, as well as the level of interest rate risk to which we are exposed.
Our investment securities portfolio is comprised of various financial instruments. At March
31, 2010, our investment securities portfolio totaled $8.9 billion.
Declines in the fair value of available-for-sale investment securities are recorded as
temporary impairment, noncredit OTTI, or credit OTTI adjustments.
Temporary impairment adjustments are recorded when the fair value of a security fluctuates
from its historical cost. Temporary impairment adjustments are recorded in accumulated other
comprehensive income (OCI), and therefore, reduce equity. Temporary impairment adjustments do not
impact net income or risk-based capital. A recovery of available-for-sale security prices also is
recorded as an adjustment to OCI for securities that are temporarily impaired, and results in an
increase to equity.
Because the available-for-sale securities portfolio is recorded at fair value, the conclusion
as to whether an investment decline is other-than-temporarily impaired does not significantly
impact our equity position, as the amount of temporary adjustment has already been reflected in
accumulated OCI. A recovery in the value of an other-than-temporarily impaired security is
recorded as additional interest income over the remaining life of the security.
During the 2009 first quarter, we recorded $6.5 million of credit OTTI losses. This amount
was comprised of $3.2 million related to the pooled-trust-preferred securities portfolio, $2.6
million related to the CMO securities portfolio, and $0.6 million related to the Alt-A securities
portfolio (see below for additional discussion of these portfolios). Given the continued
disruption in the financial markets, we may be required to recognize additional credit OTTI losses
in future periods with respect to our available-for-sale investment securities portfolio. The
amount and timing of any additional credit OTTI will depend on the decline in the underlying
cash flows of the securities. If our intent regarding the decision to hold temporarily
impaired securities changes in future periods, we may be required to record noncredit OTTI, which
will negatively impact our earnings.
45
Alt-A, Pooled-Trust-Preferred, and Private-Label CMO Securities
Our three highest risk segments of our investment portfolio are the Alt-A mortgage-backed,
pooled-trust-preferred, and private-label CMO portfolios. The Alt-A mortgage-backed securities and
pooled-trust-preferred securities are located within the asset-backed securities portfolio. The
performance of the underlying securities in each of these segments continues to reflect the
economic environment. Each of these securities in these three segments is subjected to a rigorous
review of their projected cash flows. These reviews are supported with analysis from independent
third parties.
The following table presents the credit ratings for our Alt-A, pooled-trust-preferred, and
private label CMO securities as of March 31, 2010:
Table 34 Credit Ratings of Selected Investment Securities (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Credit Rating of Fair Value Amount |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
AAA |
|
|
AA +/- |
|
|
A +/- |
|
|
BBB +/- |
|
|
<BBB- |
|
Private label CMO securities |
|
$ |
509.1 |
|
|
$ |
462.7 |
|
|
$ |
35.1 |
|
|
$ |
21.6 |
|
|
$ |
33.4 |
|
|
$ |
94.0 |
|
|
$ |
278.7 |
|
Alt-A mortgage-backed
securities |
|
|
131.4 |
|
|
|
113.7 |
|
|
|
22.1 |
|
|
|
27.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63.9 |
|
Pooled-trust-preferred
securities |
|
|
238.3 |
|
|
|
105.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
68.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total At March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
878.8 |
|
|
$ |
681.8 |
|
|
$ |
57.2 |
|
|
$ |
73.9 |
|
|
$ |
33.4 |
|
|
$ |
106.2 |
|
|
$ |
411.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total At December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
912.3 |
|
|
$ |
700.3 |
|
|
$ |
62.1 |
|
|
$ |
72.9 |
|
|
$ |
35.6 |
|
|
$ |
121.3 |
|
|
$ |
408.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Credit ratings reflect the lowest current rating assigned by a nationally recognized credit rating agency. |
Negative changes to the above credit ratings would generally result in an increase of our
risk-weighted assets, which could result in a reduction to our regulatory capital ratios.
The following table summarizes the relevant characteristics of our pooled-trust-preferred
securities portfolio at March 31, 2010. Each of the securities is part of a pool of issuers and
each support a more senior tranche of securities except for the I-Pre TSL II security that is the
most senior class.
Table 35 Trust Preferred Securities Data
March 31, 2010
(dollar amounts in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferrals |
|
|
Expected |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Defaults |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# of Issuers |
|
|
Defaults |
|
|
as a % of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lowest |
|
Currently |
|
|
as a % of |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Book |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Credit |
|
Performing/ |
|
|
Original |
|
|
Performing |
|
|
Excess |
|
Deal Name |
|
Par Value |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Rating(2) |
|
Remaining(3) |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
Subordination(4) |
|
Alesco II(1) |
|
$ |
40,422 |
|
|
$ |
31,549 |
|
|
$ |
10,873 |
|
|
$ |
20,676 |
|
|
C |
|
|
33/43 |
|
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
Alesco IV(1) |
|
|
20,353 |
|
|
|
10,612 |
|
|
|
2,324 |
|
|
|
8,288 |
|
|
C |
|
|
38/53 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
ICONS |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
12,192 |
|
|
|
7,808 |
|
|
BBB |
|
|
29/30 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
I-Pre TSL II |
|
|
36,916 |
|
|
|
36,813 |
|
|
|
24,648 |
|
|
|
12,165 |
|
|
AA |
|
|
29/29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
MM Comm II(1) |
|
|
24,544 |
|
|
|
23,457 |
|
|
|
17,903 |
|
|
|
5,554 |
|
|
BB |
|
|
5/8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
MM Comm III(1) |
|
|
11,930 |
|
|
|
11,398 |
|
|
|
6,137 |
|
|
|
5,261 |
|
|
B |
|
|
8/12 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL IX(1) |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
4,117 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
2,522 |
|
|
C |
|
|
35/49 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL X(1) |
|
|
17,236 |
|
|
|
9,914 |
|
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
|
7,177 |
|
|
C |
|
|
37/57 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL XI(1) |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
24,040 |
|
|
|
8,973 |
|
|
|
15,067 |
|
|
C |
|
|
48/65 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL XIII(1) |
|
|
27,530 |
|
|
|
23,414 |
|
|
|
7,907 |
|
|
|
15,507 |
|
|
C |
|
|
53/65 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reg
Diversified(1) |
|
|
25,500 |
|
|
|
7,499 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
6,986 |
|
|
D |
|
|
28/45 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Soloso(1) |
|
|
12,500 |
|
|
|
4,486 |
|
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
3,887 |
|
|
C |
|
|
51/70 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tropic III |
|
|
31,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
|
|
8,981 |
|
|
|
22,019 |
|
|
CCC- |
|
|
29/45 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
297,931 |
|
|
$ |
238,299 |
|
|
$ |
105,382 |
|
|
$ |
132,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Security was determined to have other-than-temporary impairment. As such, the book value is net of recorded credit impairment. |
|
(2) |
|
For purposes of comparability, the lowest credit rating expressed is equivalent to Fitch ratings even where lowest rating is
based on another nationally recognized credit rating agency. |
46
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Includes both banks and/or insurance companies. |
|
(4) |
|
Excess subordination percentage represents the additional defaults in excess of both current and projected defaults that the
security can absorb before the bond experiences credit impairment. Excess subordinated percentage is calculated by: (a)
determining what percentage of defaults a deal can experience before the bond has credit impairment, and (b) subtracting from this
default breakage percentage both total current and expected future default percentages. |
Market Risk
Market risk represents the risk of loss due to changes in market values of assets and
liabilities. We incur market risk in the normal course of business through exposures to market
interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equity prices, credit spreads, and expected lease residual
values. We have identified two primary sources of market risk: interest rate risk and price risk.
Interest rate risk is our primary market risk.
Interest Rate Risk
OVERVIEW
Interest rate risk is the risk to earnings and value arising from changes in market interest
rates. Interest rate risk arises from timing differences in the repricings and maturities of
interest-bearing assets and liabilities (reprice risk), changes in the expected maturities of
assets and liabilities arising from embedded options, such as borrowers ability to prepay
residential mortgage loans at any time and depositors ability to terminate certificates of deposit
before maturity (option risk), changes in the shape of the yield curve whereby interest rates
increase or decrease in a non-parallel fashion (yield curve risk), and changes in spread
relationships between different yield curves, such as U.S. Treasuries and London Interbank Offered
Rate (LIBOR) (basis risk.)
Asset sensitive position refers to an increase in short-term interest rates that is expected
to generate higher net interest income as rates earned on our interest-earning assets would reprice
upward more quickly than rates paid on our interest-bearing liabilities, thus expanding our net
interest margin. Conversely, liability sensitive position refers to an increase in short-term
interest rates that is expected to generate lower net interest income as rates paid on our
interest-bearing liabilities would reprice upward more quickly than rates earned on our
interest-earning assets, thus compressing our net interest margin.
INCOME SIMULATION AND ECONOMIC VALUE ANALYSIS
Interest rate risk measurement is performed monthly. Two broad approaches to modeling
interest rate risk are employed: income simulation and economic value analysis. An income
simulation analysis is used to measure the sensitivity of forecasted net interest income to changes
in market rates over a one-year time period. Although bank owned life insurance, automobile
operating lease assets, and excess cash balances held at the Federal Reserve Bank are classified as
noninterest earning assets, and the net revenue from these assets is in noninterest income and
noninterest expense, these portfolios are included in the interest sensitivity analysis because
they have attributes similar to interest earning assets. Economic value of equity (EVE) analysis
is used to measure the sensitivity of the values of period-end assets and liabilities to changes in
market interest rates. EVE serves as a complement to income simulation modeling as it provides
risk exposure estimates for time periods beyond the one-year simulation period.
The simulations for evaluating short-term interest rate risk exposure are scenarios that model
gradual +/-100 and +/-200 basis point parallel shifts in market interest rates over the next
12-month period beyond the interest rate change implied by the current yield curve. We assumed
that market interest rates would not fall below 0% over the next 12-month period for the scenarios
that used the -100 and -200 basis point parallel shift in market interest rates. The table
below shows the results of the scenarios as of March 31, 2010, and December 31, 2009. All of the
positions were within the board of directors policy limits.
47
Table 36 Net Interest Income at Risk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Interest Income at Risk (%) |
|
Basis point change scenario |
|
|
-200 |
|
|
|
-100 |
|
|
|
+100 |
|
|
|
+200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Board policy limits |
|
|
-4.0 |
% |
|
|
-2.0 |
% |
|
|
-2.0 |
% |
|
|
-4.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
-1.4 |
% |
|
|
-0.5 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
+0.1 |
% |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
-0.3 |
% |
|
|
+0.2 |
% |
|
|
-0.1 |
% |
|
|
-0.4 |
% |
The net interest income at risk reported as of March 31, 2010 for the +200 basis points
scenario shows a change to a slight near-term asset sensitive position compared with December 31,
2009.
The primary simulations for EVE at risk assume immediate +/-100 and +/-200 basis point
parallel shifts in market interest rates beyond the interest rate change implied by the current
yield curve. The table below outlines the March 31, 2010, results compared with December 31, 2009.
All of the positions were within the board of directors policy limits.
Table 37 Economic Value of Equity at Risk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Value of Equity at Risk (%) |
|
Basis point change scenario |
|
|
-200 |
|
|
|
-100 |
|
|
|
+100 |
|
|
|
+200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Board policy limits |
|
|
-12.0 |
% |
|
|
-5.0 |
% |
|
|
-5.0 |
% |
|
|
-12.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
-4.6 |
% |
|
|
+0.1 |
% |
|
|
-2.6 |
% |
|
|
-6.5 |
% |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
+0.8 |
% |
|
|
+2.7 |
% |
|
|
-3.7 |
% |
|
|
-9.1 |
% |
The EVE at risk reported as of March 31, 2010 for the +200 basis points scenario shows
a change to a lower long-term liability sensitive position compared with December 31, 2009. The
primary factors contributing to this change include lower fixed-rate loan balances, expectations
for faster prepayments on loans and securities, an increase in core deposits, and a slight
reduction in the remaining life of our interest rate swap portfolio.
MORTGAGE SERVICING RIGHTS (MSRs)
(This section should be read in conjunction with Note 5 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.)
At March 31, 2010, we had a total of $207.6 million of capitalized MSRs representing the right
to service $16.0 billion in mortgage loans. Of this $207.6 million, $162.1 million was recorded
using the fair value method, and $45.5 million was recorded using the amortization method. If we
actively engage in hedging, the MSR asset is carried at fair value. If we do not actively engage
in hedging, the MSR asset is adjusted using the amortization method, and is carried at the lower of
cost or market value.
MSR fair values are very sensitive to movements in interest rates as expected future net
servicing income depends on the projected outstanding principal balances of the underlying loans,
which can be greatly reduced by prepayments. Prepayments usually increase when mortgage interest
rates decline and decrease when mortgage interest rates rise. We have employed strategies to
reduce the risk of MSR fair value changes or impairment. In addition, we engage a third party to
provide improved valuation tools and assistance with our strategies with the objective to decrease
the volatility from MSR fair value changes. However, volatile changes in interest rates can
diminish the effectiveness of these hedges. We typically report MSR fair value adjustments net of
hedge-related trading activity in the mortgage banking income category of noninterest income.
Changes in fair value between reporting dates are recorded as an increase or decrease in mortgage
banking income.
MSRs recorded using the amortization method generally relate to loans originated with
historically low interest rates, resulting in a lower probability of prepayments and, ultimately,
impairment. MSR assets are included in other assets, and are presented in Table 10.
Price Risk
Price risk represents the risk of loss arising from adverse movements in the prices of
financial instruments that are carried at fair value and are subject to fair value accounting. We
have price risk from trading securities, securities owned by our broker-dealer subsidiaries,
foreign exchange positions, equity investments, investments in securities backed by mortgage loans,
and marketable
equity securities held by our insurance subsidiaries. We have established loss limits on the
trading portfolio, on the amount of foreign exchange exposure that can be maintained, and on the
amount of marketable equity securities that can be held by the insurance subsidiaries.
48
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity is the ability to meet cash flow needs on a timely basis at a reasonable cost. We
manage liquidity risk at both the Bank and at the parent company, Huntington Bancshares
Incorporated. The liquidity of the Bank is used to make loans and leases and to repay deposit
liabilities as they become due or are demanded by customers. The overall objective of liquidity
risk management is to ensure that we can obtain cost-effective funding to meet current and future
obligations, as well as maintain sufficient levels of on-hand liquidity, under both normal
business as usual and unanticipated, stressed circumstances. The Asset, Liability, and Capital
Management Committee (ALCO) was appointed by the HBI Board Risk Oversight Committee to oversee
liquidity risk management and establish policies and limits, based upon the analyses of the ratio
of loans to deposits, the percentage of assets funded with noncore or wholesale funding, and other
considerations. Operating guidelines have been established to ensure diversification of noncore
funding by type, source, and maturity and that sufficient liquidity exists to cover 100% of
wholesale funds maturing within a six-month period. A contingency funding plan is in place, which
includes forecasted sources and uses of funds under various scenarios, to prepare for unexpected
liquidity shortages and to cover unanticipated events that could affect liquidity.
Bank Liquidity and Sources of Liquidity
Our primary sources of funding for the Bank are retail and commercial core deposits. Core
deposits are comprised of interest bearing and noninterest bearing demand deposits, money market
deposits, savings and other domestic time deposits, consumer certificates of deposit both over and
under $250,000, and nonconsumer certificates of deposit less than $250,000. Noncore deposits
consist of brokered money market deposits and certificates of deposit, foreign time deposits, and
other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more comprised primarily of public fund certificates of
deposit more than $250,000.
Core deposits may increase our need for liquidity as certificates of deposit mature or are
withdrawn before maturity and as nonmaturity deposits, such as checking and savings account
balances, are withdrawn. The Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAGP) is a voluntary program
provided by the FDIC as part of its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP). Under the
program, all noninterest-bearing transaction accounts are fully guaranteed by the FDIC for the
customers entire account balance. This program provides our customers with additional deposit
insurance coverage, and is in addition to and separate from the $250,000 coverage available under
the FDICs general deposit insurance rules.
At March 31, 2010, noninterest-bearing transaction account balances exceeding $250,000 totaled
$2.4 billion, and represented the amount of noninterest-bearing transaction customer deposits that
would not have been FDIC insured without the additional coverage provided by the TAGP. In April
2010, the FDIC adopted an interim rule extending the TAGP through December 31, 2010 for financial
institutions that desire to continue TAGP participation. On April 30, 2010, we notified the FDIC
of our decision to opt-out for the FDICs TAGP extension, effective July, 1, 2010. The impact of
this decision on our deposit levels cannot be readily determined at this time, although we
anticipate that a portion of deposits that will no longer be
FDIC-insured may shift
into collateralized deposit products or other collateralized liabilities.
As referenced in the above paragraph, the FDIC establishes a coverage limit, generally
$250,000 currently, for interest-bearing deposit balances. To provide our customers deposit
insurance above the established $250,000, we have joined the Certificate of Deposit Account
Registry Service (CDARS), a program that allows customers to invest up to $50 million in
certificates of deposit through one participating financial institution, with the entire amount
covered by FDIC insurance. At March 31, 2010, we had $439.4 million of CDARS deposit balances.
49
The following table reflects deposit composition detail for each of the past five quarters.
Table 38 Deposit Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits -
noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
6,938 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
6,907 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
6,306 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
|
$ |
6,169 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
|
$ |
5,887 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing
|
|
|
5,948 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,890 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,401 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
4,842 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,306 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
10,644 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
9,485 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
8,548 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
6,622 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
5,857 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Savings and other domestic time
deposits |
|
|
4,666 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,652 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
4,631 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,859 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
5,007 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
9,441 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
10,453 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
11,205 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
12,197 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
12,616 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
37,637 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
37,387 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
36,091 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
34,689 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
33,673 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
652 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
689 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,041 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Brokered deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
1,605 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2,098 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2,630 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3,229 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
3,848 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
40,303 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
40,494 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,829 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,165 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,070 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
11,844 |
|
|
|
31 |
% |
|
$ |
11,368 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
$ |
10,884 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
$ |
9,738 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
$ |
8,934 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
Personal |
|
|
25,793 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
26,019 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
25,207 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
24,951 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
24,739 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
$ |
37,637 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,387 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,091 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
34,689 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
33,673 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core deposits grew $0.3 billion during the first three-month period of 2010. This
increase reduced our reliance upon noncore funding sources.
To the extent that we are unable to obtain sufficient liquidity through core deposits, we may
meet our liquidity needs through sources of wholesale funding. These sources include other
domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more, brokered deposits and negotiable CDs, deposits in
foreign offices, short-term borrowings, Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances, other long-term
debt, and subordinated notes.
The Bank also has access to the Federal Reserves discount window. These borrowings are
secured by commercial loans and home equity lines-of-credit. The Bank is also a member of the
FHLB-Cincinnati, and as such, has access to advances from this facility. These advances are
generally secured by residential mortgages, other mortgage-related loans, and available-for-sale
securities. Information regarding amounts pledged, for the ability to borrow if necessary, and
unused borrowing capacity at both the Federal Reserve and the FHLB-Cincinnati, are outlined in the
following table:
Table 39 Federal Reserve and FHLB-Cincinnati Borrowing Capacity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in billions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and Securities Pledged: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Reserve Bank |
|
$ |
8.3 |
|
|
$ |
8.5 |
|
FHLB-Cincinnati |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and securities pledged |
|
$ |
16.3 |
|
|
$ |
16.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total unused borrowing capacity at Federal
Reserve Bank and FHLB-Cincinnati |
|
$ |
7.3 |
|
|
$ |
7.9 |
|
We can also obtain funding through other methods including: (a) purchasing federal funds,
(b) selling securities under repurchase agreements, (c) the sale or maturity of investment
securities, (d) the sale or securitization of loans, (e) the sale of national market
certificates of deposit, (f) the relatively shorter-term structure of our commercial loans and
automobile loans, and (g) the issuance of common and preferred stock.
50
At March 31, 2010, we believe that the Bank has sufficient liquidity to meet its cash flow
obligations for the foreseeable future.
Parent Company Liquidity
The parent companys funding requirements consist primarily of dividends to shareholders, debt
service, income taxes, operating expenses, funding of non-bank subsidiaries, repurchases of our
stock, and acquisitions. The parent company obtains funding to meet obligations from dividends
received from direct subsidiaries, net taxes collected from subsidiaries included in the federal
consolidated tax return, fees for services provided to subsidiaries, and the issuance of debt
securities.
At March 31, 2010, the parent company had $1.1 billion in cash or cash equivalents, compared
with $1.4 billion at December 31, 2009, reflecting a $0.3 billion contribution of additional
capital to the Bank. The contribution increased the Banks regulatory capital levels above its
already well-capitalized levels.
Based on the current dividend of $0.01 per common share, cash demands required for common
stock dividends are estimated to be approximately $7.2 million per quarter.
We have an aggregate outstanding amount of $362.5 million of Series A Non-cumulative Perpetual
Convertible Preferred Stock. The Series A Preferred Stock pays, as declared by our board of
directors, dividends in cash at a rate of 8.50% per annum, payable quarterly (see Note 9 of the
Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements). Cash demands required for
Series A Preferred Stock are estimated to be approximately $7.7 million per quarter.
In 2008, we received $1.4 billion of equity capital by issuing 1.4 million shares of Series B
Preferred Stock to the U.S. Department of Treasury as a result of our participation in the Troubled
Asset Relief Program (TARP) voluntary capital purchase program. The Series B Preferred Stock pays
cumulative dividends at a rate of 5% per year for the first five years and 9% per year thereafter,
resulting in quarterly cash demands of approximately $18 million through 2012, and $32 million
thereafter (see Note 9 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for additional information regarding the Series B Preferred Stock issuance).
Based on a regulatory dividend limitation, the Bank could not have declared and paid a
dividend to the parent company at March 31, 2010, without regulatory approval. We do not
anticipate that the Bank will request regulatory approval to pay dividends in the near future as we
continue to build Bank regulatory capital above our already well-capitalized level. To help meet
any additional liquidity needs, we have an open-ended, automatic shelf registration statement filed
and effective with the SEC, which permits us to issue an unspecified amount of debt or equity
securities.
With the exception of the common and preferred dividends previously discussed, the parent
company does not have any significant cash demands. There are no maturities of parent company
obligations until 2013, when a debt maturity of $50 million is payable.
Considering the factors discussed above, and other analyses that we have performed, we believe
the parent company has sufficient liquidity to meet its cash flow obligations for the foreseeable
future.
Credit Ratings
Credit ratings provided by the three major credit rating agencies are an important component
of our liquidity profile. Among other factors, the credit ratings are based on financial strength,
credit quality and concentrations in the loan portfolio, the level and volatility of earnings,
capital adequacy, the quality of management, the liquidity of the balance sheet, the availability
of a significant base of core deposits, and and our ability to access a broad array of wholesale
funding sources, as well as the overall operating and economic environment of our markets. Adverse
changes in these factors could result in a negative change in credit ratings and impact our ability
to raise funds at a reasonable cost in the capital markets. In addition, certain financial on- and
off-balance sheet arrangements contain credit rating triggers that could increase funding needs if
a negative rating change occurs. Other arrangements that could be impacted by credit rating
changes include, but are not limited to, letter of credit commitments for marketable securities,
interest rate swap collateral agreements, and certain asset securitization transactions contain
credit rating provisions or could otherwise be impacted by credit rating changes.
51
The most recent credit ratings for the parent company and the Bank are as follows:
Table 40 Credit Ratings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Senior Unsecured |
|
|
Subordinated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Short-term |
|
|
Outlook |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moodys Investor Service |
|
Baa2 |
|
Baa3 |
|
WR |
|
Negative |
Standard and Poors |
|
BB+ |
|
BB |
|
WR |
|
Negative |
Fitch Ratings |
|
BBB |
|
BBB- |
|
|
F2 |
|
|
Negative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Huntington National Bank |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moodys Investor Service |
|
Baa1 |
|
Baa2 |
|
|
P-2 |
|
|
Negative |
Standard and Poors |
|
BBB- |
|
BB+ |
|
WR |
|
Negative |
Fitch Ratings |
|
BBB+ |
|
BBB |
|
|
F2 |
|
|
Negative |
|
|
|
WR=Withdrawn rating. The Moodys Investor Service rating was withdrawn effective March 1, 2010. The Standard
and Poors ratings were withdrawn effective April 1, 2010. |
As of March 31, 2010, we did not have any outstanding short-term debt that required more
than one rating from a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). As a result,
we elected to withdraw the Moodys Investor Service short-term rating for the parent company as
well as the Standard and Poors short-term rating for both the parent company and the Bank.
A security rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold securities, is subject to
revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization, and should be evaluated
independently of any other rating.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the normal course of business, we enter into various off-balance sheet arrangements. These
arrangements include financial guarantees contained in standby letters of credit issued by the Bank
and commitments by the Bank to sell mortgage loans.
Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued to guarantee the performance of a
customer to a third party. These guarantees are primarily issued to support public and private
borrowing arrangements, including commercial paper, bond financing, and similar transactions. Most
of these arrangements mature within two years, and are expected to expire without being drawn upon.
Standby letters of credit are included in the determination of the amount of risk-based capital
that the parent company, and the Bank, are required to hold.
Through our credit process, we monitor the credit risks of outstanding standby letters of
credit. When it is probable that a standby letter of credit will be drawn and not repaid in full,
losses are recognized in the provision for credit losses. At March 31, 2010, we had $0.6 billion
of standby letters of credit outstanding, of which 65% were collateralized.
We enter into forward contracts relating to the mortgage banking business to hedge the
exposures we have from commitments to extend new residential mortgage loans to our customers and
from our held-for-sale mortgage loans. At March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009, and March 31, 2009, we
had commitments to sell residential real estate loans of $600.9 million, $662.9 million, and $912.5
million, respectively. These contracts mature in less than one year.
Effective January 1, 2010, we consolidated an automobile loan securitization that previously
had been accounted for as an off-balance sheet transaction. We elected to account for the
automobile loan receivables and the associated notes payable at fair value per accounting guidance
supplied in ASC 810 Consolidation (See Note 2 and Note 5 of the Notes to the Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.)
We do not believe that off-balance sheet arrangements will have a material impact on our
liquidity or capital resources.
52
Operational Risk
As with all companies, we are subject to operational risk. Operational risk is the risk of
loss due to human error, inadequate or failed internal systems and controls, violations of, or
noncompliance with, laws, rules, regulations, prescribed practices, or ethical standards, and
external influences such as market conditions, fraudulent activities, disasters, and security
risks. We continuously strive
to strengthen our system of internal controls to ensure compliance with laws, rules, and
regulations, and to improve the oversight of our operational risk.
To mitigate operational and compliance risks, we have established a senior management level
Operational Risk Committee, and a senior management level Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance
Committee. The responsibilities of these committees, among other things, include establishing and
maintaining management information systems to monitor material risks and to identify potential
concerns, risks, or trends that may have a significant impact and develop recommendations to
address the identified issues. Both of these committees report any significant findings and
recommendations to the Risk Management Committee. Additionally, potential concerns may be
escalated to the HBI Board Risk Oversight Committee, as appropriate.
The goal of this framework is to implement effective operational risk techniques and
strategies, minimize operational losses, and strengthen our overall performance.
Capital / Capital Adequacy
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 4.)
Capital is managed both at the Bank and on a consolidated basis. Capital levels are maintained
based on regulatory capital requirements and the economic capital required to support credit,
market, liquidity, and operational risks inherent in our business, and to provide the flexibility
needed for future growth and new business opportunities. Shareholders equity totaled $5.4
billion at March 31, 2010, an increase of $0.1 billion, or 1%, compared with December 31, 2009.
This increase primarily reflected improvements in the components of accumulated OCI.
53
The following table presents risk-weighed assets and other financial data necessary to
calculate certain financial ratios that we use to measure capital adequacy.
Table 41 Capital Adequacy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated capital calculations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders common equity |
|
$ |
3,678 |
|
|
$ |
3,648 |
|
|
$ |
3,992 |
|
|
$ |
3,541 |
|
|
$ |
3,047 |
|
Shareholders preferred equity |
|
|
1,692 |
|
|
|
1,688 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,679 |
|
|
|
1,768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
5,370 |
|
|
|
5,336 |
|
|
|
5,675 |
|
|
|
5,220 |
|
|
|
4,815 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
(452 |
) |
Intangible assets |
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
|
(289 |
) |
|
|
(303 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(340 |
) |
Intangible asset deferred tax
liability (1) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible equity (2) |
|
|
4,747 |
|
|
|
4,704 |
|
|
|
5,034 |
|
|
|
4,563 |
|
|
|
4,142 |
|
Shareholders preferred equity |
|
|
(1,692 |
) |
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
(1,683 |
) |
|
|
(1,679 |
) |
|
|
(1,768 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible common equity (2) |
|
$ |
3,055 |
|
|
$ |
3,016 |
|
|
$ |
3,351 |
|
|
$ |
2,884 |
|
|
$ |
2,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
51,867 |
|
|
$ |
51,555 |
|
|
$ |
52,513 |
|
|
$ |
51,397 |
|
|
$ |
51,702 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
(452 |
) |
Other intangible assets |
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
|
(289 |
) |
|
|
(303 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(340 |
) |
Intangible asset deferred tax
liability (1) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible assets (2) |
|
$ |
51,244 |
|
|
$ |
50,923 |
|
|
$ |
51,872 |
|
|
$ |
50,740 |
|
|
$ |
51,029 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 equity |
|
$ |
5,090 |
|
|
$ |
5,201 |
|
|
$ |
5,755 |
|
|
$ |
5,390 |
|
|
$ |
5,167 |
|
Shareholders preferred equity |
|
|
(1,692 |
) |
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
(1,683 |
) |
|
|
(1,679 |
) |
|
|
(1,768 |
) |
Trust preferred securities |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(736 |
) |
REIT preferred stock |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity (2) |
|
$ |
2,778 |
|
|
$ |
2,893 |
|
|
$ |
3,452 |
|
|
$ |
3,091 |
|
|
$ |
2,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-weighted assets (RWA) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
42,522 |
|
|
$ |
43,248 |
|
|
$ |
44,142 |
|
|
$ |
45,463 |
|
|
$ |
46,383 |
|
Bank |
|
|
42,511 |
|
|
|
43,149 |
|
|
|
43,964 |
|
|
|
45,137 |
|
|
|
45,951 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity / RWA ratio (2), (3) |
|
|
6.53 |
% |
|
|
6.69 |
% |
|
|
7.82 |
% |
|
|
6.80 |
% |
|
|
5.63 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible equity / tangible asset ratio (2) |
|
|
9.26 |
|
|
|
9.24 |
|
|
|
9.71 |
|
|
|
8.99 |
|
|
|
8.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible common equity / tangible asset ratio (2) |
|
&nbs |