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, 2011
Commission File Number 1-34073
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated
|
|
|
Maryland
|
|
31-0724920 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
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). þ 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 863,398,578 shares of Registrants common stock ($0.01 par value) outstanding on March
31, 2011.
HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED
INDEX
2
Glossary of Acronyms and Terms
The following listing provides a comprehensive reference of common acronyms and terms used
throughout the document:
|
|
|
2010 Form 10-K
|
|
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 |
ABL
|
|
Asset Based Lending |
ACL
|
|
Allowance for Credit Losses |
AFCRE
|
|
Automobile Finance and Commercial Real Estate |
ALCO
|
|
Asset-Liability Management Committee |
ALLL
|
|
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses |
ARM
|
|
Adjustable Rate Mortgage |
ARRA
|
|
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 |
ASC
|
|
Accounting Standards Codification |
ATM
|
|
Automated Teller Machine |
AULC
|
|
Allowance for Unfunded Loan Commitments |
AVM
|
|
Automated Valuation Methodology |
C&I
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
CDARS
|
|
Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service |
CDO
|
|
Collateralized Debt Obligations |
CFPB
|
|
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection |
CMO
|
|
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations |
CPP
|
|
Capital Purchase Program |
CRE
|
|
Commercial Real Estate |
DDA
|
|
Demand Deposit Account |
DIF
|
|
Deposit Insurance Fund |
Dodd-Frank Act
|
|
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act |
EESA
|
|
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 |
EPS
|
|
Earnings Per Share |
ERISA
|
|
Employee Retirement Income Security Act |
EVE
|
|
Economic Value of Equity |
Fannie Mae
|
|
(see FNMA) |
FASB
|
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board |
FDIC
|
|
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation |
FDICIA
|
|
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 |
FFIEC
|
|
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council |
FHA
|
|
Federal Housing Administration |
FHFA
|
|
Federal Housing Finance Agency |
FHLB
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank |
FHLMC
|
|
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation |
FICA
|
|
Federal Insurance Contributions Act |
FICO
|
|
Fair Isaac Corporation |
FNMA
|
|
Federal National Mortgage Association |
Franklin
|
|
Franklin Credit Management Corporation |
Freddie Mac
|
|
(see FHLMC) |
FSP
|
|
Financial Stability Plan |
FTE
|
|
Fully-Taxable Equivalent |
FTP
|
|
Funds Transfer Pricing |
3
|
|
|
GAAP
|
|
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States of America |
GSE
|
|
Government Sponsored Enterprise |
HASP
|
|
Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan |
HCER Act
|
|
Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 |
IPO
|
|
Initial Public Offering |
IRS
|
|
Internal Revenue Service |
LIBOR
|
|
London Interbank Offered Rate |
LTV
|
|
Loan to Value |
MD&A
|
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
MRC
|
|
Market Risk Committee |
MSR
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Rights |
NALs
|
|
Nonaccrual Loans |
NAV
|
|
Net Asset Value |
NCO
|
|
Net Charge-off |
NPAs
|
|
Nonperforming Assets |
NSF / OD
|
|
Nonsufficient Funds and Overdraft |
OCC
|
|
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency |
OCI
|
|
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) |
OCR
|
|
Optimal Customer Relationship |
OLEM
|
|
Other Loans Especially Mentioned |
OREO
|
|
Other Real Estate Owned |
OTTI
|
|
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment |
Plan
|
|
Huntington Bancshares Retirement Plan |
Reg E
|
|
Regulation E, of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act |
REIT
|
|
Real Estate Investment Trust |
SAD
|
|
Special Assets Division |
SBA
|
|
Small Business Administration |
SEC
|
|
Securities and Exchange Commission |
SERP
|
|
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan |
Sky Financial
|
|
Sky Financial Group, Inc. |
SRIP
|
|
Supplemental Retirement Income Plan |
Sky Trust
|
|
Sky Bank and Sky Trust, National Association |
TAGP
|
|
Transaction Account Guarantee Program |
TARP
|
|
Troubled Asset Relief Program |
TARP Capital
|
|
Series B Preferred Stock |
TCE
|
|
Tangible Common Equity |
TDR
|
|
Troubled Debt Restructured Loan |
TLGP
|
|
Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program |
Treasury
|
|
U.S. Department of the Treasury |
UCS
|
|
Uniform Classification System |
Unizan
|
|
Unizan Financial Corp. |
USDA
|
|
U.S. Department of Agriculture |
VA
|
|
U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs |
VIE
|
|
Variable Interest Entity |
WGH
|
|
Wealth Advisors, Government Finance, and Home Lending |
4
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
When we refer to we, our, and us in this report, we mean Huntington Bancshares
Incorporated and our consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context indicates that we refer only to
the parent company, Huntington Bancshares Incorporated. When we refer to the Bank in this
report, we mean our only bank subsidiary, The Huntington National Bank, and its subsidiaries.
|
|
|
Item 2: |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
INTRODUCTION
We are a multi-state diversified regional bank holding company organized under Maryland law in
1966 and headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. Through the Bank, we have 145 years of servicing the
financial needs of our customers. Through our subsidiaries, we provide full-service commercial and
consumer banking services, mortgage banking services, automobile financing, equipment leasing,
investment management, trust services, brokerage services, customized insurance service programs,
and other financial products and services. Our over 600 banking offices are located in Indiana,
Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Selected financial services and other
activities are also conducted in various other states. International banking services are
available through the headquarters office in Columbus, Ohio and a limited purpose office located in
the Cayman Islands and another limited purpose office located in Hong Kong. Our foreign banking
activities, in total or with any individual country, are not significant.
This MD&A provides information we believe necessary for understanding our financial condition,
changes in financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. The MD&A included in our
2010 Form 10-K should be read in conjunction with this MD&A as this discussion provides only
material updates to the 2010 Form 10-K. This MD&A should also be read in conjunction with the
financial statements, notes and other information contained in this report.
Our discussion is divided into key segments:
|
|
|
Executive Overview - Provides a summary of our current financial performance, and
business overview, including our thoughts on the impact of the economy, legislative and
regulatory initiatives, and recent industry developments. This section also provides our
outlook regarding our expectations for the remainder of 2011. |
|
|
|
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, operational, and
compliance 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. |
|
|
|
Additional Disclosures - Provides comments on important matters including
forward-looking statements, critical accounting policies and use of significant estimates,
recent accounting pronouncements and developments, and acquisitions. |
A reading of each section is important to understand fully the nature of our financial
performance and prospects.
5
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
Summary of 2011 First Quarter Results
For the quarter, we reported net income of $126.4 million, or $0.14 per common share, compared
with $122.9 million, or $0.05 per common share, in the prior quarter (see Table 1). The 2010
fourth quarter included a nonrecurring reduction of $0.07 per common share for the deemed dividend
resulting from the repurchase of $1.4 billion in TARP Capital.
Fully-taxable equivalent net interest income was $408.3 million for the quarter, down $10.7
million, or 3%, from the 2010 fourth quarter. The decline primarily reflected the impact of fewer
days and a decline in average investment securities. The fully-taxable equivalent net interest
margin increased to 3.42% from 3.37%.
Total noninterest income declined $27.3 million, or 10%. This reflected a $30.5 million, or
57%, decline in mortgage banking income from the prior quarter primarily related to a 49% decline
in mortgage originations. The anticipated decline was due to expected lower originations as
mortgage interest rates increased late in the prior quarter. The decline was partially offset by a
5% increase in trust services income and a 21% increase in brokerage income.
Total noninterest expense declined $3.9 million, or 1%, reflecting declines in legal costs as
collection activities declined, consulting expenses, OREO and foreclosure expense, and several
other expense categories. Partially offsetting these declines were $17.0 million in additions to
litigation reserves, seasonal increases in certain expenses, most notably personnel costs related
to the annual FICA and other benefit expense resets, as well as annual merit increases for
nonexecutives.
Credit quality performance in the current quarter continued to show significant improvement as
NALs and criticized loans declined 18% and 13%, respectively. NCOs were $165.1 million, or an
annualized 1.73% of average total loans and leases, down from $172.3 million, or 1.82%, in the 2010
fourth quarter. This helped drive a $37.6 million, or 43%, decline in the provision for credit
losses. While the ACL as a percentage of loans and leases was 3.07%, down from 3.39% at December
31, 2010, the ACL as a percentage of NALs increased to 185% from 166%.
On January 19, 2011, we repurchased for $49.1 million the warrant to purchase 23.6 million
common shares issued to the Treasury in connection with the CPP under the TARP. While the
repurchase of this warrant had the positive effect of removing any possible future share dilutive
impact, it negatively impacted our capital ratios. For example, the warrant repurchase negatively
impacted our tangible common equity ratio by 9 basis points. Despite this impact, as a result of
the first quarters earnings, our March 31, 2011, capital ratios increased from the end of last
year.
Business Overview
General
Our general business objectives are: (1) grow revenue and profitability, (2) grow key fee
businesses (existing and new), (3) improve credit quality, including lower NCOs and NPAs, (4)
improve cross-sell and share-of-wallet across all business segments, (5) reduce noncore CRE
exposure, and (6) continue to improve our overall management of risk.
Throughout last year, and continuing into this year, we are taking advantage of what we view
as an opportunity to make significant investments in strategic initiatives to position us for more
profitable and sustainable long-term growth. This includes implementing our Fair Play banking
philosophy value proposition for our customers, deepening product penetration, investing in
expanding existing business, and launching new businesses.
This quarter, we are especially pleased with the increase in our net interest margin as this
primarily reflected the benefit of continued growth in low cost noninterest-bearing demand
deposits. These represent our most profitable deposits and the primary customer banking
relationship. During the quarter, consumer checking account households grew at a 9% annualized
rate, reflecting the traction we are gaining with customers in our markets as they increasingly
embrace the benefits offered through our Fair Play banking philosophy with programs such as
24-Hour Grace on overdrafts.
Economy
Borrower and consumer confidence and the sustainability of the slow economic recovery remain
major factors impacting growth opportunities for the rest of 2011. Some signs that our footprint
states of Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia have been experiencing
cyclical recovery in line with, and in certain instances stronger than, the national average over
the past year include:
|
|
|
Increase in total payroll for all of our footprint states, with all but Indiana and West
Virginia (two of our smaller regions) exceeding the national average. |
|
|
|
Strong manufacturing growth providing a boost to the regional economy as evidenced by
the first manufacturing payroll growth since the 1990s. |
6
|
|
|
Decline in unemployment rates for all of our footprint states, except West Virginia. |
|
|
|
Combined exports from our footprint states have risen 51% between the recession low in
January 2009 and February 2011. |
|
|
|
With the exception of Michigan, the FHFA House Price Index in the Huntington footprint
states declined by less than the national average during the recession and all footprint
states outperformed the FHFA House Price Index during 2010. Overall regional vacancy rates
have shown signs of stabilization along with the national vacancy rate in 2010. |
Unfortunately, during the 2011 first quarter a number of issues have emerged that could
negatively impact the recovery. These include the continued instability in the Middle East with
its ramifications on the cost of oil translating to higher gas prices, and the crisis in Japan
which could negatively impact the production of consumer goods and services, most notably the
electronics and automobile sectors. In addition, above average office vacancy rates in large
metropolitan areas indicate the possibility for some continued softness in commercial real estate
in 2011. For now, we continue to believe that the economy will remain relatively stable throughout
2011, with the potential for improvement in the latter half.
Legislative and Regulatory
Legislative and regulatory reforms continue to be adopted which impose additional restrictions
on current business practices. Recent actions affecting us included an amendment to Reg E relating
to certain overdraft fees for consumer deposit accounts and the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Durbin Amendment
The Durbin Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act instructed the Federal Reserve to establish
the rate merchants pay banks for electronic clearing of debit card transactions (i.e., the
interchange rate). Interchange fees accounted for about $90 million, or just over 80%, of our
electronic banking income last year, our fourth largest fee income activity. In the fourth quarter,
the Federal Reserve put out a proposal for comment that would cap the interchange rate at either
$0.07 or $0.12 per transaction. While these rates are not finalized, if they stand, we estimate
that between 75%-85% of our interchange income could be lost. The new rate is scheduled to take
effect July 21, 2011.
Recent Industry Developments
Foreclosure Documentation We are continuing to evaluate our foreclosure process and procedures
given the recent consent orders entered into by some of the largest servicers regarding their
foreclosure activities. We have determined that there is no reason to conclude that foreclosures
were filed that should not have been filed. We have identified and are implementing process and
control enhancements to ensure that our foreclosure processes are in compliance with applicable
laws and regulations. We are consulting with counsel as necessary with respect to requirements
imposed on the largest servicers in the consent orders and by the courts in which foreclosure
proceedings are pending, which could impact our foreclosure actions.
Representation and Warranty Reserve We primarily conduct our loan sale and securitization
activity with FNMA and FHLMC. In connection with these and other sale and securitization
transactions, we make certain representations and warranties that the loans meet certain criteria,
such as collateral type and underwriting standards. In the future, we may be required to repurchase
individual loans and / or indemnify these organizations against losses due to material breaches of
these representations and warranties. At March 31, 2011, we have a reserve for such losses of $23.8
million, which is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities.
Mortgage Servicing Rights MSR fair values are estimated based on residential mortgage servicing
revenue in excess of estimated market costs to service the underlying loans. Historically, the
estimated market cost to service has been stable. Due to changes in the regulatory environment
related to loan servicing and foreclosure activities, costs to service may potentially increase,
however the potential impact on the market costs to service remains uncertain. Certain large
residential mortgage loan servicers entered into consent orders with banking regulators in April
2011, which require the banks to remedy deficiencies and unsafe or unsound practices and to enhance
residential mortgage servicing and foreclosure processes. It is unclear what impact this may
ultimately have on market costs to service. At March 31, 2011, we estimated a 25% increase to our
loan servicing market cost assumption would result in a fair value impairment charge of
approximately $8 million.
Expectations
We are optimistic about our prospects for continued earnings growth for the rest of the year.
Net income is expected to grow from the current quarter level throughout the rest of the year
as pretax, pre-provision income rebounds from the current quarters level.
7
We believe the momentum we are seeing in loan and deposit growth, coupled with a stable net
interest margin, will contribute to growth in net interest income. Our C&I portfolio is expected
to continue to show meaningful growth with much of this reflecting the positive impact from
strategic initiatives to expand our commercial lending expertise into areas like specialty banking,
asset based lending, and equipment financing, in addition to our long-standing continued support of
small business lending. Growth in automobile loans is also expected to remain strong, aided by our
recent expansion into new markets. Home equity and residential mortgages are likely to show only
modest growth until there is more consumer confidence in the sustainability of the economic
recovery. Our noncore CRE portfolio is expected to continue to decline, but likely at a slower
rate.
We anticipate our core deposits will continue to grow, reflecting growth in consumer
households and business relationships. Further, we expect the shift toward lower-cost
noninterest-bearing demand deposit accounts will continue.
From a fee income perspective, first quarter results reflect for the most part the negative
run rate impacts from the decline in mortgage banking income and deposit service charges. Mortgage
banking income will likely show only modest, if any, growth throughout the rest of this year.
Service charge income should begin to show modest growth later in this year as the benefits from
our Fair Play banking philosophy continue to gain momentum commensurate with consumer household
growth and increased product penetration.
Electronic banking income in the second half of the year could be negatively impacted by as
much as $45 million if the Federal Reserves currently proposed interchange fee structure is
implemented July 21, 2011 as planned. There are some congressional movements to block or postpone
the implementation, but any outcome is uncertain at this time. We also expect to see continued
growth in the earnings contribution from other key fee income activities including capital markets,
treasury management services, and brokerage, reflecting the impact of our cross-sell and product
penetration initiatives throughout the Company, as well as the positive impact from strategic
initiatives.
Expense levels are expected to remain relatively stable with declines resulting from continued
low credit costs and improved expense efficiencies, offset by continued investments in strategic
initiatives.
Nonaccrual loans are expected to decline meaningfully throughout the year.
We anticipate an effective tax rate for the remainder of the year to approximate 35% of income
before income taxes less approximately $60.0 million of permanent tax differences over the
remainder of 2011 primarily related to tax-exempt income, tax-advantaged investments, and general
business credits.
8
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 Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and
Statement of Income 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.
9
Table 1 Selected Quarterly Income Statement Data (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
501,877 |
|
|
$ |
528,291 |
|
|
$ |
534,669 |
|
|
$ |
535,653 |
|
|
$ |
546,779 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
97,547 |
|
|
|
112,997 |
|
|
|
124,707 |
|
|
|
135,997 |
|
|
|
152,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
404,330 |
|
|
|
415,294 |
|
|
|
409,962 |
|
|
|
399,656 |
|
|
|
393,893 |
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
49,385 |
|
|
|
86,973 |
|
|
|
119,160 |
|
|
|
193,406 |
|
|
|
235,008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income after provision for credit losses |
|
|
354,945 |
|
|
|
328,321 |
|
|
|
290,802 |
|
|
|
206,250 |
|
|
|
158,885 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
|
54,324 |
|
|
|
55,810 |
|
|
|
65,932 |
|
|
|
75,934 |
|
|
|
69,339 |
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
22,684 |
|
|
|
53,169 |
|
|
|
52,045 |
|
|
|
45,530 |
|
|
|
25,038 |
|
Trust services income |
|
|
30,742 |
|
|
|
29,394 |
|
|
|
26,997 |
|
|
|
28,399 |
|
|
|
27,765 |
|
Electronic banking income |
|
|
28,786 |
|
|
|
28,900 |
|
|
|
28,090 |
|
|
|
28,107 |
|
|
|
25,137 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
17,945 |
|
|
|
19,678 |
|
|
|
19,801 |
|
|
|
18,074 |
|
|
|
18,860 |
|
Brokerage income |
|
|
20,511 |
|
|
|
16,953 |
|
|
|
16,575 |
|
|
|
18,425 |
|
|
|
16,902 |
|
Bank owned life insurance income |
|
|
14,819 |
|
|
|
16,113 |
|
|
|
14,091 |
|
|
|
14,392 |
|
|
|
16,470 |
|
Automobile operating lease income |
|
|
8,847 |
|
|
|
10,463 |
|
|
|
11,356 |
|
|
|
11,842 |
|
|
|
12,303 |
|
Securities gains (losses) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(296 |
) |
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
38,247 |
|
|
|
33,843 |
|
|
|
32,552 |
|
|
|
28,784 |
|
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
236,945 |
|
|
|
264,220 |
|
|
|
267,143 |
|
|
|
269,643 |
|
|
|
240,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
|
219,028 |
|
|
|
212,184 |
|
|
|
208,272 |
|
|
|
194,875 |
|
|
|
183,642 |
|
Outside data processing and other services |
|
|
40,282 |
|
|
|
40,943 |
|
|
|
38,553 |
|
|
|
40,670 |
|
|
|
39,082 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
28,436 |
|
|
|
26,670 |
|
|
|
26,718 |
|
|
|
25,388 |
|
|
|
29,086 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
17,896 |
|
|
|
23,320 |
|
|
|
23,406 |
|
|
|
26,067 |
|
|
|
24,755 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
13,465 |
|
|
|
21,021 |
|
|
|
20,672 |
|
|
|
24,388 |
|
|
|
22,697 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
22,477 |
|
|
|
22,060 |
|
|
|
21,651 |
|
|
|
21,585 |
|
|
|
20,624 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
16,895 |
|
|
|
16,168 |
|
|
|
20,921 |
|
|
|
17,682 |
|
|
|
11,153 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
13,370 |
|
|
|
15,046 |
|
|
|
15,145 |
|
|
|
15,141 |
|
|
|
15,146 |
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
3,931 |
|
|
|
10,502 |
|
|
|
12,047 |
|
|
|
4,970 |
|
|
|
11,530 |
|
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
8,142 |
|
|
|
9,159 |
|
|
|
9,667 |
|
|
|
10,066 |
|
Other expense |
|
|
48,083 |
|
|
|
38,537 |
|
|
|
30,765 |
|
|
|
33,377 |
|
|
|
30,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
430,699 |
|
|
|
434,593 |
|
|
|
427,309 |
|
|
|
413,810 |
|
|
|
398,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
161,191 |
|
|
|
157,948 |
|
|
|
130,636 |
|
|
|
62,083 |
|
|
|
1,644 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
|
|
34,745 |
|
|
|
35,048 |
|
|
|
29,690 |
|
|
|
13,319 |
|
|
|
(38,093 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
126,446 |
|
|
$ |
122,900 |
|
|
$ |
100,946 |
|
|
$ |
48,764 |
|
|
$ |
39,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on preferred shares |
|
|
7,703 |
|
|
|
83,754 |
|
|
|
29,495 |
|
|
|
29,426 |
|
|
|
29,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to common shares |
|
$ |
118,743 |
|
|
$ |
39,146 |
|
|
$ |
71,451 |
|
|
$ |
19,338 |
|
|
$ |
10,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average common shares basic |
|
|
863,359 |
|
|
|
757,924 |
|
|
|
716,911 |
|
|
|
716,580 |
|
|
|
716,320 |
|
Average common shares diluted(2) |
|
|
867,237 |
|
|
|
760,582 |
|
|
|
719,567 |
|
|
|
719,387 |
|
|
|
718,593 |
|
Net income per common share basic |
|
$ |
0.14 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
Net income per common share diluted |
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.05 |
|
|
|
0.10 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
Return on average total assets |
|
|
0.96 |
% |
|
|
0.90 |
% |
|
|
0.76 |
% |
|
|
0.38 |
% |
|
|
0.31 |
% |
Return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Return on average common tangible shareholders equity(3) |
|
|
12.7 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
Net interest margin(4) |
|
|
3.42 |
|
|
|
3.37 |
|
|
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
3.46 |
|
|
|
3.47 |
|
Efficiency ratio(5) |
|
|
64.7 |
|
|
|
61.4 |
|
|
|
60.6 |
|
|
|
59.4 |
|
|
|
60.1 |
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
21.6 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
|
|
|
22.7 |
|
|
|
21.5 |
|
|
|
(2,317.1 |
) |
Revenue FTE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
404,330 |
|
|
$ |
415,294 |
|
|
$ |
409,962 |
|
|
$ |
399,656 |
|
|
$ |
393,893 |
|
FTE adjustment |
|
|
3,945 |
|
|
|
3,708 |
|
|
|
2,631 |
|
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income(4) |
|
|
408,275 |
|
|
|
419,002 |
|
|
|
412,593 |
|
|
|
402,146 |
|
|
|
396,141 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
236,945 |
|
|
|
264,220 |
|
|
|
267,143 |
|
|
|
269,643 |
|
|
|
240,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue(4) |
|
$ |
645,220 |
|
|
$ |
683,222 |
|
|
$ |
679,736 |
|
|
$ |
671,789 |
|
|
$ |
636,993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Comparisons for presented periods are impacted by a number of factors. Refer
to Significant Items for additional discussion regarding these key factors. |
10
|
|
|
(2) |
|
For all periods presented, the impact of the convertible preferred stock issued in
2008 and the warrants issued to the U.S. Department of the Treasury in 2008 related to Huntingtons
participation in the voluntary Capital Purchase Program was excluded
from the diluted share calculation because the result was more than basic earnings per common share
(anti-dilutive) for the periods. The convertible preferred stock and warrants were repurchased in
December 2010, and January 2011, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
Net income 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. |
|
(4) |
|
On a fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) basis assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(5) |
|
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). |
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. 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, litigation actions, 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 provides a better understanding of 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.
Significant Items Influencing Financial Performance Comparisons
Earnings comparisons were impacted by the Significant Items summarized below.
|
1. |
|
Litigation Reserve. During the 2011 first quarter, $17.0 million of additions to
litigation reserves were recorded as other noninterest expense. This resulted in a negative
impact of $0.01 per common share. |
|
2. |
|
TARP Capital Purchase Program Repurchase. During the 2010 fourth quarter, we issued $920.0
million of our common stock and $300.0 million of subordinated debt. The net proceeds, along
with other available funds, were used to repurchase all $1.4 billion of TARP capital that we
issued to the Treasury under its TARP CPP in 2008. As part of this transaction, there was a
deemed dividend that did not impact net income, but resulted in a negative impact of $0.07
per common share for the 2010 fourth quarter. |
|
3. |
|
Franklin Relationship. Our relationship with Franklin was acquired in the Sky Financial
acquisition in 2007. On March 31, 2009, we restructured our relationship with Franklin.
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 March 31, 2009 restructuring. |
11
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
EPS |
|
Net income GAAP |
|
$ |
126,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
122,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
39,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share, after-tax |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
Change from prior quarter $ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.57 |
|
Change from prior quarter % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
180.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.R. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from year-ago $ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6.80 |
|
Change from year-ago % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,300 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
109 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.R. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant Items - favorable (unfavorable) impact: |
|
Earnings (1) |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
Earnings (1) |
|
|
EPS |
|
|
Earnings (1) |
|
|
EPS |
|
Net tax benefit recognized (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,222 |
|
|
|
0.05 |
|
Litigation reserves addition |
|
|
(17,028 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock conversion
deemed dividend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.07 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.R. not relevant. The numerator of the calculation is a positive value and the dominator is a negative value. |
|
(1) |
|
Pretax unless otherwise noted. |
|
(2) |
|
After-tax. |
Pretax, Pre-provision Income Trends
One non-GAAP performance measurement that we believe is useful in analyzing our underlying
performance trends is pretax, pre-provision income. This is the level of pretax earnings adjusted
to exclude the impact of: (a) provision expense, (b) investment securities gains/losses, which are
excluded because securities market valuations may 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 we use to gauge performance trends, and (d) certain other items
identified by us (see Significant Items) that we believe may distort our underlying performance
trends.
The following table reflects pretax, pre-provision income for each of the past five quarters:
Table 3 Pretax, Pre-provision Income (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
$ |
161,191 |
|
|
$ |
157,948 |
|
|
$ |
130,636 |
|
|
$ |
62,083 |
|
|
$ |
1,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add: Provision for credit losses |
|
|
49,385 |
|
|
|
86,973 |
|
|
|
119,160 |
|
|
|
193,406 |
|
|
|
235,008 |
|
Less: Securities gains (losses) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(296 |
) |
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
Add: Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
13,370 |
|
|
|
15,046 |
|
|
|
15,145 |
|
|
|
15,141 |
|
|
|
15,146 |
|
Less: Litigation reserves addition |
|
|
(17,028 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total pretax, pre-provision income |
|
$ |
240,934 |
|
|
$ |
260,070 |
|
|
$ |
265,237 |
|
|
$ |
270,474 |
|
|
$ |
251,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in total pretax, pre-provision income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior quarter change amount |
|
$ |
(19,136 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,167 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,237 |
) |
|
$ |
18,645 |
|
|
$ |
9,768 |
|
Prior quarter change percent |
|
|
(7 |
)% |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
(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 an important metric with which to analyze and evaluate our results of operations and financial strength. Other companies may calculate this
financial measure differently. |
12
Pretax, pre-provision income was $240.9 million in the 2011 first quarter, down $19.1
million, or 7%, from the prior quarter. From a run-rate basis, the decline reflected:
|
|
|
$8.8 million seasonal reduction in revenue as the current quarter had fewer days than
the prior quarter. This included a $7.0 million reduction in net interest income and a
$1.8 million reduction in service charge and electronic banking income. |
|
|
|
$6.9 million seasonal increase in noninterest expense, primarily associated with the
annual reset of FICA and other payroll taxes. |
Net Interest Income / Average Balance Sheet
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 First Quarter
Fully-taxable equivalent net interest income increased $12.1 million, or 3%, from the year-ago
quarter. This reflected the benefit of a $2.1 billion, or 5%, increase in average earning assets.
The FTE net interest margin declined to 3.42% from 3.47%. The increase in average earning assets
reflected a combination of factors including:
|
|
|
$1.1 billion, or 3%, increase in average total loans and leases. |
|
|
|
$1.1 billion, or 13%, increase in average total available-for-sale and other securities,
reflecting the deployment of cash from core deposit growth. |
The 5 basis point decline in the FTE net interest margin reflected the impact of stronger
deposit growth funding available-for-sale and other securities purchases at a lower incremental
spread.
The following table details the change in our average loans and leases and deposits:
Table 4 Average Loans/Leases and Deposits 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Loans/Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
13,121 |
|
|
$ |
12,314 |
|
|
$ |
807 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
6,524 |
|
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
(1,153 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,645 |
|
|
|
19,991 |
|
|
|
(346 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Automobile |
|
|
5,701 |
|
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
1,451 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,728 |
|
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,465 |
|
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other loans |
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
(164 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
18,453 |
|
|
|
16,989 |
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
38,098 |
|
|
$ |
36,980 |
|
|
$ |
1,118 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
7,333 |
|
|
$ |
6,627 |
|
|
$ |
706 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,357 |
|
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Money market deposits |
|
|
13,492 |
|
|
|
10,340 |
|
|
|
3,152 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Savings and other domestic time
deposits |
|
|
4,701 |
|
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
8,391 |
|
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
(1,585 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
39,274 |
|
|
|
37,272 |
|
|
|
2,002 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
2,390 |
|
|
|
2,951 |
|
|
|
(561 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
41,664 |
|
|
$ |
40,223 |
|
|
$ |
1,441 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $1.1 billion, or 3%, increase in average total loans and leases primarily reflected:
|
|
|
$1.5 billion, or 34%, increase in the average automobile portfolio. Automobile lending
is a core competency and continued to be an area of growth. The growth from the year-ago
quarter exhibited further penetration within our historical geographic footprint, as well
as the positive impact of our expansion into Eastern Pennsylvania and five New England
states. Origination quality remained high. |
|
|
|
$0.8 billion, or 7%, increase in the average C&I portfolio. Growth from the year-ago
quarter reflected the benefits from our strategic initiatives including large corporate,
asset based lending, and equipment finance. In addition, we continued to see growth in
automobile floor plan lending as well as more traditional middle-market loans. This growth
is evident despite line-of-credit utilization rates that remain well below historical
norms. |
|
|
|
$0.2 billion, or 3%, increase in the average home equity portfolio, reflecting higher
originations and continued slower runoff. |
13
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$1.2 billion, or 15%, decrease in average CRE loans reflecting the continued execution
of our plan to reduce CRE exposure, primarily in the noncore CRE segment. This reduction
will continue through 2011, reflecting normal amortization,
paydowns, and refinancing. |
Average total deposits increased $1.4 billion, or 4%, from the year-ago quarter reflecting:
|
|
|
$2.0 billion, or 5%, growth in average total core deposits. The drivers of this change
were a $3.2 billion, or 30%, growth in average money market deposits, and a $0.7 billion,
or 11%, growth in average noninterest-bearing demand deposits. These increases were
partially offset by a $1.6 billion, or 16%, decline in average core certificates of deposit
and a $0.4 billion, or 6%, decrease in average interest-bearing demand deposits.
Contributing to the growth in noninterest-bearing demand deposits was 7% growth in the
number of retail banking DDA households. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.4 billion, or 23%, decline in average brokered deposits and negotiable CDs,
reflecting a strategy of reducing such noncore funding. |
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 Fourth Quarter
FTE net interest income decreased $10.7 million, or 3%, from the 2010 fourth quarter. This
reflected a 2% (8% annualized) decrease in average earning assets as the FTE net interest margin
increased to 3.42% from 3.37%. The decrease in average earning assets reflected a combination of
factors including:
|
|
|
$0.6 billion, or 6% (25% annualized), decrease in average available-for-sale and other
securities, primarily related to two funding requirements. The first was to fund the
repurchase of TARP capital and related warrants and the second was the $0.4 billion decline
in noncore deposits. |
|
|
|
$0.4 billion, or 46%, decline in loans held for sale as our mortgage pipeline slowed
considerably during the current quarter. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.3 billion, or 1% (3% annualized), increase in average total loans and leases. |
The net interest margin increased 5 basis points, reflecting the positive impacts of increases
in lower cost deposits, improved deposit pricing, and day count, partially offset by the negative
impacts of a reduction in swap income, lower loan yields, and the issuance of subordinated debt.
14
The following table details the change in our average loans / leases and deposits:
Table 5 Average Loans/Leases and Deposits 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Loans/Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
13,121 |
|
|
$ |
12,767 |
|
|
$ |
354 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
6,524 |
|
|
|
6,798 |
|
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,645 |
|
|
|
19,565 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
5,701 |
|
|
|
5,520 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,728 |
|
|
|
7,709 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,465 |
|
|
|
4,430 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
18,453 |
|
|
|
18,235 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
38,098 |
|
|
$ |
37,800 |
|
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
7,333 |
|
|
$ |
7,188 |
|
|
$ |
145 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,357 |
|
|
|
5,317 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
13,492 |
|
|
|
13,158 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Savings and other domestic time
deposits |
|
|
4,701 |
|
|
|
4,640 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
8,391 |
|
|
|
8,646 |
|
|
|
(255 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
39,274 |
|
|
|
38,949 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
2,390 |
|
|
|
2,755 |
|
|
|
(365 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
41,664 |
|
|
$ |
41,704 |
|
|
$ |
(40 |
) |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $0.3 billion, or 1% (3% annualized), increase in average total loans and leases primarily
reflected:
|
|
|
$0.4 billion, or 3% (11% annualized), growth in the average C&I portfolio. The growth
in the C&I portfolio during the 2011 first quarter came from several business lines
including large corporate, middle market, asset based lending, automobile floor plan
lending, and equipment finance. On a geographic basis, nine of our eleven regions
experienced loan growth in the quarter, adding to the diversity of the portfolio growth.
Line-of-credit utilization rates remained low and little changed from the end of the prior
quarter. |
|
|
|
$0.2 billion, or 3% (13% annualized), growth in the average automobile portfolio. We
continue to originate high quality loans with acceptable returns. To date, we have seen no
material change in our outlook for automobile originations as a result of the crisis in
Japan. While the crisis in Japan has resulted in a selective slowdown in automobile
production, we currently do not see this having a material negative impact on our
automobile finance business. We focus on larger, multi-franchised, well-capitalized
dealers that are rarely reliant on the success of one franchise to generate profitability.
In addition, the slowdown is only impacting new automobile production, which is providing
support to used automobile pricing and sales activity. More than half of our loan
production represents used automobile financing. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.3 billion, or 4% (16% annualized), decline in average CRE loans, primarily as a
result of our ongoing strategy to reduce our exposure to the commercial real estate market.
The decline in noncore CRE accounted for 63% of the decline in the total CRE portfolio.
The noncore CRE declines reflected paydowns, refinancing, and NCOs. The core CRE portfolio
continued to exhibit high quality characteristics with minimal downgrade or NCO activity. |
Average total deposits were little changed from the prior quarter reflecting:
|
|
|
$0.3 billion, or 1% (3% annualized), growth in average total core deposits. The primary
drivers of this growth were a 3% (10% annualized) increase in average money market
deposits, partially reflecting funds from maturing CDs flowing into money market accounts
given the low absolute level of rates on new CD offerings. The growth in average total
core deposits also reflected 2% (8% annualized) growth in average noninterest-bearing
demand deposits. Contributing to the growth in noninterest-bearing demand deposits was a
9% annualized prior quarter growth in consumer checking account households. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$0.2 billion, or 10% (42% annualized), decline in average brokered deposits and
negotiable CDs, reflecting a strategy of reducing such noncore funding. |
15
Tables 6 and 7 reflect quarterly average balance sheets and rates earned and paid on
interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.
Table 6 Consolidated Quarterly Average Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
1Q11 vs. 1Q10 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits in banks |
|
$ |
130 |
|
|
$ |
218 |
|
|
$ |
282 |
|
|
$ |
309 |
|
|
$ |
348 |
|
|
$ |
(218 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
)% |
Trading account securities |
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
779 |
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Available-for-sale and other securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
9,108 |
|
|
|
9,747 |
|
|
|
8,876 |
|
|
|
8,369 |
|
|
|
8,027 |
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Tax-exempt |
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available-for-sale and other securities |
|
|
9,553 |
|
|
|
10,196 |
|
|
|
9,241 |
|
|
|
8,758 |
|
|
|
8,470 |
|
|
|
1,083 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Loans and leases: (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
13,121 |
|
|
|
12,767 |
|
|
|
12,393 |
|
|
|
12,244 |
|
|
|
12,314 |
|
|
|
807 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
1,279 |
|
|
|
1,409 |
|
|
|
(798 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
Commercial |
|
|
5,913 |
|
|
|
6,082 |
|
|
|
6,084 |
|
|
|
6,085 |
|
|
|
6,268 |
|
|
|
(355 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
6,524 |
|
|
|
6,798 |
|
|
|
7,073 |
|
|
|
7,364 |
|
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
(1,153 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,645 |
|
|
|
19,565 |
|
|
|
19,466 |
|
|
|
19,608 |
|
|
|
19,991 |
|
|
|
(346 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
5,701 |
|
|
|
5,520 |
|
|
|
5,140 |
|
|
|
4,634 |
|
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
1,451 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,728 |
|
|
|
7,709 |
|
|
|
7,567 |
|
|
|
7,544 |
|
|
|
7,539 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,465 |
|
|
|
4,430 |
|
|
|
4,389 |
|
|
|
4,608 |
|
|
|
4,477 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other consumer |
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
(164 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
18,453 |
|
|
|
18,235 |
|
|
|
17,749 |
|
|
|
17,481 |
|
|
|
16,989 |
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
38,098 |
|
|
|
37,800 |
|
|
|
37,215 |
|
|
|
37,089 |
|
|
|
36,980 |
|
|
|
1,118 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(1,231 |
) |
|
|
(1,323 |
) |
|
|
(1,384 |
) |
|
|
(1,506 |
) |
|
|
(1,510 |
) |
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans and leases |
|
|
36,867 |
|
|
|
36,477 |
|
|
|
35,831 |
|
|
|
35,583 |
|
|
|
35,470 |
|
|
|
1,397 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
48,345 |
|
|
|
49,290 |
|
|
|
47,511 |
|
|
|
46,606 |
|
|
|
46,240 |
|
|
|
2,105 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
|
1,299 |
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
1,618 |
|
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
1,761 |
|
|
|
(462 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
Intangible assets |
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
All other assets |
|
|
4,291 |
|
|
|
4,313 |
|
|
|
4,277 |
|
|
|
4,384 |
|
|
|
4,486 |
|
|
|
(195 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
53,369 |
|
|
$ |
54,146 |
|
|
$ |
52,717 |
|
|
$ |
51,703 |
|
|
$ |
51,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,667 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
7,333 |
|
|
$ |
7,188 |
|
|
$ |
6,768 |
|
|
$ |
6,849 |
|
|
$ |
6,627 |
|
|
$ |
706 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,357 |
|
|
|
5,317 |
|
|
|
5,319 |
|
|
|
5,971 |
|
|
|
5,716 |
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Money market deposits |
|
|
13,492 |
|
|
|
13,158 |
|
|
|
12,336 |
|
|
|
11,103 |
|
|
|
10,340 |
|
|
|
3,152 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Savings and other domestic deposits |
|
|
4,701 |
|
|
|
4,640 |
|
|
|
4,639 |
|
|
|
4,677 |
|
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
8,391 |
|
|
|
8,646 |
|
|
|
8,948 |
|
|
|
9,199 |
|
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
(1,585 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
39,274 |
|
|
|
38,949 |
|
|
|
38,010 |
|
|
|
37,799 |
|
|
|
37,272 |
|
|
|
2,002 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
690 |
|
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
Brokered deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
1,410 |
|
|
|
1,575 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,505 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
(433 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
374 |
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
402 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
41,664 |
|
|
|
41,704 |
|
|
|
40,646 |
|
|
|
40,367 |
|
|
|
40,223 |
|
|
|
1,441 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
2,134 |
|
|
|
2,134 |
|
|
|
1,739 |
|
|
|
966 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
) |
Subordinated notes and other long-term debt |
|
|
3,525 |
|
|
|
3,558 |
|
|
|
3,672 |
|
|
|
3,836 |
|
|
|
4,062 |
|
|
|
(537 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
40,020 |
|
|
|
40,320 |
|
|
|
39,477 |
|
|
|
38,532 |
|
|
|
38,764 |
|
|
|
1,256 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other liabilities |
|
|
994 |
|
|
|
993 |
|
|
|
952 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
5,022 |
|
|
|
5,645 |
|
|
|
5,520 |
|
|
|
5,398 |
|
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
(342 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
53,369 |
|
|
$ |
54,146 |
|
|
$ |
52,717 |
|
|
$ |
51,703 |
|
|
$ |
51,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,667 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For purposes of this analysis, NALs are reflected in the average balances of loans. |
16
Table 7 Consolidated Quarterly Net Interest Margin Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Rates (2) |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Fully-taxable equivalent basis (1) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits in banks |
|
|
0.11 |
% |
|
|
0.63 |
% |
|
|
0.21 |
% |
|
|
0.20 |
% |
|
|
0.18 |
% |
Trading account securities |
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
1.74 |
|
|
|
2.15 |
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
4.08 |
|
|
|
4.01 |
|
|
|
5.75 |
|
|
|
5.02 |
|
|
|
4.98 |
|
Available-for-sale and other securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
2.53 |
|
|
|
2.42 |
|
|
|
2.77 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
|
Tax-exempt |
|
|
4.70 |
|
|
|
4.59 |
|
|
|
4.70 |
|
|
|
4.62 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available-for-sale and other securities |
|
|
2.63 |
|
|
|
2.52 |
|
|
|
2.84 |
|
|
|
2.93 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
|
Loans and leases: (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
4.57 |
|
|
|
4.94 |
|
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
5.31 |
|
|
|
5.60 |
|
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
3.36 |
|
|
|
3.07 |
|
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
2.61 |
|
|
|
2.66 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
3.93 |
|
|
|
3.92 |
|
|
|
3.91 |
|
|
|
3.69 |
|
|
|
3.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
3.88 |
|
|
|
3.83 |
|
|
|
3.76 |
|
|
|
3.49 |
|
|
|
3.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
4.34 |
|
|
|
4.56 |
|
|
|
4.64 |
|
|
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
4.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
5.22 |
|
|
|
5.46 |
|
|
|
5.79 |
|
|
|
6.46 |
|
|
|
6.63 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
4.54 |
|
|
|
4.64 |
|
|
|
4.74 |
|
|
|
5.26 |
|
|
|
5.59 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4.76 |
|
|
|
4.82 |
|
|
|
4.97 |
|
|
|
4.70 |
|
|
|
4.89 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
7.85 |
|
|
|
7.92 |
|
|
|
7.10 |
|
|
|
6.84 |
|
|
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
4.90 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
5.19 |
|
|
|
5.49 |
|
|
|
5.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
4.61 |
|
|
|
4.79 |
|
|
|
4.90 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
5.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
4.24 |
% |
|
|
4.29 |
% |
|
|
4.49 |
% |
|
|
4.63 |
% |
|
|
4.82 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits noninterest-bearing |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
0.13 |
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
0.50 |
|
|
|
0.77 |
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
|
|
|
1.00 |
|
Savings and other domestic deposits |
|
|
0.81 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
0.99 |
|
|
|
1.07 |
|
|
|
1.19 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
2.07 |
|
|
|
2.11 |
|
|
|
2.31 |
|
|
|
2.68 |
|
|
|
2.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
1.05 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
1.33 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more |
|
|
1.08 |
|
|
|
1.21 |
|
|
|
1.28 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
|
Brokered deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
1.11 |
|
|
|
1.53 |
|
|
|
2.21 |
|
|
|
2.56 |
|
|
|
2.49 |
|
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
0.20 |
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
1.06 |
|
|
|
1.21 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.55 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
2.98 |
|
|
|
0.95 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
1.93 |
|
|
|
2.71 |
|
Subordinated notes and other long-term debt |
|
|
2.34 |
|
|
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
0.99 |
% |
|
|
1.11 |
% |
|
|
1.25 |
% |
|
|
1.41 |
% |
|
|
1.60 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest rate spread |
|
|
3.21 |
% |
|
|
3.16 |
% |
|
|
3.24 |
% |
|
|
3.22 |
% |
|
|
3.22 |
% |
Impact of noninterest-bearing funds on margin |
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
0.24 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
3.42 |
% |
|
|
3.37 |
% |
|
|
3.45 |
% |
|
|
3.46 |
% |
|
|
3.47 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
FTE yields are calculated assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(2) |
|
Loan and lease and deposit average rates include impact of applicable derivatives, non-deferrable fees, and amortized deferred fees. |
|
(3) |
|
For purposes of this analysis, NALs are reflected in the average balances of loans. |
17
Provision for Credit Losses
(This section should be read in conjunction with 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 2011 first quarter was $49.4 million, down $37.6
million, or 43%, from the prior quarter and down $185.6 million, or 79%, from the year-ago quarter.
Reflecting the resolution of problem credits for which reserves had previously been established,
the current quarters provision for credit losses was $115.7 million less than total NCOs (see
Credit Quality discussion).
Noninterest Income
The following table reflects noninterest income for each of the past five quarters:
Table 8 Noninterest Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
$ |
54,324 |
|
|
$ |
55,810 |
|
|
$ |
65,932 |
|
|
$ |
75,934 |
|
|
$ |
69,339 |
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
22,684 |
|
|
|
53,169 |
|
|
|
52,045 |
|
|
|
45,530 |
|
|
|
25,038 |
|
Trust services income |
|
|
30,742 |
|
|
|
29,394 |
|
|
|
26,997 |
|
|
|
28,399 |
|
|
|
27,765 |
|
Electronic banking income |
|
|
28,786 |
|
|
|
28,900 |
|
|
|
28,090 |
|
|
|
28,107 |
|
|
|
25,137 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
17,945 |
|
|
|
19,678 |
|
|
|
19,801 |
|
|
|
18,074 |
|
|
|
18,860 |
|
Brokerage income |
|
|
20,511 |
|
|
|
16,953 |
|
|
|
16,575 |
|
|
|
18,425 |
|
|
|
16,902 |
|
Bank owned life insurance income |
|
|
14,819 |
|
|
|
16,113 |
|
|
|
14,091 |
|
|
|
14,392 |
|
|
|
16,470 |
|
Automobile operating lease income |
|
|
8,847 |
|
|
|
10,463 |
|
|
|
11,356 |
|
|
|
11,842 |
|
|
|
12,303 |
|
Securities gains (losses) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(296 |
) |
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
38,247 |
|
|
|
33,843 |
|
|
|
32,552 |
|
|
|
28,784 |
|
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
236,945 |
|
|
$ |
264,220 |
|
|
$ |
267,143 |
|
|
$ |
269,643 |
|
|
$ |
240,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
The following table details mortgage banking income and the net impact of MSR hedging
activity for each of the past five quarters:
Table 9 Mortgage Banking Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands, except as noted) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Mortgage Banking Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Origination and secondary marketing |
|
$ |
19,799 |
|
|
$ |
48,236 |
|
|
$ |
35,840 |
|
|
$ |
19,778 |
|
|
$ |
13,586 |
|
Servicing fees |
|
|
12,546 |
|
|
|
11,474 |
|
|
|
12,053 |
|
|
|
12,178 |
|
|
|
12,418 |
|
Amortization of capitalized servicing |
|
|
(9,863 |
) |
|
|
(13,960 |
) |
|
|
(13,003 |
) |
|
|
(10,137 |
) |
|
|
(10,065 |
) |
Other mortgage banking income |
|
|
3,769 |
|
|
|
4,789 |
|
|
|
4,966 |
|
|
|
3,664 |
|
|
|
3,210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-total |
|
|
26,251 |
|
|
|
50,539 |
|
|
|
39,856 |
|
|
|
25,483 |
|
|
|
19,149 |
|
MSR valuation adjustment(1) |
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
31,319 |
|
|
|
(12,047 |
) |
|
|
(26,221 |
) |
|
|
(5,772 |
) |
Net trading (losses) gains related to MSR hedging |
|
|
(4,341 |
) |
|
|
(28,689 |
) |
|
|
24,236 |
|
|
|
46,268 |
|
|
|
11,661 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage banking income |
|
$ |
22,684 |
|
|
$ |
53,169 |
|
|
$ |
52,045 |
|
|
$ |
45,530 |
|
|
$ |
25,038 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage originations (in millions) |
|
$ |
929 |
|
|
$ |
1,827 |
|
|
$ |
1,619 |
|
|
$ |
1,161 |
|
|
$ |
869 |
|
Average trading account securities used to hedge
MSRs (in millions) |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Capitalized mortgage servicing rights(2) |
|
|
202,559 |
|
|
|
196,194 |
|
|
|
161,594 |
|
|
|
179,138 |
|
|
|
207,552 |
|
Total mortgages serviced for others (in millions)(2) |
|
|
16,456 |
|
|
|
15,933 |
|
|
|
15,713 |
|
|
|
15,954 |
|
|
|
15,968 |
|
MSR % of investor servicing portfolio |
|
|
1.23 |
% |
|
|
1.23 |
% |
|
|
1.03 |
% |
|
|
1.12 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Impact of MSR Hedging |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MSR valuation adjustment(1) |
|
$ |
774 |
|
|
$ |
31,319 |
|
|
$ |
(12,047 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,221 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,772 |
) |
Net trading (losses) gains related to MSR
hedging |
|
|
(4,341 |
) |
|
|
(28,689 |
) |
|
|
24,236 |
|
|
|
46,268 |
|
|
|
11,661 |
|
Net interest income related to MSR hedging |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
713 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) gain of MSR hedging |
|
$ |
(3,468 |
) |
|
$ |
3,343 |
|
|
$ |
12,221 |
|
|
$ |
20,105 |
|
|
$ |
6,058 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The change in fair value for the period represents the MSR valuation adjustment, net of amortization of capitalized servicing. |
|
(2) |
|
At period end. |
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 First Quarter
Noninterest income decreased $3.9 million, or 2%, from the year-ago quarter.
Table 10 Noninterest Income 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
Service charges on
deposit accounts |
|
$ |
54,324 |
|
|
$ |
69,339 |
|
|
$ |
(15,015 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
)% |
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
22,684 |
|
|
|
25,038 |
|
|
|
(2,354 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Trust services income |
|
|
30,742 |
|
|
|
27,765 |
|
|
|
2,977 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Electronic banking income |
|
|
28,786 |
|
|
|
25,137 |
|
|
|
3,649 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
17,945 |
|
|
|
18,860 |
|
|
|
(915 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Brokerage income |
|
|
20,511 |
|
|
|
16,902 |
|
|
|
3,609 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Bank owned life
insurance income |
|
|
14,819 |
|
|
|
16,470 |
|
|
|
(1,651 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Automobile operating
lease income |
|
|
8,847 |
|
|
|
12,303 |
|
|
|
(3,456 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
Securities gains (losses) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
N.R. |
|
Other income |
|
|
38,247 |
|
|
|
29,069 |
|
|
|
9,178 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
236,945 |
|
|
$ |
240,852 |
|
|
$ |
(3,907 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.R. Not relevant, as denominator of calculation is a loss in prior period compared with income in current period. |
19
The $3.9 million, or 2%, decrease in total noninterest income from the year-ago quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$15.0 million, or 22%, decline in service charges on deposit accounts, reflecting lower
consumer service charges due to a combination of factors including the implementation of
the amendment to Reg E, our Fair Play banking philosophy, and lower underlying activity
levels. |
|
|
|
$3.5 million, or 28%, decline in automobile operating lease income reflecting the impact
of a declining portfolio as a result of having exited that business in 2008. |
|
|
|
$2.4 million, or 9%, decrease in mortgage banking income. This primarily reflected a
$9.5 million reduction in MSR net hedging income (losses), as the current quarter reflected
a $3.6 million net loss, partially offset by a $6.2 million, or 46%, increase in
origination and secondary marketing income, as originations increased 7% from the year-ago
quarter. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$9.2 million, or 32%, increase in other income, of which $7.5 million was associated
with increased gains from the sale of SBA loans. Also contributing to the growth were
increases from capital market activities and the sale of interest rate protection products. |
|
|
|
$3.6 million, or 15%, increase in electronic banking income, reflecting an increase in
debit card transaction volume and new account growth. |
|
|
|
$3.6 million, or 21%, increase in brokerage income, primarily reflecting increased sales
of investment products. |
|
|
|
$3.0 million, or 11%, increase in trust services income, reflecting increases in asset
market values, net growth in accounts, and higher fees for income tax preparation. |
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 Fourth Quarter
Noninterest income decreased $27.3 million, or 10%, from the prior quarter.
Table 11 Noninterest Income 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
Service charges on
deposit accounts |
|
$ |
54,324 |
|
|
$ |
55,810 |
|
|
$ |
(1,486 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
22,684 |
|
|
|
53,169 |
|
|
|
(30,485 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
Trust services income |
|
|
30,742 |
|
|
|
29,394 |
|
|
|
1,348 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Electronic banking income |
|
|
28,786 |
|
|
|
28,900 |
|
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Insurance income |
|
|
17,945 |
|
|
|
19,678 |
|
|
|
(1,733 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Brokerage income |
|
|
20,511 |
|
|
|
16,953 |
|
|
|
3,558 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Bank owned life
insurance income |
|
|
14,819 |
|
|
|
16,113 |
|
|
|
(1,294 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Automobile operating
lease income |
|
|
8,847 |
|
|
|
10,463 |
|
|
|
(1,616 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Securities gains (losses) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
N.R. |
|
Other income |
|
|
38,247 |
|
|
|
33,843 |
|
|
|
4,404 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
236,945 |
|
|
$ |
264,220 |
|
|
$ |
(27,275 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N.R. Not relevant, as denominator of calculation is a loss in prior period compared with income in current period. |
The $27.3 million, or 10%, decrease in total noninterest income from the prior quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$30.5 million, or 57%, decline in mortgage banking income. The decrease primarily
resulted from a $28.4 million, or 59%, reduction in origination and secondary marketing
income. Mortgage originations declined to $0.9 billion, or 49%, from $1.8 billion in the
prior quarter, reflecting a rise in mortgage interest rates late in the 2010 fourth
quarter, thus decreasing refinancing and purchase activity. The decline also reflected a
$6.2 million reduction associated with MSR hedging activities as the current quarter
reflected $3.6 million of MSR net hedging losses compared with $2.6 million of such gains
in the prior quarter. |
20
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$4.4 million, or 13%, growth in other income, reflecting a $4.8 million increase in
gains on the sale of SBA loans. |
|
|
|
$3.6 million, or 21%, growth in brokerage income, reflecting increased annuity sales. |
Noninterest Expense
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 1.)
The following table reflects noninterest expense for each of the past five quarters:
Table 12 Noninterest Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
219,028 |
|
|
$ |
212,184 |
|
|
$ |
208,272 |
|
|
$ |
194,875 |
|
|
$ |
183,642 |
|
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
40,282 |
|
|
|
40,943 |
|
|
|
38,553 |
|
|
|
40,670 |
|
|
|
39,082 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
28,436 |
|
|
|
26,670 |
|
|
|
26,718 |
|
|
|
25,388 |
|
|
|
29,086 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
17,896 |
|
|
|
23,320 |
|
|
|
23,406 |
|
|
|
26,067 |
|
|
|
24,755 |
|
Professional services |
|
|
13,465 |
|
|
|
21,021 |
|
|
|
20,672 |
|
|
|
24,388 |
|
|
|
22,697 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
22,477 |
|
|
|
22,060 |
|
|
|
21,651 |
|
|
|
21,585 |
|
|
|
20,624 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
16,895 |
|
|
|
16,168 |
|
|
|
20,921 |
|
|
|
17,682 |
|
|
|
11,153 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
13,370 |
|
|
|
15,046 |
|
|
|
15,145 |
|
|
|
15,141 |
|
|
|
15,146 |
|
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
3,931 |
|
|
|
10,502 |
|
|
|
12,047 |
|
|
|
4,970 |
|
|
|
11,530 |
|
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
8,142 |
|
|
|
9,159 |
|
|
|
9,667 |
|
|
|
10,066 |
|
Other expense |
|
|
48,083 |
|
|
|
38,537 |
|
|
|
30,765 |
|
|
|
33,377 |
|
|
|
30,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
430,699 |
|
|
$ |
434,593 |
|
|
$ |
427,309 |
|
|
$ |
413,810 |
|
|
$ |
398,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of employees (FTE), at period-end |
|
|
11,319 |
|
|
|
11,341 |
|
|
|
11,279 |
|
|
|
11,117 |
|
|
|
10,678 |
|
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 First Quarter
Noninterest expense increased $32.6 million, or 8%, from the year-ago quarter.
Table 13 Noninterest Expense 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 First Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
219,028 |
|
|
$ |
183,642 |
|
|
$ |
35,386 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
40,282 |
|
|
|
39,082 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Net occupancy |
|
|
28,436 |
|
|
|
29,086 |
|
|
|
(650 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
17,896 |
|
|
|
24,755 |
|
|
|
(6,859 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
Professional services |
|
|
13,465 |
|
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
(9,232 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
Equipment |
|
|
22,477 |
|
|
|
20,624 |
|
|
|
1,853 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
16,895 |
|
|
|
11,153 |
|
|
|
5,742 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
13,370 |
|
|
|
15,146 |
|
|
|
(1,776 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
3,931 |
|
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
(7,599 |
) |
|
|
(66 |
) |
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
10,066 |
|
|
|
(3,230 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
Other expense |
|
|
48,083 |
|
|
|
30,312 |
|
|
|
17,771 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
430,699 |
|
|
$ |
398,093 |
|
|
$ |
32,606 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of employees (FTE), at period-end |
|
|
11,319 |
|
|
|
10,678 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
21
The $32.6 million, or 8%, increase in total noninterest expense from the year-ago quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$35.4 million, or 19%, increase in personnel costs, primarily reflecting a 6% increase
in full-time equivalent staff in support of strategic initiatives, as well as higher
benefit related expenses, including the reinstatement of our 401(k) plan matching
contribution in the second quarter of last year. |
|
|
|
$17.8 million, or 59%, increase in other expense, primarily reflecting $17.0 million of
expense associated with additions to litigation reserves in the current quarter. |
|
|
|
$5.7 million, or 51%, increase in marketing expense, reflecting increases in branding
and product advertising activities in support of strategic initiatives. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$9.2 million, or 41%, decrease in professional services, reflecting a decline in costs
related to collection activities and consulting expenses. |
|
|
|
$7.6 million, or 66%, decline in OREO and foreclosure expense, reflecting a 64% decline
in OREO from the year-ago quarter. |
|
|
|
$6.9 million, or 28%, decline in deposit and other insurance expense. |
|
|
|
$3.2 million, or 32%, decline in automobile operating lease expense as that portfolio
continued to run-off. |
2011 First Quarter versus 2010 Fourth Quarter
Noninterest expense decreased $3.9 million, or 1%, from the prior quarter.
Table 14 Noninterest Expense 2011 First Quarter vs. 2010 Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First Quarter |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel costs |
|
$ |
219,028 |
|
|
$ |
212,184 |
|
|
$ |
6,844 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Outside data processing and other
services |
|
|
40,282 |
|
|
|
40,943 |
|
|
|
(661 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Net occupancy |
|
|
28,436 |
|
|
|
26,670 |
|
|
|
1,766 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Deposit and other insurance expense |
|
|
17,896 |
|
|
|
23,320 |
|
|
|
(5,424 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
Professional services |
|
|
13,465 |
|
|
|
21,021 |
|
|
|
(7,556 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
Equipment |
|
|
22,477 |
|
|
|
22,060 |
|
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
16,895 |
|
|
|
16,168 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
13,370 |
|
|
|
15,046 |
|
|
|
(1,676 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
OREO and foreclosure expense |
|
|
3,931 |
|
|
|
10,502 |
|
|
|
(6,571 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
Automobile operating lease expense |
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
8,142 |
|
|
|
(1,306 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Other expense |
|
|
48,083 |
|
|
|
38,537 |
|
|
|
9,546 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
430,699 |
|
|
$ |
434,593 |
|
|
$ |
(3,894 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of employees (FTE), at period-end |
|
|
11,319 |
|
|
|
11,341 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
% |
The $3.9 million, or 1%, decrease in total noninterest expense from the prior quarter
reflected:
|
|
|
$7.6 million, or 36%, decline in professional services, reflecting a decline in legal
costs related to collection activities and consulting expenses. |
|
|
|
$6.6 million, or 63%, decline in OREO and foreclosure expense as OREO balances declined
18% in the current quarter. |
|
|
|
$5.4 million, or 23%, decline in deposit and other insurance expense. |
Partially offset by:
|
|
|
$9.5 million, or 25%, increase in other expense. This reflected the current quarters
$17.0 million of expense associated with additions to litigation reserves, partially offset
by the benefit of declines in fraud losses, repurchase losses related to representations
and warranties made on mortgage loans sold, and travel expense. |
|
|
|
$6.8 million, or 3%, increase in personnel costs, primarily reflecting a seasonal $6.9
million increase in FICA and other employment taxes. |
22
Provision for Income Taxes
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 3.)
The provision for income taxes in the 2011 first quarter was $34.7 million. This compared with
a provision for income taxes of $35.0 million in the 2010 fourth quarter and a benefit for income
taxes of $38.1 million in the 2010 first quarter. All three quarters include the benefits from
tax-exempt income, tax-advantaged investments, and general business credits. At March 31, 2011, we
had a net deferred tax asset of $532.6 million. Based on both positive and negative evidence and
our level of forecasted future taxable
income, there was no impairment to the deferred tax asset at March 31, 2011. The total
disallowed deferred tax asset for regulatory capital purposes decreased to $89.9 million at March
31, 2011, from $161.3 million at December 31, 2010.
The IRS completed audits of our consolidated federal income tax returns for tax years through
2007. The IRS, various states, and other jurisdictions remain open to examination, including
Kentucky, Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Illinois. The IRS and the
Commonwealth of Kentucky have proposed adjustments to our previously filed tax returns. We believe
that our tax positions related to such proposed adjustments are correct and supported by applicable
statutes, regulations, and judicial authority, and intend to vigorously defend them. It is
possible 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 assurance can be given, we
believe the resolution of these examinations will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a
material adverse impact on our consolidated financial position.
23
RISK MANAGEMENT AND CAPITAL
Risk awareness, identification and assessment, reporting, and active management are key
elements in overall risk management. We manage risk to an aggregate moderate-to-low risk profile
strategy through a control framework and by monitoring and responding to potential risks. We
believe that our primary risk exposures are credit, market, liquidity, operational, and compliance
risk. We hold capital proportionately against these risks. More information on risk can be found
in the Risk Factors section included in Item 1A of our 2010 Form 10-K and subsequent filings with
the SEC. Additionally, the MD&A included in our 2010 Form 10-K should be read in conjunction with
this MD&A as this discussion provides only material updates to the 2010 Form 10-K. Our definition,
philosophy, and approach to risk management have not materially changed from the discussion
presented in the 2010 Form 10-K.
Credit Risk
Credit risk is the risk of financial loss if a counterparty is not able to meet the agreed
upon terms of the financial obligation. 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 significant credit risk associated with our available-for-sale and other investment
securities portfolio (see Investment Securities Portfolio discussion). While there is credit risk
associated with derivative activity, we believe this exposure is minimal. The significant change
in the economic conditions and the resulting changes in borrower behavior over the past several
years resulted in our focusing significant resources to the identification, monitoring, and
managing of our credit risk. In addition to the traditional credit risk mitigation strategies of
credit policies and processes, market risk management activities, and portfolio diversification, we
added more quantitative measurement capabilities utilizing external data sources, enhanced use of
modeling technology, and internal stress testing processes. Our portfolio management policies
demonstrate our commitment to maintaining an aggregate moderate-to-low risk profile. To that end,
we continue to expand resources in our credit risk management area.
Our portfolio has shown steadily improving credit quality trends across the entire loan and
lease portfolio despite the continued weakness in the residential real estate market and the U.S.
economy in general. Although NCOs and delinquencies remain elevated, the improving trend of our
credit metrics is significant and sustained. We believe that early identification of problem loans
and aggressive action plans for these problem loans, combined with high quality new loan
originations, will result in continuing improvement. However, despite the improvement in credit
metrics, additional risks emerged during the 2011 first quarter. These include the continued
instability in the Middle East with its ramifications on the cost of oil, and the crisis in Japan
that could negatively impact the production of consumer goods and services, most notably in the
automobile sector. In the short term, we anticipate the rising price of gasoline will have a
direct affect on the consumer confidence index, and will impact the finances of some of our retail
and commercial borrowers. The pronounced downturn in the residential real estate market that began
in early 2007 has resulted in significantly lower residential real estate values and higher
delinquencies and NCOs, including loans to builders and developers of residential real estate. In
addition, continued high unemployment, among other factors, has slowed any significant recovery. As
a result, we have experienced higher than historical levels of delinquencies and NCOs in our loan
portfolios since 2008. The value of our investment securities backed by residential and
commercial real estate was also negatively impacted by a lack of liquidity in the financial markets
and anticipated credit losses.
Loan and Lease Credit Exposure Mix
At March 31, 2011, our loans and leases totaled $38.2 billion, little changed compared to
$38.1 billion at December 31, 2010.
At March 31, 2011, commercial loans and leases totaled $19.6 billion, and represented 52% of
our total credit exposure. Our commercial portfolio is diversified along product type, size, and
geography within our footprint and is comprised of the following (see Commercial Credit
discussion):
C&I C&I loans and leases are made to commercial customers for use in normal business
operations to finance working capital needs, equipment purchases, or other projects. The majority
of these borrowers are customers doing business within our geographic regions. C&I loans and
leases are generally underwritten individually and 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 credit decision process, which focuses on cash flow from operations of the business
to repay the debt. The operation, sale, rental, or refinancing of the real estate is not
considered the primary repayment source for these types of loans. As we look to grow our C&I
portfolio, we have further developed our ABL capabilities by adding experienced ABL professionals
to take advantage of market opportunities resulting in better leveraging of the manufacturing base
in our primary markets. Also, our Equipment Finance area is targeting larger equipment financings
in the manufacturing sector in addition to our core products. We also added a large corporate
banking group with sufficient resources to ensure we appropriately recognize and manage the risks
associated with these types of lending.
24
CRE CRE loans consist of loans for income-producing real estate properties, real estate
investment trusts, 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 projected cash flow 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 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, and condominiums), office, and
warehouse product types. Generally, these loans are for construction projects that have been
presold or preleased, or have secured permanent financing, as well as loans to real estate
companies with significant equity invested in each project. These loans are underwritten and
managed by a specialized real estate lending group that actively monitors the construction phase
and manages the loan disbursements according to the predetermined construction schedule.
Total consumer loans and leases were $18.6 billion at March 31, 2011, and represented 48% of
our total loan and lease credit exposure. The consumer portfolio was primarily diversified among
home equity loans and lines-of-credit, residential mortgages, and automobile loans and leases (see
Consumer Credit discussion).
Automobile Automobile loans and leases are primarily comprised of loans made through
automotive dealerships and include exposure in selected states outside of our primary banking
markets. No state outside of our primary banking markets represented more than 5% of our total
automobile portfolio at March 31, 2011. Our automobile lease portfolio represents an immaterial
portion of the total portfolio as we exited the automobile leasing business during the 2008 fourth
quarter.
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- lien on the borrowers residence, allows
customers to borrow against the equity in their home. Given the current low interest rate
environment, many borrowers have utilized the line-of-credit home equity product as the primary
source of financing their home. As a result, the proportion of the home equity portfolio secured
by a first-lien has increased significantly in our portfolio over the past three years, positively
impacting the portfolios performance. We expect this positive impact to continue in the future.
Real estate market values at the time of origination directly affect the amount of credit extended
and, in the event of default, subsequent changes in these values impact the severity of losses. We
actively manage the extension of credit and the amount of credit extended through a combination of
criteria including debt-to-income policies and LTV policy limits.
Residential mortgage 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. Generally,
our practice is to sell a significant portion of our fixed-rate originations in the secondary
market. As such, the majority of the loans in our portfolio are ARMs. These ARMs primarily
consist of a fixed-rate of interest for the first 3 to 5 years, and then adjust annually. These
loans comprised approximately 56% of our total residential mortgage loan portfolio at March 31,
2011. We are subject to repurchase risk associated with residential mortgage loans sold in the
secondary market. This activity has increased recently reflecting the overall market conditions
and GSE activity and an appropriate level of allowance has been established to address the
repurchase risk inherent in the portfolio.
Other consumer This portfolio primarily consists of consumer loans not secured by real
estate or automobiles, including personal unsecured loans.
25
Table 15 Loan and Lease Portfolio Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
Commercial:(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
13,299 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
13,063 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
12,425 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
$ |
12,392 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
12,245 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
5,711 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
6,001 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6,174 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6,078 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6,013 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial real estate |
|
|
6,298 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
6,651 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
6,912 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
7,184 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
7,456 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
19,597 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
19,714 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
19,337 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
19,576 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
19,701 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
5,802 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,614 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,385 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
4,847 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4,403 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
7,784 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,713 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,690 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
7,510 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7,514 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
4,517 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,500 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,511 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,354 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,614 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
578 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
18,649 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
18,393 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
18,164 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
17,394 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
17,231 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
38,246 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
38,107 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,501 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,970 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,932 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
There were no commercial loans outstanding that would be considered a concentration of lending to a particular industry or group of industries. |
The table below provides our total loan and lease portfolio segregated by the type of
collateral securing the loan or lease:
Table 16 Loan and Lease Portfolio by Collateral Type
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
Real estate |
|
$ |
22,231 |
|
|
|
58 |
% |
|
$ |
22,603 |
|
|
|
59 |
% |
|
$ |
22,717 |
|
|
|
61 |
% |
|
$ |
22,666 |
|
|
|
61 |
% |
|
$ |
23,238 |
|
|
|
63 |
% |
Vehicles |
|
|
7,333 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
7,134 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
6,652 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
6,054 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5,583 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Receivables/Inventory |
|
|
3,819 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3,763 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3,524 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3,511 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3,503 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Machinery/Equipment |
|
|
1,787 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,766 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,763 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Unsecured |
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,117 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,018 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
997 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Securities/Deposits |
|
|
778 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Other |
|
|
1,139 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
990 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,097 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,120 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
38,246 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
38,107 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,501 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,970 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
36,932 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Credit
In commercial lending, on-going 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 (severity of loss). This two-dimensional rating methodology provides granularity
in the portfolio management process. The probability-of-default is rated and applied at the
borrower level. The loss-given-default is rated and applied based on the specific type of credit
extension and the quality and lien position associated with the underlying collateral. The
internal risk ratings are assessed at origination and updated at each periodic monitoring event.
There is also extensive macro portfolio management analysis on an on-going basis. As an example,
the retail properties class of the CRE portfolio and manufacturing loans within the C&I portfolio
have each received more frequent evaluation at the individual loan level given the weak environment
and our portfolio composition. We continually review and adjust our risk-rating criteria based on
actual experience, which provides us with the current risk level in the portfolio and is the basis
for determining an appropriate allowance amount for this portfolio.
26
Our Credit Review group performs testing to provide an independent review and assessment of
the quality and / or risk of new loan originations. This group is part of our Risk Management
area, and conducts portfolio reviews on a risk-based cycle to evaluate individual loans, validate
risk ratings, as well as test the consistency of credit processes. Similarly, to provide
consistent oversight, a centralized portfolio management team monitors and reports on the
performance of small business loans, which are included within the commercial loan portfolio.
All loans categorized as Classified (see Note 3 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements) are managed by our SAD. The SAD is a specialized credit group that handles
the day-to-day management of workouts, commercial recoveries, and problem loan sales. Its
responsibilities include developing action plans, assessing risk ratings, and determining the
adequacy of the allowance, the accrual status, and the ultimate collectability of the Classified
loan portfolio.
Our commercial portfolio is diversified by customer size, as well as geographically throughout
our footprint. No outstanding commercial loans and leases comprised an industry or geographic
concentration of lending. Certain segments of our commercial portfolio are discussed in further
detail below.
C&I PORTFOLIO
We manage the risks inherent in this portfolio through origination policies, concentration
limits, on-going 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.
While C&I borrowers have been challenged by the weak economy, quarterly levels of newly
identified problem loans have declined, reflecting a combination of proactive risk identification
as well as some relative improvement in the economic conditions. Nevertheless, some borrowers may
no longer have sufficient capital to withstand the extended stress. As a result, these borrowers
may not be able to comply with the original terms of their credit agreements. We continue to focus
attention on the portfolio management process to proactively identify borrowers that may be facing
financial difficulty and to assess all potential solutions. The impact of the economic environment
is further evidenced by the level of line-of-credit activity, as borrowers continued to maintain
relatively low utilization percentages.
As shown in the following table, C&I loans and leases totaled $13.3 billion at March 31, 2011:
Table 17 Commercial and Industrial Loans and Leases by Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
Commitments |
|
|
Loans Outstanding |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
Class: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owner occupied |
|
$ |
4,288 |
|
|
|
22 |
% |
|
$ |
3,861 |
|
|
|
29 |
% |
Other commercial and industrial |
|
|
15,244 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
9,438 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
19,532 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
13,299 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The difference in the composition between the commitments and loans and leases
outstanding in the other commercial and industrial class results from a significant amount of
working capital lines-of-credit and businesses have reduced these borrowings. The funding
percentage associated with the lines-of-credit has been a significant indicator of credit quality.
Generally, borrowers that fully utilize their line-of-credit consistently, over time, have a higher
risk profile. This represents one of many credit risk factors we utilize in assessing the credit
risk portfolio of individual borrowers and the overall portfolio.
CRE PORTFOLIO
We manage the risks inherent in this portfolio specific to CRE lending, focusing on the
quality of the developer, and the specifics associated with each project. Generally, we: (1) limit
our loans to 80% of the appraised value of the commercial real estate, (2) require net operating
cash flows to be 125% of required interest and principal payments, and (3) if the commercial real
estate is nonowner occupied, require that at least 50% of the space of the project be preleased.
Each CRE loan is classified as either core or noncore. We separated the CRE portfolio into
these categories in order to provide more clarity around our portfolio management strategies and to
provide an additional level of transparency. We believe segregating the noncore CRE from core CRE
improves our ability to understand the nature, performance prospects, and problem resolution
opportunities, thus allowing us to continue to deal proactively with any emerging credit issues.
27
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 with us
that generates an acceptable return on capital or demonstrates the prospect of becoming one. The
core CRE portfolio was $3.9 billion at March 31, 2011, representing 62% of total CRE loans. The
performance of the core portfolio met our expectations based on the consistency of the asset
quality metrics within the portfolio.
Based on our extensive project level assessment process, including forward-looking collateral
valuations, we continue to believe the credit quality of the core portfolio is stable.
A CRE loan is generally considered noncore based on the lack of a substantive relationship
outside of the loan product, with no immediate prospects for meeting the core relationship
criteria. The noncore CRE portfolio declined from $2.6 billion at December 31, 2010, to $2.4
billion at March 31, 2011, and represented 38% of total CRE loans. Of the loans in the noncore
portfolio at March 31, 2011, 53% were categorized as Pass, 95% had guarantors, 99% were secured,
and 92% were located within our geographic footprint. However, it is within the noncore portfolio
where most of the credit quality challenges exist. For example, $0.3 billion, or 12%, of related
outstanding balances, are classified as NALs. SAD administered $1.2 billion, or 52%, of total
noncore CRE loans at March 31, 2011. We expect to exit the majority of noncore CRE relationships
over time through normal repayments and refinancings, possible sales should economically attractive
opportunities arise, or the reclassification to a core CRE relationship if it expands to meet the
core criteria.
The table below provides a segregation of the CRE portfolio as of March 31, 2011:
Table 18 Core Commercial Real Estate Loans by Property Type and Property Location
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
West |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Ohio |
|
|
Michigan |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
Indiana |
|
|
Kentucky |
|
|
Florida |
|
|
Virginia |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total Amount |
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core portfolio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail properties |
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
$ |
89 |
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
77 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
344 |
|
|
$ |
1,112 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
Office |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Multi family |
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Industrial and warehouse |
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Other commercial real
estate |
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core portfolio |
|
|
1,993 |
|
|
|
469 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
3,911 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Total noncore portfolio |
|
|
1,353 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
2,387 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,346 |
|
|
$ |
858 |
|
|
$ |
410 |
|
|
$ |
433 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
166 |
|
|
$ |
221 |
|
|
$ |
779 |
|
|
$ |
6,298 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
Credit quality data regarding the ACL and NALs, segregated by core CRE loans and noncore
CRE loans, is presented in the following table:
Table 19 Commercial Real Estate Core vs. Noncore Portfolios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
Ending |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Balance |
|
|
Prior NCOs |
|
|
ACL $ |
|
|
ACL % |
|
|
Credit Mark (1) |
|
|
Loans |
|
Total core |
|
$ |
3,911 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
140 |
|
|
|
3.58 |
% |
|
|
3.87 |
% |
|
$ |
30.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore SAD (2) |
|
|
1,249 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
22.82 |
|
|
|
39.83 |
|
|
|
239.3 |
|
Noncore Other |
|
|
1,138 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
8.35 |
|
|
|
9.46 |
|
|
|
35.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncore |
|
|
2,387 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
15.92 |
|
|
|
27.12 |
|
|
|
275.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial real estate |
|
$ |
6,298 |
|
|
$ |
379 |
|
|
$ |
520 |
|
|
|
8.26 |
% |
|
|
13.46 |
% |
|
$ |
305.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
Total core |
|
$ |
4,042 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
160 |
|
|
|
3.96 |
% |
|
|
4.08 |
% |
|
$ |
15.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncore SAD (2) |
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
23.50 |
|
|
|
39.80 |
|
|
|
307.2 |
|
Noncore Other |
|
|
1,209 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
8.68 |
|
|
|
9.06 |
|
|
|
40.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncore |
|
|
2,609 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
16.63 |
|
|
|
27.33 |
|
|
|
348.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial real estate |
|
$ |
6,651 |
|
|
$ |
389 |
|
|
$ |
594 |
|
|
|
8.93 |
% |
|
|
13.96 |
% |
|
$ |
363.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Calculated as (Prior NCOs + ACL $) / (Ending Balance + Prior NCOs). |
|
(2) |
|
Noncore loans managed by SAD, the area responsible for managing loans and relationships designated as Classified Loans. |
As shown in the above table, the ending balance of the CRE portfolio at March 31, 2011,
declined $0.4 billion, or 5%, compared with December 31, 2010. Of this decline, 63% occurred in
the noncore segment of the portfolio and was a result of payoffs and NCOs
as we actively focus on the noncore portfolio to reduce our overall CRE exposure. This
reduction demonstrates our continued commitment to maintaining an aggregate moderate-to-low risk
profile. We anticipate further noncore CRE declines in future periods based on our strategy to
reduce our overall CRE exposure. The reduction in the core segment is a result of limited
origination activity reflecting our strategy to reduce our overall CRE exposure. We will continue
to support our core developer customers as appropriate, however, we do not believe that significant
additional CRE activity is appropriate given our current exposure in CRE lending and the current
economic conditions.
Also as shown above, substantial reserves for the noncore portfolio have been established. At
March 31, 2011, the ACL related to the noncore portfolio was 15.92%. The combination of the
existing ACL and prior NCOs represents the total credit actions taken on each segment of the
portfolio. From this data, we calculate a credit mark that provides a consistent measurement of
the cumulative credit actions taken against a specific portfolio segment. We believe the combined
credit activity is appropriate for each of the CRE segments.
Retail Properties
Our portfolio of CRE loans secured by retail properties totaled $1.7 billion, or approximately
4% of total loans and leases, at March 31, 2011. Loans within this portfolio segment declined $0.1
billion, or 4%, from $1.8 billion at December 31, 2010. Credit approval in this portfolio segment
is generally dependent on preleasing requirements, and net operating income from the project must
cover debt service by specified percentages when the loan is fully funded.
The weakness of the economic environment in our geographic regions continued to impact the
projects that secure the loans in this portfolio class. Lower occupancy rates, reduced rental
rates, and the expectation these levels will remain stressed for the foreseeable future may
adversely affect some of our borrowers ability to repay these loans. We have increased the level
of credit risk management activity on this portfolio segment, and we analyze our retail property
loans in detail by combining property type, geographic location, and other data, to assess and
manage our credit risks. We review the majority of this portfolio segment on a monthly basis.
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 on-going analysis and review
process results in a determination of an appropriate allowance for our consumer loan and lease
portfolio.
29
AUTOMOBILE PORTFOLIO
Our strategy in the automobile portfolio continued to focus on high quality borrowers as
measured by both FICO and internal custom scores, combined with appropriate LTVs, terms, and a
reasonable level of profitability. We discontinued automobile leasing in 2008 with the portfolio
in run-off mode thereafter. Our strategy and operational capabilities allow us to appropriately
manage the origination quality across the entire portfolio, including our newer markets. Although
increased origination volume and the expansion into new markets can be associated with increased
risk levels, we believe our strategy and operational capabilities significantly mitigate these
risks.
We have continued to consistently execute our value proposition while taking advantage of
market opportunities that allow us to grow our automobile loan portfolio. The significant growth
in the portfolio over the past two years was accomplished while maintaining our consistently high
credit quality metrics. As we further execute our strategies and take advantage of these
opportunities, we are developing alternative plans to address any growth in excess of our
established portfolio concentration limits, including both securitizations and loan sales.
RESIDENTIAL-SECURED PORTFOLIOS
The residential mortgage and home equity portfolios are primarily located within our
footprint. The continued stress on home prices has caused the performance in these portfolios to
remain weaker than historical levels. We continue to evaluate all of our policies and processes
associated with managing these portfolios to provide as much clarity as possible. In the 2011
first quarter, we implemented a more conservative position regarding NCOs in our residential
mortgage portfolio by accelerating the timing of charge-off recognition. In addition, we
established an immediate charge-off process regardless of the delinquency status for short sale
situations. Both of these policy changes resulted in accelerated recognition of charge-offs
totaling $6.8 million in the 2011 first quarter. These changes in our charge-off policies do not
impact our commitment to providing assistance to our borrowers through our Home Savers Group. Our
charge-off policies for the home equity portfolio remain unchanged.
Table 20 Selected Home Equity and Residential Mortgage
Portfolio Data
(dollar amounts in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home Equity |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
|
Secured by first-lien |
|
|
Secured by second-lien |
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
|
03/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
|
03/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
3,194 |
|
|
$ |
3,041 |
|
|
$ |
4,590 |
|
|
$ |
4,672 |
|
|
$ |
4,517 |
|
|
$ |
4,500 |
|
Portfolio weighted average LTV
ratio(1) |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
78 |
% |
|
|
77 |
% |
Portfolio weighted average FICO
score(2) |
|
|
745 |
|
|
|
745 |
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home Equity |
|
|
Residential Mortgage (3) |
|
|
|
Secured by first-lien |
|
|
Secured by second-lien |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Originations |
|
$ |
404 |
|
|
$ |
232 |
|
|
$ |
194 |
|
|
$ |
130 |
|
|
$ |
304 |
|
|
$ |
242 |
|
Origination weighted average LTV
ratio(1) |
|
|
71 |
% |
|
|
67 |
% |
|
|
82 |
% |
|
|
77 |
% |
|
|
82 |
% |
|
|
73 |
% |
Origination weighted average FICO
score(2) |
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
766 |
|
|
|
756 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
755 |
|
|
|
764 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The LTV ratios for home equity loans and home equity lines-of-credit are cumulative and reflect the balance of any senior loans.
LTV ratios reflect collateral values at the time of loan origination. |
|
(2) |
|
Portfolio weighted average FICO scores reflect currently updated customer credit scores whereas origination weighted average FICO
scores reflect the customer credit scores at the time of loan origination. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents only owned-portfolio originations. |
Home Equity Portfolio
Our home equity portfolio (loans and lines-of-credit) consists of both first-lien and
second-lien mortgage loans with underwriting criteria based on minimum credit scores,
debt-to-income ratios, and LTV ratios. We offer closed-end home equity loans which are generally
fixed-rate with principal and interest payments, and variable-rate interest-only home equity
lines-of-credit which do not require payment of principal during the 10-year revolving period of
the line-of-credit.
30
At March 31, 2011, approximately 41% of our home equity portfolio was secured by first-lien
mortgages. The credit risk profile is substantially reduced when we hold a first-lien position.
During the 2011 first quarter, more than 65% of our home equity portfolio originations were secured
by a first-lien mortgage. We focus on high quality borrowers primarily located within our
footprint. The majority of our home equity line-of-credit borrowers consistently pay more than the
required interest-only amount. Additionally, since we focus on developing complete relationships
with our customers, many of our home equity borrowers are utilizing other products and services.
We believe we have underwritten credit conservatively within this portfolio. We have not
originated home equity loans or lines-of-credit with an LTV at origination greater than 100%,
except for infrequent situations with high quality borrowers. However, continued declines in
housing prices have likely decreased the value of the collateral for this portfolio and it is
likely some loans with an original LTV ratio of less than 100% currently have an LTV ratio greater
than 100%.
For certain home equity loans and lines-of-credit, we may utilize an AVM or other model-driven
value estimate during the credit underwriting process. We utilize a series of credit parameters to
determine the appropriate valuation methodology. While we believe an AVM estimate is an
appropriate valuation source for a portion of our home equity lending activities, we continue to
re-evaluate all of our policies on an on-going basis, specifically related to recent FFIEC
guidelines regarding property valuation. The intent of these guidelines is to ensure complete
independence in the requesting and review of real estate valuations associated with loan decisions.
We are committed to appropriate valuations for all of our real estate lending, and do not
anticipate significant impacts to our loan decision process as a result of these guidelines. We
update values as appropriate, and in compliance with applicable regulations, for loans identified
as higher risk. Loans are identified as higher risk based on performance indicators and the
updated values are utilized to facilitate our portfolio management, as well as our workout and loss
mitigation functions.
We continue to make 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
actions, as necessary, to manage the risk profile of this portfolio.
Residential Mortgage Portfolio
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 mortgages that allow
negative amortization or allow the borrower multiple payment options.
All residential mortgages are originated based on a completed full appraisal during the credit
underwriting process. We update values on a regular basis in compliance with applicable
regulations to facilitate our portfolio management, as well as our workout and loss mitigation
functions.
Several government actions were enacted that impacted the residential mortgage portfolio,
including various refinance programs which positively affected the availability of credit for the
industry. We are utilizing these programs to enhance our existing strategy of working closely with
our customers.
Credit Quality
We believe the most meaningful way to assess overall credit quality performance is through an
analysis of credit quality performance ratios. This approach forms the basis of most of the
discussion in the sections immediately following: NPAs and NALs, TDRs, 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.
Credit quality performance in the 2011 first quarter reflected continued improvement in the
commercial loan portfolio relating to NCO activity, as well as some improvement in the consumer
portfolio relating to delinquency trends and NCO activity in certain segments excluding any policy
change impacts (see Consumer Credit section). Key credit quality metrics also showed improvement,
including an 18% decline in NPAs and a 13% decline in the level of Criticized commercial loans
compared to the prior quarter. New NPA inflows also declined and delinquency trends continued to
improve compared to the prior quarter.
Our ACL declined $115.7 million to $1,175.4 million, or 3.07% of period-end loans and leases
at March 31, 2011, from $1,291.1 million, or 3.39% at December 31, 2010. Importantly, our ACL as a
percent of period-end NALs increased to 185% from 166%, and the coverage ratio associated with NPAs
also increased. These improved coverage ratios indicated a strengthening of our allowance position
relative to troubled assets from the prior year-end. These coverage ratios are a key component of
our internal adequacy assessment process and provide an important consideration in the
determination of the adequacy of the ACL.
31
NPAs, NALs, AND TDRs
NPAs and NALs
NPAs consist of (1) NALs, which represent loans and leases no longer accruing interest, (2)
impaired loans held for sale, (3) OREO properties, and (4) other NPAs. A C&I or CRE loan is
generally placed on nonaccrual status no later than 90-days past due. With the exception of
residential mortgage loans guaranteed by government organizations which continue to accrue
interest, residential mortgage loans are placed on nonaccrual status no later than 180-days past
due. A home equity loan is placed on nonaccrual status no later than 180-days past due.
Automobile and other consumer loans are not placed on nonaccrual status, but are charged-off when
the loan is 120-days past due. Any loan in our portfolio may be placed on nonaccrual status prior
to the policies described above when collection of principal or interest is in doubt. 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
collectability is no longer in doubt, the loan or lease is returned to accrual status.
32
The following table reflects period-end NALs and NPAs detail for each of the last five
quarters:
Table 21 Nonaccrual Loans and Leases and Nonperforming Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
260,397 |
|
|
$ |
346,720 |
|
|
$ |
398,353 |
|
|
$ |
429,561 |
|
|
$ |
511,588 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
305,793 |
|
|
|
363,692 |
|
|
|
478,754 |
|
|
|
663,103 |
|
|
|
826,781 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
44,812 |
|
|
|
45,010 |
|
|
|
82,984 |
|
|
|
86,486 |
|
|
|
372,950 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
25,255 |
|
|
|
22,526 |
|
|
|
21,689 |
|
|
|
22,199 |
|
|
|
54,789 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
636,257 |
|
|
|
777,948 |
|
|
|
981,780 |
|
|
|
1,201,349 |
|
|
|
1,766,108 |
|
Other real estate owned, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
28,668 |
|
|
|
31,649 |
|
|
|
65,775 |
|
|
|
71,937 |
|
|
|
68,289 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
25,961 |
|
|
|
35,155 |
|
|
|
57,309 |
|
|
|
67,189 |
|
|
|
83,971 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other real estate owned, net |
|
|
54,629 |
|
|
|
66,804 |
|
|
|
123,084 |
|
|
|
139,126 |
|
|
|
152,260 |
|
Impaired loans held for sale(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
242,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets |
|
$ |
690,886 |
|
|
$ |
844,752 |
|
|
$ |
1,104,864 |
|
|
$ |
1,582,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,918,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual loans as a % of total loans and leases |
|
|
1.66 |
% |
|
|
2.04 |
% |
|
|
2.62 |
% |
|
|
3.25 |
% |
|
|
4.78 |
% |
Nonperforming assets ratio(2) |
|
|
1.80 |
|
|
|
2.21 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
4.24 |
|
|
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming Franklin assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
297,967 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,067 |
|
OREO |
|
|
5,971 |
|
|
|
9,477 |
|
|
|
15,330 |
|
|
|
24,515 |
|
|
|
24,423 |
|
Impaired loans held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
242,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming Franklin assets |
|
$ |
5,971 |
|
|
$ |
9,477 |
|
|
$ |
15,330 |
|
|
$ |
266,742 |
|
|
$ |
353,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The June 30, 2010, figure represents NALs associated with the transfer of Franklin-related residential mortgage and home equity loans to loans held for sale. Loans held for sale are carried at the
lower of cost or fair value less costs to sell. |
|
(2) |
|
This ratio is calculated as NPAs divided by the sum of loans and leases, impaired loans held for sale, and net other real estate. |
The $153.9 million decline in NPAs primarily reflected:
|
|
|
$86.3 million, or 25%, decline in C&I NALs, reflecting both NCO activity and problem
credit resolutions, including payoffs. The decline 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. |
|
|
|
$57.9 million, or 16%, decline in CRE NALs, reflecting both NCO activity and problem
credit resolutions, including borrower payments and payoffs. This decline was a direct
result of our on-going proactive management of these credits by our SAD. Also key to the
decline was the significantly lower level of inflows. The level of inflows, or migration,
is an important indicator of the future trend for the portfolio. |
|
|
|
$12.2 million, or 18%, decline in OREO, primarily reflecting continued declines in both
the commercial and residential segments. Of this decline, only $3.0 million was in the
residential segment as the selling of residential properties remains challenging in our
markets. |
As part of our loss mitigation process, we reunderwrite, modify, or restructure loans when
borrowers are experiencing payment difficulties, based on the borrowers ability to repay the loan.
33
NPA activity for each of the past five quarters was as follows:
Table 22 Nonperforming Asset Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming assets, beginning of period |
|
$ |
844,752 |
|
|
$ |
1,104,864 |
|
|
$ |
1,582,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,918,368 |
|
|
$ |
2,058,091 |
|
New nonperforming assets |
|
|
192,044 |
|
|
|
237,802 |
|
|
|
278,388 |
|
|
|
171,595 |
|
|
|
237,914 |
|
Franklin-related impact, net |
|
|
(3,506 |
) |
|
|
(5,853 |
) |
|
|
(251,412 |
) |
|
|
(86,715 |
) |
|
|
14,957 |
|
Returns to accruing status |
|
|
(70,886 |
) |
|
|
(100,051 |
) |
|
|
(111,168 |
) |
|
|
(78,739 |
) |
|
|
(80,840 |
) |
Loan and lease losses |
|
|
(128,730 |
) |
|
|
(126,047 |
) |
|
|
(151,013 |
) |
|
|
(173,159 |
) |
|
|
(185,387 |
) |
Other real estate owned gains (losses) |
|
|
1,492 |
|
|
|
(5,117 |
) |
|
|
(5,302 |
) |
|
|
2,483 |
|
|
|
(4,160 |
) |
Payments |
|
|
(87,041 |
) |
|
|
(191,296 |
) |
|
|
(210,612 |
) |
|
|
(140,881 |
) |
|
|
(107,640 |
) |
Sales |
|
|
(57,239 |
) |
|
|
(69,550 |
) |
|
|
(26,719 |
) |
|
|
(30,250 |
) |
|
|
(14,567 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming assets, end of period |
|
$ |
690,886 |
|
|
$ |
844,752 |
|
|
$ |
1,104,864 |
|
|
$ |
1,582,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,918,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
Table 23 Accruing Past Due Loans and Leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(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 |
|
Residential mortgage (excluding loans guaranteed
by the U.S. government) |
|
|
41,858 |
|
|
|
53,983 |
|
|
|
56,803 |
|
|
|
47,036 |
|
|
|
72,702 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
24,130 |
|
|
|
23,497 |
|
|
|
27,160 |
|
|
|
26,797 |
|
|
|
29,438 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
7,578 |
|
|
|
10,177 |
|
|
|
11,423 |
|
|
|
9,533 |
|
|
|
10,598 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total, excl. loans guaranteed by the U.S. government |
|
|
73,566 |
|
|
|
87,657 |
|
|
|
95,386 |
|
|
|
83,366 |
|
|
|
113,213 |
|
Add: loans guaranteed by the U.S. government |
|
|
94,440 |
|
|
|
98,288 |
|
|
|
94,249 |
|
|
|
95,421 |
|
|
|
96,814 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accruing loans and leases past due 90 days
or more, including loans guaranteed by the U.S.
government |
|
$ |
168,006 |
|
|
$ |
185,945 |
|
|
$ |
189,635 |
|
|
$ |
178,787 |
|
|
$ |
210,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios: (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding loans guaranteed by the U.S. government,
as a percent of total loans and leases |
|
|
0.19 |
% |
|
|
0.23 |
% |
|
|
0.25 |
% |
|
|
0.23 |
% |
|
|
0.31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guaranteed by the U.S. government, as a percent of
total loans and leases |
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Including loans guaranteed by the U.S. government,
as a percent of total loans and leases |
|
|
0.44 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
|
|
0.51 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
|
|
0.57 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Ratios are calculated as a percentage of related loans and leases. |
TDR Loans
TDRs are modified loans in which a concession is provided to a borrower experiencing financial
difficulties. Loan modifications are considered TDRs when the concessions provided are not
available to the borrower through either normal channels or other sources. However, not all loan
modifications are TDRs. Our standards relating to loan modifications consider, among other
factors, minimum verified income requirements, cash flow analysis, and collateral valuations.
However, each potential loan modification is reviewed individually and the terms of the loan are
modified to meet a borrowers specific circumstances at a point in time. All loan modifications,
including those classified as TDRs, are reviewed and approved. Our ALLL is largely driven by
updated risk ratings assigned to commercial loans, updated borrower credit scores on consumer
loans, and borrower delinquency history in both the commercial and consumer portfolios. As such,
the provision for credit losses is impacted primarily by changes in borrower payment performance
rather than the TDR classification. TDRs can be classified as either accrual or nonaccrual loans.
Nonaccrual TDRs are included in NALs whereas accruing TDRs are excluded because the borrower
remains contractually current.
In the workout of a problem loan, many factors are considered when determining the most
favorable resolution. For consumer loans, we evaluate the ability and willingness of the borrower
to make contractual or reduced payments, the value of the underlying collateral, and the costs
associated with the foreclosure or repossession, and remarketing of the collateral. For commercial
loans, we consider similar criteria and also evaluate the borrowers business prospects.
35
Residential Mortgage loan TDRs Residential mortgage TDRs represent loan
modifications associated with traditional first-lien mortgage loans in which a
concession has been provided to the borrower. Residential mortgages identified as
TDRs involve borrowers who are unable to refinance their mortgages through our
normal mortgage origination channels or through other independent sources. Some,
but not all, of the loans may be delinquent. Modifications can include adjustments
to rates and/or principal. Modified loans identified as TDRs are aggregated into
pools for analysis. Cash flows and weighted average interest rates are used to
calculate impairment at the pooled-loan level. Once the loans are aggregated into
the pool, they continue to be classified as TDRs until contractually repaid or
charged-off. No consideration is given to removing individual loans from the pools.
Residential mortgage loans not guaranteed by a U.S. government agency such as the
FHA, VA, and the USDA, including restructured loans, are reported as accrual or
nonaccrual based upon delinquency status. NALs are those that are greater than
180-days contractually past due. Loans guaranteed by U.S. government organizations
continue to accrue interest upon delinquency.
Residential mortgage loan TDR classifications resulted in an impairment adjustment
of $2.0 million during the 2011 first quarter. Prior to the TDR classification,
residential mortgage loans individually had minimal ALLL associated with them
because the ALLL is calculated on a total pooled-portfolio basis.
Other Consumer loan TDRs Generally, these are TDRs associated with home
equity borrowings and automobile loans. We make similar interest rate, term, and
principal concessions as with residential mortgage loan TDRs. The TDR
classification for these other consumer loans resulted in an impairment adjustment
of $0.6 million during the 2011 first quarter.
Commercial loan TDRs Commercial accruing TDRs represent loans rated as
Classified and are no more than 90-days past due on contractual principal and
interest, but undergo a modification. Accruing TDRs often result from loans rated
as Classified receiving an extension on the maturity of their loan, for example, to
allow additional time for the sale or lease of underlying CRE collateral. Often, it
is prudent to extend the maturity rather than foreclose on a commercial loan,
particularly for borrowers who are generating cash flows to support contractual
interest payments. These borrowers cannot obtain a loan with similar terms through
other independent sources because of their current financial circumstances.
Therefore, a concession is provided and the modification is classified as a TDR.
The TDR remains in accruing status as long as the customer is current on payments
and no loss is probable.
Commercial nonaccrual TDRs result from either: (1) an accruing commercial TDR being placed on
nonaccrual status (at March 31, 2011, approximately $12.8 million of our commercial
nonaccrual TDRs represented this situation); or (2) a workout where an existing commercial
NAL is restructured and a concession is given. The majority of these workouts restructure
the NAL so that two or more new notes are created. The senior note is underwritten based
upon our normal underwriting standards at current market rates and is sized so projected cash
flows are sufficient to repay contractual principal and interest. The terms on the
subordinate note(s) vary by situation, but often defer interest payments until after the
senior note is repaid. Creating two or more notes often allows the borrower to continue a
project or weather a temporary economic downturn and allows us to right-size a loan based
upon the current expectations for a projects performance. The senior note is considered for
return to accrual status if the borrower has sustained sufficient cash flows for a six-month
period of time and we believe no loss is probable. This six-month period could extend before
or after the restructure date. Subordinated notes created in the workout are charged-off
immediately. Any interest or principal payments received on the subordinated notes are
applied to the principal of the senior note first until the senior note is repaid. Further
payments are recorded as recoveries on the subordinated note. At March 31, 2011,
approximately $25.0 million of our commercial nonaccrual TDRs resulted from such workouts.
As the loans are already considered Classified, an adequate ALLL has been recorded when
appropriate. Consequently, a TDR classification on commercial loans does not usually result
in significant additional reserves. We consider removing the TDR status on commercial loans
if the loan is at a market rate of interest and after the loan has performed in accordance
with the restructured terms for a sustained period of time, generally one year.
36
The table below provides a summary of our accruing and nonaccruing TDRs by loan type for each
of the past five quarters:
Table 24 Accruing and Nonaccruing Troubled Debt Restructured Loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
Troubled debt restructured loans accruing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
333,492 |
|
|
$ |
328,411 |
|
|
$ |
304,356 |
|
|
$ |
281,473 |
|
|
$ |
253,135 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
78,488 |
|
|
|
76,586 |
|
|
|
73,210 |
|
|
|
65,061 |
|
|
|
62,148 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
206,462 |
|
|
|
222,632 |
|
|
|
157,971 |
|
|
|
141,353 |
|
|
|
117,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
troubled debt restructured loans accruing |
|
|
618,442 |
|
|
|
627,629 |
|
|
|
535,537 |
|
|
|
487,887 |
|
|
|
432,950 |
|
Troubled debt restructured loans nonaccruing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
8,523 |
|
|
|
5,789 |
|
|
|
10,581 |
|
|
|
11,337 |
|
|
|
9,415 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
37,858 |
|
|
|
33,462 |
|
|
|
33,236 |
|
|
|
90,266 |
|
|
|
122,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
troubled debt restructured loans nonaccruing |
|
|
46,395 |
|
|
|
39,251 |
|
|
|
43,817 |
|
|
|
101,603 |
|
|
|
132,174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total troubled debt restructured loans |
|
$ |
664,837 |
|
|
$ |
666,880 |
|
|
$ |
579,354 |
|
|
$ |
589,490 |
|
|
$ |
565,124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACL
(This section should be read in conjunction with Note 3 of the Notes to Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.)
We maintain two reserves, both of which in our judgment are adequate to absorb credit losses
inherent in our loan and lease portfolio: the ALLL and the AULC. Combined, these reserves comprise
the total ACL. Our Credit Administration group is responsible for developing the methodology
assumptions and estimates used in the calculation, as well as determining the adequacy of the ACL.
The ALLL represents the estimate of losses inherent in the loan portfolio at the reported date.
Additions to the ALLL result from recording provision expense for loan losses or increased risk
levels resulting from loan risk-rating downgrades, while reductions reflect charge-offs,
recoveries, decreased risk levels resulting from loan risk-rating upgrades, or the sale of loans.
The AULC is determined by applying the transaction reserve process to the unfunded portion of the
loan exposures adjusted by an applicable funding expectation.
A provision for credit losses is recorded to adjust the ACL to the level we have determined to
be adequate to absorb credit losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio. The provision for
credit losses in the 2011 first quarter was $49.4 million, compared with $87.0 million in the prior
quarter and $235.0 million in the year-ago quarter. The decline in provision expense reflects a
combination of lower NCOs and the reduction of Criticized loans throughout the entire loan and
lease portfolio.
We regularly assess the adequacy of the ACL by performing on-going evaluations of the loan and
lease portfolio, including such factors as the differing economic risks associated with each loan
category, the financial condition of specific borrowers, the level of delinquent loans, the value
of any collateral and, where applicable, the existence of any guarantees or other documented
support. We evaluate the impact of changes in interest rates and overall economic conditions on
the ability of borrowers to meet their financial obligations when quantifying our exposure to
credit losses and assessing the adequacy of our ACL at each reporting date. In addition to general
economic conditions and the other factors described above, we also consider the impact of declining
residential real estate values and the diversification of CRE loans, particularly loans secured by
retail properties.
Our ACL assessment process includes the on-going assessment of credit quality metrics, and a
comparison of certain ACL adequacy benchmarks to current performance. While the total ACL balance
has declined in recent quarters, all of the relevant benchmarks improved as a result of the asset
quality improvement. The coverage ratios of NALs, Criticized, and Classified loans have
significantly improved in recent quarters despite the decline in the ACL level.
37
The table below reflects activity in the ALLL and the AULC for each of the last five quarters:
Table 25 Quarterly Allowance for Credit Losses Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses,
beginning of period |
|
$ |
1,249,008 |
|
|
$ |
1,336,352 |
|
|
$ |
1,402,160 |
|
|
$ |
1,477,969 |
|
|
$ |
1,482,479 |
|
Loan and lease losses |
|
|
(199,007 |
) |
|
|
(205,587 |
) |
|
|
(221,144 |
) |
|
|
(312,954 |
) |
|
|
(264,222 |
) |
Recoveries of loans previously charged-off |
|
|
33,924 |
|
|
|
33,336 |
|
|
|
36,630 |
|
|
|
33,726 |
|
|
|
25,741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan and lease losses |
|
|
(165,083 |
) |
|
|
(172,251 |
) |
|
|
(184,514 |
) |
|
|
(279,228 |
) |
|
|
(238,481 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
49,301 |
|
|
|
84,907 |
|
|
|
118,788 |
|
|
|
203,633 |
|
|
|
233,971 |
|
Allowance for assets sold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, end of period |
|
$ |
1,133,226 |
|
|
$ |
1,249,008 |
|
|
$ |
1,336,352 |
|
|
$ |
1,402,160 |
|
|
$ |
1,477,969 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for unfunded loan commitments
and letters of credit, beginning of period |
|
$ |
42,127 |
|
|
$ |
40,061 |
|
|
$ |
39,689 |
|
|
$ |
49,916 |
|
|
$ |
48,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for (reduction in) unfunded loan
commitments and letters of credit losses |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
2,066 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
(10,227 |
) |
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for unfunded loan commitments
and letters of credit, end of period |
|
$ |
42,211 |
|
|
$ |
42,127 |
|
|
$ |
40,061 |
|
|
$ |
39,689 |
|
|
$ |
49,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for credit losses, end of period |
|
$ |
1,175,437 |
|
|
$ |
1,291,135 |
|
|
$ |
1,376,413 |
|
|
$ |
1,441,849 |
|
|
$ |
1,527,885 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as % of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
2.96 |
% |
|
|
3.28 |
% |
|
|
3.56 |
% |
|
|
3.79 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
Nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Nonperforming assets |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for credit losses as % of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
3.07 |
% |
|
|
3.39 |
% |
|
|
3.67 |
% |
|
|
3.90 |
% |
|
|
4.14 |
% |
Nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Nonperforming assets |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
The reduction in the ACL, compared with December 31, 2010, reflected a decline in the
commercial portfolio ALLL as a result of NCOs on loans with specific reserves, and an overall
reduction in the level of commercial Criticized loans. Commercial Criticized loans are commercial
loans rated as OLEM, Substandard, Doubtful, or Loss. As shown in the table below, commercial
Criticized loans declined $0.4 billion from December 31, 2010, reflecting significant upgrade and
payment activity.
Table 26 Criticized Commercial Loan Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criticized commercial loans, beginning of period |
|
$ |
3,074,481 |
|
|
$ |
3,637,533 |
|
|
$ |
4,106,602 |
|
|
$ |
4,608,610 |
|
|
$ |
4,971,637 |
|
New additions / increases |
|
|
169,884 |
|
|
|
289,850 |
|
|
|
407,514 |
|
|
|
280,353 |
|
|
|
306,499 |
|
Advances |
|
|
61,516 |
|
|
|
52,282 |
|
|
|
75,386 |
|
|
|
79,392 |
|
|
|
91,450 |
|
Upgrades to Pass |
|
|
(238,518 |
) |
|
|
(382,713 |
) |
|
|
(391,316 |
) |
|
|
(409,092 |
) |
|
|
(273,011 |
) |
Payments |
|
|
(294,564 |
) |
|
|
(401,302 |
) |
|
|
(408,698 |
) |
|
|
(331,145 |
) |
|
|
(324,229 |
) |
Loan losses |
|
|
(112,008 |
) |
|
|
(121,169 |
) |
|
|
(151,955 |
) |
|
|
(121,516 |
) |
|
|
(163,736 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criticized commercial loans, end of period |
|
$ |
2,660,792 |
|
|
$ |
3,074,481 |
|
|
$ |
3,637,533 |
|
|
$ |
4,106,602 |
|
|
$ |
4,608,610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compared with December 31, 2010, the AULC was little changed.
The ACL coverage ratio associated with NALs was 185% at March 31, 2011, representing a
continued improvement compared with recent prior periods. This improvement reflected substantial
payments on C&I and CRE NALs.
Although credit quality asset metrics and trends, including those mentioned above, continued
to improve in the 2011 first quarter, the economic environment in our markets remained weak and
uncertain as reflected by continued weak residential values, continued weakness in industrial
employment in northern Ohio and southeast Michigan, and the significant subjectivity involved in
commercial real estate valuations for properties located in areas with limited sale or refinance
activities. Residential real estate values continued to be negatively impacted by high
unemployment, increased foreclosure activity, and the elimination of home-buyer tax credits. In
the near-term, we believe these factors will result in continued stress in our portfolios secured
by residential real estate and an elevated level of NCOs compared to historic levels. Further,
concerns continue to exist regarding conditions in both national and international markets (for
example, the political turmoil in the Middle East and the natural disasters in Japan), the
conditions of both the financial and credit markets, the unemployment rate, the impact of the
Federal Reserve monetary policy, and continued uncertainty regarding federal, state, and local
government budget deficits. We do not anticipate any meaningful change in the overall economy in
the near-term. All of these factors are impacting consumer confidence, as well as business
investments and acquisitions. Given the combination of these noted factors, we believe that our
ACL coverage levels are reflective of the quality of our portfolio and the operating environment.
38
The table below reflects the allocation of our ACL among our various loan categories during
each of the past five quarters:
Table 27 Allocation of Allowance for Credit Losses (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and
industrial |
|
$ |
299,564 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
$ |
340,614 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
353,431 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
$ |
426,767 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
$ |
459,011 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
Commercial real
estate |
|
|
511,068 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
588,251 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
654,219 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
695,778 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
741,669 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
810,632 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
928,865 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
1,007,650 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
1,122,545 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
1,200,680 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
50,862 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
49,488 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
44,505 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
41,762 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
56,111 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
149,370 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
150,630 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
154,323 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
117,708 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
127,970 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
96,741 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
93,289 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
93,407 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
79,105 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
60,295 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
25,621 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
26,736 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
36,467 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
41,040 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
32,913 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
322,594 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
320,143 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
328,702 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
279,615 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
277,289 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for loan and lease
losses |
|
|
1,133,226 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,249,008 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,336,352 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,402,160 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
1,477,969 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for unfunded loan
commitments |
|
|
42,211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,689 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for credit losses |
|
$ |
1,175,437 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,291,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,376,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,441,849 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,527,885 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Percentages represent the percentage of each loan and lease category to total loans and leases. |
NCOs
C&I and CRE loans are either charged-off or written down to fair value at 90-days past due.
Automobile loans and other consumer loans are charged-off at 120-days past due. Home equity loans
are charged-off to fair value at 120-days past due. Residential mortgages are charged-off to fair
value at 150-days past due. Any loan in any portfolio may be charged-off prior to the policies
described above if a loss confirming event has occurred. Loss confirming events include, but are
not limited to, bankruptcy (unsecured), continued delinquency, foreclosure, or receipt of an asset
valuation indicating a collateral deficiency and that asset is the sole source of repayment.
39
Table 28
reflects NCO detail for each of the last five quarters. Table 29 displays the NCO
Franklin-related impacts for each of the last five quarters.
Table 28
Quarterly Net Charge-off Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Net charge-offs by loan and lease type: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
42,191 |
|
|
$ |
59,124 |
|
|
$ |
62,241 |
|
|
$ |
58,128 |
|
|
$ |
75,439 |
|
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
28,400 |
|
|
|
11,084 |
|
|
|
17,936 |
|
|
|
45,562 |
|
|
|
34,426 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
39,283 |
|
|
|
33,787 |
|
|
|
45,725 |
|
|
|
36,169 |
|
|
|
50,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
67,683 |
|
|
|
44,871 |
|
|
|
63,661 |
|
|
|
81,731 |
|
|
|
85,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
109,874 |
|
|
|
103,995 |
|
|
|
125,902 |
|
|
|
139,859 |
|
|
|
160,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
4,712 |
|
|
|
7,035 |
|
|
|
5,570 |
|
|
|
5,436 |
|
|
|
8,531 |
|
Home equity(1) |
|
|
26,715 |
|
|
|
29,175 |
|
|
|
27,827 |
|
|
|
44,470 |
|
|
|
37,901 |
|
Residential mortgage(2), (3) |
|
|
18,932 |
|
|
|
26,775 |
|
|
|
18,961 |
|
|
|
82,848 |
|
|
|
24,311 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
4,850 |
|
|
|
5,271 |
|
|
|
6,254 |
|
|
|
6,615 |
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
55,209 |
|
|
|
68,256 |
|
|
|
58,612 |
|
|
|
139,369 |
|
|
|
77,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs |
|
$ |
165,083 |
|
|
$ |
172,251 |
|
|
$ |
184,514 |
|
|
$ |
279,228 |
|
|
$ |
238,481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs annualized percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
1.29 |
% |
|
|
1.85 |
% |
|
|
2.01 |
% |
|
|
1.90 |
% |
|
|
2.45 |
% |
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
18.59 |
|
|
|
6.19 |
|
|
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
14.25 |
|
|
|
9.77 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
2.66 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
2.38 |
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
4.15 |
|
|
|
2.64 |
|
|
|
3.60 |
|
|
|
4.44 |
|
|
|
4.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
2.24 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
2.59 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
3.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.51 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
|
0.47 |
|
|
|
0.80 |
|
Home equity(1) |
|
|
1.38 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
|
2.36 |
|
|
|
2.01 |
|
Residential mortgage(2), (3) |
|
|
1.70 |
|
|
|
2.42 |
|
|
|
1.73 |
|
|
|
7.19 |
|
|
|
2.17 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
3.47 |
|
|
|
3.66 |
|
|
|
3.83 |
|
|
|
3.81 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
1.50 |
|
|
|
1.32 |
|
|
|
3.19 |
|
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs as a % of average loans |
|
|
1.73 |
% |
|
|
1.82 |
% |
|
|
1.98 |
% |
|
|
3.01 |
% |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The 2010 second quarter included net charge-offs totaling $14,678 thousand associated with the transfer of Franklin-related home equity loans to loans held for sale and $1,262 thousand of other
Franklin-related net charge-offs. |
|
(2) |
|
The 2010 second quarter included net charge-offs totaling $60,822 thousand associated with the transfer of Franklin-related residential mortgage loans to loans held for sale and $3,403 thousand of
other Franklin-related net charge-offs. |
|
(3) |
|
The 2010 fourth quarter included net charge-offs of $16,389 thousand related to the sale of certain underperforming residential mortgage loans. |
40
Table 29 Quarterly NCOs Franklin-Related Impact
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Total residential mortgage net charge-offs (recoveries): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
(3.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(4.4 |
) |
|
$ |
3.4 |
|
|
$ |
64.2 |
|
|
$ |
8.1 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
|
15.6 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
18.9 |
|
|
$ |
26.8 |
|
|
$ |
19.0 |
|
|
$ |
82.8 |
|
|
$ |
24.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgage net charge-offs annualized
percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1.70 |
% |
|
|
2.42 |
% |
|
|
1.73 |
% |
|
|
7.19 |
% |
|
|
2.17 |
% |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
2.82 |
|
|
|
1.42 |
|
|
|
1.74 |
|
|
|
1.57 |
|
41
In assessing NCO trends, it is helpful to understand the process of how these loans are
treated as they deteriorate over time. The allowance for loans are established at origination
consistent with the level of risk associated with the original underwriting. As a part of our
normal portfolio management process for commercial loans, the loan is reviewed and the allowance is
increased or decreased as warranted. If the quality of a loan has deteriorated, it migrates to a
lower quality risk rating, and a higher reserve amount is assigned.
Charge-offs, if necessary, are generally recognized in a period after the allowance was
established. If the previously established allowance exceeds that needed to satisfactorily resolve
the problem loan, a reduction in the overall level of the allowance could be recognized. In
summary, if loan quality deteriorates, the typical credit sequence is periods of allowance
building, followed by periods of higher NCOs as the previously established allowance is utilized.
Additionally, an increase in the allowance either precedes or is in conjunction with increases in
NALs. When a loan is classified as NAL, it is evaluated for specific allowance or charge-off. As
a result, an increase in NALs does not necessarily result in an increase in the allowance or an
expectation of higher future NCOs.
C&I NCOs declined $16.9 million, or 29%, reflected lower levels of large dollar NCOs in the
current quarter as well as the results of our continued proactive credit risk management practices.
CRE NCOs increased $22.8 million, or 51%, reflected an increase in loan sale activity in the
current quarter combined with our continued aggressive treatment of problem loans, including
conservative valuation of the underlying collateral. The majority of these NCOs were in the
noncore portfolio as our core portfolio continued to perform well. Based on asset quality trends,
we anticipate lower CRE NCOs in future quarters.
Automobile NCOs declined $2.3 million, or 33%, reflected historically lower delinquency levels
during the current quarter and high credit quality of originations. Also, the current quarter
benefited from $0.5 million of recoveries associated with a previously charged-off loan sale.
Home equity NCOs declined $2.5 million, or 8%. This performance was consistent with our
expectations for the portfolio given the economic conditions in our markets. We continue to manage
the default rate through focused delinquency monitoring as virtually all defaults for second-lien
home equity loans incur significant losses primarily due to insufficient equity in the collateral
property.
Residential mortgage NCOs declined $7.8 million, or 29%, included $6.8 million of NCOs related
to a more conservative loss recognition policy (see Consumer Credit section) and Franklin-related
net recoveries of $3.1 million in the current quarter, and the prior quarter included $16.4 million
of NCOs related to the sale of certain underperforming loans and Franklin-related net recoveries of
$4.4 million. Excluding these impacts, residential mortgage NCOs increased $0.4 million,
consistent with our expectations.
42
Table 30
reflects NCO activity for the first three-month period of 2011 and the first
three-month period of 2010. Table 31 displays the NCO Franklin-related impacts for the first
three-month period of 2011 and the first three-month period of 2010.
Table 30 Year to Date Net Charge-off Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Net charge-offs by loan and lease type: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
42,191 |
|
|
$ |
75,439 |
|
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
28,400 |
|
|
|
34,426 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
39,283 |
|
|
|
50,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
67,683 |
|
|
|
85,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
109,874 |
|
|
|
160,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
4,712 |
|
|
|
8,531 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
26,715 |
|
|
|
37,901 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
18,932 |
|
|
|
24,311 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
4,850 |
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
55,209 |
|
|
|
77,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net charge-offs |
|
$ |
165,083 |
|
|
$ |
238,481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs annualized percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
1.29 |
% |
|
|
2.45 |
% |
Commercial real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
18.59 |
|
|
|
9.77 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
2.66 |
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
4.15 |
|
|
|
4.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
2.24 |
|
|
|
3.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile |
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.80 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
1.38 |
|
|
|
2.01 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
1.70 |
|
|
|
2.17 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
3.47 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs as a % of average loans |
|
|
1.73 |
% |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
Table 31 Year to Date NCOs Franklin-Related Impact
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Total home equity net charge-offs (recoveries): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3.7 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
26.7 |
|
|
|
34.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
26.7 |
|
|
$ |
37.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total home equity net charge-offs annualized percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1.38 |
% |
|
|
2.01 |
% |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
1.38 |
|
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgage net charge-offs (recoveries): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
$ |
(3.1 |
) |
|
$ |
8.1 |
|
Non-Franklin |
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
18.9 |
|
|
$ |
24.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgage net charge-offs annualized percentages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1.70 |
% |
|
|
2.17 |
% |
Non-Franklin |
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
1.57 |
|
44
C&I NCOs decreased $33.2 million, or 44%, primarily reflected significant credit quality
improvement in the underlying portfolio as well as our on-going proactive credit management
practices.
CRE NCOs decreased $17.6 million, or 21%, primarily reflected significant credit quality
improvement in the underlying portfolio as well as our on-going proactive credit management
practices.
Automobile NCOs decreased $3.8 million, or 45%, reflected our consistent high quality
origination profile since the beginning of 2008, as well as a continued strong market for used
automobiles. This focus on origination quality has been the primary driver for the improvement in
this portfolio in the current period compared with the year-ago period. Origination quality
remains high as measured by our vintage analysis.
Home equity NCOs declined $11.2 million, or 30%. The first three-month period of 2010
included $3.7 million of Franklin-related NCOs compared with no Franklin-related NCOs in the
current period. Excluding the Franklin-related impacts, home equity NCOs decreased $7.5 million
compared with the first three-month period of 2010. The performance is consistent with our
expectations for the portfolio.
Residential mortgage NCOs declined $5.4 million, or 22%. The first three-month period of 2010
included $8.1 million of Franklin-related NCOs, while the first three-month period of 2011 included
$6.8 million of NCOs related to a more conservative loss recognition policy (see Consumer Credit
section) and Franklin-related net recoveries of $3.1 million. Excluding these impacts,
residential mortgage NCOs decreased $1.0 million compared with the first three-month period of
2010. Delinquency trends continued to improve, indicating losses should remain manageable even
with the economic stress on our borrowers.
AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE AND OTHER SECURITIES PORTFOLIO
(This section should be read in conjunction with Note 4 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.)
During the first three-month period of 2011, we recorded $4.2 million of credit OTTI losses.
This amount was comprised of $3.2 million related to the pooled-trust-preferred securities, $0.8
million related to the CMO securities, and $0.2 million related to the Alt-A mortgage-backed
securities. Given the continued disruption in the housing and financial markets, we may be
required to recognize additional credit OTTI losses in future periods with respect to our
available-for-sale and other 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 to
hold temporarily impaired securities changes in future periods, we may be required to recognize
noncredit OTTI through income, which will negatively impact earnings.
Alt-A mortgage-backed, 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 its projected cash flows. These reviews are supported with analysis from independent
third parties.
The following table presents the credit ratings for our Alt-A mortgage-backed,
pooled-trust-preferred, and private label CMO securities as of March 31, 2011:
Table 32 Credit Ratings of Selected Investment Securities (1)
(dollar amounts in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Credit Rating of Fair Value Amount |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
AAA |
|
|
AA +/- |
|
|
A +/- |
|
|
BBB +/- |
|
|
<BBB- |
|
Private-label CMO securities |
|
$ |
124.4 |
|
|
$ |
115.5 |
|
|
$ |
21.3 |
|
|
$ |
6.6 |
|
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
|
$ |
13.5 |
|
|
$ |
68.8 |
|
Alt-A mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
64.7 |
|
|
|
58.1 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
26.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.3 |
|
Pooled-trust-preferred securities |
|
|
229.2 |
|
|
|
107.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
418.3 |
|
|
$ |
281.1 |
|
|
$ |
34.2 |
|
|
$ |
33.5 |
|
|
$ |
30.7 |
|
|
$ |
13.5 |
|
|
$ |
169.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
435.8 |
|
|
$ |
284.6 |
|
|
$ |
41.2 |
|
|
$ |
33.8 |
|
|
$ |
29.7 |
|
|
$ |
15.1 |
|
|
$ |
164.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Credit ratings reflect the lowest current rating assigned by a nationally recognized credit rating agency. |
45
Negative changes to the above credit ratings would generally result in an increase of our
risk-weighted assets, and a reduction to our regulatory capital ratios.
The following table summarizes the relevant characteristics of our pooled-trust-preferred
securities portfolio at March 31, 2011. Each security is part of a pool of issuers and supports a
more senior tranche of securities except for the I-Pre TSL II, MM Comm II and MM Comm III
securities which are the most senior class.
Table 33 Trust-preferred Securities Data
March 31, 2011
(dollar amounts in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferrals |
|
|
Expected |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Defaults |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# of Issuers |
|
Defaults |
|
|
as a % of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lowest |
|
Currently |
|
as a % of |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Credit |
|
Performing/ |
|
Original |
|
|
Performing |
|
|
Excess |
|
Deal Name |
|
Par Value |
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Rating(2) |
|
Remaining(3) |
|
Collateral |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
Subordination(4) |
|
Alesco II(1) |
|
$ |
41,241 |
|
|
$ |
31,540 |
|
|
$ |
11,118 |
|
|
$ |
(20,422 |
) |
|
C |
|
32/38 |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
Alesco IV(1) |
|
|
20,773 |
|
|
|
8,243 |
|
|
|
1,726 |
|
|
|
(6,517 |
) |
|
C |
|
31/44 |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
ICONS |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
13,500 |
|
|
|
(6,500 |
) |
|
BB |
|
28/29 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
I-Pre TSL II |
|
|
36,916 |
|
|
|
36,817 |
|
|
|
25,395 |
|
|
|
(11,422 |
) |
|
A |
|
28/29 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
MM Comm II |
|
|
21,085 |
|
|
|
20,150 |
|
|
|
18,679 |
|
|
|
(1,471 |
) |
|
BB |
|
4/7 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
MM Comm III |
|
|
11,150 |
|
|
|
10,653 |
|
|
|
7,185 |
|
|
|
(3,468 |
) |
|
CC |
|
7/11 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Pre TSL IX(1) |
|
|
5,026 |
|
|
|
4,035 |
|
|
|
1,617 |
|
|
|
(2,418 |
) |
|
C |
|
34/49 |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL X(1) |
|
|
17,595 |
|
|
|
9,915 |
|
|
|
3,322 |
|
|
|
(6,593 |
) |
|
C |
|
35/55 |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL XI(1) |
|
|
25,239 |
|
|
|
22,725 |
|
|
|
7,678 |
|
|
|
(15,047 |
) |
|
C |
|
43/64 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pre TSL XIII(1) |
|
|
27,939 |
|
|
|
22,703 |
|
|
|
6,398 |
|
|
|
(16,305 |
) |
|
C |
|
43/65 |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reg
Diversified(1) |
|
|
25,500 |
|
|
|
7,499 |
|
|
|
495 |
|
|
|
(7,004 |
) |
|
D |
|
23/44 |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
Soloso(1) |
|
|
12,500 |
|
|
|
3,906 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
(3,405 |
) |
|
C |
|
43/69 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tropic III |
|
|
31,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
|
|
9,877 |
|
|
|
(21,123 |
) |
|
CC |
|
25/45 |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
295,964 |
|
|
$ |
229,186 |
|
|
$ |
107,491 |
|
|
$ |
(121,695 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Security was determined to have OTTI. 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 the lowest rating is based on another nationally recognized credit rating agency. |
|
(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 CDO 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
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-earning assets and interest-bearing 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 redeem certificates of
deposit before maturity (option risk), changes in the shape of the yield curve where 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 LIBOR (basis risk).
46
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 recorded in noninterest income
and noninterest expense, these portfolios are included in the interest sensitivity analysis because
they have attributes similar to interest-earning assets. EVE analysis is used to measure the
sensitivity of the values of period-end assets and liabilities to changes in market interest rates.
EVE analysis serves as a complement to income simulation modeling as it provides risk exposure
estimates for time periods beyond the one-year simulation period.
The models used for these measurements take into account prepayment speeds on mortgage loans,
mortgage-backed securities, and consumer installment loans, as well as cash flows of other assets
and liabilities. Balance sheet growth assumptions are also
considered in the income simulation model. The models include the effects of derivatives,
such as interest rate swaps, caps, floors, and other types of interest rate options.
The baseline scenario for income simulation analysis, with which all other scenarios are
compared, is based on market interest rates implied by the prevailing yield curve as of the
period-end. Alternative interest rate scenarios are then compared with the baseline scenario.
These alternative interest rate scenarios include parallel rate shifts on both a gradual and an
immediate basis, movements in interest rates that alter the shape of the yield curve (e.g., flatter
or steeper yield curve), and no changes in current interest rates for the entire measurement
period. Scenarios are also developed to measure short-term repricing risks, such as the impact of
LIBOR-based interest rates rising or falling faster than the prime rate.
The simulations for evaluating short-term interest rate risk exposure are scenarios that model
gradual +/-100 and +/-200 basis points parallel shifts in market interest rates over the next
one-year period beyond the interest rate change implied by the current yield curve. We assumed
market interest rates would not fall below 0% over the next one-year period for the scenarios that
used the -100 and -200 basis points parallel shift in market interest rates. The table below shows
the results of the scenarios as of March 31, 2011, and December 31, 2010. All of the positions
were within the board of directors policy limits as of March 31, 2011, except for the -100 basis
points scenario.
Table 34 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, 2011 |
|
|
-3.5 |
|
|
|
-2.7 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
-3.2 |
|
|
|
-1.8 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
The net interest income at risk reported as of March 31, 2011 for the +200 basis points
scenario shows a significant change to an asset sensitive near-term interest rate risk position
compared with December 31, 2010. The ALCOs strategy is to be near-term asset-sensitive to a
rising rate scenario. The primary factor contributing to this change is the termination of $4.1
billion of interest rate swaps maturing through June 2012. The terminations also impacted exposure
to declining interest rate scenarios, resulting in the -100 basis points scenario exceeding the
board of directors policy limit. A key factor which impacts the exposure to declining interest
rates is an assumption that rates paid on deposit products, such as money market accounts, savings
accounts, and interest-bearing checking accounts, will not decline much further from current rates
being paid. However, management would most likely lower the rates on these deposit products if the
economic climate associated with a declining interest rate environment warranted such action. The
ALCO recommended, and the board approved, an exception to the policy limit noting a low probability
of rates going lower. The ALCO has no immediate plans to take any action at this time to bring the
down 100 basis point scenario results within policy limits.
The following table shows the income sensitivity of select portfolios to changes in market
interest rates. A portfolio with 100% sensitivity would indicate that interest income and expense
will change with the same magnitude and direction as interest rates. A portfolio with 0%
sensitivity is insensitive to changes in interest rates. For the +200 basis points scenario, total
interest-sensitive income is 41.6% sensitive to changes in market interest rates, while total
interest-sensitive expense is 43.3% sensitive to changes in market interest rates. However, net
interest income at risk for the +200 basis points scenario has a neutral near-term interest rate
risk position because of the larger base of total interest-sensitive income relative to total
interest-sensitive expense.
47
Table 35 Interest Income/Expense Sensitivity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of |
|
|
Percent Change in Interest Income/Expense for a Given |
|
|
|
Total Earning |
|
|
Change in Interest Rates |
|
|
|
Assets (1) |
|
|
Over / (Under) Base Case Parallel Ramp |
|
Basis point change scenario |
|
|
|
|
-200 |
|
|
-100 |
|
|
+100 |
|
|
+200 |
|
Total loans |
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
-21.5 |
% |
|
|
-32.1 |
% |
|
|
46.1 |
% |
|
|
46.3 |
% |
Total investments and other earning assets |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
-18.9 |
|
|
|
-22.0 |
|
|
|
38.7 |
|
|
|
28.4 |
|
Total interest sensitive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-20.4 |
|
|
|
-29.3 |
|
|
|
43.4 |
|
|
|
41.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
-9.9 |
|
|
|
-11.7 |
|
|
|
41.1 |
|
|
|
38.8 |
|
Total borrowings |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
-20.5 |
|
|
|
-38.4 |
|
|
|
71.5 |
|
|
|
72.1 |
|
Total interest-sensitive expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-11.3 |
|
|
|
-15.4 |
|
|
|
45.2 |
|
|
|
43.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 36 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, 2011 |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
-3.5 |
|
|
|
-7.7 |
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
-0.5 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
-4.0 |
|
|
|
-8.9 |
|
The EVE at risk reported as of March 31, 2011, for the +200 basis points scenario shows a
change to a lower long-term liability sensitive position compared with December 31, 2010. The
primary factor contributing to this change is the termination of $4.1 billion of interest rate
swaps maturing through June 2012.
The following table shows the economic value sensitivity of select portfolios to changes in
market interest rates. The change in economic value for each portfolio is measured as the percent
change from the base economic value for that portfolio. For the +200 basis points scenario, total
net tangible assets decreased in value 3.4% to changes in market interest rates, while total net
tangible liabilities increased in value 2.6% to changes in market interest rates.
Table 37 Economic Value Sensitivity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net |
|
|
Percent Change in Economic Value for a Given |
|
|
|
Tangible |
|
|
Change in Interest Rates |
|
|
|
Assets (1) |
|
|
Over / (Under) Base Case Parallel Shocks |
|
Basis point change scenario |
|
|
|
|
-200 |
|
|
-100 |
|
|
+100 |
|
|
+200 |
|
Total loans |
|
|
72 |
% |
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
|
-1.4 |
% |
|
|
-2.8 |
% |
Total investments and other earning assets |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
-3.3 |
|
|
|
-6.6 |
|
Total net tangible assets (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
-1.7 |
|
|
|
-3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
-2.6 |
|
|
|
-1.4 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
Total borrowings |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
-1.6 |
|
|
|
-0.8 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
Total net tangible liabilities (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-2.5 |
|
|
|
-1.3 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
At March 31, 2011. |
|
(2) |
|
Tangible assets excluding ALLL. |
|
(3) |
|
Tangible liabilities excluding AULC. |
MSRs
(This section should be read in conjunction with Note 5 of Notes to Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.)
At March 31, 2011, we had a total of $202.6 million of capitalized MSRs representing the right
to service $16.5 billion in mortgage loans. Of this $202.6 million, $119.2 million was recorded
using the fair value method, and $83.4 million was recorded using the amortization method. When we
actively engage in hedging, the MSR asset is carried at fair value.
48
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 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 a 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 presented in Table 9.
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.
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity risk is the risk of loss due to the possibility that funds may not be available to
satisfy current or future commitments resulting from external macro market issues, investor and
customer perception of financial strength, and events unrelated to us, such as war, terrorism, or
financial institution market specific issues. We manage liquidity risk at both the Bank and the
parent company.
Bank Liquidity and Sources of Liquidity
Our primary sources of funding for the Bank are retail and commercial core deposits. At March
31, 2011, these core deposits funded 74% of total assets. At March 31, 2011, total core deposits
represented 95% of total deposits, an increase from 93% at the prior year-end.
Core deposits are comprised of interest-bearing and noninterest-bearing demand deposits, money
market deposits, savings and other domestic 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 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.
Demand deposit overdrafts that have been reclassified as loan balances were $12.0 million,
$13.1 million, and $15.5 million at March 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, and March 31, 2010,
respectively.
Other domestic time deposits of $250,000 or more and brokered deposits and negotiable CDs
totaled $1.8 billion, $2.2 billion, and $2.3 billion at March 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, and
March 31, 2010, respectively.
49
The following table reflects deposit composition detail for each of the past five quarters:
Table 38 Deposit Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
By Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits
noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
7,597 |
|
|
|
18 |
% |
|
$ |
7,217 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
6,926 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
$ |
6,463 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
|
$ |
6,938 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
5,532 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
5,469 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
5,347 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
5,850 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5,948 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
13,105 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
13,410 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
12,679 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
11,437 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
10,644 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Savings and other domestic
deposits |
|
|
4,762 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,643 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
4,613 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
4,652 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,666 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
8,208 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
8,525 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
8,765 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
8,974 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
9,441 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
39,204 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
39,264 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
38,330 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
37,376 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
37,637 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Other domestic deposits of $250,000
or more |
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
678 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Brokered deposits and negotiable CDs |
|
|
1,253 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,532 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,576 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,373 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,605 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Deposits in foreign offices |
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
41,366 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
41,854 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
41,072 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,849 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
40,303 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
12,785 |
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
$ |
12,476 |
|
|
|
32 |
% |
|
$ |
12,262 |
|
|
|
32 |
% |
|
$ |
11,515 |
|
|
|
31 |
% |
|
$ |
11,844 |
|
|
|
31 |
% |
Personal |
|
|
26,419 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
26,788 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
26,068 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
25,861 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
25,793 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
$ |
39,204 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
39,264 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
38,330 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,376 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
37,637 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To the extent 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, FHLB advances, other long-term debt,
and subordinated notes. At March 31, 2011, total wholesale funding was $7.6 billion, a decrease
from $8.4 billion at December 31, 2010.
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, 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 the unused
borrowing capacity at both the Federal Reserve Bank and the FHLB, is outlined in the following
table:
Table 39 Federal Reserve and FHLB Borrowing Capacity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in billions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Loans and Securities Pledged: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Reserve Bank |
|
$ |
9.9 |
|
|
$ |
9.7 |
|
FHLB |
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
7.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and securities pledged |
|
$ |
17.4 |
|
|
$ |
17.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total unused borrowing capacity at Federal Reserve Bank and FHLB |
|
$ |
9.5 |
|
|
$ |
8.8 |
|
We can also obtain funding through other methods including: (1) purchasing federal funds,
(2) selling securities under repurchase agreements, (3) the sale or maturity of investment
securities, (4) the sale or securitization of loans, (5) the sale of national market certificates
of deposit, (6) the relatively shorter-term structure of our commercial loans and automobile loans,
and (7) the issuance of common and preferred stock.
At March 31, 2011, we believe the Bank has sufficient liquidity to meet its cash flow
obligations for the foreseeable future.
50
Parent Company Liquidity
The parent companys funding requirements consist primarily of dividends to shareholders, debt
service, income taxes, operating expenses, funding of nonbank subsidiaries, repurchases of our
stock, and acquisitions. The parent company obtains funding to meet obligations from interest
received from the Bank, interest and 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, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the parent company had $0.6 billion in cash and cash
equivalents. Appropriate limits and guidelines are in place to ensure the parent company has
sufficient cash to meet operating expenses and other commitments during 2011 without relying on
subsidiaries or capital markets for funding.
During the 2010 fourth quarter, we completed a public offering and sale of 146.0 million
shares of common stock at a price of $6.30 per share, or $920.0 million in aggregate gross
proceeds. Also during the 2010 fourth quarter, we completed the public offering and sale of $300.0
million aggregate principal amount of 7.00% Subordinated Notes due 2020. We used the net proceeds
from these transactions to repurchase our TARP Capital. On January 19, 2011, we repurchased the
warrant we had issued to the Treasury at an agreed upon purchase price of $49.1 million. The
warrant had entitled the Treasury to purchase 23.6 million shares of common stock.
Based on the current dividend of $0.01 per common share, cash demands required for common
stock dividends are estimated to be approximately $8.6 million per quarter. Based on the current
dividend, cash demands required for Series A Preferred Stock are estimated to be approximately $7.7
million per quarter.
Based on a regulatory dividend limitation, the Bank could not have declared and paid a
dividend to the parent company at March 31, 2011, without regulatory approval. We do not
anticipate that the Bank will need to request regulatory approval to pay dividends in the near
future as we continue to build Bank regulatory capital above its 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 $50.0 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.
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, 2011, we had $0.6 billion
of standby letters of credit outstanding, of which 77% were collateralized. Included in this $0.6
billion are letters of credit issued by the Bank that support securities that were issued by our
customers and remarketed by The Huntington Investment Company, our broker-dealer subsidiary.
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 mortgage loans held for sale. At March 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, and March 31, 2010, we
had commitments to sell residential real estate loans of $360.9 million, $998.7 million, and $600.9
million, respectively. These contracts mature in less than one year.
We do not believe that off-balance sheet arrangements will have a material impact on our
liquidity or capital resources.
51
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 risks, we have established a senior management Operational Risk
Committee and a senior management Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance Committee. The
responsibilities of these committees, among other duties, 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 ensuring that recommendations are developed 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 our Board Risk Oversight Committee, as appropriate.
The goal of this framework is to implement effective operational risk techniques and
strategies, minimize operational and fraud losses, and enhance our overall performance.
Representation and Warranty Reserve
We primarily conduct our loan sale and securitization activity with Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. In connection with these and other securitization transactions, we make certain
representations and warranties that the loans meet certain criteria, such as collateral type and
underwriting standards. We may be required to repurchase individual loans and / or indemnify these
organizations against losses due to a loan not meeting the established criteria. We have a reserve
for such losses, which is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities. The reserves were
estimated based on historical and expected repurchase activity, average loss rates, and current
economic trends. The level of mortgage loan repurchase losses depends upon economic factors,
investor demand strategies and other external conditions containing a level of uncertainty and risk
that may change over the life of the underlying loans. We do not believe we have sufficient
information to estimate the range of reasonably possible loss related to representation and
warranty exposure.
The table below reflects activity in the representations and warranties reserve:
Table 40 Summary of Reserve for Representations and Warranties on Mortgage Loans Serviced for Others
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
First |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Reserve for representations and warranties, beginning of
period |
|
$ |
20,170 |
|
|
$ |
18,026 |
|
|
$ |
10,519 |
|
|
$ |
5,920 |
|
|
$ |
5,916 |
|
Acquired reserve for representations and warranties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve charges |
|
|
(270 |
) |
|
|
(4,242 |
) |
|
|
(1,787 |
) |
|
|
(1,875 |
) |
|
|
(1,108 |
) |
Provision for representations and warranties |
|
|
3,885 |
|
|
|
6,386 |
|
|
|
2,294 |
|
|
|
6,474 |
|
|
|
1,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve for representations and warranties, end of period |
|
$ |
23,785 |
|
|
$ |
20,170 |
|
|
$ |
18,026 |
|
|
$ |
10,519 |
|
|
$ |
5,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreclosure Documentation
Recently, several high volume servicers have announced the execution of consent orders with
various federal regulators. Those consent orders do not preclude the assessment of civil money
penalties in the future by the regulators.
Compared to the high volume servicers, we service a relatively low volume of residential
mortgage foreclosures, with approximately 3,900 foreclosure cases as of March 31, 2011, in states
that require foreclosures to proceed through the courts. We have reviewed and are continuing to
review our residential foreclosure process. We have no reason to conclude that foreclosures were
filed that should not have been filed. We have and are strengthening our processes and controls to
ensure that our foreclosure processes do not have the deficiencies identified in those institutions
which are the subject of the consent orders.
Compliance Risk
Financial institutions are subject to a myriad of laws, rules and regulations emanating at
both the federal and state levels. These mandates cover a broad scope, including but not limited
to, expectations on anti-money laundering, lending limits, client privacy, fair lending, community
reinvestment, and other important areas. Recently, the volume and complexity of regulatory changes
adds to the overall compliance risk. At Huntington, we take these mandates seriously and have
invested in people, processes, and systems to help ensure we meet expectations. At the corporate
level, we have a team of compliance experts and lawyers dedicated to ensuring our conformance. We
provide, and require, training for our colleagues on a number of broad-based laws and regulations.
For example, all of our employees are expected to take, and pass, courses on anti-money laundering
and customer privacy. Those who are engaged in lending activities must also take training related
to flood disaster protection, equal credit opportunity, fair lending, and / or a variety of other
courses related to the extension of credit. We set a high standard of expectation for adherence to
compliance management and seek to continuously enhance our performance in this regard.
52
Capital
(This section should be read in conjunction with Significant Item 2.)
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 $5.0
billion at March 31, 2011, a slight increase from December 31, 2010, primarily reflecting an
increase in retained earnings.
We believe our current level of capital is adequate.
TARP Capital
As discussed in our 2010 Form 10-K, we fully exited our TARP relationship during the 2011
first quarter by repurchasing the ten-year warrant we had issued to the Treasury as part of the
TARP Capital for $49.1 million. Refer to the 2010 Form 10-K for a complete discussion regarding
the issuing and repayment of our TARP Capital.
Capital Adequacy
The following table presents risk-weighted assets and other financial data necessary to
calculate certain financial ratios that we use to measure capital adequacy.
Table 41 Capital Adequacy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
Consolidated capital calculations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shareholders equity |
|
$ |
4,676 |
|
|
$ |
4,618 |
|
|
$ |
3,867 |
|
|
$ |
3,742 |
|
|
$ |
3,678 |
|
Preferred shareholders equity |
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
|
|
1,692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
5,039 |
|
|
|
4,981 |
|
|
|
5,567 |
|
|
|
5,438 |
|
|
|
5,370 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
Other intangible assets |
|
|
(215 |
) |
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
(244 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(274 |
) |
Other intangible assets
deferred tax liability (1) |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible equity (2) |
|
|
4,455 |
|
|
|
4,388 |
|
|
|
4,964 |
|
|
|
4,826 |
|
|
|
4,747 |
|
Preferred shareholders equity |
|
|
(363 |
) |
|
|
(363 |
) |
|
|
(1,700 |
) |
|
|
(1,696 |
) |
|
|
(1,692 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible common equity (2) |
|
$ |
4,092 |
|
|
$ |
4,025 |
|
|
$ |
3,264 |
|
|
$ |
3,130 |
|
|
$ |
3,055 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
52,949 |
|
|
$ |
53,820 |
|
|
$ |
53,247 |
|
|
$ |
51,771 |
|
|
$ |
51,867 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(444 |
) |
Other intangible assets |
|
|
(215 |
) |
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
(244 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(274 |
) |
Other intangible assets
deferred tax liability (1) |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible assets (2) |
|
$ |
52,365 |
|
|
$ |
53,227 |
|
|
$ |
52,644 |
|
|
$ |
51,159 |
|
|
$ |
51,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 capital |
|
$ |
5,179 |
|
|
$ |
5,022 |
|
|
$ |
5,480 |
|
|
$ |
5,317 |
|
|
$ |
5,090 |
|
Preferred shareholders equity |
|
|
(363 |
) |
|
|
(363 |
) |
|
|
(1,700 |
) |
|
|
(1,696 |
) |
|
|
(1,692 |
) |
Trust-preferred securities |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
(570 |
) |
REIT-preferred stock |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity (2) |
|
$ |
4,196 |
|
|
$ |
4,039 |
|
|
$ |
3,160 |
|
|
$ |
3,001 |
|
|
$ |
2,778 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-weighted assets (RWA) |
|
$ |
43,024 |
|
|
$ |
43,471 |
|
|
$ |
42,759 |
|
|
$ |
42,486 |
|
|
$ |
42,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity / RWA ratio (2) |
|
|
9.75 |
% |
|
|
9.29 |
% |
|
|
7.39 |
% |
|
|
7.06 |
% |
|
|
6.53 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible equity / tangible asset ratio (2) |
|
|
8.51 |
|
|
|
8.24 |
|
|
|
9.43 |
|
|
|
9.43 |
|
|
|
9.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible common equity / tangible asset ratio (2) |
|
|
7.81 |
|
|
|
7.56 |
|
|
|
6.20 |
|
|
|
6.12 |
|
|
|
5.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible common equity / RWA ratio (2) |
|
|
9.51 |
|
|
|
9.26 |
|
|
|
7.63 |
|
|
|
7.37 |
|
|
|
7.18 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Other intangible assets are net of deferred tax liability, and calculated assuming a 35% tax rate. |
|
(2) |
|
Tangible equity, Tier 1 common equity, tangible common equity, and tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures. Additionally, any ratios utilizing these financial measures are
also non-GAAP. These financial measures have been included as they are considered to be critical metrics with which to analyze and evaluate financial condition and capital strength.
Other companies may calculate these financial measures differently. |
53
Our consolidated TCE ratio was 7.81% at March 31, 2011, an increase from 7.56% at
December 31, 2010. The 25 basis point increase from December 31, 2010, primarily reflected the
combination of an increase in retained earnings and lower period-end tangible assets, partially
offset by the repurchase of the TARP warrant during the current quarter.
Regulatory Capital
Regulatory capital ratios are the primary metrics used by regulators in assessing the safety
and soundness of banks. We intend to maintain both our and the Banks risk-based capital ratios at
levels at which both would be considered Well-capitalized by regulators. The Bank is primarily
supervised and regulated by the OCC, which establishes regulatory capital guidelines for banks
similar to those established for bank holding companies by the Federal Reserve Board.
Regulatory capital primarily consists of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital. The sum of Tier 1
capital and Tier 2 capital equals our total risk-based capital. The following table reflects
changes and activity to the various components utilized in the calculation of our consolidated Tier
1, Tier 2, and total risk-based capital amounts during the first three-month period of 2011.
Table 42 Consolidated Regulatory Capital Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disallowed |
|
|
Disallowed |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Shareholders |
|
|
Shareholders |
|
|
Qualifying |
|
|
Goodwill & |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Tier 1 |
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Equity (1) |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
Core Capital (2) |
|
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
Adjustments (net) |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
4,815.1 |
|
|
$ |
362.5 |
|
|
$ |
620.3 |
|
|
$ |
(607.2 |
) |
|
$ |
(168.9 |
) |
|
$ |
5,021.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
126.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126.4 |
|
Changes to disallowed adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
21.0 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
(16.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.3 |
) |
Repurchase of TARP Capital warrant |
|
|
(49.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49.1 |
) |
Disallowance of deferred tax assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71.3 |
|
|
|
71.3 |
|
Other |
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
4,879.6 |
|
|
$ |
362.5 |
|
|
$ |
620.3 |
|
|
$ |
(585.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(98.3 |
) |
|
$ |
5,178.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total risk-based capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualifying |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Qualifying |
|
|
Subordinated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
risk-based |
|
|
|
ACL |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Tier 2 Capital |
|
|
(from above) |
|
|
capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
552.3 |
|
|
$ |
710.5 |
|
|
$ |
1,262.8 |
|
|
$ |
5,021.8 |
|
|
$ |
6,284.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in qualifying
subordinated debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45.2 |
) |
|
|
(45.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45.2 |
) |
Change in qualifying ACL |
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
Changes to Tier 1 Capital (see
above) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156.8 |
|
|
|
156.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
545.7 |
|
|
$ |
665.3 |
|
|
$ |
1,211.0 |
|
|
$ |
5,178.6 |
|
|
$ |
6,389.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes accumulated other comprehensive income and minority interest. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes minority interest. |
54
The following table presents our regulatory capital ratios at both the consolidated and
Bank levels for each of the past five quarters:
Table 43 Regulatory Capital Ratios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
Total risk-weighted assets (in millions) |
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
43,024 |
|
|
$ |
43,471 |
|
|
$ |
42,759 |
|
|
|
42,486 |
|
|
$ |
42,522 |
|
|
|
Bank |
|
|
42,750 |
|
|
|
43,281 |
|
|
|
42,503 |
|
|
|
42,249 |
|
|
|
42,511 |
|
Tier 1 leverage ratio |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
9.80 |
% |
|
|
9.41 |
% |
|
|
10.54 |
% |
|
|
10.45 |
% |
|
|
10.05 |
% |
|
|
Bank |
|
|
7.23 |
|
|
|
6.97 |
|
|
|
6.85 |
|
|
|
6.54 |
|
|
|
5.99 |
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
12.04 |
|
|
|
11.55 |
|
|
|
12.82 |
|
|
|
12.51 |
|
|
|
11.97 |
|
|
|
Bank |
|
|
8.87 |
|
|
|
8.51 |
|
|
|
8.28 |
|
|
|
7.80 |
|
|
|
7.11 |
|
Total risk-based capital ratio |
|
Consolidated |
|
|
14.85 |
|
|
|
14.46 |
|
|
|
15.08 |
|
|
|
14.79 |
|
|
|
14.28 |
|
|
|
Bank |
|
|
13.11 |
|
|
|
12.82 |
|
|
|
12.69 |
|
|
|
12.23 |
|
|
|
11.53 |
|
The increase in our consolidated Tier 1 risk-based capital ratios compared with December
31, 2010 primarily reflected current quarter earnings, a reduction in the disallowed deferred tax
asset, and a slight decline in risk-weighted assets, partially offset by the negative impact
related to the repurchase of the TARP warrants.
At March 31, 2011, our Tier 1 and total risk-based capital in excess of the minimum level
required to be considered Well-capitalized were $2.6 billion and $2.1 billion, respectively. The
Bank had Tier 1 and total risk-based capital in excess of the minimum level required to be
considered Well-capitalized of $1.2 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, at March 31, 2011.
Other Capital Matters
Our strong capital ratios and expectations for continued earnings growth positions us to
actively explore capital management opportunities, including raising our dividend.
55
BUSINESS SEGMENT DISCUSSION
Overview
This section reviews financial performance from a business segment perspective and should be
read in conjunction with the Discussion of Results of Operations, Note 17 of the Notes to Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, and other sections for a full understanding of our
consolidated financial performance.
Business segment results are determined based upon our management reporting system, which
assigns balance sheet and income statement items to each of the business segments. The process is
designed around our organizational and management structure and, accordingly, the results derived
are not necessarily comparable with similar information published by other financial institutions.
Funds Transfer Pricing
We use an active and centralized FTP methodology to attribute appropriate net interest income
to the business segments. The intent of the FTP methodology is to eliminate all interest rate risk
from the business segments by providing matched duration funding of assets and liabilities. The
result is to centralize the financial impact, management, and reporting of interest rate and
liquidity risk in the Treasury / Other function where it can be centrally monitored and managed.
The Treasury / Other function charges (credits) an internal cost of funds for assets held in (or
pays for funding provided by) each business segment. The FTP rate is based on prevailing market
interest rates for comparable duration assets (or liabilities), and includes an estimate for the
cost of liquidity (liquidity premium). Deposits of an indeterminate maturity receive an FTP credit
based on a combination of vintage-based average lives and replicating portfolio pool rates. Other
assets, liabilities, and capital are charged (credited) with a four-year moving average FTP rate.
The denominator in the net interest margin calculation has been modified to add the amount of net
funds provided by each business segment for all periods presented.
Revenue Sharing
Revenue is recorded in the business segment responsible for the related product or service.
Fee sharing is recorded to allocate portions of such revenue to other business segments involved in
selling to, or providing service to, customers. Results of operations for the business segments
reflect these fee sharing allocations.
Expense Allocation
The management accounting process that develops the business segment reporting utilizes
various estimates and allocation methodologies to measure the performance of the business segments.
Expenses are allocated to business segments using a two-phase approach. The first phase consists
of measuring and assigning unit costs (activity-based costs) to activities related to product
origination and servicing. These activity-based costs are then extended, based on volumes, with
the resulting amount allocated to business segments that own the related products. The second
phase consists of the allocation of overhead costs to all four business segments from Treasury /
Other. We utilize a full-allocation methodology, where all Treasury / Other expenses, except those
related to our insurance business, reported Significant Items (except for the goodwill impairment),
and a small amount of other residual unallocated expenses, are allocated to the four business
segments.
Treasury / Other
The Treasury / Other function includes revenue and expense related to our insurance business,
and assets, liabilities, and equity not directly assigned or allocated to one of the four business
segments. Assets include investment securities, bank owned life insurance, and the OREO properties
acquired through the 2009 first quarter Franklin restructuring. The financial impact associated
with our FTP methodology, as described above, is also included.
Net interest income includes the impact of administering our investment securities portfolios
and the net impact of derivatives used to hedge interest rate sensitivity. Noninterest income
includes insurance income, miscellaneous fee income not allocated to other business segments, such
as bank owned life insurance income and any investment security and trading asset gains or losses.
Noninterest expense includes any insurance-related expenses, as well as certain corporate
administrative, merger, and other miscellaneous expenses not allocated to other business segments.
The provision for income taxes for the business segments is calculated at a statutory 35% tax rate,
though our overall effective tax rate is lower. As a result, Treasury / Other reflects a credit
for income taxes representing the difference between the lower actual effective tax rate and the
statutory tax rate used to allocate income taxes to the business segments.
56
Net Income by Business Segment
We reported net income of $126.4 million during the first three-month period of 2011. This
compared with net income of $39.7 million during the first three-month period of 2010. The
segregation of net income by business segment for the first three-month period of 2011 and 2010 is
presented in the following table:
Table 44 Net Income by Business Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Retail and Business Banking |
|
$ |
54,887 |
|
|
$ |
9,944 |
|
Regional and Commercial Banking |
|
|
24,067 |
|
|
|
(349 |
) |
AFCRE |
|
|
34,656 |
|
|
|
(40,637 |
) |
WGH |
|
|
9,448 |
|
|
|
17,923 |
|
Treasury/Other |
|
|
3,388 |
|
|
|
52,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net income |
|
$ |
126,446 |
|
|
$ |
39,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Loans/Leases and Deposits by Business Segment
The segregation of total average loans and leases and total average deposits by business
segment for the first three-month period of 2011, is presented in the following table:
Table 45 Average Loans/Leases and Deposits by Business Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regional and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail and |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury / |
|
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in millions) |
|
Business Banking |
|
|
Banking |
|
|
AFCRE |
|
|
WGH |
|
|
Other |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Average Loans/Leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
2,966 |
|
|
$ |
7,480 |
|
|
$ |
1,803 |
|
|
$ |
774 |
|
|
$ |
98 |
|
|
$ |
13,121 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
5,565 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
3,418 |
|
|
|
7,803 |
|
|
|
7,368 |
|
|
|
958 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
19,645 |
|
Automobile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,701 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
6,907 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
7,728 |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
1,048 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,410 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4,465 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer |
|
|
8,362 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
5,840 |
|
|
|
4,234 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
18,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
11,780 |
|
|
$ |
7,824 |
|
|
$ |
13,208 |
|
|
$ |
5,192 |
|
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
38,098 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits
noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
3,511 |
|
|
$ |
2,032 |
|
|
$ |
394 |
|
|
$ |
1,259 |
|
|
$ |
137 |
|
|
$ |
7,333 |
|
Demand deposits interest-bearing |
|
|
4,406 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
811 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5,357 |
|
Money market deposits |
|
|
8,297 |
|
|
|
1,280 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
3,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,492 |
|
Savings and other domestic deposits |
|
|
4,533 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,701 |
|
Core certificates of deposit |
|
|
8,202 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8,391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits |
|
|
28,949 |
|
|
|
3,446 |
|
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
6,023 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
39,274 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
2,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
29,139 |
|
|
$ |
3,666 |
|
|
$ |
763 |
|
|
$ |
7,394 |
|
|
$ |
702 |
|
|
$ |
41,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
Retail and Business Banking
Table 46 Key Performance Indicators for Retail and Business Banking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands unless otherwise noted) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
235,845 |
|
|
$ |
203,405 |
|
|
$ |
32,440 |
|
|
|
16 |
% |
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
23,694 |
|
|
|
67,974 |
|
|
|
(44,280 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Noninterest income |
|
|
94,428 |
|
|
|
94,645 |
|
|
|
(217 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
222,137 |
|
|
|
214,777 |
|
|
|
7,360 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
29,555 |
|
|
|
5,355 |
|
|
|
24,200 |
|
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
54,887 |
|
|
$ |
9,944 |
|
|
$ |
44,943 |
|
|
|
452 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of employees (full-time equivalent) |
|
|
5,460 |
|
|
|
5,213 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total average assets (in millions) |
|
$ |
13,157 |
|
|
$ |
13,158 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total average loans/leases (in millions) |
|
|
11,780 |
|
|
|
11,779 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total average deposits (in millions) |
|
|
29,139 |
|
|
|
28,371 |
|
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
3.26 |
% |
|
|
2.90 |
% |
|
|
0.36 |
% |
|
|
12 |
|
NCOs |
|
$ |
39,008 |
|
|
$ |
69,718 |
|
|
$ |
(30,710 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
NCOs as a % of average loans and leases |
|
|
1.32 |
% |
|
|
2.37 |
% |
|
|
(1.05 |
)% |
|
|
(44 |
) |
Return on average common equity |
|
|
15.2 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
|
424 |
|
Retail banking # DDA households (eop) |
|
|
1,005,107 |
|
|
|
936,081 |
|
|
|
69,026 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Business banking # business DDA relationships (eop) |
|
|
122,271 |
|
|
|
114,335 |
|
|
|
7,936 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
N.R. Not relevant, as denominator of calculation is a loss in prior period compared with income in current period. |
|
eop End of Period. |
2011 First Three Months vs. 2010 First Three Months
Retail and Business Banking reported net income of $54.9 million for the first three-month
period of 2011, compared with net income of $9.9 million in the first three-month period of 2010.
As discussed further below, the $44.9 million increase included a $32.4 million, or 16%, increase
in the net interest income and a $44.3 million, or 65%, decline in the provision for credit losses,
partially offset by a $24.2 million increase in income taxes.
Net interest income increased $32.4 million, or 16%, primarily reflecting a $0.8 billion
increase in average total deposits, a 39 basis point improvement in our deposit spread, and a 7%
increase in the number of DDA households. These increases were the result of increased sales
results throughout 2010 and 2011, particularly in our money market and checking account deposit
products through the use of more targeted direct mail and advertising of 24-Hour Grace, part of
our Fair Play banking philosophy.
Total average loans and leases were flat between the first three-month period of 2011, and the
first three-month period in 2010. The CRE portfolio declined $103 million and reflected our
ongoing commitment to reduce our exposure to CRE loans. This CRE decrease was partially offset by
a $50 million increase in our C&I portfolio. We also sold SBA loans of $38.0 million, and the
gains are referenced below.
Provision for credit losses declined $44.3 million, or 65%, reflecting lower NCOs and
improvement in delinquencies. NCOs declined $30.7 million, or 44%, and reflected a $10.1 million
decline in total commercial NCOs, and a $20.7 million decline in total consumer NCOs. The decrease
in NCOs reflected a lower level of large dollar charge-offs, improvement in delinquencies, and an
improved credit environment.
58
Noninterest income decreased $0.2 million, or 0.2%, reflecting a $14.6 million decline in
deposit service charges resulting from the amendment to Reg E, the reduction or elimination of
certain overdraft fees, and the introduction of our new 24-Hour Grace consumer checking feature.
The decrease was partially offset by (1) $3.6 million increase in electronic banking income,
primarily reflecting an increased number of deposit accounts and transaction volumes, (2) $2.3
million increase in mortgage banking income, (3) $1.0 million increase in brokerage and insurance
income, and (4) $7.5 million increase in other income primarily related to recognition of
additional gains on sales of SBA loans.
Noninterest expense increased $7.3 million, or 3%. This increase reflected: (1) $5.4 million
increase in personnel expense reflecting a 5% increase in full-time equivalent employees and salary
increases, (2) $5.5 million increase in marketing expenses related to branch and product
advertising and direct mail efforts, and branch and ATM branding investments in support of
strategic initiatives, and (3) $1.0 million increase in equipment expenses related to branch
refurbishment and rebrand strategies. These increases were partially offset by: (1) $1.8 million
improvement in OREO losses, (2) $1.1 million of lower allocated expenses, and (3) $1.4 million of
lower amortization of intangibles expense.
59
Regional and Commercial Banking
Table 47 Key Performance Indicators for Regional and Commercial Banking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands unless otherwise noted) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
57,438 |
|
|
$ |
50,831 |
|
|
$ |
6,607 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
5,969 |
|
|
|
41,207 |
|
|
|
(35,238 |
) |
|
|
(86 |
) |
Noninterest income |
|
|
29,238 |
|
|
|
25,393 |
|
|
|
3,845 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
43,681 |
|
|
|
35,554 |
|
|
|
8,127 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
|
|
12,959 |
|
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
13,147 |
|
|
|
(6,993 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
24,067 |
|
|
$ |
(349 |
) |
|
$ |
24,416 |
|
|
|
N.R. |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of employees (full-time equivalent) |
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total average assets (in millions) |
|
$ |
8,722 |
|
|
$ |
8,143 |
|
|
$ |
579 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total average loans/leases (in millions) |
|
|
7,824 |
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
|
|
502 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total average deposits (in millions) |
|
|
3,666 |
|
|
|
3,130 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
2.99 |
% |
|
|
2.77 |
% |
|
|
0.22 |
% |
|
|
8 |
|
NCOs |
|
$ |
15,160 |
|
|
$ |
40,509 |
|
|
$ |
(25,349 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
NCOs as a % of average loans and leases |
|
|
0.78 |
% |
|
|
2.21 |
% |
|
|
(1.43 |
)% |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Return on average common equity |
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
14.3 |
|
|
|
N.R. |
|
|
|
|
N.R. Not relevant, as denominator of calculation is a loss in prior period compared with income in current period. |
2011 First Three Months vs. 2010 First Three Months
Regional and Commercial Banking reported net income of $24.1 million in the first three-month
period of 2011, compared with a net loss of $0.3 million in the first three-month period of 2010.
This $24.4 million improvement reflected a $35.2 million decline in provision for credit losses.
The increased earnings also reflected significant improvement in our net interest income and
noninterest income due to the successful execution of our strategic initiatives. Noninterest
expense and total FTEs have increased as a result of these strategic investments.
Net interest income increased $6.6 million, or 13%. The primary drivers of this increase are
due to: (1) $0.5 billion, or 7%, increase in average total loans and leases, (2) $0.6 billion, or
22%, increase in average core deposits, and (3) net interest margin expanded 22 basis points. The
commercial loan spread improved by 34 basis points primarily due to a lower cost of funds on our
renewals. In addition, as the liquidity position of the Bank improved in 2010, the liquidity
premium was lowered for new and renewed loans.
Average total loans and leases increased $0.5 billion, or 7%, primarily reflecting the
successful execution of our strategic initiatives, higher sales performance levels within our
primary markets, and investments in additional leadership, expertise and sales talent. Seven out
of our eleven markets experienced loan growth during this time period. Our core middle market loan
portfolio average balance grew $259 million from the 2010 first quarter. The majority of this
growth was due to marketing efforts and community development within our Michigan and Cleveland
markets. Our equipment finance portfolio grew $180 million, or 21%, from the 2010 first quarter
due to our focus on developing vertical strategies in business aircraft, rail, and syndications.
Our large corporate portfolio grew $279 million due to establishing relationships with targeted
prospects within our footprint.
We have made significant investments in our sales process, with an emphasis on our Optimal
Customer Relationship, or OCR, program which entails robust customer relationship planning, as well
as a renewed investment in technology, including a referral tracking system and new customer
relationship management system. These investments have resulted in loan originations in the 2011
first quarter that increased 75% from the year-ago period.
Total average deposits increased $0.5 billion, or 17%, primarily reflecting a $0.6 billion
increase in core deposits. The increase in core deposits primarily reflected: (1) $0.5 billion
increase in commercial savings and money market deposits; and (2) $0.1 billion increase in
commercial demand deposits. These increases were primarily a result of strategic initiatives to
deepen customer relationships, new and innovative product offerings, pricing discipline and sales &
retention initiatives.
60
The Commercial Relationship Manager sales teams were educated on the importance of liquidity
solutions in partnering with Treasury Management to deliver customer-focused solutions. This
partnership, combined with the value of depository solutions, enabled our relationship managers to
shift from a lending focus to a broader solutions-based cross-selling approach, including
depository solutions. Targeted money market promotions and sales campaigns for loans and other
products were deployed in Regional and Commercial Banking. They served as an effective door
opener to drive success in ultimately obtaining operating account
supported with Treasury management solutions which generally produce longer relationships.
Best practices from each region were shared and institutionalized. A money desk was created to
assist commercial bankers with tailored pricing solutions for customers having complex large dollar
depository needs. This additional support and expertise helped our bankers win relationships and
encouraged their expanded prospecting efforts.
Provision for credit losses declined $35.2 million, or 86%, reflecting improved credit quality
of the portfolio, as well as a $25.3 million decline in NCOs. Expressed as a percentage of related
average balances, NCOs decreased to 0.78% in the 2011 first quarter from 2.21% in the 2010 first
quarter. The decline was primarily driven by $27.4 million lower C&I NCOs, partially offset by
$2.4 million higher CRE NCOs. The overall decline in NCOs was the result of proactive treatment of
problem credits since mid-2009, an improved credit environment, and increased recoveries.
Noninterest income increased $3.8 million, or 15%, and primarily reflected: (1) $1.2 million
in derivatives revenue due to increased sales and trading activities, (2) $1.3 million in brokerage
income reflecting the transfer of our institutional sales business to Regional and Commercial
Banking from WGH during the first three-month period of 2011, (3) $1.1 million in capital markets
income resulting from strategic investments made over the last year in these types of products and
services, and (4) $0.5 million increase of loan-related fees relating to the improved collection
efforts. These increases were partially offset by a $0.9 million decline in equipment operating
lease income as lease originations were structured as direct finance leases beginning in the 2009
second quarter.
Noninterest expense increased $8.1 million, or 23%, and reflected a $7.7 million increase in
personnel expense due to a 27% increase in full-time equivalent employees. This increase in
personnel is attributable to our strategic investments in our core footprint markets, vertical
strategies, and product capabilities.
61
Automobile Finance and Commercial Real Estate
Table 48 Key Performance Indicators for Automobile Finance and Commercial Real Estate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
Change |
|
(dollar amounts in thousands unless otherwise noted) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
87,849 |
|
|
$ |
77,044 |
|
|
$ |
10,805 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
4,784 |
|
|
|
117,639 |
|
|
|
(112,855 |
) |
|
|
(96 |
) |
Noninterest income |
|
|
13,379 |
|
|
|
17,101 |
|
|
|
(3,722 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Noninterest expense |
|
|
43,127 |
|
|
|
39,025 |
|
|
|
4,102 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
|
|
18,661 |
|
|
|
(21,882 |
) |
|
|