BANK OF THE JAMES FINANCIAL GROUP INC - Annual Report: 2015 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

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

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2015

BANK OF THE JAMES FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Commission file number 001-35402

(434) 846-2000

(Issuer’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act: Common Stock, $2.14 par value

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 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 Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    x  Yes    ¨  No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) 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, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

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

The aggregate value of the voting common equity held by nonaffiliates as of June 30, 2015, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $33,451,713 based on the price at which the common stock last traded on such day. This price reflects inter-dealer prices without retail mark up, mark down, or commissions, and may not represent actual transactions.

The number of shares outstanding of Common Stock, $2.14 par value as of March 16, 2016 was approximately 4,378,436.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the 2016 Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders, scheduled to be held on May 17, 2016, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PART I

General

Bank of the James Financial Group, Inc. (“Financial” or the “Company”) is a bank holding company with its headquarters in Lynchburg, Virginia. Financial was incorporated at the direction of Bank of the James (the “Bank” or “Bank of the James”) on October 3, 2003 to serve as a bank holding company of the Bank. Financial acquired all of the shares of the Bank in a statutory share exchange on a one-for-one basis on January 1, 2004.

The Bank is a Virginia banking corporation headquartered in Lynchburg, Virginia. The Bank was incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia as a state chartered bank in 1998 and began banking operations in July 1999. The Bank was organized to engage in general retail and commercial banking business.

The Bank was organized in part as a response to the loss of many of the Central Virginia, Region 2000 area’s (as defined in below) local financial institutions through mergers with larger, non-local banks and bank holding companies. The organizers perceived that local customers who once relied on experienced personal attention were being forced to use 800 numbers, computerized menus, and persons in other localities who were not familiar with their needs.

The Bank opened for business on July 22, 1999 to fill this void left in the Region 2000 market. The Bank’s organizers recognized that an opportunity existed to create a banking institution designed exclusively for a market that expected personalized service. The idea was to build a financial institution staffed with experienced professionals who would place a high value on knowing their customers and serving their distinctive banking needs. This remains our philosophy today.

Management believes that the key to the Bank’s success lies in providing Bank customers with personalized service while providing products and services that meet their banking needs.

The Bank’s principal office is located at 828 Main Street, Lynchburg, Virginia 24504 and its telephone number is (434) 846-2000. The Bank also maintains a website at www.bankofthejames.com.

Financial conducts two principal activities: (1) general retail and commercial banking through Bank of the James; (2) mortgage brokerage services through Bank of the James, a division of the Bank.

In addition, Financial provides securities brokerage services through BOTJ Investment, a division of the Bank and acts as an agent for insurance and annuity products through BOTJ Insurance, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bank. The operating results of these business operations have not had a material impact on our financial performance and are not considered principal activities of Financial at this time.

The Bank, BOTJ Insurance, and BOTJ Investment Group, Inc., a non-operating subsidiary, are our only subsidiaries and primary assets.

1

Table of Contents

Products and Services

Retail and Commercial Banking

The Bank currently conducts business within Virginia from ten full-service offices and three limited service offices, one loan production office, and three mortgage production offices. Four of the full-service offices are located in Lynchburg, Virginia, one full-service location is located in Madison Heights, Virginia, one is located in the Town of Amherst, Virginia, one is located in Forest, Virginia, one is located in the City of Bedford, Virginia, one is located in the Town of Altavista, Virginia, and one is located in the City of Harrisonburg, Virginia. Of the limited services branches, one is located in the Westminster-Canterbury facilities in Lynchburg, one is located in the Westminster-Canterbury facilities in Charlottesville, Virginia and one is located in the Pantops area of Charlottesville. The Bank established a mortgage loan origination division that conducts business under the name “Bank of the James Mortgage, a Division of Bank of the James.” The mortgage division conducts business primarily from the division’s main office located in the Forest branch of the Bank. In addition, in 2013 the Bank expanded into Charlottesville with a loan production office (which also houses the limited service branch referenced above) and Roanoke, Virginia with a mortgage/loan production office. For a more detailed description of these facilities, see “Item 2. Properties” below.

Deposit Services. Deposits are a major source of our funding. The Bank offers a full range of deposit services that are typically available in most banks and other financial institutions including checking accounts, savings accounts and other time deposits of various types, ranging from daily money market accounts to longer-term certificates of deposit. The transaction accounts and time certificates are tailored to the Bank’s market area at rates competitive to those offered in the area. In addition, the Bank offers its customers Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and Health Care Savings Accounts (HSAs). All deposit accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) up to the maximum amount allowed by law (generally, $250,000 per depositor, subject to aggregation rules). The Bank solicits such accounts from individuals, businesses, associations and organizations, and governmental authorities.

Lending Services. The Bank offers a full range of short- to medium-term commercial and consumer loans. Our primary focus is on making loans to small businesses and consumers in the Region 2000 (Lynchburg, Amherst, Bedford, Campbell) area, Charlottesville, Harrisonburg, and Roanoke. In addition, we also provide a wide range of real estate finance services. Commercial loans include both secured and unsecured loans for working capital (including inventory and receivables), business expansion (including acquisition of real estate and improvements), and purchase of equipment and machinery. Consumer loans include secured and unsecured loans for financing automobiles, home improvements, education and personal investments. Additionally, the Bank originates fixed and floating-rate mortgage loans and real estate construction and acquisition loans. Where appropriate, the Bank attempts to limit interest rate risk through the use of variable interest rates and terms of less than five years.

In general, the Bank offers the following lending services:

2

Table of Contents

Other Banking Services. Other services offered by the Bank include safe deposit boxes, traveler’s checks, direct deposit of payroll and social security checks, automatic drafts for various accounts, treasury management services and credit card merchant services. The Bank also is associated with a shared network of automated teller machines (ATMs) that may be used by Bank customers throughout Virginia, the United States, and internationally.

The Bank intends to introduce new products and services desired by the public and as permitted by the regulatory authorities. The Bank remains committed to meeting the challenges that require technology. The Bank provides its customers with access to the latest technological products, such as telephone banking and internet banking, including on-line bill pay. This service allows customers to handle routine transactions using a standard touch tone telephone, applications for mobile devices, and via the internet at the Bank’s website.

Mortgage Banking. The Bank, through Bank of the James Mortgage, a Division of Bank of the James (the “Mortgage Division”) originates conforming and non-conforming home mortgages primarily in the Region 2000 area. As part of the Bank’s overall risk management strategy, the loans originated and closed by the Mortgage Division are pre-sold to major mortgage banking or other financial institutions. Effective April 1, 2011, the Mortgage Division began funding these pre-sold loans. The loans are transferred promptly, typically within 2 to 3 business days, to the buyer for a pre-arranged price. Management believes that there is acceptable risk associated with this arrangement.

Other Activities

We provide brokerage and investment services through the Bank’s Investment division (“Investment”). The Investment division provides securities brokerage services to Bank customers and others through an agreement with Infinex Financial Group, LLC (“Infinex”), a registered broker-dealer. Under our agreement, Infinex operates a service center at 615 Church Street, Lynchburg, Virginia. To date the operating results of the Investment division have not had a material impact on our financial performance.

We provide insurance and annuity products through BOTJ Insurance as an agent for national insurance companies. As of the date hereof, we offer the following insurance products: credit life, life insurance, fixed annuities, and disability insurance. We began providing these services in September 2008. To date the operating results of BOTJ Insurance have not had a material impact on our financial performance.

Employees

As of March 17, 2016, we had approximately 125 full-time equivalent employees. None of our employees are represented by any collective bargaining agreements, and relations with employees are considered excellent. We maintain employee benefit programs that include health insurance, a flexible spending account, a health savings account, and a 401(k) plan.

3

Table of Contents

Location and Market Area

The Bank’s market area primarily consists of Region 2000, which encompasses the seven jurisdictions of the Town of Altavista, Amherst County, Appomattox County, the City of Bedford, Bedford County, Campbell County, and the City of Lynchburg. Region 2000 supports a diverse, well-rounded economy. U.S. Routes 29, 60, 221, 460 and 501 and State Routes 24 and 40 all pass through the trade area and provide efficient access to other regions of the state. Regional airport service and rail service provide additional transportation channels.

Total population in the market area equals approximately 252,000. According to the U.S. Census, in 2010 the populations of the localities in the Region 2000 market area were approximately as follows: City of Lynchburg – 76,000; Amherst County – 32,000; Appomattox County – 15,000; Bedford County (including the City of Bedford) – 74,000; Campbell County (including the Town of Altavista) – 55,000. The area is serviced by one daily newspaper and a number of radio and television stations providing diverse media outlets. Median family income in Region 2000 has risen over the past ten years.

Region 2000 has a broad range of services, light industry, and manufacturing plants. Principal service, industrial, research and development employers include: BWX Technologies, Inc. (nuclear fuel); AREVA (nuclear services); Centra Health, Inc. (health care services); C.B. Fleet, Inc. (medical supplies); Genworth Financial (life insurance and other financial products); Frito-Lay, Inc. (snack foods); Griffin Pipe Products Co. (ductile iron pipe); R.R. Donnelley Printing Inc. (printed products); as well as six colleges including Randolph College, Sweet Briar College, Liberty University, and Lynchburg College.

In 2013 the Bank expanded into Charlottesville, Virginia (north of Region 2000) with a loan production office which subsequently became a limited service branch and to Roanoke, Virginia (west of Region 2000) with a mortgage production office. As of the first quarter of 2016, the Roanoke office now houses a full time commercial lender within the mortgage production office.

In 2015 the Bank expanded into Harrisonburg, Virginia (northwest of Region 2000) with a full service branch located at 1391 South High Street. The property was previously used as a bank branch by another financial institution.

Even with this expansion outside of Region 2000, the Bank continues to consider its primary market to be Region 2000.

Competition

Retail and Commercial Banking

The banking business is highly competitive. We compete with other commercial banks, savings institutions, credit unions, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market mutual funds and other financial institutions operating in the Region 2000 market area and elsewhere. Many of our nonbank competitors are not subject to the same extensive federal regulations that govern federally-insured banks and state regulations governing state chartered banks. As a result, such nonbank competitors may have certain advantages over the Bank in providing certain services.

Virginia law permits statewide branching by banks. Consequently, the Bank’s market area is a highly competitive, highly branched banking market. Competition in the market area for loans to individuals, small businesses, and professional concerns, the Bank’s target market, is keen, and pricing is important. Most of the Bank’s competitors have substantially greater resources and lending limits than the Bank and offer certain services, such as extensive and established branch networks and trust services, that the Bank is not currently providing. Deposit competition is strong and comes from institutions in the market, U.S. Government securities, private issuers of debt obligations and suppliers of other investment alternatives for depositors, among other sources. As a result, the Bank has paid, and may in the future pay, above-market rates to attract deposits.

4

Table of Contents

The adoption of legislation permitting nationwide interstate banking and branching and the use of financial holding companies may also increase competition in the Bank’s market area. See “Supervision and Regulation of Financial” below.

Mortgage Banking

The Mortgage Division competes with large national and regional banks, credit unions, regional mortgage lenders and local mortgage brokers. Following 2008, the mortgage industry experienced consolidation. Despite the consolidation, the competition with regard to price has increased as the remaining participants struggle to achieve volume and profitability. The downturn in the housing markets related to declines in real estate values, increased payment defaults and foreclosures have had a dramatic effect on the secondary market. The guidelines surrounding agency business (i.e., loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) have become much more restrictive and the associated mortgage insurance for loans above 80 percent loan-to-value has continued to tighten. These changes in the conventional market have caused a dramatic increase in government lending and state bond programs. The Mortgage Division competes by attracting the top sales people in the industry, providing an operational infrastructure that manages the guideline changes efficiently and effectively, offering a product menu that is both competitive in loan parameters as well as price, and providing consistently high quality customer service.

The Mortgage Division, like other residential mortgage originators and lenders, would be impacted by the inability of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the FHA or the VA to purchase loans. Although the Mortgage Division sells loans to various intermediaries, the ability of these aggregators to purchase loans would be limited if these government-sponsored entities cease to exist or materially limit their purchases of mortgage loans.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

Both Financial, as a bank holding company, and the Bank are subject to extensive federal and state laws and regulations. These laws and regulations impose specific requirements or restrictions on and provide for general regulatory oversight of virtually all aspects of our operations. The following briefly summarizes the more significant provisions of applicable federal and state laws, certain regulations and the potential impact of such provisions on Financial and the Bank. These laws and regulations are generally intended to protect depositors, not shareholders. The following summary is qualified by reference to the statutory and regulatory provisions discussed.

Changes in applicable laws or regulations may have a material effect on our business and prospects. Our operations may be affected by legislative changes and the policies of various regulatory authorities. We cannot predict the effect that fiscal or monetary policies, economic control, or new federal or state legislation may have on our business and earnings in the future.

Regulation of Financial

General. Financial is subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), including the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) of annual, quarterly and other reports on the financial condition and performance of the organization. Financial is directly affected by the corporate responsibility and accounting reform legislation signed into law on July 30, 2002, known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “SOX Act”), and the related rules and regulations. The SOX Act includes provisions that, among other things, require

5

Table of Contents

that periodic reports containing financial statements that are filed with the SEC be accompanied by chief executive officer and chief financial officer certifications as to the accuracy and compliance with law, additional disclosure requirements and corporate governance and other related rules. Although we are not required to receive an opinion of our external auditors regarding our internal control over financial reporting under section 404 of the SOX Act because of our status as a smaller reporting company, our management’s report on internal control over financial reporting is set forth in Item 8 and incorporated into Item 9A herein. Financial has expended considerable time and money in complying with the SOX Act and expects to continue to incur additional expenses in the future.

Bank Holding Company Act. As a bank holding company registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the “BHCA”), Financial is subject to regulation and examination by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”). Financial is required to file with the Federal Reserve Board an annual report and such other additional information as the Federal Reserve Board may require pursuant to the BHCA.

The Federal Reserve Board requires a bank holding company to act as a source of financial strength and to take measures to preserve and protect its bank subsidiaries. Financial would be compelled by the Federal Reserve Board to invest additional capital in the event the Bank experiences either significant loan losses or rapid growth of loans or deposits.

The Federal Reserve Board has jurisdiction under the BHCA to approve any bank or non-bank acquisition, merger or consolidation proposed by a bank holding company. The BHCA, and other applicable laws and regulations, generally limit the activities of a bank holding company and its subsidiaries to that of banking, managing or controlling banks, or any other activity that is so closely related to banking or to managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto.

Since September 1995, the BHCA has permitted bank holding companies from any state to acquire banks and bank holding companies located in any other state, subject to certain conditions, including nationwide and state imposed concentration limits. Banks are also able to branch across state lines, provided certain conditions are met, including that applicable state laws expressly permit such interstate branching. Virginia has adopted legislation that permits branching across state lines, provided there is reciprocity with the state in which the out-of-state bank is based.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) which was effective March 11, 2000, permits bank holding companies to become financial holding companies and thereby affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are financial in nature. A bank holding company may become a financial holding company by filing a declaration that the bank holding company wishes to become a financial holding company if each of its subsidiary banks (i) is well capitalized under regulatory prompt corrective action provisions, (ii) is well managed, and (iii) has at least a satisfactory rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”). No regulatory approval will be required for a financial holding company to acquire a company, other than a 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.

The GLB Act defines “financial in nature” to include securities underwriting, dealing and market making; sponsoring mutual funds and investment companies; insurance underwriting and agency; merchant banking activities; and activities that the Board has determined to be closely related to banking. Subsidiary banks of a financial holding company must continue to be well capitalized and well managed in order to continue to engage in activities that are financial in nature without regulatory actions or restrictions, which could include divestiture of the financial in nature subsidiary or subsidiaries. In addition, a financial holding company or a bank may not acquire a company that is engaged in activities that are financial in nature unless each of the subsidiary banks of the financial holding company or the bank has a CRA rating of satisfactory or better.

6

Table of Contents

The GLB Act also imposes customer privacy requirements on financial institutions. Financial institutions generally are prohibited from disclosing customer information to non-affiliated third parties, unless the customer has been given the opportunity to object and has not objected to such disclosure. Financial institutions must disclose their specific privacy policies to their customers annually. Upon making such disclosure, there is no specific restriction on financial institutions disclosing customer information to affiliated parties. Financial institutions must comply with state law, however, if it protects customer privacy more fully than federal law.

The cumulative effect of the GLB Act and other recent bank legislation has caused us to strengthen our staff to handle the procedures required by this additional regulation. The increased staff and operational costs have impacted our profitability. Although the above laws may have a significant impact on the banking industry by promoting, among other things, competition, it is not possible for the management of the Bank to determine, with any degree of certainty, the impact of such laws on the Bank.

Mergers and Acquisitions. The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 authorizes the Federal Reserve Board to permit adequately capitalized and adequately managed bank holding companies to acquire all or substantially all of the assets of an out-of-state bank or bank holding company, subject to certain conditions, including nationwide and state concentration limits. Banks also are able to branch across state lines, provided certain conditions are met, including that applicable state law must expressly permit such interstate branching. Virginia law permits branching across state lines, provided there is reciprocity with the state in which the out-of-state bank is based.

Limits on the Payment of Dividends. Financial is a legal entity, separate and distinct from the Bank. Financial currently does not have any significant sources of revenue other than cash dividends paid to it by its subsidiaries. Both Financial and the Bank are subject to laws and regulations that limit the payment of cash dividends, including requirements to maintain capital at or above regulatory minimums. As a bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System (“state member bank”), the Bank must obtain prior written approval for any cash dividend if the total of all dividends declared in any calendar year would exceed the total of its net profits for that year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years.

Banking regulators have indicated that Virginia banking organizations should generally pay dividends only (1) from net undivided profits of the bank, after providing for all expenses, losses, interest and taxes accrued or due by the bank and (2) if the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. In addition, the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) prohibits insured depository institutions such as the Bank from making capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, if, after making such distribution, the institution would become undercapitalized as defined in the statute. In addition, the Federal Reserve is authorized to determine under certain circumstances relating to the financial condition of a bank that the payment of dividends would be an unsafe and unsound practice and to prohibit payment thereof. The payment of dividends that deplete a bank’s capital base could be deemed to constitute such an unsafe and unsound banking practice. The Federal Reserve has indicated that banking organizations generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. In addition, under Virginia law, no dividend may be declared or paid out of a Virginia bank’s paid-in capital. The Bank may be prohibited under Virginia law from the payment of dividends if the Virginia Bureau of Financial Institutions determines that a limitation of dividends is in the public interest and is necessary to ensure the Bank’s financial soundness, and may also permit the payment of dividends not otherwise allowed by Virginia law.

The Dodd-Frank Act

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Reform Act”) was signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Reform Act represents a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial services industry, although many of its provisions (e.g., the interchange and trust preferred capital limitations) apply to companies that are significantly larger than

7

Table of Contents

Financial. The Dodd-Frank Reform Act directs applicable regulatory authorities to promulgate regulations implementing its provisions, and its effect on Financial and on the financial services industry as a whole will be clarified as those regulations are issued. Major elements of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act include:

8

Table of Contents

Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to rulemaking and will take effect over several years. As a result, it is difficult to anticipate the overall impact of the act on Financial. Financial continues to evaluate the potential impact of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act.

Economic Emergency Stabilization Act of 2008 In response to the financial crisis affecting the banking system and financial markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial institutions, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the “EESA”) was signed into law. Through its authority under the EESA, the Treasury announced in October 2008 the Troubled Asset Relief Program—Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”) a program designed to bolster healthy institutions, like Financial, by making $250 billion of capital available to U.S. financial institutions in the form of preferred stock. Participants in the CPP are subject to executive compensation limits and are encouraged to expand their lending and mortgage loan modifications. Although Financial received preliminary approval from the United States Treasury to participate in the TARP Capital Purchase Program, Financial decided not to participate in the program.

Regardless of our lack of participation in certain programs, governmental intervention and new regulations under these programs could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Incentive Compensation

In June 2010, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the FDIC issued a comprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation 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 guidance, which covers all employees that 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.

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations, such as Financial, 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.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC and the federal bank regulatory agencies to establish joint regulations or guidelines that require financial institutions with assets of at least $1 billion to disclose the structure of their incentive compensation practices and prohibit such institutions from maintaining compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risk-taking by providing excessive compensation or that could lead to material financial loss to the financial institution.

9

Table of Contents

Regulation of the Bank

The Bank is a Virginia chartered commercial bank and a state member bank. The Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the DIF of the FDIC up to the maximum legal limits of the FDIC and it is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the Virginia Bureau of Financial Institutions and the Federal Reserve. The regulations of these various agencies govern most aspects of the Bank’s business, including required reserves against deposits, loans, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowings, dividends and location and number of branch offices. The laws and regulations governing the Bank generally have been promulgated to protect depositors and the deposit insurance funds, and not for the purpose of protecting shareholders.

General. As a state-chartered commercial bank, the Bank and its subsidiaries are subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Federal Reserve and the Virginia State Corporation Commission’s Bureau of Financial Institutions (the “Commission”). As such, the Bank is subject to various statutes and regulations administered by these agencies that govern, among other things, required reserves, investments, loans, lending limits, acquisitions of fixed assets, interest rates payable on deposits, transactions among affiliates and the Bank, the payment of dividends, mergers and consolidations, and establishment of branch offices.

The earnings of the Bank are affected by general economic conditions, management policies and the legislative and governmental actions of the various regulatory authorities, including those referred to above.

FDIC Insurance Premiums. The Bank has deposits that are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). FDIC maintains a Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) that is funded by risk-based insurance premium assessments on insured depository institutions. Assessments are determined based upon several factors, including the level of regulatory capital and the results of regulatory examinations. FDIC may adjust assessments if the insured institution’s risk profile changes or if the size of the DIF declines in relation to the total amount of insured deposits. In 2015, the Bank expensed $331,000 in FDIC assessments which compared to $262,000 in 2014. Any increases in FDIC insurance premiums could adversely affect the Bank’s profitability.

Deposits at FDIC-insured institutions are insured up to $250,000 per depositor, subject to aggregation rules.

After giving primary regulators an opportunity to first take action, FDIC may initiate an enforcement action against any depository institution it determines is engaging in unsafe or unsound actions or which is in an unsound condition, and the FDIC may terminate that institution’s deposit insurance.

New Capital Requirements. On June 7, 2012, the Federal Reserve issued a series of proposed rules that would revise and strengthen its risk-based and leverage capital requirements and its method for calculating risk-weighted assets. The rules were proposed to implement the Basel III regulatory capital reforms from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. On July 2, 2013, the Federal Reserve approved certain revisions to the proposals and finalized new capital requirements for banking organizations.

Effective January 1, 2015, the final rules required Financial and the Bank to comply with the following new minimum capital ratios: (i) a new common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 4.5% of risk-weighted assets; (ii) a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.0% of risk-weighted assets (increased from the previous requirement of 4.0%); (iii) a total capital ratio of 8.0% of risk-weighted assets (unchanged from the previous requirement); and (iv) a leverage ratio of 4.0% of total assets. These are the initial capital requirements, which will be phased in over a five-year period. When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, the rules will require Financial and the Bank to maintain (i) a minimum ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% “capital conservation buffer” (which is added to the 4.5% common

10

Table of Contents

equity Tier 1 ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7.0% upon full implementation), (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 6.0% Tier 1 capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5% upon full implementation), (iii) a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 8.0% total capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5% upon full implementation), and (iv) a minimum leverage ratio of 4.0%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average assets.

The capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning January 1, 2016, at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing each year until fully implemented at 2.5% on January 1, 2019. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases, and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

With respect to the Bank, the rules also revised the “prompt corrective action” regulations pursuant to Section 38 of the FDIA by (i) introducing a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio requirement at each level (other than critically undercapitalized), with the required ratio being 6.5% for well-capitalized status; (ii) increasing the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement for each category, with the minimum ratio for well-capitalized status being 8.0% (as compared to the previous 6.0%); and (iii) eliminating the current provision that provides that a bank with a composite supervisory rating of 1 may have a 3.0% Tier 1 leverage ratio and still be well-capitalized.

The new capital requirements also include changes in the risk weights of assets to better reflect credit risk and other risk exposures. These include a 150% risk weight (up from 100%) for certain high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans and nonresidential mortgage loans that are 90 days past due or otherwise on nonaccrual status, a 20% (up from 0%) credit conversion factor for the unused portion of a commitment with an original maturity of one year or less that is not unconditionally cancellable, a 250% risk weight (up from 100%) for mortgage servicing rights and deferred tax assets that are not deducted from capital, and increased risk-weights (from 0% to up to 600%) for equity exposures.

If the new minimum capital ratios described above had been effective as of December 31, 2014, based on management’s interpretation and understanding of the new rules, Financial would have remained “well capitalized” as of such date.

Transactions with Affiliates. The Bank is subject to the provisions of Section 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve Regulation W of the Federal Reserve Bank which place limits on the amount of loans or extensions of credit to affiliates (as defined in the Federal Reserve Act), investments in or certain other transactions with affiliates and on the amount of advances to third parties collateralized by the securities or obligations of affiliates. The law and regulation limit the aggregate amount of transactions with any individual affiliate to ten percent (10%) of the capital and surplus of the Bank and also limit the aggregate amount of transactions with all affiliates to twenty percent (20%) of capital and surplus. Loans and certain other extensions of credit to affiliates are required to be secured by collateral in an amount and of a type described in the regulation, and the purchase of low quality assets from affiliates is generally prohibited. The law and Regulation W also, among other things, prohibit an institution from engaging in certain transactions with certain affiliates (as defined in the Federal Reserve Act) unless the transactions are on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to such institution and/or its subsidiaries, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with non-affiliated entities. In the absence of comparable transactions, such transactions may only occur under terms and circumstances, including credit standards that in good faith would be offered to or would apply to non-affiliated companies.

11

Table of Contents

Loans to Insiders. The Bank is subject to the restrictions contained in Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation O thereunder on loans to executive officers, directors and principal stockholders. Under Section 22(h), loans to a director, an executive officer or a greater-than-10% stockholder of a bank as well as certain affiliated interests of any of the foregoing may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such person and affiliated interests, the loans-to-one-borrower limit applicable to national banks (generally 15% of the institution’s unimpaired capital and surplus), and all loans to all such persons in the aggregate may not exceed the institution’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. Regulation O also prohibits the making of loans in an amount greater than $25,000 or 5% of capital and surplus but in any event not over $500,000, to directors, executive officers and greater-than-10% stockholders of a bank, and their respective affiliates, unless such loans are approved in advance by a majority of the board of directors of the bank with any “interested” director not participating in the voting. Furthermore, Regulation O requires that loans to directors, executive officers and principal stockholders of a bank be made on terms substantially the same as those that are offered in comparable transactions to unrelated third parties unless the loans are made pursuant to a benefit or compensation program that is widely available to all employees of the bank and does not give preference to insiders over other employees. Regulation O also prohibits a depository institution from paying overdrafts over $1,000 of any of its executive officers or directors unless they are paid pursuant to written pre-authorized extension of credit or transfer of funds plans.

All of the Bank’s loans to its and the Company’s executive officers, directors and greater-than-10% stockholders, and affiliated interests of such persons, comply with the requirements of Regulation W and Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation O.

Community Reinvestment Act. The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires that, in connection with examinations of financial institutions within their respective jurisdictions, the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency or the Office of Thrift Supervision shall evaluate the record of the financial institutions in meeting the credit needs of their local communities, including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operation of those institutions. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community, consistent with the CRA. An institution’s CRA activities are considered in, among other things, evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or facility, as well as determining whether the institution will be permitted to exercise certain of the powers allowed by the GLB Act. The CRA also requires all institutions to make public disclosure of their CRA ratings. The Bank currently has a CRA rating of “satisfactory.”

Safety and Soundness. The federal banking agencies have broad powers under current federal law to take prompt corrective action to resolve problems of insured depository institutions. The extent of these powers depends upon whether the institutions in question are “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” or “critically undercapitalized,” all such terms are defined under uniform regulations defining such capital levels issued by each of the federal banking agencies. An insured depository institution which is less than adequately capitalized must adopt an acceptable capital restoration plan, is subject to increased regulatory oversight and is increasingly restricted in the scope of its permissible activities. As of December 31, 2015, the Bank was considered “well capitalized.”

Regulatory Enforcement Authority. Applicable banking laws include substantial enforcement powers available to federal banking regulators. This enforcement authority includes, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease-and-desist or removal orders and to initiate injunctive actions against banking organizations and institution-affiliated parties. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. Other actions or inactions, including the filing of misleading or untimely reports with regulatory authorities, may provide the basis for enforcement action.

12

Table of Contents

Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). Under the Bank Secrecy Act, a financial institution is required to have systems in place to detect certain transactions, based on the size and nature of the transaction. Financial institutions are generally required to report cash transactions involving more than $10,000 to the Treasury. In addition, financial institutions are required to file suspicious activity reports for transactions that involve more than $5,000 and which the financial institution knows, suspects or has reason to suspect, involves illegal funds, is designed to evade the requirements of the BSA or has no lawful purpose.

USA Patriot Act. The USA Patriot Act became effective on October 26, 2001 and provides for the facilitation of information sharing among governmental entities and financial institutions for the purpose of combating terrorism and money laundering. Among other provisions, the USA Patriot Act permits financial institutions, upon providing notice to the United States Treasury, to share information with one another in order to better identify and report to the federal government concerning activities that may involve money laundering or terrorist activities. The USA Patriot Act is considered a significant banking law in terms of information disclosure regarding certain customer transactions. Although it does create a reporting obligation, the USA Patriot Act has not to materially affected the Bank’s products, services or other business activities.

Reporting Terrorist Activities. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has sent, and will send, our banking regulatory agencies lists of the names of persons suspected of involvement in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, DC. The Bank has been asked, and may be asked again, to search its records for any relationships or transactions with persons on those lists. If the Bank finds any relationships or transactions, it must file a suspicious activity report and contact the FBI. The Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”), which is a division of the Department of the Treasury is responsible for helping to ensure that United States entities do not engage in transactions with “enemies” of the United States, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC has sent, and will send, our banking regulatory agencies lists of names of persons and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts. If the Bank finds a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, it must freeze such account, file a suspicious activity report and notify the FBI. The Bank has appointed an OFAC compliance officer to oversee the inspection of its accounts and the filing of any notifications. The Bank actively checks high-risk OFAC areas such as new accounts, wire transfers and customer files. The Bank performs these checks utilizing software, which is updated each time a modification is made to the lists provided by OFAC and other agencies of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons.

Mortgage Banking Regulation. The Bank’s Mortgage division is subject to the rules and regulations by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), the Federal Housing Administration (the “FHA”), the Department of Veteran Affairs and state regulatory authorities with respect to originating, processing, servicing and selling mortgage loans. Those rules and regulations, among other things, establish standards for loan origination, prohibit discrimination, provide for inspections and appraisals of property, require credit reports on prospective borrowers and, in some cases, restrict certain loan features, and fix maximum interest rates and fees. In addition to other federal laws, mortgage origination activities are subject to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Truth-in-Lending Act, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, and the Home Ownership Equity Protection Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder. These laws prohibit discrimination, require the disclosure of certain basic information to mortgagors concerning credit and settlement costs, limit payment for settlement services to the reasonable value of the services rendered and require the maintenance and disclosure of information regarding the disposition of mortgage applications based on race, gender, geographical distribution and income level.

Check Clearing for the 21^st Century Act (Check 21). Check 21 gives “substitute checks,” such as a digital image of a check and copies made from that image, the same legal standing as the original paper check. The major provisions of Check 21 include: allowing check truncation without making it mandatory; demanding that every financial institution communicate to account holders in writing a description of its

13

Table of Contents

substitute check processing program and their rights under the law; legalizing substitutions for and replacements of paper checks without agreement from consumers; retaining in place the previously-mandated electronic collection and return of checks between financial institutions only when individual agreements are in place; requiring that when account holders request verification, financial institutions produce the original check (or a copy that accurately represents the original) and demonstrate that the account debit was accurate and valid; and requiring recrediting of funds to an individual’s account on the next business day after a consumer proves that the financial institution has erred. This legislation has not significantly increased our capital spending.

Effect of Governmental Monetary Policies

Our earnings are affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States government and its agencies. The Federal Reserve Bank’s monetary policies have had, and are likely to continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through its power to implement national monetary policy in order, among other things, to curb inflation or combat a recession. The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board have major effects upon the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its open market operations in United States government securities and through its regulation of the discount rate on borrowings of member banks and the reserve requirements against member bank deposits. It is not possible to predict the nature or impact of future changes in monetary and fiscal policies.

Future Regulatory Uncertainty

Legislative and regulatory proposals regarding changes in banking, and the regulation of banks, federal savings institutions, and other financial institutions and bank and bank holding company powers are being considered by the executive branch of the federal government, Congress and various state governments. Certain of these proposals, if adopted, could significantly change the regulation or operations of banks and the financial services industry. New regulations and statutes are regularly proposed that contain wide-ranging proposals for altering the structures, regulations, and competitive relationships of the nation’s financial institutions.

Because federal regulation of financial institutions changes regularly and is the subject of constant legislative debate, we cannot forecast how federal regulation of financial institutions may change in the future and impact our operations. The current economic environment has required a greater degree of coordination and overlap of the duties and responsibilities of the U.S. Treasury, federal and state banking regulators and the FDIC. We fully expect that the financial institution industry will remain heavily regulated in the near future and that additional laws or regulations may be adopted further regulating specific banking practices. We cannot predict whether or in what form any proposed regulation or statute will be adopted or the extent to which our business may be affected by any new regulation or statute.

RISK FACTORS

In addition to the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following risk factors should be carefully considered in connection with evaluating our business and any forward-looking statements contained herein. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be harmed by any of the risk factors described below, or other risks that have not been identified or which we believe are immaterial or unlikely. If one or more of these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.

14

Table of Contents

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Our profitability depends significantly on local economic conditions.

Our success depends primarily on the general economic conditions of the primary markets in Virginia in which we operate and where our loans are concentrated. Unlike nationwide banks that are more geographically diversified, the Company provides banking and financial services to customers primarily in the Lynchburg metropolitan statistical area (“MSA”). Lynchburg’s MSA, which is often referred to as Region 2000, consists of approximately 2,122 square miles, and includes the City of Lynchburg and the Counties of Bedford, Campbell, Amherst and Appomattox. To a lesser extent, our lending market includes the Roanoke, Charlottesville and Harrisonburg MSAs. While our Roanoke office now houses, as of the first quarter of 2016, a full time commercial lending officer, our Roanoke presence otherwise has been limited to mortgage origination, and while we operate a Charlottesville loan production office, our Charlottesville banking operations are limited services branches, offering less than full-service banking. Our existing business presence in localities outside of Region 2000 has a short operating history or is presently limited in scope, or both. As of December 2015, the Lynchburg MSA had an unemployment rate of 4.3%, as compared to a statewide average unemployment rate of 4.2%.

The local economic conditions in these areas have a significant impact on the Company’s commercial and industrial, real estate and construction loans, the ability of its borrowers to repay their loans and the value of the collateral securing these loans. In addition, if the population or income growth in the Company’s market areas is slower than projected, income levels, deposits and housing starts could be adversely affected and could result in a reduction of the Company’s expansion, growth and profitability. If the Company’s market areas experience a downturn or a recession for a prolonged period of time, the Company could experience significant increases in nonperforming loans, which could lead to operating losses, impaired liquidity and eroding capital. A significant decline in general economic conditions, caused by inflation, recession, acts of terrorism, outbreaks of hostilities or other international or domestic calamities, unemployment, monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government or other factors could impact these local economic conditions and could negatively affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our business may be adversely affected by conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions generally.

The Company’s financial performance generally, and in particular the ability of borrowers to pay interest on and repay principal of outstanding loans and the value of collateral securing those loans, is highly dependent upon the business environment in the markets where the Company operates and in the United States as a whole. A favorable business environment is generally characterized by, among other factors, economic growth, efficient capital markets, low inflation, high business and investor confidence and strong business earnings. Unfavorable or uncertain economic and market conditions can be caused by declines in economic growth, business activity or investor or business confidence; limitations on the availability or increases in the cost of credit and capital; increases in inflation or interest rates; natural disasters; or a combination of these or other factors.

The United States has not returned to the level of growth typical prior to the severe economic recession in 2008 and 2009. Loan portfolio quality is impacted by weak general economic conditions, which hamper prospects for loan repayment and pressure the value of real estate collateral that supports many commercial and residential loans. These events have also reduced demand for the construction of new housing and increased delinquencies in construction, residential and commercial mortgage loans in many markets in the United States.

Our lending business is tied in part to the real estate market, which could be weakened if economic conditions worsen. We remain vulnerable to adverse changes affecting the real estate market and business

15

Table of Contents

conditions. Such conditions or a significant weakening in general economic conditions such as inflation, recession, unemployment or other factors beyond our control, or both, could negatively affect the credit quality of the Company’s loans, results of operations and our financial results. Finally, negative developments in the securities markets could adversely affect the value of our securities.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate, and events that negatively impact the real estate market could hurt our business.

At December 31, 2015, a substantial majority of our loans had real estate as a primary or secondary component of collateral. The real estate collateral in each case provides an alternate source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. Because most of our loans are concentrated in the Region 2000 area in and surrounding the City of Lynchburg, a decline in local economic conditions may have a greater effect on our earnings and capital than on the earnings and capital of larger financial institutions whose real estate loan portfolios are more geographically diverse. A weakening of the real estate market in our primary market areas could result in an increase in the number of borrowers who default on their loans and a reduction in the value of the collateral securing their loans, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our profitability and asset quality. If we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt during a period of reduced real estate values, our earnings and capital could be adversely affected. Additionally, acts of nature, including hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, fires and floods, which may cause uninsured damage and other loss of value to real estate that secures these loans, may also negatively impact our financial condition.

Our loan portfolio contains a number of real estate loans with relatively large balances.

At December 31, 2015, a significant portion of our total loan portfolio contained real estate loans with balances in excess of $1,000,000. The deterioration of one or a few of these loans could cause a significant increase in nonperforming loans, which could result in a net loss of earnings, an increase in the provision for loan losses and an increase in loan charge-offs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Commercial real estate loans increase our exposure to credit risk.

At December 31, 2015, a majority of our loan portfolio was secured by commercial real estate. Loans secured by commercial real estate are generally viewed as having more risk of default than loans secured by residential real estate or consumer loans because repayment of the loans often depends on the successful operation of the property, the income stream of the borrowers, the accuracy of the estimate of the property’s value at completion of construction and the estimated cost of construction. An adverse development with respect to one lending relationship can expose us to a significantly greater risk of loss as compared with a single-family residential mortgage loan because we typically have more than one loan with such borrowers. Additionally, these loans typically involve larger loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers compared with single-family residential mortgage loans. Therefore, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans could cause a significant decline in the related asset quality. These loans represent higher risk and could result in a sharp increase in loans charged-off and could require us to significantly increase our allowance for loan losses, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

A percentage of the loans in our portfolio currently include exceptions to our loan policies and supervisory guidelines.

All of the loans that we make are subject to written loan policies adopted by our board of directors and to supervisory guidelines imposed by our regulators. Our loan policies are designed to reduce the risks associated with the loans that we make by requiring our loan officers to take certain steps that vary

16

Table of Contents

depending on the type and amount of the loan, prior to closing a loan. These steps include, among other things, making sure the proper liens are documented and perfected on property securing a loan, and requiring proof of adequate insurance coverage on property securing loans. Loans that do not fully comply with our loan policies are known as “exceptions.” We categorize exceptions as policy exceptions, financial statement exceptions and document exceptions. As a result of these exceptions, such loans may have a higher risk of loan loss than the other loans in our portfolio that fully comply with our loan policies. In addition, we may be subject to regulatory action by federal or state banking authorities if they believe the number of exceptions in our loan portfolio represents an unsafe banking practice.

As a community bank, we have different lending risks than larger banks. We provide services to individuals and small to medium-sized businesses in our local markets who may have fewer financial resources to weather a downturn in the economy.

Our ability to diversify our economic risks is limited by our own local markets and economies. We lend primarily to small to medium-sized businesses, professionals and individuals, which may expose us to greater lending risks than those of banks lending to larger, better-capitalized businesses with longer operating histories. For instance, small to medium-sized businesses frequently have smaller market share than their competition, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience significant volatility in operating results. Any one or more of these factors may impair the borrower’s ability to repay a loan. In addition, the success of a small to medium-sized business often depends on the management talents and efforts of one or two persons or a small group of persons, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on the business and its ability to repay a loan. Economic downturns and other events that negatively impact the Company’s market areas could cause the Company to incur substantial credit losses that could negatively affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about clients and counterparties, and our financial condition could be adversely affected if we rely on misleading information.

In deciding whether to extend credit or to enter into other transactions with clients and counterparties, we may rely on information furnished to us by or on behalf of clients and counterparties, including financial statements and other financial information, which we do not independently verify as a matter of course. We also may rely on representations of clients and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. For example, in deciding whether to extend credit to customers, we may assume that a customer’s audited financial statements conform with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) and present fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the customer. Our financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted to the extent we rely on financial statements that do not comply with GAAP or are materially misleading.

If we suffer loan losses from a decline in credit quality, our earnings will decrease.

We could sustain losses if borrowers, guarantors or related parties fail to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans. We have adopted underwriting and credit monitoring procedures and policies, including the establishment and review of the allowance for loan losses that we believe are appropriate to minimize this risk by assessing the likelihood of nonperformance, tracking loan performance and diversifying our credit portfolio. These policies and procedures, however, may not prevent unexpected losses that could materially adversely affect our results of operations.

These policies and procedures necessarily rely on our making various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. In

17

Table of Contents

determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses, we review our loans and our loss and delinquency experience, and we evaluate economic conditions. If our assumptions are incorrect, our allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover probable incurred losses in our loan portfolio, resulting in additions to our allowance. Any future additions to our allowance could materially decrease our net income.

In addition, the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and the Virginia Bureau of Financial Institutions (the “BFI”) periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or recognize further loan charge-offs. Any increase in our allowance for loan losses or loan charge-offs as required by regulatory authorities might have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The markets for our deposit and lending products and services are highly competitive, and we face substantial competition.

The banking and financial services industry is highly competitive. We compete as a financial intermediary with other commercial banks, savings banks, credit unions, finance companies, mutual funds, insurance companies and brokerage and investment banking firms soliciting business from residents of and businesses located in the Virginia localities where the Bank has a presence, surrounding areas and elsewhere. Many of these competing institutions have nationwide or regional operations and have greater resources than we have. We also face competition from local community institutions, such as ones that serve local markets only. Many of our competitors enjoy competitive advantages, including greater name recognition, financial resources, a wider geographic presence or more accessible branch office locations, the ability to offer additional services, greater marketing resources, more favorable pricing alternatives for loans and deposits and lower origination and operating costs. We are also subject to lower lending limits than our larger competitors. Our profitability depends upon our continued ability to successfully compete in our market areas. Increased deposit competition could increase our cost of funds and could adversely affect our ability to generate the funds necessary for our lending operations. If we must raise interest rates paid on deposits or lower interest rates charged on our loans, our net interest margin and profitability could be adversely affected. Competition could result in a decrease in loans we originate and could negatively affect our ability to grow and the results of operations.

Technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. Additionally, due to their size, many competitors may be able to achieve economies of scale and, as a result, may offer a broader range of products and services as well as better pricing for those products and services.

We have increased and plan to continue to increase our levels of commercial and industrial loans. We may not be successful in continuing to penetrate this market segment, which has helped to drive some of our recent earnings.

At December 31, 2015, a significant percentage of our loans were commercial and industrial loans. Our portfolio of commercial and industrial loans has increased during the past year.

While we intend to originate these types of loans in a manner that is consistent with safety and soundness, these non-residential loans generally expose us to greater risk of loss than one- to four-family residential mortgage loans, as repayment of such commercial and industrial loans generally depends, in large part, on the borrower’s business to cover operating expenses and debt service. In addition, these types of loans typically involve larger loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers, as compared to one- to four-family residential mortgage loans. Changes in economic conditions that are beyond our or the borrower’s control could adversely affect the value of the security for the loan, including the future cash flow of the affected business. As we increase our portfolio of these loans, we may experience higher levels of non-performing assets or loan losses, or both.

18

Table of Contents

Opening new branches may not result in increased assets or revenues for us, or may negatively impact our earnings.

We opened a new branch in Harrisonburg, Virginia on October 1, 2015 and plan to open an additional branch in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2016. The initial costs to start up, and the additional costs to operate, these new branches may negatively impact our earnings and efficiency ratio in the short term. There is a risk that we will be unable to manage our growth, as the process of opening new branches may divert our time and resources. There is a risk that, if we do open the Charlottesville branch or other new branches, they may not be profitable, which would negatively impact our results of operations. In addition, any new branches will be subject to regulatory approval, and there can be no assurance that we will succeed in securing such approval.

Our plans for future expansion depend, in some instances, on factors beyond our control, and an unsuccessful attempt to achieve growth could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We expect to continue to engage in new branch expansion in the future. We may also seek to acquire other financial institutions, or parts of those institutions, though we have no present plans in that regard. Expansion involves a number of risks, including, without limitation:

We may continue to acquire and hold other real estate owned (OREO) properties, which could lead to increased operating expenses and vulnerability to additional declines in the market value of real estate in our areas of operations.

From time-to-time, we foreclose upon and take title to the real estate serving as collateral for our loans as part of our business. If our OREO balance increases, management expects that our earnings will be negatively affected by various expenses associated with OREO, including personnel costs, insurance and taxes, completion and repair costs, valuation adjustments and other expenses associated with property ownership. Also, at the time that we foreclose upon a loan and take possession of a property, we estimate the value of that property using third-party appraisals and opinions and internal judgments. OREO property is valued on our books at the estimated market value of the property, less the estimated costs to sell (or “fair value”). Upon foreclosure, a charge-off to the allowance for loan losses is recorded for any excess between the value of the asset on our books over its fair value. Thereafter, we periodically reassess our judgment of fair value based on updated appraisals or other factors, including, at times, at the request of our regulators. Any further declines in our estimate of fair value for OREO will result in additional valuation adjustments, with a corresponding expense in our statements of income that is recorded under the line item for “Other real estate expenses.” As a result, our results of operations are vulnerable to additional declines in the

19

Table of Contents

market for residential and commercial real estate in the areas in which we operate. The expenses associated with OREO and any further property write downs could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any increase in nonaccrual loans may lead to further increases in our OREO balance in the future.

Additional growth and regulatory requirements may require us to raise additional capital in the future, and capital may not be available when it is needed or may have unfavorable terms, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We are required by federal and state regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations. While the boards of the Company and the Bank intend to take steps to ensure that the capital plan aligns with the Bank’s strategic plan, that all material risks to the Bank are identified and measured and that capital limits are appropriate for the institution’s risk profile, failure to successfully implement such steps could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We may at some point need to raise additional capital to support our continued growth. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and on our financial performance. Accordingly, we can make no assurances of our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, on terms acceptable to us. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, our ability to further expand our operations could be materially impaired.

Our corporate culture has contributed to our success, and if we cannot maintain this culture as we grow, we could lose the teamwork and increased productivity fostered by our culture, which could harm our business.

We believe that a critical contributor to our success has been our corporate culture, which we believe fosters teamwork and increased productivity. As our organization grows and we are required to implement more complex organizational management structures, we may find it increasingly difficult to maintain the beneficial aspects of our corporate culture. This could negatively impact our future success.

If we fail to retain our key employees, our growth and profitability could be adversely affected.

Our success is, and is expected to remain, highly dependent on our executive management team. Four of our key executives are Robert R. Chapman III (President of the Company and President and CEO of the Bank), J. Todd Scruggs (Secretary-Treasurer of the Company and Executive Vice President and CFO of the Bank), Harry P. “Chip” Umberger (Executive Vice President and Senior Credit Officer of the Bank), and Michael A. Syrek (Executive Vice President and Senior Loan Officer of the Bank). We are especially dependent on these executives as well as other key personnel because, as a community bank, we depend on our management team’s ties to the community to generate business for us, and our executives have key expertise needed to implement our business strategy. Our executive management and other key personnel have not signed non-competition covenants.

Competition for personnel is intense, and we may not be successful in attracting or retaining qualified personnel. Our failure to compete for these personnel, or the loss of the services of several of such key personnel, could adversely affect our growth strategy and seriously harm our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

As a community bank, our ability to maintain our reputation is critical to the success of our business, and our failure to do so may materially adversely affect our performance.

As a community bank, our reputation is one of the most valuable components of our business. As such, we strive to conduct our business in a manner that enhances our reputation. This is done, in part, by recruiting, hiring and retaining employees who share our core values of being an integral part of the communities we serve, delivering superior service to our customers and caring about our customers and

20

Table of Contents

associates. Negative publicity can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, acquisitions and actions taken or threatened by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. If our reputation is negatively affected by the actions of our employees or otherwise, there may be an adverse effect on our ability to keep and attract customers, and we might be exposed to litigation and regulatory action. Any of such events could harm our business, and, therefore, our operating results may be materially adversely affected. As a financial services company with a high profile in our market area, we are inherently exposed to this risk. While we take steps to minimize reputation risk in dealing with customers and other constituencies, we will continue to face additional challenges maintaining our reputation with respect to customers of the Bank in our current primary market area in Region 2000 and in establishing our reputation in new market areas.

Our decisions regarding how we manage our credit exposure may materially and adversely affect our business.

We manage our credit exposure through careful monitoring of lending relationships and loan concentrations in particular industries, and through loan approval and review procedures.

We have established an evaluation process designed to determine the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses. While this evaluation process uses historical and other objective information, the classification of loans and the establishment of loan losses is an estimate based on experience, judgment and expectations regarding our borrowers and the economies in which we and our borrowers operate, as well as the judgment of our regulators. While our board and senior management are continuing to improve the Bank’s risk management framework and align the Bank’s risk philosophy with its capital and strategic plans, failure to continue to improve such risk management framework could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We can make no assurances that our loan loss reserves will be sufficient to absorb future loan losses or prevent a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our profitability is vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations and changes in monetary policies.

Our profitability depends substantially upon our net interest income. Net interest income is the difference between the interest earned on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and the interest expense paid on interest-bearing liabilities, such as NOW accounts, savings accounts, time deposits and other borrowings. Market interest rates for loans, investments and deposits are highly sensitive to many factors beyond our control. Interest rate spreads have seen a sustained period of narrowness due to many factors, such as market conditions, policies of various government and regulatory authorities and competitive pricing pressures, and we cannot predict whether these rate spreads will narrow further. This narrowing of interest rate spreads could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we cannot predict whether interest rates will continue to remain at present levels. Changes in interest rates may cause significant changes, up or down, in our net interest income. Depending on our portfolio of loans and investments, our results of operations may be adversely affected by changes in interest rates.

Our financial condition and results of operations are affected by credit policies of monetary authorities, particularly the Federal Reserve Board. Actions by monetary and fiscal authorities, including the Federal Reserve Board, could have an adverse effect on our deposit levels, loan demand or business and earnings.

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

21

Table of Contents

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, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability; any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We face the risk of cyber-attack to our computer systems.

Our computer systems, software and networks have been and will continue to be vulnerable to unauthorized access, loss or destruction of data (including confidential client information), account takeovers, unavailability of service, computer viruses or other malicious code, cyber-attacks and other events. These threats may derive from human error, fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, or may result from accidental technological failure. If one or more of these events occurs, it could result in the disclosure of confidential client information, damage to our reputation with our clients and the market, additional costs to us (such as repairing systems or adding new personnel or protection technologies), costs of breach response, regulatory penalties and financial losses, to both us and our clients and customers. Such events could also cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations (such as the lack of availability of our online banking system), as well as the operations of our clients, customers or other third parties. Although we maintain safeguards to protect against these risks, there can be no assurance that we will not suffer losses in the future that may be material in amount or nature.

Changes in consumers’ use of banks and changes in consumers’ spending and saving habits could adversely affect our financial results.

Technology and other changes now allow many consumers to complete financial transactions without using banks. For example, consumers can pay bills and transfer funds directly without going through a bank. This disintermediation could result in the loss of fee income, as well as the loss of customer deposits and income generated from those deposits. In addition, changes in consumer spending and saving habits could adversely affect our operations, and we may be unable to timely develop competitive new products and services in response to these changes that are accepted by new and existing customers.

Failure to implement new technologies in our operations may adversely affect our growth or profits.

The market for financial services, including banking services and consumer finance services, is increasingly affected by advances in technology, including developments in telecommunications, data processing, computers, automation, Internet-based banking and telebanking. Our ability to compete successfully in our markets may depend on the extent to which we are able to exploit such technological changes. However, we can provide no assurance that we will be able to properly or timely anticipate or implement such technologies or properly train our staff to use such technologies. Any failure to adapt to new technologies could adversely affect our business, financial condition or operating results.

We are subject to operational risks.

The Company may also be subject to disruptions of its systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond its control (including, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages), which may give rise to losses in service to customers and to financial loss or liability. The Company is further exposed to the risk that its external vendors may be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors by their respective employees as is the Company) and to the risk that the Company’s (or its vendors’) business continuity and data security systems prove to be inadequate.

22

Table of Contents

We are subject to liquidity risk.

Liquidity risk is the potential that we will be unable to meet our obligations as they become due, capitalize on growth opportunities as they arise or pay regular cash dividends because of an inability to liquidate assets or obtain adequate funding in a timely basis, at a reasonable cost and within acceptable risk tolerances. At the direction of the Federal Reserve, the boards and senior management of the Company and the Bank are in the process of enhancing liquidity risk management practices, including developing a liquidity policy that establishes limits on the use of aggregate wholesale funding as well as individual specific wholesale funding sources and unencumbered liquid assets, and improving management information services (MIS) to ensure that accurate reporting is aligned with approved policies, commensurate with the Bank’s liquidity profile and growth strategies. These practices are being refined to manage, but will not be effective to eliminate, liquidity risk. A failure to adequately manage our liquidity risk could adversely affect our business, financial condition or operating results, especially in the event of another financial crisis. Further, the Federal Reserve could impose additional requirements on the Company if the agency determines that our enhanced liquidity risk management practices do not adequately manage our liquidity risk.

We may lose lower-cost funding sources.

Checking, savings and money market deposit account balances and other forms of customer deposits can decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If customers move money out of bank deposits and into other investments, the Bank could lose a relatively low-cost source of funds, thereby increasing its funding costs and reducing the Bank’s net interest income and net income.

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

Effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent or detect fraud and to operate successfully as a public company.

The Company faces the risk that the design of its controls and procedures, including those to mitigate the risk of fraud by employees or outsiders, may prove to be inadequate or are circumvented, thereby causing delays in detection of errors or inaccuracies in data and information. We regularly review and update the Company’s internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of the Company’s controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.

Any failure to maintain effective controls or timely effect any necessary improvement of our internal and disclosure controls could hinder our ability to accurately report our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations, which could affect our ability to remain listed with The NASDAQ Capital Market. Ineffective internal and disclosure controls could also harm our reputation, negatively impact our operating results or cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which likely would have a negative effect on the trading price of our securities.

23

Table of Contents

Changes in the financial markets could impair the value of our investment portfolio.

Our investment securities portfolio is a significant component of our total earning assets. Turmoil in the financial markets could impair the market value of our investment portfolio, which could adversely affect our net income and possibly our capital.

We hold as investments certain securities that have unrealized losses (representing a significant majority of our securities portfolio). While we currently maintain substantial liquidity which supports our intent and ability to hold these investments until they mature, or until there is a market price recovery, if we were to cease to have the ability and intent to hold these investments until maturity or if the market prices do not recover, and we were to sell these securities at a loss, it could adversely affect our net income and possibly our capital.

Our deposit insurance premiums could be substantially higher in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our future earnings.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured depository institutions, such as the Bank, up to applicable limits. The amount of a particular institution’s deposit insurance assessment is based on that institution’s risk classification under an FDIC risk-based assessment system. An institution’s risk classification is assigned based on its capital levels and the level of supervisory concern the institution poses to its regulators. Recent market developments and bank failures significantly depleted the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund and reduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits. As a result of recent economic conditions and the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act, banks are now assessed deposit insurance premiums based on the bank’s average consolidated total assets, and the FDIC has modified certain risk-based adjustments, which increase or decrease a bank’s overall assessment rate. This has resulted in increases to the deposit insurance assessment rates, and thus raised deposit premiums for many insured depository institutions. If these increases are insufficient for the Deposit Insurance Fund to meet its funding requirements, further special assessments or increases in deposit insurance premiums may be required. We are generally unable to control the amount of premiums that we are required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failures, we may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the recently increased levels. Any future additional assessments, increases or required prepayments in FDIC insurance premiums could reduce our profitability, may limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities or otherwise negatively impact our operations.

We may be adversely affected by the soundness of other financial institutions.

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 us 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 held by the Bank cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the credit or derivative exposure due to the Bank. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

REGULATORY AND LEGAL RISKS

We are subject to extensive regulation that could limit or restrict our activities and impose financial requirements or limitations on the conduct of our business, which limitations or restrictions could adversely affect our profitability.

As a bank holding company, we are primarily regulated by the Federal Reserve. The Bank is primarily regulated by the BFI. These regulatory authorities have extensive discretion in connection with

24

Table of Contents

their supervisory and enforcement activities, including the imposition of restrictions on the operation of a financial institution, the classification of assets by a financial institution and the adequacy of a financial institution’s allowance for loan losses. The Company periodically reviews its policies, procedures and limits, and undertakes reporting, to ensure all guidance is appropriate for the Bank’s current and planned operations and aligns with regulatory expectations. In this regard, regulatory authorities may impose particular requirements on the Bank, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. Upon the direction of the Federal Reserve, the boards and management of the Company and the Bank are taking a more proactive role in strengthening and implementing the Bank’s risk management framework; improving the existing capital plan to ensure that it aligns with the Bank’s strategic plan; and enhancing liquidity risk management practices commensurate with the Bank’s liquidity profile and growth strategies. Any change in such regulation and regulatory oversight, whether in the form of regulatory policy, regulations or legislation, could have a material impact on us and our operations. Further, our compliance with Federal Reserve and the BFI regulations is costly. Because our business is highly regulated, the applicable laws, rules and regulations are subject to regular modification and change. Laws, rules and regulations may be adopted in the future that could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition or prospects. For instance, such changes may limit our growth and restrict certain of our activities, including payment of dividends, mergers and acquisitions, investments, loans and interest rates charged, interest rates paid on deposits and locations of offices. We are also subject to capital requirements by our regulators.

The laws and regulations, including the Dodd-Frank Reform Act, applicable to the banking industry could change at any time, and these changes may adversely affect our business and profitability.

We are subject to extensive federal and state regulation. Because government regulation greatly affects the business and financial results of all commercial banks and bank holding companies, our cost of compliance could adversely affect our ability to operate profitably. The increased scope, complexity, and cost of corporate governance, reporting, and disclosure practices are proportionately higher for a company of our size and will affect our profitability more than that of some of our larger competitors. We expect to experience increasing compliance costs related to this supervision and regulation.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”) recently issued “ability-to-repay” and “qualified mortgage” rules that may have a negative impact on our loan origination process and foreclosure proceedings, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

On January 10, 2013, the CFPB issued a final rule to implement the “qualified mortgage” provisions of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act requiring mortgage lenders to consider consumers’ ability to repay home loans before extending them credit. The CFPB’s “qualified mortgage” rule, which became effective on January 10, 2014, describes certain minimum requirements for lenders making ability-to-repay determinations, but does not dictate that they follow particular underwriting models. Lenders will be presumed to have complied with the ability-to-repay rule if they issue “qualified mortgages,” which are generally defined as mortgage loans prohibiting or limiting certain risky features. Loans that do not meet the ability-to-repay standard can be challenged in court by borrowers who default, and the absence of ability-to-repay status can be used against a lender in foreclosure proceedings. Any loans that we make outside of the “qualified mortgage” criteria could expose us to an increased risk of liability and reduce or delay our ability to foreclose upon the underlying property. Any decreases in loan origination volume or increases in compliance and foreclosure costs caused by the rule could negatively affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

25

Table of Contents

Compliance with the Dodd-Frank Reform Act will increase our regulatory compliance burdens, and may increase our operating costs and may adversely impact our earnings or capital ratios, or both.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Reform Act, which represented a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial services industry. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Reform Act created the CFPB, tightened capital standards, imposed clearing and margining requirements on many derivatives activities and generally increased oversight and regulation of financial institutions and financial activities.

In addition to the self-implementing provisions of the statute, the Dodd-Frank Reform Act calls for over 200 administrative rulemakings by numerous federal agencies to implement various parts of the legislation. While many rules have been finalized or issued in proposed form, additional rules have yet to be proposed. It is not possible at this time to predict when all such additional rules will be issued or finalized, and what the content of such rules will be. We will have to apply resources to ensure that we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act and any implementing rules, which may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings or capital, or both.

The Dodd-Frank Reform Act and any implementing rules that are ultimately issued could have adverse implications on the financial industry, the competitive environment and our ability to conduct business.

Negative developments in the financial services industry and in the credit markets may adversely impact our operations and results.

Financial institution regulatory agencies have been very aggressive in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, including the expected issuance of many formal enforcement actions. Negative developments in the financial services industry and the impact of new legislation in response to those developments could negatively impact our operations by restricting our business operations, including our ability to originate or sell loans, and adversely impact our financial performance.

The short-term and long-term impact of the changing regulatory capital requirements and new capital rules is uncertain.

On July 2, 2013, the Federal Reserve Board, and shortly thereafter, the other federal bank regulatory agencies issued a final rule that will revise their risk-based capital requirements and the method for calculating risk-weighted assets to make them consistent with agreements that were reached by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act. The final rule applies to all depository institutions, top-tier bank holding companies and top-tier savings and loan holding companies with total consolidated assets of $1 billion or more. Among other things, the rule establishes a new common equity Tier 1 minimum capital requirement (4.5% of risk-weighted assets), increases the minimum Tier 1 capital to risk-based assets requirement (from 4.0% to 6.0% of risk-weighted assets) and assigns a higher risk weight (150%) to exposures that are more than 90 days past due or are on nonaccrual status and to certain commercial real estate facilities that finance the acquisition, development or construction of real property. The final rule also requires unrealized gains and losses on certain “available-for-sale” securities holdings to be included for purposes of calculating regulatory capital requirements unless a one-time opt-in or opt-out is exercised. The Bank exercised this one-time opt-out. The rule limits a banking organization’s capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments if the banking organization does not hold a “capital conservation buffer” consisting of 2.5% of common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets in addition to the amount necessary to meet its minimum risk-based capital requirements. The final rule became effective for the Bank on January 1, 2015. The capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning January 1, 2016 and ending January 1, 2019, when the full capital conservation buffer requirement will be effective.

26

Table of Contents

Under the new capital standards, in order to be well-capitalized, the Bank is required to have a common equity to Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5% and a Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.0%. The application of more stringent capital requirements for the Bank could, among other things, result in lower returns on invested capital, require the raising of additional capital and result in regulatory actions if we were to be unable to comply with such requirements. Furthermore, the imposition of liquidity requirements in connection with the implementation of Basel III could result in our having to lengthen the term of our funding, restructure our business models or increase our holdings of liquid assets, or all or any combination of the foregoing. Implementation of changes to asset risk weightings for risk based capital calculations, items included or deducted in calculating regulatory capital or additional capital conservation buffers, or both, could result in management modifying its business strategy, and could limit our ability to make distributions, including paying out dividends or buying back shares. Specifically, beginning in 2016, the Bank’s ability to pay dividends will be limited if the Bank does not have the capital conservation buffer required by the new capital rules, which may limit our ability to pay dividends to stockholders.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR STOCK

Our ability to pay cash dividends is limited, and we may be unable to pay future dividends even if we desire to do so.

The Company is a legal entity, separate and distinct from the Bank. The Company currently does not have any significant sources of revenue other than cash dividends paid to it by its subsidiaries. Both the Company and the Bank are subject to laws and regulations that limit the payment of cash dividends, including requirements to maintain capital at or above regulatory minimums. As a bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System, the Bank must obtain prior written approval for any cash dividend if the total of all dividends declared in any calendar year would exceed the total of its net profits for that year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years.

Banking regulators have indicated that Virginia banking organizations should generally pay dividends only (1) from net undivided profits of the bank, after providing for all expenses, losses, interest and taxes accrued or due by the bank and (2) if the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. In addition, the FDIA prohibits insured depository institutions such as the Bank from making capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, if, after making such distribution, the institution would become undercapitalized as defined in the statute. Moreover, the Federal Reserve is authorized to determine under certain circumstances relating to the financial condition of a bank that the payment of dividends would be an unsafe and unsound practice and to prohibit payment thereof. The payment of dividends that deplete a bank’s capital base could be deemed to constitute such an unsafe and unsound banking practice. The Federal Reserve has indicated that banking organizations generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. The Bank may be prohibited under Virginia law from the payment of dividends, including in the event the BFI determines that a limitation of dividends is in the public interest and is necessary to ensure the Bank’s financial soundness.

The capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning January 1, 2016, at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing each year until fully implemented at 2.5% on January 1, 2019. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

If the Bank is not permitted to pay cash dividends to the Company, it is unlikely that the Company would be able to pay cash dividends on our common stock. Moreover, holders of our common stock are entitled to receive dividends only when and if declared by our board of directors. Although we currently pay cash dividends on our common stock, we are not required to do so and our board of directors could reduce or eliminate the amount of our common stock dividends in the future.

27

Table of Contents

A limited market exists for our common stock.

Our common stock commenced trading on The NASDAQ Capital Market on January 25, 2012, and trading volumes since that time have been relatively low as compared to other larger financial services companies. The limited trading market for our common stock may cause fluctuations in the market value of our common stock to be exaggerated, leading to price volatility in excess of that which would occur in a more active trading market. Accordingly, holders of our common stock may have difficulty selling our common stock at prices which holders find acceptable or which accurately reflect the value of the Company.

Future offerings of debt or other securities may adversely affect the market price of our stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources or, if our or the Bank’s capital ratios fall below the required minimums, we or the Bank could be forced to raise additional capital by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, including medium-term notes, trust preferred securities, senior or subordinated notes and preferred stock. Upon liquidation, holders of any debt securities and shares of preferred stock and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock, or both. Holders of our common stock are not entitled to preemptive rights or other protections against dilution.

Virginia law and the provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws could deter or prevent takeover attempts by a potential purchaser of our common stock that would be willing to pay holders a premium for their shares of our common stock.

Our articles of incorporation and bylaws contain provisions that may be deemed to have the effect of discouraging or delaying uninvited attempts by third parties to gain control of us. These provisions include the division of our board of directors into classes with staggered terms, the ability of our board of directors to set the price, terms and rights of, and to issue, one or more series of our preferred stock and the ability of our board of directors, in evaluating a proposed business combination or other fundamental change transaction, to consider the effect of the business combination on us and our stockholders, employees, customers and the communities which we serve. Similarly, the Virginia Stock Corporation Act contains provisions designed to protect Virginia corporations and employees from the adverse effects of hostile corporate takeovers. These provisions reduce the possibility that a third party could effect a change in control without the support of our incumbent directors. These provisions may also strengthen the position of current management by restricting the ability of stockholders to change the composition of the board of directors, to affect its policies generally and to benefit from actions which are opposed by the current board of directors.

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. An investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in these “Risk Factors” and the Company’s filings with the SEC 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 may lose some or all of your investment.

28

Table of Contents

Current Locations and Property

Depending on such factors as cost, availability, and location, we may either lease or purchase our operating facilities. The existing facilities that we have purchased typically have been former branches of other financial institutions. As of December 31, 2015, the Bank conducts its operations from 14 locations, of which we own 7 and lease 7. The following table describes the location and general character of our operating facilities:

29

Table of Contents

We believe that each of these operating facilities is maintained in good operating condition and is suitable for our operational needs.

In addition, the Bank may evaluate the feasibility of entering into sale/leaseback agreements for certain branches.

Interest in Additional Properties

As discussed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis—Expansion Plans” in addition to the facilities set forth above, the Bank owns the following properties which are being held for possible expansion:

30

Table of Contents

Management of the Bank continues to look for and evaluate additional locations for future branch growth and will consider opening an additional branch in the next 18 months if a suitable location is available on acceptable terms. The opening of all additional branches is contingent upon the receipt of regulatory approval.

We will use the internet, consistent with applicable regulatory guidelines, to augment our growth plans. We currently offer online account access, bill payment, and account management functions through our website. The Bank recently released an application that enables customers to transact banking business on smartphones and other mobile devices.

There are no material pending legal proceedings to which the Company is a party or to which the property of the Company is subject.

31

Table of Contents

PART II

Market Prices and Dividends

As of January 25, 2012, the Common Stock of Financial is traded on the NASDAQ Capital Market LLC (NASDAQ) under the symbol “BOTJ.” Prior to this time, the Common Stock of Financial was quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) under the symbol “BOJF (“BOJF.OB” on some systems) and transactions generally involved a small number of shares. The following table sets forth the quarterly high and low bid prices for each quarter in fiscal 2015 and 2014 for Financial and was obtained from Bloomberg. Management believes this source to be accurate.

The quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions.

As of March 15, 2016 (the most recent date available), the Common Stock traded for $11.80 per share. As of March 15, 2016, there were approximately 4,378,436 shares of Common Stock outstanding, which shares are held by approximately 1,634 active shareholders of record.

Dividend Policy

The Company’s future dividend policy is subject to the discretion of its Board of Directors and will depend upon a number of factors, including future earnings, financial condition, liquidity and capital requirements of both the Company and the Bank, applicable governmental regulations and policies and other factors deemed relevant by its Board of Directors.

The Company is organized under the Virginia Stock Corporation Act, which prohibits the payment of a dividend if, after giving it effect, the corporation would not be able to pay its debts as they become due in the usual course of business or if the corporation’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus the amount that would be needed, if the corporation were to be dissolved, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of any preferred shareholders.

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries. Its ability to distribute cash dividends will depend primarily on the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to it, and the Bank is

32

Table of Contents

subject to laws and regulations that limit the amount of dividends that it can pay. As a state member bank, the Bank is subject to certain restrictions imposed by the reserve and capital requirements of federal and Virginia banking statutes and regulations. For a discussion of these restrictions, see “Supervision and Regulation of Financial – Limits on the Payment of Dividends.”

Financial declared a cash dividend for the fourth quarter of 2015 of $0.06 per common share. The dividend is payable on March 25, 2016 to shareholders of record at the close of business on March 11, 2016. Financial will evaluate the factors set forth above when making a determination of whether to continue to pay a cash dividend in 2016.

Stock Buyback Plan

In October, 2014, Financial’s board of directors authorized a share repurchase program. The plan, which expired in October, 2015, authorized Financial to buy back up to 100,000 shares of common stock on such terms and conditions as the Company deems favorable. Financial did not repurchase any shares under the plan.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

The following table summarizes information concerning Financial’s equity compensation plans at December 31, 2015. All figures have been adjusted to reflect all prior stock dividends declared by Financial. All outstanding stock options have been issued under plans approved by shareholders.

33

Table of Contents

Recent Sales of Unregistered Equity Securities

On December 3, 2015, Financial closed on the sale of 1,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $2.14 at a price of $11.52 per share. Gross proceeds from the sale equaled $11,520,000. Raymond James & Associates, Inc. acted as the placement agent for the sale of the common stock. The proceeds of the sale were used as follows:

The issuance of shares of Common Stock pursuant to the Private Placement was a private placement to “accredited investors” (as that term is defined under Rule 501 of Regulation D), and is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), in reliance upon Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and Regulation D Rule 506, as a transaction by an issuer not involving a public offering.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion is intended to assist readers in understanding and evaluating our financial condition and results of operations. You should read this discussion in conjunction with our financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere in this report. Because Bank of the James Financial Group, Inc. (“Financial”) has no material operations and conducts no business other than the ownership of its operating subsidiary, Bank of the James (and its divisions and subsidiary), the discussion primarily concerns the business of the Bank. However, for ease of reading and because our financial statements are presented on a consolidated basis, references to “we,” “us,” or “our” refer to Financial, Bank of the James, and their divisions and subsidiaries as appropriate. The comparison of operating results for Financial between the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 should be read in the context of both the size and the time frame in which the Bank has been operating.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The words “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “plan” and similar expressions and variations thereof identify certain of such forward-looking statements which speak only as of the dates on which they were made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Readers are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties, and that actual results may differ materially from those indicated in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: economic conditions (both generally and more specifically in the

34

Table of Contents

markets in which we operate); competition for our customers from other providers of financial services; government legislation and regulation relating to the banking industry (which changes from time to time and over which we have no control) including but not limited to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; changes in the value of real estate securing loans made by the Bank; changes in interest rates; and material unforeseen changes in the liquidity, results of operations, or financial condition of our customers. Other risks, uncertainties and factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statements we make.

Overview

Financial is a bank holding company headquartered in Lynchburg, Virginia. Our primary business is retail banking which we conduct through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Bank of the James (which we refer to as the “Bank”). We conduct three other business activities, mortgage banking through the Bank’s Mortgage division (which we refer to as “Mortgage”), investment services through the Bank’s Investment division (which we refer to as “Investment”), and insurance activities through BOTJ Insurance, Inc., a subsidiary of the Bank, (which we refer to as “Insurance”).

Although we intend to increase other sources of revenue, our operating results depend primarily upon the Bank’s net interest income, which is determined by the difference between (i) interest and dividend income on earning assets, which consist primarily of loans, investment securities and other investments, and (ii) interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, which consist principally of deposits and other borrowings. The Bank’s net income also is affected by its provision for loan losses, as well as the level of its noninterest income, including loan fees and service charges, and its noninterest expenses, including salaries and employee benefits, occupancy expense, data processing expenses, miscellaneous other expenses, franchise taxes, and income taxes.

As discussed in more detail below,

35

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth selected financial ratios:

Effect of Economic Trends

Although the U.S. economy improved in 2015, the U.S. economy continued to experience slow growth. Locally, real estate values appear to have stabilized and have begun to show signs of increasing valuation. Region 2000 experienced positive trends in housing during 2014 and 2015. In 2015, the Bank saw a modest increase in loan demand from small and medium size businesses. However, to date in 2016, loan demand from these small and medium size businesses has diminished, which management believes is the result of global and national market turmoil and a variety of economic uncertainties. Management expects loan demand to remain slow despite the continued low interest rate environment. Despite the difficult economic environment, the Bank’s capital levels continued to improve in 2015. Management does not anticipate that the modest decline in asset quality will have a material impact on Financial.

For additional information regarding the local economy and its impact on the Company’s business refer to the Business Section in this 10-K under the caption “Location and Market Area” (Part I. Item 1. Business Section – Location and Market Area).

Despite this improvement, management expects difficult economic conditions to persist in 2016. In light of these conditions, financial institutions also face continued heightened levels of scrutiny from federal and state regulators. Financial institutions experienced, and are expected to continue to experience, pressure on credit costs, loan yields, deposit and other borrowing costs, liquidity, and capital.

A variety and wide scope of economic factors affect Financial’s success and earnings. Although interest rate trends are one of the most important of these factors, Financial believes that interest rates cannot be predicted with a reasonable level of confidence and therefore does not attempt to do so with complicated economic models. Management believes that the best defense against wide swings in interest rate levels is to minimize vulnerability at all potential interest rate levels. Rather than concentrate on any one interest rate scenario, Financial prepares for the opposite as well, in order to safeguard margins against the unexpected.

The downward trend in short term interest rates beginning in the last quarter of 2007 was due to the actions of the Federal Open Market Committee (“FOMC”) resulting from a deteriorating economy. The federal funds target rate set by the Federal Reserve has remained at 0.00% to 0.25% since December 2008, following a decline from 4.25% in December 2007 through a series of rate reductions. As liquidity increased as a result of open market operations and other government actions, longer-term interest rates decreased and the yield curve remains positively sloped. Although it cannot be certain, as discussed below under “Results of Operations—Net Interest Income” management believes that short term interest rates will remain stable for the foreseeable future. An increase in long-term interest rates would have an adverse impact on the Mortgage Division, primarily due to reduced refinancing opportunities.

36

Table of Contents

Stock Dividends

All share amounts and dollar amounts per share in this report with regard to the common stock have been adjusted to reflect all prior stock splits and stock dividends.

Critical Accounting Policies

Financial’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The financial information contained within our statements is, to a significant extent, based on measures of the financial effects of transactions and events that have already occurred. A variety of factors could affect the ultimate value that is obtained either when earning income, recognizing an expense, recovering an asset or relieving a liability. The Bank uses historical loss factors as one factor in determining the inherent loss that may be present in the loan portfolio. Actual losses could differ significantly from the historical factors that the Bank uses in estimating risk. In addition, GAAP itself may change from one previously acceptable method to another method. Although the economics of Financial’s transactions would be the same, the timing of events that would impact the transactions could change.

The allowance for loan losses is management’s estimate of the losses that may be sustained in our loan portfolio. The allowance is based on two basic principles of accounting: (i) ASC 450, Contingencies, which requires that losses be accrued when they are probable of occurring and are reasonably estimable and (ii) ASC 310, Receivables, which requires that losses on impaired loans be accrued based on the differences between the value of collateral, present value of future cash flows or values that are observable in the secondary market and the loan balance. Guidelines for determining allowances for loan losses are also provided in the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 102 – “Selected Loan Loss Allowance Methodology and Documentation Issues” and the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s interagency guidance, “Interagency Policy Statement on the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses” (the “FFIEC Policy Statement”). See “Management Discussion and Analysis Results of Operations – Allowance for Loan Losses and Loan Loss Reserve” below for further discussion of the allowance for loan losses.

In situations where, for economic or legal reasons related to a borrower’s financial condition, management may grant a concession to the borrower that it would not otherwise consider, the related loan is classified as a troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”). Management strives to identify borrowers in financial difficulty early and work with them to modify their loan to more affordable terms before their loans reach nonaccrual status. These modified terms may include rate reductions, principal forgiveness, payment forbearance and other actions intended to minimize the economic loss and to avoid foreclosure or repossession of collateral. In cases where borrowers are granted new terms that provide for a reduction of either interest or principal, management measures any impairment on the restructuring as noted above for impaired loans. The Bank had loans totaling $646,000 and $376,000 that were classified as TDRs as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

37

Table of Contents

Management considers historical trends, industry trends, peer comparisons, as well as individual classified impaired loans, in addition to historical experience to evaluate the allowance for loan losses. Our method for determining the allowance for loan losses is discussed more fully under “Provision and Allowance for Loan Losses for the Bank” below.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

December 31, 2015 compared to year ended December 31, 2014

Net Income

The net income for Financial for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $3,692,000 or $1.07 per basic and diluted share compared with net income of $3,413,000 or $1.01 per basic and diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2014. Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements provides additional information with respect to the calculation of Financial’s earnings per share.

The increase of $279,000 in 2015 net income compared to 2014 was due in large part the following: i) a 7.36% increase in net interest income; ii) a decrease in expenses associated with other real estate owned. These increases were partially offset by increases in interest expense, salary and employee benefits expense, occupancy and equipment expense, marketing expense, and “other” expenses, which include such expenses as business development, training, and travel (all of which were related to the Bank’s market expansion). As discussed in more detail below, we charged off $615,000 in nonperforming loans during the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared with $551,000 in 2014. The amount of the provision for loan losses was $282,000 in the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to $55,000 in 2014.

These operating results represent a return on average stockholders’ equity of 9.78% for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to 10.28% for the year ended December 31, 2014. As discussed below, Financial issued $11,520,000 in additional common stock on December 3, 2015. This increased capital is the primary reason for a decrease in the return on average stockholders’ equity in 2015 from 2014. The return on average assets for the year ended December 31, 2015 was 0.74% compared to 0.76% in 2014.

Net Interest Income

The fundamental source of Financial’s earnings, net interest income, is defined as the difference between income on earning assets and the cost of funds supporting those assets. The significant categories of earning assets are loans, federal funds sold, and investment securities, while deposits, fed funds purchased, and other borrowings represent interest-bearing liabilities. The level of net interest income is impacted primarily by variations in the volume and mix of these assets and liabilities, as well as changes in interest rates when compared to previous periods of operation.

Interest income increased to $20,302,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015 from $18,729,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014. This increase was due to the interest earned on the increase in loan balances and was mitigated by a decrease in the yields on average earning assets which primarily consist of loans and investment securities, as discussed below.

Net interest income for 2015 increased $1,207,000 to $17,611,000 or 7.36% from net interest income of $16,404,000 in 2014. The growth in net interest income was due primarily to the interest generated from loan growth and resulting increased loan balances. The increase was partially offset by an increase in our interest expense of $366,000 from $2,325,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $2,691,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015. This increase in interest expense was primarily due to an increase in the average balances of time deposits from $97,228,000 during 2014 to $137,374,000 in 2015. Time deposits typically pay depositors a higher rate of interest than demand accounts. The increase was mitigated by the fact that the average interest rate paid on time deposits decreased by 5 basis points during 2015 as compared to 2014.

38

Table of Contents

The net interest margin decreased to 3.78% in 2015 from 3.97% in 2014. The average rate on earning assets decreased 18 basis points from 4.53% in 2014 to 4.35% in 2015 and the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities increased from 0.68% in 2014 to 0.72% in 2015. Management cannot predict with certainty future interest rate decisions by the FOMC and statements from the Federal Reserve Board have been ambiguous. While rates may increase, management anticipates that short term interest rates will remain low through at least the next six months.

The following table shows the average balances of total interest earning assets and total interest bearing liabilities for the periods indicated, showing the average distribution of assets, liabilities, stockholders’ equity and related revenue, expense and corresponding weighted average yields and rates. The average balances used in this table and other statistical data were calculated using average daily balances.

39

Table of Contents

Net Interest Margin Analysis

Average Balance Sheets

For the Year Ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

(dollars in thousands)

40

Table of Contents

Interest income and expenses are affected by fluctuations in interest rates, by changes in the volume of earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, and by the interaction of rate and volume factors. The following table shows the direct causes of the year-to-year changes in components of net interest income on a taxable equivalent basis.

41

Table of Contents

Noninterest Income of Financial

Noninterest income has been and will continue to be an important factor for increasing our profitability. Our management continues to review and consider areas where noninterest income can be increased. Noninterest income (excluding securities gains and losses) consists of income from mortgage originations and sales, service fees, distributions from a title insurance agency in which we have an ownership interest, income from credit and debit card transactions, and fees generated by the investment services of Investment. Service fees consist primarily of monthly service and minimum account balance fees and charges on transactional deposit accounts, treasury management fees, overdraft charges, and ATM service fees.

The Bank, through the Mortgage division originates both conforming and non-conforming consumer residential mortgage loans primarily in the Region 2000 area. As part of the Bank’s overall risk management strategy, all of the loans originated and closed by the Mortgage division are presold to mortgage banking or other financial institutions. The Mortgage division assumes no credit or interest rate risk on these mortgages.

The Mortgage Division originated 350 mortgage loans, totaling $62,545,000 in 2014 as compared with 444 mortgage loans, totaling $78,549,000 during the year ended December 31, 2015. Income improved with the increased origination volume. We continued to benefit from an improved pricing model that resulted from the migration of the Mortgage Division’s broker relationships to hybrid correspondent in 2013. The hybrid correspondent relationship allows the Bank to close loans in its name before an investor purchases the loan. By using the Bank’s funds to close the loan (as compared to a broker relationship in which loans are funded by the purchaser of the mortgage), the Bank is able to obtain better pricing due to the slight increase in risk. In 2015, the Mortgage Division continued to operate in an environment in which real estate values continued to improve. Loans for new home purchases comprised 66% of the total volume as compared to 67% in 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the Mortgage Division accounted for 9.30% of Financial’s total revenue as compared with 7.75% of Financial’s total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2014. Mortgage contributed $579,000 and $306,000 to Financial’s pre-tax net income in 2015 and 2014, respectively. Although management anticipates that residential mortgage rates will remain low by historical standards throughout 2016, management also anticipates that if rates trend higher, the loan mix will continue to shift towards new home purchases and away from refinancing. The Mortgage Division continues to improve its market share in its markets. We opened a new mortgage origination office in Roanoke in October, 2013 and began originating mortgages in Charlottesville in March, 2014. In addition, in the first quarter of 2016, we also hired a new mortgage loan origination officer for the Harrisonburg Market. Management expects that low rates coupled with the Mortgage Division’s reputation in its markets and our recently-added offices and producers present an opportunity for us to continue to grow the Mortgage Division’s revenue.

Service charges and fees and commissions increased slightly to $1,390,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015 from $1,352,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Our Investment division provides brokerage services through an agreement with a third-party broker-dealer. Pursuant to this arrangement, the third party broker-dealer operates a service center adjacent to one of the branches of the Bank. The center is staffed by dual employees of the Bank and the broker-dealer. Investment receives commissions on transactions generated and in some cases ongoing management fees such as mutual fund 12b-1 fees. The Investment division’s financial impact on our consolidated revenue has been immaterial. Although management cannot predict the financial impact of Investment with certainty, management anticipates it will continue to be an immaterial component of revenue in 2016.

In the third quarter of 2008, we began providing insurance and annuity products to Bank customers and others, through the Bank’s Insurance subsidiary. The Bank has one full-time and one part-time

42

Table of Contents

employee that are dedicated to selling insurance products through Insurance. Insurance generates minimal revenue and its financial impact on our consolidated revenue has been immaterial. Management anticipates that Insurance’s impact on noninterest income will remain immaterial in 2016.

Noninterest income, exclusive of gains and losses on sale of securities, increased to $4,144,000 in 2015 from $3,444,000 in 2014. Inclusive of gains and losses on sale of securities, noninterest income increased to $4,193,000 in 2015 from $3,587,000 in 2014. The following table summarizes our noninterest income for the periods indicated.

The increase in noninterest income for 2015 as compared to 2014 was primarily due to an increase in income from gains on loans held for sale. These gains were partially offset by a decrease in income on gains on sales of securities available-for-sale.

Noninterest Expense of Financial

Noninterest expenses increased from $15,235,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $16,179,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015. The following table summarizes our noninterest expense for the periods indicated.

The increase in noninterest expense was due in large part to an increase in compensation, equipment, supplies, credit, FDIC insurance and other expense. The increase in these costs was partially

43

Table of Contents

offset by a decrease in occupancy, professional, marketing, and other real estate expenses as well as a decrease in the amortization expense associated with a tax credit investment. Our total personnel expense, net of direct salary costs incurred in originating certain loans (in accordance with current accounting rules), increased to $8,727,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015, from $7,940,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014. Compensation for some employees of the Mortgage Division and Investment is commission-based and therefore subject to fluctuation.

The efficiency ratio, that is the cost of producing each dollar of revenue, is determined by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income plus noninterest income. Financial’s efficiency ratio decreased from 76.21% in 2014 to 74.20% in 2015, in large part due to the increases in the above revenues.

Income Tax Expense

For the year ended December 31, 2015, Financial had federal income tax expense of $1,651,000, as compared to a federal income tax expense of $1,288,000 in 2014, which equates to effective tax rates of 30.90% and 27.39%, respectively. Our effective rate was lower than the statutory corporate tax rate in both 2015 and 2014 because of federal income tax benefits resulting from the tax treatment of earnings on bank owned life insurance, certain tax free municipal securities, and tax credits. Note 12 of the consolidated financial statements provide additional information with respect to our 2015 federal income tax expense and the deferred tax accounts.

ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION

As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014

General

Our total assets were $527,143,000 at December 31, 2015, an increase of $66,278,000 or 14.38% from $460,865,000 at December 31, 2014, primarily due to an increase in cash and cash equivalents and loan balances, as well as increases in securities available-for-sale, and premises and equipment. As explained in more detail below, deposits increased from $399,497,000 on December 31, 2014 to $467,610,000 on December 31, 2015. Loans, net of unearned income and allowance, increased to $430,445,000 on December 31, 2015 from $394,573,000 on December 31, 2014.

Loans

Our loan portfolio is the largest and most profitable component of our earning assets. The Bank has comprehensive policies and procedures which cover both commercial and consumer loan origination and management of credit risk. Loans are underwritten in a manner that focuses on the borrower’s ability to repay. Management’s goal is not to avoid risk, but to manage it and to include credit risk as part of the pricing decision for each product.

The Bank’s loan portfolio consists of commercial short-term lines of credit, term loans, mortgage financing and construction loans that are used by the borrower to build or develop real estate properties, and consumer loans. The consumer portfolio includes residential real estate mortgages, home equity lines and installment loans.

Loans, net of unearned income and allowance, increased to $430,445,000 on December 31, 2015 from $394,573,000 on December 31, 2014. Total loans, including loans held for sale increased to $437,092,000 on December 31, 2015 from $400,393,000 on December 31, 2014. The increase in total loans was partially due to enhanced marketing efforts and the employment of a Charlottesville-based lender in September 2013 as well as Harrisonburg-based lender in April 2015. We anticipate that these offices will continue to add to our loan balances. The increase is also attributed to increased calling and sales efforts by our lenders. Despite these factors, the number of qualified borrowers remains limited. Management expects that the number of qualified borrowers will remain limited until the economy further improves and economic uncertainties subside.

44

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2015, the Bank had $3,406,000, or 0.78% of its total loans, in non-accrual status compared with $3,506,000, or 0.88% of its total loans, at December 31, 2014. Management is continuing its efforts to reduce non-performing assets through enhanced collection efforts and the liquidation of underlying collateral. The Bank attempts to work with borrowers on a case-by-case basis to attempt to protect the Bank’s interests. However, despite our commitment, a reduction of non-accrual loans can be dependent on improvements in employment, housing, and overall economic conditions at the local, regional and national levels. See “Asset Quality” below.

The following table summarizes the composition of the Bank’s loan portfolio for the periods indicated by dollar amount:

The following table sets forth the maturities of the loan portfolio at December 31, 2015.

45

Table of Contents

Deposits

We experienced an increase in deposits from $399,497,000 at December 31, 2014 to $467,610,000 at December 31, 2015, for an increase of 17.05%. Noninterest-bearing deposits increased $16,643,000 or 22.29% from $74,682,000 at December 31, 2014 to $91,325,000 at December 31, 2015. The increase in non-interest bearing deposits was due to increased and continued efforts to procure the primary checking accounts of our commercial loan customers. The increase can also be attributed to end of the year real estate and business closings related to our professional settlement accounts. Interest-bearing deposits increased $51,470,000, or 15.85%, from $324,815,000 at December 31, 2014 to $376,285,000 at December 31, 2015. A total of $10,000,000 of this increase in time deposits, resulted from management’s decision to lock in attractive rates by accepting a brokered certificate of deposit. The majority of the increase in time deposits was raised through a local offering of certificates of deposit. Specifically, the Bank offered an 18-month certificate of deposit at 1.16% APY. The total raised with this offer was approximately $34,000,000.

The following table sets forth the average deposit balance and the rates paid on deposits for the years indicated:

The following table includes a summary of maturities of CDs greater than $100,000:

46

Table of Contents

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents increased from $12,743,000 on December 31, 2014 to $28,655,000 on December 31, 2015. Federal funds sold amounted to $12,703,000 on December 31, 2015 compared to $0 on December 31, 2014. The increase was due primarily to the increase in deposits discussed above, the fluctuations in transactional accounts and professional settlement accounts as discussed above, and use of cash and cash equivalents to fund loan growth.

Investment Securities

The investment securities portfolio of the Bank is used as a source of income and liquidity.

The following table summarizes the fair value of the Bank’s securities portfolio for the periods indicated:

Deposited funds are generally invested in overnight vehicles, including federal funds sold, until approved loans are funded. The decision to purchase investment securities is based on several factors or a combination thereof, including:

a) The fact that yields on acceptably rated investment securities (S&P “A” rated or better) are significantly better than the overnight federal funds rate;

b) Whether demand for loan funding exceeds the rate at which deposits are growing, which leads to higher or lower levels of surplus cash;

c) Management’s target of maintaining a minimum of 6% of the Bank’s total assets in a combination of federal funds sold and investment securities (aggregate of available–for-sale and held-to-maturity portfolios); and

d) Whether the maturity or call schedule meets management’s asset/liability plan.

Available-for-sale securities (as opposed to held-to-maturity securities) may be liquidated at any time as funds are needed to fund loans. Liquidation of securities may result in a net loss or net gain depending on current bond yields available in the primary and secondary markets and the shape of the U.S. Treasury yield curve. Management is cognizant of its credit standards policy and does not feel pressure to maintain loan growth at the same levels as deposit growth and thus sacrifice credit quality in order to avoid security purchases.

47

Table of Contents

Management has made the decision to maintain a significant portion of its available funds in liquid assets so that funds are available to fund future growth of the loan portfolio. Management believes that this strategy will allow us to maximize interest margins while maintaining appropriate levels of liquidity.

Securities held-to-maturity at carrying cost decreased from $2,528,000 as of December 31, 2014 to $2,519,000 as of December 31, 2015. This decrease resulted from the amortization of premiums within the held-to-maturity portfolio. The decision to invest in securities held-to-maturity is based on the same factors as the decision to invest in securities available-for-sale except that management invests surplus funds in securities held-to-maturity only after concluding that such funds will not be necessary for liquidity purposes during the term of such security. However, the held-to-maturity securities may be pledged for such purposes as short term borrowings and as collateral for public deposits.

The portfolio of securities available-for-sale increased to $35,996,000 as of December 31, 2015 from $24,395,000 as of December 31, 2014. The increase is a result of management’s desire to continue to increase on-balance sheet liquidity. During 2015, the Bank purchased $27,019,000 of available-for-sale securities and sold available-for-sale securities totaling $13,440,000.

48

Table of Contents

The following table shows the maturities of held-to-maturity and available-for-sale securities at amortized cost and market value at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 and approximate weighted average yields of such securities. Yields on state and political subdivision securities are not shown on a tax equivalent basis. Financial attempts to maintain diversity in its portfolio and maintain credit quality and repricing terms that are consistent with its asset/liability management and investment practices and policies. For further information on Financial’s securities, see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

49

Table of Contents

Cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance

On July 1, 2009, the Company funded bank owned life insurance (BOLI) for a small group of its officers, where the Company is the owner and sole beneficiary of the policies. As of December 31, 2015, the BOLI had a cash surrender value of $9,781,000, an increase of $269,000 from the cash surrender value of $9,512,000 as of December 31, 2014. The increase resulted from an increase in the cash surrender value relating to the aggregate earnings on all of the BOLI policies. The value of BOLI increases from the cash surrender values of the pool of insurance. The increase in cash surrender value is recorded as a component of noninterest income; however, the Company does not pay tax on increase in cash value. This profitability

50

Table of Contents

is used to offset a portion of current and future employee benefit costs. BOLI can be liquidated if necessary with associated tax costs. However, the Company intends to hold this pool of insurance, because it provides income that enhances the Company’s capital position. Therefore, the Company has not provided for deferred income taxes on the earnings from the increase in cash surrender value.

Liquidity

Liquidity represents the ability of a company to convert assets into cash or cash equivalents without significant loss, and the ability to raise additional funds by increasing liabilities.

The liquidity of Financial depends primarily on Financial’s current assets, available credit, and the dividends paid to it by the Bank. Payment of cash dividends by the Bank is limited by regulations of the Federal Reserve Board and is tied to the regulatory capital requirements. Although Financial’s liquidity is limited, management believes that Financial has sufficient liquidity to meet its current obligations. See “Capital Resources,” below.

The objective of liquidity management for the Bank is to ensure the continuous availability of funds to meet the demands of depositors, investors and borrowers. Liquidity management involves monitoring the Bank’s sources and uses of funds in order to meet the day-to-day cash flow requirements while maximizing profits. Stable core deposits and a strong capital position are the components of a solid foundation for the Bank’s liquidity position. Liquidity management is made more complicated because different balance sheet components are subject to varying degrees of management control. For example, the timing of maturities of securities held-to-maturity is fairly predictable and subject to a high degree of control at the time investment decisions are made. However, net deposit inflows and outflows are far less predictable and are not subject to the same degree of control.

Funding sources for the Bank primarily include paid-in capital and customer-based deposits but also include borrowed funds and cash flow from operations. The Bank has in place several agreements that will provide alternative sources of funding, including, but not limited to, lines of credit, sale of investment securities, purchase of federal funds, advances through the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLBA”) and correspondents, and brokered certificate of deposit arrangements. Management believes that the Bank has the ability to meet its liquidity needs.

At December 31, 2015, liquid assets, which include cash, interest-bearing and noninterest-bearing deposits with banks, federal funds sold, and securities available-for-sale totaled $64,863,000 as compared to $37,138,000 at December 31, 2014. Management deems liquidity to be adequate. Investment securities traditionally provide a secondary source of liquidity since they can be converted into cash in a timely manner. However, approximately $11,795,000 (current book value) of these securities are pledged against outstanding debt, public deposits, or lines of credit. Therefore, the related debt would need to be repaid prior to the securities being sold in order for these securities to be converted to cash.

51

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth non-deposit sources of funding:

At the end of 2015, approximately 76.44%, or $332,599,000 of the loan portfolio would mature or could reprice within a one-year period. At December 31, 2015, non-deposit sources of available funds totaled $138,877,000, which included $105,493,000 available from the FHLBA.

Capital Resources

Capital adequacy is an important measure of financial stability and performance. Management’s objectives are to maintain a level of capitalization that is sufficient to sustain asset growth and promote depositor and investor confidence.

Regulatory agencies measure capital adequacy utilizing a formula that takes into account the individual risk profiles of financial institutions. The guidelines define capital as Tier 1 (primarily common stockholders’ equity, defined to include certain debt obligations) and Tier 2 (remaining capital generally consisting of a limited amount of subordinated debt, certain hybrid capital instruments and other debt securities, preferred stock and a limited amount of the general valuation allowance for loan losses).

On June 7, 2012, the Federal Reserve issued a series of proposed rules that would revise and strengthen its risk-based and leverage capital requirements and its method for calculating risk-weighted assets. The rules were proposed to implement the Basel III regulatory capital reforms from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. On July 2, 2013, the Federal Reserve approved certain revisions to the proposals and finalized new capital requirements for banking organizations.

Effective January 1, 2015, the final rules required Financial and the Bank to comply with the following new minimum capital ratios: (i) a new common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 4.5% of risk-weighted assets; (ii) a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.0% of risk-weighted assets (increased from the previous requirement of 4.0%); (iii) a total capital ratio of 8.0% of risk-weighted assets (unchanged from the previous requirement); and (iv) a leverage ratio of 4.0% of total assets. These are the initial capital requirements, which will be phased in over a five-year period. When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, the rules will require Financial and the Bank to maintain (i) a minimum ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% “capital conservation buffer” (which is added to the 4.5% common equity Tier 1 ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7.0% upon full implementation), (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 6.0% Tier 1 capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5% upon full implementation), (iii) a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least

52

Table of Contents

8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 8.0% total capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5% upon full implementation), and (iv) a minimum leverage ratio of 4.0%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average assets.

The capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning January 1, 2016, at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing each year until fully implemented at 2.5% on January 1, 2019. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases, and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

With respect to the Bank, the rules also revised the “prompt corrective action” regulations pursuant to Section 38 of the FDIA by (i) introducing a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio requirement at each level (other than critically undercapitalized), with the required ratio being 6.5% for well-capitalized status; (ii) increasing the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement for each category, with the minimum ratio for well-capitalized status being 8.0% (as compared to the previous 6.0%); and (iii) eliminating the current provision that provides that a bank with a composite supervisory rating of 1 may have a 3.0% Tier 1 leverage ratio and still be well-capitalized.

The new capital requirements also include changes in the risk weights of assets to better reflect credit risk and other risk exposures. These include a 150% risk weight (up from 100%) for certain high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans and nonresidential mortgage loans that are 90 days past due or otherwise on nonaccrual status, a 20% (up from 0%) credit conversion factor for the unused portion of a commitment with an original maturity of one year or less that is not unconditionally cancellable, a 250% risk weight (up from 100%) for mortgage servicing rights and deferred tax assets that are not deducted from capital, and increased risk-weights (from 0% to up to 600%) for equity exposures.

The Bank’s regulatory capital levels exceed those established for well-capitalized institutions. If the new minimum capital ratios described above had been effective as of December 31, 2014, based on management’s interpretation and understanding of the new rules, Financial would have remained “well capitalized” as of such date.

53

Table of Contents