FIRST COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL CORP /PA/ - Annual Report: 2012 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission file Number 001-11138

FIRST COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (724) 349-7220

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

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

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

Note—Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act from their obligations under those Sections.

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant 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). Yes x    No ¨

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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ¨        Accelerated filer x        Non-accelerated filer ¨        Smaller reporting company ¨

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock, par value $1 per share, held by non-affiliates of the registrant (based upon the closing sale price on June 30, 2012) was approximately $696,275,402.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock, $1.00 Par Value as of March 7, 2013, was 99,298,120.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the annual meeting of shareholders to be held April 23, 2013 are incorporated by reference into Part III.

Table of Contents

FIRST COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

FORM 10-K

INDEX

Table of Contents

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained in this report that are not historical facts may 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 are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements include, among others, statements regarding our strategy, evaluations of our asset quality, future interest rate trends and liquidity, prospects for growth in assets and prospects for future operating results. Forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate” or words of similar meaning, or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “would,” “should,” “could” or “may.” Forward-looking statements are based on assumptions of management and are only expectations of future results. You should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of, among others, the risk factors described in Item 1A of this report. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made. We do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made.

Table of Contents

Overview

First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (“First Commonwealth” or “we”) is a financial holding company that is headquartered in Indiana, Pennsylvania. We provide a diversified array of consumer and commercial banking services through our bank subsidiary, First Commonwealth Bank (“FCB” or the “Bank”). We also provide trust and wealth management services and offer insurance products through FCB and our other operating subsidiaries. At December 31, 2012, we had total assets of $6.0 billion, total loans of $4.2 billion, total deposits of $4.6 billion and shareholders’ equity of $746.0 million. Our principal executive office is located at 601 Philadelphia Street, Indiana, Pennsylvania 15701, and our telephone number is (724) 349-7220.

FCB is a Pennsylvania bank and trust company. At December 31, 2012, the Bank operated 112 community banking offices throughout western and central Pennsylvania and a loan production office in downtown Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The largest concentration of our branch offices is located within the greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area in Allegheny, Butler, Washington and Westmoreland counties, while our remaining offices are located in smaller cities, such as Altoona, Johnstown, and Indiana, Pennsylvania, and in towns and villages throughout predominantly rural counties. The Bank also operates a network of 120 automated teller machines, or ATMs, at various branch offices and offsite locations. All of our ATMs are part of the NYCE and MasterCard/Cirrus networks, both of which operate nationwide. The Bank is a member of the Allpoint ATM network which allows surcharge-free access to over 50,000 ATMs. The Bank is also a member of the “Freedom ATM Alliance,” which affords cardholders surcharge-free access to a network of over 700 ATMs in over 50 counties in Pennsylvania, Maryland, New York, West Virginia and Ohio.

Historical and Recent Developments

FCB began in 1934 as First National Bank of Indiana with initial capitalization of $255 thousand. First National Bank of Indiana changed its name to National Bank of the Commonwealth in 1971 and became a subsidiary of First Commonwealth in 1983.

Since the formation of the holding company in 1983, we have grown steadily through the acquisition of smaller banks and thrifts in our market area, including Deposit Bank in 1984, Dale National Bank and First National Bank of Leechburg in 1985, Citizens National Bank of Windber in 1986, Peoples Bank and Trust Company in 1990, Central Bank in 1992, Peoples Bank of Western Pennsylvania in 1993, Unitas National Bank and Reliable Savings Bank in 1994. In 1995, we merged all of our banking subsidiaries (other than Reliable Savings Bank) into Deposit Bank and renamed the resulting institution “First Commonwealth Bank.” We then merged Reliable Savings Bank into FCB in 1997. We acquired Southwest Bank in 1998 and merged it into FCB in 2002.

In the fourth quarter of 2003, we acquired Pittsburgh Financial Corp., the holding company for Pittsburgh Savings Bank (dba BankPittsburgh), for a total cost of approximately $28.6 million. Pittsburgh Financial had total assets of approximately $376.4 million, with 7 branch offices and one loan production office in Allegheny and Butler counties of Pennsylvania. In the second quarter of 2004, we acquired GA Financial, Inc., the holding company for Great American Federal, for a total cost of approximately $176.7 million. GA Financial, Inc. had total assets of approximately $890.3 million, with 12 branch offices located in Allegheny County. In the third quarter of 2006, we acquired Laurel Capital Group, Inc. (“Laurel”), the holding company for Laurel Savings Bank, for a total cost of approximately $56.1 million. Laurel had total assets of approximately $314.3 million, with 8 branch offices located in Allegheny and Butler Counties.

In recent years, we have primarily focused on organic growth, improving the reach of our franchise and the breadth of our product offering. As part of this strategy, we have opened fourteen de novo branches since 2005, all of which are in the greater Pittsburgh area. As a result of our acquisition and de novo strategy, FCB operates 49 branches in the Pittsburgh metropolitan statistical area and currently ranks ninth in deposit market share.

4

Table of Contents

Competition

The banking and financial services industry is extremely competitive in our market area. We face vigorous competition for customers, loans and deposits from many companies, including commercial banks, savings and loan associations, finance companies, credit unions, trust companies, mortgage companies, money market mutual funds, insurance companies, and brokerage and investment firms. Many of these competitors are significantly larger than us, have greater resources, lending limits and larger branch systems and offer a wider array of financial services than us. In addition, some of these competitors, such as credit unions, are subject to a lesser degree of regulation than that imposed on us.

Employees

At December 31, 2012, First Commonwealth and its subsidiaries employed 1,289 full-time employees and 193 part-time employees.

Supervision and Regulation

The following discussion sets forth the material elements of the regulatory framework applicable to financial holding companies and their subsidiaries and provides certain specific information relevant to First Commonwealth and its subsidiaries. The regulatory framework is intended primarily for the protection of depositors, other customers and the federal deposit insurance fund and not for the protection of security holders. The rules governing the regulation of financial institutions and their holding companies are very detailed and technical. Accordingly, the following discussion is general in nature and is not intended to be complete or to describe all the laws and regulations that apply to First Commonwealth and its subsidiaries. A change in applicable statutes, regulations or regulatory policy may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Regulatory Reforms

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which was enacted in July 2010, significantly restructures the financial regulatory regime in the United States. Although the Dodd-Frank Act’s provisions that have received the most public attention generally have been those applying to or more likely to affect larger institutions such as bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, it contains numerous other provisions that affect all bank holding companies and banks, including First Commonwealth and FCB, some of which are described in more detail below.

Many of the Dodd-Frank Act’s provisions are subject to final rulemaking by the U.S. financial regulatory agencies, and the implications of the Dodd-Frank Act for First Commonwealth’s businesses will depend to a large extent on how such rules are adopted and implemented by the primary U.S. financial regulatory agencies. First Commonwealth continues to analyze the impact of rules adopted under Dodd-Frank, on its businesses. However, the full impact will not be known until the rules, and other regulatory initiatives that overlap with the rules, are finalized and their combined impacts can be understood.

Bank Holding Company Regulation

First Commonwealth is registered as a financial holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHC Act”), and is subject to supervision and regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”).

Acquisitions. Under the BHC Act, First Commonwealth is required to obtain the prior approval of the FRB before it can merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company or acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any bank that is not already majority owned by it or acquire direct or indirect ownership, or control of,

5

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Bank Holding Company Regulation (Continued)

any voting shares of any bank that is not already majority owned by it, if after such acquisition it would directly or indirectly own or control more than 5% of the voting shares of such bank. Satisfactory financial condition, particularly with regard to capital adequacy, and satisfactory Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) ratings are generally prerequisites to obtaining federal regulatory approval to make acquisitions and open branch offices.

Non-Banking Activities. First Commonwealth is generally prohibited under the BHC Act from engaging in, or acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company engaged in non-banking activities unless the FRB, by order or regulation, has found such activities to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. In making this determination, the FRB considers whether the performance of these activities by a bank holding company can reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public that outweigh the possible adverse effects.

Reporting. Under the BHC Act, First Commonwealth is subject to examination by the FRB and is required to file periodic reports and other information of its operations with the FRB. In addition, under the Pennsylvania Banking Code of 1965, the Pennsylvania Department of Banking has the authority to examine the books, records and affairs of any Pennsylvania bank holding company or to require any documentation deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the Pennsylvania Banking Code.

Source of Strength Doctrine. FRB policy has historically required bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) codifies this policy as a statutory requirement. Under this requirement, First Commonwealth is expected to commit resources to support FCB, including at times when First Commonwealth may not be in a financial position to provide such resources. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary banks. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

Affiliate Transactions. Transactions between FCB, on the one hand, and First Commonwealth and its other subsidiaries, on the other hand, are regulated by the Federal Reserve Board. These regulations limit the types and amounts of covered transactions engaged in by FCB and generally require those transactions to be on an arm’s-length basis. “Covered transactions” are defined by statute to include a loan or extension of credit, as well as a purchase of securities issued by an affiliate, a purchase of assets (unless otherwise exempted by the Federal Reserve Board) from the affiliate, certain derivative transactions that create a credit exposure to an affiliate, the acceptance of securities issued by the affiliate as collateral for a loan, and the issuance of a guarantee, acceptance or letter of credit on behalf of an affiliate. In general, these regulations require that any such transaction by FCB (or its subsidiaries) with an affiliate must be secured by designated amounts of specified collateral and must be limited to certain thresholds on an individual and aggregate basis.

SEC Regulations. First Commonwealth is also under the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and various state securities commissions for matters relating to the offer and sale of its securities and is subject to the SEC rules and regulations relating to periodic reporting, proxy solicitation and insider trading.

Bank Regulations

FCB is a state bank chartered under the Pennsylvania Banking Code and is not a member of the FRB. As such, FCB is subject to the supervision of, and is regularly examined by, both the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and is required to furnish quarterly reports

6

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Bank Regulations (Continued)

to both agencies. The approval of the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and FDIC is also required for FCB to establish additional branch offices or merge with or acquire another banking institution.

Restrictions on Dividends. The Pennsylvania Banking Code states, in part, that dividends may be declared and paid only out of accumulated net earnings and may not be declared or paid unless surplus is at least equal to capital. Dividends may not reduce surplus without the prior consent of the Pennsylvania Department of Banking. FCB has not reduced its surplus through the payment of dividends.

The FDIC also prohibits the declaration or payout of dividends at a time when FCB is in default in payment of any assessment due the FDIC. In addition, supervisory guidance issued by the FRB requires, among other things, that a company must consult with the FRB in advance of paying a dividend that exceeds earnings for the quarter for which the dividend is paid or that could result in a material adverse change to the company’s capital structure. The guidance also states that a company should, as a general matter, eliminate, defer or severely limit its dividend if (1) the company’s net income for the past four quarters, net of dividends paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividend; (2) the company’s prospective rate of earnings retention is not consistent with the company’s capital needs and current and prospective financial condition; or (3) the company will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios.

Community Reinvestment. Under the Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA, a bank has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with its safe and sound operation, to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. 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. The CRA requires the applicable regulatory agency to assess an institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community. The CRA requires public disclosure of an institution’s CRA rating and requires that the applicable regulatory agency provide a written evaluation of an institution’s CRA performance utilizing a four-tiered descriptive rating system. An institution’s CRA rating is considered in determining whether to grant charters, branches and other deposit facilities, relocations, mergers, consolidations and acquisitions. Performance less than satisfactory may be the basis for denying an application. For its most recent examination, FCB received a “satisfactory” rating.

Consumer Protection Laws. The operations of FCB are also subject to numerous federal, state and local consumer protection laws and regulations including the Truth in Lending Act, Truth in Savings Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Fair Housing Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. Among other things, these acts:

7

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Bank Regulations (Continued)

Deposit Insurance. Deposits of FCB are insured up to applicable limits by the FDIC and are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”). Deposit insurance assessments are based upon average total assets minus average total equity. The insurance assessments are based upon a matrix that takes into account a bank’s capital level and supervisory rating. The FDIC may terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC.

In November 2009, the FDIC issued a rule that required all insured depository institutions, with limited exceptions, to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. As of December 31, 2012, $9.2 million in pre-paid deposit insurance is included in “other assets” in the accompanying Statements of Financial Condition.

In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a new DIF restoration plan to ensure that the fund reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by September 30, 2020, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. At least semi-annually, the FDIC will update its loss and income projections for the fund and, if needed, will increase or decrease assessment rates, following notice-and-comment rulemaking if required.

The separate deposit insurance coverage for non-interest-bearing transaction accounts that became effective on December 31, 2010 terminated on December 31, 2012.

Capital Requirements

As a bank holding company, we are subject to consolidated regulatory capital requirements administered by the FRB. FCB is subject to similar capital requirements administered by the FDIC and the Pennsylvania Department of Banking. The federal regulatory authorities’ risk-based capital guidelines are based upon the 1988 capital accord (“Basel I”) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”). The Basel Committee is a committee of central banks and bank supervisors/regulators from the major industrialized countries that develops broad policy guidelines for use by each country’s supervisors in determining the supervisory policies they apply. The requirements are intended to ensure that banking organizations have adequate capital given the risk levels of assets and off-balance sheet financial instruments. Under the requirements, banking organizations are required to maintain minimum ratios for Tier 1 capital and total capital to risk-weighted assets (including certain off-balance sheet items, such as letters of credit). For purposes of calculating the ratios, a banking organization’s assets and some of its specified off-balance sheet commitments and obligations are assigned to various risk categories.

A depository institution’s or holding company’s capital, in turn, is classified in one of three tiers, depending on type:

8

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Capital Requirements (Continued)

First Commonwealth, like other bank holding companies, currently is required to maintain Tier 1 capital and “total capital” (the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital) equal to at least 4.0% and 8.0%, respectively, of its total risk-weighted assets (including various off-balance sheet items, such as letters of credit). FCB, like other depository institutions, is required to maintain similar capital levels under capital adequacy guidelines. In addition, for a depository institution to be considered “well capitalized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, its Tier 1 and total capital ratios must be at least 6.0% and 10.0% on a risk-adjusted basis, respectively.

Bank holding companies and banks are also required to comply with minimum leverage ratio requirements. The leverage ratio is the ratio of a banking organization’s Tier 1 capital to its total adjusted quarterly average assets (as defined for regulatory purposes). The minimum leverage ratio is 3.0% for bank holding companies and depository institutions that either have the highest supervisory rating or have implemented the appropriate federal regulatory authority’s risk-adjusted measure for market risk. All other bank holding companies and depository institutions are required to maintain a minimum leverage ratio of 4.0%, unless a different minimum is specified by an appropriate regulatory authority. In addition, for a depository institution to be considered “well capitalized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, its leverage ratio must be at least 5.0%.

As of December 31, 2012, FCB was a “well-capitalized” bank as defined by the FDIC. See Note 28 “Regulatory Restrictions and Capital Adequacy” of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, contained in Item 8, for a table that provides a comparison of First Commonwealth’s and FCB’s risk-based capital ratios and the leverage ratio to minimum regulatory requirements.

In June 2012, the FRB published two notices of proposed rulemaking (the “2012 Capital Proposals”) that would substantially revise the risk-based capital requirements applicable to bank holding companies and depository institutions compared to the current U.S. risk-based capital rules, which are based on the aforementioned Basel I capital accords of the Basel Committee. One of the 2012 Capital Proposals (the “Basel III Proposal”) addresses the components of capital and other issues affecting the numerator in banking institutions’ regulatory capital ratios and would implement the Basel Committee’s December 2010 framework known as “Basel III” for strengthening international capital standards. The other proposal (the “Standardized Approach Proposal”) addresses risk weights and other issues affecting the denominator in banking institutions’ regulatory capital ratios and would replace the existing Basel I-derived risk-weighting approach with a more risk-sensitive approach based, in part, on the standardized approach in the Basel Committee’s 2004 “Basel II” capital accords. The 2012 Capital Proposals would also implement the requirements of Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Act to remove references to credit ratings from the federal banking agencies’ rules. As proposed, the Basel III Proposal and the Standardized Approach Proposal would come into effect on January 1, 2013 (subject to a phase-in period) and January 1, 2015 (with an option for early adoption), respectively; however, final rules have not yet been adopted, and the Basel III framework is therefore not yet applicable to First Commonwealth or FCB.

The Basel III Proposal, among other things: (1) introduces a new capital measure called “Common Equity Tier 1”, (2) specifies that Tier 1 capital consist of Common Equity Tier 1 and “Additional Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (3) defines Common Equity Tier 1 narrowly by requiring that most deductions/adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to Common Equity Tier 1 and not to the other components of capital and (4) expands the scope of the deductions/adjustments as compared to existing regulations.

When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, the Basel III Proposal will require First Commonwealth and FCB to maintain (1) 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,

9

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Capital Requirements (Continued)

effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of Common Equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7% upon full implementation), (2) 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), (3) a minimum ratio of Total capital (that is, Tier 1 plus Tier 2) 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 (4) a minimum leverage ratio of 4%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average assets.

The Basel III Proposal also provides for a “countercyclical capital buffer” over and above the capital conservation buffer that is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. The countercyclical capital buffer is applicable to only certain covered institutions and is not expected to have any current applicability to First Commonwealth or FCB.

The Basel III Proposal provides for a number of deductions from and adjustments to Common Equity Tier 1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets dependent upon future taxable income and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of Common Equity Tier 1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of Common Equity Tier 1. Under current capital standards, the effects of accumulated other comprehensive income items included in capital are excluded for the purposes of determining regulatory capital ratios. Under the Basel III Proposal, the effects of certain accumulated other comprehensive items are not excluded, which could result in significant variations in the level of capital depending upon the impact of interest rate fluctuations on the fair value of First Commonwealth’s securities portfolio. The Basel III Proposal also requires the phase-out of certain hybrid securities, such as trust preferred securities, as Tier 1 capital of bank holding companies. Trust preferred securities no longer included in Tier 1 capital may nonetheless be included as a component of Tier 2 capital. Implementation of the deductions and other adjustments to Common Equity Tier 1 will begin on January 1, 2014 and will be phased-in over a five-year period (20% per year). The implementation of the capital conservation buffer will begin on January 1, 2016 at the 0.625% level and be phased in over a four-year period (increasing by that amount on each subsequent January 1, until it reaches 2.5% on January 1, 2019).

The Standardized Approach Proposal would expand the risk-weighting categories from the current four Basel I-derived categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a much larger and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the assets, generally ranging from 0% for U.S. government and agency securities, to 600% for certain equity exposures, and resulting in higher risk weights for a variety of asset categories, including many residential mortgages and certain commercial real estate. Among other things, the Standardized Approach Proposal would:

10

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Capital Requirements (Continued)

In addition, the Standardized Approach Proposal also provides more advantageous risk weights for derivatives and repurchase-style transactions cleared through a qualifying central counterparty and increases the scope of eligible guarantors and eligible collateral for purposes of credit risk mitigation.

Management believes that, as of December 31, 2012, First Commonwealth and FCB would meet all capital adequacy requirements under the Basel III and Standardized Approach Proposals on a fully phased-in basis if such requirements were currently effective. There can be no guarantee that the Basel III and the Standardized Approach Proposals will be adopted in their current form, what changes may be made before adoption, or when ultimate adoption will occur. Requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or to maintain higher levels of liquid assets could adversely impact the Corporation’s net income and return on equity.

Liquidity Requirements

Historically, regulation and monitoring of bank and bank holding company liquidity has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required formulaic measures. The Basel III final framework requires banks and bank holding companies to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests that, although similar in some respects to liquidity measures historically applied by banks and regulators for management and supervisory purposes, going forward will be required by regulation. One test, referred to as the liquidity coverage ratio (“LCR”), is designed to ensure that the banking entity maintains an adequate level of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets equal to the entity’s expected net cash outflow for a 30-day time horizon (or, if greater, 25% of its expected total cash outflow) under an acute liquidity stress scenario. The other, referred to as the net stable funding ratio (“NSFR”), is designed to promote more medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of banking entities over a one-year time horizon. These requirements will incent banking entities to increase their holdings of U.S. Treasury securities and other sovereign debt as a component of assets and increase the use of long-term debt as a funding source. The Basel III framework contemplates that the LCR will remain subject to an observation period through mid-2013 and be implemented as a standard on January 1, 2015 and that the NSFR will be subject to an observation period through mid-2016 and be implemented as a minimum standard by January 1, 2018. These new standards are subject to further rulemaking and their terms may change before implementation. The federal banking agencies have not proposed rules implementing the Basel III liquidity framework and have not determined to what extent they will apply to U.S. banks that are not large, internationally active banks.

Anti-Money Laundering and the USA Patriot Act

A major focus of governmental policy on financial institutions in recent years has been aimed at combating money laundering and terrorist financing. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (the “USA Patriot Act”) substantially broadened the scope of United States anti-money laundering laws and regulations by imposing significant new compliance and due diligence obligations, creating new crimes and penalties and expanding the extra-territorial

11

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation (Continued)

Anti-Money Laundering and the USA Patriot Act (Continued)

jurisdiction of the United States. The United States Treasury Department has issued and, in some cases, proposed a number of regulations that apply various requirements of the USA Patriot Act to financial institutions such as FCB. These regulations impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing and to verify the identity of their customers. Certain of those regulations impose specific due diligence requirements on financial institutions that maintain correspondent or private banking relationships with non-U.S. financial institutions or persons. Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution.

Availability of Financial Information

We file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. You may read and copy any document we file at the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Our SEC filings are also available to the public on the SEC website at www.sec.gov and on our website at www.fcbanking.com.

We also make available on our website, www.fcbanking.com, and in print to any shareholder who requests them, our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters for our Audit, Risk, Compensation and Human Resources, and Governance Committees, and the Code of Conduct and Ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers and employees.

Our Chief Executive Officer has certified to the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) that, as of the date of the certification, he was not aware of any violation by First Commonwealth of NYSE’s corporate governance listing standards. In addition, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have made certain certifications concerning the information contained in this report pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Section 302 certifications appear as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 to this annual report on Form 10-K.

12

Table of Contents

As a financial services company, we are subject to a number of risks, many of which are outside of our control. These risks include, but are not limited to:

Changes in interest rates could negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Our results of operations depend substantially on net interest income, which is the difference between interest earned on interest-earning assets (such as investments and loans) and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities (such as deposits and borrowings). Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions. Conditions such as inflation, recession, unemployment, money supply, and other factors beyond our control may also affect interest rates. If our interest-earning assets mature or reprice more quickly than interest-bearing liabilities in a declining interest rate environment, net interest income could be adversely impacted. Likewise, if interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest-earnings assets in a rising interest rate environment, net interest income could be adversely impacted.

Changes in interest rates also can affect the value of loans and other assets. An increase in interest rates that adversely affects the ability of borrowers to pay the principal or interest on loans may lead to an increase in nonperforming assets and a reduction of income recognized, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.

We are subject to extensive government regulation and supervision.

Banking regulations are primarily intended to protect depositors’ funds, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not security holders. These regulations affect our lending practices, capital structure, investment practices, dividend policy and growth, among other things. Congress and federal regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in July 2010, instituted major changes to the banking and financial institutions regulatory regimes in light of the recent performance of and government intervention in the financial services sector. Other changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations or policies, could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways. Such changes could subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products we may offer and/or increase the ability of non-banks to offer competing financial services and products, among other things. Failure to comply with laws, regulations or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties and/or reputation damage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Supervision and Regulation” included in Item 1. Business for a more detailed description of the Dodd-Frank Act and other regulatory requirements applicable to First Commonwealth.

Further declines in real estate values could adversely affect our earnings and financial condition.

As of December 31, 2012, approximately 62% of our loans were secured by real estate. These loans consist of residential real estate loans (approximately 30% of total loans), commercial real estate loans (approximately 30% of total loans) and real estate construction loans (approximately 2% of total loans). Since the beginning of the economic recession in 2008, declines in real estate values and weak demand for new construction, particularly outside of our core Pennsylvania market, have caused deterioration in our loan portfolio and adversely impacted our financial condition and results of operations. Additional declines in real estate values, both within and outside of Pennsylvania, could adversely affect the value of the collateral for these loans, the ability of borrowers to make timely repayment of these loans and our ability to recoup the value of the collateral upon foreclosure, further impacting our earnings and financial condition.

13

Table of Contents

Our earnings are significantly affected by general business and economic conditions.

Our operations and profitability are impacted by general business and economic conditions in the United States and abroad. These conditions include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, money supply, political issues, legislative and regulatory changes, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, broad trends in industry and finance and the strength of the United States economy, all of which are beyond our control. A deterioration in economic conditions could result in an increase in loan delinquencies and nonperforming assets, decreases in loan collateral values and a decrease in demand for our products and services, among other things, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our allowance for credit losses may be insufficient.

All borrowers carry the potential to default and our remedies to recover may not fully satisfy money previously loaned. We maintain an allowance for credit losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for credit losses charged to expense, which represents management’s best estimate of probable credit losses that have been incurred within the existing portfolio of loans. The allowance, in the judgment of management, is adequate to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent in the loan portfolio. The level of the allowance for credit losses reflects management’s continuing evaluation of industry concentrations; specific credit risks; loan loss experience; current loan portfolio quality; present economic conditions; and unidentified losses in the current loan portfolio. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for credit losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks using existing qualitative and quantitative information, all of which may undergo material changes. Changes in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may require an increase in the allowance for credit losses. In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review our allowance for credit losses and may require an increase in the provision for credit losses or the recognition of additional loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. An increase in the allowance for credit losses results in a decrease in net income, and possibly risk-based capital, and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Acts of cyber-crime may compromise client and company information, disrupt access to our systems or result in loss of client or company assets.

Our business is dependent upon the availability of technology, the Internet and telecommunication systems to enable financial transactions by clients, record and monitor transactions and transmit and receive data to and from clients and third parties. Information security risks have increased significantly due to the use of online, telephone and mobile banking channels by clients and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists and other external parties. Our technologies, systems, networks and our clients’ devices have been subject to, and are likely to continue to be the target of, cyber-attacks, computer viruses, malicious code, phishing attacks or information security breaches that could result in the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss or destruction of our or our clients’ confidential, proprietary and other information, the theft of client assets through fraudulent transactions or disruption of our or our clients’ or other third parties’ business operations.

During the quarter ending September 30, 2012, we incurred a $3.5 million charge in connection with fraudulent wire transfers involving the breach of a commercial client’s computer system to gain access to our online banking system. There was no breach of First Commonwealth’s systems, however, following this incident, we have enhanced our monitoring and security procedures to help prevent and mitigate the risk of fraudulent transfers. However, there can be no assurance that we will not incur fraud losses in the future.

14

Table of Contents

We could suffer large losses due to the large size of certain loans.

As of December 31, 2012, we had 38 commercial loans with commitments greater than $15.0 million with an aggregate amount of such commitments equal to $907.8 million. If one or more of these large loans deteriorates or if the borrowers default, we could suffer losses which would have a significant impact on our earnings and financial condition.

We have a significant deferred tax asset and cannot assure it will be fully realized.

We had net deferred tax assets of $64.1 million as of December 31, 2012. We did not establish a valuation allowance against our federal net deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2012 as we believe that it is more likely than not that all of these assets will be realized. In evaluating the need for a valuation allowance, we estimated future taxable income based on management approved forecasts. This process required significant judgment by management about matters that are by nature uncertain. If future events differ from our current forecasts, we may need to establish a valuation allowance, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We must evaluate whether any portion of our recorded goodwill is impaired. Impairment testing may result in a material, non-cash write-down of our goodwill assets and could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

At December 31, 2012, goodwill represented approximately 3% of our total assets. We have recorded goodwill because we paid more for some of our businesses than the fair market value of the tangible and separately measurable intangible net assets of those businesses. We test our goodwill and other intangible assets with indefinite lives for impairment at least annually (or whenever events occur which may indicate possible impairment). Goodwill impairment is determined by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value exceeds the carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is not considered impaired. If the fair value of the reporting unit is less than the carrying amount, goodwill is considered impaired. Determining the fair value of our company requires a high degree of subjective management assumptions. Any changes in key assumptions about our business and its prospects, changes in market conditions or other externalities, for impairment testing purposes could result in a non-cash impairment charge and such a charge could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations. The challenges of the current economic environment may adversely affect our earnings, the fair value of our assets and liabilities and our stock price, all of which may increase the risk of goodwill impairment.

We have significant exposure to a downturn in the financial services industry due to our investments in trust preferred securities.

As of December 31, 2012, we had single issuer trust preferred securities and trust preferred collateralized debt obligations with an aggregate book value of $51.9 million and an unrealized loss of approximately $23.4 million. These securities were issued by banks, bank holding companies and other financial services providers. Depending on the severe economic recession and its impact on the financial services industry, we may be required to record additional impairment charges on other investment securities if they suffer a decline in value that is considered other-than-temporary. If the credit quality of the securities in our investment portfolio deteriorates, we may also experience a loss in interest income from the suspension of either interest or dividend payments. Numerous factors, including lack of liquidity for resales of certain investment securities, absence of reliable pricing information for investment securities, adverse changes in business climate or adverse actions by regulators could have a negative effect on our investment portfolio in future periods. If an impairment charge is significant enough it could affect the ability of FCB to upstream dividends to us, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to pay dividends to shareholders and could also negatively impact our regulatory capital ratios and result in us not being classified as “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes.

15

Table of Contents

First Commonwealth relies on dividends from its subsidiaries for most of its revenues.

First Commonwealth is a separate and distinct legal entity from its subsidiaries. It receives substantially all of its revenues from dividends from its subsidiaries. These dividends are the principal source of funds to pay dividends on First Commonwealth’s common stock and interest and principal on First Commonwealth’s debt. Various federal and/or state laws and regulations limit the amount of dividends that FCB and certain non-bank subsidiaries may pay to First Commonwealth. In the event FCB is unable to pay dividends to First Commonwealth, First Commonwealth may not be able to service debt, pay obligations or pay dividends on its common stock. The inability to receive dividends from FCB could have a material adverse effect on First Commonwealth’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Competition from other financial institutions in originating loans, attracting deposits and providing various financial services may adversely affect our profitability.

We face substantial competition in originating loans and attracting deposits. This competition comes principally from other banks, savings institutions, mortgage banking companies and credit unions, as well as institutions offering uninsured investment alternatives, including money market funds. Many of our competitors enjoy advantages, including greater financial resources and higher lending limits, better brand recognition, a wider geographic presence, more accessible branch office locations, the ability to offer a wider array of services or more favorable pricing alternatives, as well as lower origination and operating costs. These competitors may offer more favorable pricing through lower interest rates on loans or higher interest rates on deposits, which could force us to match competitive rates and thereby reduce our net interest income.

Negative publicity could damage our reputation.

Reputation risk, or the risk to our earnings and capital from negative public opinion, is inherent in our business. Negative public opinion could adversely affect our ability to keep and attract customers and expose us to adverse legal and regulatory consequences. Negative public opinion could result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, regulatory compliance, mergers and acquisitions, and disclosure, sharing or inadequate protection of customer information, and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to that conduct. Because we conduct all of our business under the “First Commonwealth” brand, negative public opinion about one business could affect our other businesses.

An interruption to our information systems could adversely impact our operations.

We rely upon our information systems for operating and monitoring all major aspects of our business, including deposit and loan operations, as well as internal management functions. These systems and our operations could be damaged or interrupted by natural disasters, power loss, network failure, improper operation by our employees, security breaches, computer viruses, intentional attacks by third parties or other unexpected events. Any disruption in the operation of our information systems could adversely impact our operations, which may affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Provisions of our articles of incorporation, bylaws and Pennsylvania law, as well as state and federal banking regulations, could delay or prevent a takeover of us by a third party.

Provisions in our articles of incorporation and bylaws, the corporate law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and state and federal regulations could delay, defer or prevent a third party from acquiring us, despite the possible benefit to our shareholders, or otherwise adversely affect the price of our common stock. These provisions include, among other things, advance notice requirements for proposing matters that shareholders may act on at shareholder meetings. In addition, under Pennsylvania law, we are prohibited from engaging in a

16

Table of Contents

business combination with any interested shareholder for a period of five years from the date the person became an interested shareholder unless certain conditions are met. These provisions may discourage potential takeover attempts, discourage bids for our common stock at a premium over market price or adversely affect the market price of, and the voting and other rights of the holders of, our common stock.

None.

Our principal office is located in the old Indiana County courthouse complex, consisting of the former courthouse building and the former sheriff’s residence and jail building for Indiana County. This certified Pennsylvania and national historic landmark was built in 1870 and restored by us in the early 1970s. We lease the complex from Indiana County pursuant to a lease agreement that was originally signed in 1973 and has a current term that expires in 2048.

The majority of our administrative personnel are also located in two owned buildings and one leased premise in Indiana, Pennsylvania, each of which is in close proximity to our principal office.

First Commonwealth Bank has 112 banking offices of which 27 are leased and 85 are owned. We also lease one loan production offices.

While these facilities are adequate to meet our current needs, available space is limited and additional facilities may be required to support future expansion. However, we have no current plans to lease, purchase or construct additional administrative facilities.

The information required by this Item is set forth in Part II, Item 8, Note 26, “Contingent Liabilities,” which is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

Not applicable

Executive Officers of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation

The name, age and principal occupation for each of the executive officers of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation as of December 31, 2012 is set forth below:

I. Robert Emmerich, age 62, has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Credit Officer of First Commonwealth Bank since 2009. Prior to joining First Commonwealth, Mr. Emmerich was retired from a 31-year career at National City Corporation, where he most recently served as Executive Vice President & Chief Credit Officer for Consumer Lending.

Leonard V. Lombardi, age 53, has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Audit Executive of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation since January 1, 2009. He was formerly Senior Vice President / Loan Review and Audit Manager.

17

Table of Contents

Executive Officers of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation (Continued)

Norman J. Montgomery, age 45, has served as the Executive Vice President of Business Integration of First Commonwealth Bank since May 2011. He oversees First Commonwealth’s product development, marketing and business analysis functions and assumed oversight of First Commonwealth’s technology and operations functions in July 2012. He served as Senior Vice President/Business Integration of First Commonwealth Bank from September 2007 until May 2011 and previously held positions in the technology, operations and audit areas.

T. Michael Price, age 50, has served as President of First Commonwealth Bank since November 2007. On March 7, 2012, he began serving as President and Chief Executive Officer of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation. From January 1, 2012 to March 7, 2012, he served as Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation. He was formerly Chief Executive Officer of the Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky Region of National City Bank from July 2004 to November 2007 and Executive Vice President and Head of Small Business Banking of National City Bank prior to July 2004.

Robert E. Rout, age 61, joined First Commonwealth Financial Corporation as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in February 2010. Prior to joining First Commonwealth, Mr. Rout served as Chief Financial Officer and Secretary for S&T Bancorp, Inc. in Indiana, PA, since 1999 and as Chief Administrative Officer of S&T Bancorp, Inc. since April 2008.

Matthew C. Tomb, age 36, has served as Executive Vice President, Chief Risk Officer and General Counsel of First Commonwealth Financial Corporation since November 2010. He previously served as Senior Vice President / Legal and Compliance since September 2007. Before joining First Commonwealth, Mr. Tomb practiced law with Sherman & Howard L.L.C. in Denver, Colorado.

18

Table of Contents

PART II

First Commonwealth is listed on the NYSE under the symbol “FCF.” As of December 31, 2012, there were approximately 9,002 holders of record of First Commonwealth’s common stock. The table below sets forth the high and low sales prices per share and cash dividends declared per share for common stock of First Commonwealth for each quarter during the last two fiscal years.

Federal and state regulations contain restrictions on the ability of First Commonwealth to pay dividends. For information regarding restrictions on dividends, see Part I, Item 1 “Business—Supervision and Regulation—Restrictions on Dividends” and Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 28, Regulatory Restrictions and Capital Adequacy.” In addition, under the terms of the capital securities issued by First Commonwealth Capital Trust I, II, and III, First Commonwealth could not pay dividends on its common stock if First Commonwealth deferred payments on the junior subordinated debt securities which provide the cash flow for the payments on the capital securities.

19

Table of Contents

The following five-year performance graph compares the cumulative total shareholder return (assuming reinvestment of dividends) on First Commonwealth’s common stock to the KBW Regional Banking Index and the Russell 2000 Index. The stock performance graph assumes $100 was invested on December 31, 2007, and the cumulative return is measured as of each subsequent fiscal year end.

20

Table of Contents

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

On June 19, 2012, the Company announced a share repurchase program through which the Board of Directors authorized management to repurchase up to $50.0 million of the Company’s common stock. The following table details the amount of shares repurchased under this program during the fourth quarter of 2012:

21

Table of Contents

The following selected financial data is not covered by the auditor’s report and should be read in conjunction with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, which follows, and with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes.

22

Table of Contents

The following discussion and analysis represents an overview of the financial condition and the results of operations of First Commonwealth and its subsidiaries, FCB, First Commonwealth Insurance Agency, Inc. (“FCIA”) and First Commonwealth Financial Advisors, Inc. (“FCFA”), as of and for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010. The purpose of this discussion is to focus on information concerning our financial condition and results of operations that is not readily apparent from the Consolidated Financial Statements. In order to obtain a clear understanding of this discussion, you should refer to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the notes thereto and other financial information presented in this Annual Report.

Company Overview

First Commonwealth provides a diversified array of consumer and commercial banking services through our bank subsidiary, FCB. We also provide trust and wealth management services through FCFA and insurance products through FCIA. At December 31, 2012, FCB operated 112 community banking offices throughout western Pennsylvania and one loan production office in downtown Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Our consumer services include Internet, mobile and telephone banking, an automated teller machine network, personal checking accounts, interest-earning checking accounts, savings accounts, insured money market accounts, debit cards, investment certificates, fixed and variable rate certificates of deposit, secured and unsecured installment loans, construction and real estate loans, safe deposit facilities, credit lines with overdraft checking protection and IRA accounts. Commercial banking services include commercial lending, small and high-volume business checking accounts, on-line account management services, ACH origination, payroll direct deposit, commercial cash management services and repurchase agreements. We also provide a variety of trust and asset management services and a full complement of auto, home and business insurance as well as term life insurance. We offer annuities, mutual funds, stock and bond brokerage services through an arrangement with a broker-dealer and insurance brokers. Most of our commercial customers are small and mid-sized businesses in central and western Pennsylvania.

As a financial institution with a focus on traditional banking activities, we earn the majority of our revenue through net interest income, which is the difference between interest earned on loans and investments and interest paid on deposits and borrowings. Growth in net interest income is dependent upon balance sheet growth and maintaining or increasing our net interest margin, which is net interest income (on a fully taxable-equivalent basis) as a percentage of our average interest-earning assets. We also generate revenue through fees earned on various services and products that we offer to our customers and through sales of assets, such as loans, investments or properties. These revenue sources are offset by provisions for credit losses on loans, loss on sale or other-than-temporary impairments on investment securities, operating expenses and income taxes.

General economic conditions also affect our business by impacting our customers’ need for financing, thus affecting loan growth, and impacting the credit strength of existing and potential borrowers.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates

First Commonwealth’s accounting and reporting policies conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and predominant practice in the banking industry. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Over time, these estimates, assumptions and judgments may prove to be inaccurate or vary from actual results and may significantly affect our reported results and financial position for the period presented or in future periods. We currently view the determination of the allowance for credit losses, fair value of financial instruments, goodwill and other intangible assets, and income taxes to be critical because they are highly dependent on subjective or complex judgments, assumptions and estimates made by management.

23

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates (Continued)

Allowance for Credit Losses

We account for the credit risk associated with our lending activities through the allowance and provision for credit losses. The allowance represents management’s best estimate of probable losses that are inherent in our existing loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date. The provision is a periodic charge to earnings in an amount necessary to maintain the allowance at a level that is appropriate based on management’s assessment of probable estimated losses. Management determines and reviews with the Board of Directors the adequacy of the allowance on a quarterly basis in accordance with the methodology described below.

There are many factors affecting the allowance for credit losses; some are quantitative while others require qualitative judgment. These factors require the use of estimates related to the amount and timing of expected future cash flows, appraised values on impaired loans, collateral valuations for classified loans that are not impaired, estimated losses for each loan category based on historical loss experience and delinquency trends by category using a four to twenty quarter average, and consideration of current economic trends and conditions, all of which may be susceptible to significant judgment and change. To the extent that actual outcomes differ from estimates, additional provisions for credit losses could be required that could adversely affect our earnings or financial position in future periods. The loan portfolio represents the largest asset category on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition.

24

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates (Continued)

Fair Values of Financial Instruments

FASB ASC Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” establishes a framework for measuring fair value. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 820, First Commonwealth groups financial assets and financial liabilities measured at fair value in three levels based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value.

Level 1 valuations are obtained from readily available pricing sources for market transactions involving identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 valuations are for instruments that trade in less active dealer or broker markets and incorporates values obtained for identical or comparable instruments. Level 3 valuations are derived from other valuation methodologies, including option pricing models, discounted cash flow models and similar techniques, and not based on market exchange, dealer or broker traded transactions. Level 3 valuations incorporate certain assumptions and projections in determining the fair value assigned to each instrument.

Level 2 investment securities are valued by a recognized third party pricing service using observable inputs. Management validates the market values provided by the third party service by having another recognized pricing service price 100% of securities on an annual basis and a random sample of securities each quarter, monthly monitoring of variances from prior period pricing and on a monthly basis evaluating pricing changes compared to expectations based on changes in the financial markets.

Level 3 investments include pooled trust preferred collateralized debt obligations. The fair values of these investments are determined by a specialized third party valuation service. Management validates the fair value of the pooled trust preferred collateralized debt obligations by monitoring the performance of the underlying collateral, discussing the discount rate, cash flow assumptions and general market trends with the specialized third party and by confirming changes in the underlying collateral to the trustee and underwriter reports. Management’s monitoring of the underlying collateral includes deferrals of interest payments, payment defaults, cures of previously deferred interest payments, any regulatory filings or actions and general news related to the underlying collateral. Management also evaluates fair value changes compared to expectations based on changes in the interest rates used in determining the discount rate and general financial markets.

Methodologies and estimates used by management when determining the fair value for pooled trust preferred collateralized debt obligations and testing those securities for other-than-temporary impairment are discussed in detail in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and in Note 11 “Impairment of Investment Securities” and Note 21 “Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities” of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

We consider our accounting policies related to goodwill and other intangible assets to be critical because the assumptions or judgment used in determining the fair value of assets and liabilities acquired in past acquisitions are subjective and complex. As a result, changes in these assumptions or judgment could have a significant impact on our financial condition or results of operations.

The fair value of acquired assets and liabilities, including the resulting goodwill, was based either on quoted market prices or provided by other third-party sources, when available. When third-party information was not available, estimates were made in good faith by management primarily through the use of internal cash flow modeling techniques. The assumptions that were used in the cash flow modeling were subjective and are susceptible to significant changes.

25

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates (Continued)

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Continued)

Goodwill and other intangible assets with indefinite useful lives are tested for impairment at least annually and written down and charged to results of operations only in periods in which the recorded value is more than the estimated fair value. Intangible assets that have finite useful lives will continue to be amortized over their useful lives and are periodically evaluated for impairment.

As of December 31, 2012, goodwill and other intangible assets were not considered impaired; however, changing economic conditions that may adversely affect our performance and stock price could result in impairment, which could adversely affect earnings in future periods. Our Step 1 goodwill impairment analysis as of November 30, 2012, determined that the fair value of our goodwill exceeded its carrying value by approximately 6%. An assessment of qualitative factors was completed as of December 31, 2012 and indicated that it is more likely than not that our fair value exceeded its carrying value.

Income Taxes

We estimate income tax expense based on amounts expected to be owed to the tax jurisdictions where we conduct business. On a quarterly basis, management assesses the reasonableness of its effective tax rate based upon its current estimate of the amount and components of net income, tax credits and the applicable statutory tax rates expected for the full year.

Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined using the asset and liability method and are reported in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. If current available information raises doubt as to the realization of the deferred tax assets, a valuation allowance is established. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to be applied to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. Management assesses all available positive and negative evidence on a quarterly basis to estimate if sufficient future taxable income will be generated to utilize the existing deferred tax assets. The amount of future taxable income used in management’s valuation is based upon management approved forecasts, evaluation of historical earnings levels, proven ability to raise capital to support growth or during times of economic stress and consideration of prudent and feasible potential tax strategies. If future events differ from our current forecasts, a valuation allowance may be required, which could have a material impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due to taxing jurisdictions and are reported in other liabilities in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. Management evaluates and assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions after considering statutes, regulations, judicial precedent and other information and maintains tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these relative risks and merits. Changes to the estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in tax rates, interpretations of tax laws, the status of examinations being conducted by taxing authorities and changes to statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance. These changes, when they occur, can affect deferred taxes and accrued taxes, as well as the current period’s income tax expense and can be significant to our operating results.

Results of Operations—2012 Compared to 2011

Net Income

Net income for 2012 was $42.0 million, or $0.40 per diluted share, as compared to net income of $15.3 million, or $0.15 per diluted share, in 2011. The increase in 2012 performance was primarily the result of a $35.3 million

26

Table of Contents

Results of Operations—2012 Compared to 2011 (Continued)

Net Income (Continued)

decrease in provision expense, a decrease of $2.0 million related to loss on sale or write-down of assets, and a $7.4 million decrease in credit risk recognized on interest rate swaps. Partially offsetting the aforementioned items are a $0.9 million decrease in net interest income, a $2.0 million decrease in net securities gains, and a $3.6 million increase in operational losses.

Our return on average equity was 5.5% and return on average assets was 0.71% for 2012, compared to 2.0% and 0.27%, respectively, for 2011.

Average diluted shares for the year 2012 were 1% less than the comparable period in 2011 primarily due to the common stock buyback program that was authorized during 2012.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income, which is our primary source of revenue, is the difference between interest income from earning assets (loans and securities) and interest expense paid on liabilities (deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt). The amount of net interest income is affected by both changes in the level of interest rates and the amount and composition of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The net interest margin is expressed as the percentage of net interest income, on a fully taxable equivalent basis, to average interest-earning assets. To compare the tax exempt asset yields to taxable yields, amounts are adjusted to the pretaxable equivalent amounts based on the marginal corporate federal income tax rate of 35%. The taxable equivalent adjustment to net interest income for 2012 was $4.4 million compared to $5.5 million in 2011.

Net interest income, on a fully taxable equivalent basis, was $193.3 million for the year-ended December 31, 2012, a $2.1 million, or 1%, decrease compared to $195.4 million for the same period in 2011. The net interest margin, on a fully taxable equivalent basis decreased 19 basis points, or 5%, to 3.61% in 2012 from 3.80% in 2011. The net interest margin is affected by both changes in the level of interest rates and the amount and composition of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.

During the year-ended December 31, 2012, the net interest margin has been challenged by the continuing low interest rate environment and decreasing rates earned on interest-earning assets. Despite a disciplined approach to pricing which has provided for maintaining the level of new volume spreads, runoff of existing assets which are earning higher interest rates has continued to provide for lower yields on earning assets. Growth in earning assets has helped to offset the impact of runoff, as average earning assets for the year increased $212.1 million, or 4%, compared to the comparable period in 2011. Positively impacting the net interest margin for the year 2012 was the recognition of $1.0 million in interest income related to the payoff of a loan that was previously in nonaccrual status and $0.5 million in interest income recognized as an adjustment of yield for a loan that was returned to accrual status. These contributed 3 basis points to the net interest margin for the year 2012. Given the current interest rate environment, it is expected that the challenges to the net interest margin will continue as $2.8 billion in interest-sensitive assets either reprice or mature over the next twelve months.

The taxable equivalent yield on interest-earning assets was 4.18% for the year-ended December 31, 2012, a decrease of 43 basis points from the 4.61% yield for the same period in 2011. This decline can be attributed to the repricing of our variable rate assets in a low rate environment as well as lower interest rates available on new investments and loans. Reductions in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities partially offset the impact of lower yields on interest-earning assets. The cost of interest-bearing liabilities was 0.70% for the year-ended December 31, 2012, compared to 0.99% for the same period in 2011.

27

Table of Contents

Results of Operations—2012 Compared to 2011 (Continued)

Net Interest Income (Continued)

Comparing the year-ended December 31, 2012 with the same period in 2011, changes in interest rates negatively impacted net interest income by $13.3 million. The lower yield on interest-earning assets adversely impacted net interest income by $22.7 million, while the decline in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities had a positive impact of $9.4 million. We have been able to partially mitigate the impact of lower interest rates and the effect on net interest income through improving the mix of deposits and borrowed funds, disciplined pricing strategies, loan growth and increasing our investment volumes within established interest rate risk management guidelines.

While decreases in interest rates and yields compressed the net interest margin, increases in average interest-earning assets and low cost average interest-bearing liabilities neutralized the effect on net interest income. Changes in the volumes of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities positively impacted net interest income by $11.3 million in the year-ended December 31, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. Higher levels of interest-earning assets resulted in an increase of $9.2 million in interest income, while volume changes primarily attributed to the mix of deposits reduced interest expense by $2.1 million.

Positively affecting net interest income was a $97.2 million increase in average net free funds at December 31, 2012 as compared to December 31, 2011. Average net free funds are the excess of noninterest-bearing demand deposits, other noninterest-bearing liabilities and shareholders’ equity over noninterest-earning assets. The largest component of the increase in net free funds was a $90.0 million increase in average noninterest-bearing demand deposits as a result of marketing promotions aimed at attracting new and retaining existing customers. Additionally, higher costing time deposits continue to runoff and reprice to lower costing certificates or other deposit alternatives. Average time deposits for the year-ended December 31, 2012 decreased $205.2 million, or 15%, compared to the comparable period in 2011. The positive change in deposit mix is expected to continue as $511.1 million in certificates of deposits either mature or reprice over the next twelve months.

The following table reconciles interest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income to net interest income adjusted to a fully taxable equivalent basis for the periods presented:

28

Table of Contents

Results of Operations—2012 Compared to 2011 (Continued)

Net Interest Income (Continued)

The following table provides information regarding the average balances and yields and rates on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities for the periods ended December 31:

29

Table of Contents

Results of Operations—2012 Compared to 2011 (Continued)

Net Interest Income (Continued)

The following table sets forth certain information regarding changes in net interest income attributable to changes in the volumes of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and changes in the rates for the periods indicated: