BANCFIRST CORP /OK/ - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

BANCFIRST CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

101 North Broadway, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102

(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (405) 270-1086

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 x

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 x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required 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 x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicated by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the Common Stock held by nonaffiliates of the registrant computed using the last sale price on June 30, 2009 was approximately $249,853,000.

As of February 28, 2010, there were 15,318,641 shares of Common Stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

Portions of the Proxy Statement for the May 27, 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the registrant (the “2010 Proxy Statement”) to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.

Table of Contents

FORM 10-K

CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business.

General

BancFirst Corporation (the “Company”) is an Oklahoma business corporation and a financial holding company under Federal law. It conducts virtually all of its operating activities through its principal wholly-owned subsidiary, BancFirst (the “Bank” or “BancFirst”), a state-chartered bank headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The Company also owns 100% of the common securities of BFC Capital Trust II, a Delaware Business Trust, 100% of Council Oak Partners LLC, an Oklahoma limited liability company engaging in investing activities, 100% of Wilcox, Jones & McGrath, Inc., an Oklahoma business corporation operating as an independent insurance agency and 100% of First State Bank (Jones), a state-chartered bank headquartered in Jones, Oklahoma that the Company acquired in December 2009 and was merged into BancFirst in early March 2010.

The Company was incorporated as United Community Corporation in July 1984 for the purpose of becoming a bank holding company. In June 1985, it merged with seven Oklahoma bank holding companies that had operated under common ownership and the Company has conducted business as a bank holding company since that time. Over the next several years the Company acquired additional banks and bank holding companies, and in November 1988 the Company changed its name to BancFirst Corporation. Effective April 1, 1989, the Company consolidated its 12 subsidiary banks and formed BancFirst. Over the intervening decades, the Company has continued to expand through acquisitions and de-novo branches. BancFirst currently has 85 banking locations serving 47 communities throughout Oklahoma.

The Company’s strategy focuses on providing a full range of commercial banking services to retail customers and small to medium-sized businesses in both the non-metropolitan trade centers of Oklahoma and the metropolitan markets of Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Lawton, Muskogee, Norman and Shawnee. The Company operates as a “super community bank”, managing its community banking offices on a decentralized basis, which permits them to be responsive to local customer needs. Underwriting, funding, customer service and pricing decisions are made by Presidents in each market within the Company’s strategic parameters. At the same time, the Company generally has a larger lending capacity, broader product line and greater operational scale than its principal competitors in the non-metropolitan market areas (which typically are independently-owned community banks). In the metropolitan markets served by the Company, the Company’s strategy is to focus on the needs of local businesses that are not served adequately by larger institutions.

The Bank maintains a strong community orientation by, among other things, selecting members of the communities in which the Bank’s branches operate to local consulting boards that assist in marketing and providing feedback on the Bank’s products and services to meet customer needs. As a result of the development of broad banking relationships with its customers and community branch network, the Bank’s lending and investing activities are funded almost entirely by core deposits.

The Bank centralizes virtually all of its processing, support and investment functions in order to achieve consistency and operational efficiencies. The Bank maintains centralized control functions such as operations support, bookkeeping, accounting, loan review, compliance and internal auditing to ensure effective risk management. The Bank also provides centrally certain specialized financial services that require unique expertise.

The Bank provides a wide range of retail and commercial banking services, including: commercial, real estate, agricultural and consumer lending; depository and funds transfer services; collections; safe deposit boxes; cash management services; retail brokerage services; and other services tailored for both individual and corporate customers. The Bank also offers trust services and acts as executor, administrator, trustee, transfer agent and in various other fiduciary capacities. Through its Technology and Operations Center, the Bank provides item processing, research and other correspondent banking services to financial institutions and governmental units.

1

Table of Contents

The Bank’s primary lending activity is the financing of business and industry in its market areas. Its commercial loan customers are generally small to medium-sized businesses engaged in light manufacturing, local wholesale and retail trade, commercial and residential real estate development and construction, services, agriculture, and the energy industry. Most forms of commercial lending are offered, including commercial mortgages, other forms of asset-based financing and working capital lines of credit. In addition, the Bank offers Small Business Administration (“SBA”) guaranteed loans through BancFirst Commercial Capital, a division established in 1991.

Consumer lending activities of the Bank consist of traditional forms of financing for automobiles, residential mortgage loans, home equity loans, and other personal loans. In addition, the Bank is one of Oklahoma’s largest providers of guaranteed student loans. Residential loans consist primarily of home loans in non-metropolitan areas which are generally shorter in duration than typical mortgages and reprice within five years.

The Bank’s range of deposit services include checking accounts, Negotiable Order of Withdrawal (“NOW”) accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, sweep accounts, club accounts, individual retirement accounts and certificates of deposit. Overdraft protection and autodraft services are also offered. Deposits of the Bank are insured by the Bank Insurance Fund administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). In addition, certain Bank employees are licensed insurance agents qualified to offer tax deferred annuities.

Trust services offered through the Bank’s Trust and Investment Management Division (the “Trust Division”) consist primarily of investment management and administration of trusts for individuals, corporations and employee benefit plans. Investment options include pooled equity and fixed income funds managed by the Trust Division and advised by nationally recognized investment management firms. In addition, the Trust Division serves as bond trustee and paying agent for various Oklahoma municipalities and governmental entities.

BancFirst has the following principal subsidiaries: Council Oak Investment Corporation, a small business investment corporation, Council Oak Real Estate, Inc., a real estate investment company, BancFirst Agency, Inc., a credit life insurance agency, Lenders Collection Corporation, which is engaged in collection of troubled loans assigned to it by BancFirst, and BancFirst Community Development Corporation, a certified community development entity. All of these companies are Oklahoma corporations.

The Company had approximately 1,428 and 1,457 full-time equivalent employees as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Its principal executive offices are located at 101 North Broadway, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102, telephone number (405) 270-1086.

Market Areas and Competition

The banking environment in Oklahoma is very competitive. The geographic dispersion of the Company’s banking locations presents several different levels and types of competition. In general, however, each location competes with other banking institutions, savings and loan associations, brokerage firms, personal loan finance companies and credit unions within their respective market areas. The communities in which the Bank maintains offices are generally local trade centers throughout Oklahoma. The major areas of competition include interest rates charged on loans, underwriting terms and conditions, interest rates paid on deposits, fees on non-credit services, levels of service charges on deposits, completeness of product line and quality of service.

Management believes the Company is in an advantageous competitive position operating as a “super community bank.” Under this strategy, the Company provides a broad line of financial products and services to small to medium-sized businesses and consumers through full service community banking offices with decentralized management, while achieving operating efficiency and product scale through product standardization and centralization of processing and other functions. Each full service banking office has senior management with significant lending experience who exercise substantial autonomy over credit and pricing

2

Table of Contents

decisions. This decentralized management approach, coupled with continuity of service by the same staff members, enables the Bank to develop long-term customer relationships, maintain high quality service and respond quickly to customer needs. The majority of its competitors in the non-metropolitan areas are much smaller, and neither offer the range of products and services nor have the lending capacity of BancFirst. In the metropolitan communities, the Company’s strategy is to be more responsive to, and more focused on, the needs of local businesses that are not served effectively by larger institutions. As reported by the FDIC, the Company’s market share of deposits for Oklahoma was 5.64% as of June 30, 2009 and 5.37% as of June 30, 2008.

Marketing to existing and potential customers is performed through a variety of media advertising, direct mail and direct personal contacts. The Company monitors the needs of its customer base through its Product Development Group, which develops and enhances products and services in response to such needs. Sales, customer service and product training are coordinated with incentive programs to motivate employees to cross-sell the Bank’s products and services.

Control of the Company

Affiliates of the Company beneficially own approximately 53% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock outstanding as of February 28, 2010. Under Oklahoma law, holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock are able to elect all of the directors and approve significant corporate actions, including business combinations. Accordingly, the affiliates have the ability to control the business and affairs of the Company.

Supervision and Regulation

Banking is a complex, highly regulated industry. The Company’s growth and earnings performance and those of the Bank can be affected not only by management decisions and general and local economic conditions, but also by the statutes administered by, and the regulations and policies of, various governmental regulatory authorities.

These authorities include, but are not limited to, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”), the FDIC and the Oklahoma State Banking Department.

The primary goals of the bank regulatory framework are to maintain a safe and sound banking system and to facilitate the conduct of sound monetary policy. This regulatory framework is intended primarily for the protection of a financial institution’s depositors, rather than the institution’s shareholders and creditors. The following discussion describes certain of the material elements of the regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies and financial holding companies and their subsidiaries and provides certain specific information relevant to the Company, which is both a bank holding company and a financial holding company. The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the specific statutes and regulations discussed. Further, such statutes, regulations and policies are continually under review by Congress and state legislatures, and federal and state regulatory agencies. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company, including changes in interpretation or implementation thereof, could have a material effect on the Company’s business.

Regulatory Agencies

As a financial holding company and a bank holding company, the Company is regulated under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the “Bank Holding Company Act”), as amended by the 1999 financial modernization legislation known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”), as well as other federal and state laws governing the banking business. The GLB Act preserves the role of the Federal Reserve Board as the umbrella supervisor for both financial holding companies and bank holding companies while at the same time incorporating a system of functional regulation designed to take advantage of the strengths of the various federal

3

Table of Contents

and state regulators. In particular, the GLB Act replaces with more limited exemptions the broad exemption from Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) regulation that banks previously enjoyed, and it reaffirms that states are the regulators for the insurance activities of all persons who conduct such activities, including banks.

The Company’s banking subsidiary is subject to regulation and supervision by various regulatory authorities, including the Oklahoma State Banking Department and the FDIC. The Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates are also subject to various other laws, regulations, supervision and examination by other regulatory agencies, all of which directly or indirectly affect the operations and management of the Company and its ability to make distributions to shareholders.

Additionally, the Company’s common stock is registered with the SEC under Section 12(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Consequently, the Company is subject to the information, proxy solicitation, insider trading and other restrictions and requirements of the SEC under the Exchange Act and, as a company whose shares are traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market System, the rules of the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (the “NASDAQ”).

Recent Legislation

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the “EESA”) was signed into law. The EESA authorized the Treasury to access up to $700 billion to protect the U.S. economy and restore confidence and stability to the financial markets. One such program under the Treasury Department’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) was action by Treasury to make significant investments in U.S. financial institutions through the TARP Capital Purchase Program. The Treasury’s stated purpose for implementing the TARP Capital Purchase Program was to improve the capitalization of healthy institutions, which would improve the flow of credit to businesses and consumers, and boost the confidence of depositors, investors, and counterparties alike. All federal banking and thrift regulatory agencies encouraged eligible institutions to participate in the TARP Capital Purchase Program. The Company elected not to participate in the TARP Capital Purchase Program. Management believes that current capital sources are sufficient to support organic growth, acquisitions within our current market areas, cash dividends on our common stock and periodic stock repurchases.

Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program

In November 2008, the Board of Directors of the FDIC adopted a final rule relating to the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLG Program”). The TLG Program was announced by the FDIC in October 2008, preceded by the determination of systemic risk by the Secretary of the Department of Treasury (after consultation with the President), as an initiative to counter the system-wide crisis in the nation’s financial sector. Under the TLG Program, the FDIC will (i) guarantee, through the earlier of maturity or December 31, 2012 (extended from June 30, 2012 by subsequent amendment), certain newly issued senior unsecured debt issued by participating institutions on or after October 14, 2008, and before October 31, 2009 (extended from June 30, 2009 by subsequent amendment) and (ii) provide full FDIC deposit insurance coverage for non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts, NOW accounts paying less than 0.5% interest per annum and Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts held at participating FDIC insured institutions through June 30, 2010 (extended from December 31, 2009, subject to an opt-out provision, by subsequent amendment). The Company has elected to participate in the full FDIC deposit insurance coverage for non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts only. The fee assessment for deposit insurance coverage was 10 basis points per quarter during 2009 on amounts in covered accounts exceeding $250,000. During the six-month extension period in 2010, the fee assessment increases to 15 basis points per quarter for institutions that are in Risk Category 1 of the risk-based premium system.

4

Table of Contents

Incentive Compensation

On October 22, 2009, the Federal Reserve issued a comprehensive proposal on incentive compensation policies (the “Incentive Compensation Proposal”) intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The Incentive Compensation Proposal, which covers all employees who have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors. Banking organizations are instructed to begin an immediate review of their incentive compensation policies to ensure that they do not encourage excessive risk-taking and implement corrective programs as needed. Where there are deficiencies in the incentive compensation arrangements, they must be immediately addressed.

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations, such as the Company, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews will be tailored to each organization based on the scope and complexity of the organization’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements. The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination. Deficiencies will be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

In addition, on January 12, 2010, the FDIC announced that it would seek public comment on whether banks with compensation plans that encourage risky behavior should be charged at higher deposit assessment rates than such banks would otherwise be charged.

The scope and content of the U.S. banking regulators’ policies on executive compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect the Company’s ability to hire, retain and motivate its key employees.

Other Legislative and Regulatory Initiatives

In June 2009, President Obama’s administration proposed a wide range of regulatory reforms that, if enacted, may have significant effects on the financial services industry in the United States. Significant aspects of the administration’s proposals that may affect the Company included, among other things, proposals: (i) to reassess and increase capital requirements for banks and bank holding companies and examine the types of instruments that qualify as regulatory capital; (ii) to combine the OCC and the Office of Thrift Supervision into a National Bank Supervisor with a unified federal bank charter; (iii) to expand the current eligibility requirements for financial holding companies such as the Company so that the financial holding company must be “well capitalized” and “well managed” on a consolidated basis; (iv) to create a federal consumer financial protection agency to be the primary federal consumer protection supervisor with broad examination, supervision and enforcement authority with respect to consumer financial products and services; (v) to further limit the ability of banks to engage in transactions with affiliates; and (vi) to subject all “over-the-counter” derivatives markets to comprehensive regulation.

The U.S. Congress, state lawmaking bodies and federal and state regulatory agencies continue to consider a number of wide-ranging and comprehensive proposals for altering the structure, regulation and competitive relationships of the nation’s financial institutions, including rules and regulations related to the administration’s proposals. Separate comprehensive financial reform bills intended to address the proposals set forth by the

5

Table of Contents

Obama administration were introduced in both houses of Congress in the second half of 2009 and remain under review by both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. In addition, both the U.S. Treasury Department and the Basel Committee have issued policy statements regarding proposed significant changes to the regulatory capital framework applicable to banking organizations as discussed above. The Company cannot predict whether or in what form further legislation or regulations may be adopted or the extent to which the Company may be affected thereby.

In addition to the specific proposals described above, from time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures, as well as by regulatory agencies. Such initiatives may include proposals to expand or contract the powers of bank holding companies and depository institutions or proposals to substantially change the financial institution regulatory system. Such legislation could change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Company in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other financial institutions. The Company cannot predict whether any such legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company or any of its subsidiaries could have a material effect on the Company.

Bank Holding Company Activities

“Financial in Nature” Requirement

As a bank holding company that has elected to become a financial holding company pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act, the Company may affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature. “Financial in nature” activities include securities underwriting, dealing and market making, sponsoring mutual funds and investment companies, insurance underwriting and agency, merchant banking, and other activities that the Federal Reserve Board, in consultation with the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, determines from time to time to be financial in nature or incidental to such financial activity or is complementary to a financial activity and does not pose a safety and soundness risk.

Federal Reserve Board approval is not required for the Company to acquire a company (other than a bank holding company, bank or savings association) engaged in activities that are financial in nature or incidental to activities that are financial in nature, as determined by the Federal Reserve Board. Prior Federal Reserve Board approval is required before the Company may acquire the beneficial ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares or substantially all of the assets of a bank holding company, bank or savings association.

Because the Company is a financial holding company, if its subsidiary bank receives a rating under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, as amended (“CRA”), of less than satisfactory, the Company will be prohibited, until the rating is raised to satisfactory or better, from engaging in new activities or acquiring companies other than bank holding companies, banks or savings associations, except that the Company could engage in new activities, or acquire companies engaged in activities, that are closely related to banking under the Bank Holding Company Act. In addition, if the Federal Reserve Board finds that the Company’s subsidiary bank is not well capitalized or well managed, the Company would be required to enter into an agreement with the Federal Reserve Board to comply with all applicable capital and management requirements and which may contain additional limitations or conditions. Until corrected, the Company would not be able to engage in any new activity or acquire companies engaged in activities that are not closely related to banking under the Bank Holding Company Act without prior Federal Reserve Board approval. If the Company fails to correct any such condition within a prescribed period, the Federal Reserve Board could order the Company to divest of its banking subsidiary or, in the alternative, to cease engaging in activities other than those closely related to banking under the Bank Holding Company Act. Although the Company is a financial holding company, it continues to maintain its status as a bank holding company for purposes of other Federal Reserve Board regulations.

6

Table of Contents

Interstate Banking

Under the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Act (the “Riegle-Neal Act”), a bank holding company may acquire banks in states other than its home state, subject to any state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and the requirement that the bank holding company not control, prior to or following the proposed acquisition, more than 10% of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions nationwide or, unless the acquisition is the bank holding company’s initial entry into the state, more than 30% of such deposits in the state (or such lesser or greater amount set by the state).

The Riegle-Neal Act also authorizes banks to merge across state lines, thereby creating interstate branches. Banks are also permitted to acquire and to establish new branches in other states where authorized under the laws of those states.

Regulatory Approval

In determining whether to approve a proposed bank acquisition, federal bank regulators will consider, among other factors, the effect of the acquisition on competition, financial condition, and future prospects including current and projected capital ratios and levels, the competence, experience, and integrity of management and record of compliance with laws and regulations, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, including the acquiring institution’s record of compliance under the CRA, and the effectiveness of the acquiring institution in combating money laundering activities.

Dividend Restrictions

Various federal and state statutory provisions and regulations limit the amount of dividends the Company’s subsidiary bank and certain other subsidiaries may pay without regulatory approval. The payment of dividends by any subsidiary bank may also be affected by other regulatory requirements and policies, such as the maintenance of adequate capital. If, in the opinion of the applicable regulatory authority, a bank under its jurisdiction is engaged in, or is about to engage in, an unsafe or unsound practice (which, depending on the financial condition of the bank, could include the payment of dividends), such authority may require, after notice and hearing, that such bank cease and desist from such practice. The FDIC has formal and informal policies which provide that insured banks should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings.

Holding Company Structure

Transfer of Funds from Subsidiary Bank

The Bank is subject to restrictions under federal law that limit the transfer of funds or other items of value from the Bank to the Company and its nonbank subsidiaries (including affiliates) in so-called “covered transactions.” In general, covered transactions include loans and other extensions of credit, investments and asset purchases, as well as certain other transactions involving the transfer of value from a subsidiary bank to an affiliate or for the benefit of an affiliate. Unless an exemption applies, covered transactions by a subsidiary bank with a single affiliate are limited to 10% of the subsidiary bank’s capital and surplus and, with respect to all covered transactions with affiliates in the aggregate, to 20% of the subsidiary bank’s capital and surplus. Also, loans and extensions of credit to affiliates generally are required to be secured in specified amounts. A bank’s transactions with its nonbank affiliates are also generally required to be on arm’s length terms.

Source of Strength

Federal Reserve Board policy requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to each of its subsidiary banks and, under appropriate circumstances, to commit resources to support each such subsidiary bank. This support may be required at times when the bank holding company may not have the resources to provide the support.

7

Table of Contents

The FDIC may order the assessment of the Company if the capital of the Bank were to become impaired. If the Company failed to pay the assessment within three months, the FDIC could order the sale of the Company’s stock in the Bank to cover the deficiency.

Capital loans by a bank holding company to its subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. In addition, in the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of its subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

Depositor Preference

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDI Act”) provides that, in the event of the “liquidation or other resolution” of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the institution (including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors) and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver, will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If an insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, nondeposit creditors with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to such insured depository institution.

Capital Requirements

The Federal Reserve Board, the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC have issued substantially similar risk-based and leverage capital guidelines applicable to United States banking organizations. In addition, these regulatory agencies may from time to time require that a banking organization maintain capital above the minimum levels, whether because of its financial condition or actual or anticipated growth. The risk-based guidelines of the FDIC, the regulatory agency with oversight over state nonmember banks such as the Bank, define a three-tier capital framework. Core, or “Tier 1,” capital, consists of common and qualifying preferred stockholders’ equity, less certain intangibles and other adjustments. Supplementary, or “Tier 2,” capital includes, among other items, certain other debt and equity investments that do not qualify as Tier 1 capital. Market risk, or “Tier 3,” capital, includes qualifying unsecured subordinated debt. The sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital less investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries represents qualifying total capital. Risk-based capital ratios are calculated by dividing Tier 1 and total capital by risk-weighted assets. Assets and off-balance sheet exposures are assigned to one of four categories of risk-weights, based primarily on relative credit risk. The minimum Tier 1 capital ratio is 4% and the minimum total capital ratio is 8%.

Applicable banking regulations also require banking organizations such as the Bank to maintain a minimum “leverage ratio” (Tier 1 capital to adjusted total assets) of 3%. The principal objective of this measure is to place a constraint on the maximum degree to which banks can leverage their equity capital base. These ratio requirements are minimums. Any institution operating at or near those levels would be expected by the regulators to have well-diversified risk, including no undue interest rate risk exposures, excellent asset quality, high liquidity, and good earnings and, in general, would have to be considered a strong banking organization. All other organizations and any institutions experiencing or anticipating significant growth are expected to maintain capital ratios at least one to two percent above the minimum levels, and higher capital ratios can be required if warranted by particular circumstances or risk profile.

The various regulatory agencies have adopted substantially similar regulations that define the five capital categories (well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized) for classifying insured depository institutions, using the total risk-based capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and leverage capital ratios as the relevant capital measures, and requires the respective federal regulatory agencies to implement systems for “prompt corrective action” for insured depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements within such categories. Such regulations establish progressively more restrictive constraints on operations, management and capital distributions depending on the category in which an institution is classified.

8

Table of Contents

To be “well capitalized” under federal bank regulatory agency definitions, a depository institution must have (i) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6% or greater, (ii) a total risk-based capital ratio of 10% or greater, and (iii) a leverage ratio of 5% or greater. An “adequately capitalized” bank is defined as one that has (i) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4% or greater, (ii) a total risk-based capital ratio of 8% or greater, and (iii) a leverage ratio of 4% or greater, and an “undercapitalized” bank is defined as one that has (i) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4%, (ii) a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 8%, and (iii) a leverage ratio of less than 4%. A bank is considered “significantly undercapitalized” if the bank has (i) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 3%, (ii) a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 6%, and (iii) a leverage ratio of less than 3%, and “critically undercapitalized” if the bank has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets equal to or less than 2%. The applicable federal regulatory agency for a bank that is “well capitalized” may reclassify it as an “adequately capitalized” or “undercapitalized” institution and subject it to the supervisory actions applicable to the next lower capital category, if it determines that the bank is in an unsafe or unsound condition or deems the bank to be engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice and not to have corrected the deficiency. Under federal banking laws, failure to meet the minimum regulatory capital requirements could subject a banking institution to a variety of enforcement remedies available to federal regulatory authorities, including the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC and seizure of the institution. As of December 31, 2009, the Bank had a Tier 1 ratio of 12.93%, a combined Tier 1 and Tier 2 ratio of 14.18%, and a leverage ratio of 8.71% and, accordingly, was considered to be “well capitalized” as of such date.

In addition, the Federal Reserve Board has established minimum risk based capital guidelines and leverage ratio guidelines for bank holding companies that are substantially similar to those adopted by bank regulatory agencies with respect to depository institutions. These guidelines provide for a minimum leverage ratio of 3% for bank holding companies that meet certain specified criteria, including those having the highest regulatory rating. All other bank holding companies generally are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 4%. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had a Tier 1 ratio of 13.73%, a combined Tier 1 and Tier 2 ratio of 14.96%, and a leverage ratio of 9.23% and, accordingly, was in compliance with all of the Federal Reserve Board’s capital guidelines.

From time to time, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council propose changes and amendments to, and issue interpretations of, risk-based capital guidelines and related reporting instructions. Such proposals or interpretations could, if implemented in the future, affect the Company’s reported capital ratios and net risk-adjusted assets.

As an additional means to identify problems in the financial management of depository institutions, the FDI Act requires federal bank regulatory agencies to establish certain non-capital safety and soundness standards for institutions for which they are the primary federal regulator. The standards relate generally to operations and management, asset quality, interest rate exposure and executive compensation. The agencies are authorized to take action against institutions that fail to meet such standards.

The FDIC Act requires federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to FDIC-insured depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. A depository institution’s treatment for purposes of the prompt corrective action provisions will depend upon how its capital levels compare to various capital measures and certain other factors, as established by regulation.

Deposit Insurance Assessments

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005, the FDIC adopted a new risk-based premium system for FDIC deposit insurance, providing for quarterly assessments of FDIC insured institutions based on their respective rankings in one of four risk categories depending upon their examination ratings and capital ratios. Beginning in 2007, well-capitalized institutions with certain “CAMELS” ratings (under the Uniform Financial Institutions Examination System adopted by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council)

9

Table of Contents

were grouped in Risk Category I and were assessed for deposit insurance premiums at an annual rate, with the assessment rate for the particular institution to be determined according to a formula based on a weighted average of the institution’s individual CAMELS component ratings plus either a set of financial ratios or the average ratings of its long-term debt. Institutions in Risk Categories II, III and IV are assessed premiums at progressively higher rates.

In December 2008, the FDIC issued a final rule that raised the then current assessment rates uniformly by 7 basis points for the first quarter of 2009 assessment, which resulted in annualized assessment rates for institutions in the highest risk category (“Risk Category 1 institutions”) ranging from 12 to 14 basis points (basis points representing cents per $100 of assessable deposits). In February 2009, the FDIC issued final rules to amend the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) restoration plan, change the risk-based assessment system and set assessment rates for Risk Category 1 institutions beginning in the second quarter of 2009. For Risk Category 1 institutions that have long-term debt issuer ratings, the FDIC determines the initial base assessment rate using a combination of weighted-average CAMELS component ratings, long-term debt issuer ratings (converted to numbers and averaged) and the financial ratios method assessment rate (as defined), each equally weighted. The initial base assessment rates for Risk Category 1 institutions range from 12 to 16 basis points, on an annualized basis. After the effect of potential base-rate adjustments, total base assessment rates range from 7 to 24 basis points. The potential adjustments to a Risk Category 1 institution’s initial base assessment rate include (i) a potential decrease of up to 5 basis points for long-term unsecured debt, including senior and subordinated debt and (ii) a potential increase of up to 8 basis points for secured liabilities in excess of 25% of domestic deposits.

In May 2009, the FDIC issued a final rule which levied a special assessment applicable to all insured depository institutions totaling 5 basis points of each institution’s total assets less Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, not to exceed 10 basis points of domestic deposits. The special assessment was part of the FDIC’s efforts to rebuild the DIF. The Company’s deposit insurance expense during 2009 included $1.9 million recognized in the second quarter related to the special assessment.

In November 2009, the FDIC issued a rule that required insured depository institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The FDIC also adopted a uniform three-basis point increase in assessment rates effective on January 1, 2011. In December 2009, the Company paid $20.2 million in prepaid risk-based assessments, which included $1.2 million related to the fourth quarter of 2009 that would have otherwise been payable in the first quarter of 2010. This amount is included in deposit insurance expense for 2009. The remaining $19.0 million in prepaid deposit insurance is included in other assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2009.

FDIC insurance expense totaled $7.8 million, $489,000 and $359,000 in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. FDIC insurance expense includes deposit insurance assessments and Financing Corporation (“FICO”) assessments. All FDIC-insured depository institutions must pay an annual FICO assessment to provide funds for the payment of interest on bonds issued by FICO to capitalize the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. FDIC-insured depository institutions paid an average of 1.06 basis points on assessable deposits in 2009. The FDIC established the FICO assessment rate effective for the first quarter of 2010 at 1.06 basis points annually of assessable deposits.

Fiscal and Monetary Policies

The Company’s business and earnings are affected significantly by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies. The Company is particularly affected by the policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Among the instruments of monetary policy available to the Federal Reserve Board are (a) conducting open market operations in United States government securities, (b) changing the discount rates of borrowings of depository institutions, (c) imposing or changing reserve requirements against depository institutions’ deposits, and (d) imposing or changing reserve requirements against certain borrowings by banks and their affiliates. These methods are used in varying degrees

10

Table of Contents

and combinations to directly affect the availability of bank loans and deposits, as well as the interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. The policies of the Federal Reserve Board may have a material effect on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.

Privacy Provisions of the GLB Act

Federal banking regulators, as required under the GLB Act, have adopted rules limiting the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. The rules require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to nonaffiliated third parties. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial services companies and conveyed to outside vendors.

Regulation of Securities Activities of Banks

The GLB Act also amended the federal securities laws to eliminate the blanket exceptions that banks traditionally have had from the definition of “broker” and “dealer”, but provided for certain transactional activities that would not be considered “brokerage” activities, which banks could effect without having to register as a broker. In September 2007, the Federal Reserve Board and the SEC approved Regulation R to clarify the permissible bank securities activities that can be conducted under the transactional exceptions provided by the GLB Act. Regulation R provides exceptions for networking arrangements with third party broker-dealers and authorizes compensation for bank employees who refer bank customers to such broker-dealers. The rules also provide exemptions to banks for effecting securities transactions in a trustee or fiduciary capacity, for sweeping funds into certain money market funds, and for accepting orders to effect securities transactions for custody accounts. Banks that conduct activities outside the exceptions provided by Regulation R had until the first day of their first fiscal year that commences after September 30, 2008 to either register as a broker-dealer or “push out” their brokerage activities to affiliated broker-dealers. Regulation R did not have an effect on the current securities activities that the Bank currently conducts for customers.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”) implemented a broad range of corporate governance and accounting measures to increase corporate responsibility, to provide for enhanced penalties for accounting and auditing improprieties at publicly traded companies, and to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of disclosures under federal securities laws. The Company is subject to Sarbanes-Oxley because it is required to file periodic reports with the SEC under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Among other things, Sarbanes-Oxley and/or its implementing regulations have established new membership requirements and additional responsibilities for the Company’s audit committee, imposed restrictions on the relationship between the Company and its outside independent auditors (including restrictions on the types of non-audit services the Company’s independent auditors may provide to it), imposed additional responsibilities for the Company’s external financial statements on its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, expanded the disclosure requirements for corporate insiders, required management to evaluate the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and its internal control over financial reporting, and required its auditors to issue a report on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. The NASDAQ has imposed a number of new corporate governance requirements as well.

Patriot Act

The USA Patriot Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) is intended to strengthen the ability of U.S. law enforcement agencies and intelligence communities to work together to combat terrorism on a variety of fronts. The Patriot Act substantially broadened the scope of the U.S. anti-money laundering laws and regulations by imposing significant new compliance and due diligence obligations, creating new crimes and penalties and

11

Table of Contents

expanding the extra-territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The U.S. Treasury Department has issued a number of implementing regulations which apply various requirements of the Patriot Act to financial institutions such as the Bank. Those regulations impose new obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing, and has significant implications for depository institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the transfer of money. The Patriot Act also requires federal bank regulators to evaluate the effectiveness of an applicant in combating money laundering in determining whether to approve a proposed bank acquisition.

Office of Foreign Asset Control

The Company and BancFirst, like all United States companies and individuals, are prohibited from transacting business with certain individuals and entities named on the Office of Foreign Asset Control’s list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. Failure to comply may result in fines and other penalties. The Office of Foreign Asset Control has issued guidance directed at financial institutions in which it asserts that it may, in its discretion, examine institutions determined to be high-risk or to be lacking in their efforts to comply with these prohibitions.

State Regulation

BancFirst is an Oklahoma-chartered state bank. Accordingly, BancFirst’s operations are subject to various requirements and restrictions of Oklahoma state law relating to loans, lending limits, interest rates payable on deposits, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowings, dividends, capital adequacy, and other matters. However, Oklahoma banking law specifically empowers a state-chartered bank such as BancFirst to exercise the same powers as are conferred upon national banks by the laws of the United States and the regulations and policies of the United States Comptroller of the Currency, unless otherwise prohibited or limited by the State Banking Commissioner or the State Banking Board. Accordingly, unless a specific provision of Oklahoma law otherwise provides, a state-chartered bank is empowered to conduct all activities that a national bank may conduct.

National banks are authorized by the GLB Act 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 Board, determines is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity, except (1) insurance underwriting, (2) real estate development or real estate investment activities (unless otherwise permitted by law), (3) insurance company portfolio investments and (4) 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 the bank’s capital outstanding investments in financial subsidiaries). The GLB Act provides that state nonmember banks, such as BancFirst, may invest in financial subsidiaries (assuming they have the requisite investment authority under applicable state law), subject to the same conditions that apply to national bank investments in financial subsidiaries.

As a state nonmember bank, BancFirst is subject to primary supervision, periodic examination and regulation by the State Banking Board and the FDIC, and Oklahoma law provides that BancFirst must maintain reserves against deposits as required by the FDI Act. The Oklahoma State Bank Commissioner is authorized by statute to accept an FDIC examination in lieu of a state examination. In practice, the FDIC and the Oklahoma State Banking Department alternate examinations of BancFirst. If, as a result of an examination of a bank, the Oklahoma Banking Department determines that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, or other aspects of the bank’s operations are unsatisfactory or that the management of the bank is violating or has violated any law or regulation, various remedies, including the remedy of injunction, are available to the Oklahoma Banking Department. Oklahoma law permits the acquisition of an unlimited number of wholly-owned bank subsidiaries so long as aggregate deposits at the time of acquisition in a multi-bank holding company do not exceed 20% of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions located in Oklahoma.

12

Table of Contents

In addition to the provisions of the GLB Act that authorizes state nonmember banks to invest in financial subsidiaries (assuming they have the requisite investment authority under applicable state law) on the same conditions that apply to national banks, FDICIA provides that FDIC-insured state banks such as BancFirst may engage directly or through a subsidiary in certain activities that are not permissible for a national bank, if the activity is authorized by applicable state law, the FDIC determines that the activity does not pose a significant risk to the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”), and the bank is in compliance with its applicable capital standards.

Available Information

The Company is subject to the information and periodic reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and in accordance therewith, files periodic reports, proxy statement, and other information with the SEC. This Annual Report on Form 10-K and exhibits along with such future periodic reports, proxy statements, and other information may be inspected and copied at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at its principal offices at 100 F. Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. You may obtain information on the operation of the public reference facilities by contacting the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. Copies of such materials may also be obtained at prescribed rates by writing to the SEC. The SEC maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains registration statements, reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC.

The Company maintains a website www.bancfirst.com. The Company provides copies of the most recently filed 10-K and proxy statement directly on the website and also provides links to the SEC’s website where all of the Company’s filings with the SEC can be obtained. You may also request a copy of these filings, at no cost, by writing or telephoning us at the following address:

BancFirst Corporation

101 N. Broadway

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102

ATTENTION: Joe T. Shockley, Jr.

Executive Vice President

(405) 270-1086

Item 1a. Risk Factors

In the course of conducting our business operations, the Company and our subsidiaries are exposed to a variety of risks that are inherent to the financial services industry. The following discusses some of the key inherent risk factors that could affect our business and operations, as well as other risk factors which are particularly relevant to us in the current period of significant economic and market disruption. Other factors besides those discussed below or elsewhere in this report also could adversely affect our business and operations, and these risk factors should not be considered a complete list of potential risks that may affect the Company and our subsidiaries.

Risks Related to Our Industry

The current economic environment poses significant challenges for us and could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We currently are operating in a challenging and uncertain economic environment, both nationally and in the local markets that we serve. Financial institutions continue to be affected by sharp declines in the value of financial instruments and real estate values, and while we are taking steps to reduce our market and credit risk exposure, we nonetheless are affected by these issues in view of our retaining a securities portfolio and a loan portfolio consisting of commercial and residential construction loans, residential and commercial real estate loans and commercial and industrial loans. Possible declines in the value of our investment securities could result in our recording losses on the other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) of securities, which would reduce our

13

Table of Contents

earnings and therefore our capital. Declines in real estate values and home sales, and an increase in the financial stress on borrowers stemming from an uncertain economic environment, including rising unemployment, continue to have an adverse effect on our borrowers or their customers, which could adversely impact the repayment of the loans we have made. The overall deterioration in economic conditions also could subject us to increased regulatory scrutiny. In addition, a prolonged recession, or further deterioration in local economic conditions, could result in further increases in loan delinquencies; increases in problem assets and foreclosures; and declines in the values of the collateral for our loans, which could reduce our customers’ borrowing power. Furthermore, a prolonged recession or further deterioration in local economic conditions could drive the level of loan losses beyond the level we have provided for in our loan loss allowance, which could necessitate an increase in our provision for loan losses, which, in turn, would reduce our earnings and capital. Additionally, the demand for our products and services could be reduced, which would adversely impact our liquidity and the level of revenues we generate.

There can be no assurance that actions of the U.S. Government, Federal Reserve and other governmental and regulatory bodies for the purpose of stabilizing the financial markets will achieve the intended effect.

Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2008, the U.S. government has responded to the ongoing financial crisis and economic slowdown by enacting new legislation and expanding or establishing a number of programs and initiatives. The U.S. Treasury, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve Board each have developed programs and facilities, including, among others, the TARP Capital Purchase Program and other efforts, designed to increase inter-bank lending, improve funding for consumer receivables and restore consumer and counterparty confidence in the banking sector, as more particularly described in “Item 1. Business—Supervision and Regulation.” In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”) is intended to expand and establish government spending programs and provide tax cuts to stimulate the economy. Congress and the U.S. government continue to evaluate and develop various programs and initiatives designed to stabilize the financial and housing markets and stimulate the economy, including the U.S. Treasury’s Financial Stability Plan and the U.S. government’s foreclosure prevention program. Possible changes to bankruptcy legislation, such as the mortgage relief legislation for troubled homeowners, could cause financial institutions to recognize additional losses due to the forced restructuring of certain types of loans by the bankruptcy court. The final form of any such programs or initiatives or related legislation cannot be known at this time. There can be no assurance as to the impact that ARRA or any other such initiatives or governmental programs will have on the financial markets, including the extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability currently being experienced. The failure of these efforts to stabilize the financial markets, the continuation or worsening of current financial market conditions or unintended long-term consequences of these programs or initiatives could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, access to credit, or the trading price of our common stock and other equity and debt securities.

Fluctuations in interest rates could reduce our profitability.

We realize income primarily from the difference between interest earned on loans and investments and the interest paid on deposits and borrowings. We expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-earning assets will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-bearing liabilities, or vice versa. Changes in market interest rates could either positively or negatively affect our net interest income and our profitability, depending on the magnitude, direction and duration of the change. If interest rates remain low, our net interest margin could experience further compression.

We are unable to predict fluctuations of market interest rates, which are affected by, among other factors, changes in inflation rates, economic growth, money supply, government debt, domestic and foreign financial markets and political developments, including terrorist acts and acts of war. Our asset-liability management strategy, which is designed to mitigate our risk from changes in market interest rates, may not be able to mitigate changes in interest rates from having a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

14

Table of Contents

We operate in a highly regulated environment and may be adversely affected by changes in federal and state laws and regulations.

We are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination by federal and state banking authorities. Any change in applicable regulations or federal or state legislation could have a substantial impact on us and our results of operations. Additional legislation and regulations may be enacted or adopted in the future that could significantly affect our powers, authority and operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Further, regulators have significant discretion and power to prevent or remedy unsafe or unsound practices or violations of laws by banks and bank holding companies in the performance of their supervisory and enforcement duties. The exercise of regulatory power may have a negative impact on our results of operations and financial condition. interest rates from having a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC deposit insurance premiums and assessments in the future.

Recent insured depository institution failures, as well as deterioration in banking and economic conditions, have significantly depleted the FDIC’s DIF, resulting in a decline in the ratio of reserves to insured deposits to historical lows. The FDIC anticipates that additional insured depository institutions are likely to fail in the foreseeable future so the reserve ratio may continue to decline. In addition, the deposit insurance limit on FDIC deposit insurance coverage generally has increased to $250,000 through December 31, 2013. These developments have resulted in a significant increase in the premiums assessed on us by the FDIC during 2009, and further increases are possible.

On December 16, 2008, the FDIC Board of Directors determined deposit insurance assessment rates for the first quarter of 2009 at 12 to 14 basis points per $100 of deposits. Beginning April 1, 2009, the rates increased to 12 to 16 basis points per $100 of deposits. Additionally, on May 22, 2009, the FDIC announced a final rule imposing a special emergency assessment as of June 30, 2009, payable September 30, 2009, based on $0.05 for each $100 of assets, less Tier 1 capital, as of June 30, 2009, but the amount of the assessment is capped at 10 basis points of domestic deposits. We paid a special assessment of $1.9 million.

On November 17, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule that required insured institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012, at the same time that institutions paid their regular quarterly deposit insurance assessments for the third quarter of 2009. Under the final rule, the FDIC is to maintain assessment rates at their current levels through the end of 2010 and assessment rates will be increased by an annualized 3 basis points effective January 1, 2011. Each institution recorded the entire amount of its prepaid assessment as a prepaid expense (a non-earning asset) as of December 30, 2009, the date the payment was made. As of December 31, 2009, and each quarter thereafter, each institution records an expense (charge to earnings) for its regular quarterly assessment and an offsetting credit to the prepaid assessment until the asset is exhausted. Once the asset is exhausted, the institution would resume paying and accounting for quarterly deposit insurance assessments as currently done. The institutions would record an accrued expense payable each quarter for the assessment payment, which would be made to the FDIC at the end of the following quarter. These higher FDIC assessment rates and special assessments will have an adverse impact on our results of operations. Our FDIC insurance related costs were $7.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared with $489,000 and $359,000 for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We are unable to predict the impact in future periods, including whether and when additional special assessments will occur, in the event the economic crisis continues.

Tax law changes may adversely affect our net income, effective tax rate and our overall results of operations and financial condition.

The Company’s financial performance is impacted by federal and state tax laws. Given the current economic and political environment, and ongoing state budgetary pressures, the enactment of new federal or state tax legislation may occur. The enactment of such legislation, or changes in the interpretation of existing law,

15

Table of Contents

including provisions impacting tax rates, apportionment, consolidation or combination, income, expenses, and credits, may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Recent changes in laws and regulations may cause us to incur additional costs.

Recently enacted and proposed changes in the laws and regulations affecting public companies, including the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules recently adopted by the SEC and NASDAQ, could cause us to incur increased costs as we evaluate the implications of new rules and respond to new requirements. We continue to evaluate and monitor developments with respect to these new and proposed rules, and we cannot predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs, if any, we may incur or the timing of such costs.

Changes in monetary policies may have an adverse effect on our business.

Our results of operations are affected by credit policies of monetary authorities, particularly the Federal Reserve. Actions by monetary and fiscal authorities, including the Federal Reserve, could have an adverse effect on our deposit levels, loan demand or business earnings. See “Business-Supervision and Regulation.”

Risks Related to Our Business

Our recent results may not be indicative of future results.

We may not be able to sustain our historical rate of growth or may not be able to grow our business at all. Various factors, such as poor economic conditions, changes in interest rates, regulatory and legislative considerations and competition may also impede or inhibit our ability to expand our market presence. If we experience a significant decrease in our rate of growth, our results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected due to a high percentage of our operating costs being fixed expenses.

If a significant number of customers fail to perform under their loans, our business, profitability, and financial condition would be adversely affected.

As a lender, we face the risk that a significant number of our borrowers will fail to pay their loans when due. If borrower defaults cause losses in excess of our allowance for loan losses, it could have an adverse effect on our business, profitability, and financial condition. We have established an evaluation process designed to recognize loan losses as they occur. While this evaluation process uses historical and other objective information, the classification of loans and the estimation of loan losses are dependent to a great extent on our experience and judgment. If charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for possible loan losses, we will need additional provisions to increase the allowance for possible loan losses. Any increases in the allowance for possible loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and, possibly, capital, and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” located elsewhere in this report for further discussion related to our process for determining the appropriate level of the allowance for possible loan losses. We cannot assure you that our future loan losses will not have any material adverse effects on our business, profitability or financial condition.

Adverse changes in economic conditions, especially in the State of Oklahoma, could have a material adverse effect on our business, growth, and profitability.

Our bank subsidiary operates exclusively within the State of Oklahoma and, unlike larger national or superregional banks that serve a broader and more diverse geographic region; our lending is also primarily concentrated in the State of Oklahoma. As a result, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows are subject to changes in the economic conditions in such state. Our continued success is largely dependent upon the continued growth or stability of the communities we serve. A decline in the economies of these communities could negatively impact our net income and profitability. Additionally, declines in the economies of these

16

Table of Contents

communities and of the State of Oklahoma in general could affect our ability to generate new loans or to receive repayments of existing loans, and our ability to attract new deposits, adversely affecting our financial condition.

The soundness of other financial institutions could have a material adverse effect on our business, growth, and profitability.

Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks, and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose our business to credit risk in the event of a default by a counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral we hold cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the credit or derivative exposure due to us. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Competition with other financial institutions could adversely affect our profitability.

We face vigorous competition from banks and other financial institutions, including savings and loan associations, savings banks, finance companies and credit unions. Certain of these banks and other financial institutions have substantially greater resources and lending limits, larger branch systems and other banking services that we do not offer. To a limited extent, we also compete with other providers of financial services, such as money market mutual funds, brokerage firms, consumer finance companies and insurance companies. When new competitors seek to enter one of our markets, or when existing market participants seek to increase their market share, they sometimes undercut the pricing and/or credit terms prevalent in that market. This competition may reduce or limit our margins on banking and trust services, reduce our market share and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. If Regulation Q is repealed and financial institutions are allowed to pay interest on commercial demand deposits, competitive pressures would cause our subsidiary bank to pay interest on demand deposits. Since we have a higher than average level of commercial demand deposits, paying interest on commercial demand deposits would have a negative impact on our net interest margin.

Our concentration of real estate loans is subject to the local real estate market in which we operate.

Loans secured by real estate have been a large portion of our loan portfolio. At December 31, 2009, this percentage was 60.4%. While our record of asset quality has historically been solid, we cannot guarantee that our record of asset quality will be maintained in future periods. Although we were not, and are not, involved in subprime lending, the ramifications of the subprime lending crisis and the turmoil in the financial and capital markets that followed have been far-reaching, with real estate values declining and unemployment and bankruptcies rising throughout the nation, including the region we serve. The ability of our borrowers to repay their loans could be adversely impacted by the significant change in market conditions, which not only could result in our experiencing an increase in charge-offs, but also could necessitate increasing our provision for loan losses. In addition, because multi-family and commercial real estate (“CRE”) loans represent the majority of our real estate loans outstanding, a decline in tenant occupancy due to such factors or for other reasons could adversely impact the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans on a timely basis, which could have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

We rely heavily on our management team, and the unexpected loss of key managers may adversely affect our operations.

Our success to-date has been strongly influenced by our ability to attract and to retain senior management experienced in banking and financial services. Our ability to retain executive officers and the current management teams of each of our lines of business will continue to be important to successful implementation of

17

Table of Contents

our strategies. We do not have employment or non-compete agreements with these key employees. The unexpected loss of services of any key management personnel, or the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future, could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results.

Our information systems may experience an interruption or breach in security.

We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business. Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan and other systems. While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of the failure, interruption or security breach of our information systems, there can be no assurance that any such failures, interruptions or security breaches will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. The occurrence of any failures, interruptions or security breaches of our information systems could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, and subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny or civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on certain external vendors.

We are reliant upon certain external vendors to provide products and services necessary to maintain our day-to-day operations. Accordingly, our operations are exposed to risk that these vendors will not perform in accordance with the contracted arrangements under service level agreements. The failure of an external vendor to perform in accordance with the contracted arrangements under service level agreements could be disruptive to our operations, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to environmental liability risk associated with lending activities.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real property. During the ordinary course of business, we may foreclose on and take title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, 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 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. Although we have policies and procedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure action on real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

There can be no assurance that the integration of our acquisitions will be successful or will not result in unforeseen difficulties that may absorb significant management attention.

Our completed acquisitions, or any future acquisition, may not produce the revenue, cost savings, earnings or synergies that we anticipated. The process of integrating acquired companies into our business may also result in unforeseen difficulties. Unforeseen operating difficulties may absorb significant management attention, which we might otherwise devote to our existing business. Also, the process may require significant financial resources that we might otherwise allocate to other activities, including the ongoing development or expansion of our existing operations.

If we pursue a future acquisition, our management could spend a significant amount of time and effort identifying and completing the acquisition. If we make a future acquisition, we could issue equity securities which would dilute current stockholders’ percentage ownership, incur substantial debt, assume contingent liabilities, incur a one-time charge or be required to record an impairment of goodwill, or any combination of the foregoing.

18

Table of Contents

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. Any inability to provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud could harm our business. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires management and our auditors to evaluate and assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. These Sarbanes-Oxley requirements may be modified, supplemented or amended from time to time. Implementing these changes may take a significant amount of time and may require specific compliance training of our personnel. We have in the past discovered, and may in the future discover, areas of our internal control over financial reporting that need improvement. If we or our auditors discover a material weakness, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could reduce the market’s confidence in our financial statements and have an adverse effect on our stock price. We may not be able to effectively and timely implement necessary control changes and employee training to ensure continued compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other regulatory and reporting requirements. Our historic growth and our planned expansion through acquisitions present challenges to maintaining the internal control and disclosure control standards applicable to public companies. If we fail to maintain effective internal controls we could be subject to regulatory scrutiny and sanctions, our ability to recognize revenue could be impaired and investors could lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports. We cannot assure you that we will continue to fully comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or that management or our auditors will conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective in future periods.

Maintaining or increasing our market share depends on market acceptance and regulatory approval of new products and services.

Our success depends, in part, upon our ability to adapt our products and services to evolving industry standards and consumer demand. There is increasing pressure on financial services companies to provide products and services at lower prices. In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies, including Internet-based services, could require us to make substantial expenditures to modify or adapt our existing products or services. A failure to achieve market acceptance of any new products we introduce, or a failure to introduce products that the market may demand, could have an adverse effect on our business, profitability, or growth prospects.

We have businesses other than banking.

In addition to commercial banking services, we provide life and other insurance products, as well as other business and financial services. We may in the future develop or acquire other non-banking businesses. As a result of other such businesses, our earnings could be subject to risks and uncertainties that are different from those to which our commercial banking services are subject.

We have a continuing need for technological change.

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. In addition to better serving customers, 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 customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands for convenience as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations as we continue to grow and expand our market area. 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, we cannot assure you that we will be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing such products and services to our customers.

19

Table of Contents

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, and such capital may not be available when needed or at all.

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, particularly if our asset quality or earnings were to deteriorate significantly. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial performance. Economic conditions and the 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.

We cannot assure that such capital will be available on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets, such as a decline in the confidence of debt purchasers, depositors or counterparties participating in the capital markets, or a downgrade of our debt ratings, may adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, in turn, our liquidity. Moreover, if we need to raise capital in the future, we may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would have to compete with those institutions for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a materially adverse effect on our businesses, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Associated with Our Common Stock

Our stock price can be volatile.

Investors should carefully consider the risks described in this “Risk Factors” section and the other information in this report, including our consolidated financial statements with related notes and documents incorporated by reference. If any of these risks or other risks, which have not been identified or which we may believe are immaterial or unlikely, actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed. Stock price volatility may make it more difficult for you to resell your common stock when you want and at prices you find attractive. Our stock price can fluctuate significantly in response to a variety of factors including, among other things: actual or anticipated variations in quarterly results of operations; recommendations by securities analysts; operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors deem comparable to us; news reports relating to trends, concerns and other issues in the financial services industry; perceptions in the marketplace regarding us and/or our competitors; new technology used, or services offered, by competitors; significant acquisitions or business combinations, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by or involving us or our competitors; failure to integrate acquisitions or realize anticipated benefits from acquisitions; changes in government regulations; geopolitical conditions such as acts or threats of terrorism or military conflicts.

General market fluctuations, industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events, such as economic slowdowns or recessions, interest rate changes or credit loss trends, could also cause our stock price to decrease regardless of operating results.

We may not continue to pay dividends on our common stock in the future.

We have historically paid a common stock dividend. However, BancFirst Corporation is a bank 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. In the current stressed financial markets and declining economy, which has resulted in higher FDIC insurance premiums and special assessments on FDIC-insured financial institutions, including the Bank, there can be no certainty that our

20

Table of Contents

common dividend will continue to be paid at the current levels. It is possible that our common dividend could be reduced or even cease to be paid. In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and investors may lose all or part of their investment.

An investment in our common stock is not an insured deposit.

Our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, any other 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 “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere 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.

Our directors and executive officers own a significant portion of our common stock and can influence shareholder decisions.

Our directors and executive officers, as a group, beneficially owned approximately 53% of our outstanding common stock as of February 28, 2010. As a result of their ownership, the directors and executive officers have the ability, by voting their shares in concert, to influence the outcome of any matter submitted to our shareholders for approval, including the election of directors. The directors and executive officers may vote to cause us to take actions with which our other shareholders do not agree.

Our stockholder rights plan, amended and restated certificate of incorporation, as well as provisions of Oklahoma law, could make it difficult for a third party to acquire our company.

We have a stockholder rights plan that may have the effect of discouraging unsolicited takeover proposals. The rights issued under the stockholder rights plan would cause substantial dilution to a person or group that attempts to acquire us on terms not approved in advance by our board of directors. In addition, Oklahoma corporate law and our amended and restated certificate of incorporation contain provisions that could delay, deter or prevent a change in control of our company or our management. Together, these provisions may discourage transactions that otherwise could provide for the payment of a premium over prevailing market prices of our common stock, and also could limit the price that investors are willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock.

The trading volume in our common stock is less than that of other larger financial services companies.

Although our common stock is listed for trading on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, the trading volume in our common stock is less than that of other, larger financial services companies. A public trading market having the desired characteristics of depth, liquidity and orderliness depends on the presence in the marketplace of willing buyers and sellers of our common stock at any given time. This presence depends on the individual decisions of investors and general economic and market conditions over which we have no control. Given the lower trading volume of our common stock, significant sales of our common stock, or the expectation of these sales, could cause our stock price to fall.

Item 1b. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

The principal offices of the Company are located at 101 North Broadway, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102. The Company owns substantially all of the properties and buildings in which its various offices and facilities are located. These properties include the main bank and 84 branches. BancFirst also owns properties for future expansion. There are no significant encumbrances on any of these properties.

21

Table of Contents

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

The Company has been named as a defendant in various legal actions arising from the conduct of its normal business activities. Although the amount of any liability that could arise with respect to these actions cannot be accurately predicted, in the opinion of the Company, any such liability will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or results of operations of the Company.

Item 4. Reserved.

PART II

Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Common Stock Market Prices and Dividends

The Company’s Common Stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market System (“NASDAQ/GS”) and is traded under the symbol “BANF”. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, (i) the high and low sales prices of the Company’s Common Stock as reported in the NASDAQ/GS consolidated transaction reporting system and (ii) the quarterly dividends per share declared on the Common Stock.

As of February 28, 2010 there were 341 holders of record of the Common Stock.

Future dividend payments will be determined by the Company’s Board of Directors in light of the earnings and financial condition of the Company and the Bank, their capital needs, applicable governmental policies and regulations and such other factors as the Board of Directors deems appropriate.

BancFirst Corporation is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank, and its ability to pay dividends is substantially dependent upon dividend payments received from the Bank. Various laws, regulations and regulatory policies limit the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to BancFirst Corporation, as well as BancFirst Corporation’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders. See “Liquidity and Funding” and “Capital Resources” under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” “Description of Business—Supervision and Regulation” and Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding limitations on the payment of dividends by BancFirst Corporation and the Bank.

22

Table of Contents

Share-Based Compensation Plans

Information regarding share-based compensation awards outstanding and available for future grants as of December 31, 2009, segregated between BancFirst Corporation’s nonqualified incentive stock option plan (the “BancFirst ISOP”) and BancFirst Corporation’s Non-Employee Director’s Stock Option Plan (the “BancFirst Director’s Stock Option Plan”), is presented in the following table. Additional information regarding share-based compensation plans is presented in Note 13 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Stock Repurchase Program

In November 1999, the Company adopted a new Stock Repurchase Program (the “SRP”) authorizing management to repurchase up to 600,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. The SRP was amended in May 2001, August of 2002, and September of 2007 to increase the shares authorized to be purchased by 555,832 shares, 364,530 shares and 366,948 shares, respectively. The SRP may be used as a means to increase earnings per share and return on equity, to purchase treasury stock for the exercise of stock options or for distributions under the Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, to provide liquidity for optionees to dispose of stock from exercises of their stock options, and to provide liquidity for shareholders wishing to sell their stock. The timing, price and amount of stock repurchases under the SRP may be determined by management and must be approved by the Company’s Executive Committee. At December 31, 2009 there were 560,000 shares remaining that could be repurchased under the SRP. Below is a summary of the shares repurchased under the program.

Tender Offer

In September 2007, the Company completed a modified Dutch auction self-tender offer and purchased 539,453 shares of its common stock for the maximum offering price of $45.00 per share. Cash on hand was used to pay for the purchase of the stock.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

Incorporated by reference from “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” contained on page A-2 through A-3 of the attached Appendix.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Incorporated by reference from “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” contained on pages A-4 through A-24 of the attached Appendix.

23

Table of Contents

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Incorporated by reference from “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Market Risk” contained on page A-20 through A-22 of the attached Appendix.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

The consolidated financial statements of BancFirst Corporation and its subsidiaries, are incorporated by reference from pages A-26 through A-63 of the attached Appendix, and include the following:

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.

The Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Disclosure Committee, which includes the Company’s Chief Risk Officer, Chief Asset Quality Officer, Chief Internal Auditor, Treasurer, Bank Controller and General Counsel, have evaluated, as of the last day of the period covered by this report, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on their evaluation they concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports filed or submitted by it under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the applicable rules and forms. No changes were made to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the last fiscal quarter of 2009 that materially affected, or are likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. There have been no significant changes in the Company’s internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.

Management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting is incorporated by reference from page A-25 of the attached Appendix. The independent registered public accounting firm’s report on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is incorporated by reference from page A-26 of the attached Appendix.

Item 9B. Other Information.

There is no information required to be disclosed in a report on Form 8-K during the fourth quarter of the year that was not reported.

24

Table of Contents

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

The information required by Item 401 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Election of Directors” and is hereby incorporated by reference. The information required by Item 405 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934” and is hereby incorporated by reference. The information required by Item 406 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Code of Ethics” and is hereby incorporated by reference.

Item 11. Executive Compensation.

The information required by Item 402 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Compensation of Directors and Executive Officers” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and is hereby incorporated by reference.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.

The information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans” and is hereby incorporated by reference. The information required by Item 403 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” and is hereby incorporated by reference.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.

The information required by Item 404 of Regulation S-K will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Transactions with Related Persons” and is hereby incorporated by reference.

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

The information required by Item 9(e) of Schedule 14A will be contained in the 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption “Ratification of Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” and is hereby incorporated by reference.

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.

(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:

(1) Financial Statements:

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 and 2008

Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income for the three years ended December 31, 2009

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the three years ended December 31, 2009

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flow for the three years ended December 31, 2009

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

25

Table of Contents

The above financial statements are incorporated by reference from pages A-26 through A-63 of the attached Appendix.

(2) All other schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the financial statements or notes thereto.

(3) The following Exhibits are filed with this Report or are incorporated by reference as set forth below:

26

Table of Contents

27

Table of Contents

28

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated on March 16, 2010.

29

Table of Contents

30

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A

BancFirst Corporation

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

A-1

Table of Contents

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table sets forth certain historical consolidated financial data as of and for the five years ended December 31, 2009. The historical consolidated financial data has been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. The historical consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this report.

A-2

Table of Contents

CONSOLIDATED AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND INTEREST MARGIN ANALYSIS

Taxable Equivalent Basis (Dollars in thousands)

A-3

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion is an analysis of the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the three years ended December 31, 2009 and should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto and the Selected Consolidated Financial Data included herein.

SUMMARY

BancFirst Corporation’s net income for 2009 was $32.6 million, or $2.09 per diluted share, compared to $44.4 million, or $2.85 per diluted share for 2008 and $53.1 million, or $3.33 per diluted share for 2007. The results for 2009, 2008 and 2007 include several one-time items that are more fully described below.

In 2009, net interest income was $131.3 million, compared to $139.1 million in 2008 and $148.3 million in 2007. The Company’s net interest margin was 3.42% for 2009 down 63 basis points from 4.05% in 2008 and down 121 basis points from 4.63% in 2007. The decrease is due to lower interest rates brought about by a slowing national economy, reflected in the national unemployment reaching 10%. Provision for loan losses was $10.4 million in 2009 compared to $10.7 million in 2008 up from $3.3 million in 2007. Noninterest income was $66.9 million in 2009 compared to $74.4 million in 2008 and $71.1 million in 2007, while noninterest expense was $139.1 million in 2009 compared to $135.0 million in 2008 and $134.4 million in 2007.

Total assets at year-end 2009 were $4.42 billion, up from $3.87 billion at the end of 2008 and $3.74 billion at the end of 2007. Total loans at December 31, 2009 were $2.74 billion versus $2.76 billion for 2008 and $2.49 billion for 2007. Total deposits increased to $3.93 billion from $3.38 billion for 2008 and $3.29 billion for 2007. The Company’s liquidity remains strong as its average loans-to-deposit ratio was 74.6% for 2009, compared to 78.8% for 2008 and 76.0% for 2007. Stockholders’ equity was $430.8 million, an increase of $17 million over a year ago, compared to $413.8 million for 2008 and $372.0 million for 2007. Average stockholders’ equity to average assets was 10.15% at year-end 2009, compared to 10.35% at year-end 2008 and 10.18% at year-end 2007. The Company’s borrowings include no brokered deposits and no Federal Home Loan Bank borrowings at December 31, 2009.

Asset quality deteriorated in 2009 with a ratio of nonperforming and restructured assets to total assets of 1.13% for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared to 0.72% at year-end 2008 and 0.40% at year-end 2007. The allowance for loan losses equaled 91.1% of nonperforming and restructured loans at December 31, 2009, versus 144.5% at the end of 2008 and 215.6% at the end of 2007. Net charge-offs to average loans for 2009 increased to 0.30%, compared to 0.21% for 2008 and 0.08% for 2007. While asset quality deteriorated during the year, the allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans increased to 1.33% in 2009 compared to 1.24% in 2008 and 1.17% in 2007.

The financial performance of the Company in 2009 was affected primarily by three factors: first, historically low interest rates and deposit growth from money-market funds disintermediation caused further compression of the net interest margin; second, a slowing economy caused deterioration in the credit of several customers that necessitated a continued higher level of loan loss provision; and finally, a significant increase in FDIC insurance premiums caused noninterest expense to increase. In response to these items negatively affecting the Company’s earnings, management continued a number of changes designed to lower noninterest expenses including a suspension of branch expansion, a reduction of bonuses and other personnel expenses and a salary freeze for all non-exempt personnel.

On December 8, 2009, the Company completed the acquisition of First Jones Bancorporation. On November 30, 2009, First State Bank, Jones, the subsidiary bank, had approximately $36 million in assets, $31 million in deposits, and $4.5 million in equity capital. The acquisition was accounted for under the acquisition method. First State Bank, Jones operated as a subsidiary of BancFirst Corporation until it was merged into the BancFirst system, which was completed in early March 2010. The acquisition will enhance the presence of BancFirst in eastern Oklahoma County.

A-4

Table of Contents

In November 2009, the FDIC issued a rule that required insured depository institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The FDIC also adopted a uniform three-basis point increase in assessment rates effective on January 1, 2011. In December 2009, the Company paid $20.2 million in prepaid risk-based assessments, which included $1.2 million related to the fourth quarter of 2009 that would have otherwise been payable in the first quarter of 2010. This amount is included in deposit insurance expense for 2009. The remaining $19.0 million in prepaid deposit insurance is included in other assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2009.

In May 2009 the FDIC imposed a Special Assessment on member financial institutions that was based on June 30, 2009 assets less tier one capital. The amount of $1.9 million was expensed on June 30, 2009.

During 2008, the Company repurchased 40,000 shares of its common stock for $1.63 million or an average price of $40.70 per share under its ongoing Stock Repurchase Program (the “SRP”). The Company repurchased 53,000 shares for $2.46 million or an average price of $46.47 during 2007. No shares were repurchased in 2009.

In November 2008 the Company announced it would not accept funds from the U.S. Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program due to current capital levels that exceeded well-capitalized guidelines and the potential for additional governmental regulation related to the program. The Company also did not elect to participate in the Debt Guarantee Program for newly issued senior unsecured debt. The Company did elect to participate in the Transaction Account Guarantee Program for extended coverage on noninterest bearing transaction deposit accounts at a cost of 10 basis points per assessable deposits. The Transaction Account Guarantee Program is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2010.

In April 2008, the Company completed an $80 million sale of securities resulting in a securities pre-tax gain of $6.1 million. The Company also purchased Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) senior debt securities of similar amounts and maturities. The after-tax impact of these transactions, net of the interest income differential, was approximately $3.3 million for the year.

In March 2008, the Company, as a member bank of Visa, recorded a $1.8 million pre-tax gain from the mandatory partial redemption of the Company’s Visa shares received in the first quarter initial public offering. The gain was included in gain on sale of other assets.

In September 2007, the Company completed a modified Dutch auction self-tender offer and purchased 539,453 shares of its common stock for the maximum offering price of $45.00 per share. Cash on hand was used to pay for the purchase of the stock.

In July 2007, the Company was awarded and received the $3.1 million bond claim by their fidelity bond carrier for the $3.3 million cash shortfall that was reported and expensed in 2005.

In June 2007, the Company entered into an agreement to sell one of its investments held by Council Oak Investment Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of BancFirst, which resulted in a one-time gain of approximately $7.8 million. The transaction was consummated on August 1, 2007 and included in noninterest income—securities transactions in 2007. The Company made a $1 million contribution to its charitable foundation with the funds from the gain. This one-time gain, net of related expenses, income taxes and the contribution had a net income effect of approximately $3.9 million.

During the first quarter of 2007 the Company entered into an agreement to acquire Armor Assurance Company (“Armor”), an insurance agency in Muskogee, Oklahoma for cash of approximately $3.3 million and a $372,000 note payable in three equal annual installments. The transaction was consummated in April 2007 and the note was prepaid and retired in April 2008. Armor had total assets of approximately $364,000. As a result of the acquisition, Armor was merged with the Company’s existing property and casualty agency, Wilcox & Jones, to form Wilcox, Jones & McGrath, Inc. The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase. Accordingly, the effects of the acquisition are included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements from the date of the acquisition forward. The acquisition did not have a material effect on the results of operations of the Company.

A-5

Table of Contents

In November 2006, the Company announced its intent to exercise the optional prepayment terms of its 9.65% Junior Subordinated Debentures. The securities were redeemed effective January 15, 2007 for a redemption price equal to 104.825% of the aggregate $25 million liquidation amount of the trust securities plus all accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date. As a result of the prepayment, the Company incurred a loss of approximately $1.2 million after taxes during 2007. The loss reflects the premium paid and the recognition of the unamortized issuance costs.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Net Interest Income

In 2009, net interest income, which is the Company’s principal source of operating revenue, decreased $7.8 million to $131.3 million compared to a decrease of $9.2 million in 2008, and an increase of $4.6 million in 2007. The net interest margin on a taxable equivalent basis for 2009 was 3.42%, compared to 4.05% for 2008 and 4.63% for 2007. Changes in the volume of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and changes in interest rates determine the changes in net interest income. The following volume/rate analysis summarizes the relative contribution of each of these components to the changes in net interest income in 2009 and 2008. Rapidly declining interest rates in 2008 leading to historically low rates and deposit growth from money-market funds disintermediation in 2009 have resulted in a significant decrease in net interest income. The low rates caused a negative rate variance in both 2009 and 2008 which was somewhat mitigated in 2009 by the implementation of rate floors in floating rate loans. The changes in net interest income in 2008 due to the growth in volume of earning assets, primarily loans, were more than offset by the negative impact of lower interest rates. If interest rates do not increase, management expects continued compression of its net interest margin in 2010 as higher rate assets mature in a continued low interest rate environment.

VOLUME/RATE ANALYSIS

Taxable Equivalent Basis