First Glance 12L (4Q15)

Will 2015 be the High Point for District Bank Credit Quality?

February 22, 2016

Authors: Judy Plock, Colin Perez, Martin Karpuk, Michael Nimis, Kenneth Wang

Editors:Cynthia Course, David Doyle, George Mori, Gary Palmer, Ronald Pavlick, Daniel Phillips

This report is based upon preliminary data from 4Q2015 and prior Condition & Income Reports as well as other examination andeconomic sources. Data has been prepared primarily for bank supervisors and bankers. The opinions expressed in this publication arethose of the authors. Opinions are intended only for informational purposes, and are not formal opinions of, nor binding on, the FederalReserve Bank of San Francisco or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Data Inquiries: please contact sf.bsr.publications@sf.frb.orgPress Inquiries: please contact Media Relations at http://www.frbsf.org/our-district/press/

First Glance 12L: http://www.frbsf.org/banking/publications/first-glance-12l/

Financial Performance of Banks in the 12th Federal Reserve District (“12L”)

Table of ContentsHighlights: 12th District Overview and Hot Topics 3 – 6

Section 1: Economic ConditionsJob Growth Continued Despite Global Slowing 7 – 15

Section 2: Commercial Bank Performance

EarningsYear-End Profit Ratios Improved, Led by Further Cost Containment

Provisions and Loan Loss ReservesProvisioning Ramped Up in Fourth Quarter, Typical of the Season

Loan Growth and UnderwritingPortfolios Expanded Further; Underwriting May Be Shifting

Credit QualityImproved Conditions and Limited Credit Seasoning Benefited Trends

Liquidity and Interest Rate RiskA Flatter Yield Curve Could Alter Funding and Investment Incentives

CapitalRisk-Based Asset Growth Outpaced Capital Formation Rates

16

17 – 21

22 – 24

25 – 29

30 – 34

35 – 39

40

Section 3: Commercial Bank Regulatory Ratings and Trends 41 – 45

Appendix 1/2: Summary of Institutions / Technical Information 46 – 47

12 Months Dec-15

ID 4.0%

UT 3.4%

WA 2.8%

CA 2.8%

OR 2.8%

NV 2.7%

AZ 2.5%

HI 2.2%

AK 0.1%

Nation 2.0%

Year-Over-Year Change in Nonfarm Jobs (%)

(Based on Seasonally-Adjusted, 3-Month

Moving Avg.)

The 12th District’s economic picture remained bright in 2015. Jobs in the District expanded 2.8% duringthe year, down slightly from an annual rate of 3.0% in the third quarter, but faster than the nationalgrowth rate of 2.0%. Jobs expanded by more than 2% in each District state, with the exception of oil-exposed Alaska, where job growth was anemic (see table at right). Meanwhile, the District’s aggregateunemployment rate inched down to 5.6% by December 2015, versus 5.7% and 6.7% in the prior quarterand year, respectively.

Real estate values appreciated on a year-over-year basis, but the pace of future price gains may dependon the trajectory of interest rates, capital flows, and/or credit availability. Home prices increased fasterthan average across most District states and outpaced household income gains, straining affordability.Price and job trends stimulated additional construction. Commercial real estate (CRE) vacancies andrents remained stable-to-improving. Foreign capital and ample credit availability kept capitalization rateslow and buoyed commercial property values during 2015. Still, a strong pipeline of commercialconstruction and the prospect of higher interest rates could eventually pressure CRE capitalization rates,rent growth, and/or vacancies and demand for single-family home purchases.

Slowing abroad, especially in China, contributed to ongoing commodity price declines (see chart below),weakened emerging market prospects, and heightened volatility in global equity and sub-investmentgrade debt markets. Global slowing and the strong dollar weighed on net exports, trimming 47 bps. fromfourth quarter growth in U.S. gross domestic product (advance estimate, seasonally-adjusted annualrate). Locally, fourth quarter exports from 12th District states declined 10% year-over-year and job growthin manufacturing and other trade-related sectors slowed modestly. Although providing headwinds,commodity price gyrations and slowing abroad are not expected to derail the overall U.S. economy andhad little impact on the District’s community banks through year-end 2015.

12th District Overview“Will 2015 be the High Point for District Bank Credit Quality?”

20406080

100120

Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16

All Commodities EnergyIndustrial Metals Ag. & Livestock

Commodity Prices (Indexed, January 2011=100)*

3FRB-SF *S&P GSCI indices, based upon end-of-period spot values

% of Banks with Component or Composite Rating 3, 4, 5

12th District Overview, Continued

Avg. Credit Ratios–12th District

16.4%

9.4%

10.9%19.7%

17.9%

14.5%

10.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Composite

Sensitivity

Liquidity

Earnings

Management

Asset Quality

Capital

Nation12th Dist.

*Trimmed Means

-7%

0%

7%

14%

21%

28%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Dec

-01

Dec

-03

Dec

-05

Dec

-07

Dec

-09

Dec

-11

Dec

-13

Dec

-15

Deliquencies (left)Net C/O (left)Net Ln. Growth (right)

FRB-SF*Delinquent=30+ days past-due or nonaccrual; C/O= chargeoff (year-to-date); trimmed means

On the whole, 2015 may be a tough year to beat in terms of credit performance (see chart atleft). The average District net charge-off rate for a full year hit a record low at 0.02% andproblem asset levels were very low. That said, many mid- and large-sized banks reportedquarterly increases in commercial and industrial (C&I) loan delinquencies and losses, led byenergy sector woes. According to the January 2016 Federal Reserve Senior Loan OfficerSurvey (SLOS), some lenders expect C&I loans to deteriorate further in 2016. Meanwhile, theaverage one-year net loan growth rate accelerated slightly to 12.4% districtwide, and remainedwell-above a national average growth rate of 6.9%. Construction and land development (C&LD)and multifamily remained among the fastest-growing (but also smaller) credit segments.

The latest SLOS also suggested modestly tighter underwriting among a small net fraction ofrespondents for C&I and CRE loan categories during the fourth quarter of 2015. Modesttightening in recent quarters has come on the heels of several years of loosening. Lookingforward, a notable share of lenders responded that underwriting may tighten further in somecategories in the coming year, especially within the multifamily and C&LD loan segments.

Bank earnings performance also strengthened modestly in 2015. The District’s average year-to-date return on average assets (ROAA) increased to 0.91%, led by continued declines inoverhead ratios. Because of ongoing asset quality improvement, nearly half of the District’scommunity banks reported zero or negative provision expenses for the full year. Of note,however, provisions increased quarter-over-quarter among larger banks, often prompted by oil-and gas-related stress. Credit seasoning within rapidly-growing portfolios (and the eventualimplementation of Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) accounting), could lift provisionexpense burdens and pressure earnings prospectively.

Historically, rising short-term interest rates have been associated with widening net interestmargins among the District’s commercial banks. However, compared with the last ratetightening cycle (2004-2006), banks reported higher exposures to longer-dated loans andsecurities, potentially delaying asset repricing. Meanwhile, non-maturity deposits remainedelevated. Depositors in these categories may prove rate-sensitive and disintermediate or shift tocostlier time deposit products should rates increase.

Safety and soundness and consumer compliance ratings continued to improve. Roughly 84% ofDistrict banks were rated satisfactory or strong for safety and soundness (see chart at left). Inaddition, 96% or more were rated satisfactory or better for consumer compliance and/orcommunity reinvestment.

4

The following have been identified as areas of higher concern among 12th District-based,Federal Reserve-supervised institutions:

• Cyberthreats. Attacks continue to evolve in both complexity and frequency and exposeinstitutions to financial, operational, reputational, legal, and compliance risks. Forinstitutions outsourcing core banking operations and/or security administration, vendormanagement programs remain critical to managing and mitigating cyber threats.Inherent risks can increase from a variety of factors, such as system complexity,services and visibility. To assess vulnerabilities, institutions can use the FFIEC’sCybersecurity Assessment Tool (see SR letter 15-9 for more information).

• Bank Secrecy Act (BSA)/Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance. Although mostbanks in the District have satisfactory BSA compliance programs, the District’sgeographic, demographic, and political characteristics, coupled with the institutionalmix, continue to make BSA/AML a significant “hot topic.” BSA/AML-related criticismsnoted at bank examinations most often relate to internal controls (e.g., institutional riskassessments; customer due diligence, including customer risk assessments; andsuspicious activity monitoring programs). Concerns related to scarce complianceresources and ineffective independent tests are also emerging as examination themes.

• Quality of loan growth. The District’s average annual net loan growth has outpaced thenation’s for several years (see chart at right). While the expanding economy has likelyfueled much of the growth, various banker and examiner surveys suggest somerelaxation of underwriting standards in recent years and potentially aggressive loanpricing. Prior credit cycles have shown that the worst loans are underwritten during thebest economic times. As the credit cycle lengthens, it is important to re-assessexception trends and credit risk appetite to ensure ongoing, sound risk management.

• Lengthening asset maturities. In part because of the steep yield curve, institutions haveincreased their holdings of longer-dated assets over the past few years (see chart atright). In a rising interest rate environment, higher concentrations in longer-dated assetscould mute asset repricing and margin expansion and/or lead to mis-matches in rate-sensitive assets and liabilities, if not appropriately managed.

Hot Topics: Areas We are Monitoring Most Closely

Avg. Loans & Securities Repricing > 3 Yrs. / Assets*

FRB-SF 5*Trimmed means

Avg. Year-Over-YearNet Loan Growth*

12.4%

6.9%

0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%

10.0%12.0%14.0%

Dec-12

Dec-13

Dec-14

Dec-15

12th Dist. Nation

27%

43%

31%

45%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Dec-01

Dec-08

Dec-15

12th Dist. Nation

Additionally, these areas pose more moderate, but increasing, concern:

• Nonmaturity Deposit (NMD) reliance. NMDs (traditionally viewed as “core” deposits) have becomean increasingly important source of funding for most institutions. While these products have proveninexpensive in a low-rate environment, there is a concern that these funds may disintermediate ortransition to higher-cost deposit products in a rising interest rate environment. During the last ratetightening cycle (2004-2006), the mix of bank funding shifted away from NMDs and towards higher-cost time deposits and borrowings.

• Overhead expense ratios. Asset growth has led to some economies of scale (see chart below) andimproved efficiency ratios have helped boost profitability. Still, some banks may not be devotingsufficient resources to back-office operations, internal controls, and compliance programscommensurate with their increasing size and complexity.

• Commercial real estate (CRE) lending concentrations. Concentrations of CRE loans (i.e., nonfarm-nonresidential, multifamily, C&LD, and CRE-purpose loans) relative to capital have declined frompre-crisis peaks, due mainly to lower C&LD exposures. However, CRE concentrations have recentlyedged up and remain high in relation to national averages (see table at right). During the last twobanking crises, high CRE exposures, especially C&LD, led to severe credit problems and bankfailures. In a rising interest rate environment, debt service coverage ratios on variable-ratecommercial mortgages and commercial property values may weaken. Given developing risks,lenders should review SR letter 15-17, Interagency Statement on Prudent Risk Management forCommercial Real Estate Lending, which reiterates important risk considerations.

$4.7

$5.8

$4.0

$4.6

$3.5

$4.0

$4.5

$5.0

$5.5

$6.0

Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13 Dec-14 Dec-15

12th District Nation

Avg. Assets per Employee ($ Millions)*

6*Trimmed Means; **excludescredit card and zero-loan banks.

Hot Topics: Areas We are Monitoring Most Closely

FRB-SF

2005-15 Dec-15

OR 369.4%

CA 362.6%

AZ 361.6%

NV** 358.3%

WA 342.2%

AK 308.8%

ID 248.4%

UT 223.4%

HI 179.1%

Nation 195.4%

Average Commercial Real Estate Loans / Total Capital* (%)

7

Fundamentals:

Job Growth

Housing Market Metrics

Commercial Real Estate Market Conditions

Global Trade, Currencies, & Stock Markets

Section 1 - Economic Conditions

8

3.1%

-6.7%

2.8%

-1.5%

2.1%

-4.9%

2.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District Nation

Year-Over-Year Nonfarm Job Growth

Based on average nonfarm payroll levels over trailing three months; Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics.

District Job Growth Decelerated Modestly,But Continued to Outpace the Nation

FRB-SF

9

Home Price Appreciation Accelerated Across Most District States, but Slowed in Oil-Exposed Alaska

Source: Core Logic (for market level data maps, see http://www.newyorkfed.org/home-price-index/)

Year-Over-Year Change in Home Prices

FRB-SF

1.5%

5.6% 6.

0%

7.2% 7.3% 8.

0% 8.6% 9.

1%

10.3

%

6.3%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

AK AZ HI UT CA NV ID OR WA US

Dec-14 Sep-15 Dec-15Year-Over-Year Chg., Dec. 2015

449

87

166

85

17

100

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Dec

-94

Dec

-95

Dec

-96

Dec

-97

Dec

-98

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Single Family 2+ Family

10

Average Trailing 12-Mo. Housing Starts – West (Thousands Of Units, SAAR)

SAAR=seasonally adjusted annual rate; West=12th District plus CO, MT, NM, and WY; Sources: Census Bureau via Haver Analytics; *Zelman & Associates, The Blueprint

Housing Starts in the West Climbed Higher, but Single-Family Construction Remained Well Below Historical Average

FRB-SF

National Year-Over-YearChange in Starts* (%)

Property Type 2015 2016Forecast

2017Forecast

Single Family 13% 19% 13%

Multi-Family 5% 0% -4%

11

90

110

130

150

170

190

210

230

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Apartment

Retail

IndustrialOffice

National Real Estate Prices (Indexed, Dec. 2000 = 100)

Underlying commercial properties are institutionally held, mainly investment-grade; Sources: NCREIF Commercial Real Estate Transaction-Based Price Indices, Core Logic Home Price Index

In the Past 15 Years, Commercial Property Values Have Appreciated More Strongly Than Home Prices

FRB-SF

Cumulative Change in Price Indices (%)

Property Type

Dec-00 to

Dec-15

Dec-14 to

Dec-15

Apartment 132.6% 3.8%Retail 111.8% 3.4%

Industrial 87.0% 6.8%Office 85.6% 3.5%Home 68.1% 6.3%

Single-Family Home

12.5

%

10.2

%

6.9%

4.5%

12.3

%11

.8%

8.6%

7.4%

6.9% 7.4%

4.9%

5.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-16

Dec

-17

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-16

Dec

-17

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-16

Dec

-17

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-16

Dec

-17

Office Retail Industrial Apartment

Actual Forecast

Weighted Average Vacancy or Availability Rate – 12th District

12

According to Third-Party Forecasts, Vacancy Rates Are Expected to Remain Relatively Low or Decline Through 2017

FRB-SF

Based on aggregates across 15-16 large metropolitan areas; apartment data based upon number of units; other property types based upon square footage; Source: CBRE-Econometric Advisors

-15.0%

-12.0%

-9.0%

-6.0%

-3.0%

0.0%

3.0%

6.0%

9.0%

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-16

13

Average Annual Rent Growth – 12th District

FRB-SF

Third-Party Forecasts Suggest Rent Growth in Major Western Metros May Moderate in Office and Apartment Properties

Office

Industrial

RetailApartment

Annual 12 month rolling rent average across 15-16 large metropolitan areas; Source: CBRE-Econometric Advisors

Forecast

11%

13%

-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

OITP Currencies(per $US)

Major Currencies (per $US)

-10%

14OITP = other important trading partners; export data based dollar volumes and origin of movement; Sources: Federal Reserve (G.5, Nominal Indices) and WISER Trade via Haver Analytics

Year-Over-Year Change

Economic Slowing Abroad and Continued Dollar Strength Weighed on the District’s Export Activity in Late 2015

FRB-SF

Exports from12th Dist. States

Major Currency 13% Euro Area 14% Canada 18% Japan 6% UK 6% Switzerland 1% Australia 19% Sweden 14%OITP Currency 11% China 4% Mexico 21% South Korea 6% Taiwan 6% Hong Kong 0% Malaysia 27% Singapore 9% Brazil 51% India 6%OITP also includes Thailand, Philippines, Israel, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, and Venezuela.

Year-Over-Year % Change in Foreign Currency / $US (Based on 4th Qtr. Avgs.) 136

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Jan-

15

Feb-

15

Mar

-15

Apr-1

5

May

-15

Jun-

15

Jul-1

5

Aug-

15

Sep-

15

Oct

-15

Nov

-15

Dec

-15

Jan-

16

Feb-

16

MSCI Stock Market Indices (4-Week Moving Avg., Indexed, 12/31/2014 = 100)

91 U.S.85 Other Dev. Mkts.82 China*81 Asia Emerg. Mkts.*

67 Other Emerg. Mtks.

Markets continued to fall on fears of slowing global growth, leaving major indices down year-to-date through mid-February.

15*Asia Emerging Markets includes China; Source: MSCI Inc. (through 2/16/2016)

Global Stock Markets, Especially in Emerging Economies, Remained Volatile

FRB-SF

16

Earnings

Provisions and Loan Loss Reserves

Loan Growth and Underwriting

Credit Quality

Liquidity and Interest Rate Risk

Capital

See also “Banks at a Glance,” Bank Profiles by State:http://www.frbsf.org/banking/publications/banks-at-a-glance/

Section 2 Commercial Bank Performance

Note: Bank size groups are defined as small (<$10B), mid-sized ($10B-$50B), and large (>$50B) banks. The large bank group covers nationwide banks (a larger statistical population), while the other two groups cover 12th District banks.

17

1.87%2.13%

1.17% 1.30%1.57% 1.58%

1.20% 1.24%

-1.50%

-1.00%

-0.50%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District Nation

Earnings: Pretax Profit Ratios Improved, Outpacing the Nation

FRB-SF

Average Annualized Pretax Return on Average Assets (ROAA) (TE)

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; year-to-date annualized trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; for comparability, Pretax ROAAs are adjusted on a tax-equivalent (TE) basis to assume taxes are paid on income from tax-free municipal loans and securities

Net Interest Margins Were Not Responsiblefor the Earnings Boost at Most Banks

18

4.83%

5.21%

3.83%4.23% 4.26%

3.75%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

5.00%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; year-to-date annualized trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; for comparability, net interest income is adjusted on a tax-equivalent (TE) basis to assume taxes are paid on income from tax-free municipal loans and securities

Average Net Interest Income (TE) / Average Earning Assets

FRB-SF

Will Future Rate Increases Contribute to Margin Expansion,As Was the Case Between 2004 and 2006?

Based on 12th District commercial banks, excluding De Novos; quarterly annualized trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; data are presented on a tax-equivalent (TE) basis; average 3-month constant maturity U.S. Treasury (UST) Rate from Federal Reserve via Haver Analytics

5.8%

7.9%

4.2%4.8%

5.3%

3.8%

1.0%

2.6%

0.3%0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Avg. 3-Month U.S. Treasury Rate Interest Income / Avg. Earn. Assets Net Interest Income / Avg. Earn. Assets Interest Expense / Avg. Earn. Assets

Avg. Quarterly Annualized Rate –12th District

19

FRB-SF

Funding costs respond more slowly to rate changes than asset

yields.

3-Month UST+ 410 bps. 0.87%

0.63%0.75%

0.60%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

0.70%

0.80%

0.90%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

Declines during the crisis were partially due to net

losses on the sale of foreclosed real estate.

20Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; year-to-date annualized trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data

Avg. Noninterest Inc. / Avg. Assets

Mild Deterioration in Noninterest Income Ratios Were More Than Offset by Continued, Steep Drops in Overhead Ratios

FRB-SF

3.41%

3.53%

3.25%

3.08%3.02%

3.09%

2.91%2.86%

2.70%

2.80%

2.90%

3.00%

3.10%

3.20%

3.30%

3.40%

3.50%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

Avg. Noninterest Exp. / Avg. Assets

FRB-SF

The 12th District Had One of the Largest Gap BetweenGrowth in Total Assets and Growth in Noninterest Expenses

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; noninterest expense comparison made on full year totals

6.3%

8.9%

5.4%

4.3%

5.2%

4.7%

3.2% 3.5% 3.7%

2.8%

3.9%

10.6

%

4.2%4.5%

6.3%

4.0%

3.2%

5.0%

4.0%

2.9% 3.

3%

2.9% 3.1% 4.

0%

6.3%

3.7%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

Bos. NY Phil. Clev. Rich. Atl. Chi. St.Louis

Minn. KC Dallas SF Nation

Total Assets

Noninterest Expense

Average Year-Over-Year Growth Rate

21

FRB-SF

25%

23%

21%

23%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Negative Zero

% of 12th District Banks with YTD Provision Expense that was:

22Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; year-to-date (YTD); preliminary 12/31/15 data

Loan Loss Reserves: A Large Share of Community Banks Continued to Report Zero or Negative Provision Expenses

FRB-SF

% of Banks with Zero or Negative YTD

Provision Expenses

Bank Size Dec-2014

Dec-2015

District Small

(<$10B)47 % 48%

District Mid-Sized

($10B-$50B)

41% 31%

Nation Large

(>$50B)9% 3%

1.3%

2.7%

1.6%

5.6X

0.8X

3.9X

0.0X

1.0X

2.0X

3.0X

4.0X

5.0X

6.0X

7.0X

0.0%

0.4%

0.8%

1.2%

1.6%

2.0%

2.4%

2.8%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

ALLL / Loans not HFS (Left) ALLL / Noncurrent Loans (Right)

23Based on commercial banks based in the 12th District, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; ALLL = allowance for loan and lease losses; HFS = held for sale

ALLL / Total Loans not HFS (%) -- 12th District --

Low Provisioning, Strong Loan Growth, and Improved Credit Quality Reduced Average ALLL-to-Loan Ratios

FRB-SF

ALLL / Noncurrent Loans (X)

-3%

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Mar

-14

Jun-

14Se

p-14

Dec

-14

Mar

-15

Jun-

15Se

p-15

Dec

-15

Mar

-14

Jun-

14Se

p-14

Dec

-14

Mar

-15

Jun-

15Se

p-15

Dec

-15

Mar

-14

Jun-

14Se

p-14

Dec

-14

Mar

-15

Jun-

15Se

p-15

Dec

-15

District Small(<$10B)

District Mid-Sized($10B-$50B)

Nation Large(>$50B)

ALLL Loans Not HFSAverage Quarter-Over-Quarter Growth Rate

24

Of Note, Larger Banks Expanded Loan Loss Reservesin Late 2015, Spurred in Part by Oil and Gas Concerns

FRB-SF

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means (not merger adjusted); preliminary 12/31/15 data; ALLL = allowance for loan and lease losses; HFS = held for sale

Although large banks added to reserves in late 2015, loan growth for the duration of the year diluted ALLL-to-loan ratios relative to year-end 2014.

Average ALLL /Loans Not HFS (%)

by Bank Size

Bank Size Sep-2015

Dec-2015

District Small

(<$10B)1.64% 1.59%

District Mid-Sized

($10B-$50B)1.19% 1.16%

Nation Large

(>$50B)1.13% 1.12%

25Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means (not merger adjusted); preliminary 12/31/15 data; Nevada excludes credit card and zero-loan banks

Loan Growth: Average Net Loan Growth WasBrisk Throughout the West

FRB-SF

Avg. Year-Over-YearNet Loan Growth>= 10.0%

7.5 to 10.0%

5.2 to 7.5%

< 5.2%

U.S. = 6.9%

Average Year-Over-Year Net Loan Growth23% 19%

12% 9% 9%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

Dec

-07

Dec

-11

Dec

-15

Dec

-07

Dec

-11

Dec

-15

Dec

-07

Dec

-11

Dec

-15

Dec

-07

Dec

-11

Dec

-15

Dec

-07

Dec

-11

Dec

-15

Construction &Land Dev.

(C&LD)

Multifamily Nonfarm-Nonresidential

Commercial &Industrial

1-4 FamilyMortgages

District Nation

Average Year-Over-Year Loan Growth Rate

26

Growth Among (Relatively Small) C&LD and MultifamilyMortgage Portfolios Remained Especially Strong

FRB-SF

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means (not merger adjusted); preliminary 12/31/15 data

District 5.3% 4.9% 45.1% 16.1% 13.6%Nation 4.8% 2.1% 24.4% 12.8% 25.3%

Memo: Average Share of Total Loans

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means (not merger adjusted); preliminary 12/31/15 data; *non owner-occupied commercial real estate (CRE) includes construction and land development (C&LD), multifamily, and non owner-occupied nonfarm-nonresidential mortgages, plus CRE purpose loans not secured by real estate; **supervisory CRE thresholds defined as C&LD > 100% of total capital OR total non owner-occupied CRE > 300%of total capital with a three-year growth rate above 50%; Nevada excludes credit card and zero-loan banks 27

Loan Growth Helped Propel Already HighNon Owner-Occupied CRE Loan Concentrations*

FRB-SFFRB-SF

Avg. Non Owner- Occupied CRE Loans / Total Risk-

Based Capital (%)>= 200%

150 to 200%

100 to 150%

< 100%

U.S. = 119.1%

As of 12/31/15, roughly 15% of the District’s banks exceeded supervisory CRE concentration and/or growth thresholds**,

down from 57% in 2008 but above 8% nationally

Avg. Non Owner- Occupied CRE Loans / Total Risk-Based Capital

(20%)(15%)(10%)(5%)

0%5%

10%15%20%25%

Apr-1

4Ju

l-14

Oct

-14

Jan-

15Ap

r-15

Jul-1

5O

ct-1

5Ja

n-16

Apr-1

4Ju

l-14

Oct

-14

Jan-

15Ap

r-15

Jul-1

5O

ct-1

5Ja

n-16

Apr-1

4Ju

l-14

Oct

-14

Jan-

15Ap

r-15

Jul-1

5O

ct-1

5Ja

n-16

Apr-1

4Ju

l-14

Oct

-14

Jan-

15Ap

r-15

Jul-1

5O

ct-1

5Ja

n-16

Commercial &Industrial

CommercialReal Estate (CRE)

1-4 FamilyMortgages*

Consumer

Small Borrowers

Non-Traditional/Non QM-Jumbo*

Nonfarm-Nonresid.

Multifamily

C&LD

LargeBorrowers

Credit Card

Prime/GSEEligible*

Auto

Net Share Reporting Tightening (Loosening) Standards During 3 Mos.

28

On Net, Lenders Reported Modest Tightening of Standards on Commercial & Industrial and CRE Loans in Late 2015

FRB-SFBased on a sample of loan officers at 70+/- domestic banks (number varies by period and loan type); *beginning January 2015, two categories were replaced with six based on GSE eligibility, qualifying mortgage (QM) status, and size (making comparisons imperfect); C&LD = construction and land development; Source: Federal Reserve Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey (http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/snloansurvey/)

29

6%

3%

22%

28%

34%

15%

14%

0% 50% 100%

Jumbo 1-4 Fam.

GSE-Elig. 1-4 Fam.

Nonfarm-Nonresid.

C&LD

Multifamily

Mid-Large C&I

Small C&I

Tighten Same Ease

Expectations for 2016—Share of Senior Loan Officers Reporting:

Based on a sample of loan officers at 70+/- domestic banks; C&I = commercial and industrial (*excludes syndicated loans); CRE = commercial real estate; C&LD = construction and land development; Source: Federal Reserve Sr. Loan Officer Opinion Survey (http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/snloansurvey/), Jan. 2016

Lenders Expect CRE Originations and Standards to Tighten but C&I Originations to Increase Despite Weaker Performance

FRB-SF

18%

25%

17%

31%

41%

11%

10%

21%

19%

17%

13%

9%

31%

37%

0% 50% 100%

Lower Same Higher

6%

7%

13%

26%

30%

0% 50% 100%

Worse Same Better

Not Available

Not Available

Lending Origination LoanStandards Volume Performance*

30

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; nonperforming assets = loans 90+ days past due or on nonaccrual plus other real estate owned; ALLL = allowance for loan and lease losses

3.0%

39.8%

4.8%

4.9%

19.1%

6.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

Credit Quality: Nonperforming Assets Dipped FurtherRelative to Capital and Reserves

FRB-SF

Average Nonperforming Assets / Capital + ALLL (a/k/a “Texas Ratio”)

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; nonperforming assets = loans 90+ days past due or on nonaccrual plus other real estate owned; ALLL = allowance for loan and lease losses; Nevada excludes credit card and zero-loan banks 31

Nonperforming Assets Were Low in Relation toCapital and Reserves Across Most 12th District States

FRB-SFFRB-SF

Avg. Nonperforming Assets / Capital + ALLL (%)

>= 9.00%

7.00 to 9.00%

4.50 to 7.00%

< 4.50%

U.S. = 6.6%

Average Nonperforming Assets / Capital + ALLL

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Construction &Land Dev.

(C&LD)

Commercial &Industrial (C&I)

Nonfarm-Nonresidential

1-4 FamilyMortgages

Consumer

District Small (<$10B)

District Mid-Sized ($10-$50B)

Nation Large (>$50B)

Average Share of Loans Past Due by Type and Bank Size

32

Although Credit Metrics Improved Generally, Oil & Gas Problems Pushed Up Past Due C&I Ratios at Larger Banks

FRB-SF

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; past due = loans 30+ days past due or on nonaccrual status

0.4%

7.8%

14.5%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

33

Median Estimated Expected Default Frequency

FRB-SF

Expected Default Frequencies Among Energy- and Mining-Related Firms Surged During 2015

Oil, Gas, & Coal Exploration/Production

All U.S. Sectors

Mining

Moody’s Analytics CreditEdge® (formerly KMV) Service estimates a publicly-traded firm’s expected default frequency (EDF), or the probability that the firm will default within 1 year; the model is based upon movements in a firm’s stock price and level of liabilities and is scaled from 0% to 50%; Source: Moody’s Analytics CreditEdge® (www.creditedge.com)

11% (30 of 276) of Oil, Gas, and Coal firms and 6% (6 of 104) of Mining firms had the

maximum EDF (50%) at year-end 2015.

34

2.15%

0.16%

0.72%

0.10%

0.00%

0.40%

0.80%

1.20%

1.60%

2.00%

2.40%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

Average YTD Net Chargeoffs / Average Loans and Leases

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; year-to-date (YTD) annualized trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; *Nevada excludes credit card and zero-loan banks

Average District Net Chargeoff Rate Was Near Zero and Declined Year-Over-Year in Most 12th District States

FRB-SF

AK 0.01 0.04

AZ 0.45 (0.01)

CA 0.01 (0.00)

HI 0.03 0.05

ID 0.06 0.05

NV* 0.03 0.08

OR 0.05 0.02

UT 0.18 0.14

WA 0.12 0.03

Nation 0.14 0.10

State Dec-14 Dec-15

Average YTD NetChargeoff Rate (%)

by State

70%

76%

64%

68%

63%

67%

59%

63%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District

Nation

FRB-SF

35

Avg. Net Loans and Leases / TA

Liquidity: During 2015, Bank Asset Mixes Shifted Away from Securities and Liquid Instruments and Towards Loans

25%

18%

30%

12%

32%

27%

36%

31%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District Nation

Avg. Securities & Liquid Invest. / TA

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; TA = total assets; Liquid invest. = cash, due from balances, and Federal funds sold & securities purchased under agreements to resell

13%

33%

8%

2%

-1%

12%

22%

11%

1%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

District >$100K District >$250K Nation >$100K Nation >$250K

Average Net Noncore Funds Dependence Ratio*

36

Net noncore funding ratio remained negative if CDs

between $100K and $250K were excluded.

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; *Net noncore funds dependence is sum of borrowed funds, foreign and brokered deposits, large CDs (previously defined as > $100K—green bars, now defined as > $250K—blue bars) less short-term investments divided by long-term assets

Avg. Net Noncore Funds Dependence* (%)

by Bank Size (Using CDs > $100K)

Bank Size Dec-2014

Dec-2015

District Small(<$10B) 7.5% 7.4%

District Mid-Sized

($10B-$50B)15.2% 14.7%

Nation Large(>$50B) 16.1% 15.7%

Reliance on Noncore Funding Remained Moderate,Especially Among Small Banks

FRB-SF

Interest Rate Risk: Long-Term Interest Rates May Not Risein Lockstep with Short Term Rates (as in 2004-2006)

*Constant maturity basis; Sources: Federal Reserve and National Bureau of Economic Research via HaverAnalytics 37

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

Dec

-88

Dec

-91

Dec

-94

Dec

-97

Dec

-00

Dec

-03

Dec

-06

Dec

-09

Dec

-12

Dec

-15

Recession 3-Month Bill 10-Year Bond

End-of-Period U.S. Treasury Yields*, Annualized

FRB-SF

Current Yield

curve is relatively

steep

Inverted yield curve typically precedes

recessions

The Recent Increase in Long-Term Interest Rates PressuredInvestment Portfolio Values and AOCI

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; *accumulated other comprehensive income is comprised mainly of net unrealized gains and losses on available-for-salesecurities; Constant Maturity (CM) Treasury Rate from Federal Reserve via Haver Analytics

-1.59%

1.53%

-0.06%

5.15%

1.65%

2.27%

1.00%

1.60%

2.20%

2.80%

3.40%

4.00%

4.60%

5.20%

5.80%

-2.00%

-1.50%

-1.00%

-0.50%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

Dec

-04

Jun-

05D

ec-0

5Ju

n-06

Dec

-06

Jun-

07D

ec-0

7Ju

n-08

Dec

-08

Jun-

09D

ec-0

9Ju

n-10

Dec

-10

Jun-

11D

ec-1

1Ju

n-12

Dec

-12

Jun-

13D

ec-1

3Ju

n-14

Dec

-14

Jun-

15D

ec-1

5

AOCI (Left Axis) 10-Yr. UST Rate (Right Axis)

Avg. Accumulated Other ComprehensiveIncome (AOCI)* / Tier 1 Cap. – 12th District

End-of-Period 10-YearU.S. CM Treasury Rate

38

FRB-SF

The Share of Assets Funded by Non-Maturity DepositsCould Decline as Rates Rise (as in 2004-2006)

Deposit data based on commercial banks based in the 12th District, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; *non-maturity includes demand, money market, and savings; Constant Maturity (CM) U.S. Treasury (UST) Rate from Federal Reserve via Haver Analytics 39

0.93%

5.12%

0.13%0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Non-Maturity Deposits (Left Axis)

3-Mo. UST Rate (Right Axis)

56%

42%

65%

Avg. Non-Maturity Deposits* / Total Assets –12th District

Qtly. Avg. 3-Month U.S. CM Treasury Rate

FRB-SF

Based on commercial banks, excluding De Novos; trimmed means; preliminary 12/31/15 data; new risk-based capital reporting became effective March 2014 for advanced approach adopters and March 2015 for others 40

9.7%

11.2%11.0%

12.2%

15.3% 14.7%

13.5%

16.5%

15.9%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

Tier 1 Leverage

Tier 1 Risk-Based

Total Risk-Based

Average Regulatory Capital Ratios – 12th District

Risk-Based Capital Ratios Slipped as Assets Shifted to Loans and Basel III’s Higher Risk Weights Took Effect

FRB-SF

Average TotalRisk-Based Capital

Ratios (%)by Bank Size

Bank Size Dec-2014

Dec-2015

District Small

(<$10B)16.6% 16.0%

District Mid-Sized

($10B-$50B)

15.0% 14.0%

Nation Large

(>$50B)14.5% 14.1%

41

Section 3 – Regulatory Ratings and Trends

Focusing on trends in safety and soundness, consumer

compliance, and Community Reinvestment Act

examination ratings assigned by regulatory agencies

among commercial banks headquartered within the

12th Federal Reserve District.

-1.8%

7%

-70%

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

Dec

-09

Jun-

10

Dec

-10

Jun-

11

Dec

-11

Jun-

12

Dec

-12

Jun-

13

Dec

-13

Jun-

14

Dec

-14

Jun-

15

Dec

-15

% Upgrades

% Downgrades

42

Percent of 12th District Exams that Resulted in CAMELS Composite Rating Upgrade or Downgrade (downgrades shown as negative percentages)

Includes any change in composite CAMELS rating for commercial banks; quarterly data based on examination completion dates (mail dates); preliminary fourth quarter 2015 data updated through 01/22/16

Regulatory Ratings: Upgrades Continued to Outpace Downgrades in Fourth Quarter

FRB-SF

60%

24%

32%

9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Dec

-91

Dec

-92

Dec

-93

Dec

-94

Dec

-95

Dec

-96

Dec

-97

Dec

-98

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05

Dec

-06

Dec

-07

Dec

-08

Dec

-09

Dec

-10

Dec

-11

Dec

-12

Dec

-13

Dec

-14

Dec

-15

12th Dist. - Composite "3"

12th Dist. - Composite "4"

12th Dist. - Composite "5"

Nation - Composite "3", "4", "5"

61%

16%

39%

Share of Banks Rated Composite 3, 4, or 5

43Trends for all commercial banks based on examination completion dates (mail dates); preliminary fourth quarter 2015 data updated through 01/22/16

FRB-SF

The Share of District Banks with CAMELS CompositeRatings of 3, 4, or 5 Moderated Further

2.7

2.0

3.2

2.0

3.4

2.32.4

2.0

2.5

1.8

2.9

2.2

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Dec

-07

Jun-

08

Dec

-08

Jun-

09

Dec

-09

Jun-

10

Dec

-10

Jun-

11

Dec

-11

Jun-

12

Dec

-12

Jun-

13

Dec

-13

Jun-

14

Dec

-14

Jun-

15

Dec

-15

Average CAMELS Component Ratings for 12th District Banks (1: strong; 2: satisfactory; 3-5: less-than-satisfactory)

Recession

Earnings

Asset Quality

CapitalSensitivity*

Liquidity

Earnings and Management often garnered weaker ratings compared with other component areas—even before the financial crisis.

44Trends for all commercial banks based on examination completion dates (mail dates); preliminary fourth quarter 2015 data updated through 01/22/16; *Sensitivity to Market Risk

Earnings and Management Remained Weakest Components

FRB-SF

Management

45

Trends for all commercial banks based on examination completion dates (mail dates); CRA = Community Reinvestment Act; preliminary fourth quarter 2015 data updated through 01/22/16

27%

13%

4%

14%

2%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Dec

-91

Dec

-93

Dec

-95

Dec

-97

Dec

-99

Dec

-01

Dec

-03

Dec

-05

Dec

-07

Dec

-09

Dec

-11

Dec

-13

Dec

-15

Share of 12th District Banks with Less-than-Satisfactory Ratings

Consumer

CRA

Consumer Compliance and CRA RatingsWere Relatively Steady

FRB-SF

1. Summary of Institutions

2. Technical Information

Appendices

46

This report focuses on the financial trends and performance of commercial banks headquartered within the 12th Federal Reserve District (“12L”). 12L includes 9 western states: AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, and WA, as well as Guam. Industrial banks and savings institutions, which have different operating characteristics, are excluded from graphics (other than the table to the left).

De Novos: Many of the charts exclude “De Novo” banks, or banks less than five years old.

Groups by Asset Size: “Small”, and “Mid-Sized” bank groups are based on 12th District community banks (<$10B) and regional banks ($10B-$50B), respectively. The “Large” bank group is based on nationwide banks with assets >$50B because a larger statistical population was needed to construct trimmed means.

Trimmed Mean (also referred to as “average”): Many of the charts present trends in ratio averages, adjusted for outliers. The method used is to eliminate or “trim” out the highest 10% and the lowest 10% of ratio values and average the remaining values.

Aggregate: In some cases, the trimmed mean method is not appropriate (e.g., when many banks have zero values for a particular ratio or for some growth rates where there may be many highly positive and highly negative values). In these cases, District aggregates sometimes are computed (i.e., summing numerator values across all District banks and dividing by the sum of all denominator values), as opposed to averaging individual bank ratios. When an aggregate is used, it is indicated on the chart.

47

Area Commercial Banks(De Novos)

Industrial Banks

(De Novos)

Savings Institutions (De Novos)

Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-14 Dec-15 Dec-14 Dec-15

AK 4 (0) 4 (0) - - 1 (0) 1 (0)

AZ 21 (0) 17 (0) - - 1 (0) 1 (0)

CA 193 (1) 179 (0) 4 (0) 3 (0) 13 (0) 12 (0)

GU 2 (0) 2 (0) - - 1 (0) 1 (0)

HI 6 (0) 5 (0) 1 (0) 1 (0) 2 (0) 2 (0)

ID 11 (0) 11 (0) - - 1 (0) 1 (0)

NV 12 (0) 11 (0) 4 (0) 4 (0) 2 (0) 2 (0)

OR 25 (0) 22 (0) - - 3 (0) 3 (0)

UT 31 (0) 30 (0) 18 (0) 16 (0) 4 (0) 2 (0)

WA 47 (0) 40 (0) - - 12 (0) 12 (0)

12L 352 (1) 321 (0) 27 (0) 24 (0) 40 (0) 37 (0)

US 5,571 (13) 5,309 (4) 29 (0) 26 (0) 904 (2) 844 (1)

based on preliminary 12/31/15 data.

Appendix 1: Summary of Institutions

Appendix 2: Technical Information