Ron Farnsworth
Analyst · Brandon King with Truist. Your line is now open
Okay. Thank you, Cort. And for those on the call, I am going to follow along. I will be referring to certain page numbers from our earnings presentation. Starting on page 11 of the slide presentation, which contains our performance ratios both on a GAAP and operating basis. The adjustments for our internal operating measures include various fair value changes from interest rate volatility along with merger and asset disposal costs, which are detailed in the appendix on slide 32. Our NIM continued to strengthen, up 47 basis points in Q3 to 3.88%. This drove improvement in our efficiency ratio and a continued increase in our PPNR and return metrics, both on a GAAP and operating basis. Our GAAP PPNR ROAA increased to 1.8%, while our operating PPNR ROAA increased to 2.1% and operating ROE increased to 15.9%. Turning now to page 12, which contains our summary quarterly P&L, our GAAP earnings for Q3 were $84 million or $0.39 per share. On an operating basis, we earned $103 million or $0.47 per share. For the moving parts as compared to Q2, net interest income increased $39.4 million or 16%, representing the power of our interest-bearing cash, skipping bonds and water falling down in the loans in the last few quarters, combined with the recent Fed rate increases. We added a provision for credit loss of $27.6 million, driven primarily by the continued strong loan growth and a slight deterioration in the consensus economic forecast. Non-interest income declined $25.8 million, reflecting lower home lending gain on sale revenue, along with the fair value adjustments driven by the significant bond market sell-off and higher yields. Namely rate-driven fair value losses on bonds and loans held at fair value, partially offset by net MSR and swap CVA gains, as detailed later on the right side of slide 32. And non-interest expense declined $1.6 million or 1%, mainly from lower mortgage banking and payroll tax expense. As for the balance sheet on slide 13, loans were up $1.1 billion and deposits increased $0.7 billion. This difference along with a targeted increase in interest-bearing cash was funded with short-term borrowings that mature by year end. The decline in investments AFS related primarily to the unrealized loss resulting from higher market yields this quarter. Our total available liquidity, including off-balance sheet sources ended the quarter at $14.4 billion, representing 46% to total assets and 54% of total deposits. As noted on the bottom of slide 13, our tangible book value declined due to the AOCI rate mark on AFS investments. But we also present measures for this and the TCE ratio, both including and excluding AOCI for reference. Slide 15 highlights net interest income, noting the increase to $288 million in Q3 resulted from the recent rate increases, along with continued strong loan growth. From a rate volume standpoint, increase in rates led a $29 million of the $39 million increase, with volume and mix making up the $10 million difference. Following that on slide 16, the trends for our net interest margin, noting again, our NIM increased 47 basis points in total to 3.88% in Q3. We represent a waterfall on the margin change on the right side of the page, knowing our loan and cash yields more than offset rising deposit costs. Key for me here is following the 150-basis-point increase to the federal funds rate during Q3. Our NIM for the month of September was 3.94% and another 6 basis points higher than the full Q3 amount, which bodes well for the remainder of the year. The next two slides include information which investors may find helpful on continued rate sensitivity. First, on slide 17, we provide the re-pricing and maturity characteristics of our loan portfolio. The first table on the upper left breaks down the pricing drivers on loans. Turning now to the quarter end, 34% of the portfolio is fixed, 30% is in floating rate and 36% are adjustable rates over time. The lower left table shows the maturity schedule by category. The upper right table shows the loan rate floor buckets for floating and adjustable rate loans, noting this has declined to less than 1% of the book. The lower right table breaks down the balances by rate change band along with the weighted average rate change required for these loans to move above their floor. Hopefully, investors and analysts will find this information useful in assessing the beneficial impact on net interest income of future potential rate hikes. And next on slide 18, on the left, we have included our projected net interest income sensitivity for future rate changes, in both ramp and shock scenarios over two years. This is a simulation we run in back test quarterly and assumes a static balance sheet. The deposit beta used in this simulation is 51% on interest-bearing deposits and it applies to future re-pricing, assuming future rate changes. The table on the right shows our deposit beta from the last rising rate cycle, starting Q3 2015 and running through Q3 2019 to catch the lag effect. Our beta then was 42% on interest-bearing deposits. Our cost of interest-bearing deposits increased from 11 basis points in Q2 to 23 basis points in Q3 or a net increase of 12 basis points and an implied re-pricing beta of 8% based on quarterly averages. The spot rate at September 30 was 38 basis points versus 10 basis points at June 30, for a net increase of 28 basis points during the quarter. We used the spot rates to help gauge movement and potential trajectory heading into the next quarter. This 28 basis points of spot rate increase is a deposit beta of 19% on the 150 basis points in Fed funds rate increases during Q3 and on a cumulative basis we were at 9%. For comparison, the loan coupon, though, increased by 59 basis points between June 30 and September 30. Tying everything together, we expect our interest-bearing deposit costs to increase again in Q4, but stay well below our model level, which will bode well for our NIM assuming additional Fed moves in November and potentially December. Okay, now to our segment disclosures, starting with the core banking segment on slide 21 of the presentation. Net interest income increased $39.5 million over Q2, given the higher rates and loan growth discussed previously. I will talk about CECL in the provision in detail here in a few minutes, but you will see here, we had a $27.6 million provision this quarter, again related to continued loan growth and slight deterioration in economic forecast variables. The next few rows show the fair value changes due to rising interest rates. I mean, as a Group, we are a $25 million loss in Q3, compared to a $10 million fair value loss in Q2. Non-interest income of $36.8 million increased from Q2 due to continued growth in commercial fees. And in the non-interest expense section, you will see the merger expense recognized to-date on the combination, along with exit and disposal costs related to lease exits on recent store consolidations. The direct non-interest expense for the Core Banking segment was up slightly this quarter primarily related to higher deferred loan costs back in Q2 not repeating in Q3. The efficiency ratio for the segment improved to 52%, meaning this would be 48% ex the non-operating fair value changes in merger exit costs. And the operator disclosure for the core banking segment back on page 34 in the appendix and also on page 24 of the release, it’s great to see the operating PPNR increased 45% year-over-year and 31% from Q2, which is good to see the beneficial -- benefit of continued loan growth and rate increases. This is significant and again bodes well for future core banking revenue with additional forecasted Fed funds rate increases. Turning now to slide 22 of the presentation, we show the mortgage banking segment five quarter trends. To start, the continued increase in longer term yields further depressed volumes and pipelines. We have $397 million in total held-for-sale volume this quarter, down 31% from Q2 due entirely to lower activity with higher rates. The gain on sale margin was 2.65%, up slightly from Q2. These two items resulted in the $10.5 million in origination and sale revenue noted towards the top left of the page. Our servicing revenue was stable and for the change in MSR fair value, the passage of time piece was stable, while the change due to valuation inputs was a gain of $16.4 million, due again to the increase in long-term rates during the quarter. We implemented the MSR hedge in August, offsetting $14 million of the MSR gain in line with expectations. Non-interest expense totaled $21.5 million for the quarter. Again, this represents held-for-sale origination costs, servicing costs along with administrative and allocated costs. The direct expense component of this was $10.5 million as noted on the right side of the page. As noted towards the bottom of the page, the MSRs at a record high valuation of 1.51% as of quarter end. A couple of final items before I turn it over to Frank, on slide 24, we have included the quarterly loan balance roll forward. Quarterly loan growth was driven by $1.9 billion in new originations and net advances, offset by $0.8 million of payoffs. Slides 25 and 26 provide additional stats and composition of the portfolio. And next, let me take your attention to slide 27 on CECL and our allowance for credit loss. As a reminder, our CECL process incorporates a life of loan reasonable and supportable period for the economic forecast for all portfolios, with the exception of C&I, which uses a 12-month reasonable and supportable period, reverting gradually to the output mean thereafter. We use the consensus economic forecast this quarter updated in August. Overall, the forecast reflected higher expected inflation and interest rates and a slight uptick in peak unemployment rates. With this, we recognized a $27.6 million provision for credit loss, with $12 million of that for the quarter’s strong loan growth and $15 million for slightly deteriorating economic variables. This page shows the commercial and leasing portfolio is driving the majority of the increase, as they are the most sensitive to the unemployment rate forecast, which increased slightly on peak from 3.7% to 4.1% over the horizon. The ACL increased to 1.16% at quarter end, up from 1.12% in Q2. And lastly, I want to highlight capital, on page 29, noting that all of our regulatory ratios remain in excess of well-capitalized levels. Our Tier 1 common ratio was 10.7%, and our total risk-based capital ratio was 13.2%. The Bank level total risk-based capital ratio was 12.4%. And with that, I will now turn the call over to Frank Namdar to discuss credit.