ALERUS FINANCIAL CORP - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

 

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

☒   ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

☐   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                          to

Commission File Number: 001‑39036

ALERUS FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

(701) 795‑3200

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.☐ Yes  ☑ No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.☐ Yes  ☑ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒      No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒      No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b‑2 of the Exchange Act.

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b‑2 of the Act). Yes ☐  No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting common equity held by non-affiliates, as of June 28, 2019, was approximately $234,790,674. The number of shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding at March 16, 2020 was 17,105,668.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

The information required by Part III is incorporated by reference to portions of the definitive proxy statement to be filed within 120 days after December 31, 2019, pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 12, 2020.

 

 

Table of Contents

 

 

 

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD‑LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements concerning plans, estimates, calculations, forecasts and projections with respect to the anticipated future performance of Alerus Financial Corporation. These statements are often, but not always, identified by words such as “may”, “might”, “should”, “could”, “predict”, “potential”, “believe”, “expect”, “continue”, “will”, “anticipate”, “seek”, “estimate”, “intend”, “plan”, “projection”, “would”, “annualized”, “target” and “outlook”, or the negative version of those words or other comparable words of a future or forward-looking nature. Examples of forward-looking statements include, among others, statements we make regarding our projected growth, anticipated future financial performance, financial condition, credit quality and management’s long-term performance goals and the future plans and prospects of Alerus Financial Corporation.

Forward-looking statements are neither historical facts nor assurances of future performance. Instead, they are based only on our current beliefs, expectations and assumptions regarding the future of our business, future plans and strategies, projections, anticipated events and trends, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict and many of which are outside of our control. Our actual results and financial condition may differ materially from those indicated in the forward-looking statements. Therefore, you should not rely on any of these forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause our actual results and financial condition to differ materially from those indicated in the forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:

Any forward-looking statement made by us in this report is based only on information currently available to us and speaks only as of the date on which it is made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

ITEM 1.  BUSINESS 

Company Overview and History

Alerus Financial Corporation, or the Company, is a diversified financial services company headquartered in Grand Forks, North Dakota. Through our subsidiary, Alerus Financial, National Association, or the Bank, we provide innovative and comprehensive financial solutions to businesses and consumers through four distinct business segments—banking, retirement and benefit services, wealth management, and mortgage. These solutions are delivered through a relationship‑oriented primary point of contact along with responsive and client‑friendly technology.

As of December 31, 2019, we had $2.4 billion of total assets, $1.7 billion of total loans, $2.0 billion of total deposits, $285.7 million of stockholders’ equity, $28.9 billion of assets under administration, or AUA and $6.1 billion of assets under management, or AUM. For the year ended December 31, 2019, we had $946.4 million of mortgage originations.

Our business model produces strong financial performance and a diversified revenue stream, which has helped us establish a brand and culture yielding both a loyal client base and passionate and dedicated employees. We believe

our client‑first and advice‑based philosophy, diversified business model and history of high performance and growth distinguishes us from other financial service providers. We generate a majority of our overall revenue from noninterest income, which is driven primarily by our retirement and benefit services, wealth management and mortgage business segments. The remainder of our revenue consists of net interest income, which we derive from offering our traditional banking products and services.

Our operations date back to 1879, when we were originally founded as the Bank of Grand Forks, one of the first banks chartered in the Dakota Territory. In 2000, we changed our name to Alerus Financial Corporation, reflecting our evolution from a traditional community bank to a high‑value financial services company focused on serving the needs of businesses and consumers who desire comprehensive financial solutions delivered through relationship‑based advice and service. Since this rebranding, we have experienced significant growth, both organically and through a series of strategic acquisitions. This growth has allowed us to build a diversified franchise and expand our geographic footprint into growing metropolitan areas. We believe these initiatives have transformed our Company into a high‑tech, high‑touch client service provider, increased our earnings and allowed us to return more value to stockholders.

Our Business Model and Products and Services

General

Our business model is client‑centric, with a focus on offering a diversified range of solutions to clients who desire an advice‑based relationship, enabling us to become the preferred financial services provider to clients. Through this approach, instead of focusing on the broader population, we target specific business and consumer segments that we believe we can serve better than our competitors and that have meaningful growth potential. By offering sound financial advice and a long‑term partnership, we believe we align best with clients who are achievement‑oriented in their purpose and will allow us to play an active role in their success at all stages of their businesses and lives. We classify our consumer clients based on age and income, aligning best with clients who have complex financial needs. Our business clients are classified by industry, with a focus on specific high priority industries and client types, including professional services, finance and insurance, wholesale, small business, construction, retail, and manufacturers. We target businesses with sales between $2.0 million and $100.0 million.

Our commitment to delivering diversified solutions is driven by our “One Alerus” initiative, launched in 2017, which enables us to bring all of our product and service offerings to clients in a cohesive and seamless manner. Underlying the One Alerus initiative is our strategy of serving clients through a combination of technology and skilled advisors—a “high‑tech, high‑touch” approach that we believe clients demand and deserve. One Alerus lays the strategic foundation for current and future technology investments and the synergistic growth strategies of a diversified financial services firm. It also brings together our product and service offerings in a unified way, which we believe differentiates us from our competitors and allows us to impact clients more meaningfully and generate long‑term value for our Company. The primary components of One Alerus are:

Through One Alerus, we strive to provide each client with a primary point of contact—a trusted advisor—who takes the time to develop an in‑depth understanding of the client’s needs and goals. Our advisors work holistically with clients in a guidance‑based manner to proactively help them with their financial decisions. Our products and services include traditional bank offerings such as checking accounts, debit cards, savings accounts, personal and business loans,

credit cards, online banking, mobile banking / wallet, private banking, deposit and payment solutions and mortgages, as well as fee income services such as individual retirement accounts, or IRAs, 401(k) rollovers, retirement planning, employer‑sponsored plans, employee stock ownership plans, payroll and health savings account, or HSA, flex spending account, or FSA, administration, government health insurance program services, and wealth management services such as advisory, investment management and trust and fiduciary services. The advisor is equipped to tailor this diverse set of products and services to each client’s unique goals and is empowered to reach across our organization to bring the client in contact with product specialists as needed. One Alerus bridges the gaps between our business units with a focus on client advocacy. We believe the One Alerus initiative will enable us to achieve future organic growth by leveraging our existing client base and help us continue to provide strong returns to our stockholders.

The trusted advisor relationship is supported and enhanced through an integrated client‑access portal we call “My Alerus.” By collaborating with a key technology partner, we have integrated the diverse client applications of our full product suite into a unified system and layered in new technology to bring a client’s entire financial picture into one view. For example, a client who has multiple products with our Company, such as banking accounts, a mortgage, wealth management accounts, a retirement account, and a health benefit account, can now access all of these accounts online and effect transactions via one, single login through My Alerus. Instead of being forced to use different usernames and passwords for each system, we’ve created a single login dashboard to access the most used information on client accounts and coupled that with the ability to link into more detailed information within each transaction system (banking, retirement, and benefits, wealth management and mortgage). Our clients can further personalize their dashboard by integrating or linking financial accounts held at other institutions into My Alerus. Once our clients have integrated or linked all of their financial information, the data can be used to create a custom financial fitness score to help clients save for emergencies, plan for retirement, manage their debt, optimize health savings and protect them from unexpected events with insurance. My Alerus will be rolled out to every client by the end of the first quarter of 2020.

Banking

Lending. Through our relationship‑oriented lending approach, our strategy is to offer a broad range of customized commercial and consumer lending products for the personal investment and business needs of our clients. Our commercial lending products include commercial loans, business term loans and lines of credit for a diversified mix of small and midsized businesses. We offer both owner occupied and non‑owner occupied commercial real estate loans, as well as construction and land development loans. Our consumer lending products include residential first mortgage loans. In addition to originating these loans for our own portfolio, we originate and sell, primarily servicing‑released, whole loans in the secondary market. Our mortgage loan sales activities are primarily directed at originating single family mortgages, which generally conform to Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation guidelines and are delivered to the investor shortly after funding. Additionally, we offer installment loans and lines of credit, typically to facilitate investment opportunities for consumer clients whose financial characteristics support the request. We also provide clients loans collateralized by cash and marketable securities.

Our loan portfolio includes commercial and industrial loans, commercial real estate loans, consumer loans, which include residential real estate loans, indirect auto loans and other consumer loans, and a small amount of agricultural loans. The principal risk associated with each category of loans we make is the creditworthiness of the borrower. Borrower creditworthiness is affected by general economic conditions and the attributes of the borrower and the borrower’s market or industry. We underwrite for strong cash flow, multiple sources of repayment, adequate collateral, borrower experience and backup guarantors. Attributes of the relevant business market or industry include the competitive environment, client and supplier availability, the threat of substitutes, and barriers to entry and exit.

Deposits. We provide a broad range of deposit products and services, including demand deposits, interest‑bearing transaction accounts, money market accounts, time and savings deposits, and certificates of deposit. Core deposits, which consist of noninterest bearing deposits, interest‑bearing checking accounts, certificates of deposit less than $250,000, and money market accounts, provide our major source of funds from individuals, businesses and local governments. As of December 31, 2019, core deposits totaled $1.9 billion or 97.7% of our total deposits. Our deposit portfolio includes synergistic deposits from our retirement and benefits services and wealth management segments. As of December 31, 2019, these synergistic deposits totaled $291.8 million. We also offer an HSA deposit program to attract additional low cost deposits. As of December 31, 2019, we had $119.7 million of HSA deposits.

We offer a range of treasury management products, including electronic receivables management, remote deposit capture, cash vault services, merchant services, and other cash management services. Deposit flows are significantly influenced by general and local economic conditions, changes in prevailing interest rates, internal pricing decisions and competition. Our deposits are primarily obtained from depositors located in our geographic footprint, and we believe that we have attractive opportunities to capture additional deposits in our markets. In addition we have created a National Market to focus on growing the synergistic deposits from our retirement and benefits services and wealth management segments.  In order to attract and retain deposits, we rely on providing quality service, offering a suite of consumer and commercial products and services and introducing new products and services that meet our clients’ needs as they evolve.

Retirement and Benefit Services

Our retirement and benefit services business offers retirement plan administration and investment advisory services, employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP, fiduciary services, payroll, HSA and other benefit services to clients on a nationwide basis. A breakdown of these services is as follows:

Wealth Management

Our wealth management division provides fiduciary services to consumer and commercial clients. These services include financial planning, investment management, personal and corporate trust services, estate administration, and custody services. In addition, ou wealth management division offers brokerage services to compliment the unique needs of our clients. Our investment management services offer two unique and proprietary strategies called Dimension and Blueprint, which are primarily targeted toward IRAs, and agency account relationships. A Dimension account is a proprietary, separately managed account designed for individual investors, foundations, endowments and institutions with assets typically greater than $500 thousand. Dimension accounts use actively managed portfolios consisting of individual securities, mutual funds, and exchange traded funds selected and monitored by a centralized team of investment professionals. A Blueprint account uses a series of models that are designed to help investors gain exposure to a diversified, risk‑based asset allocation. Portfolios in these accounts are comprised of mutual funds run by consistent, low‑cost fund managers, with the Bank conducting initial and ongoing fund monitoring of the model allocations and rebalancing the portfolios on a regular basis.

Mortgage

Our mortgage business offers first and second mortgage loans through a centralized mortgage unit located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as well as through our banking office locations. These loans typically enable borrowers to purchase or refinance existing homes, most of which serve as the primary residence of the owner. In 2019, approximately 71.2% of the loans made by our mortgage division were for the purchase of a residential property, compared to 28.8% for the refinance of an existing mortgage. We source most of our residential mortgage loans from the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington metropolitan statistical area, or the Twin Cities MSA, and for the year ended December 31, 2019, approximately 90.1% of the total mortgage loans were attributable to that market, compared to 7.7% attributable to the North Dakota market and 2.2% attributable to the Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale metropolitan statistical area, or the Phoenix MSA. We believe there is an opportunity to expand our mortgage loan pipeline in these

other markets, especially in the Phoenix MSA. Although we originate loans for our own portfolio, we also conduct mortgage banking activities in which we originate and sell, servicing‑released, whole loans in the secondary market. Typically, loans with a fixed interest rate of greater than 10 years are available‑for‑sale and sold on the secondary market. Our mortgage banking loan sales activities are primarily directed at originating single family mortgages that are priced and underwritten to conform to previously agreed criteria before loan funding and are delivered to the investor shortly after funding. The level of future loan originations, loan sales, and loan repayments depends on overall credit availability, the interest rate environment, the strength of the general economy, local real estate markets and the housing industry, and conditions in the secondary loan sale market. The amount of gain or loss on the sale of loans is primarily driven by market conditions and changes in interest rates, as well as our pricing and asset liability management strategies. As of December 31, 2019, we had mortgage loans held for sale of $46.8 million from the residential mortgage loans we originated. For the year ended December 31, 2019, our mortgage segment originated $946.4 million of mortgage loans.

Our Banking Market Areas

Our primary banking market areas are the states of North Dakota, Minnesota, specifically, the Twin Cities MSA, and Arizona, specifically, the Phoenix MSA. Our bank branch expansion into the Twin Cities MSA in 2007 and the Phoenix MSA in 2009 was an intentional part of our strategic plan to diversify our geographic footprint and expand into metropolitan markets outside of North Dakota. In addition to our offices located in our banking markets, our retirement and benefit services business administers plans in all 50 states through offices located in Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire.

North Dakota

Our corporate headquarters, which is a full-service banking office located at 401 Demers Avenue, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58201, primarily serves the eastern North Dakota market along with two other full-service banking offices located in Grand Forks, North Dakota, three full-service banking offices located in Fargo and West Fargo, North Dakota, and one full-service banking office located in Northwood, North Dakota. The State of North Dakota’s economy is strengthened by the Bakken oil region, which produces over 1.5 million barrels of oil per day. North Dakota has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country—2.4% as of December 2019. We believe this market is rich in low‑cost, core deposits, which we can use to fund loans in our higher growth metropolitan markets. North Dakota had total deposits of $29.5 billion as of June 30, 2019, and ranks as the 45th largest State in total deposits, based on Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or FDIC, data.

The State of North Dakota also features one of the only state‑owned banks in the nation, the Bank of North Dakota, which offers services, many of which are similar to those offered by a correspondent bank, only to banks like ours that are headquartered in the state. The Bank of North Dakota expands our lending capacity by purchasing participations from the Bank. In addition, the Bank of North Dakota offers us additional financing options such as bank stock loans and lines of credit at competitive rates. Finally, the Bank of North Dakota enables state banks to take deposits and manage funds for municipal and county governments without meeting collateral requirements, which are waived by a letter of credit from the Bank of North Dakota.

Minnesota

We serve the Minnesota market through six full‑service banking offices, one loan and deposit production office and one residential mortgage office, all located in the Twin Cities MSA. The Twin Cities MSA, ranks as the 15th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States in total deposits and the third largest metropolitan statistical area in the Midwest in total deposits, based on FDIC data. The Twin Cities MSA is defined by attractive market demographics, including strong household incomes, dense populations, low unemployment and the presence of a diverse group of large and small businesses. As of January 1, 2019, the Twin Cities MSA ranked third in median household income in the Midwest and sixth in the nation, when compared to the top 20 metropolitan statistical areas by population size in each area, based on data available on S&P Global Market Intelligence. The population in the Twin Cities MSA was approximately 3.7 million as of January 1, 2019, making it the third largest metropolitan statistical area in the Midwest and 16th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States. The low unemployment rate of 3.3%, as of

December 2019, and the significant presence of national and international businesses make the Twin Cities MSA one of the most economically vibrant and diverse markets in the country.

Arizona

We serve the Arizona market through our full‑service banking offices located in Scottsdale and Mesa, Arizona. The Phoenix MSA is a large and growing market, with a total population of approximately 4.9 million as of January 1, 2019, making it the 11th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States. The population of the Phoenix MSA is expected to increase over 7% from 2019 to 2024. The Phoenix MSA had total deposits of $110.2 billion as of June 30, 2019, and ranks as the 24th largest metropolitan statistical area in the United States in total deposits, based on FDIC data. Based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics as of December 2019, the unemployment rate in the Phoenix MSA was 3.7%. The Phoenix MSA is defined by attractive market demographics, including a large number of high net worth households, dense populations, low unemployment, and the presence of a diverse group of small‑to‑medium sized businesses.

Our National Market

Our retirement and benefit services business serves clients in all 50 states. We offer retirement and benefit services at all of our banking offices located in our three primary market areas. In addition, we operate two retirement and benefits services offices in Minnesota, two in Michigan and one in New Hampshire. To help us track retirement and benefit services business clients that reside outside of our banking markets, we recently formalized a “National Market” with a separately appointed National Market President to oversee the development of the market’s client base. AUM, AUA, and deposits attributable to the National Market were $1.8 billion, $23.6 billion and $463.5 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2019, representing approximately 30.8%, 81.4% and 23.5%, respectively of our total AUM, AUA, and deposits as of that date. No loans were attributable to the National Market as of December 31, 2019.

Competition

The financial services industry is highly competitive, and we compete in a number of areas, including commercial and consumer banking, residential mortgages, wealth advisory, investment management, trust, and record‑keeping among others. We compete with other bank and nonbank institutions located within our market areas, along with competitors situated regionally, nationally, and others with only an online presence. These include large banks and other financial intermediaries, such as consumer finance companies, brokerage firms, mortgage banking companies, and business leasing and finance companies, all actively engaged in providing various types of loans and other financial services. We also face growing competition from online businesses with few or no physical locations, including online banks, lenders and consumer and commercial lending platforms, as well as automated retirement and investment services providers. Competition involves efforts to retain current clients, obtain new loans, deposits, and advisory services, increase the scope and type of services offered, and offer competitive interest rates paid on deposits, charged on loans, or charged for advisory services. We believe our integrated and high‑touch service offering, along with our sophisticated relationship‑oriented approach sets us apart from our competitors.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

FDIC-insured institutions, their holding companies and their affiliates are extensively regulated under federal and state law. As a result, our growth and earnings performance may be affected not only by management decisions and general economic conditions, but also by the requirements of federal and state statutes and by the regulations and policies of various bank regulatory agencies, including our primary regulator, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or Federal Reserve, and the Bank’s primary regulator, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, or OCC, as well as the FDIC, as the insurer of our deposits, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, as the regulator of consumer financial services and their providers. Furthermore, taxation laws administered by the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities, accounting rules developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, securities laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and state securities authorities, and anti-money laundering laws enforced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or Treasury, have an

impact on our business. The effect of these statutes, regulations, regulatory policies and accounting rules are significant to our operations and results.

Federal and state banking laws impose a comprehensive system of supervision, regulation, and enforcement on the operations of FDIC-insured institutions, their holding companies, and affiliates that is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC-insured deposits and depositors of banks, rather than stockholders. These federal and state laws, and the regulations of the bank regulatory agencies issued under them, affect, among other things, the scope of our business; the kinds and amounts of investments we may make; reserve requirements; required capital levels relative to our assets; the nature and amount of collateral for loans; the establishment of branches; our ability to merge, consolidate, and acquire; dealings with our insiders and affiliates; and our payment of dividends. In reaction to the global financial crisis and particularly following passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, or Dodd-Frank Act, we experienced heightened regulatory requirements and scrutiny. Although the reforms primarily targeted systemically important financial service providers, their influence filtered down in varying degrees to community banks over time and caused our compliance and risk management processes, and the costs thereof, to increase. However, in May 2018, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act, or the Regulatory Relief Act, was enacted by Congress in part to provide regulatory relief for community banks and their holding companies. To that end, the law eliminated questions about the applicability of certain Dodd-Frank Act reforms to community bank systems, including relieving us of any requirement to engage in mandatory stress tests, maintain a risk committee or comply with the Volcker Rule’s complicated prohibitions on proprietary trading and ownership of private funds. We believe these reforms are favorable to our operations. 

The supervisory framework for U.S. banking organizations subjects banks and bank holding companies to regular examination by their respective regulatory agencies, which results in examination reports and ratings that are not publicly available and that can impact the conduct and growth of their business. These examinations consider not only compliance with applicable laws and regulations, but also capital levels, asset quality and risk, management ability and performance, earnings, liquidity, and various other factors. The regulatory agencies generally have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity where the agencies determine, among other things, that such operations are unsafe or unsound, fail to comply with applicable law, or are otherwise inconsistent with laws and regulations.

The following is a summary of the material elements of the supervisory and regulatory framework applicable to the Company and the Bank, beginning with a discussion of the continuing regulatory emphasis on our capital levels. It does not describe all of the statutes, regulations, and regulatory policies that apply, nor does it restate all of the requirements of those that are described. The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provision.

The Role of Capital

Regulatory capital represents the net assets of a banking organization available to absorb losses. Because of the risks attendant to their business, FDIC-insured institutions are generally required to hold more capital than other businesses, which directly affects our earnings capabilities. While capital has historically been one of the key measures of the financial health of both bank holding companies and banks, its role became fundamentally more important in the wake of the global financial crisis, as the banking regulators recognized that the amount and quality of capital held by banks prior to the crisis was insufficient to absorb losses during periods of severe stress. Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel III, discussed below, establish strengthened capital standards, require more capital to be held in the form of common stock and disallow certain funds from being included in capital determinations. These standards represent regulatory capital requirements that are meaningfully more stringent than those in place previously.

Minimum Required Capital Levels. Banks have been required to hold minimum levels of capital based on guidelines established by the bank regulatory agencies since 1983. The minimums have been expressed in terms of ratios of “capital” divided by “total assets". As discussed below, bank capital measures have become more sophisticated over the years and have focused more on the quality of capital and the risk of assets. Bank holding companies have historically had to comply with less stringent capital standards than their bank subsidiaries and have been able to raise capital with hybrid instruments such as trust preferred securities. However, the Dodd-Frank Act mandated the

Federal Reserve to establish minimum capital levels for holding companies on a consolidated basis as stringent as those required for FDIC-insured institutions. A result of this change is that the proceeds of hybrid instruments, such as trust preferred securities, which holding companies could issue as capital, were excluded from capital over a phase-out period. However, if such securities were issued prior to May 19, 2010 by bank holding companies with less than $15 billion of assets, they may be retained, subject to certain restrictions. Because we have assets of less than $15 billion, we are able to maintain our trust preferred proceeds as capital, but we will not be able to raise capital in the future through the issuance of trust preferred securities.

The Basel International Capital Accords. The risk-based capital guidelines for U.S. banks since 1989 were based upon the 1988 capital accord known as “Basel I” adopted by the international Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, a committee of central banks and bank supervisors that acts as the primary global standard-setter for prudential regulation, as implemented by the U.S. bank regulatory agencies on an interagency basis. The accord recognized that bank assets, for the purpose of the capital ratio calculations, needed to be assigned risk weights (the theory being that riskier assets should require more capital) and that off-balance sheet exposures needed to be factored in the calculations. Basel I had a very simple formula for assigning risk weights to bank assets from 0% to 100% based on four categories. In 2008, the banking agencies collaboratively began to phase-in capital standards based on a second capital accord, referred to as “Basel II,” for large or “core” international banks (generally defined for U.S. purposes as having total assets of $250 billion or more, or consolidated foreign exposures of $10 billion or more), known as “advanced approaches” banks. The primary focus of Basel II was on the calculation of risk weights based on complex models developed by each advanced approaches bank. As most banks were not subject to Basel II, the U.S. bank regulators worked to improve the risk sensitivity of Basel I standards without imposing the complexities of Basel II. This “standardized approach” increased the number of risk-weight categories and recognized risks well above the original 100% risk weight. It is institutionalized by the Dodd-Frank Act for all banking organizations as a floor.

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, announced agreement on a strengthened set of capital requirements for banking organizations around the world, known as “Basel III,” to address deficiencies recognized in connection with the global financial crisis. 

The Basel III Rule. In July 2013, the U.S. federal banking agencies approved the implementation of the Basel III regulatory capital reforms in pertinent part, and, at the same time, promulgated rules effecting certain changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act, or the Basel III Rule. In contrast to capital requirements historically, which were in the form of guidelines, Basel III was released in the form of binding regulations by each of the regulatory agencies. The Basel III Rule is applicable to all banking organizations that are subject to minimum capital requirements, including federal and state banks and savings and loan associations, as well as to bank and savings and loan holding companies, other than “small bank holding companies” who are relieved from compliance with the Basel III Rule (see “—BHC Capital Requirements” in the description of the Company below) and certain qualifying community banking organizations that may elect a simplified framework.

The Basel III Rule impacts both the definitions of the various forms of capital used to calculate the ratios and how assets will be weighted for the purpose of calculating such ratios. It increased the required quantity and quality of capital and required more detailed categories of risk weights of riskier, more opaque assets. For nearly every class of assets, the Basel III Rule requires a more complex, detailed and calibrated assessment of risk in the calculation of risk weight amounts.

Not only did the Basel III Rule increase most of the required minimum capital ratios in effect prior to January 1, 2015, but it introduced the concept of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, which consists primarily of common stock, related surplus (net of Treasury stock), retained earnings, and Common Equity Tier 1 minority interests subject to certain regulatory adjustments. The Basel III Rule also changed the definition of capital by establishing more stringent criteria that instruments must meet to be considered Additional Tier 1 Capital (primarily noncumulative perpetual preferred stock that meets certain requirements) and Tier 2 Capital (primarily other types of preferred stock, subordinated debt and the allowance for loan losses, subject to limitations). A number of instruments that qualified as Tier 1 Capital under Basel I do not qualify, or their qualifications changed. For example, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, which qualified as simple Tier 1 Capital under Basel I, does not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, but qualifies as

Additional Tier 1 Capital. The Basel III Rule also constrained the inclusion of minority interests, mortgage-servicing assets, and deferred tax assets in capital and requires deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 Capital in the event that such assets exceed a certain percentage of a banking institution’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital.

The Basel III Rule required minimum capital ratios as of January 1, 2015, as follows:

In addition, institutions that seek the freedom to make capital distributions (including for dividends and repurchases of stock) and pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers without restriction, must also maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to a capital conservation buffer. The purpose of the conservation buffer is to ensure that banking institutions maintain a buffer of capital that can be used to absorb losses during periods of financial and economic stress. Factoring in the conservation buffer increases the minimum ratios depicted above to 7% for Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, 8.5% for Tier 1 Capital and 10.5% for Total Capital.

Well-Capitalized Requirements. The ratios described above are minimum standards in order for banking organizations to be considered “adequately capitalized.” Bank regulatory agencies uniformly encourage banks to hold more capital and be “well-capitalized” and, to that end, federal law and regulations provide various incentives for banking organizations to maintain regulatory capital at levels in excess of minimum regulatory requirements. For example, a banking organization that is well-capitalized may: (i) qualify for exemptions from prior notice or application requirements otherwise applicable to certain types of activities; (ii) qualify for expedited processing of other required notices or applications; and (iii) accept, roll-over, or renew brokered deposits. Higher capital levels could also be required if warranted by the particular circumstances or risk profiles of individual banking organizations. For example, the capital guidelines contemplate that additional capital may be required to take adequate account of, among other things, interest rate risk, or the risks posed by concentrations of credit, nontraditional activities or securities trading activities. Further, any banking organization experiencing or anticipating significant growth would be expected to maintain capital ratios, including tangible capital positions (i.e., Tier 1 Capital less all intangible assets), well above the minimum levels.

Under the capital regulations of the OCC, in order to be well‑capitalized, a banking organization must maintain:

It is possible under the Basel III Rule to be well-capitalized while remaining out of compliance with the capital conservation buffer discussed above.

As of December 31, 2019: (i) the Bank was not subject to a directive from the OCC to increase its capital; and (ii) the Bank was well-capitalized, as defined by OCC regulations. The Bank was also in compliance with the capital conservation buffer of 2.5 percent.

Prompt Corrective Action. The concept of being “well-capitalized” is part of a regulatory regime that provides the federal banking regulators with broad power to take “prompt corrective action” to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions based on the capital level of each particular institution. The extent of the regulators’ powers depends on whether the institution in question is “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized,” in each case as defined by regulation. Depending upon the capital category to which an institution is assigned, the regulators’ corrective powers include: (i) requiring the institution to submit a capital restoration plan; (ii) limiting the institution’s asset growth and restricting its activities; (iii) requiring the institution to issue additional capital stock (including additional voting stock) or to sell itself; (iv) restricting transactions between the institution and its affiliates; (v) restricting the interest rates that the institution may pay on deposits; (vi) ordering a new election of directors of the institution; (vii) requiring that senior executive officers or directors be dismissed; (viii) prohibiting the institution from accepting deposits from correspondent banks; (ix) requiring the institution to divest certain subsidiaries; (x) prohibiting the payment of principal or interest on subordinated debt; and (xi) ultimately, appointing a receiver for the institution.

The Potential for Community Bank Capital Simplification. Community banks have long raised concerns with bank regulators about the regulatory burden, complexity, and costs associated with certain provisions of the Basel III Rule. In response, Congress provided an “off-ramp” for institutions, like us, with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion. Section 201 of the Regulatory Relief Act instructed the federal banking regulators to establish a single “Community Bank Leverage Ratio”, or CBLR, of between 8% and 10%. Under the final rule, a community banking organization is eligible to elect the new framework if it has less than $10 billion in total consolidated assets, limited amounts of certain assets and off-balance sheet exposures, and a CBLR greater than 9%. We may elect the CBLR framework at any time but have not currently determined to do so.

Supervision and Regulation of the Company

General. The Company, as the sole stockholder of the Bank, is a bank holding company that has elected financial holding company status. As a bank holding company, we are registered with, and subject to regulation by, the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, or BHCA. We are legally obligated to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank in circumstances where we might not otherwise do so. Under the BHCA, we are subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve and are required to file with the Federal Reserve periodic reports of our operations and such additional information regarding our operations as the Federal Reserve may require.

Acquisitions and Activities/ Financial Holding Company Election. The primary purpose of a bank holding company is to control and manage banks. The BHCA generally requires the prior approval of the Federal Reserve for any merger involving a bank holding company or any acquisition by a bank holding company of another bank or bank holding company. Subject to certain conditions (including deposit concentration limits established by the BHCA), the Federal Reserve may allow a bank holding company to acquire banks located in any state of the United States. In approving interstate acquisitions, the Federal Reserve is required to give effect to applicable state law limitations on the aggregate amount of deposits that may be held by the acquiring bank holding company and its FDIC-insured institution affiliates in the state in which the target bank is located (provided that those limits do not discriminate against out-of-state institutions or their holding companies) and state laws that require that the target bank have been in existence for a minimum period of time (not to exceed five years) before being acquired by an out-of-state bank holding company. Furthermore, in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act, bank holding companies must be well-capitalized and well-managed in order to effect interstate mergers or acquisitions.

The BHCA generally prohibits the Company from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company that is not a bank and from engaging in any business other than that of banking, managing and controlling banks or furnishing services to banks and their subsidiaries. This general prohibition is subject to a number of exceptions. The principal exception allows bank holding companies to engage in, and to own

shares of companies engaged in, certain businesses found by the Federal Reserve prior to November 11, 1999 to be “so closely related to banking ... as to be a proper incident thereto.” This authority would permit us to engage in a variety of banking-related businesses, including the ownership and operation of a savings association, or any entity engaged in consumer finance, equipment leasing, the operation of a computer service bureau (including software development), and mortgage banking and brokerage services. The BHCA does not place territorial restrictions on the domestic activities of nonbank subsidiaries of bank holding companies.

Additionally, bank holding companies that meet certain eligibility requirements prescribed by the BHCA and elect to operate as financial holding companies may engage in, or own shares in companies engaged in, a wider range of nonbanking activities, including securities and insurance underwriting and sales, merchant banking and any other activity that the Federal Reserve, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, determines by regulation or order is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity or that the Federal Reserve determines by order to be complementary to any such financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety or soundness of FDIC-insured institutions or the financial system generally. We have elected to operate as a financial holding company. In order to maintain our status as a financial holding company, both the Company and the Bank must be well-capitalized, well-managed, and have at least a satisfactory Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA, rating. If the Federal Reserve determines that we are not well-capitalized or well-managed, we will have a period of time in which to achieve compliance, but during the period of noncompliance, the Federal Reserve may place any limitations on us it believes to be appropriate. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve determines that the Bank has not received a satisfactory CRA rating, we would not be able to commence any new financial activities or acquire a company that engages in such activities.

Change in Control. Federal law also prohibits any person or company from acquiring “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or its holding company without prior notice to the appropriate federal bank regulator. “Control” is conclusively presumed to exist upon the acquisition of 25% or more of the outstanding voting securities of a bank or bank holding company, but may arise under certain circumstances between 10% and 24.99% ownership.

BHC Capital Requirements. Under the Federal Reserve’s Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement, holding companies with less than $3 billion in total assets are exempt from the Basel III consolidated capital requirements, as long as their pro forma consolidated assets remain under $3 billion and as long as they do not engage in significant nonbanking activities, conduct significant off-balance sheet activities, or have a material amount of debt or equity securities registered with the SEC. The Company is a publicly reporting company with its common stock registered with the SEC. As such, we do not meet the qualifications of the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement. For a discussion of capital requirements, see “—The Role of Capital” above.

Dividend Payments. Our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders may be affected by both general corporate law considerations and policies of the Federal Reserve applicable to bank holding companies. As a Delaware corporation, we are subject to the limitations of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or DGCL. The DGCL allows us to pay dividends only out of its surplus (as defined and computed in accordance with the provisions of the DGCL) or if we have no such surplus, out of its net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year.

As a general matter, the Federal Reserve has indicated that the board of directors of a bank holding company should eliminate, defer, or significantly reduce dividends to stockholders if: (i) the company’s net income available to stockholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends; (ii) the prospective rate of earnings retention is inconsistent with the company’s capital needs and overall current and prospective financial condition; or (iii) the company will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios. The Federal Reserve also possesses enforcement powers over bank holding companies and their nonbank subsidiaries to prevent or remedy actions that represent unsafe or unsound practices or violations of applicable statutes and regulations. Among these powers is the ability to proscribe the payment of dividends by banks and bank holding companies. In addition, under the Basel III Rule, institutions that seek the freedom to pay dividends will have to maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to the capital conservation buffer. See “—The Role of Capital” above.

Monetary Policy. The monetary policy of the Federal Reserve has a significant effect on the operating results of financial or bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. Among the tools available to the Federal Reserve to affect the money supply are open market transactions in U.S. government securities, changes in the discount rate on bank borrowings and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits. These means are used in varying combinations to influence overall growth and distribution of bank loans, investments and deposits, and their use may affect interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits.

Federal Securities Regulation. Our common stock is registered with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. Consequently, we are subject to the information, proxy solicitation, insider trading and other restrictions and requirements of the SEC under the Exchange Act.

Corporate Governance. The Dodd-Frank Act addressed many investor protection, corporate governance and executive compensation matters that will affect most U.S. publicly traded companies. The Dodd-Frank Act increased stockholder influence over boards of directors by requiring companies to give stockholders a nonbinding vote on executive compensation and so-called “golden parachute” payments, and authorizing the SEC to promulgate rules that would allow stockholders to nominate and solicit voters for their own candidates using a company’s proxy materials. The legislation also directed the Federal Reserve to promulgate rules prohibiting excessive compensation paid to executives of bank holding companies, regardless of whether such companies are publicly traded.

Supervision and Regulation of the Bank

General. The Bank is a national bank, chartered by the OCC under the National Bank Act. The deposit accounts of the Bank are insured by the DIF to the maximum extent provided under federal law and FDIC regulations, currently $250,000 per insured depositor category, and the Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System. As a national bank, the Bank is subject to the examination, supervision, reporting and enforcement requirements of the OCC, the chartering authority for national banks. Our defined business lines of Banking, Mortgage, Retirement and Benefits and Wealth Management are each subject to that authority and are examined by the OCC. The FDIC, as administrator of the DIF, also has regulatory authority over the Bank.

Deposit Insurance. As an FDIC-insured institution, the Bank is required to pay deposit insurance premium assessments to the FDIC. The FDIC has adopted a risk-based assessment system whereby FDIC-insured institutions pay insurance premiums at rates based on their risk classification. For institutions like the Bank that are not considered large and highly complex banking organizations, assessments are now based on examination ratings and financial ratios. The total base assessment rates currently range from 1.5 basis points to 30 basis points. At least semi-annually, the FDIC updates its loss and income projections for the DIF and, if needed, increases or decreases the assessment rates, following notice and comment on proposed rulemaking. The assessment base against which an FDIC-insured institution’s deposit insurance premiums paid to the DIF have been calculated is based on its average consolidated total assets less its average tangible equity. This method shifted the burden of deposit insurance premiums toward those large depository institutions that rely on funding sources other than U.S. deposits.

The reserve ratio is the FDIC insurance fund balance divided by estimated insured deposits. The Dodd-Frank Act altered the minimum reserve ratio of the DIF, increasing the minimum from 1.15 percent to 1.35 percent of the estimated amount of total insured deposits, and eliminating the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to FDIC-insured institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The reserve ratio reached 1.36 percent as of September 30, 2018, exceeding the statutory required minimum reserve ratio of 1.35 percent. As a result, the FDIC is providing assessment credits to insured depository institutions, like the Bank, with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion for the portion of their regular assessments that contributed to growth in the reserve ratio between 1.15 percent and 1.35 percent. The share of the aggregate small bank credits allocated to each insured institution is proportional to its credit base, defined as the average of its regular assessment base during the credit calculation period. The FDIC is currently applying the credits for quarterly assessment periods beginning July 1, 2019, and, as long as the reserve ratio is at least 1.35 percent, the FDIC will remit the full nominal value of any remaining credits in a lump-sum payment.

Supervisory Assessments. National banks are required to pay supervisory assessments to the OCC to fund the operations of the OCC. The amount of the assessment is calculated using a formula that considers the bank’s size and its supervisory condition. During the year ended December 31, 2019, the Bank paid supervisory assessments to the OCC totaling $408 thousand.

Capital Requirements. Banks are generally required to maintain capital levels in excess of other businesses. For a discussion of capital requirements, see “—The Role of Capital” above.

Liquidity Requirements. Liquidity is a measure of the ability and ease with which bank assets may be converted to cash. Liquid assets are those that can be converted to cash quickly if needed to meet financial obligations. To remain viable, FDIC-insured institutions must have enough liquid assets to meet their near-term obligations, such as withdrawals by depositors. In addition to liquidity guidelines already in place, the U.S. bank regulatory agencies implemented the Basel III Liquidity Coverage Ratios, or LCR, in September 2014, which require large financial firms to hold levels of liquid assets sufficient to protect against constraints on their funding during times of financial turmoil.  While the LCR only applies to the largest banking organizations in the country, we continue to review our liquidity risk management policies in light of developments.

In addition to liquidity guidelines already in place, the federal bank regulatory agencies implemented the Basel III LCR in 2014 and have proposed the net stable funding ratio, or NSFR. While these rules do not, and will not, apply to the Bank, we continue to review our liquidity risk management policies in light of these developments.

Dividend Payments. The primary source of funds for the Company is dividends from the Bank. Under the National Bank Act, a national bank may pay dividends out of its undivided profits in such amounts and at such times as the bank’s board of directors deems prudent. Without prior OCC approval, however, a national bank may not pay dividends in any calendar year that, in the aggregate, exceed the bank’s year-to-date net income plus the bank’s retained net income for the two preceding years. The payment of dividends by any FDIC-insured institution is affected by the requirement to maintain adequate capital pursuant to applicable capital adequacy guidelines and regulations, and an FDIC-insured institution generally is prohibited from paying any dividends if, following payment thereof, the institution would be undercapitalized. As described above, the Bank exceeded its capital requirements under applicable guidelines as of December 31, 2019. Notwithstanding the availability of funds for dividends, however, the OCC may prohibit the payment of dividends by the Bank if it determines such payment would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice. In addition, under the Basel III Rule, institutions that seek the freedom to pay dividends have to maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to the capital conservation buffer. See “—The Role of Capital” above.

Insider Transactions. The Bank is subject to certain restrictions imposed by federal law on “covered transactions” between the Bank and its “affiliates.” The Company is an affiliate of the Bank for purposes of these restrictions, and covered transactions subject to the restrictions include extensions of credit to the Company, investments in the stock or other securities of the Company and the acceptance of the stock or other securities of the Company as collateral for loans made by the Bank. The Dodd-Frank Act enhanced the requirements for certain transactions with affiliates, including an expansion of the definition of “covered transactions” and an increase in the amount of time for which collateral requirements regarding covered transactions must be maintained.

Certain limitations and reporting requirements are also placed on extensions of credit by the Bank to its directors and officers, to directors and officers of the Company and its subsidiaries, to principal stockholders of the Company, and to “related interests” of such directors, officers, and principal stockholders. In addition, federal law and regulations may affect the terms upon which any person who is a director or officer of the Company or the Bank, or a principal stockholder of the Company, may obtain credit from banks with which the Bank maintains a correspondent relationship.

Safety and Soundness Standards/Risk Management. FDIC-insured institutions are expected to operate in a safe and sound manner. The federal banking agencies have adopted operational and managerial standards to promote the safety and soundness of such institutions that address internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, compensation, fees and benefits, asset quality and earnings.

In general, the safety and soundness standards prescribe the goals to be achieved in each area, and each institution is responsible for establishing its own procedures to achieve those goals. If an institution fails to operate in a safe and sound manner, the FDIC-insured institution’s primary federal regulator may require the institution to submit a plan for achieving and maintaining compliance. If an FDIC-insured institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan, or fails in any material respect to implement a compliance plan that has been accepted by its primary federal regulator, the regulator is required to issue an order directing the institution to cure the deficiency. Until the deficiency cited in the regulator’s order is cured, the regulator may restrict the FDIC-insured institution’s rate of growth, require the FDIC-insured institution to increase its capital, restrict the rates the institution pays on deposits or require the institution to take any action the regulator deems appropriate under the circumstances. Operating in an unsafe or unsound manner will also constitute grounds for other enforcement action by the federal bank regulatory agencies, including cease and desist orders and civil money penalty assessments.

During the past decade, the bank regulatory agencies have increasingly emphasized the importance of sound risk management processes and strong internal controls when evaluating the activities of the FDIC-insured institutions they supervise. Properly managing risks has been identified as critical to the conduct of safe and sound banking activities and has become even more important as new technologies, product innovation, and the size and speed of financial transactions have changed the nature of banking markets. The agencies have identified a spectrum of risks facing a banking institution including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, legal, and reputational risk. The OCC identified key risk themes for 2020 as: (i) elevated operational risk as banks adapt to an evolving technology environment and persistent cybersecurity risks; (ii) the need for banks to prepare for a cyclical change in credit risk while credit performance is strong; (iii) elevated interest rate risk due to lower rates continuing to compress net interest margins; and (iv) strategic risks from non-depository financial institutions, use of innovative and evolving technology, and progressive data analysis capabilities. The Bank is expected to have active board and senior management oversight; adequate policies, procedures and limits; adequate risk measurement, monitoring and management information systems; and comprehensive internal controls.

Privacy and Cybersecurity. The Bank is subject to many U.S. federal and state laws and regulations governing requirements for maintaining policies and procedures to protect non-public confidential information of their customers. These laws require the Bank to periodically disclose their privacy policies and practices relating to sharing such information and permit consumers to opt out of their ability to share information with unaffiliated third parties under certain circumstances. They also impact the Bank’s ability to share certain information with affiliates and non-affiliates for marketing and/or non-marketing purposes, or to contact customers with marketing offers. In addition, as a part of its operational risk mitigation, the Bank is required to implement a comprehensive information security program that includes administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information and to require the same of its service providers. These security and privacy policies and procedures, for the protection of personal and confidential information, are in effect across all business lines and geographic locations.

Branching Authority. National banks headquartered in North Dakota, such as the Bank, have the same branching rights in North Dakota as banks chartered under North Dakota law, subject to OCC approval. North Dakota law grants North Dakota-chartered banks the authority to establish branches anywhere in the State of North Dakota, subject to receipt of all required regulatory approvals.

The Dodd-Frank Act permits well-capitalized and well-managed banks to establish new branches across state lines without legal impediments. However, while Federal law permits state and national banks to merge with banks in other states, such mergers are subject to: (i) regulatory approval; (ii) federal and state deposit concentration limits; and (iii) state law limitations requiring the merging bank to have been in existence for a minimum period of time (not to exceed five years) prior to the merger.

Financial Subsidiaries. Under federal law and OCC regulations, national banks are authorized to engage, through “financial subsidiaries,” in any activity that is permissible for a financial holding company and any activity that the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Federal Reserve, determines is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity, except (i) insurance underwriting, (ii) real estate development or real estate investment activities (unless otherwise permitted by law), (iii) insurance company portfolio investments and (iv) merchant banking. The authority of a national bank to invest in a financial subsidiary is subject to a number of conditions, including, among

other things, requirements that the bank must be well-managed and well-capitalized (after deducting from capital the bank’s outstanding investments in financial subsidiaries). The Bank has not applied for approval to establish any financial subsidiaries.

Federal Home Loan Bank System. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank, or FHLB, of Des Moines, which serves as a central credit facility for its members. The FHLB is funded primarily from proceeds from the sale of obligations of the FHLB system. It makes loans to member banks in the form of FHLB advances. All advances from the FHLB are required to be fully collateralized as determined by the FHLB.

Transaction Account Reserves. Federal Reserve regulations require FDIC-insured institutions to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). For 2020, the first $16.9 million of otherwise reservable balances are exempt from reserves and have a zero percent reserve requirement; for transaction accounts aggregating between $16.9 million to $127.5 million, the reserve requirement is 3% of those transaction account balances; and for net transaction accounts in excess of $127.5 million, the reserve requirement is 10% of the aggregate amount of total transaction account balances in excess of $127.5 million. These reserve requirements are subject to annual adjustment by the Federal Reserve.

Community Reinvestment Act Requirements. The CRA requires the Bank to have a continuing and affirmative obligation in a safe and sound manner to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Federal regulators regularly assess the Bank’s record of meeting the credit needs of its communities. Applications for additional acquisitions would be affected by the evaluation of the Bank’s effectiveness in meeting its CRAs.

Anti-Money Laundering. The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, or the USA Patriot Act, is designed to deny terrorists and criminals the ability to obtain access to the U.S. financial system and has significant implications for FDIC-insured institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the transfer of money. The USA Patriot Act mandates financial services companies to have policies and procedures with respect to measures designed to address any or all of the following matters: (i) customer identification programs; (ii) money laundering; (iii) terrorist financing; (iv) identifying and reporting suspicious activities and currency transactions; (v) currency crimes; and (vi) cooperation between FDIC-insured institutions and law enforcement authorities.

Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate. Concentration risk exists when FDIC-insured institutions deploy too many assets to any one industry or segment. A concentration in commercial real estate is one example of regulatory concern. The interagency Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices guidance, or CRE Guidance, provides supervisory criteria, including the following numerical indicators, to assist bank examiners in identifying banks with potentially significant commercial real estate loan concentrations that may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny: (i) commercial real estate loans exceeding 300% of capital and increasing 50% or more in the preceding three years; or (ii) construction and land development loans exceeding 100% of capital. The CRE Guidance does not limit banks’ levels of commercial real estate lending activities, but rather guides institutions in developing risk management practices and levels of capital that are commensurate with the level and nature of their commercial real estate concentrations. On December 18, 2015, the federal banking agencies issued a statement to reinforce prudent risk-management practices related to CRE lending, having observed substantial growth in many CRE asset and lending markets, increased competitive pressures, rising CRE concentrations in banks, and an easing of CRE underwriting standards. The federal bank agencies reminded FDIC-insured institutions to maintain underwriting discipline and exercise prudent risk-management practices to identify, measure, monitor, and manage the risks arising from CRE lending. In addition, FDIC-insured institutions must maintain capital commensurate with the level and nature of their CRE concentration risk.

Based on the Bank’s loan portfolio as of December 31, 2019, we do not exceed the 300% guideline for commercial real estate loans or the 100% guideline for construction and land development loans.

Consumer Financial Services. The historical structure of federal consumer protection regulation applicable to all providers of consumer financial products and services changed significantly on July 21, 2011, when the CFPB

commenced operations to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws. The CFPB has broad rulemaking authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to all providers of consumer products and services, including the Bank, as well as the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive, or abusive” acts and practices. The CFPB has examination and enforcement authority over providers with more than $10 billion in assets. FDIC-insured institutions with $10 billion or less in assets, like the Bank, continue to be examined by their applicable bank regulators.

Because abuses in connection with residential mortgages were a significant factor contributing to the financial crisis, many new rules issued by the CFPB and required by the Dodd-Frank Act addressed mortgage and mortgage-related products, their underwriting, origination, servicing and sales. The Dodd-Frank Act significantly expanded underwriting requirements applicable to loans secured by 1-4 family residential real property and augmented federal law combating predatory lending practices. In addition to numerous disclosure requirements, the Dodd Frank Act imposed new standards for mortgage loan originations on all lenders, including banks and savings associations, in an effort to strongly encourage lenders to verify a borrower’s ability to repay, while also establishing a presumption of compliance for certain “qualified mortgages.” The Regulatory Relief Act provided relief in connection with mortgages for banks with assets of less than $10 billion, and, as a result, mortgages the Bank makes are now considered to be qualified mortgages if they are held in portfolio for the life of the loan.

The CFPB’s rules have not had a significant impact on our operations, except for higher compliance costs.

Employees

As of December 31, 2019, we had 789 full‑time equivalent employees. None of our employees is a party to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good and we have not experienced interruptions of operations due to labor disagreements.

Corporate Information

Our principal executive office is located at 401 Demers Avenue, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58201, and our telephone number at that address is (701) 795‑3200. Our website address is www.alerus.com. The information contained on our website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this report.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. The material risks and uncertainties that management believes affect us are described below. Before you decide to invest, you should carefully review and consider the risks described below, together with all other information included in this report and other documents we file with the SEC. Any of the following risks, as well as risks that we do not know or currently deem immaterial, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Risks Related to Our Business

Credit Risks

Our business depends on our ability to manage credit risk.

As a bank, our business requires us to manage credit risk. As a lender, we are exposed to the risk that our borrowers will be unable to repay their loans according to their terms, and that the collateral securing repayment of their loans, if any, may not be sufficient to ensure repayment. In addition, there are risks inherent in making any loan, including risks with respect to the period of time over which the loan may be repaid, risks relating to proper loan underwriting, risks resulting from changes in economic and industry conditions, and risks inherent in dealing with individual borrowers, including the risk that a borrower may not provide information to us about its business in a timely manner, or may present inaccurate or incomplete information to us, as well as risks relating to the value of collateral. To manage our credit risk, we must, among other actions, maintain disciplined and prudent underwriting standards and ensure that our bankers follow those standards. The weakening of these standards for any reason, such as an attempt to

attract higher yielding loans, a lack of discipline or diligence by our employees in underwriting and monitoring loans, or our inability to adequately adapt policies and procedures to changes in economic, or any other conditions affecting borrowers and the quality of our loan portfolio, may result in loan defaults, foreclosures, and charge‑offs and may necessitate that we significantly increase our allowance for loan losses, each of which could adversely affect our net income. As a result, our inability to successfully manage credit risk could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects.

Our allowance for loan losses may prove to be insufficient to absorb potential losses in our loan portfolio.

We establish and maintain our allowance for loan losses at a level that management considers adequate to absorb probable loan losses based on an analysis of our loan portfolio and current market environment. The allowance for loan losses represents our estimate of probable losses in the portfolio at each balance sheet date and is based upon relevant information available to us at such time. The allowance contains provisions for probable losses that have been identified relating to specific borrowing relationships, as well as probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio that are not specifically identified. Additions to the allowance for loan losses, which are charged to earnings through the provision for loan losses, are determined based on a variety of factors, including an analysis of the loan portfolio, historical loss experience and an evaluation of current economic conditions in our market area. The actual amount of loan losses is affected by, among other things, changes in economic, operating, and other conditions within our markets, which may be beyond our control, and such losses may exceed current estimates.

As of December 31, 2019, our allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.39% and as a percentage of total nonperforming loans was 305.66%. Although management believes that the allowance for loan losses was adequate on such date to absorb probable losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible, losses in excess of the existing allowance will reduce our net income and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. We may also be required to take additional provisions for loan losses in the future to further supplement the allowance for loan losses, either due to management’s assessment that the allowance is inadequate or as required by our banking regulators. Our banking regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and the value attributed to nonaccrual loans or to real estate acquired through foreclosure and may require us to adjust our determination of the value for these items. These adjustments may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

A new accounting standard could require us to increase our allowance for loan losses and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued a new accounting standard that will replace the current approach under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, for establishing the allowance for loan losses which generally considers only past events and current conditions, with a forward‑looking methodology that reflects the expected credit losses over the lives of financial assets, starting when such assets are first originated or acquired. This standard, referred to as Current Expected Credit Loss, or CECL, will require financial institutions to determine periodic estimates of lifetime expected credit losses on loans and recognize the expected credit losses as allowances for loan losses. Under the revised methodology, credit losses will be measured based on past events, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts of future conditions that affect the collectability of financial assets. The new standard is expected to generally result in increases to allowance levels and will require the application of the revised methodology to existing financial assets through a one‑time adjustment to retained earnings upon initial effectiveness. The change will also likely greatly increase the types of data we will need to collect and analyze to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses. Any increase in our allowance for loan losses, or expenses incurred to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses, will result in a decrease in net income and capital and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, the CECL model may create more volatility in our level of allowance for loan losses and could result in the need for additional capital.

As an emerging growth company, this standard is expected to become applicable to us on January 1, 2023 after the FASB recently elected to delay implementation for private companies. In connection with our initial public offering, we elected to use the extended transition period available to emerging growth companies, which means that we are not

subject to all new or revised accounting standards generally applicable to public companies until those standards apply to private companies.

A decline in the business and economic conditions in our market areas could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our business activities and credit exposure, including real estate collateral for many of our loans, are concentrated in North Dakota, Minnesota and Arizona, although we also pursue business opportunities nationally. As of December 31, 2019, 95.7% of the loans in our loan portfolio were made to borrowers who live in or conduct business in those states. This concentration imposes risks from lack of geographic diversification. Weak economic conditions in North Dakota, Minnesota and Arizona may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, where adverse economic developments, among other things, could affect the volume of loan originations, increase the level of nonperforming assets, increase the rate of foreclosure losses on loans and reduce the value of our loans and loan servicing portfolio. Weak economic conditions are characterized by, among other indicators, state and local government deficits, deflation, elevated levels of unemployment, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, increased delinquencies on mortgage, consumer and commercial loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines and lower home sales and commercial activity. Any regional or local economic downturn that affects North Dakota, Minnesota or Arizona or existing or prospective borrowers or property values in such areas may affect us and our profitability more significantly and more adversely than our competitors whose operations are less geographically concentrated. Further, a general economic slowdown could decrease the value of the AUA and AUM of our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses resulting in lower fee income, and clients could potentially seek alternative investment opportunities with other providers, which could also result in lower fee income to us. Our business is also significantly affected by monetary, trade and other regulatory policies of the U.S. federal government, its agencies and government‑sponsored entities. Changes in any of these policies are influenced by macroeconomic conditions and other factors that are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and growth prospects.

Because a significant portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of real estate loans, negative changes in the economy affecting real estate values and liquidity, as well as environmental factors, could impair the value of collateral securing our real estate loans and result in loan and other losses.

At December 31, 2019, approximately 67.1% of our total loan portfolio was comprised of loans with real estate as a primary or secondary component of collateral. The repayment of such loans is highly dependent on the ability of the borrowers to meet their loan repayment obligations to us, which can be adversely affected by economic downturns that can lead to (i) declines in the rents and, therefore, in the cash flows generated by those real properties on which the borrowers depend to fund their loan payments to us, (ii) decreases in the values of those real properties, which make it more difficult for the borrowers to sell those real properties for amounts sufficient to repay their loans in full, and (iii) job losses of residential home buyers, which makes it more difficult for these borrowers to fund their loan payments. As a result, adverse developments affecting real estate values in our market areas could increase the credit risk associated with our real estate loan portfolio. The market value of real estate can fluctuate significantly in a short period of time as a result of market conditions in the area in which the real estate is located. Adverse changes affecting real estate values and the liquidity of real estate in one or more of our markets could increase the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio, significantly impair the value of property pledged as collateral on loans and affect our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure without a loss or additional losses or our ability to sell those loans on the secondary market. Such declines and losses would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. If real estate values decline, it is also more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance for loan losses, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, adverse weather events, including tornados, wildfires, flooding, and mudslides, can cause damage to the property pledged as collateral on loans, which could result in additional losses upon a foreclosure.

In addition, if hazardous or toxic substances are found on properties pledged as collateral, the value of the real estate could be impaired. If we foreclose on and take title to such properties, we may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. Environmental laws may require us to incur substantial expenses to

address unknown liabilities and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit our ability to use or sell the affected property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations or enforcement policies with respect to existing laws may increase our exposure to environmental liability. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Many of our loans are to commercial borrowers, which have a higher degree of risk than other types of loans.

Commercial and industrial loans represented 27.8% of our total loan portfolio at December 31, 2019. These loans are often larger and involve greater risks than other types of lending. Because payments on such loans are often dependent on the successful operation of the business involved, repayment of such loans is often more sensitive than other types of loans to the general business climate and economy. Accordingly, a challenging business and economic environment may increase our risk related to commercial loans. Unlike residential mortgage loans, which generally are made on the basis of the borrowers’ ability to make repayment from their employment and other income and which are secured by real property whose value tends to be more easily ascertainable, commercial loans typically are made on the basis of the borrowers’ ability to make repayment from the cash flow of the commercial venture. Our commercial and industrial loans are primarily made based on the identified cash flow of the borrower and secondarily on the collateral underlying the loans. Most often, this collateral consists of accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. Inventory and equipment may depreciate over time, may be difficult to appraise and may fluctuate in value based on the success of the business. If the cash flow from business operations is reduced, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Due to the larger average size of each commercial loan as compared with other loans such as residential loans, as well as collateral that is generally less readily‑marketable, losses incurred on a small number of commercial loans could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our loan portfolio has a large concentration of commercial real estate loans, which involve risks specific to real estate values and the health of the real estate market generally.

As of December 31, 2019, we had $521.1 million of commercial real estate loans, consisting of $413.8 million of loans secured by nonfarm nonresidential properties, $69.4 million of loans secured by multifamily residential properties, $26.4 million of construction and land development loans and $11.5 million of loans secured by farmland. Commercial real estate loans represented 30.3% of our total loan portfolio and 189.8% of the Bank’s total capital at December 31, 2019. The market value of real estate securing our commercial real estate loans can fluctuate significantly in a short period of time as a result of market conditions. Adverse developments affecting real estate values in our market areas could increase the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio. Additionally, the repayment of commercial real estate loans generally is dependent, in large part, on sufficient income from the properties securing the loans to cover operating expenses and debt service. Economic events or governmental regulations outside of the control of the borrower or lender could negatively impact the future cash flow and market values of the affected properties. If the loans that are collateralized by real estate become troubled during a time when market conditions are declining or have declined, then we may not be able to realize the full value of the collateral that we anticipated at the time of originating the loan, which could force us to take charge‑offs or require us to increase our provision for loan losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Construction and land development loans are based upon estimates of costs and values associated with the complete project. These estimates may be inaccurate, and we may be exposed to significant losses on loans for these projects.

Construction and land development loans comprised approximately 2.2% of our total loan portfolio as of December 31, 2019. Such lending involves additional risks because funds are advanced upon the security of the project, which is of uncertain value prior to its completion, and costs may exceed realizable values in declining real estate markets. Because of the uncertainties inherent in estimating construction costs and the realizable market value of the completed project and the effects of governmental regulation of real property, it is relatively difficult to evaluate accurately the total funds required to complete a project and the related loan‑to‑value ratio. As a result, construction and land development loans often involve the disbursement of substantial funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the ultimate project and the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property, rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest. If our appraisal of the value of the completed project proves to be

overstated or market values or rental rates decline, we may have inadequate security for the repayment of the loan upon completion of construction of the project. If we are forced to foreclose on a project prior to or at completion due to a default, we may not be able to recover all of the unpaid balance of, and accrued interest on, the loan as well as related foreclosure and holding costs. In addition, we may be required to fund additional amounts to complete the project and may have to hold the property for an unspecified period of time while we attempt to dispose of it.

Nonperforming assets take significant time to resolve and adversely affect our net interest income.

As of December 31, 2019, our nonperforming loans (which consist of nonaccrual loans and loans past due 90 days or more) totaled $7.8 million, or 0.45% of our total loan portfolio, and our nonperforming assets (which consist of nonperforming loans, foreclosed assets and other real estate owned) totaled $7.8 million, or 0.33% of total assets. In addition, we had $2.3 million in accruing loans that were 31‑89 days delinquent as of December 31, 2019.

Our nonperforming assets adversely affect our net interest income in various ways. We do not record interest income on nonaccrual loans or foreclosed assets, thereby adversely affecting our net income and returns on assets and equity. When we take collateral in foreclosure and similar proceedings, we are required to mark the collateral to its then‑fair market value, which may result in a loss. These nonperforming loans and foreclosed assets also increase our risk profile and the level of capital our regulators believe is appropriate for us to maintain in light of such risks. The resolution of nonperforming assets requires significant time commitments from management, which increases our loan administration costs and adversely affects our efficiency ratio, and can be detrimental to the performance of their other responsibilities. If we experience increases in nonperforming loans and nonperforming assets, our net interest income may be negatively impacted and our loan administration costs could increase, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our high concentration of large loans to certain borrowers may increase our credit risk.

We have developed relationships with certain individuals and businesses that have resulted in a concentration of large loans to a small number of borrowers. As of December 31, 2019, our 10 largest borrowing relationships accounted for approximately 6.1% of our total loan portfolio. We have established an informal, internal limit on loans to one borrower, principal or guarantor, but we may, under certain circumstances, consider going above this internal limit in situations where management’s understanding of the industry, the borrower’s business and the credit quality of the borrower are commensurate with the increased size of the loan. Along with other risks inherent in these loans, such as the deterioration of the underlying businesses or property securing these loans, this high concentration of borrowers presents a risk to our lending operations. If any one of these borrowers becomes unable to repay its loan obligations as a result of business, economic or market conditions, or personal circumstances, such as divorce or death, our nonaccruing loans and our provision for loan losses could increase significantly, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The small to midsized businesses that we lend to may have fewer resources to weather adverse business developments, which may impair their ability to repay their loans.

We lend to small to midsized businesses, which generally have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities, frequently have smaller market share than their competition, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience substantial volatility in operating results, any of which may impair their ability to repay their loans. In addition, the success of a small and midsized business often depends on the management talents and efforts of one or two people or a small group of people, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these people could have a material adverse impact on the business and its ability to repay its loan. If general economic conditions negatively impact the markets in which we operate and small to midsized businesses are adversely affected or our borrowers are otherwise affected by adverse business developments, our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects may be materially adversely affected.

Real estate market volatility and future changes in our disposition strategies could result in net proceeds that differ significantly from our foreclosed asset fair value appraisals.

As of December 31, 2019, we had $8 thousand of foreclosed assets, which consisted of properties that we obtained through foreclosure. Assets acquired through loan foreclosure are included in other assets and are initially recorded at estimated fair value less estimated selling costs. The estimated fair value of foreclosed assets is evaluated regularly and any decreases in value along with holding costs, such as taxes, insurance and utilities, are reported in noninterest expense.

In response to market conditions and other economic factors, we may utilize alternative sale strategies other than orderly disposition as part of our foreclosed asset disposition strategy, such as immediate liquidation sales. In this event, as a result of the significant judgments required in estimating fair value and the variables involved in different methods of disposition, the net proceeds realized from such sales transactions could differ significantly from appraisals, comparable sales and other estimates used to determine the fair value of our foreclosed assets.

Our exposure to home equity lines of credit may increase the potential for loss.

Our mortgage loan portfolio consists, in part, of home equity lines of credit. A large portion of home equity lines of credit are originated in conjunction with the origination of first mortgage loans eligible for sale in the secondary market, which we typically do not service if the loan is sold. By not servicing the first mortgage loans, we are unable to track the delinquency status which may indicate whether such loans are at risk of foreclosure by others. In addition, home equity lines of credit are initially offered as “revolving” lines of credit whereby the borrowers are only required to make scheduled interest payments during the initial terms of the loans, which is generally five or ten years. Thereafter, the borrowers no longer have the ability to make principal draws from the lines and the loans convert to a fully‑amortizing basis, requiring scheduled principal and interest payments sufficient to repay the loans within a certain period of time, which is generally 10 or 20 years. The conversion of a home equity line of credit to a fully amortizing basis presents an increased level of default risk to us since the borrower no longer has the ability to make principal draws on the line, and the amount of the required monthly payment could substantially increase to provide for scheduled repayment of principal and interest.

Operational, Strategic and Reputational Risks

Noninterest income represents a significant portion of our total revenue and may be negatively impacted by changes in economic or market conditions and competition.

A significant portion of our revenue results from fee‑based services provided by our retirement and benefit services business. This contrasts with many other community and regional banks that rely more heavily on interest‑based sources of revenue, such as loans and investment securities. For the year ended December 31, 2019, noninterest income represented approximately 60.5% of our total revenue, which includes net interest income and noninterest income, a significant portion of which is derived from our retirement and benefit services business. This fee income business presents special risks not borne by other institutions that focus exclusively on banking. The level of these fees is influenced by several factors, including the number of plans and participants we provide retirement, advisory and other services for, the level of transactions within the plans, and the asset values of the plans whose fees are earned based on the level of assets in the plans. If we are unable to maintain our number of plans, participants and AUA and AUM at historical or greater levels, our fee income derived from this business may decline. For example, in a typical year we expect to experience outflows in AUA and AUM due to withdrawals, client turnover, plan terminations, mergers and acquisition activity. In 2019, we experienced outflows of $5.4 billion in our retirement and benefit services division partially offset by inflows of $5.0 billion.

In addition, economic, market or other factors that reduce the level or rates of savings in or with our clients, either through reductions in financial asset valuations or through changes in investor preferences, could materially reduce our fee revenue. The financial markets and businesses operating in the securities industry are highly volatile (meaning that performance results can vary greatly within short periods of time) and are directly affected by, among other factors, domestic and foreign economic conditions and general trends in business and finance, all of which are

beyond our control. We cannot assure you that broad market performance will be favorable in the future. Declines in the financial markets or a lack of sustained growth may result in a corresponding decline in our performance and may adversely affect the value of the assets that we manage. A general economic slowdown could decrease the value of the AUA and AUM in our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses and result in clients potentially seeking alternative investment opportunities with other providers, which could result in lower fee income to our Company.

Even when economic and market conditions are generally favorable, our investment performance may be adversely affected by the investment style of our asset managers and the particular investments that they make. To the extent our future investment performance is perceived to be poor in either relative or absolute terms, the revenues and profitability of our wealth management business will likely be reduced and our ability to attract new clients will likely be impaired. In addition, our management contracts generally provide for fee payments for wealth management and trust services based on the market value of AUM. Because most contracts provide for a fee based on market values of securities, fluctuations in the underlying securities values may have a material adverse effect on our revenue. Fee compression due to competitive pressures has resulted in and continues to result in significant pressure to reduce the fees we charge for our services in both our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses.

We may not be successful in implementing our organic growth strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Part of our business strategy is to focus on organic growth, which includes leveraging our business lines across our entire client base, enhancing brand awareness and building our infrastructure. The success of our organic growth strategy depends on our ability to increase loans, deposits, AUM and AUA at acceptable risk levels without incurring offsetting increases in noninterest expense. We may not be successful in generating organic growth if we fail to effectively execute our integrated One Alerus strategy, or as a result of other factors, including delays in introducing and implementing new products and services and other impediments resulting from regulatory oversight or lack of qualified personnel at our office locations. In addition, the success of our organic growth strategy will depend on maintaining sufficient regulatory capital levels and on favorable economic conditions in our primary market areas. Failure to adequately manage the risks associated with our anticipated organic growth could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

In addition to our organic growth strategy, we intend to expand our business by acquiring other banks and financial services companies, but we may not be successful in doing so, either because of an inability to find suitable acquisition candidates, constrained capital resources or otherwise.

While a key element of our business strategy is to grow our banking franchise and increase our market share through organic growth, we intend to take advantage of opportunities to acquire other banks and financial services companies, including wealth management and retirement administration businesses, as such opportunities present themselves. Although we intend to continue to grow our business through organic growth and strategic acquisitions, because certain of our market areas are comprised of mature, rural communities with limited population growth, we anticipate that much of our future growth will be dependent on our ability to successfully implement our acquisition growth strategy. However, we may not be able to identify suitable acquisition targets or even if we do, we may not succeed in seizing such opportunities when they arise or in integrating any such banks or financial service companies within our existing business framework. In addition, even if suitable targets are identified, we expect to compete for such businesses with other potential bidders, many of which may have greater financial resources than we have, which may adversely affect our ability to make acquisitions at attractive prices. Our ability to execute on acquisition opportunities may require us to raise additional capital and to increase our capital position to support the growth of our franchise. It will also depend on market conditions over which we have no control. Moreover, certain acquisitions may require the approval of our bank regulators, and we may not be able to obtain such approvals on acceptable terms, if at all.

If we pursue additional acquisitions, it may expose us to financial, execution and operational risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and growth prospects.

Since 2000, we have experienced significant growth, both organically and through acquisitions of banks and other financial service providers, including wealth management and retirement administration businesses. We plan to continue to grow our business by executing additional strategic acquisitions of all or parts of other banks or financial institutions or through the hiring of teams of employees that fit within our overall strategy and that we believe make financial and strategic sense. These acquisitions may result in us entering new markets.

If we grow through acquisitions, it may expose us to financial, execution and operational risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and growth prospects. Acquiring other banks and financial service providers involve risks commonly associated with acquisitions, including:

In addition to the foregoing, we may face additional risks in acquisitions to the extent we acquire new lines of business or new products, or enter new geographic areas, in which we have little or no current experience, especially if we lose key employees of the acquired operations. If we hire a new team of employees, we may incur additional expenses relating to their compensation without any guarantee that such new team will be successful in generating new business. In addition, if we later determine that the value of an acquired business has decreased and that the related goodwill is impaired, an impairment of goodwill charge to earnings would be recognized.

Acquisitions involve inherent uncertainty and we cannot assure you that we will be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with acquisitions. Our inability to overcome risks associated with acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our retirement and benefit services business relies on acquisitions to maintain and grow our AUA and AUM.

In 2019, our retirement and benefit services business experienced outflows of AUA and AUM of $5.4 billion, due to withdrawals, client turnover, plan terminations, and mergers and acquisition activity. We believe this level of runoff is typical in the industry. To maintain and grow this business, we believe we need to be an active acquirer and seek to complete acquisitions of retirement administration providers if we are able to find quality acquisition opportunities. If we are unable to source a pipeline of potential acquisitions of companies that we determine are a good strategic fit for our Company, our retirement and benefit services business may fail to grow or even shrink, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We have a concentration of large clients in our retirement and benefit services business, and if one of these clients were to terminate their business relationship with us or be acquired by another organization, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, our 10 largest client relationships accounted for approximately 8.3% of the revenue attributable to our retirement and benefit services business. During a typical year, our retirement and benefit services business loses clients due to plan terminations, primarily as a result of merger and acquisition activity. If any one of these larger clients terminates their business relationship with us, either voluntarily or as a result of being acquired by another organization, it could decrease the revenue of this business line and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

If we are unable to continue to originate residential real estate loans and sell them into the secondary market for a profit, our noninterest income could decrease.

We derive a portion of our noninterest income from the origination of residential real estate loans and the subsequent sale of such loans into the secondary market. If we are unable to continue to originate and sell residential real estate loans at historical or greater levels, our residential real estate loan volume would decrease, which could decrease our earnings. A rising interest rate environment, general economic conditions, market volatility or other factors beyond our control could adversely affect our ability to originate residential real estate loans. Mortgage banking income is highly influenced by the level and direction of mortgage interest rates and real estate and refinancing activity. In a lower interest rate environment, the demand for mortgage loans and refinancing activity will tend to increase. This has the effect of increasing fee income, but could adversely impact the estimated fair value of our Company’s mortgage servicing rights as the rate of loan prepayments increase. In a higher interest rate environment, the demand for mortgage loans and refinancing activity will generally be lower. This has the effect of decreasing fee income opportunities.

The financial services industry is experiencing an increase in regulations and compliance requirements related to mortgage loan originations necessitating technology upgrades and other changes. If new regulations continue to increase and we are unable to make technology upgrades, our ability to originate mortgage loans will be reduced or eliminated. Additionally, we sell a large portion of our residential real estate loans to third party investors, and rising interest rates could negatively affect our ability to generate suitable profits on the sale of such loans. If interest rates increase after we originate the loans, our ability to market those loans is impaired as the profitability on the loans decreases. These fluctuations can have an adverse effect on the revenue we generate from residential real estate loans and in certain instances, could result in a loss on the sale of the loans.

In addition, a prolonged period of illiquidity in the secondary mortgage market, and an increase in interest rates, could reduce the demand for residential mortgage loans and increase investor yield requirements for those loans. As a result, we may be at higher risk of retaining a larger portion of mortgage loans than in other environments until they are sold to investors. Our ability to retain residential mortgage loans is limited and could result in a reduction of loan production volumes, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The occurrence of fraudulent activity, breaches or failures of our information security controls or cybersecurity‑related incidents could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

As a financial institution, we are susceptible to fraudulent activity, information security breaches and cybersecurity‑related incidents that may be committed against us, our clients or third parties with whom we interact, which may result in financial losses or increased costs to us or our clients, disclosure or misuse of our information or our client information, misappropriation of assets, privacy breaches against our clients, litigation or damage to our reputation. Such fraudulent activity may take many forms, including check fraud, electronic fraud, wire fraud, phishing, social engineering and other dishonest acts. Information security breaches and cybersecurity‑related incidents may include fraudulent or unauthorized access to systems used by us or our clients, denial or degradation of service attacks and malware or other cyber‑attacks.

In recent periods, there continues to be a rise in electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches and cyber‑attacks within the financial services industry, especially in the commercial banking sector due to cyber criminals targeting commercial bank accounts. Consistent with industry trends, we have also experienced an increase in attempted electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches and cybersecurity related incidents in recent periods. Moreover, in recent periods, several large corporations, including financial institutions and retail companies, have suffered major data breaches, in some cases exposing not only confidential and proprietary corporate information, but also sensitive financial and other personal information of their clients and employees and subjecting them to potential fraudulent activity. We are not aware that we have experienced any material misappropriation, loss or other unauthorized disclosure of confidential or personally identifiable information as a result of a cyber‑security breach or other act, however, some of our clients may have been affected by these breaches, which could increase their risks of identity theft and other fraudulent activity that could involve their accounts with us.

Information pertaining to us and our clients is maintained, and transactions are executed, on networks and systems maintained by us and certain third‑party partners, such as our online banking, mobile banking, record keeping or accounting systems. The secure maintenance and transmission of confidential information, as well as execution of transactions over these systems, are essential to protect us and our clients against fraud and security breaches and to maintain the confidence of our clients. Breaches of information security also may occur through intentional or unintentional acts by those having access to our systems or the confidential information of our clients, including employees. In addition, increases in criminal activity levels and sophistication, advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries, vulnerabilities in third party technologies (including browsers and operating systems) or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology, processes and controls that we use to prevent fraudulent transactions and to protect data about us, our clients and underlying transactions, as well as the technology used by our clients to access our systems. Our third party partners’ inability to anticipate, or failure to adequately mitigate, breaches of security could result in a number of negative events, including losses to us or our clients, loss of business or clients, damage to our reputation, the incurrence of additional expenses, disruption to our business, additional regulatory scrutiny or penalties or our exposure to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We depend on information technology and telecommunications systems, and any systems failures, interruptions or data breaches involving these systems could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

Our business is highly dependent on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems, third party servicers, accounting systems, mobile and online banking platforms and financial intermediaries. The risks resulting from use of these systems result from a variety of factors, both internal and external. We are vulnerable to the impact of failures of our systems to operate as needed or intended. Such failures could include those resulting from human error, unexpected transaction volumes, or overall design or performance issues.

We outsource to third parties many of our major systems, such as data processing and mobile and online banking. In addition, we recently partnered with a leading financial technology company to create an online account portal that integrates our diverse product applications into a user‑friendly experience for our consumer clients. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third‑party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third‑party systems fail or experience interruptions. A system failure or service denial could result in a deterioration of our ability to process loans or gather deposits and provide customer service, compromise our ability to operate effectively, result in potential noncompliance with applicable laws or regulations, damage our reputation, result in a loss of client business or subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, failures of third parties to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or fraud or misconduct on the part of employees of any of these third parties, could disrupt our operations or adversely affect our reputation.

It may be difficult for us to replace some of our third‑party vendors, particularly vendors providing our core banking and information services, in a timely manner if they are unwilling or unable to provide us with these services in the future for any reason and even if we are able to replace them, it may be at higher cost or result in the loss of clients.

Any such events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our operations rely heavily on the secure processing, storage and transmission of information and the monitoring of a large number of transactions on a minute‑by‑minute basis, and even a short interruption in service could have significant consequences. We also interact with and rely on retailers, for whom we process transactions, as well as financial counterparties and regulators. Each of these third parties may be targets of the same types of fraudulent activity, computer break‑ins and other cyber security breaches described above, and the cyber security measures that they maintain to mitigate the risk of such activity may be different than our own and may be inadequate.

Because financial entities and technology systems are becoming more interdependent and complex, a cyber incident, information breach or loss, or technology failure that compromises the systems or data of one or more financial entities could have a material impact on counterparties or other market participants, including ourselves. As a result of the foregoing, our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by any significant disruptions to us or to third parties with whom we interact.

A transition away from the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, as a reference rate for financial contracts could negatively affect our income and expenses and the value of various financial contracts.

LIBOR is used extensively in the United States and globally as a benchmark for various commercial and financial contracts, including adjustable rate mortgages, corporate debt and interest rate swaps. LIBOR is set based on interest rate information reported by certain banks, which may stop reporting such information after 2021. It is not certain at this time whether LIBOR will change or cease to exist, or the extent to which those entering into commercial or financial contracts will transition to any particular new benchmark. Other benchmarks may perform differently than LIBOR, or alternative benchmarks have performed in the past or have other consequences that cannot currently be anticipated. It is also uncertain what will happen with instruments that rely on LIBOR for future interest rate adjustments and which remain outstanding if LIBOR ceases to exist.

While there is no consensus on what rate, or rates, may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of U.S. financial market participants, selected by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, started in May 2018, to publish the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or SOFR, as an alternative to LIBOR. SOFR is a broad measure of the cost of overnight borrowings collateralized by Treasury securities that was selected by the Alternative Reference Rate Committee due to the depth and robustness of the Treasury repurchase market. At this time, it is impossible to predict whether SOFR will become an accepted alternative to LIBOR.

We have loans, available-for-sale securities, derivative contracts, subordinated notes payable, and junior subordinated debentures with terms that are either directly or indirectly dependent on LIBOR. The transition from LIBOR to alternative rates such as SOFR, could create considerable costs and additional risk. Any such transition could: (i) adversely affect the interest rates paid or received on, the revenue and expenses associated with, and the value of our floating-rate obligations, loans, deposits, derivatives, and other financial instruments tied to LIBOR rates, or other securities or financial arrangements given LIBOR’s role in determining market interest rates globally; (ii) prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of our preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate; (iii) result in disputes, litigation, or other actions with counterparties regarding the interpretation and enforceability of certain fallback language in LIBOR-based securities; and (iv) require the transition to or development of appropriate systems and analytics to effectively transition our risk management processes from LIBOR-based products to those based on the applicable alternative pricing benchmark, such as SOFR. Since proposed alternative rates are calculated differently, payments under contracts referencing new rates will differ from those referencing LIBOR. The transition will change our market risk profile, requiring changes to risk and pricing models, valuation tools, product design and hedging strategies. Further, a failure to adequately manage this transition process with our customers could adversely affect our reputation. Although we are currently unable to assess the ultimate impact of the transition from LIBOR, a failure to adequately manage the transition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Potential losses incurred in connection with possible repurchases and indemnification payments related to mortgages that we have sold into the secondary market may require us to increase our financial statement reserves in the future.

We engage in the origination and sale of residential real estate loans into the secondary market. In connection with such sales, we make certain representations and warranties, which, if breached, may require us to repurchase such loans or indemnify the purchasers of such loans for actual losses incurred in respect of such loans. These representations and warranties vary based on the nature of the transaction and the purchaser’s or insurer’s requirements but generally pertain to the ownership of the mortgage loan, the real property securing the loan and compliance with applicable laws and applicable lender and government‑sponsored entity underwriting guidelines in connection with the origination of the loan. While we believe our mortgage lending practices and standards to be adequate, we may receive repurchase or indemnification requests in the future, which could be material in volume. If that were to happen, we could incur losses in connection with loan repurchases and indemnification claims, and any such losses might exceed our financial statement reserves, requiring us to increase such reserves. In that event, any losses we might have to recognize and any increases we might have to make to our reserves could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are highly dependent on our executive management team, and the loss of any of our senior executive officers or other key employees, or our inability to attract and retain qualified personnel, could harm our ability to implement our strategic plan and impair our relationships with clients.

Our success is dependent, to a large degree, upon the continued service and skills of our executive management team, which consists of Randy Newman, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, Katie Lorenson, our Chief Financial Officer, Ann McConn, our Chief Business Officer, and Karin Taylor, our Chief Risk Officer. Our business and growth strategies are built primarily upon our ability to retain employees with experience and business relationships within our market areas. The loss of any of the members of our executive management team or any of our other key personnel, including our client relationship managers, could have an adverse impact on our business and growth because of their skills, years of industry experience, knowledge of our market areas, the difficulty of finding qualified replacement personnel and any difficulties associated with transitioning of responsibilities to any new members of the executive management team. As such, we need to continue to attract and retain key personnel and to recruit qualified individuals who fit our culture to succeed existing key personnel and ensure the continued growth and successful operation of our business. Leadership changes may occur from time to time, and except as noted below, we cannot predict whether significant retirements or resignations will occur or whether we will be able to recruit additional qualified personnel. Kris Compton, our former Chief Strategy Officer, retired from our Company at the end of 2019. As part of our succession plan, Ms. McConn assumed the role of Chief Shared Services Officer and on March 10, 2020, we announced the hire of Ryan Goldberg, our Chief Revenue Officer.

Competition for senior executives and skilled personnel in the financial services industry is intense, which means the cost of hiring, incentivizing and retaining skilled personnel may continue to increase. In addition, our ability to effectively compete for senior executives and other qualified personnel by offering competitive compensation and benefit arrangements may be restricted by applicable banking laws and regulations. The loss of the services of any senior executive or other key personnel, the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future or the failure to develop and implement a viable succession plan could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our ability to retain and recruit employees is critical to the success of our business strategy and any failure to do so could impair our customer relationships and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our ability to retain and grow our loans, deposits and fee income depends upon the business generation capabilities, reputation and relationship management skills of our employees. If we lose the services of any of our employees, including successful employees employed by banks or other businesses that we may acquire, to a new or existing competitor or otherwise, we may not be able to retain valuable relationships and some of our customers could choose to use the services of a competitor instead of our services.

Our success and growth strategy also depends on our continued ability to attract and retain experienced employees for all of our business lines. We may face difficulties in recruiting and retaining personnel of our desired caliber, including as a result of competition from other financial institutions. Competition for high quality personnel is strong and we may not be successful in attracting or retaining the personnel we require. In particular, many of our competitors are significantly larger with greater financial resources, and may be able to offer more attractive compensation packages and broader career opportunities. Additionally, we may incur significant expenses and expend significant time and resources on training, integration and business development before we are able to determine whether a new employee will be profitable or effective in his or her role. If we are unable to attract and retain a successful customer development and management team or if our customer development and management team fails to meet our expectations in terms of customer relationships and profitability, we may be unable to execute our business strategy and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects may be negatively affected.

Our ability to maintain our reputation is critical to the success of our business, and the failure to do so may materially adversely affect our business and the value of our stock.

We rely, in part, on our reputation to attract clients and retain our client relationships. Damage to our reputation could undermine the confidence of our current and potential clients in our ability to provide high‑quality financial services. Such damage could also impair the confidence of our counterparties and vendors and ultimately affect our ability to effect transactions. In particular, our ability to attract and retain clients and employees could be adversely affected to the extent our reputation is damaged. Our actual or perceived failure to address various issues could give rise to reputational risk that could cause harm to us and our business prospects. These issues include, but are not limited to, legal and regulatory requirements; privacy; client and other third‑party fraud; properly maintaining and safeguarding client and employee personal information; money‑laundering; illegal or fraudulent sales practices; ethical issues; appropriately addressing potential conflicts of interest; and the proper identification and disclosure of the legal, reputational, credit, liquidity, and market risks inherent in our products. Failure to appropriately address any of these issues could also give rise to additional regulatory restrictions, reputational harm and legal risks, which could, among other consequences, increase the size and number of litigation claims and damages asserted or subject us to enforcement actions, fines, and penalties and cause us to incur related costs and expenses. In addition, our businesses are dependent on the integrity of our relationship, asset managers and other employees. If a relationship manager, asset manager or other employee were to misappropriate any client funds or client information, the reputation of our businesses could be negatively affected, which may result in the loss of accounts and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Maintenance of our reputation depends not only on our success in maintaining our service‑focused culture and controlling and mitigating the various risks described in this report, but also on our success in identifying and appropriately addressing issues that may arise in the areas described above. Maintaining our reputation also depends on our ability to successfully prevent third parties from infringing on the “Alerus” brand and associated trademarks and our other intellectual property. Defense of our reputation, trademarks and other intellectual property, including through litigation, could result in costs that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our use of third‑party vendors and our other ongoing third‑party business relationships is subject to increasing regulatory requirements and attention.

Our use of third party vendors, including the financial technology company we recently partnered with to create a customer portal, for certain information systems is subject to increasingly demanding regulatory requirements and attention by our federal bank regulators. Recent regulations require us to enhance our due diligence, ongoing monitoring and control over our third‑party vendors and other ongoing third‑party business relationships. In certain cases, we may be required to renegotiate our agreements with these vendors to meet these enhanced requirements, which could increase our costs. We expect that our regulators will hold us responsible for deficiencies in our oversight and control of our third‑party relationships and in the performance of the parties with which we have these relationships. As a result, if our regulators conclude that we have not exercised adequate oversight and control over our third party vendors or other ongoing third party business relationships or that such third parties have not performed appropriately, we could be subject to enforcement actions, including civil money penalties or other administrative or judicial penalties or fines, as

well as requirements for client remediation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We have a continuing need for technological change, and we may not have the resources to effectively implement new technology or we may experience operational challenges when implementing new technology.

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes with frequent introductions of new technology‑driven products and services. In addition to better serving clients, the effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to reduce costs. Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to address the needs of our clients by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy client demands for convenience as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. We may experience operational challenges as we implement these new technology enhancements, which could result in us not fully realizing the anticipated benefits from such new technology or require us to incur significant costs to remedy any such challenges in a timely manner.

Many of our larger competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. As a result, they may be able to offer additional or superior products to those that we will be able to offer, which would put us at a competitive disadvantage. Accordingly, a risk exists that we will not be able to effectively implement new technology‑driven products and services or be successful in marketing such products and services to our clients.

In addition, the implementation of technological changes and upgrades to maintain current systems and integrate new ones may also cause service interruptions, transaction processing errors and system conversion delays and may cause us to fail to comply with applicable laws. We expect that new technologies and business processes applicable to the financial services industry will continue to emerge, and these new technologies and business processes may be better than those we currently use. Because the pace of technological change is high and our industry is intensely competitive, we may not be able to sustain our investment in new technology as critical systems and applications become obsolete or as better ones become available. A failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry and failure to avoid interruptions, errors and delays could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are subject to certain operational risks, including, but not limited to, customer or employee fraud and data processing system failures and errors.

Employee errors and employee and customer misconduct could subject us to financial losses or regulatory sanctions and seriously harm our reputation. Misconduct by our employees could include hiding unauthorized activities from us, improper or unauthorized activities on behalf of our customers or improper use of confidential information. It is not always possible to prevent employee errors and misconduct, and the precautions we take to prevent and detect this activity may not be effective in all cases. Employee errors could also subject us to financial claims for negligence.

We maintain a system of internal controls and insurance coverage to mitigate against operational risks, including data processing system failures and errors and customer or employee fraud. If our internal controls fail to prevent or detect an occurrence, or if any resulting loss is not insured or exceeds applicable insurance limits, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition results of operations and growth prospects.

Our dividend policy may change.

Although we have historically paid dividends to our stockholders and currently intend to maintain or increase our current dividend levels in future quarters, we have no obligation to continue doing so and may change our dividend policy at any time without notice to our stockholders. Holders of our common stock are only entitled to receive such cash dividends as our board of directors, in its discretion, may declare out of funds legally available for such payments. Further, consistent with our strategic plans, growth initiatives, capital availability, projected liquidity needs, and other factors, we have made, and will continue to make, capital management decisions and policies that could adversely impact the amount of dividends paid to our common stockholders.

In addition, we are a financial holding company, and our ability to declare and pay dividends is dependent on certain federal regulatory considerations, including the guidelines of the Federal Reserve regarding capital adequacy and dividends. It is the policy of the Federal Reserve that bank and financial holding companies should generally pay dividends on capital stock only out of earnings, and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs, asset quality and financial condition.

We are a separate and distinct legal entity from our subsidiaries, including the Bank. We receive substantially all of our revenue from dividends from the Bank, which we use as the principal source of funds to pay our expenses. Various federal and state laws and regulations limit the amount of dividends that the Bank and certain of our non‑bank subsidiaries may pay us. Such limits are also tied to the earnings of our subsidiaries. If the Bank does not receive regulatory approval or if its earnings are not sufficient to make dividend payments to us while maintaining adequate capital levels, our ability to pay our expenses and our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely impacted.

Future issuances of common stock could result in dilution, which could cause our common stock price to decline.

We are generally not restricted from issuing additional shares of stock, up to the 30,000,000 shares of common stock and 2,000,000 shares of preferred stock authorized in our certificate of incorporation, which in each case could be increased by a vote of the holders of a majority of our shares of common stock. We may issue additional shares of our common stock in the future pursuant to current or future equity compensation plans, upon conversions of preferred stock or debt, or in connection with future acquisitions or financings. If we choose to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock for any reason, the issuance would have a dilutive effect on the holders of our common stock and could have a material negative effect on the market price of our common stock.

We may issue shares of preferred stock in the future, which could make it difficult for another company to acquire us or could otherwise adversely affect holders of our common stock, which could depress the price of our common stock.

Although there are currently no shares of our preferred stock issued and outstanding, our certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue up to 2,000,000 shares of one or more series of preferred stock. Our board of directors also has the power, without stockholder approval, to set the terms of any series of preferred stock that may be issued, including voting rights, dividend rights, preferences over our common stock with respect to dividends or in the event of a dissolution, liquidation or winding up, and other terms. If we issue preferred stock in the future that has preference over our common stock with respect to payment of dividends or upon our liquidation, dissolution or winding up, or if we issue preferred stock with voting rights that dilute the voting power of our common stock, the rights of the holders of our common stock or the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected. In addition, the ability of our board of directors to issue shares of preferred stock without any action on the part of our stockholders may impede a takeover of us and prevent a transaction perceived to be favorable to our stockholders.

The holders of our debt obligations and preferred stock, if any, will have priority over our common stock with respect to payment in the event of liquidation, dissolution or winding up and with respect to the payment of interest and dividends.

In any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Company, our common stock would rank junior in priority to all claims of debt holders against us and claims of all of our outstanding shares of preferred stock. As of December 31, 2019, we had $50.0 million of subordinated notes payable and $10.3 million of junior subordinated debentures outstanding. We do not currently have any shares of preferred stock outstanding. As a result, holders of our common stock will not be entitled to receive any payment or other distribution of assets upon the liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Company until after all of our obligations to our debt holders have been satisfied and holders of senior equity securities, including any preferred shares, if any, have received any payment or distribution due to them.

Our business and operations may be adversely affected in numerous and complex ways by weak economic conditions and global trade.

Our businesses and operations, which primarily consist of lending money to clients in the form of commercial and residential mortgage loans, borrowing money from clients in the form of deposits and savings accounts, investing in securities, and providing wealth management, trust and fiduciary and recordkeeping services, are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the United States. If the United States economy weakens, our growth and profitability from our lending, deposit and investment operations could be constrained. Uncertainty about the federal fiscal policymaking process, the medium‑ and long‑term fiscal outlook of the federal government, and future tax rates is a concern for businesses, consumers and investors in the United States. In addition, economic conditions in foreign countries and weakening global trade due to increased anti‑globalization sentiment and recent tariff activity could affect the stability of global financial markets, which could hinder the economic growth of the United States. There are also concerns about the potential effects of coronavirus on international trade (including supply chains and export levels), travel, and employee productivity and other economic activities. Weak economic conditions are characterized by deflation, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, a lack of liquidity or depressed prices in the secondary market for loans, increased delinquencies on mortgage, consumer and commercial loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines and lower home sales and commercial activity. The current economic environment is also characterized by interest rates remaining at historically low levels, which impacts our ability to attract deposits and to generate attractive earnings through our investment portfolio. Further, a general economic slowdown could decrease the value of our AUA and AUM resulting in clients potentially seeking alternative investment opportunities with other providers, which could result in lower fee income. All of these factors are detrimental to our business, and the interplay between these factors can be complex and unpredictable. Adverse economic conditions and government policy responses to such conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about clients and counterparties.

In deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions, and in evaluating and monitoring our loan portfolio on an ongoing basis, we may rely on information furnished by or on behalf of clients and counterparties, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information. We may also rely on representations of those clients or counterparties or of other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate, incomplete, fraudulent or misleading financial statements, credit reports or other financial or business information, or the failure to receive such information on a timely basis, could result in loan losses, reputational damage or other effects that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

New lines of business, products, product enhancements or services may subject us to additional risks.

From time to time, we may implement new lines of business or offer new products and product enhancements as well as new services within our existing lines of business. There are substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances in which the markets are not fully developed. In implementing, developing or marketing new lines of business, products, product enhancements or services, we may invest significant time and resources, although we may not assign the appropriate level of resources or expertise necessary to make these new lines of business, products, product enhancements or services successful or to realize their expected benefits. Further, initial timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business, products, product enhancements or services may not be achieved, and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible.

External factors, such as compliance with regulations, competitive alternatives and shifting market preferences, may also affect the successful implementation of a new line of business or offerings of new products, product enhancements or services. Further, any new line of business, product, product enhancement or service or system conversion could have a significant impact on the effectiveness of our system of internal controls. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business or offerings of new products, product enhancements or services could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We face intense competition from other banks and financial services companies that could hurt our business.

We operate in the highly competitive financial services industry and face significant competition for clients from financial institutions located both within and beyond our market areas. Overall, we compete with national commercial banks, regional banks, private banks, mortgage companies, online lenders, savings banks, credit unions, non‑bank financial services companies, other financial institutions, including investment advisory and wealth management firms, financial technology companies and securities brokerage firms, operating within or near the areas we serve. Many of our non‑bank competitors are not subject to the same extensive regulations that govern our activities and may have greater flexibility in competing for business. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation.

In our banking business, we may not be able to compete successfully with other financial institutions in our markets, particularly with larger financial institutions that have significantly greater resources than us, and we may have to pay higher interest rates to attract deposits, accept lower yields to attract loans and pay higher wages for new employees, resulting in lower net interest margins and reduced profitability. In addition, increased lending activity of competing banks has also led to increased competitive pressures on loan rates and terms for high‑quality credits.

Competition in the retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses is especially strong in our geographic market areas because there are numerous well‑established, well‑resourced, well‑capitalized, and successful investment management, wealth advisory and wealth management and trust firms in these areas. In addition, the record keeping and administration industry is dominated by a small number of larger institutions that may charge fees that are lower than we charge for similar services. Our ability to successfully attract and retain retirement and benefit services and wealth management clients is dependent upon our ability to compete with competitors’ investment, advisory, fiduciary and recordkeeping products and services, levels of investment performance and marketing and distribution capabilities. If we are unable to compete effectively with other banking or other financial services businesses, we could find it more difficult to attract new and retain existing clients and our noninterest income could decline, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We originate, sell and service residential mortgage loans. Our mortgage business faces vigorous competition from banks and other financial institutions, including larger financial institutions and independent mortgage companies. Our mortgage business competes on a number of factors including customer service, quality, range of products and services offered, price, reputation, interest rates, closing process and duration, and loan origination fees. The ability to attract and retain skilled mortgage origination professionals is critical to our mortgage origination business. Changes in interest rates and pricing decisions by our loan competitors affect demand for our residential mortgage loan products, the revenue realized on the sale of loans and revenues received from servicing such loans for others, ultimately reducing our noninterest income. In addition, if we are unable to attract and retain enough skilled employees, our mortgage origination volume may decline.

Our business and operations may be adversely affected in numerous and complex ways by external business disruptors in the financial services industry.

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid change, as technology enables traditional banks to compete in new ways and non‑traditional entrants to compete in certain segments of the banking market, in some cases with reduced regulation. As client preferences and expectations continue to evolve, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for banks to expand their geographic reach by providing services over the internet and for non‑banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems, online lending and low‑cost investment advisory services. New entrants may use new technologies, advanced data and analytic tools, lower cost to serve, reduced regulatory burden or faster processes to challenge traditional banks. For example, new business models have been observed in retail payments, consumer and commercial lending, foreign exchange and low‑cost investment advisory services. While we closely monitor business disruptors and seek to adapt to changing technologies, matching the pace of innovation exhibited by new and differently situated competitors may require us and policy‑makers to adapt at a greater pace. Because the financial services industry is experiencing rapid changes in technology, our future success will depend in part on our ability to address our clients’

needs by using technology. Client loyalty can be influenced by a competitor’s new products, especially offerings that could provide cost savings or a higher return to the client.

The investment management contracts we have with our clients are terminable without cause and on relatively short notice by our clients, which makes us vulnerable to short‑term declines in the performance of the securities under our management.

Like most investment advisory and wealth management businesses, the investment advisory contracts we have with our clients are typically terminable by the client without cause upon less than 30 days’ notice. As a result, even short‑term declines in the performance of the securities we manage, which can result from factors outside our control, such as adverse changes in market or economic conditions or the poor performance of some of the investments we have recommended to our clients, could lead some of our clients to move assets under our management to other asset classes such as broad index funds or treasury securities, or to investment advisors which have investment product offerings or investment strategies different than ours. Therefore, our operating results are heavily dependent on the financial performance of our investment portfolios and the investment strategies we employ in our investment advisory businesses and even short‑term declines in the performance of the investment portfolios we manage for our clients, whatever the cause, could result in a decline in AUM and a corresponding decline in investment management fees, which would adversely affect our results of operations.

Severe weather, natural disasters, pandemics, acts of war or terrorism or other adverse external events could significantly impact our business.

Severe weather, natural disasters, widespread disease or pandemics, acts of war or terrorism or other adverse external events could have a significant impact on our ability to conduct business. In addition, such events could affect the stability of our deposit base, impair the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans, impair the value of collateral securing loans, cause significant property damage, result in loss of revenue or cause us to incur additional expenses. The coronavirus outbreak may have an adverse impact on our customers that are directly or indirectly engaged in industries that could be affected by the outbreak, such as, international trade or hospitality. Their businesses may be adversely affected by quarantines and travel restrictions in areas most affected by the coronavirus. In addition, entire industries, such as agriculture, may be adversely impacted due to lower exports caused by reduced economic activity in the affected areas. As a result, the coronavirus may materially and adversely impact various aspects of our operations and financial results, by requiring us to take certain responsive actions, including but not limited to, increasing our loan loss reserves, incurring costs for emergency preparedness, closing branch offices or branch operations and requiring that employees work remotely, which may lead to personnel shortages. The occurrence of any of these events in the future could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our wealth management business is dependent on asset managers to produce investment returns and financial advisors to solicit and retain clients, and the loss of a key asset manager or financial advisor could adversely affect our wealth management business.

We rely on our asset managers to produce investment returns and financial advisors to advise clients of our wealth management business. We believe that investment performance is an important factor for the growth of our AUM. Poor investment performance could impair our revenues and growth because existing clients might withdraw funds in favor of better performing products, which would result in lower investment management fees, or our ability to attract funds from existing and new clients might diminish.

The market for asset managers and financial advisors is extremely competitive and is increasingly characterized by frequent movement of these types of employees among different firms. In addition, our asset managers and financial advisors often have regular direct contact with our clients, which can lead to a strong client relationship based on the client’s trust in that individual manager or advisor. The loss of a key asset manager or financial advisor could jeopardize our relationships with our clients and lead to the loss of client accounts. Losses of such accounts could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may be adversely affected by the soundness of certain securities brokerage firms.

At the end of 2018, we made the decision to no longer provide custodial services for our clients through our broker‑dealer subsidiary. Instead, client investment accounts are maintained under custodial arrangements with large, well established securities brokerage firms or bank institutions that provide custodial services, either directly or through arrangements made by us with those firms. As a result, the performance of, or even rumors or questions about the integrity or performance of, any of those firms could adversely affect the confidence of our clients in the services provided by those firms or otherwise adversely impact their custodial holdings. Such an occurrence could negatively impact our ability to retain existing or attract new clients and, as a result, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Liquidity and Funding Risks

Liquidity risks could affect our operations and jeopardize our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Liquidity is essential to our business. Liquidity risk is the risk that we will not be able to meet our obligations, including financial commitments, as they come due and is inherent in our operations. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans or investment securities, and from other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity.

Our most important source of funds consists of our client deposits, which can decrease for a variety of reasons, including when clients perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. Our future growth will largely depend on our ability to maintain and grow a strong deposit base and our ability to retain our largest retirement and benefit services and wealth management clients, many of whom are also depositors. If clients, including our retirement and benefit services and wealth management clients, move money out of bank deposits and into other investments, we could lose a relatively low‑cost source of funds, which would require us to seek other funding alternatives, including increasing our dependence on wholesale funding sources, in order to continue to grow, thereby increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income.

Additionally, we access collateralized public funds, which are bank deposits of state and local municipalities. These deposits are required to be secured by certain investment grade securities to ensure repayment, which reduces standby liquidity by restricting the potential liquidity of the pledged collateral. As of December 31, 2019, we had pledged $123.8 million of investment securities for this purpose, which represented approximately 39.9% of our total securities portfolio. If we are unable to pledge sufficient collateral to secure public funding, we may lose access to this source of liquidity that we have historically relied upon. In addition, the availability of and fluctuations in these funds depends on the individual municipality’s fiscal policies and cash flow needs.

Other primary sources of funds consist of cash from operations, investment security maturities and sales and proceeds from the issuance and sale of our equity and debt securities to investors. Additional liquidity is provided by repurchase agreements and the ability to borrow from the Federal Reserve and the FHLB. We may also borrow from third‑party lenders from time to time. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our activities or on terms that are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us directly or the financial services industry or economy in general, such as disruptions in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry. Economic conditions and a loss of confidence in financial institutions may increase our cost of funding and limit access to certain customary sources of capital, including inter‑bank borrowings, repurchase agreements and borrowings from the discount window of the Federal Reserve. There is also the potential risk that collateral calls with respect to our repurchase agreements could reduce our available liquidity.

Any decline in available funding could adversely impact our ability to continue to implement our strategic plan, including originating loans and investing in securities, or to fulfill obligations such as paying our expenses, repaying our borrowings or meeting deposit withdrawal demands, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may not be able to maintain a strong core deposit base or other low‑cost funding sources.

We depend primarily on core deposits from our clients, which consist of noninterest bearing deposits, interest bearing checking accounts, certificates of deposit less than $250,000 and money market savings accounts, as our primary source of funding for our lending activities. Our future growth will largely depend on our ability to maintain and grow this strong, core deposit base and our ability to retain our retirement and benefit and wealth management clients, many of whom are also depositors. Deposit and account balances can decrease when clients perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market or real estate, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If clients, including our retirement and benefit and wealth management clients, move money out of bank deposits or money market accounts and into investments (or similar deposit products at other institutions that may provide a higher rate of return), we could lose a relatively low‑cost source of funds, increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income.

We supplement our core deposit funding with non‑core, short‑term funding sources, including FHLB advances and fed funds purchased. As of December 31, 2019, we had no secured or unsecured FHLB advances or fed funds purchased from the FHLB. Our maximum borrowing capacity from the FHLB is based on the amount of mortgage and commercial loans we can pledge. As of December 31, 2019, our advances from the FHLB were collateralized by $870.5 million of real estate loans. If we are unable to pledge sufficient collateral to secure funding from the FHLB, we may lose access to this source of liquidity. If we are unable to access any of these types of funding sources or if our costs related to them increases, our liquidity and ability to support demand for loans could be materially adversely affected.

Our high concentration of large depositors may increase our liquidity risk.

We have developed relationships with certain individuals and businesses that have resulted in a concentration of large deposits from a small number of clients. As of December 31, 2019, our 10 largest depositor relationships accounted for approximately 9.2% of our total deposits. This high concentration of depositors presents a risk to our liquidity if one or more of them decides to change its relationship with us and to withdraw all or a significant portion of their accounts. If such an event occurs, we may need to seek out alternative sources of funding that may not be on the same terms as the deposits being replaced, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our liquidity is largely dependent on dividends from the Bank.

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. A substantial portion of our cash flow, including cash flow to pay principal and interest on our debt, comes from dividends the Company receives from the Bank. Various federal and state laws and regulations limit the amount of dividends that the Bank may pay to the Company. As of December 31, 2019, the Bank had the capacity to pay the Company a dividend of up to $49.1 million without the need to obtain prior regulatory approval. Also, the Company’s right to participate in a distribution of assets upon a subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization is subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary’s creditors. In the event the Bank is unable to pay dividends to us, we may not be able to service our debt, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, and if we fail to maintain sufficient capital, whether due to losses, an inability to raise additional capital or otherwise, our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, as well as our ability to maintain regulatory compliance, would be adversely affected.

We face significant capital and other regulatory requirements as a financial institution. We may need to raise additional capital in the future to provide us with sufficient capital resources and liquidity to meet our commitments and business needs, which could include the possibility of financing acquisitions. We do not have any current plans, arrangements or understandings to make any additional acquisitions. In addition, our Company, on a consolidated basis, and the Bank, on a stand‑alone basis, must meet certain regulatory capital requirements and maintain sufficient liquidity. Regulatory capital requirements could increase from current levels, which could require us to raise additional capital or contract our operations. Our ability to raise additional capital depends on conditions in the capital markets, economic conditions and a number of other factors, including investor perceptions regarding the banking industry, market conditions and governmental activities, our credit ratings, our ability to maintain a listing on Nasdaq and our financial

condition and performance. If we fail to maintain an investment grade credit rating, it may adversely impact our ability to raise capital or incur additional debt. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be able to raise additional capital if needed or on terms acceptable to us. If we fail to maintain capital to meet regulatory requirements, our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects would be materially and adversely affected.

We may be adversely affected by changes in the actual or perceived soundness or condition of other financial institutions.

Financial services institutions that deal with each other are interconnected as a result of trading, investment, liquidity management, clearing, counterparty and other relationships. Concerns about, or a default by, one institution could lead to significant liquidity problems and losses or defaults by other institutions, as the commercial and financial soundness of many financial institutions is closely related as a result of these credit, trading, clearing and other relationships. Even the perceived lack of creditworthiness of, or questions about, a counterparty may lead to market‑wide liquidity problems and losses or defaults by various institutions. This systemic risk may adversely affect financial intermediaries with which we interact on a daily basis or key funding providers such as the FHLB, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our access to liquidity or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We receive substantial deposits and AUM as a result of referrals by professionals, such as attorneys, accountants, and doctors, and such referrals are dependent upon the continued positive interaction with and financial health of those referral sources.

Many of our deposit clients and clients of our wealth management business are individuals involved in professional vocations, such as lawyers, accountants, and doctors. These clients are a significant source of referrals for new clients in both the deposit and wealth management areas. If we fail to adequately serve these professional clients with our deposit services, lending, wealth management products and other services, this source of referrals may diminish, which could have a negative impact on our financial results. Further, if the economy in the geographic areas that we serve is negatively impacted, the amount of deposits and services that these professional individuals will utilize and the number of referrals that they will make may decrease, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Legal, Accounting and Compliance Risks

Our risk management framework may not be effective in mitigating risks or losses to us.

Our risk management framework is comprised of various processes, systems and strategies, and is designed to manage the types of risk to which we are subject, including, among others, credit, market, liquidity, interest rate and compliance. Our framework also includes financial or other modeling methodologies that involve management assumptions and judgment. Our risk management framework may not be effective under all circumstances and it may not adequately mitigate any risk or loss to us. If our framework is not effective, we could suffer unexpected losses and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. We may also be subject to potentially adverse regulatory consequences.

Our accounting estimates and risk management processes and controls rely on analytical and forecasting techniques and models and assumptions, which may not accurately predict future events.

Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to the way we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Our management must exercise judgment in selecting and applying many of these accounting policies and methods so they comply with GAAP and reflect management’s judgment of the most appropriate manner to report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, management must select the accounting policy or method to apply from two or more alternatives, any of which may be reasonable under the circumstances, yet which may result in our reporting materially different results than would have been reported under a different alternative.

Certain accounting policies are critical to presenting our financial condition and results of operations. They require management to make difficult, subjective or complex judgments about matters that are uncertain. Materially different amounts could be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions or estimates. If our underlying assumptions or estimates prove to be incorrect, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our risk management processes, internal controls, disclosure controls and corporate governance policies and procedures are based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable (not absolute) assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of our controls, processes and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls, processes and procedures could necessitate changes in those controls, processes and procedures, which may increase our compliance costs, divert management attention from our business or subject us to regulatory actions and increased regulatory scrutiny. Any of these could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Changes in accounting policies or standards could materially impact our financial statements.

From time to time, the FASB or the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, may change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. Such changes may result in us being subject to new or changing accounting and reporting standards. In addition, the bodies that interpret the accounting standards (such as banking regulators or outside auditors) may change their interpretations or positions on how these standards should be applied. These changes may be beyond our control, can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, or apply an existing standard differently, in each case resulting in our needing to revise or restate prior period financial statements.

The obligations associated with being a public company require significant resources and management attention, which divert time and attention from our business operations.

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act. The Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition with the SEC. The Sarbanes‑Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we establish and maintain effective internal controls and procedures for financial reporting. Compliance with these reporting requirements and other rules of the SEC could increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time consuming and costly, which could negatively affect our efficiency ratio. Further, the need to maintain the corporate infrastructure demanded of a public company may divert management’s attention from implementing our strategic plan, which could prevent us from successfully implementing our growth initiatives and improving our business, results of operations and financial condition.

As an emerging growth company as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, we are taking advantage of certain temporary exemptions from various reporting requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and an exemption from the requirement to obtain an attestation from our auditors on management’s assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. When these exemptions cease to apply, we expect to incur additional expenses and devote increased management effort toward ensuring compliance with them.

The financial reporting resources we have put in place may not be sufficient to ensure the accuracy of the additional information we are required to disclose as a publicly listed company.

As a public company, we are subject to heightened financial reporting standards under GAAP and SEC rules, including more extensive levels of disclosure. Complying with these standards required enhancements to the design and operation of our internal control over financial reporting as well as additional financial reporting and accounting staff with appropriate training and experience in GAAP and SEC rules and regulations.

If we are unable to meet the demands required of us as a public company, including the requirements of the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act, we may be unable to report our financial results accurately, or report them within the timeframes required by law or stock exchange regulations. Failure to comply with the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act, when and as applicable, could also potentially subject us to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities. If material weaknesses or other deficiencies occur, our ability to report our financial results accurately and timely could be impaired, which could result in late filings of our annual and quarterly reports under the Exchange Act, restatements of our consolidated financial statements, a decline in our stock price, suspension or delisting of our common stock from the Nasdaq Capital Market, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. Even if we are able to report our financial statements accurately and in a timely manner, any disclosure of material weaknesses in our future filings with the SEC could cause our reputation to be harmed and our stock price to decline significantly.

We did not perform an evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting, as contemplated by Section 404 of Sarbanes‑Oxley, nor did we engage our independent registered public accounting firm to perform an audit of our internal control over financial reporting under the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, as of any balance sheet date reported in our financial statements as of December 31, 2019. Had we performed such an evaluation or had our independent registered public accounting firm performed an audit of our internal control over financial reporting under the standards of PCAOB, material weaknesses may have been identified. In addition, the JOBS Act provides that, so long as we qualify as an emerging growth company, we will be exempt from the provisions of Section 404(b) of Sarbanes‑Oxley, which would require that our independent registered public accounting firm provide an attestation report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting under the standards of PCAOB. We may take advantage of this exemption so long as we qualify as an emerging growth company.

Litigation and regulatory actions, including possible enforcement actions, could subject us to significant fines, penalties, judgments or other requirements resulting in increased expenses or restrictions on our business activities.

Our business is subject to increased litigation and regulatory risks because of a number of factors, including the highly regulated nature of the financial services industry and the focus of state and federal prosecutors on banks and the financial services industry generally. This focus has only intensified since the financial crisis, with regulators and prosecutors focusing on a variety of financial institution practices and requirements, including foreclosure practices, compliance with applicable consumer protection laws, classification of “held for sale” assets and compliance with anti‑money laundering statutes, the Bank Secrecy Act and sanctions administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or U.S. Treasury.

In the normal course of business, from time to time, we have in the past and may in the future be named as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation, arising in connection with our current or prior business activities. Legal actions could include claims for substantial compensatory or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages. We may also, from time to time, be the subject of subpoenas, requests for information, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by governmental agencies regarding our current or prior business activities. Any such legal or regulatory actions may subject us to substantial compensatory or punitive damages, significant fines, penalties, obligations to change our business practices or other requirements resulting in increased expenses, diminished income and damage to our reputation. Our involvement in any such matters, whether tangential or otherwise and even if the matters are ultimately determined in our favor, could also cause significant harm to our reputation and divert management attention from the operation of our business. Further, any settlement, consent order or adverse judgment in connection with any formal or informal proceeding or investigation by government agencies may result in litigation, investigations or proceedings as other litigants and government agencies begin independent reviews of the same activities. As a result, the outcome of legal and regulatory actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Moreover, U.S. authorities have been increasingly focused on “conduct risk,” a term that is used to describe the risks associated with behavior by employees and agents, including third‑party vendors, that could harm clients, consumers, investors or the markets, such as failures to safeguard consumers’ and investors’ personal information, failures to identify and manage conflicts of interest and improperly creating, selling and marketing products and

services. In addition to increasing compliance risks, this focus on conduct risk could lead to more regulatory or other enforcement proceedings and litigation, including for practices which historically were acceptable but are now receiving greater scrutiny. Further, while we take numerous steps to prevent and detect conduct by employees and agents that could potentially harm clients, investors or the markets, such behavior may not always be deterred or prevented. Banking regulators have also focused on the overall culture of financial services firms. In addition to regulatory restrictions or structural changes that could result from perceived deficiencies in our culture, such focus could also lead to additional regulatory proceedings.

If the goodwill that we recorded in connection with our recent acquisitions becomes impaired, it could have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2019, we had goodwill of $27.3 million, or 9.6% of our total stockholders’ equity. The excess purchase consideration over the fair value of net assets from acquisitions, or goodwill, is evaluated for impairment at least annually and on an interim basis if an event or circumstance indicates that it is more likely than not that an impairment has occurred. In testing for impairment, we conduct a qualitative assessment, and we also estimate the fair value of net assets based on analyses of our market value, discounted cash flows and peer values. Consequently, the determination of the fair value of goodwill is sensitive to market‑based economics and other key assumptions. Variability in market conditions or in key assumptions could result in impairment of goodwill, which is recorded as a non‑cash adjustment to income. An impairment of goodwill could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are subject to extensive regulation, and the regulatory framework that applies to us, together with any future legislative or regulatory changes, may significantly affect our operations.

The banking industry is extensively regulated and supervised under both federal and state laws and regulations that are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, clients, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not for the protection of our stockholders. Our Company is subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve, and the Bank is subject to supervision and regulation by the OCC and the FDIC. The laws and regulations applicable to us govern a variety of matters, including permissible types, amounts and terms of loans and investments we may make, the maximum interest rate that may be charged, the amount of reserves we must hold against deposits we take, the types of deposits we may accept, maintenance of adequate capital and liquidity, changes in the control of us and our Bank, restrictions on dividends and establishment of new offices. We must obtain approval from our regulators before engaging in certain activities, and there is the risk that such approvals may not be obtained, either in a timely manner or at all. Our regulators also have the ability to compel us to take certain actions, or restrict us from taking certain actions entirely, such as actions that our regulators deem to constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. Our failure to comply with any applicable laws or regulations, or regulatory policies and interpretations of such laws and regulations, could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties or damage to our reputation, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Since the financial crisis, federal and state banking laws and regulations, as well as interpretations and implementations of these laws and regulations, have undergone substantial review and change. In particular, the Dodd‑Frank Act drastically revised the laws and regulations under which we operate. As an institution with less than $10 billion in assets, certain elements of the Dodd‑Frank Act have not been applied to us and provisions of the Regulatory Relief Act are intended to result in meaningful regulatory relief for community banks and their holding companies. While we endeavor to maintain safe banking practices and controls beyond the regulatory requirements applicable to us, our internal controls may not match those of larger banking institutions that are subject to increased regulatory oversight.

Financial institutions generally have also been subjected to increased scrutiny from regulatory authorities. This increased regulatory burden has resulted, and may continue to result in, increased costs of doing business, and may in the future, result in decreased revenues and net income, reduce our ability to compete effectively, to attract and retain clients, or make it less attractive for us to continue providing certain products and services. Any changes in federal and state laws and regulations, as well as the interpretation and implementation of such laws and regulations, could affect us

in substantial and unpredictable ways, including those listed above or other ways that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. For example, in December 2019, the United States Congress enacted the Setting Every Community up for Retirement Enhancement, or SECURE Act. The SECURE Act made significant changes to provisions of existing law governing retirement plans and IRAs. Some of the changes in law made by the SECURE Act are complex and unclear in application. Moreover, many of the provisions were effective on January 1, 2020, while other provisions are effective on later dates, including some that are not effective until action is taken to modify underlying retirement plan documents. We cannot predict what impact the SECURE Act will ultimately have on our business. In addition, political developments, including a possible change in administration in the United States in 2020, an election year, add uncertainty to the implementation, scope and timing of regulatory reforms.

Our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses are highly regulated, and the regulators have the ability to limit or restrict our activities and impose fines or suspensions on the conduct of our business.

Our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses are highly regulated, primarily at the federal level. The failure of any of our businesses that provide investment management or wealth management and trust services to comply with applicable laws or regulations could result in fines, suspensions of individual employees or other sanctions. We are also subject to the provisions and regulations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, or ERISA, to the extent that we act as a “fiduciary” under ERISA with respect to certain of our clients. ERISA and the applicable provisions of the federal tax laws, impose a number of duties on persons who are fiduciaries under ERISA and prohibit certain transactions involving the assets of each ERISA plan which is a client, as well as certain transactions by the fiduciaries (and certain other related parties) to such plans. Changes in these laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may be subject to claims and litigation relating to our fiduciary responsibilities.

Some of the services we provide, such as trust and investment services, require us to act as fiduciaries for our clients and others. From time to time, third parties make claims and take legal action against us pertaining to the performance of our fiduciary responsibilities. If these claims and legal actions are not resolved in a manner favorable to us, we may be exposed to significant financial liability or our reputation could be damaged. Either of these results may adversely impact demand for our products and services or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Changes in tax laws and regulations, or changes in the interpretation of existing tax laws and regulations, may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We operate in an environment that imposes income taxes on our operations at both the federal and state levels to varying degrees. We engage in certain strategies to minimize the impact of these taxes. Consequently, any change in tax laws or regulations, or new interpretation of an existing law or regulation, could significantly alter the effectiveness of these strategies.

The net deferred tax asset reported on our balance sheet generally represents the tax benefit of future deductions from taxable income for items that have already been recognized for financial reporting purposes. The bulk of these deferred tax assets consists of deferred loan loss deductions and deferred compensation deductions. The net deferred tax asset is measured by applying currently‑enacted income tax rates to the accounting period during which the tax benefit is expected to be realized. As of December 31, 2019, our net deferred tax asset was $7.9 million.

There is uncertainty surrounding potential legal, regulatory and policy changes by new presidential administrations in the United States that may directly affect financial institutions and the global economy.

2020 is a presidential election year. Changes in federal policy and at regulatory agencies occur over time through policy and personnel changes following elections, which lead to changes involving the level of oversight and focus on the financial services industry. The nature, timing and economic and political effects of potential changes to the current legal and regulatory framework affecting financial institutions remain highly uncertain. Uncertainty surrounding

future changes may adversely affect our operating environment and therefore our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are subject to stringent capital requirements.

Banking institutions are required to hold more capital as a percentage of assets than most industries. In the wake of the global financial crisis, our capital requirements increased, both in the amount of capital we must hold and in the quality of the capital to absorb losses. Holding high amounts of capital compresses our earnings and constrains growth. In addition, the failure to meet applicable regulatory capital requirements could result in one or more of our regulators placing limitations or conditions on our activities, including our growth initiatives, or restricting the commencement of new activities, and could affect client and investor confidence, our costs of funds and FDIC insurance costs and our ability to make acquisitions and result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Federal regulators periodically examine our business, and we may be required to remediate adverse examination findings.

The Federal Reserve and the OCC periodically examine us, including our operations and our compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, a banking agency were to determine that our financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, asset concentrations, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, sensitivity to market risk or other aspects of any of our operations had become unsatisfactory, or that we were in violation of any law or regulation, they may take a number of different remedial actions as they deem appropriate. These actions include the power to enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, to require affirmative action to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in our capital, to restrict our growth, to assess civil money penalties, to fine or remove officers and directors and, if it is concluded that such conditions cannot be corrected or there is an imminent risk of loss to depositors, to terminate our deposit insurance and place us into receivership or conservatorship. Any regulatory action against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including the Community Reinvestment Act and fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions.

The CRA requires the Bank, consistent with safe and sound operations, to ascertain and meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate‑income areas. Our failure to comply with the CRA could, among other things, result in the denial or delay of certain corporate applications filed by us, including applications for branch openings or relocations and applications to acquire, merge or consolidate with another banking institution or holding company. In addition, the CRA, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations prohibit discriminatory lending practices by financial institutions. The U.S. Department of Justice, federal banking agencies and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful challenge to an institution’s compliance with fair lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity, restrictions on expansion and restrictions on entering new business lines. Private parties may also challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. In addition, new regulations, increased regulatory reviews or changes in the structure of the secondary mortgage markets which we utilize to sell mortgage loans may be introduced and may increase costs and make it more difficult to operate a residential mortgage origination business. Any of the actions described above could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Noncompliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti‑money laundering statutes and regulations could result in fines or sanctions against us.

The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain effective anti‑money laundering programs and to file reports such as suspicious activity and currency transaction reports. We are required to comply with these and other anti‑money laundering

requirements. The federal banking agencies and Financial Crimes Enforcement Network are authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and have recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts against banks and other financial services providers with the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration and IRS. We are also subject to increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient or the policies, procedures and systems of any financial institution we acquire in the future are deemed deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including any acquisitions.

Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us. Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Regulations relating to privacy, information security and data protection could increase our costs, affect or limit how we collect and use personal information and adversely affect our business opportunities.

We are subject to various privacy, information security and data protection laws, including requirements concerning security breach notification, and we could be negatively affected by these laws. For example, our business is subject to the Gramm‑Leach‑Bliley Act which, among other things (i) imposes certain limitations on our ability to share nonpublic personal information about our clients with nonaffiliated third parties, (ii) requires that we provide certain disclosures to clients about our information collection, sharing and security practices and afford clients the right to “opt out” of any information sharing by us with nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions) and (iii) requires that we develop, implement and maintain a written comprehensive information security program containing appropriate safeguards based on our size and complexity, the nature and scope of our activities and the sensitivity of client information we process, as well as plans for responding to data security breaches. Various state and federal banking regulators and states have also enacted data security breach notification requirements with varying levels of individual, consumer, regulatory or law enforcement notification in certain circumstances in the event of a security breach. Moreover, legislators and regulators in the United States are increasingly adopting or revising privacy, information security and data protection laws that potentially could have a significant impact on our current and planned privacy, data protection and information security‑related practices, our collection, use, sharing, retention and safeguarding of consumer or employee information and some of our current or planned business activities. This could also increase our costs of compliance and business operations and could reduce income from certain business initiatives. This includes increased privacy‑related enforcement activity at the federal level, by the Federal Trade Commission and the CFPB, as well as at the state level, such as with regard to mobile applications.

Compliance with current or future privacy, data protection and information security laws (including those regarding security breach notification) affecting client or employee data to which we are subject could result in higher compliance and technology costs and could restrict our ability to provide certain products and services, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. Our failure to comply with privacy, data protection and information security laws could result in potentially significant regulatory or governmental investigations or actions, litigation, fines, sanctions and damage to our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The Federal Reserve may require us to commit capital resources to support the Bank.

As a matter of policy, the Federal Reserve expects a financial holding company to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to a subsidiary bank and to commit resources to support such subsidiary bank. The Dodd‑Frank Act codified the Federal Reserve’s policy on serving as a source of financial strength. Under the “source of strength” doctrine, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank and may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for failure to commit resources to a subsidiary bank. A capital injection may be required at times when the holding company may not have the resources to provide it and therefore may be required to borrow the funds or raise capital. Any loans by a holding company to its subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary bank. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee will assume any

commitment by the holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank. Moreover, bankruptcy law provides that claims based on any such commitment will be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of the institution’s general unsecured creditors, including the holders of its note obligations. Thus, any borrowing that must be done by our Company to make a required capital injection becomes more difficult and expensive and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

New and future rulemaking by the CFPB and other regulators, as well as enforcement of existing consumer protection laws, may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The CFPB has the authority to implement and enforce a variety of existing federal consumer protection statutes and to issue new regulations but, with respect to institutions of our size, does not have primary examination and enforcement authority with respect to such laws and regulations. The authority to examine depository institutions with $10.0 billion or less in assets, like us, for compliance with federal consumer laws remains largely with our primary federal regulator, the OCC. However, the CFPB may participate in examinations of smaller institutions on a “sampling basis” and may refer potential enforcement actions against such institutions to their primary regulators. In some cases, regulators such as the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice also retain certain rulemaking or enforcement authority, and we also remain subject to certain state consumer protection laws. As an independent bureau within the Federal Reserve, the CFPB may impose requirements more severe than the previous bank regulatory agencies. The CFPB has placed significant emphasis on consumer complaint management and has established a public consumer complaint database to encourage consumers to file complaints they may have against financial institutions. We are expected to monitor and respond to these complaints, including those that we deem frivolous, and doing so may require management to reallocate resources away from more profitable endeavors.

The level of our commercial real estate portfolio may subject us to heightened regulatory scrutiny.

The federal banking regulators have issued the Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices guidance, or CRE Guidance, which provides supervisory criteria, including the following numerical indicators, to assist bank examiners in identifying banks with potentially significant commercial real estate loan concentrations that may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny: (i) commercial real estate loans exceeding 300% of capital and increasing 50% or more in the preceding three years; or (ii) construction and land development loans exceeding 100% of capital. The CRE Guidance does not limit the Bank’s levels of commercial real estate lending activities, but rather, guides institutions in developing risk management practices and levels of capital that are commensurate with the level and nature of their commercial real estate concentrations. On December 18, 2015, the federal banking agencies issued a statement to reinforce prudent risk-management practices related to CRE lending, having observed substantial growth in many CRE asset and lending markets, increased competitive pressures, rising CRE concentrations in banks, and an easing of CRE underwriting standards. The federal bank agencies reminded FDIC-insured institutions to maintain underwriting discipline and exercise prudent risk-management practices to identify, measure, monitor, and manage the risks arising from CRE lending. In addition, FDIC-insured institutions must maintain capital commensurate with the level and nature of their CRE concentration risk.

As of December 31, 2019, the Bank did not exceed these guidelines.

We are an emerging growth company within the meaning of the Securities Act and because we have decided to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting and other requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, our common stock could be less attractive to investors.

For as long as we remain an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act, we will have the option to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting and other requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act, being permitted to have an extended transition period for adopting any new or revised accounting standards that may be issued by the FASB or the SEC, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved.

We have elected to, and expect to continue to, take advantage of certain of these and other exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (i) the end of the fiscal year during which we have total annual gross revenues of $1.07 billion or more, (ii) the end of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of common equity securities under our registration statement on Form S-1, which was declared effective by the SEC on September 12, 2019, (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three‑year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non‑convertible debt and (iv) the end of the first fiscal year in which (A) the market value of our equity securities that are held by non‑affiliates exceeds $700 million as of June 30 of that year, (B) we have been a public reporting company under the Exchange Act for at least twelve calendar months and (C) we have filed at least one annual report on Form 10‑K.

Because we have elected to use the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards for an emerging growth company, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with these accounting standards as of the public company effective dates.

We have elected to use the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards under Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act. This election allows us to delay the adoption of new or revised accounting standards that have different effective dates for public and private companies until those standards apply to private companies. As a result of this election, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with these accounting standards as of the public company effective dates. Because our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with public company effective dates, investors may have difficulty evaluating or comparing our business, financial results or prospects in comparison to other public companies, which may have a negative impact on the value and liquidity of our common stock. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we plan to rely on this exemption. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

Certain banking laws and certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have an anti‑takeover effect.

Provisions of federal banking laws, including regulatory approval requirements, could make it difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would be perceived to be beneficial to our stockholders. In general, acquisitions of 10% or more of any class of voting stock of a bank holding company or depository institution generally creates a rebuttable presumption that the acquirer “controls” the bank holding company or depository institution. Also, a bank holding company must obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve before, among other things, acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any bank, including the Bank.

There are also provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws that could have the effect of delaying, deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control of us, even if such acquisition would be viewed by our stockholders to be in their best interests. These include supermajority stockholder voting thresholds and requirements relating to stockholder meetings and nominations or proposals. We are also subject to a statutory antitakeover provision included in the DGCL. In addition, our board of directors is authorized under our certificate of incorporation to issue shares of preferred stock, and determine the rights, terms conditions and privileges of such preferred stock, without stockholder approval. These provisions may effectively inhibit a non‑negotiated merger or other business combination, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Our certificate of incorporation has an exclusive forum provision, which could limit a stockholder’s ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees.

Our certificate of incorporation has an exclusive forum provision providing that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for: (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty by any of our directors, officers, employees or agents; (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to the DGCL, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws; or (iv) any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. However, Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. As a result, the exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to

enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. In addition, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. As a result, there is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce such a provision, and our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Our stockholders approved this provision at our annual stockholders’ meeting held on May 13, 2014. Any person purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in any shares of our capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to this provision of our certificate of incorporation. The exclusive forum provision, if enforced, may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits. Alternatively, if a court were to find the exclusive forum provision to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 or other such laws could result in increased operating expenses as well as additional exposure to the risk of litigation by or on behalf of customers.

In June of 2018, the Governor of California signed into law The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or the CCPA. This new law becomes effective on January 1, 2020 and provides consumers with expansive rights and control over their personal information, which is obtained by or shared with “covered businesses,” including for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data collection thresholds. The CCPA will give consumers the right to request disclosure of information collected about them and whether that information has been sold or shared with others, the right to request deletion of personal information subject to certain exceptions, the right to opt out of the sale of the consumer’s personal information, and the right not to be discriminated against because of choices regarding the consumer’s personal information.

The CCPA provides for certain monetary penalties and for its enforcement by the California Attorney General or consumers whose rights under the law are not observed. It also provides for damages as well as injunctive or declaratory relief if there has been unauthorized access, theft, or disclosure of personal information due to failure to implement reasonable security procedures. We have not yet determined the potential impact of the CCPA on our business, but it could result in increased operating expenses as well as additional exposure to the risk of litigation by or on behalf of consumers. It is also possible that other states where we have customers could enact similar laws.

Climate change and related legislative and regulatory initiatives may result in operational changes and expenditures that could significantly impact our business.

The current and anticipated effects of climate change are creating an increasing level of concern for the state of the global environment. As a result, political and social attention to the issue of climate change has increased. In recent years, governments across the world have entered into international agreements to attempt to reduce global temperatures, in part by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. Congress, state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies have continued to propose and advance numerous legislative and regulatory initiatives seeking to mitigate the effects of climate change. These agreements and measures may result in the imposition of taxes and fees, the required purchase of emission credits, and the implementation of significant operational changes, each of which may require us to expend significant capital and incur compliance, operating, maintenance, and remediation costs. Consumers and businesses may also change their behavior on their own as a result of these concerns. The impact on our customers will likely vary depending on their specific attributes, including reliance on, or role in, carbon intensive activities. Our efforts to take these risks into account in making lending and other decisions, including by increasing our business with climate-friendly companies, may not be effective in protecting us from the negative impact of new laws and regulations or changes in consumer or business behavior.

Given the lack of empirical data on the credit and other financial risks posed by climate change, it is difficult to predict how climate change may impact our financial condition and operations; however, as a banking organization, the physical effects of climate change may present certain unique risks. For example, weather disasters, shifts in local

climates, and other disruptions related to climate change may adversely affect the value of real properties securing our loans, which could diminish the value of our loan portfolio. Such events may also cause reductions in regional and local economic activity that may have an adverse effect on our customers, which could limit our ability to raise and invest capital in these areas and communities.

Market and Interest Rate Risks

Our business is subject to interest rate risk, and fluctuations in interest rates may adversely affect our earnings.

Fluctuations in interest rates may negatively affect our business and may weaken demand for some of our products. Our earnings and cash flows are dependent, in part, on our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income that we earn on interest earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and the interest expense that we pay on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Changes in interest rates might also impact the values of equity and debt securities under management and administration by our retirement and benefit services and wealth management businesses which may have a negative impact on our fee income. Additionally, changes in interest rates also affect our ability to fund our operations with client deposits and the fair value of securities in our investment portfolio. Therefore, any change in general market interest rates, including changes in federal fiscal and monetary policies, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our interest earning assets and interest‑bearing liabilities may react in different degrees to changes in market interest rates. Interest rates on some types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate prior to changes in broader market interest rates, while rates on other types of assets and liabilities may lag behind. The result of these changes to rates may cause differing spreads on interest earning assets and interest‑bearing liabilities. We cannot control or accurately predict changes in market rates of interest. If short‑term interest rates remain at the current low levels for a prolonged period, and if longer term interest rates fall, we could experience net interest margin compression as our interest‑earning assets would continue to reprice downward while our interest‑bearing liability rates could fail to decline in tandem. This could have a material adverse effect on our net interest income and our results of operations.

Interest rates are volatile and highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control, such as economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, and, in particular U.S. monetary policy. For example, we face uncertainty regarding the interest rate risk, and resulting effect on our portfolio, that could result when the Federal Reserve reduces the amount of securities it holds on its balance sheet. In recent years, it has been the policy of the Federal Reserve to maintain interest rates at historically low levels through a targeted federal funds rate and the purchase of U.S. Treasury and mortgage‑backed securities. As a result, yields on securities we have purchased, and market rates on the loans we have originated, have generally been at levels lower than were available prior to the financial crisis. Consequently, the average yield on our interest‑earning assets has generally decreased during the current low interest rate environment. If a low interest rate environment persists, we may be unable to increase our net interest income.

In addition, we could be prevented from increasing the interest rates we charge on loans or from reducing the interest rates we offer on deposits and money market savings accounts due to “price” competition from other banks and financial institutions with which we compete. As of December 31, 2019, we had $577.7 million of non-maturity, noninterest bearing deposit accounts and $1.2 billion of non‑maturity interest-bearing deposit accounts. Interest rates for interest-bearing accounts have been at historically low levels due to market conditions, although in recent periods, banks and financial institutions started to increase rates in response to a series of increases made by the Federal Reserve in the targeted fed funds rate from 2015 through 2018 and market competition. We do not know what market rates will eventually be, especially given the recent cuts made by the Federal Reserve to its target interest rate in 2019, and the emergency interest rate cuts (and possibility of additional cuts) made by the Federal Reserve in response to the coronavirus. We have started to offer higher interest rates to maintain current clients or attract new clients, and as a result, our interest expense has increased in recent periods and may increase further, perhaps materially. If we fail to offer interest in a sufficient amount to keep these non‑maturity deposits, our core deposits may be reduced, which would require us to obtain funding in other ways or risk slowing our future asset growth.

We could recognize losses on securities held in our securities portfolio, particularly if interest rates increase or economic and market conditions deteriorate.

As of December 31, 2019, the fair value of our securities portfolio was approximately $313.2 million, or 13.3% of our total assets. Factors beyond our control can significantly influence and cause potential adverse changes to the fair value of securities in our portfolio. For example, fixed‑rate securities acquired by us are generally subject to decreases in market value when interest rates rise. Additional factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency downgrades of the securities or our own analysis of the value of the securities, defaults by the issuers or individual mortgagors with respect to the underlying securities and instability in the credit markets. Any of the foregoing factors, as well as changing economic and market conditions and other factors, could cause other‑than‑temporary impairments and realized or unrealized losses in future periods and declines in other comprehensive income, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. The process for determining whether impairment is other‑than‑temporary usually requires complex, subjective judgments, which could subsequently prove to have been wrong, about the future financial performance and liquidity of the issuer, the fair value of any collateral underlying the security and whether and the extent to which the principal and interest on the security will ultimately be paid in accordance with its payment terms.

Monetary policies and regulations of the Federal Reserve could adversely affect our operations.

In addition to being affected by general economic conditions, our earnings and growth are affected by the policies of the Federal Reserve. An important function of the Federal Reserve is to regulate the money supply and credit conditions. Among the instruments used by the Federal Reserve to implement these objectives are open market purchases and sales of U.S. government securities, adjustments of the discount rate and changes in banks’ reserve requirements against bank deposits. These instruments are used in varying combinations to influence overall economic growth and the distribution of credit, bank loans, investments and deposits. Their use also affects interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits.

The monetary policies and regulations of the Federal Reserve have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the future. The effects of such policies upon our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects cannot be predicted.

Our stock is relatively thinly traded.

Although our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market, the average daily trading volume of our common stock is relatively low compared to many public companies. The desired market characteristics of depth, liquidity, and orderliness require the substantial presence of willing buyers and sellers in the marketplace at any given time. In our case, this presence depends on the individual decisions of a relatively small number of investors and general economic and market conditions over which we have no control. Due to the relatively low trading volume of our common stock, significant sales of our common stock, or the expectation of these sales, could cause the stock price to fall more than would be justified by the inherent worth of the Company. Conversely, attempts to purchase a significant amount of our stock could cause the market price to rise above the reasonable inherent worth of the Company.

The price of our common stock could be volatile, and other factors could cause our stock price to decline.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in price in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among other things:

If any of the foregoing occurs, it could cause our stock price to fall and may expose us to lawsuits that, even if unsuccessful, could be costly to defend and a distraction to management.

In addition, the stock market and, in particular, the market for financial institution stocks have experienced substantial fluctuations in recent years, which in many cases, have been unrelated to the operating performance and prospects of particular companies. If the market of stocks in our industry, or the stock market in general, experiences a loss of investor confidence, the trading price of our common stock could decline for reasons unrelated to our business, financial condition results of operations or growth prospects. In addition, significant fluctuations in the trading volume in our common stock may cause significant price variations to occur. Increased market volatility may materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock, which could make it difficult to sell your shares at the volumes, prices, and times desired.

An investment in our common stock is not an insured deposit and is subject to risk of loss.

An investment in our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, the deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in this report, and is subject to the same market forces that affect the price of common stock in any company. As a result, if you acquire our common stock, you could lose some or all of your investment.

ITEM 1.B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES

Our corporate headquarters are located at 401 Demers Avenue, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58201. In addition to our corporate headquarters, which includes a full service banking office, we operate two other full‑service banking

offices located in Grand Forks, North Dakota, three full‑service banking offices located in Fargo and West Fargo, North Dakota, one full‑service banking office located in Northwood, North Dakota, six full‑service banking offices, one loan and deposit production office and one residential mortgage office located in the Twin Cities MSA, one full‑service banking office located in Phoenix, Arizona, and one full‑service banking office located in Mesa, Arizona. We offer retirement and benefits, wealth management and mortgage products and services at all of our full‑service banking offices. In addition, we operate two retirement and benefit services offices in Minnesota, two in Michigan and one in New Hampshire. We monitor client behavior and interactions with our banking and other offices, and in recent periods, we have shifted financial resources away from physical locations to technology solutions, as client demands continue to change. In 2016, we closed two bank branches in Fargo, North Dakota, and one in the Twin Cities MSA, and we also remodeled several locations to use space in a more efficient manner.

Additional information regarding our locations is set forth below.

 

 

ITEM 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries is a party, and no property of these entities is subject, to any material pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation incidental to the Bank’s business. The Company does not know of any proceeding contemplated by a governmental authority against the Company or any of its subsidiaries.

ITEM 4.  MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

Our common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market, or Nasdaq, under the symbol “ALRS” on September 13, 2019. Prior to that date, shares of our common stock were quoted on the OTC Markets Group, Inc. OTCQX Marketplace under the symbol “ALRS.”

Shareholders

As of March 13, 2020, the Company had 237 holders of record of the Company’s common stock and an estimated 1,383 additional beneficial holders of the Company’s common stock whose stock was held in street name by brokerages or fiduciaries.

Performance Graph

The following graph compares the percentage change in the cumulative stockholder return of the Company’s common stock during the period from the date of our initial public offering and listing on the Nasdaq through December 31, 2019, with the cumulative return of the Nasdaq Composite Index and the total return of the SNL-U.S. Banks, Midwest Region Index. This comparison assumes $100.00 was invested on September 13, 2019 and the comparison groups and assumes the reinvestment of all cash dividends prior to any tax effect and retention of all stock dividends.

 

 

The banks in the custom peer group, SNL-U.S. Banks, Midwest Region Index, includes all major exchange (NYSE, NYSE American, NASDAQ) banks in SNL’s coverage universe headquartered in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Dividend Policy

It has been our policy to pay quarterly dividends to holders of our common stock, and we intend to maintain or increase our current dividend levels in future quarters. Our dividend policy and practice may change in the future, however, and our board of directors may change or eliminate the payment of future dividends at its discretion, without notice to our stockholders. Any future determination to pay dividends to holders of our common stock will depend on our results of operations, financial condition, capital requirements, banking regulations, contractual restrictions and any other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant.

Dividend Restrictions

As a Delaware corporation, we are subject to certain restrictions on dividends under the DGCL. In general, a Delaware corporation may only pay dividends either out of surplus (as defined and computed in accordance with the provisions of the DGCL) or out of the current or the immediately preceding year’s net profits. Surplus is defined as the excess, if any, at any given time, of the total assets of a corporation over its total liabilities and statutory capital. The value of a corporation’s assets can be measured in a number of ways and may not necessarily equal their book value.

Under the terms of our subordinated notes issued in December of 2015, and the related subordinated note purchase agreements, we are not permitted to declare or pay any dividends on our capital stock if an event of default occurs under the terms of the subordinated notes, excluding any dividends or distributions in shares of, or options, warrants or rights to subscribe for or purchase shares of, any class of our common stock and any declaration of a non‑cash dividend in connection with the implementation of a stockholders’ rights plan. In addition, under the terms of our junior subordinated debentures issued to our two statutory trusts, we are not permitted to pay dividends on our capital stock if an event of default occurs under the terms of the debentures, we are otherwise in default with respect to our payment obligations or we have elected to defer interest payments on the debentures.

In addition, we are subject to certain restrictions on the payment of cash dividends as a result of banking laws, regulations and policies. See “SUPERVISION AND REGULATION—Supervision and Regulation of the Company—Dividend Payments.” Because we are a holding company and do not engage directly in business activities of a material nature, our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders depends, in large part, upon our receipt of dividends from the Bank, which is also subject to numerous limitations on the payment of dividends under federal banking laws, regulations and policies. See “SUPERVISION AND REGULATION—Supervision and Regulation of the Bank—Dividend Payments.”

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.

In 2019, prior to the filing by the Company on September 18, 2019, of a registration statement on Form S-8, the Company issued a total of 83,761 shares of common stock to employees and directors in the form of restricted stock grants, restricted stock units and retainer shares pursuant to compensatory plans. These grants were made in reliance upon exemptions from registration requirements under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act and pursuant to Rule 701 under the Securities Act.

Use of Proceeds

On September 17, 2019, the Company sold 2,860,000 shares of common stock in its initial public offering. On September 25, 2019, the Company sold 429,000 additional shares of common stock pursuant to the exercise in full by the underwriters of their option to purchase additional shares to cover over-allotments. All of the shares were sold pursuant to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, as amended (File No. 333-233339), which was declared

effective by the SEC on September 12, 2019. The Company’s common stock is currently traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “ALRS”.

There has been no material change in the planned use of proceeds from the initial public offering as described in the Company’s prospectus filed with the SEC on September 13, 2019, pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4) under the Securities Act of 1933. From the effective date of the registration statement through December 31, 2019, the Company has maintained the net proceeds of the initial public offering on deposit with the Bank. The Bank has used the deposits of the Company to pay down short-term borrowings.

 

ITEM 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following consolidated selected financial data is derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements as of and for the five years ended December 31, 2019. This information should be read in connection with our audited consolidated financial statements, related notes and “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS” appearing elsewhere in this report.

The consolidated selected financial data presented below contains financial measures that are not presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and have not been audited. See “Non-GAAP to GAAP Reconciliations and Calculation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below.

Non-GAAP to GAAP Reconciliations and Calculation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

In addition to the results presented in accordance with GAAP, we routinely supplement our evaluation with an analysis of certain non-GAAP financial measures. These non-GAAP financial measures include the ratio of tangible common equity to tangible assets, tangible common equity per share, return on average tangible common equity, net interest margin (tax-equivalent), and the efficiency ratio. Management uses these non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis of its performance, and believes financial analysts and others frequently use these measures, and other similar measures, to evaluate capital adequacy. Management calculates: (i) tangible common equity as total common stockholders’ equity, less goodwill and other intangible assets; (ii) tangible common equity per share as tangible common equity divided by shares of common stock outstanding; (iii) tangible assets as total assets, less goodwill and other intangible assets; (iv) return on average tangible common equity as net income adjusted for intangible amortization net of tax, divided by average tangible common equity; (v) net interest margin (tax-equivalent) as net interest income plus a tax-equivalent adjustment, divided by average earning assets; and (vi) efficiency ratio as noninterest expense less intangible amortization expense, divided by net interest income plus noninterest income plus a tax-equivalent adjustment.

The following tables present these non-GAAP financial measures along with the most directly comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP for the periods indicated.