M&T Bank Corporation

With all sights on hold, we appreciate your patience and ask that you continue to stand by.

© transcript Emily Beynon

Please stand by. Your program is about to begin. If you need assistance during your conference today, please press star zero. Welcome to the M&T Bank First Quarter 2023 Earnings Conference Call. All lines have been placed on listen-only mode, and the floor will be open for your questions following the presentation. If you would like to ask a question at that time, please press star, then the number 1 on your telephone keypad. If at any point your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star 2. When posing your question, we ask that you please pick up your handset to allow for optimal sound quality. Lastly, if you should require operator assistance, please press star 0. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to Brian Klock, Head of Markets and Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Shelby, and good morning. I'd like to thank everyone for participating in M&T's first quarter 2023 earnings conference call, both by telephone and through the webcast. If you have not read the earnings release we issued this morning, you may access it along with the financial tables and schedules by going to our website, www.mtv.com. Once there, you can click on the investor relations link, and then on the events and presentations link. Also, before we start, I'd like to mention that today's presentation may contain forward-looking information, cautionary statements about this information, as well as reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures, are included in today's earnings release materials, as well as our SEC filings and other investor materials. These materials are available on our investor relations webpage, and we encourage participants to refer to them for a complete discussion of forward-looking statements and risk factors. These statements speak only as of the date made, and M&T undertakes no obligation to update them. Now I'd like to turn the call over to our Chief Financial Officer, Darren King. Thank you, Brian, and good morning, everyone.

Our first quarter results reflect the strength of our balance sheet and liquidity position, as well as the impact of our merger with People's United Bank. Compared to last year's first quarter, revenues have grown over $970 million, or 67%, translating into 24% positive operating leverage year over year. Pre-provisioned net revenues, have more than doubled since last year to $1.1 billion. Credit remains solid with net charge-offs still below our long-term average. Capital levels remain strong with the CET1 ratio estimated to end the first quarter at 10.15%. During the quarter, we repurchased $600 million in common shares, which represented 2% of our outstanding common stock, and the Board approved an 8% or $0.10 per share increase in the quarterly common dividend to $1.30 per share. Tangible common equity per share increased 3% to $88.81 per share. In addition, April 1st marked the one-year anniversary of the closing of the People's United acquisition. We're pleased with the results of the largest acquisition in our company's history. The tangible book value dilution was only 4% and has been earned back already. Merger costs were less than anticipated at the time of announcement. Targeted expense synergies have largely been realized and are now in the run rate. As a result of the above, the return on investment and EPS accretion have exceeded those expected at the time the deal was announced.

Let's take a look at the first quarter results.

Diluted GAAP earnings per common share were $4.01 for the first quarter of 2023, down 7% compared with $4.29 in the fourth quarter of 2022. Net income for the quarter was $702 million, 8% lower than the $765 million in the link quarter. On a GAAP basis, M&T's first quarter results produced an annualized rate of return on average assets of 1.4%. and an annualized rate of return on average common equity of 11.74%. This compares with rates of 1.53% and 12.59%, respectively, in the previous quarter. Included in GAAP results were after-tax expenses from the amortization of intangible assets amounting to $13 million in the first quarter and $14 million in the sequential quarter, representing $0.08 per common share in both quarters. Pre-tax merger-related expenses of $45 million, related to the People's United acquisition, were included in the fourth quarter's GAAP results. These merger-related charges translate to $33 million after tax, or 20 cents per common share. There were no merger-related expenses in this year's first quarter. In accordance with the SEC's guidelines, this morning's press release contains a reconciliation of GAAP and non-GAAP results including tangible assets and equity. Consistent with our long-term practice, M&T provides supplemental reporting of its results on a net operating or tangible basis, from which we have only ever excluded the after-tax effect of amortization of intangible assets, as well as any gains or expenses associated with mergers and acquisitions. We believe this information provides investors with a better picture of the long-term earnings power of the institution. M&T's net operating income for the first quarter, which excludes intangible amortization and the merger-related expenses, was $715 million, down 12% from the $812 million in the linked quarter. Diluted net operating earnings per common share were $4.09 for the recent quarter, compared with $4.57 in 2022's fourth quarter. Net operating income yielded annualized rates of return on average tangible assets and average tangible common shareholders' equity of 1.49% and 19% in the recent quarter. The comparable returns were 1.7% and 21.3% in the fourth quarter of 2022. As a reminder, GAAP and net operating earnings for the fourth quarter of 2022 were impacted by certain noteworthy events. This included a $136 million gain related to the sale of the M&T Insurance Agency, as well as a $135 million contribution to M&T's charitable foundation. These items collectively netted and did not materially impact net income. Next, we'll take a deeper dive into the underlying trends that generated our first quarter results. Taxable net interest income was $1.83 billion for the first quarter of 2023, slightly below the linked quarter. The $9 million decrease was driven largely by a $30 million in lower net interest income, reflecting the two-day shorter calendar quarter, partially offset by a $13 million positive impact from our hedging program, and $8 million from higher average earning asset volumes net of higher average interest bearing liability volumes. The net interest margin for the past quarter was 4.04%, down two basis points from the 4.06% in the linked quarter. The primary driver of the decrease to the margin was the impact from a higher level of borrowing, which we estimate reduced the margin by 19 basis points. This was partially offset by the net of deposit funding, which we estimate added 18 basis points. All other factors had a negligible impact on the margin. Total average loans and leases were $132 billion during the quarter, up 2.6 billion, or 2%, compared to the lean quarter. Looking at the loans by category on an average basis compared to the fourth quarter, commercial and industrial loans and leases increased $2.4 billion, or 6%, to $42.4 billion, with $1.9 billion being broadly based and $453 million of growth in average dealer floor plan balances. During the first quarter, average commercial real estate loans decreased by $363 million, or 1%, to $45.3 billion. The decline was driven largely by balances were essentially flat. Residential real estate loans increased by $435 million, or about 2%, to $23.8 billion, due largely to the timing of the retention of originations throughout the prior quarter. End of period balances were essentially flat sequentially. Average consumer loans were up $144 million, or about 1%, to $20.5 billion. Recreational finance loan growth continues to be the main driver of increased balances, and these average loans grew $178 million, or 2%. Average earning assets, excluding interest-bearing cash on deposit at the Federal Reserve, increased $4.9 billion, or 3%, due to the $2.6 billion growth in average loans and $2.3 billion increase in average investment securities. Although average interest-bearing cash balances have decreased $777 million to $24.3 billion during the first quarter of this year, they came in higher than our initial projections. The sequential quarterly decline in cash reflects loan growth and the drop in deposit balances partially offset by the proceeds from long-term borrowings issued during the quarter. deposits declined sequentially. However, the $1.9 billion or 1% sequential average decline was slightly better than our expectations at the January earnings call. We remain focused on growing and retaining deposits. Our experience in prior rising rate environments reminds us to expect increased competition for deposits and changing customer behavior leading to a mix shift within the deposit base. During the first quarter, average demand deposits declined $8.4 billion. Savings and interest-bearing checking deposits increased $1 billion, and time deposits increased $5.4 billion. Average commercial deposits declined a net $2.4 billion as business owners shifted $6.3 billion out of operating demand deposit accounts and into both on and off balance sheet sweep accounts, to earn a higher return on their excess balances, as well as to make distributions. Almost two-thirds of the decline in non-interest-bearing deposits was offset by movement into on-balance sheet sweep accounts, where those average balances increased $3.8 billion during the first quarter of 2023.

Turning to consumer deposits,

They declined a net $758 million in the first quarter as $2.5 billion in outflows were partially offset by a $1.7 billion increase in average time deposits. Lower levels of activity in the capital markets and seasonal factors also impacted average balances for the following lines of business. Trust fund demand balances declined $1.2 billion. Municipal deposits declined $789 million, and escrow deposits declined $684 million. Average brokered CDs increased $3.8 billion sequentially, due almost entirely from growth during the previous quarter.

Turning to non-interest income.

Non-interest income totaled $587 million in the first quarter compared with $682 million in the linked quarter. M&T normally receives an annual distribution from the Bayview Lending Group during the first quarter of the year. This distribution was $20 million in 2023 and $30 million in last year's first quarter. As noted earlier, the fourth quarter of last year included a $136 million gain from the sale of the M&T Insurance Agency. Excluding these two items, non-interest income was up $21 million, or 4% sequentially. Gross income of $194 million in the recent quarter was flat sequentially. Service charges on deposit accounts were $114 million, compared with $106 million in the fourth quarter. The increase primarily reflects a full quarter of service charges on acquired customer deposit accounts after these fees were waived in October and November of last year. Mortgage banking revenues were $85 million in the recent quarter, up 4% from the linked quarter. Revenues from our residential mortgage business were $55 million in the first quarter compared with $54 million in the prior quarter. Commercial mortgage banking revenues were $30 million in the first quarter compared to $28 million in the final quarter of 2022. Other revenue from operations, excluding the distribution from Bayview Lending Group in this year's first quarter, and the gain from the sale of the M&T Insurance Agency in the sequential quarter were $140 million, up $9 million sequentially.

Turning to expenses.

Operating expenses, which exclude deamortization of intangible assets and merger-related expenses, were $134 billion in the first quarter of this year, little changed from the fourth quarter of last year. As is typical for M&T's first quarter results, operating expenses for the recent quarter included approximately a gretzky of seasonally higher compensation costs relating to accelerated recognition of equity compensation expense for certain retirement eligible employees, the HSA contribution, the impact of annual incentive compensation payouts on the 401k match and FICA payments, as well as the annual reset in FICA payments and unemployment insurance. Those same items amounted to an increase in salaries and benefits of approximately $74 million in last year's first quarter.

As usual,

Net charge-offs for the recent quarter amounted to $70 million, including amounts that reflect updated appraisals of non-accrual office loans. Annualized net charge-offs as a percentage of total loans were 22 basis points for the first quarter, compared to 12 basis points in the fourth quarter. Loans 90 days past due on which we continue to accrue interest were $407 million at the end of the recent quarter, compared to $491 million sequentially. In total, 75% of these 90-day past due loans were guaranteed by government-related entities. Turning to capital, M&T's common equity Tier 1 ratio was an estimated 10.15%, compared with 10.4% at the end of the fourth quarter. The decrease was due in part to growth in risk-weighted assets and the impact of the repurchase of $600 million in common shares, which represented 2% of our outstanding common stock. Tangible common equity totaled $14.7 billion, up slightly from the end of the prior quarter. Tangible common equity per share amounted to $88.81 per share, up 3% from the end of the year.

Turning to the outlook.

As we look forward to the rest of this year, we believe we are well positioned to navigate through the challenging economic conditions. However, the rapidly changing interest rate expectations, combined with continued As a reminder, the acquisition of People's United closed on April 1st of 2022, and thus the outlook for 2023 includes four quarters of operations and balances from the acquired company compared to only three quarters during 2022. Our 2023 outlook also reflects the sale of the M&T Insurance Agency that closed in October of last year, and even though the sale of the Collective Investment Trust outlook includes the full year of operations from this business first let's talk about net interest income outlook the outlook for interest rates in the economy continues to change frequently since March 8th the 10-year US government bond yield has dropped 46 basis points and the forward curve has changed meaningfully as well we expect taxable net billion during 2022. This range reflects different rates of deposit balance growth, deposit pricing, and loan growth. Consistent with the current forward curve, our forecast incorporates two 25 basis point cuts in the final quarter of this year. As we noted on the first quarter call, driver of net interest income in 2023 will be the ability to efficiently fund earning asset growth. We expect continued intense competition for deposits in the face of industry-wide outflows. Full-year average total deposit balances are expected to be down low single digits compared to the $158.5 billion average during 2022. During the first quarter, we issued $3.5 billion in senior debt and will utilize a combination of FHLB funding and senior debt over the course of this year, as needed, to ensure that we can continue to meet the loan demands of our customers. We continue to expect the deposit mix to shift toward higher-cost deposits, with declines expected in demand deposits and growth in time and on-balance sheet sweep. This is expected to translate to a through-the-cycle interest to low 40% range. Taking all of these factors into account, we anticipate the net interest margin to be slightly below 4% for the full year of 2023 and to continue to migrate towards the long-term range we have been discussing for the past couple of quarters. Next, let's discuss the drivers of earning asset growth. We currently plan to grow the securities portfolio by $2 billion compared to the $28 billion dollar balance at the end of March of this year with the addition of longer duration mortgage-backed securities throughout the year. Looking at average loans, we expect average loan and lease balances during 2023 to grow in the 10 to 12% range when compared to the 2022 full-year average of $119.3 billion. We anticipate growth to continue in the second quarter and then for average balances to be flat to slightly down over the second half of the year. This implies total average loan and lease balances in the fourth quarter of 2023 to be up 1% to 3% from the $129.4 billion average during the fourth quarter of 2022. The mix of C&I, CRE, and consumer loans inclusive of consumer real estate is almost one-third each as of the end of March. we expect this trend to shift slightly as CNI growth outpaces CRE. As we have seen over the past three quarters, higher levels of interest rates are expected to slow down the growth in our consumer loan book in 2023. After these average loans grew 2% in the first quarter, we expect the indirect portfolio to be relatively flat over the remainder of the year. Turning to fees, excluding the $136 million gain on the sale of the M&T Insurance Agency in the fourth quarter of 2022, as well as securities losses, non-interest income was $2.23 billion in 2022. We expect 2023 non-interest income growth to be in the 7% to 9% range compared to the $2.23 billion in 2022. This outlook for non-interest income includes the impact of a bulk purchase of residential mortgage servicing rights that we completed at the end of this year's first quarter. Turning to expenses, we anticipate expenses excluding merger-related costs, the charitable contribution, and intangible amortization to be up 11 to 13% when compared to the $4.52 billion during 2022. Recall that approximately half expenses. In addition, this outlook for net operating expenses includes the impact of the previously noted mortgage servicing rights purchase. We do not anticipate incurring any material merger-related costs in 2023, and intangible amortization is expected to be in the $60 to $65 million range during 2023. Turning to credit, we expect credit M&T's long-term average of 33 basis points, although the quarterly cadence could be lumpy. Provision expense over the year will follow the CECL methodology and will be affected by changes in the macroeconomic outlook as well as loan balances. For 2023, we expect the taxable equivalent tax rate to be in the 25% range. Finally, turning to capital. M&T's common equity Tier 1 ratio of 10.15% at March 31, 2023, comfortably exceeds the required regulatory minimum threshold, which takes into account our stress capital buffer, or SCB. We believe the current level of core capital exceeds that needed to safely run the company and to support lending in our communities. We plan to return excess capital to shareholders at a measured pace over the long term, However, in the near term, we plan to maintain a CE2 to 1 ratio slightly above the current level until the current economic uncertainty abates. With that, let's open up the call to questions, before which Shelby will briefly review the instructions.

Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press star, then the number 1 on your telephone keypad. If at any point your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star 2. To get as many questions as possible, we ask that you please limit yourself to one and one follow-up. We'll take our first question from Ibrahim Poonawalla from Bank of America. Hey, good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I guess I just wanted to go back to the deposit beta and the NII guidance, so high 30s to low 40s deposit beta. If you can unpack that a little bit in terms of how has your view around deposit pricing behavior changed today relative to January, and that could be because Fed funds is at 5% events of the last one month post-SVB. Just give us a flavor of commercial versus retail. Are you seeing differences, and has one changed a lot more than the other? Would appreciate any color there.

Sure, Ibrahim. You know, the deposit betas are largely moving consistent with how we thought they would. You know, when we think about the cumulative through the cycle beta, we really haven't changed our thought process there. What happens is kind of from quarter to quarter, You might see the pace at which we get from where we are today to that terminal cumulative beta shifts a little bit depending on the competition. And obviously, the first quarter, there was a lot of disruption going on in the market. But generally, the most elastic deposits are the commercial and the wealth deposits. And when we look underneath the hood there, we see that the betas of the commercial deposits are in kind of the mid-60s, low-70s. And, you know, that would be higher in commercial. If we add in, you know, small business, that comes down a little bit because those deposits tend to be a little bit less price sensitive. And then when you get in the consumer space, you know, you're in kind of the mid-teens deposit beta so far. And with that number, that includes the impact of time deposits. If we didn't include the impact of time deposits on those consumer deposit betas, they'd be pretty low. But we tend to include the time when we think about the beta because we see time for consumers as a substitute product in rising rates for money market savings and savings accounts. And so, you know, we try to think about the all-in funding costs, which includes time deposits, which is why we include those. You know, and so when we look at the quarter and we look at the decline, you know, for me, a couple things kind of jump out. You know, first is that the decline in deposits this first quarter versus last year's first quarter are almost identical. And so given that last year was kind of a more normal year and this year had a lot of activity going on, for those numbers to be about the same when you look at as-at, that gave us a lot of – we felt really good about that. And the other thing is just a little bit about, you know, there's a normal seasonal decline that happens in the first quarter as commercial customers tend to make their – make their distributions to principals to pay taxes. But underneath, you know, the surface, it's important to keep in mind that there are a couple of things that affected deposit flows for us this quarter. You know, one was trust demand balances were down about a billion two, right? So about 20% of those balances were trust demand balances, which moved with economic activity. And another 700 million odd dollars was escrow. And with mortgage rates moving, there's less action in the escrow accounts. And so outside of that, I see it as very typical seasonal decline in commercial balances offset by folks moving, commercial folks in particular, moving some of their balances into on-balance sheet sweep or interest bearing. And so we kind of look at those two categories together as one. And when rates go down, we see deposits flow into non-interest-bearing, and when rates go up, there's a different mix of interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing, but nothing that we're seeing that's outside of our history, our expectations. So hopefully that, I said a lot, gives you a little color.

No, it was a lot, and thank you so much. And just on a separate question, I think you mentioned you made some reserves against Office CRE. Obviously, a lot of focus there. Give us a perspective of is there a pool within your Office CRE book that you view or within the CRE book as higher risk, and how do you frame the lost content if some of these buildings end up in foreclosure and you had to have a distressed sale around that? Is it easy to handicap that right now and just your thought process in managing that portfolio?

Sure. You know, office obviously is getting a lot of attention in the world, and we've been focused on it for quite some time. You know, when we go through it and we look at what we think the loss content is, it's a little bit tricky to estimate right now, only because there hasn't been a lot of asset sales. I think in talking to our team prior to the call, they suggested that there were four properties that sold nationwide outside of Manhattan and three in Manhattan in the first quarter. So That's not a lot of activity to get a market price. So everything that's happening is everyone's looking at cash flows and NOIs. And so when you think about the cash flows, as we think about our clients, one of the things that's really important to keep in mind is about two-thirds of our clients in real estate in general have put on floating to fixed swaps on their loans. And so the impact of the interest rate increases hasn't really affected their ability to carry the loans. And then we start looking at what's coming due. And so you worry about maturities and the ability for folks to refi and the pace at which those loans might come due. And so when I look forward, when we look forward into the next couple of quarters, in aggregate, we have about $200 million of office maturing each quarter for the next two. Then it actually drops down in the fourth quarter. And when we look at the LTVs of what's maturing, we're in the neighborhood of 80% of those maturing loans have an LTV of 60% or less. Now, again, it's important to keep in mind that not all of those LTVs are calculated off of brand-new appraisals. Some of them will be a little bit dated. But when you look at some of the protections in place, there's a bunch of room there. I would suggest that there will be no losses. As you could see in our results for the quarter, we did take some partial charge-offs on a couple of office properties as we did get new appraisals on things that were troubled. But there is still room there. And I think for us, we keep looking at what's the pace at which the loans are maturing. And I think what you'll see, you know, certainly for M&T, and I would expect, although I don't know other people's portfolios, that the office story is one that will play itself out over multiple quarters, if not multiple years, because of the maturities, because of the fact that most people will hedge if they got a floating rate note. And a lot of the leases are still not maturing because office leases tend to be longer dated than residential leases. You know, when we look at our office leases, the numbers, something in the neighborhood of 75%, don't come due until after 2024. So, you know, I guess the long-winded way of saying it's a concern. We're watching it. You know, our portfolio is pretty broadly spread across our footprint, and it will play itself out over the next several quarters.

That's great, Kala.

Thank you so much. And we'll take our next question from Manan Gosalia with Morgan Stanley.

Hey, good morning. Morning. Just on the deposit side, you know, it's not surprising that deposits end of the quarter below the average. Can you talk a little bit about the trajectory of deposits in the second half of March? you know, how much, you know, I guess, how much did deposit balances change through, you know, from Feb 28th through, you know, the impact from SVB through quarter end and, you know, even if you have what's been happening quarter to date this quarter?

Sure. You know, I guess I would just caution on drawing cause and effect that, you know, the numbers are the numbers, but whether the decline is that happened in March was specifically attributable to the SCV or signature challenges is difficult to say, just because there's normal activity that happens in the first quarter. As we mentioned, the trust demand balances move based on capital markets, not an activity, not necessarily because of an exogenous event. But roughly, when you look at the decline, in total deposits over the quarter was about 60% happened before March and 40% happened in March. So a little bit heavier in March, but as you get into that March timeframe, that's when we got our distribution from Bayview, which is when distributions often get paid right in front of taxes for commercial clients. And so when we look at the effect on the bank of the changes that happened What we tended to see was we opened up more accounts in our business and middle market space than we would typically in a month. And we saw balances come onto our balance sheet as people sought to diversify. And there were some cases where that went the other way. But net-net, we were flat to slightly up from what our expectations were given all the activity that was happening in the marketplace. From our perspective, we were in line with what we thought for the quarter and pleased with how the client base and our teams reacted to everything that was going on in the world in the month of March.

Got it. And I guess, how confident are you at this stage that deposit balances are stabilized And, you know, to the extent, you know, we noticed that the CDs essentially doubled on a Q-on-Q basis. So, you know, how confident are you that, A, the deposit balances are stabilized, and then, B, you know, given that you've kept your deposit beta assumptions, you know, what would cause you to increase your deposit rates as we went through the middle of the year? And maybe if you have it, what were your spot deposit rates as of March 31st?

Thanks. I'll start with I don't have the spot deposit rates in front of me, and we can follow up with that. But in terms of the stability of deposits, again, keep in mind that the action that we're seeing right now is really a non-interest bearing, and that's really being driven by commercial deposits. When we look at consumer balances outside of some outflow in January, and when I say that I mean non-interest bearing, they've been relatively stable through February and March. And when you look in the consumer space, what you're seeing is shift between interest bearing categories. And so we're seeing movement from savings and money market into time, which is pretty typical during rising rates. And the net is some small outflow in DDA, which, again, is pretty standard in the first quarter of the year. In the commercial space, outside of the normal seasonal activity, what will happen is deposits, non-interest-bearing deposits, will start to stabilize as customers get down to the level of deposits they need to keep in their operational accounts to make payroll, to pay accounts payable and the like. And excess deposits, will not necessarily leave the balance sheet. It will just shift into some form of interest bearing. It could be interest checking or it could be an on-balance sheet sweep. And so there will be some decline, and there always is for M&T in these environments. You know, when we look through the past, we see that when rates have gone down to zero, we tend to have an increase of about four or five percentage points in the percentage of our deposit base that sits in non-interest bearing. As rates rise, that goes back the other direction. And that's just exactly what we're seeing now and what's happening. And, and so over time, you know, if you get went all the way back into, you know, pre global financial crisis for, for banks, not just for M and T, but for the industry, you know, non-interest bearing deposits were in the kind of 20% range of total deposits, you know, and they peaked at 45% for us and about 30% for the industry. And that was the last time Fed funds was anywhere near the rates that they are today. On the flip side, time deposits were a huge percentage of total deposits in the industry in that time period, upwards of 25% or 30%. And they've come all the way down into the 5% to 10% range. I give you that as context to say that what's going to happen, what we think will happen is you'll continue to see some outflow of deposits. but it will stabilize as rates start to stop increasing. And what you'll see is less movement out and more movement across categories. Again, for consumers, we think that will be from interest products like money market and savings into time. And for commercial customers, it will be from non-interesting DDA into interest-bearing things like sweep and commercial checking. And so for us, for the rest of the year, we think Things start to stabilize as we get into the second quarter and second half, and the buildback in commercial checking balances will start in anticipation of next year's first quarter. It's a cycle that follows itself very predictably every year.

Great. Thanks so much. Very helpful.

And we'll take our next question from John Pancari with Evercore. Good morning.

Lauren, John, how are you doing? All right. I want to see if you can give us a little more color on the updated loan growth guidance, the 10% to 12%. Where are you seeing some of the better trends coming from? Because it looks like it was upwardly revised from where you had expected it coming out of last quarter. Thanks.

Yep. So, John, keep in mind that that 10% to 12%, includes four quarters of people's this year in the averages versus three quarters last year, right? So some of that is in there. I think we noted in the outlook that if you look based on the average balances in just the fourth quarter of last year, we're more in the 1% to 3% range. And if you look at that, a lot of that's happened already in the first quarter. And based on where the first quarter loan balances ended, Just the averaging effect of that should carry a little bit of growth through the second quarter. And then we expect things to kind of flatten out a little bit as we go through the back half of the year. And that's just the math that gets the average into that range. And really, I think the challenge that you're seeing is pipelines have been robust, but they're starting to slow down a little bit. And we're managing them to focus our liquidity on our best customers and our relationship customers. And then in some instances, in some of the consumer space, as it is indirect and RECFI, with rates going up, you're seeing a little less demand from the clients and therefore a little bit of a slowdown that will keep balances flat to slightly down in that space just as the duration of that portfolio is pretty short. And so you need to continue to originate new to keep it flat or to grow it. Within the commercial world, there's not a lot of activity that's really happening in CRE. There's not a lot of new construction. And so what we would expect is you see for us and for the industry, as loans mature, a lot of capital and liquidity is devoted to those clients and keeping them around. And then in the C&I space, we've seen fairly broad-based growth, whether it's by geography or by industry type. We did note that the dealer floor plan balances have grown. They're still maybe half of their long-term average, which is better than they were, but there's some upside there. Obviously, you get a slowdown in indirect, you likely see an uptick in the dealer floor plan balances. Those are the spaces where we're seeing activity and how we expect the rest of the year to play itself out.

Got it. All right. Thanks Darren. And then just secondly, back to the office portfolio, just a few things around that. What percentage of the office book is criticized? I believe last quarter you indicated about 20% of it was criticized. And in that 60% LTV that you mentioned for what is maturing coming up, um, Do you have some granularity on what the refreshed LTVs look like as part of that? And then lastly, did you add to the commercial real estate reserve this quarter?

Okay, a lot in there. Let me try and make sure I get it all. So the office criticized is still right around 20%. It's up slightly, but not up dramatically. And the hotel criticized continues to come down. So it's important to keep that in mind because as we talk about the CREs increase that you're asking about, there's an offset within the whole CRE allowance, right? We've seen some improvement in hotel and retail offset by some decline in office, but we did add to the CRE allowance in the quarter. If you think about dollar amount, it's probably half Two-thirds of the $50 million provision was allocated towards the net, towards the CRE portfolio. The rest would be driven by growth in other portfolios. When you look at the LTVs, what we've seen in the ones that we have updated so far is we're seeing somewhere between a 15% and 20% decline in some of the updated values of the properties that we've reappraised. And so, you know, that's why you didn't hear me talk much about 80% or 70% LTVs, because those ones are getting closer, perhaps, to where these properties might reappraise. But, you know, 60% LTVs and sub-50% LTVs would seem to still have a lot of cushion before you're into any material loss content. And so, you know, when we look at that... We feel good about where we are. It doesn't mean that we're taking our eye off the ball, but we feel good about where we are. And, again, just to give a little more color on New York City office, next quarter, this quarter we're in right now, there's five loans that are maturing with a principal balance of $30 million.

Got it. All right. Thank you, Darren.

And we'll take our next question from Dave Rochester with Compass Point.

Hey, good morning, guys. Good morning. On capital buyback going forward, it sounds like you're pretty much saying no buyback for 2Q, or is that too strong a statement? Or is the thought just that you'll wait to get your CCAR results and then hope that the market is more stable at that point and go from there?

Yeah, I think that zero is a strong statement. When we look through the quarter and what we see with the pace of risk-weighted asset growth, we see the potential actually for kind of a trifecta and that we should see a little bit of risk-weighted asset growth. As rates are rising and liquidity is constrained, we think that we'll start to see some increased margin and profitability of new lending activity, which usually happens at this point in the cycle. So we'll deploy capital to those opportunities first. We do anticipate closing the sale of the CIT business in this quarter, which will create a gain, which will help with our capital ratios, which should allow us to be in the market and repurchase some shares. And at the same time, maintain this kind of capital level that gives us a really nice cushion, you know, given the uncertainty in the market and while we wait for the SCB. You know, from our perspective, if we run a little light for a quarter, it doesn't mean that the capital is gone. It just means it comes back a little bit later in the year. But, you know, we think we're in a position here, which is nice, where we can actually do all three. We can grow risk-weighted assets, we can return capital, and we can grow the capital ratios all at the same time.

Got it. Very helpful. And then as a follow-up, you mentioned your outlook on hotel retail and multifamily properties improved. I was just wondering if you could unpack that a little bit and just talk about what you're seeing that drives that improved outlook there. And then you'd mentioned, I guess, office properties that the, as you kind of are redoing these LTVs are coming down maybe 15 to 20%. If I heard that right, is that how much you're actually marking these as well? So the NPAs that you have and the marks that you took this quarter, Is that roughly the magnitude or is it less just given that, you know, 15 to 20% really doesn't cut into a lot of those properties if those LPVs are that low? Thanks.

Sure. Yeah. I can't write fast enough to keep up with all the questions that you got. So if I miss one, just let me know. So in hotel and retail, hotel in particular, you know, we saw that portfolio peak at kind of 80% criticized back in the pandemic. Okay. And what you're seeing is the return to travel, a lot of capacity that came out of the system during those times, and occupancy rates and rev par is really strong. And so the NOIs on hotels are really strong, and that's why you're seeing those come out of criticized, and the asset values are holding up. Multifamily also continues to be strong. I did not make a comment about multifamily values. But multifamily has been very strong. When you look at rent increases over the last 24 months, they've been very strong. And in fact, rents in multifamily appreciated faster than interest rates did. And so they should be well covered to handle moving interest rates. And retail kind of played itself out largely through the pandemic. And as the economy opened up, we've typically seen retail sales of physical retail pretty darn close to where it was pre-pandemic when looking at volume between in-person and online. And so those have performed very well. When you think about what was the last question? The marks on these, yeah. So when you look at where some of these are reappraising, They are coming – the appraisals are coming down and affecting the LTV. We would only put it into the allowance if we have something that is criticized or not performing and we're worried about it and we think that it would affect the recoverable value, and then we take that in and we'll put that through the allowance and ultimately through charge-off.

Great.

And we'll take our next question from Bill Carcacci with Wolf Research.

Thank you. Good morning, Darren. Could you address how you're thinking about the risk of tougher regulations following the SIVB fallout and BAR's recent testimony, including in areas like TLAC and the elimination of the OCI opt-out? And how could we see this As we see this play out, how could we see it affect your appetite for buybacks and RWA growth?

So I guess a couple of thoughts, Bill. On the OCI piece, we've had that in mind for the last three years. And all the discussions that we've had over the prior number of years about putting the cash to work and the impact of that that might have in the securities portfolio on AOCI and our capital. We were looking at both the CET1 ratio as well as the tangible common equity ratio. And it was really the latter one that gave us a little bit of agita in debating how fast and how much to put into securities. And so from an OCI perspective, if that comes to pass and that goes into our capital ratios, You know, at the end of the quarter, we had about $1.3 billion in total marks across the AFS and HTM portfolios. About $350 million was pre-tax, the AFS mark, and so $264 million after tax. So maybe 20 basis points of CET1. And then, you know, if you look at the total, you know, you're maybe slightly below that, call it 80-ish basis points of CET1 if you had to put both through. And so when we talk a little bit about our thoughts on capital and where we're kind of managing the CET1 ratio for the next little while, it's giving ourselves some cushion as these things play themselves out. And so from that perspective... It won't surprise me if that's a change that happens, but I think we're well-covered and well-prepared should that play itself out. As it comes to TLAC, that's really a longer-term change. I think when you look at what's happening in the industry right now, most organizations have been increasing their use of wholesale funding and banknotes, which ultimately will help with TLAC as it plays itself out. And then there's always the question of how Basel IV and those regulations come to pass and what the final proposals look like. And so we're trying to be mindful that those are changes that could come and not do something today that would put us in a place where we would have to raise equity or issue TLAC at a suboptimal time.

helpful there in them thank you if I can follow up on your deposit remixing commentary earlier yeah what's the non-interest-bearing mix that's implicit in your high 30% to low 40% beta expectation and and you know following up on you know the commentary about that non-interest-bearing mix you know perhaps you know declining to pre GFC levels that you mentioned Are you thinking about that risk? What would that mean for betas?

I'll try and unpack that for you. I give the comment about where rates were and where balance sheets were pre-GFC to give context. Most of the time when we talk about deposit betas in these industry forums, The point of reference tends to be the last rising rate environment, which was the 16 to 19 period, where Fed funds only got to about 2.25%. And so given where Fed funds are today, and we'll see how long they stay there, it's important to keep in mind what bank balance sheets looked like back in that time period. We might not get all the way back there. We probably won't get all the way back there, depending on how long rates stay at this level. Although it does look like they'll stay there longer than the last time rates rose. And so when we look at the deposit mix and where things stabilize, we tend to look at and think about demand deposits in conjunction with interest checking and on-balance sheet sweep. And what we've been seeing is, you know, some decline in those balances over time as as deposit balances come out of the system with the Fed's quantitative tightening that they're doing. And what we think we'll see, which is included in that outlook, is we'll see a continued shift from demand, particularly commercial clients, commercial and small business, from non-interest bearing into interest checking and sweep. And that over time, you know, you see those balances look maybe closer to 50-50 from where they are today in those particular categories. there will still be non-interest deposits on the consumer side, and those you won't see as much movement into interest-bearing products because they don't tend to switch categories like that. And those are some of the factors that are implicit in those deposit betas. And really the question to me is twofold. Where do Fed funds ultimately end up, and how long does it stay there?

That's very helpful. Thanks, Darren.

Hey, Shelby, this is Brian. We're going to go for another 10 minutes, and we've got a bunch of analysts in the queue, so maybe we can limit it to just one question for the analysts that are still there.

Absolutely, and as a reminder, just star 1 to ask a question, and please limit yourself to one question. We'll take our next question from Matt O'Connor with Deutsche Bank.

Hey, guys. Thanks for fitting me in here. Darren, I want to circle back on the comment about NIM being below 4% for the full year and then trending to kind of that longer-term average. I guess first just confirm, is it still, I think, 3.6% to 3.9% the long-term average that you've talked about?

That is correct.

And then in terms of, I guess, like the timing of getting there and, you know, what are some of the – Besides the obvious, like if rates go to zero, it'll be the low end. But what are some of the kind of puts and takes, like the 3.6 versus 3.9? And then lastly, just to weave in, like any thoughts on the jumping off point for the end of this year? Thanks.

Yeah. So, Matt, the biggest driver of the change, you know, in our posture and thoughts on NIM has really been the shift in funding sources. right? And so if you look at the work that we did in the first quarter, the $3.5 billion that we issued, we talked about issuing wholesale over the course of the year. The markets were very receptive when we went out in January. And so we pulled forward a bunch of that funding, which had a big impact. We talked about 19 basis points on the NIM. And so where we stand today, when you look at our asset sensitivity, you can see we're kind of plus or minus 2%, which is where we try to run the bank. And so we'll see when we go through and we look at those factors and expectations that Fed funds are starting to top out and likely based on the forward curve, we see a decline in the end of the year. That's why you start to see that deposit or that margin start to come back down. But as I mentioned, with our asset sensitivity where it is, it's not going to drop precipitously because of the things that we've done with some of the forward-starting swaps, with the securities portfolio build, with the mix of fixed-rate assets on the balance sheet and what have you. And so it will start to grind down into that range. But given, you know, over the long run, the reason we've talked about that range is because we expect over the long run that things quote-unquote normalize. And what we mean by that is that the mix of deposits on the balance sheet looks more like what you would see in a normal rate environment. It's not extreme, like where we had 45% of the deposits in non-interest bearing. That's not normal. As that changes, the margin comes down. We'll see a mix of time deposits and what the rates are on time deposits, and that will affect the margin. we'll look at what percentage of the balance sheet sits in cash and securities. And as those start to normalize, you'll see an improvement in the margin. And so it's the shift in all of those categories that became very extreme through the pandemic, that as they start to come back into what we would consider normal ranges, that's why we think that 360 to 390 is a normal long-term range for our bank and our balance sheet, just kind of based on history. And so we'll start to see that change. That migration happened. You know, we started to see it, obviously, this quarter and at the end of last year, and it will continue through 2023. How fast we get there? It seems like things are moving pretty quickly right now, just given quantitative tightening and how balances are shifting around the industry. As we get to the end of the year and the jumping off point for the margin, you're probably – migrating towards the 360 range, you know, for the last quarter of the year. But, you know, there's a lot of factors that can get us there between now and then. That would be kind of the low end of where I think we would end the year. For the whole year, you know, we're in the ballpark of, you know, high threes just based on that trajectory. And then as we go through the year, and the deposit balances reprice, you see some migration down, but it starts to level off as we get towards the back half of the year, and you operate in that range through most of 2024 would be our expectation right now. But keep in mind, there's a lot of assumptions that go into that, not the least of which is what the forward curve looks like

Okay, that was a lot of detail, but just to summarize, so you think you get to the kind of lower end of the 3.6 to 3.9 range by the end of the year, but that's kind of relatively stable for next year with all the caveats that you highlighted.

Yeah, I would just alter that slightly and say that the bottom end of the range, you probably don't see until the first half of next year. you know, that 360 to 390, but you're slowly moving down as we go through the year. But as we get towards the end of the year, the rate of decline slows and you kind of stabilize and hold flattish as we go through 2024.

Okay, that was helpful. Thanks so much.

And we'll take our next question from Ken Houston with Jeffrey's.

Hey, Darren, how's it going? Just a quick one on the fee guide going to 7.9 from 5% to 7% growth. Is the entirety of that just the MSR ad that you mentioned you did at the end of the quarter?

Pretty much, yep.

Okay, and then if I could just weaken the same one in on the cost side. Do you, in terms of like the expected sale of the corporate trust business, You gave us the revenue number in the press release. Do you have an approximate idea of when that's going to close so we can just kind of think about taking out the fees and the expenses relative to that as the course of the year goes on?

Yeah, sure. We expect it to close this quarter. For safety, for you guys, I would assume that it's out of the run rate for the second half of the year. And you've got the revenue. The expenses are... Not quite the same as revenue, but they're not far off, which is one of the reasons why we're contemplating this move.

Okay. Got it. Right. And you were pretty clear that the rest of the cost guide is inclusive of the MSR, any cost related to the MSR ads.

That's correct. Right. And so in the guide, we have both the full year of the CIT business right now, just to try and keep it apples to apples year over year, as well as to let you know that we made that MSR purchase. But other than that, there were a few things. that were kind of pulled forward in this quarter, you know, some advertising expense, some of the items, costs related to that divestiture that won't repeat themselves to try and, you know, just give you guys a little bit of color as to why we still feel good about the full year guide.

Got it. Thank you.

And we'll take our next question from Gerard Cassidy with RBC Capital Markets.

Hi, Darren.

Morning, Gerard.

We're going to miss you. Congratulations on your run as CFO. I guess you started in 2016, so I know you've got a heavy hit of replacing you, but good luck in the new role.

Thank you. I appreciate it. It's been a run. There's a lot that we've seen. We lost Bob and Mark. We went through a pandemic, bought the largest bank, and went through a couple bank failures. So it's been an eventful time.

It sure has, and to help you in your new role, your spot rate on your My Choice Money Market account is three basis points for under $10,000 in the account, and over $10,000, it jumps to 2.96%.

I'm just trying to help out the new CFO so that he has good numbers to report. He'll be chastising me about why balances are leaving, but... Don't forget, that's the offer rate, not the portfolio rate, but I appreciate that.

Oh, God, yes. No, no, I know. Absolutely. But here's my question. Speaking of deposit rates, can you share with us, and you alluded to this in some of your answers, if the Fed reaches its terminal rate on Fed funds in June, let's say, at 5%, 5.5%, and does not cut, even though I know you're looking at the forward curve that includes two cuts in the fourth quarter. Say they don't cut until maybe the first half of 24. When does your deposit bettors go flat after reaching the terminal rate? And second, if they go flat 60 days afterwards or whatever you think the number would be, Do you then benefit from reinvesting the cash flows off of the securities portfolio into a higher rate environment, assuming the Fed doesn't cut the Fed funds rate?

So when you start seeing a slowdown in deposit repricing, you know, history has been it's typically one to two quarters after the Fed stops. And so, you know, I would expect even if the Fed stopped in the summer and likelihood until sometime in next year. If you get into the space where they stop and then hold and it goes into 2024, the same thing would be true in terms of you'd see deposit betas go up for a quarter or two after and then start to level off. In all of these things, in the pricing, in the ultimate beta, there's a couple of factors to keep in mind. We always talk about it in terms of where Fed Funds is. But as we look at the bank and the balance sheet, there's a bunch of trade-offs that are being made. And so for interest-bearing deposits, there's a cost that is born that you need to offer to the customers. But then there's other alternatives that you can look at to meet those funding needs. It's brokered money market. It's brokered CD. It's wholesale funding. And so our preference is if we're going to give rate, we'd rather give it to our customers than to the capital markets. But at the end of the day, you're always making those trade-offs. And then it's the mix shift that happens. For our clients, they are a reflection of the economy, just as any bank's clients are. Consumers are going to keep some amount of money in their checking account that they're comfortable with. And every person has their own number, but they won't go below it unless they're in dire circumstances. Businesses are the same way. And so there's a certain amount of deposits that are going to be on each bank's balance sheet. And then within each category... You know, the market's pretty perfect, and we can't pay, you know, materially less for money market savings in Buffalo than our competitors can. And the same thing is true for time and the other categories. And so there's a natural governor in the market that gets all of these different deposit categories to their normal, what I would call their normal pricing. And then what kind of differentiates one bank from the next is their mix. And our advantage has always been that we tend to focus on operating accounts, whether it's consumers or commercial customers, and we have a slightly higher mix of those in our funding, which ultimately helps our cost of funds. And so those will be the things that will determine where we end up and how big our beta is, you know, perhaps compared to others. But, you know, we think the betas continue after Fed funds stops for a little bit, and the terminal amount is as much a function of your mix of deposits as how high the absolute number goes.

Very good. Again, congratulations, and we'll talk to you in the future in your new role. Thanks. Thanks, Gerard.

And we'll take our next question from Stephen Alexopoulos with J.P. Morgan.

Hey, Darren. Thanks for squeezing me in. Morning, Stephen. I'm curious, you know, in the aftermath of SVB, which was obviously all over the news, what are you hearing now from your large deposit customers? Are they looking to diversify? Did you guys lose balances to larger banks? Has the storm now passed? Just any color you could provide how this is impacting a bank like yours would be really helpful. Thanks.

Yeah. No, happy to. You know, the long story short was that the changes was a positive for us for adding clients and adding accounts. And so we're helpful that we were able to serve as a source of strength and to help some of these folks out when these changes happen. And we were, I would say, a net slightly positive as a result of all the disruption that happened in these various markets. For our clients, when we look at particular commercial clients and the average tenure, You know, they're 20-, 25-year relationships, and so they know us well, and they tend to worry a little bit less. That said, there were, you know, some people who chose to move some money into some of the money funds for diversification for rates as well as some of their comfort level. We didn't lose a ton, to be honest with you, to the larger organizations. But what I would say is in some of those shifts, we were a recipient of balances as much as we saw in outflow. And so when you add in some of the accounts that we opened during the crisis, the net was a slight positive. And so for us, it wasn't the big shift in balances that many were anticipating. More, I would say, as much a continuation of the trend that we've been talking about of as quantitative tightening happens, as rates are moving up and the rates paid on the money funds always moves faster than the deposit accounts on the balance sheet, that normal migration is happening. And over time, we expect it will come back as those other rates start to match what you can get in the funds. Great.

Thanks for taking my question.

And we'll take our last question from Brian Poren with Autonomous Research.

Oh, hi. I guess just quickly on lending, it sounds like any underwriting changes on your end are only marginal, if I got that comment about focusing liquidity on our best customers, right? So I just wanted to confirm that. And then just more broadly, definitely appreciate the point that the rollover in commercial real estate in particular is fairly slow. But do you think some of your peers will change underwriting more significantly as people worry about a credit crunch in lending and CRE in particular? Do you think that's a valid concern or do you think that's overblown right now?

So I can't speak to what others will do. I think there's a big difference between the banks and the REITs and the CMBS and how they underwrite and how they've underwritten and how they think about things. You know, for us in particular, we don't move our credit standards very much at all. And I think we've talked about this for a while that we've, you know, we've had two chief credit officers since 1983. Our viewpoint on underwriting is pretty consistent. And we try to be the same through good times and bad, right? Because what our clients value is consistency and knowing what what they need to have in terms of a profile of the loan for us to be there. I think for us and the industry, as you look at what's maturing, there's a question of how many alternative sources of funds are available for those loans, particularly in the real estate space. And so as loans mature, one of the questions will be, is there another bank or a fund or someone out there who is ready to take that loan on? which obviously will be a function of the debt service coverage and the loan-to-value. What likely happens, though, as prices are challenged in the short term is you'll see some sponsors will have the ability to put in some extra equity, which will help with the underwriting. You might see some A-note, B-note structures. You might see some outside private equity money come in in the form of preferreds or MES debt to help with some of those shortfalls. So I think statement about what will happen it's more client by client and property by property that you that you work through these things and and so you know like i said for us uh we we preserve our capital and our liquidity for our best customers and and many of these ones particularly in real estate have been around for a long time like we're in the second or third generation uh of supporting them and and we'll continue to do that um you know but there's always opportunity when when these uh when this kind of disruption occurs, and we'll be paying close attention to that as well.

I appreciate all that. Thank you very much.

And it appears that we have no further questions at this time. I will now turn the program back over to Brian Clock for closing remarks.

Again, thank you all for participating today, and as always, if clarification of any of the items in the call or news release is necessary, please contact our Investor Relations Department at area code 716-842-5138. Thank you and have a great day.

That concludes today's teleconference. Thank you for your participation.