Wintrust Financial Corporation, an Illinois corporation (“we,” “Wintrust” or “the Company”), which was incorporated in 1992, is a financial holding company based in Rosemont, Illinois, with total assets of approximately $27.9$31.2 billion as of December 31, 2017.2018. We conduct our businesses through three segments: community banking, specialty finance and wealth management. All segment measurements discussed below are based on the reportable segments and do not reflect intersegment eliminations.

We provide community-oriented, personal and commercial banking services to customers located in the Chicago metropolitan area, southern Wisconsin and northwest Indiana (“our market area”) through our fifteen wholly-owned-banking subsidiaries (collectively, the “banks”), as well as the origination and purchase of residential mortgages for sale into the secondary market through Wintrust Mortgage, a division of Barrington Bank and Trust Company, N.A. (“Barrington Bank”). For the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, the community banking segment had net revenues of $1.0 billion, $889 million $819 million and $714$819 million, respectively, and net income of $241 million, $175 million $145 million and $102$145 million, respectively. The community banking segment had total assets of $25.4 billion, $22.8 billion $21.2 billion and $19.2$21.2 billion as of December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, respectively. The community banking segment accounted for approximately 76%77% of our consolidated net revenues, excluding intersegment eliminations, for the year ended December 31, 2017.2018.

We provide specialty finance services, including financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums and life insurance premiums (“premium finance receivables”) on a national basis through FIRST Insurance Funding (“FIRST Insurance Funding”), a division of our wholly-owned subsidiary Lake Forest Bank & Trust Company, N.A. ("Lake Forest Bank"), and Wintrust Life Finance (“Wintrust Life Finance”), a division of Lake Forest Bank, and in Canada through our premium finance company, First Insurance Funding of Canada (“FIFC Canada”), lease financing and other direct leasing opportunities through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Wintrust Asset Finance, and short-term accounts receivable financing and outsourced administrative services through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Tricom, Inc. of Milwaukee (“Tricom”). For the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, the specialty finance segment had net revenues of $203 million, $179 million $148 million and $119$148 million, respectively, and net income of $82 million, $66 million $49 million and $42$49 million, respectively. The specialty finance segment had total assets of $5.1 billion, $4.5 billion $3.9 billion and $3.1$3.9 billion as of December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, respectively. The specialty finance segment accounted for 15% of our consolidated net revenues, excluding intersegment eliminations, for the year ended December 31, 2017.2018.

We provide a full range of wealth management services primarily to customers in our market area through threefour separate subsidiaries, The Chicago Trust Company, N.A. (“CTC”), Wayne HummerWintrust Investments, LLC (“WHI”Wintrust Investments”) and, Great Lakes Advisors, LLC (“Great Lakes Advisors”) and Chicago Deferred Exchange Company, LLC ("CDEC"). For the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, the wealth management segment had net revenues of $109 million, $103 million $97 million and $93$97 million, respectively, and net income of $17$20 million, $13$17 million and $13 million, respectively. The wealth management segment had total assets of $733 million, $618 million $612 million and $549$612 million as of December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, respectively. The wealth management segment accounted for 9%8% of our consolidated net revenues, excluding intersegment eliminations, for the year ended December 31, 2017.2018.

As set forth in Note 23,24, “Segment Information,” our operations consist of three primary segments: community banking, specialty finance and wealth management. The three reportable segments are strategic business units that are separately managed as they offer different products and services and have different marketing strategies. In addition, each segment’s customer base has varying characteristics and each segment has a different regulatory environment. While the Company’s management monitors each of the fifteen bank subsidiaries’ operations and profitability separately, these subsidiaries have been aggregated into one reportable operating segment due to the similarities in products and services, customer base, operations, profitability measures and economic characteristics.

Through our community banking segment, our banks provide community-oriented, personal and commercial banking services to customers located in our market area. Our customers include individuals, small to mid-sized businesses, local governmental units and institutional clients residing primarily in the banks' local service areas. The banks have a strategy to provide comprehensive community-focused banking services. In keeping with this strategy, the banks provide highly personalized and responsive service, a characteristic of locally-owned and managed institutions. As such, the banks compete for deposits principally by offering

We now own fifteen banks, including eight Illinois-chartered banks: Hinsdale Bank and Trust Company (“Hinsdale Bank”), Wintrust Bank, Libertyville Bank and Trust Company (“Libertyville Bank”), Northbrook Bank & Trust Company (“Northbrook Bank”), Village Bank & Trust (“Village Bank”), Wheaton Bank & Trust Company (“Wheaton Bank”), State Bank of the Lakes and St. Charles Bank & Trust Company (“St. Charles Bank”). In addition, we have one Wisconsin-chartered bank, Town Bank, and six nationally chartered banks: Lake Forest Bank, Barrington Bank, Crystal Lake Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Crystal Lake Bank”), Schaumburg Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Schaumburg Bank”), Beverly Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Beverly Bank”) and Old Plank Trail Community Bank, N.A. (“Old Plank Trail Bank”). As of December 31, 2017,2018, we had 157167 banking locations.

Each bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by: (1) the Secretary of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (“Illinois Secretary”) and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve”) for Illinois-chartered banks; (2) the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) for nationally-chartered banks; or (3) the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions (“Wisconsin Department”) and the Federal Reserve for Town Bank.

We also engage in the retail origination and correspondent purchase of residential mortgages through Wintrust Mortgage. Most originated and purchased loans sold into the secondary market are sold with servicing released.Mortgage as well as consumer direct lending primarily to veterans through our Veterans First brand. Certain originated loans are sold to unaffiliated companies or the Company's banks with servicing remaining within Wintrust Mortgage operations. Wintrust Mortgage maintains retail mortgage offices in a number of states, with the largest concentration located in the Chicago, Minneapolis and Los Angeles metropolitan areas.

We also offer several niche lending products through several of the banks. These include Barrington Bank's Community Advantage program, which provides lending, deposit and cash management services to condominium, homeowner and community associations; Hinsdale Bank's mortgage warehouse lending program, which provides loan and deposit services to mortgage brokerage companies located predominantly in the Chicago metropolitan area; and Lake Forest Bank's franchise lending program, which provides lending to restaurant franchisees. Other niches offered throughout our banking franchise include Wintrust Commercial Finance, which offers direct leasing opportunities; Wintrust Business Credit, which specializes in asset-based lending for middle-market companies; Wintrust SBA Lending, which is dedicated to offering expertise in Small Business Administration loans; Wintrust Commercial Real Estate, which concentrates on real estate lending solutions including commercial mortgages and construction loans; and Wintrust Government, Non-Profit & Hospital, which focuses on financial solutions for mission-based organizations such as hospitals, non-profits, educational institutions and local government operations.

Through our specialty finance segment, we offer financing of insurance premiums for businesses and individuals; accounts receivable financing, value-added, out-sourced administrative services; and other specialty finance businesses. FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance engage in the premium finance receivables business, our most significant specialized lending niche, including commercial insurance premium finance and life insurance premium finance. We also engage in commercial insurance premium finance in Canada through our wholly-owned subsidiary FIFC Canada.

In their commercial insurance premium finance operations, FIRST Insurance Funding and FIFC Canada make loans to businesses to finance the insurance premiums they pay on their commercial insurance policies. Approved medium and large insurance agents and brokers located throughout the United States and Canada assist FIRST Insurance Funding and FIFC Canada, respectively, in arranging each commercial premium finance loan between the borrower and FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada, as the case may be. FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada evaluates each loan request according to its own underwriting criteria including the amount of the down payment on the insurance policy, the term of the loan, the credit quality of the insurance company providing the financed insurance policy, the interest rate, the borrower's previous payment history, if any, and other factors deemed appropriate. Upon approval of the loan by FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada, as the case may be, the borrower makes a down payment on the financed insurance policy, which is generally done by providing payment to the agent or broker, who then forwards it to the insurance company. FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada may either forward the financed amount of the remaining policy premiums directly to the insurance carrier or to the agent or broker for remittance to the insurance carrier on FIRST Insurance Funding's or FIFC Canada's behalf. In some cases the agent or broker may hold our collateral, in the form of the proceeds of the unearned insurance premium from the insurance company, and forward it to FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada in the event of a default by the borrower. This lending involves relatively rapid turnover of the loan portfolio and high volume of loan originations. Because the agent or broker is the primary contact to the ultimate borrowers who are located nationwide and because proceeds and our collateral may be handled by the agent or brokers during the term of the loan, FIRST Insurance Funding and FIFC Canada may be more susceptible to third party (i.e., agent or broker) fraud. The Company performs various controls and procedures including ongoing credit and other reviews of the agents and brokers as well as performs various internal audit steps to mitigate against the risk of material fraud.

The commercial and property premium finance business is subject to regulation in the majority of states. Regulation typically governs notices to borrowers prior to cancellation of a policy and required communication to insurance agents and insurance companies. FIRST Insurance Funding is qualified to provideoffers financing of commercial insurance policies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  FIRST Insurance Funding’s legal department regularly monitors changes to regulations and updates policies and programs accordingly.

Wintrust Life Finance also finances life insurance policy premiums generally used for estate planning purposes of high net-worth borrowers. These loans are originated directly with the borrowers with assistance from life insurance carriers, independent insurance agents, financial advisors and legal counsel. The cash surrender value of the life insurance policy is the primary form of collateral. In addition, these loans often are secured with a letter of credit, marketable securities or certificates of deposit. In some cases, Wintrust Life Finance may make a loan that has a partially unsecured position.

The life insurance premium finance business is governed undersubject to banking regulations but is not subject to additional systemic regulation.regulatory regimes (e.g. additional state regulation). Wintrust Life Finance's compliance department regularly monitors the regulatory environment and the company's compliance with existing regulations. Wintrust Life Finance maintains a policy prohibiting the known financing of stranger-originated life insurance and has established procedures to identify and prevent the company from financing such policies. While a carrier could potentially put at risk the cash surrender value of a policy, which serves as Wintrust Life Finance's primary collateral, by challenging the validity of the insurance contract for lack of an insurable interest, Wintrust Life Finance believes it has strong counterclaims against any such claims by carriers, in addition to recourse to borrowers and guarantors as well as to additional collateral in certain cases.

Premium finance loans made by FIRST Insurance Funding, Wintrust Life Finance and FIFC Canada are primarily secured by the insurance policies financed by the loans. These insurance policies are written by a large number of insurance companies geographically dispersed throughout the United States and Canada. Our premium finance receivables balances finance insurance policies that are spread among a large number of insurers, however one of the insurers represents approximately 14%15% of such balances and two additional insurers represent approximately 6% and 5%4%, respectively, of such balances. FIRST Insurance Funding, Wintrust Life Finance and FIFC Canada consistently monitor carrier ratings and financial performance of our carriers. In the event ratings fall below certain levels, most of Wintrust Life Finance's life insurance premium finance policies provide for an event of default and allow Wintrust Life Finance to have recourse to borrowers and guarantors as well as to additional collateral in certain cases. For the commercial premium finance business, the term of the loans is sufficiently short such that in the event of a decline in carrier ratings, FIRST Insurance Funding or FIFC Canada, as the case may be, can restrict or eliminate additional loans to finance premiums to such carriers. The majority of premium finance receivables are purchased by the banks in order to more fully utilize their lending capacity as these loans generally provide the banks with higher yields than alternative investments.

Through our wholly-owned subsidiary Wintrust Asset Finance, we provide equipment financing through structured loan and lease products to customers in a variety of industries throughout the United States. Wintrust Asset Finance provides financing of fixed assets consisting of property, plant and equipment, transportation (trucks, trailers, rail, marine, buses), construction, manufacturing equipment, technology, oil and gas, restaurant equipment, medical and healthcare. During 2017,2018, Wintrust Asset Finance contributed approximately $31.0$38.5 million to our revenue, which does not reflect intersegment eliminations.

Through our wholly-owned subsidiary Tricom, we provide high-yielding, short-term accounts receivable financing and value-added, outsourced administrative services, such as data processing of payrolls, billing and cash management services to the temporary staffing industry. Tricom’s clients, located throughout the United States, provide staffing services to businesses in diversified industries. During 2017,2018, Tricom processed payrolls with associated client billings of approximately $686$739 million and contributed approximately $10.7$11.4 million to our revenue, net of interest expense. Net revenue is based on our reportable segments and does not reflect intersegment eliminations.

In 2017,2018, our commercial premium finance operations, life insurance premium finance operations, leasing operations and accounts receivable finance operations accounted for 42%39%, 35%36%, 17%19% and 6%, respectively, of the total revenues of our specialty finance business.

Through our wealth management segment, we offer a full range of wealth management services through threefour separate subsidiaries (WHI,(Wintrust Investments, CTC, and Great Lakes Advisors)Advisors and CDEC): trust and investment services, tax-deferred like-kind exchange services, asset management, securities brokerage services and 401(k) and retirement plan services. These subsidiaries are subject

Wintrust Investments, our registered broker/dealer subsidiary which has been operating since 1931, provides a full range of private client and securities brokerage services to regulationclients located primarily in the Midwest. Wintrust Investments is headquartered in downtown Chicago, operates an office in Appleton, Wisconsin, and has established branch locations in offices at a majority of our banks. Wintrust Investments also provides a full range of investment services to clients through a network of relationships with community-based financial institutions primarily located in Illinois. Wintrust Investments is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”(“SEC”) and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). as a registered broker-dealer, as well as by the SEC as a registered investment adviser.

Great Lakes Advisors, our registered investment adviser with locations in downtown Chicago and Tampa Bay, Florida as well as in various banking offices of our fifteen banks, provides money management services and advisory services to individuals, institutions, and municipal and tax-exempt organizations. Great Lakes Advisors also provides portfolio management and financial advisory services for a wide range of pension and profit-sharing plans as well as money management and advisory services to CTC. Great Lakes Advisors is regulated by the SEC as a registered investment adviser.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, the Company’s wealth management subsidiaries had approximately $24.6$24.2 billion of assets under administration, which included $2.7$3.6 billion of assets owned by the Company and its subsidiary banks.

CTC,CDEC, our trustprovider of tax-deferred like-kind exchange services, provides Qualified Intermediary services (as defined by U.S. Treasury regulations) for taxpayers seeking to structure tax-deferred like-kind exchanges under Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") Section 1031. Under IRC Section 1031, a taxpayer may defer the gain on the sale of certain investment property if the taxpayer utilizes the services of a Qualified Intermediary. These transactions typically generate customer deposits during the period following the sale of the property until such proceeds are used to purchase a replacement property.  These deposit flows result in a source of low-cost deposits. CDEC is the subsidiary offers trust and investment management services to clients through offices located in downtown Chicago and at various banking offices of our fifteen banks. CTC is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examinationElektra Holding Company, LLC ("Elektra"), which was acquired by the OCC.

The Company has employed certain strategies since 2013 to manageachieve strong net income amid an environment characterized by low interest rates and increased competition. In general, the Company has taken a steady and measured approach to grow strategically and manage expenses. Specifically, the Company has:

Our strategy and competitive position for each of our business segments is summarized in further detail, below.

We compete in the commercial banking industry through our banks in the communities they serve. The commercial banking industry is highly competitive and the banks face strong direct competition for deposits, loans and other financial related services. The banks compete with other commercial banks, thrifts, credit unions, stockbrokers, government-sponsored entities, mutual fund companies, insurance companies, factoring companies and other non-bank financial companies. Some of these competitors are local, while others are statewide or nationwide.

As a mid-size financial services company, we expect to benefit from greater access to financial and managerial resources than our smaller local competitors while maintaining our commitment to local decision-making and to our community banking philosophy. In particular, we are able to provide a wider product selection and larger credit facilities than many of our smaller competitors, and we believe our service offerings help us in recruiting talented staff. We continue to add lenders throughout the community banking organization, many of whom have joined us because of our ability to offer a range of products and level of services which compete effectively with both larger and smaller market participants. We have continued to expand our product delivery systems, including a wide variety of electronic banking options for our retail and commercial customers which allow us to provide a level of service typically associated with much larger banking institutions. Consequently, management views technology as a great equalizer to offset some of the inherent advantages of its significantly larger competitors. Additionally, we have access to public capital markets whereas many of our local competitors are privately held and may have limited capital-raising capabilities.

We also believe we are positioned to compete effectively with other larger and more diversified banks, bank holding companies and other financial services companies due to the multi-chartered approach that pushes accountability for building a franchise and a high level of customer service down to each of our banking franchises. Additionally, we believe that we provide a relatively complete portfolio of products that is responsive to the majority of our customers' needs through the retail and commercial operations supplied by our banks, and through our mortgage and wealth management operations. The breadth of our product mix allows us to compete effectively with our larger competitors, while our multi-chartered approach with local and accountable management provides for what we believe is superior customer service relative to our larger and more centralized competitors.

Wintrust Mortgage competes with large mortgage brokers as well as other banking organizations. Consolidation, on-going investor push-backs, enhanced regulatory guidance and the promise of equal oversight for both banks and independent lenders have created challenges for small and medium-sized independent mortgage lenders. Wintrust Mortgage's size, bank affiliation, regulatory competency, branding, technology, business development tools and reputation make the firm well positioned to compete in this environment. In 2017,2018, we increased the amount of loans sold with servicing retained, including those loans sold to the Company's banks with servicing remaining within Wintrust Mortgage operations. While earnings will fluctuate with the rise and fall of long-term interest rates, we expect that mortgage banking revenue will be a continuous source of revenue for us and our mortgage lending relationships will continue to provide franchise value to our other financial service businesses.

In 2017,2018, the Company opened foursix new branch locations in the Chicago metropolitan area. However, the Company closed two bankingarea as well as four new branch locations in 2017 as part of the integration of operations and the identification of under-performing locations.Wisconsin. We believe this strategic branch expansion will allow us to grow into contiguous markets that we currently do not service and expand our footprint.

FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance encounter intense competition from numerous other firms, including a number of national commercial premium finance companies, companies affiliated with insurance carriers, independent insurance brokers who offer premium finance services and other lending institutions. Some of theirour competitors are larger and have greater financial

Wintrust Asset Finance competes with other bank-affiliated, independent, captive and vendor equipment leasing and finance companies.  Wintrust Asset Finance believes a customer-focused origination philosophy, an experienced team, strong underwriting discipline and expert asset management enables them to compete effectively in a growing and dynamic market.

Tricom competes with numerous other firms, including a small number of similar niche finance companies and payroll processing firms, as well as various finance companies, banks and other lending institutions. Tricom's management believes that its commitment to service distinguishes it from competitors.

Our wealth management companies (CTC, WHI andWintrust Investments, Great Lakes Advisors)Advisors and CDEC) compete with larger wealth management subsidiaries of other larger bank holding companies as well as with other trust companies, brokerage and other financial service companies, stockbrokers and financial advisors. We believe we can successfully compete for trust, tax services, asset management and brokerage business by offering personalized attention and customer service to small to midsize businesses and affluent individuals. We continue to recruit and hire experienced professionals from the larger Chicago area wealth management companies, which is expected to help in attracting new customer relationships.

Our business is heavily regulated by both statefederal and federalstate agencies. Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which our business is subject have increased in recent years, in response to the financial crisis as well as other factors such as technological and market changes. Regulatory enforcement and fines have also increased across the banking and financial services sector. Many of these changes have occurred as a result of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) and its implementing regulations, most of which are now in place. The current presidential administration has issued an executive order that sets forth principles for the reform of the federal financial regulatory framework, and the majority in Congress has also suggested an agenda for financial regulatory change. It is too early to assess whether there will be any major changes inWhile the regulatory environment or onlyhas entered a period of rebalancing of the post financial crisis framework. The Company expectsframework, we expect that itsour business will remain subject to extensive regulation and supervision.

The Company is a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”), subject to regulation, supervision, and examination by the Federal Reserve. The Company is also subject to the disclosure and regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, both as administered by the SEC, as well as the rules of NASDAQ that apply to companies with securities listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. Our subsidiary banks are subject to regulation, supervision, and examination by the agency that granted their banking charters: (1) the OCC for Barrington Bank, Lake Forest Bank, Crystal Lake Bank, Schaumburg Bank, Beverly Bank and Old Plank Trail Bank; (2) the Illinois Secretary for Hinsdale Bank, Wintrust Bank, Libertyville Bank, Northbrook Bank, Village Bank, Wheaton Bank, State Bank of the Lakes and St. Charles Bank; and (3) the Wisconsin Department for Town Bank. Our Illinois and Wisconsin

state-chartered bank subsidiaries are also members of the Federal Reserve System, subject to regulation, supervision, and regulationexamination by the Federal Reserve as their primary federal regulator. The deposits of all of our subsidiary banks are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) and, as such, the FDIC has additional oversight authority over the banks. The supervision, regulation and examination of banks and bank holding companies by bank regulatory agencies are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, the DIF, and the banking system as a whole, rather than shareholders of banks and bank holding companies, and in some instances may be contrary to theirshareholders' interests.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) has broad rulemaking authority over a wide range of federal consumer protection laws applicable to the business of our subsidiary banks and some other operating subsidiaries. Because each of our subsidiary banks has less than $10 billion in total consolidated assets, our subsidiary banks’ primary federal banking agency and, where applicable, state banking agency, not the CFPB, is responsible for examining and supervising the subsidiary banks’ compliance with federal consumer protection laws and regulations. Our non-bank subsidiaries are subject to regulation by their

Federal and state laws, and the regulations of the bank regulatory agencies issued under them, affect the scope of business, the kinds and amounts of investments banks may make, reserve requirements, capital levels, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, the ability to merge, consolidate and acquire, dealings with insiders and affiliates and the payment of dividends. The regulatory agencies have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity where the agencies determine, among other things, that such operations are unsafe or unsound, fail to comply with applicable law or are otherwise inconsistent with laws and regulations or with the supervisory policies of these agencies.

The following is a description of some of the laws and regulations that affect our business. By necessity, the descriptions below are summaries that do not purport to be complete, and that are qualified in their entirety by reference to those statutes and regulations discussed, and all regulatory interpretations thereof. Any changes in applicable laws, regulations, or the interpretations thereof could have a material adverse effect on our business or the business of our subsidiaries.

The Company is a bank holding company that has elected to be treated as a financial holding company. The activities of bank holding companies generally are limited to the business of banking, managing or controlling banks, and certain other activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be closely related to banking. As a financial holding company, we may engage in an expanded range of activities, including activities that are considered to be financial in nature. Financial holding companies may also engage in activities incidental or complementary to financial activities, if the Federal Reserve determines that such activities pose no substantial risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system in general. Impermissible activities for financial holding companies and their subsidiaries include activities that are related to commerce, such as retail sales of nonfinancial products or manufacturing. As a result, subject to certain exceptions, the BHC Act generally prohibits us from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of voting shares of any company engaged in activities that are not permissible for us to engage in.

Maintaining our financial holding company status requires that the Company and each of our subsidiary banks remain “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” as defined by regulation and that each of our subsidiary banks maintain at least a “satisfactory” rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”). If we or our subsidiary banks fail to continue to meet these requirements, we could be subject to restrictions on new activities and acquisitions, and/or be required to cease and possibly divest operations that conduct existing activities that are not permissible for a bank holding company that is not a financial holding company.

The BHC Act generally requires us to obtain prior approval from the Federal Reserve before acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of an additional bank or bank holding company, or to merge or consolidate with another bank holding company. The Bank Merger Act generally requires our subsidiary banks to obtain prior regulatory approval to merge or consolidate with, or acquire substantially all of the assets of or assume deposits of, another bank. We must also be well-capitalized and well-managed, in order to acquire a bank located outside of our home state.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”) and Federal Reserve regulations and policy require us to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength for our subsidiary banks, and to commit resources to support the banks. This support may be required even if doing so may adversely affect our ability to meet other obligations.

Acquisitions of the Company’s voting stock above certain thresholds may be subject to prior regulatory notice or approval under applicable federal and state banking laws. Investors are responsible for ensuring that they do not, directly or indirectly, acquire shares of our stock in excess of the amount that can be acquired without regulatory approval or notice under the BHC Act, the Change in Bank Control Act, the Illinois Banking Act and Wisconsin banking laws.

We are prohibited under the Volcker Rule from (1) engaging in short-term proprietary trading for our own account, and (2) having certain ownership interests in and relationships with hedge funds or private equity funds. The fundamental prohibitions of the Volcker Rule apply to banking entities of any size, including the Company and its bank subsidiaries. The final Volcker Rule regulations contain exemptions for market-making, hedging, underwriting, trading in U.S. government and agency obligations and also permit certain ownership interests in certain types of funds to be retained. They also permit the offering and sponsoring of funds under certain conditions. The final Volcker Rule regulations impose significant compliance and reporting obligations on

We and our subsidiary banks are required to maintain minimum risk-based and leverage capital ratios, as well as a capital conservation buffer ("Capital Conservation Buffer"), pursuant to regulations adopted by the Federal Reserve and the OCC to implement the Basel III capital framework (“U.S. Basel III Rule”).

Regulatory capital requirements apply to Common Equity Tier 1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital.

Certain adjustments to and deductions from capital are required for purposes of calculating these regulatory capital measures, including with respect to goodwill, intangible assets, certain deferred tax assets, AOCI and investments in the capital instruments of unconsolidated financial institutions. Certain of these adjustments and deductions arewere subject to phase-in periods that began on January 1, 2015 and ended on January 1, 2018. On November 21, 2017, the federal banking agencies issued a final rule that, for certain bank holding companies and banks, including us and our subsidiary banks, delayed the last phase of the U.S. Basel III Rule’s transition provisions relating to capital deductions for mortgage servicing assets, certain deferred tax assets and investments in the capital instruments of unconsolidated financial institutions, and the recognition of minority interests in regulatory capital,

until a revised rule is finalized. On September 26, 2017, the federal banking agencies issued a proposed rule that, for certain bank holding companies and banks, including us and our subsidiary banks, would simplify these regulatory capital deductions and limitations. The federal banking agencies have stated that these aspects of the September 26, 2017 proposed rule remain under consideration.    

Under the U.S. Basel III Rule, risk weights are assigned to our and our subsidiary banks’ assets, exposures and certain off-balance sheet items to determine their risk-weighted assets ("RWAs"),RWAs, which are used to calculate certain capital ratios. On September 18, 2018, the federal banking agencies issued a proposed rule that would revise the definition of high-volatility commercial real estate exposure to conform with the statutory definition of a high-volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development, or construction loan, in accordance with the Economic Growth Act. The revised definition would exclude the requirement to apply a heightened risk weight of 150% to any loans made prior to January 1, 2015, and certain other loans currently classified as high-volatility commercial real estate exposures. The federal banking agencies have stated that, in light of the changes to the definition of high-volatility commercial real estate exposures required by the Economic Growth Act, they will not act on aspects of the September 26, 2017 proposed rule would replace the framework for applying heightened risk weightsthat related to high-volatility commercial real estate with a simpler framework that would focus on how loan proceeds are used, instead of underwriting criteria, to identify applicable exposures and would reduce the risk weight applied to applicable exposures from 150% to 130%. If adopted, these changes would apply prospectively.estate.

Under the U.S. Basel III Rule, we and our subsidiary banks are required to maintain the following minimum capital ratios:

To be well-capitalized, our subsidiary banks must maintain the following capital ratios:

The Federal Reserve has not yet revised the well-capitalized standard for bank holding companies to reflect the higher capital requirements imposed under the U.S. Basel III Rule. For purposes of the Federal Reserve’s Regulation Y, including determining whether a bank holding company meets the requirements to be a financial holding company, bank holding companies, such as the Company, must maintain a Tier 1 Capital Ratio of 6.0% or greater and a Total Capital Ratio of 10.0% or greater to be well-capitalized. If the Federal Reserve were to apply the same or a very similar well-capitalized standard to bank holding companies as that applicable to our subsidiary banks, the Company’s capital ratios as of December 31, 20172018 would exceed such revised well-capitalized standard. The Federal Reserve may require bank holding companies, including us, to maintain capital ratios substantially in excess of mandated minimum levels, depending upon general economic conditions and a bank holding company’s particular condition, risk profile and growth plans.

Failure to be well-capitalized or to meet minimum capital requirements could result in certain mandatory and possible additional discretionary actions by regulators, including restrictions on our or our subsidiary banks’ ability to pay dividends or otherwise distribute capital or to receive regulatory approval of applications, or other restrictions on growth. Such actions, if undertaken, could have an adverse material effect on our operations or financial condition.

In addition to meeting the minimum capital requirements, under the U.S. Basel III Rule we and our banking subsidiaries must also maintain the required Capital Conservation Buffer to avoid becoming subject to restrictions on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments to management. The Capital Conservation Buffer is calculated as a ratio of Common Equity Tier 1 capital to RWAs and it effectively increases the required minimum risk-based capital ratios. The Capital Conservation Buffer requirement is beingwas phased in over a three-year period that began in January 1, 2016. When theThe phase-in period is completeended on January 1, 2019, and the Capital Conservation Buffer will beis now at its fully phased-in level of 2.5%. Throughout 2017,2018, the required Capital Conservation Buffer was 1.25%, and the required Capital Conservation Buffer throughout 2018 will be 1.875%. The Tier 1 Leverage Ratio is not impacted by the Capital Conservation Buffer, and a banking institution may be considered well-capitalized while remaining out of compliance with the Capital Conservation Buffer.

The table below summarizes the capital requirements that we and our subsidiary banks must satisfy to avoid limitations on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments (i.e., the required minimum capital ratios plus the Capital Conservation Buffer) during the remaining transition period for the Capital Conservation Buffer:

As of December 31, 2017,2018, our and our subsidiary banks’ regulatory capital ratios were above the well-capitalized standards and met the then-applicable Capital Conservation Buffer. Based on current estimates, we believe that we and our subsidiary banks will continue to exceed all applicable well-capitalized regulatory capital requirements and the Capital Conservation Buffer, on a fully phased-in basis. Please refer to the table below for a summary of our regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2017,2018, calculated using the regulatory capital methodology applicable to us during 2017.2018.

Historically, monitoring of bank and bank holding company liquidity has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required formulaic measures set by regulation, and the liquidity requirements of the Company and our banking subsidiaries continue to be subject to supervision by federal and state banking regulators. Large financial firms are subject to the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (“LCR”) rule, which requires them to meet certain liquidity measures by holding an adequate amount of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets, such as Treasury securities and other sovereign debt. In addition, in May 2016 the federal banking agencies proposed a Net Stable Funding Ratio (“NSFR”) rule, which would require large financial firms to meet certain net stable funding measures by funding themselves with adequate amounts of medium- and long-term funding.

Although weOn October 31, 2018, the federal banking agencies proposed a rule that would, among other things, increase the asset thresholds at which large financial firms would be subject to the LCR and the proposed NSFR. We and our subsidiary banks are not subject to the LCR and would not be subject to the NSFR as proposed, certain elementsproposed. Instead, monitoring of the LCR ruleCompany’s and NSFR proposed rule could influence theour banking subsidiaries’ liquidity is addressed as a supervisory policies of thematter by our federal and state banking agencies.regulators, without required formulaic measures set by regulation.

WePursuant to the Economic Growth Act, which increased the asset thresholds at which company-run stress test requirements apply, we are no longer required to conduct annual company-run stress tests using data as of December 31st with submissions due to the Federal Reserve no later than July 31st of each following year. We are also required to publicly disclose the results of our stress tests. None of our subsidiary banks met the previous asset thresholds or meet the current increased asset thresholds that would cause them to be subject to stress testing requirements.requirements under this rule.

We are a legal entity separate and distinct from our banking and non-banking subsidiaries. Since our consolidated net income consists largely of net income of our bank and non-bank subsidiaries, our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares depends upon our receipt of dividends from our subsidiaries. There are various federal and state law limitations on the extent to which our banking subsidiaries can declare and pay dividends to us, including regulatory capital requirements, general regulatory oversight to prevent unsafe or unsound practices and federal and state banking law requirements concerning the payment of dividends out of net profits or surplus. Applicable federal and state banking laws also prohibit, without prior regulatory approval, insured depository institutions, such as our bank subsidiaries, from making dividend distributions if such distributions are not paid out of available earnings. In addition, our right, and the right of our shareholders and creditors, to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of our bank and non-bank subsidiaries is further subject to the prior claims of creditors of our subsidiaries. No assurances can be given that the banks will, in any circumstances, pay dividends to the Company.

Our ability to declare and pay dividends to our shareholders is similarly limited by federal banking law and Federal Reserve regulations and policy. Federal Reserve policy provides that a bank holding company should not pay dividends unless (1) the bank holding company’s net income over the last four quarters (net of dividends paid) is sufficient to fully fund the dividends, (2) the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition of the bank holding company and its subsidiaries and (3) the bank holding company will continue to meet minimum required capital adequacy ratios. The policy also provides that a bank holding company should inform the Federal Reserve reasonably in advance of declaring or paying a dividend that exceeds earnings for the period for which the dividend is being paid or that could result in a material adverse change to the bank holding company’s capital structure. Bank holding companies also are required to consult with the Federal Reserve before materially increasing dividends or redeeming or repurchasing capital instruments. Additionally, thedividends. The Federal Reserve could prohibit or limit the payment of dividends by a bank holding company if it determines that payment of the dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice. Additionally, bank holding companies are required to receive prior written approval from the Federal Reserve prior to announcing the redemption or repurchase of capital instruments.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” regarding FDIC-insured depository institutions that do not meet certain capital adequacy standards. A depository institution’s treatment for purposes of the prompt corrective action provisions depends upon its level of capitalization and certain other factors. An institution that fails to remain well-capitalized becomes subject to a series of restrictions that increase in severity as its capital condition weakens. Such restrictions may include a prohibition on capital distributions, restrictions on asset growth or restrictions on the ability to receive regulatory approval of applications. The FDICIA also provides for enhanced supervisory authority over undercapitalized institutions, including authority for the appointment of a conservator or receiver for the institution. In certain instances, a bank holding company may be required to guarantee the performance of an undercapitalized subsidiary bank’s capital restoration plan.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, each of the Company’s banks was categorized as “well-capitalized” and, in addition, met additional requirements under the Capital Conservation Buffer.

The federal bank regulatory agencies have broad authority to issue orders to depository institutions and their holding companies prohibiting activities that constitute violations of law, rule, regulation, or administrative order, or that represent unsafe or unsound banking practices, as determined by the federal banking agencies. The federal banking agencies also are empowered to require affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice; issue administrative orders that can be judicially enforced; direct increases in capital; limit dividends and distributions; restrict growth; assess civil money penalties against institutions or individuals who violate any laws, regulations, orders, or written agreements with the agencies; order termination of certain activities of holding companies or their non-bank subsidiaries; remove officers and directors; order divestiture of ownership or control of a non-banking subsidiary by a holding company; or terminate deposit insurance and appoint a conservator or receiver. The Illinois and Wisconsin state bank regulatory agencies have similar authority and power with respect to our Illinois and Wisconsin state-chartered banks, respectively.

The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted a set of guidelines prescribing safety and soundness standards relating to internal controls and information systems, informational security, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, fees and benefits. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice, and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal shareholder.

During the past decade, properly managing risks has been identified as critical to the conduct of safe and sound banking activities and has become even more important as new technologies, product innovation, and the size and speed of financial transactions have changed the nature of banking markets.  The agencies have identified a spectrum of risks facing banking institutions including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, legal, and reputational risk. Some of the regulatory pronouncements have focused on operational risk, which arises from the potential that inadequate information systems, operational problems, breaches in internal controls, fraud, or unforeseen catastrophes will result in unexpected losses. New products and services, third-party risk management and cybersecurity are critical sources of operational risk that financial institutions are expected to address in the

Under the cross-guarantee provision of the FDIA, insured depository institutions such as our subsidiary banks may be liable to the FDIC for any losses incurred, or reasonably expected to be incurred, by the FDIC resulting from the default of, or FDIC assistance to, any other commonly controlled insured depository institution. An FDIC cross-guarantee claim against a depository institution is superior in right of payment to claims of the holding company and its affiliates against such depository institution. All of our subsidiary banks are commonly controlled within the meaning of the cross-guarantee provision.

The deposits of each of our subsidiary banks are insured by the Depositors Insurance Fund ("DIF") up to the standard maximum deposit insurance amount of $250,000 per depositor. Each of our subsidiary banks is subject to deposit insurance assessments based on the risk it poses to the DIF, as determined by the capital category and supervisory category to which it is assigned. The FDIC has authority to raise or lower assessment rates on insured deposits in order to achieve statutorily required reserve ratios in the DIF and to impose special additional assessments. Until December 31,September 30, 2018, insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more mustwere required to pay an assessment surcharge. None of our bank subsidiaries arewere subject to this surcharge. However, there is a risk that our subsidiary banks’ deposit insurance premiums will increase if failures of insured depository institutions deplete the DIF or if the FDIC were to change its view of the risk that they pose to the DIF.

In addition, the Deposit Insurance Fund Act of 1996 authorizes the Financing Corporation (“FICO”) to impose assessments on DIF assessable deposits in order to service the interest on FICO’s bond obligations. The FICO assessment rate is adjusted quarterly and for the fourth quarter of 20172018 was approximately 0.5400.320 basis points (54(32 cents per $10,000 of assessable deposits).

Federal and state banking laws impose limits on the amount of credit a bank can extend to any one person (or group of related persons). For national banks, this limit includes credit exposures arising from derivative transactions, repurchase agreements, and securities lending and borrowing transactions. In addition, state-chartered banks (including certain of our banking subsidiaries) are prohibited from engaging in derivative transactions unless the state lending limit laws take into account credit exposure to such transactions.

Applicable banking laws and regulations also place restrictions on loans by FDIC-insured banks and their affiliates to their directors, executive officers and principal shareholders.

The federal banking agencies have adopted uniform regulations prescribing standards for extensions of credit that are secured by liens or interests in real estate or made for the purpose of financing permanent improvements to real estate. Under these regulations, all insured depository institutions, such as our subsidiary banks, must adopt and maintain written policies establishing appropriate

limits and standards for extensions of credit that are secured by liens or interests in real estate or are made for the purpose of financing permanent improvements to real estate. These policies must establish loan portfolio diversification standards, prudent underwriting standards (including loan-to-value limits) that are clear and measurable, loan administration procedures, and documentation, approval and reporting requirements. The real estate lending policies must reflect consideration of the federal bank regulators’ Interagency Guidelines for Real Estate Lending Policies.

The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated prohibitions under federal law against the payment of interest on demand deposits, thus allowing businesses to have interest-bearing checking accounts.

Federal Reserve regulations require depository institutions to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). For 2018,2019, the first $16.0$16.3 million of otherwise reservable balances are exempt from the reserve requirements; for transaction accounts aggregating more than $16.0$16.3 million to $122.3$124.2 million, the reserve requirement is 3% of total transaction accounts; and for net transaction accounts in excess of $122.3$124.2 million, the reserve requirement is 10% of the

With the approval of applicable regulators, national banks and state banks may establish de novo branches in states other than their home state as if such state was the bank’s home state.

For a three-year period, newly chartered banks are subject to enhanced supervisory procedures, including higher capital requirements, more frequent examinations and other requirements.

Each of our subsidiary banks is prohibited from conditioning the availability of any product or service, or varying the price for any product or service, on the requirement that the customer obtain some additional product or service from the bank or any of its affiliates, other than loans, deposits and trust services.

Certain transactions between a bank and its holding company or other non-bank affiliates are subject to various restrictions imposed by state and federal law and regulation. Such “covered transactions” include loans and other extensions of credit by the bank to the affiliate, investments in securities issued by the affiliate, purchases of assets 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 the affiliate. In general, these affiliate transaction rules limit the amount of covered transactions between an institution and a single affiliate, as well as the aggregate amount of covered transactions between an institution and all of its affiliates. In addition, covered transactions that are credit transactions must be secured by acceptable collateral, and all affiliate transactions, including those that do not qualify as covered transactions, must be on terms that are at least as favorable to the bank as then-prevailing in the market for comparable transactions with unaffiliated entities. Transactions between affiliated banks may be subject to certain exemptions under applicable federal law.

Under the CRA, insured depository institutions, including our subsidiary banks, have a continuing and affirmative obligation 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 insured depository institutions nor does it limit an insured depository 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. However, insured depository institutions are rated on their performance in meeting the needs of their communities. The CRA requires each federal banking agency to take an insured depository institution’s CRA record into account when evaluating certain applications by the insured depository institution or its holding company, including applications for charters, branches and other deposit facilities, relocations, mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of assets or assumptions of liabilities, and bank and savings association acquisitions. An unsatisfactory record of performance may be the basis for denying or conditioning approval of an application by an insured depository institution or its holding company. The CRA also requires that all institutions publicly disclose their CRA ratings. Each of our subsidiary banks received a “satisfactory” or better rating from the Federal Reserve or the OCC on its most recent CRA performance evaluation.

Our subsidiary banks and some other operating subsidiaries are subject to a variety of federal and state statutes and regulations designed to protect consumers. The CFPB has broad rulemaking authority over a wide range of federal consumer protection laws that apply to banks and other providers of financial products and services, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices, but examination and supervision is carried out by each subsidiary bank’s primary federal banking agency and, where applicable, state banking agency, not the CFPB. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes state attorneys general and other state officials to enforce consumer protection rules issued by the CFPB. State authorities have recently increased their focus on and enforcement of consumer protection rules.

Interest and other charges collected or contracted for by banks are subject to state usury laws and federal laws concerning interest rates. Loan operations are also subject to federal laws applicable to credit transactions, such as:    

Deposit operations are subject to, among others:

There are consumer protection standards that apply to functional areas of operation rather than applying only to loan or deposit products. Our subsidiary banks and some other operating subsidiaries are also subject to certain state laws and regulations designed to protect consumers.

The CFPB has promulgated many mortgage-related final rules since it was established under the Dodd-Frank Act, including rules related to the ability to repay and qualified mortgage standards, mortgage servicing standards, loan originator compensation standards, high-cost mortgage requirements, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requirements and appraisal and escrow standards for higher priced mortgages. Most of the provisions of these mortgage-related final rules are currently effective. In addition, several proposed revisions to mortgage-related rules are pending finalization. The mortgage-related final rules issued by the CFPB have materially restructured the origination, servicing and securitization of residential mortgages in the United States. These rules have impacted, and will continue to impact, the business practices of mortgage lenders, including the Company.

In order to ensure compliance with all mortgage-related rules and regulations, the Company consolidated its consumer mortgage loan origination and loan servicing operations within Wintrust Mortgage. All consumer mortgage applications are taken through Wintrust Mortgage, which has extensively trained loan originators located at many of our branches. While in certain limited cases our banks may offer specialized consumer mortgages to our customers, substantially all consumer mortgages for all of our banks are originated and closed by Wintrust Mortgage. Wintrust Mortgage then sells loans to third parties or to our banks. To the extent that we retain consumer mortgage loans in our bank portfolios, our banks have engaged Wintrust Mortgage to provide loan servicing.

Changes to consumer protection regulations, including those promulgated by the CFPB, could affect our business but the likelihood, timing and scope of any such changes and the impact any such change may have on us cannot be determined with any certainty. See Item 1A. Risk Factors.

The Dodd-Frank Act amended the laws governing federal preemption of state laws as applied to national banks, and eliminated federal preemption for subsidiaries of national banks. These changes may subject the Company’s national banks and their divisions, including Wintrust Mortgage, to additional state regulation and enforcement.

We are subject to a statutory requirement that interchange fees for electronic debit transactions that are paid to or charged by payment card issuers, including our bank subsidiaries, be reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer. Interchange fees for electronic debit transactions are limited to 21 cents plus .05%0.05% of the transaction, plus an additional one cent per transaction fraud adjustment, impose requirements regarding routing and exclusivity of electronic debit transactions, and generally require that debit cards be usable in at least two unaffiliated networks.

The Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) and USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (“USA PATRIOT Act”) contain anti-money laundering (“AML”) and financial transparency provisions intended to detect, and prevent the use of the U.S. financial system for, money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The BSA, as amended by the USA PATRIOT Act, requires depository institutions and their holding companies to undertake activities including maintaining an AML program, verifying the identity of clients, monitoring for and reporting suspicious transactions, reporting on cash transactions exceeding specified thresholds, and responding to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. Each of our subsidiary banks is subject to the BSA and, therefore, is required to provide its employees with AML training, designate an AML compliance officer and undergo an annual, independent audit to assess the effectiveness of its AML program. We have implemented policies, procedures and internal controls that are designed to comply with these AML requirements. In May 2016, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), which is a unit of the Treasury Department that drafts regulations implementing the USA PATRIOT Act and other AML and BSA legislation, issued final rules governing enhanced customer due diligence. The rules impose several new obligations on covered financial institutions with respect to their “legal entity customers,” including corporations, limited liability companies and other similar entities. For each such customer that opens an account (including an existing customer opening a new account), the covered financial institution must identify and verify the customer’s “beneficial owners,” who are specifically defined in the rules. The rules contain an exemption for certain insurance premium financing transactions, but cash refunds issued in connection with such transactions are not exempt, thus requiring verification of beneficial ownership before cash refunds may be issued to borrowers.transactions. Bank regulators are focusing their examinations on anti-money laundering compliance, and we will continue to monitor and augment, where necessary, our AML compliance programs. The federal banking agencies are required, when reviewing bank and bank holding company acquisition or merger applications, to take into account the effectiveness of the anti-money laundering activities of the applicant.

An investment in our securities is subject to risks inherent to our business. Certain material risks and uncertainties that management believes affect Wintrust are described below. Before making an investment decision, you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in our other filings with the SEC. Additional risks and uncertainties that management is not aware of or that management currently deems immaterial may also impair Wintrust's business operations. This Annual Report on Form 10-K is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. If this were to happen, the value of our securities could decline significantly, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

 

 

Our business activities and earnings are affected by general business conditions in the United States and abroad, including factors such as the level and volatility of short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, home prices, unemployment and underemployment levels, bankruptcies, household income, consumer spending, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, liquidity of the global financial markets, the availability and cost of capital and credit, investor sentiment and confidence in the financial markets, and the strength of the domestic economies in which we operate. The deterioration of any of these conditions can adversely affect our consumer and commercial businesses and securities portfolios, our level of charge-offs and provision for credit losses, our capital levels and liquidity, and our results of operations.

 

More specifically, the U.S. economy has generally strengthened and growth in economic activity in our geographic area has increased to a moderate pace over recent periods. As a lending institution, our business is directly affected by the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans, as well as by the value of collateral, such as real estate, that secures many of our loans. Any economic deterioration from current levels or slowing of current economic activity could lead to an increase in loan charge-offs and negatively affect consumer confidence as well as the level of business activity. However, netNet charge-offs, excluding covered loans, decreasedincreased to $19.7 million in 2018 from $15.0 million in 2017 from $16.9 million in 2016.2017. Our balance of non-performing loans, excluding covered loans and other real estate owned (“OREO”), excluding covered other real estate owned, was $113.2 million and $24.8 million, respectively, at December 31, 2018 compared to $90.2 million and $40.6 million, respectively, at December 31, 2017 compared to $87.5 million and $40.3 million, respectively, at December 31, 2016.2017. Deterioration in the economy, real estate markets or increased unemployment rates, particularly in the markets in which we operate, will likely diminish the ability of our borrowers to repay loans that we have made to them, the value of any collateral securing such loans and may cause increases in delinquencies, problem assets, charge-offs and provision for credit losses, all of which could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Further, the underwriting and credit monitoring policies and procedures that we have adopted may not prevent losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

 

Except for our premium finance business and certain other niche businesses, our success depends primarily on the general economic conditions of the specific local markets in which we operate. Unlike larger national or other regional banks that are more geographically diversified, we provide banking and financial services to customers primarily in the Chicago metropolitan and southern Wisconsin market areas. The local economic conditions in these areas significantly impact the demand for our products and services as well as the ability of our customers to repay loans, the value of the collateral securing loans and the stability of our deposit funding sources. Specifically, many of the loans in our portfolio are secured by real estate located in the Chicago metropolitan area. Any declines in economic conditions, including inflation, recession, unemployment, changes in securities markets or other factors impacting these local markets could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Deterioration in the real estate markets where collateral for our mortgage loans is located could adversely affect the borrower's ability to repay the loan and the value of the collateral securing the loan, and in turn the value of our assets.

 

In addition, the State of Illinois has experienced significant financial difficulty in recent years. To the extent that these issues impact the economic vitality of the state and the businesses operating in Illinois, businesses may be encouraged to leave the state or new employers may be discouraged to start or move businesses to Illinois, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

We maintain an allowance for loan losses that is intended to absorb credit losses that we expect to incur in our loan portfolio. At each balance sheet date, our management determines the amount of the allowance for loan losses based on our estimate of probable and reasonably estimable losses in our loan portfolio, taking into account probable losses that have been identified relating to specific borrowing relationships, as well as probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio and credit undertakings that are not specifically identified.

 

Because our allowance for loan losses represents an estimate of inherent losses, there is no certainty that it will be adequate over time to cover credit losses in the portfolio, particularly if there is deterioration in general economic or market conditions or events that adversely affect specific customers. In 2017,2018, we charged off $15.0$19.7 million in loans, excluding covered loans (net of recoveries) and increased our allowance for loan losses excluding the allowance for covered loans, from $122.3 million at December 31, 2016 to $137.9 million at December 31, 2017.2017 to $152.8 million at December 31, 2018. The increase in allowance in 20172018 was primarily the result of higher impaired loans requiring specific reserves and significant loan growth during the period. Our allowance for loan losses excluding the allowance for covered loans, represents 0.64% and 0.62% of total loans, excluding covered loans outstanding at December 31, 20172018 and 2016, respectively.2017. The Company's future adoption of Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” may result in an increase in the allowance for loan losses and related coverage ratios at the time of adoption regardless of changes in the economy and the related ability of borrowers to repay their loans. Such accounting rules are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted.

 

Although we believe our loan loss allowance is adequate to absorb reasonably estimable losses in our loan portfolio, if our estimates are inaccurate and our actual loan losses exceed the amount that is anticipated, or if the loss assumptions we used in calculating our reserves are significantly different from those we actually experience, our financial condition and liquidity could be materially adversely affected.

 

For more information regarding our allowance for loan losses, see “Loan Portfolio and Asset Quality” under Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7.

 

 

The repayment of our commercial loans is dependent upon the financial success and viability of the borrower. If the economy weakens for a prolonged period or experiences deterioration or if the industry or market in which the borrower operates weakens, our borrowers may experience depressed or dramatic and sudden decreases in revenues that could hinder their ability to repay their loans. Our commercial loan portfolio totaled $7.8 billion or 33% of our total loan portfolio, at December 31, 2018, compared to $6.8 billion, or 31% of our total loan portfolio, at December 31, 2017, compared to $6.0 billion, or 30% of our total loan portfolio, at December 31, 2016.2017.

 

Commercial loans are secured by different types of collateral related to the underlying business, such as accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. Should a commercial loan require us to foreclose on the underlying collateral, the unique nature of the collateral may make it more difficult and costly to liquidate, thereby increasing the risk to us of not recovering the principal amount of the loan. Accordingly, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected by defaults in this portfolio.

 

 

As of both December 31, 2018 and 2017, approximately 37% and 2016, approximately 39% and 41%, respectively, of our total loan portfolio was secured by real estate, the majority of which is commercial real estate. The commercial and residential real estate market continues to experience a variety of difficulties, including the Chicago metropolitan area and southern Wisconsin, in which a majority of our real estate loans are concentrated. Increases in commercial and consumer delinquency levels or declines in real estate market values would require increased net charge-offs and increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

We use analytical and forecasting models to estimate the effects of economic conditions on our loan portfolio and probable loan performance. Those models reflect certain assumptions about market forces, including interest rates and consumer behavior that may be incorrect. If our analytical and forecasting models’ underlying assumptions are incorrect, improperly applied, or otherwise inadequate, we may suffer deleterious effects such as higher than expected loan losses, lower than expected net interest income, lower than expected liquidity, lower than expected capital or unanticipated charge-offs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

Wintrust isWe are exposed to interest rate risk in its core banking activities of lending and deposit taking, since changes in prevailing interest rates affect the value of our assets and liabilities. Such changes may adversely affect our net interest income, which is the difference between interest income and interest expense. Our net interest income is affected by the fact that assets and liabilities reprice at different times and by different amounts as interest rates change. Net interest income represents our largest component of net income, and was $832.1$964.9 million and $722.2$832.1 million for the years ended December 31, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively.

 

Each of our businesses may be affected differently by a given change in interest rates. For example, we expect that the results of our mortgage banking business in selling loans into the secondary market would be negatively impacted during periods of rising interest rates, whereas falling interest rates could have a negative impact on the net interest spread earned on deposits as we would be unable to lower the rates on many interest bearing deposit accounts of our customers to the same extent as many of our higher yielding asset classes.

 

Additionally, increases in interest rates may adversely influence the growth rate of loans and deposits, the quality of our loan portfolio, loan and deposit pricing, the volume of loan originations in our mortgage banking business and the value that we can recognize on the sale of mortgage loans in the secondary market.

 

We seek to mitigate our interest rate risk through several strategies, which may not be successful. With the relatively low interest rates that prevailed in recent years, we were able to augment the total return of our investment securities portfolio by selling call options on fixed-income securities that we own. We recorded fee income of approximately $3.5 million, $4.4 million $11.5 million and $15.4$11.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 2016 and 2015,2016, respectively. We also mitigate our interest rate risk by entering into interest rate swaps and other interest rate derivative contracts from time to time with counterparties. To the extent that the market value of any derivative contract moves to a negative market value, we are subject to loss if the counterparty defaults. In the future, there can be no assurance that such mitigation strategies will be available or successful.successful or that we will be successful in implementing any new mitigation strategies necessary to address the current rising interest rate environment. In addition, transactions entered into as part of mitigation strategies employed to mitigate risks associated with a prolonged low interest rate environment could be less beneficial or result in losses if interest rates continue to rise.

 

 

Liquidity is a measure of whether our cash flows and liquid assets are sufficient to satisfy current and future financial obligations, such as demand for loans, deposit withdrawals and operating costs. Our liquidity position is affected by a number of factors, including the amount of cash and other liquid assets on hand, payment of interest and dividends on debt and equity instruments that we have issued, capital we inject into our bank subsidiaries, proceeds we raise through the issuance of securities, our ability to draw upon our revolving credit facility and dividends received from our banking subsidiaries. Our future liquidity position may be adversely affected by multiple factors, including:

 

Weakness or worsening of the economy, real estate markets or unemployment levels may increase the likelihood that one or more of these events will occur. If our liquidity is adversely affected, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

We face competition in attracting and retaining deposits, making loans, and providing other financial services (including wealth management services) throughout our market area. Our competitors include national, regional and other community banks, and a wide range of other financial institutions such as credit unions, government-sponsored enterprises, mutual fund companies, insurance companies, factoring companies and other non-bank financial companies such as marketplace lenders and other financial technology ("FinTech") companies. Many of these competitors have substantially greater resources and market presence or more advanced technology than Wintrust and, as a result of their size, may be able to offer a broader range of products and services, better pricing for those products and services, or newer technologies to deliver those products and services than we can. Several of our local competitors have experienced improvements in their financial condition over the past few years and are better positioned to compete for loans, acquisitions and personnel. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. For example, the Economic Growth Act and, if adopted, certain proposed implementing regulations significantly reduce the regulatory burden of certain large BHCs and raise the asset thresholds at which more onerous requirements apply, which could cause certain large BHCs to become more competitive or to more aggressively pursue expansion. Also, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as mobile payment and other automatic transfer and payment systems, and for banks that do not have a physical presence in our markets to compete for deposits. The absence of regulatory requirements may give non-bank financial companies a competitive advantage over Wintrust.

 

Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including, among other things:

 

If we are unable to compete effectively, we will lose market share and income from deposits, loans and other products may be reduced. This could adversely affect our profitability and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

In the past several years, we have completed numerous acquisitions of banks, other financial service related companies and financial

service related assets, including acquisitions of troubled financial institutions, as more fully described below. We expect to continue to make such acquisitions in the future. Wintrust seeks merger or acquisition partners that are culturally similar, have experienced management, possess either significant market presence or have potential for improved profitability through financial management, economies of scale or expanded services. Failure to successfully identify and complete acquisitions likely will result in Wintrust achieving slower growth.

The Economic Growth Act could result in increased competition for merger or acquisition partners, potentially resulting in higher acquisition prices or an inability to complete desired acquisitions. Acquiring other banks, businesses or branches involves various risks commonly associated with acquisitions, including, among other things:

 

Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and market values, and, therefore, some dilution of Wintrust's tangible book value and net income per common share may occur as a result of any future acquisitions. In addition, certain acquisitions may expose us to additional regulatory risks, including from foreign governments. Our ability to comply with any such regulations will impact the success of any such acquisitions. Furthermore, failure to realize the expected revenue increases, cost savings, increases in geographic or product presence, and/or other projected benefits from an acquisition could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

As part of our growth strategy, we have made opportunistic partial acquisitions of troubled financial institutions in transactions facilitated by the FDIC through our bank subsidiaries. These acquisitions, and any future FDIC-assisted transactions we may undertake, involve greater risk than traditional acquisitions because they are typically conducted on an accelerated basis, allowing less time for us to prepare for and evaluate possible transactions, or to prepare for integration of an acquired institution. These transactions also present risks of customer loss, strain on management resources related to collection and management of problem loans and problems related to the integration of operations and personnel of the acquired financial institutions. As a result, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully integrate the financial institutions we acquire, or that we will realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisitions. Additionally, while the FDIC may agree to assume certain losses in transactions that it facilitates, there can be no assurances that we would not be required to raise additional capital as a condition to, or as a result of, participation in an FDIC-assisted transaction. Any such transactions and related issuances of stock may have dilutive effect on earnings per share. Furthermore, we may face competition from other financial institutions with respect to proposed FDIC-assisted transactions.

 

We may also be subject to certain risks relating to any future loss sharing agreements with the FDIC. Under a loss sharing agreement, the FDIC generally agreedagrees to reimburse the acquiring bank for a portion of any losses relating to covered assets of the acquired financial institution. This was an important financial term of any FDIC-assisted transaction, as troubled financial institutions often have poorer asset quality. As a condition to reimbursement, however, the FDIC requiredrequires the acquiring bank to follow certain servicing procedures. A failure to follow servicing procedures or any other breach of a loss sharing agreement by us would result in the loss of FDIC reimbursement. In addition, reimbursable losses and recoveries under loss sharing agreements wereare based on the book value of the relevant loans and other assets as determined by the FDIC as of the effective dates of the acquisitions. The amount that the acquiring banks realizedrealizes on these assets could differ materially from the carrying value that was reflected in our financial statements, based upon the timing and amount of collections on the covered loans. Any failure to receive reimbursement, or any material differences between the amount of reimbursements that we receivedreceive and the carrying value reflected in our financial statements, would have a material negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

Maintaining trust in the Company is critical to our ability to attract and maintain customers, investors and employees. If our reputation is damaged, our business could be significantly harmed. Harm to our reputation could arise from numerous sources, including, among others, employee misconduct, security breaches, compliance failures, litigation or regulatory outcomes or governmental investigations. Our reputation could also be harmed by the failure or perceived failure of an affiliate or a vendor or other third party with which we do business, to comply with laws or regulations. In addition, our reputation or prospects could be

significantly damaged by adverse publicity or negative information regarding the Company, whether or not true, that may be posted on social media, non-mainstream news services or other parts of the internet, and this risk can be magnified by the speed and pervasiveness with which information is disseminated through those channels.

Actions by the financial services industry generally or by certain members of or individuals in the industry can also affect our reputation. For example, the role played by financial services firms during and after the financial crisis, including concerns that consumers have been treated unfairly by financial institutions or that a financial institution had acted inappropriately with respect to the methods employed in offering products to customers, have damaged the reputation of the industry as a whole.

Should any of these or other events or factors that can undermine our reputation occur, there is no assurance that the additional costs and expenses that we may need to incur to address the issues giving rise to the damage to our reputation would not adversely affect our earnings and results of operations, or that damage to our reputation will not impair our ability to retain our existing customers and employees or attract new customers and employees. Harm to our reputation or the reputation of our industry may also result in greater regulatory or legislative scrutiny, which may lead to changes in laws or regulations that could constrain our business or operations. Events that result in damage to our reputation may also increase our litigation risk.

Our customers rely upon our financial strength and stability and evaluate the risks of doing business with us. If we experience diminished financial strength or stability, actual or perceived, including due to market or regulatory developments, announced or rumored business developments or results of operations, or a decline in stock price, customers may withdraw their deposits or otherwise seek services from other banking institutions and prospective customers may select other service providers. The risk that we may be perceived as less creditworthy relative to other market participants is increased in the current market environment,

 

 

We are required by regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations (see “ - Risks Related to Our Regulatory Environment - If we fail to meet our regulatory capital ratios, we may be forced to raise capital or sell assets”) and as we grow, internally and through acquisitions, the amount of capital required to support our operations grows as well. We may need to raise additional capital to support continued growth both internally and through acquisitions. Any capital we obtain may result in the dilution of the interests of existing holders of our common stock.

 

Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on conditions in the capital markets at that time which are outside our control and on our financial condition and performance. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, or on terms acceptable to us, our ability to further expand our operations through internal growth and acquisitions could be materially impaired and our financial condition and liquidity could be materially and negatively affected.

 

 

The Company's available-for-sale debt and trading securities as well as certain equity securities are carried at fair value.

 

Accounting standards require the Company to categorize these securities according to a fair value hierarchy. As of December 31, 2017,2018, approximately 96%95% of the Company's available-for-sale debt securities and equity securities with a readily determinable fair value were categorized in level 1 or 2 of the fair value hierarchy (meaning that their fair values were determined by unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets, quoted prices for similar assets or other observable inputs). Significant prolonged reduced investor demand could manifest itself in lower fair values for these securities and may result in recognition of an other-than-temporary or permanent impairment of these assets,available-for-sale debt securities and unrealized losses of equity securities with a readily determinable fair value recognized in earnings, which could lead to accounting charges and have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition and results of operations. 

 

The remaining securities in our available-for-sale debt securities portfolioand equity securities with a readily determinable fair value portfolios were categorized as level 3 (meaning that their fair values were determined by inputs that are unobservable in the market and therefore require a greater degree of management judgment). The determination of fair value for securities categorized in level 3 involves significant judgment due to the complexity of factors contributing to the valuation, many of which are not readily observable in the market. In addition, the nature of the business of the third party source that is valuing the securities at any given time could impact the valuation of the securities. Consequently, the ultimate sales price for any of these securities could vary significantly from the recorded fair value at December 31, 2017,2018, especially if the security is sold during a period of illiquidity or market disruption or as part of a large block of securities under a forced transaction.

 

There can be no assurance that decline in market value of available-for-sale debt securities and equity securities with a readily determinable fair value associated with these disruptions will not result in other-than-temporary or permanent impairments, and unrealized losses, respectively, of these assets, which would lead to accounting charges which could have a material negative effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls over financial reporting, 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 circumvention of our controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

 

We continually implement new lines of business and offer new products and services within existing lines of business to offer our customers a competitive array of products and services. The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services.services, such as the rapid adoption of mobile payment platforms. The effective use of technology can increase

 

At the same time, there can be substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances where the markets for such services are still developing. In developing and marketing new lines of business and/or new products or services, we may invest significant time and resources. Initial timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business and/or new products or services may not be achieved, and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible. External factors, such as compliance with regulations, competitive alternatives, and shifting market preferences, may also impact the successful implementation of a new line of business or a new product or service. Furthermore, any new line of business and/or new product or service could have a significant impact on the effectiveness of our system of internal controls. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business or new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

 

The potential for operational risk exposure exists throughout our business and, as a result of our interactions with, and reliance on, third parties, is not limited to our own internal operational functions. Our operational and security systems and infrastructure, including our computer systems, data management, and internal processes, as well as those of third parties, are integral to our performance. We rely on our employees and third parties in our day-to-day and ongoing operations, who may, as a result of human error, misconduct, malfeasance or failure, or breach of our or of third-party systems or infrastructure, expose us to risk. For example, our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by any significant disruptions to us or to third parties with whom we interact or upon whom we rely. In addition, our ability to implement backup systems and other safeguards with respect to third-party systems is more limited than with respect to our own systems. Our financial, accounting, data processing, backup or other operating or security systems and infrastructure may fail to operate properly or become disabled or damaged as a result of a number of factors, including events that are wholly or partially beyond our control, which could adversely affect our ability to process transactions or provide services. Such events may include sudden increases in customer transaction volume; electrical, telecommunications or other major physical infrastructure outages; natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and floods; disease pandemics; and events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including wars and terrorist acts. In addition, we may need to take our systems offline if they become infected with malware or a computer virus or as a result of another form of cyber-attack. In the event that backup systems are utilized, they may not process data as quickly as our primary systems and some data might not have been saved to backup systems, potentially resulting in a temporary or permanent loss of such data. We frequently update our systems to support our operations and growth and to remain compliant with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. This updating entails significant costs and creates risks associated with implementing new systems and integrating them with existing ones, including business interruptions. Implementation and testing of controls related to our computer systems, security monitoring and retaining and training personnel required to operate our systems also entail significant costs. Operational risk exposures could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, as well as cause reputational harm. In addition, we may not have adequate insurance coverage to compensate for losses from a major interruption.

Our computer systems and network infrastructure and those of third parties, on which we are highly dependent, are subject to security risks and could be susceptible to cyberattacks, such as denial of service attacks, hacking, terrorist activities or identity theft. Our business relies on the secure processing, transmission, storage and retrieval of confidential, personal, proprietary and other information in our computer and data management systems and networks, and in the computer and data management systems and networks of third parties. In addition, to access our network, products and services, our customers and other third parties may use personal mobile devices or computing devices that are outside of our network environment and are subject to their own cybersecurity risks.

We, our customers, regulators and other third parties, including other financial services institutions and companies engaged in data processing, have been subject to, and are likely to continue to be the target of, cyber-attacks. These cyber-attacks include computer viruses, malicious or destructive code, phishing attacks, denial of service or information, ransomware, improper access by employees or vendors, attacks on personal email of employees, ransom demands to not expose security vulnerabilities in our systems or the systems of third parties or other security breaches that could result in the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss or destruction of confidential, proprietary and other information of ours, our employees, our customers or of third parties, damage to our systems or other material disruption of our or our customers’ or other third parties’ network access or business operations. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities or incidents. Despite efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems and implement controls, processes, policies and other protective measures, we may not be able to anticipate all security breaches, nor may we be able to implement guaranteed preventive measures against such security breaches. Cyber threats are rapidly evolving and we may not be able to anticipate or prevent all such attacks and could be held liable for any security breach or loss.

Cybersecurity risks for banking organizations have significantly increased in recent years in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, and the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions. For example, cybersecurity risks may increase in the future as we continue to increase our mobile-payment and other internet-based product offerings and expand our internal usage of web-based products and applications. In addition, cybersecurity risks have significantly

increased in recent years in part due to the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime affiliates, terrorist organizations, hostile foreign governments, disgruntled employees or vendors, activists and other external parties, including those involved in corporate espionage. Even the most advanced internal control environment may be vulnerable to compromise. Targeted social engineering attacks and "spear phishing" attacks are becoming more sophisticated and are extremely difficult to prevent. In such an attack, an attacker will attempt to fraudulently induce colleagues, customers or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to its data or that of its clients. Persistent attackers may succeed in penetrating defenses given enough resources, time, and motive. The techniques used by cyber criminals change frequently, may not be recognized until launched and may not be recognizedor until well after a breach has occurred. The risk of a security breach caused by a cyber-attack at a vendor or by unauthorized vendor access has also increased in recent years. Additionally, the existence of cyber-attacks or security breaches at third-party vendors with access to our data may not be disclosed to us in a timely manner.

We also face indirect technology, cybersecurity and operational risks relating to the customers, clients and other third parties with whom we do business or upon whom we rely to facilitate or enable our business activities, including, for example, financial counterparties, regulators and providers of critical infrastructure such as internet access and electrical power. As a result of increasing consolidation, interdependence and complexity of financial entities and technology systems, a technology failure, cyber-attack or other information or security breach that significantly degrades, deletes or compromises the systems or data of one or more financial entities could have a material impact on counterparties or other market participants, including us. This consolidation, interconnectivity and complexity increases the risk of operational failure, on both individual and industry-wide bases, as disparate systems need to be integrated, often on an accelerated basis. Any third-party technology failure, cyber-attack or other information or security breach, termination or constraint could, among other things, adversely affect our ability to effect transactions, service our clients, manage our exposure to risk or expand our business.

Cyber-attacks or other information or security breaches, whether directed at us or third parties, may result in a material loss or have material consequences. Furthermore, the public perception that a cyber-attack on our systems has been successful, whether or not this perception is correct, may damage our reputation with customers and third parties with whom we do business. Hacking of personal information and identity theft risks, in particular, could cause serious reputational harm. A successful penetration or circumvention of system security could cause us serious negative consequences, including our loss of customers and business opportunities, significant disruption to our operations and business, misappropriation or destruction of our confidential information and/or that of our customers, or damage to our or our customers’ and/or third parties’ computers or systems, and could result in a violation of applicable privacy laws and other laws, litigation exposure, regulatory fines, penalties or intervention, loss of confidence in our security measures, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensatory costs, remediation costs, additional compliance costs, and could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition.

 

 

We use and rely upon many external vendors to provide us with day-to-day products and services essential to our operations. We are thus exposed to risk that such vendors will not perform as contracted or at agreed-upon service levels. The failure of our vendors to perform as contracted or at necessary service levels for any reason could disrupt our operations, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, if any of our vendors experience insolvency or other business failure, such failure could affect our ability to obtain necessary products or services from a substitute vendor in a timely and cost-effective manner or prevent us from effectively

 

Debit card numbers are susceptible to theft at the point of sale via the physical terminal through which transactions are processed and by other means of hacking. The security and integrity of these transactions are dependent upon retailers’ vigilance and willingness to invest in technology and upgrades. Despite third-party security risks that are beyond our control, we offer our customers protection against fraud and attendant losses for unauthorized use of debit cards in order to stay competitive in the marketplace. Offering such protection to our customers exposes us to potential losses which, in the event of a data breach at one or more retailers of considerable magnitude, may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

 

 

We rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties in deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions. This information could include financial statements, credit reports, and other financial information. We also rely on representations of those customers, counterparties, or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports, or other

financial information could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

We believe that our future success depends, in part, on our ability to attract and retain experienced personnel, including our senior management and other key personnel. Our business model is dependent upon our ability to provide high quality and personal service. In addition, as a holding company that conducts its operations through our subsidiaries, we are focused on providing entrepreneurial-based compensation to the chief executives of each our business units. As a Company with start-up and growth oriented operations, we are cognizant that to attract and retain the managerial talent necessary to operate and grow our businesses we often have to compensate our executives with a view to the business we expect them to manage, rather than the size of the business they currently manage. Accordingly, any executive compensation restrictions may negatively impact our ability to retain and attract senior management. The departure of a senior manager or other key personnel may damage relationships with certain customers, or certain customers may choose to follow such personnel to a competitor. The loss of any of our senior managers or other key personnel, or our inability to identify, recruit and retain such personnel, could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

 

A significant portion of the Company's loan portfolio is secured by real property. In the ordinary course of business, the Company may foreclose on and take title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, the Company may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. In addition, we own and operate a number of properties that may be subject to similar environmental liability risks.

 

Environmental laws may require the Company to incur substantial expenses and could materially reduce the affected property's value or limit the Company's ability to use or sell the affected property. The costs associated with investigation and remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, if we are the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. Although the Company has policies and procedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure action on real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Periodically, as a result of our normal course of business, we are involved in claims and related litigation from our customers, employees or other parties. These claims and legal actions, whether meritorious or not, as well as reviews, investigations and proceedings by governmental and self-regulatory agencies could involve large monetary claims and significant legal expense. In addition, such actions may negatively impact our reputation in the marketplace and lessen customer demand. If such claims and

 

 

We engage in the origination and purchase of residential mortgages for sale into the secondary market. In connection with such sales, we make certain representations and warranties, which, if breached, may require us to repurchase such loans, substitute other loans or indemnify the purchasers of such loans for actual losses incurred in respect of such loans. Due, in part, to increased mortgage payment delinquency rates and declining housing prices during the post 2007 period, we have been receiving such requests for loan repurchases and indemnification payments relating to the representations and warranties with respect to such loans. We have been able to reach settlements with a number of purchasers, and believe that we have established appropriate reserves with respect to indemnification requests. It is possible that the number of such requests will increase or that we will not be able to reach settlements with respect to such requests in the future. Accordingly, it is possible that losses incurred in connection with loan repurchases and indemnification payments may be in excess of our financial statement reserves, and we may be required to increase such reserves and may sustain additional losses associated with such loan repurchases and indemnification payments in the future. Increases to our reserves and losses incurred by us in connection with actual loan repurchases and indemnification

payments in excess of our reserves could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

 

 

Technology and other changes are allowing parties to complete financial transactions that historically have involved banks through alternative methods. For example, consumers can now maintain funds that would have historically been held as bank deposits in brokerage accounts or mutual funds. Consumers can also complete transactions such as paying bills and transferring funds directly without the assistance of banks. The process of eliminating banks as intermediaries could result in the loss of fee income, as well as the loss of customer deposits and the related income generated from those deposits. The loss of these revenue streams and the lower cost deposits as a source of funds could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. 

 

 

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 the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”), commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk as well as market and liquidity risk in the event of a default by a counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount due to us. Any such losses could have material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

Our financial results have been and will continue to be impacted by our strategy of branch openings and de novo bank formations. We expect to increase the opening of additional branches as market conditions improve and, if the interest rate environment and economic climate and regulatory conditions become favorable, may resume de novo bank formations. It may take longer than expected or more than the amount of time Wintrust has historically experienced for new banks and/or banking facilities to reach profitability, and there can be no guarantee that these branches or banks will ever be profitable. Moreover, the FDIC's enhanced supervisory period for de novo banks of three years, including higher capital requirements during this period, could also delay a new bank's ability to contribute to the Company's earnings and impact the Company's willingness to expand through de novo bank formation. To the extent we undertake additional de novo bank, branch and business formations, our level of reported net income, return on average equity and return on average assets will be impacted by startup costs associated with such operations, and it is likely to continue to experience the effects of higher expenses relative to operating income from the new operations. These expenses may be higher than we expected or than our experience has shown, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

In the normal course of business, we, as well as our subsidiaries, are routinely subject to examinations from federal and state tax authorities regarding the amount of taxes due in connection with investments we have made and the businesses in which we have engaged. Recently, federal and state tax authorities have become increasingly aggressive in challenging tax positions taken by financial institutions. These tax positions may relate to among other things tax compliance, sales and use, franchise, gross receipts, payroll, property and income tax issues, including tax base, apportionment and tax credit planning. The challenges made by tax authorities may result in adjustments to the timing or amount of taxable income or deductions or the allocation of income among tax jurisdictions. If any such challenges are made and are not resolved in our favor, they could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The federal government enacted the Tax Act on December 22, 2017, and given the current economic and political environment and ongoing budgetary pressures, the enactment of further new federal or state tax legislation may occur. The enactment of such legislation, or changes in the interpretation of existing law, including provisions impacting tax rates, apportionment, consolidation or combination, income, expenses, credits and creditsexemptions may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Our accounting policies are fundamental to understanding our financial results and financial condition. Some of these policies require use of estimates and assumptions that affect the value of our assets or liabilities and financial results. Some of our accounting policies are critical because they require management to make difficult, subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because it is likely that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions. If such estimates or assumptions underlying our financial statements are incorrect, we may experience material losses. From time to time, the FASB and the SEC change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. These changes, such as the new CECL standard discussed above, can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in the restatement of prior period financial statements.

 

We are a bank holding company and our operations are primarily conducted by and through our 15 operating banks, which are subject to significant federal and state regulation. Cash available to pay dividends to our shareholders, repurchase our shares or repay our indebtedness is derived primarily from dividends received from our banks and our ability to receive dividends from our subsidiaries is restricted. Various statutory provisions restrict the amount of dividends our banks can pay to us without regulatory approval. The banks may not pay cash dividends if that payment could reduce the amount of their capital below that necessary to meet the “adequately capitalized” level in accordance with regulatory capital requirements. It is also possible that, depending upon the financial condition of the banks and other factors, regulatory authorities could conclude that payment of dividends or other payments, including payments to us, is an unsafe or unsound practice and impose restrictions or prohibit such payments. Our inability to receive dividends from our banks could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

Certain provisions of our articles of incorporation, by-laws and Illinois law may have the effect of impeding the acquisition of control of Wintrust by means of a tender offer, a proxy fight, open-market purchases or otherwise in a transaction not approved by our board of directors. For example, our board of directors may issue additional authorized shares of our capital stock to deter future attempts to gain control of Wintrust, including the authority to determine the terms of any one or more series of preferred stock, such as voting rights, conversion rates and liquidation preferences. As a result of the ability to fix voting rights for a series

 

The ability of a third party to acquire us is also limited under applicable banking regulations. The BHC Act requires any “bank holding company” (as defined in the BHC Act) to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve prior to acquiring more than 5% of our outstanding common stock. Any person other than a bank holding company is required to obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve to acquire 10% or more of our outstanding common stock under the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978. Any holder of 25% or more of our outstanding common stock, other than an individual, is subject to regulation as a “bank holding company” under the BHC Act. For purposes of calculating ownership thresholds under these banking regulations, bank regulators would likely at least take the position that the minimum number of shares, and could take the position that the maximum number of shares, of Wintrust common stock that a holder is entitled to receive pursuant to securities convertible into or settled in Wintrust common stock, including pursuant to Wintrust's warrants to purchase Wintrust common stock held by such holder, must be taken into account in calculating a shareholder's aggregate holdings of Wintrust common stock.

 

These provisions may have the effect of discouraging a future takeover attempt that is not approved by our board of directors but which our individual shareholders may deem to be in their best interests or in which our shareholders may receive a substantial premium for their shares over then-current market prices. As a result, shareholders who might desire to participate in such a transaction may not have an opportunity to do so. Such provisions will also render the removal of our current board of directors or management more difficult.

On July 27, 2017, the Chief Executive of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR to the administrator of LIBOR

after 2021. The announcement indicates that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot and will not be guaranteed after 2021. It is currently impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.

At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates maywe cannot predict whether SOFR and reformed SONIA will become accepted alternatives to LIBOR and it is impossible to predict theor what effect of any such alternatives will have on the value of LIBOR-based securities or financial arrangements, including the Company’s Series D Preferred Stock or other securities or financial arrangements, given LIBOR’s role in determining market interest rates globally. Uncertainty as to the nature of alternative reference rates and as to potential changes or other reforms to LIBOR may adversely affect LIBOR rates and other interest rates. In the event that a published LIBOR rate is unavailable after 2021, the dividend rate on the Company’s Series D Preferred Stock, which are currently is based on the LIBOR rate, will be determined as set forth in the accompanying offering documents, and the value of such securities may be adversely affected. In addition, the transition away from LIBOR could prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of the Company’s preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate, as well as result in disputes, litigation or other actions with counterparties regarding the interpretation and enforceability of certain fallback language in LIBOR-based contracts and securities. Currently, the manner and impact of this transition and related developments, as well as the effect of these developments on our funding costs, loan, derivative and investment portfolios, asset-liability management and business, is uncertain.

 

 

As a banking institution, we are subject to regulations that require us to maintain certain capital ratios, such as the ratio of our Tier 1 capital to our risk-based assets, and in recent years these regulatory and market expectations have increased substantially. If our regulatory capital ratios decline, as a result of decreases in the value of our loan portfolio or otherwise, we may be required to improve such ratios by either raising additional capital or by disposing of assets. If we choose to dispose of assets, we cannot be certain that we will be able to do so at prices that we believe to be appropriate, and our future operating results could be negatively affected. If we choose to raise additional capital, we may accomplish this by selling additional shares of common stock, or securities convertible into or exchangeable for common stock, which could significantly dilute the ownership percentage of holders of our common stock and cause the market price of our common stock to decline. Additionally, events or circumstances in the capital markets generally may increase our capital costs and impair our ability to raise capital at any given time.

 

Our ability to profitably operate is dependent, in part, upon federal fiscal policies that cannot be predicted. We are particularly affected by the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve, which influence money supply in the United States. Any change in the United States’ monetary policy, or worsening federal budgetary pressures, could affect our access to capital. During the past few years, the Federal Reserve has made two notable changes to U.S. monetary policy. First, following a prolonged period of low and relatively stable interest rates, it has begun to raise interest rates. Second, it has stated its intention to end its quantitative easing program and has begun to reduce the size of its balance sheet by selling securities, which might also affect interest rates. Additionally, any trend toward inflation, economic decline, destabilizing of financial markets, or other factors beyond our control may significantly affect consumer demand for our products and consumers’ ability to repay loans, reducing our results of operations.

 

 

We are subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision. The cost of compliance with such laws and regulations can be substantial and adversely affect our ability to operate profitably. While we are unable to predict the scope or impact of any potential legislation or regulatory action until it becomes final, it is possible that changes in applicable laws, regulations or interpretations thereof could significantly increase our regulatory compliance costs, impede the efficiency of our internal business processes, negatively impact the recoverability of certain of our recorded assets, require us to increase our regulatory capital, interfere with our executive compensation plans, or limit our ability to pursue business opportunities in an efficient manner including our plan for de novo growth and growth through acquisitions.

Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which our business is subject have increased in recent years, in response to the financial crisis as well as other factors such as technological and market changes. For example, as cybersecurity and data privacy risks for banking organizations and the broader financial system have significantly increased in recent years, cybersecurity and data privacy issues have become the subject of increasing legislative and regulatory focus. For example, in June of 2018, the Governor of California signed into law the CCPA. The CCPA, which becomes effective on January 1, 2020, applies to for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data collection thresholds. For more information regarding data privacy laws and regulations, see “Protection of Client Information” under Supervision and Regulation in Item 1.

Regulatory enforcement and fines have also increased across the banking and financial services sector. Many of these changes have occurred as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations, most of which are now in place. The current presidential administration has issued an executive order that sets forth principles for the reform of the federal financial regulatory framework, and the majority in Congress has also suggested an agenda for financial regulatory change. It is too early to assess whether there will be any major changes inWhile the regulatory environment or merelyhas entered a period of rebalancing of the post financial crisis framework. The Company expectsframework, we expect that itsour business will remain subject to extensive regulation and supervision,supervision.

On May 24, 2018, the Economic Growth Act was signed into law. Among other regulatory changes, the Economic Growth Act amends various sections of the Dodd-Frank Act, including section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was revised to raise the asset thresholds for determining the application of enhanced prudential standards for BHCs. The effects of these changes on the Company are expected to be limited because the Company was subject to only limited enhanced prudential standards prior to the Economic Growth Act’s enactment. Certain of our competitors, however, will benefit from a more significant reduction in regulatory burdens, and, any changesas a result, may become more competitive or aggressive in the regulatory environment may, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect upon the Company's business, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.pursuing expansion.

 

The CFPB has broad rulemaking authority over a wide range of federal consumer protection laws applicable to the business of our subsidiary banks and some other operating subsidiaries, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices, but examination and supervision of our subsidiary banks is carried out by the primary federal banking agency and, where applicable, the state banking agency. Consumer protection is an area of heightened regulatory focus, and the CFPB has promulgated a number of specific regulatory requirements in this area. These rules have increased and may further increase the costs of doing business for all market participants, including our subsidiaries.

In particular, the mortgage-related final rules issued by the CFPB have materially restructured the origination, servicing and securitization of residential mortgages in the United States. These rules have impacted, and will continue to impact, the business practices of mortgage lenders, including the Company. For example, in order to ensure compliance with mortgage-related rules issued by the CFPB, the Company consolidated its consumer mortgage loan origination and loan servicing operations within Wintrust Mortgage.

In the wake of the mortgage crisis, the CFPB and federal and state banking agencies are closely examining the mortgage and mortgage servicing activities of depository financial institutions. Should these or other agencies have serious concerns with respect to our operations in this regard, the effect of such concerns could have a material adverse effect on our profits.

 

 

Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered “predatory.” These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. The CFPB has promulgated many mortgage-related final rules since it was established under the Dodd-Frank Act, including rules relating to the ability to repay loans and relating to qualified mortgage standards. Most of these mortgage-related rules have been adopted, although portions of certain of these rules have not yet become effective. In addition, several proposed revisions to mortgage-related rules are pending finalization. We may find it necessary to tighten our mortgage loan underwriting standards in response to the CFPB rules, which may constrain our ability to make loans consistent with our business strategies. It is our policy not to make predatory loans and to determine borrowers' ability to repay, but the law and related rules create the potential for increased liability with respect to our lending and loan investment activities. They increase our cost of doing business and, ultimately, may prevent us from making certain loans and cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that we do make. In addition, regulation related to redlining, fair lending, CRA compliance and BSA compliance create significant burdens which necessitate increased costs. Any failure to comply with any of these regulations could have a significant impact on our ability to operate, our ability to acquire or open new banks and/or result in meaningful fines.

 

 

Since 2013, the U.S. federal banking authorities have increased most of the required minimum regulatory capital ratios applicable to all U.S. banks that are subject to minimum capital requirements as well as to bank and saving and loan holding companies, other than “small bank holding companies” (generally bank holding companies with consolidated assets of less than $500 million). The U.S. federal banking authorities also introduced a new Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio and the concept of a capital conservation buffer in addition to changing the definition of capital. In 2012, the Federal Reserve also implemented the stress test requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act. As a bank holding company with between $10 billion and $50 billion in total consolidated assets, we are required to conduct annual stress tests based on scenarios provided by the Federal Reserve, and are required to publicly disclose the results of our stress tests.

 

These provisions, as well as any other aspects of current or proposed regulatory or legislative changes to laws applicable to the financial industry, have increased our compliance cost, are expected to impactcosts, impacted the profitability of our business activities and may change certain of our business practices, including the ability to offer new products, obtain financing, attract deposits, make loans, and achieve satisfactory interest spreads, and could expose us to additional costs, including increased compliance costs. These changes also may require us to invest significant management attention and resources to make any necessary changes to operations in order to comply, and could therefore also materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to engage in capital distributions, including paying dividends or repurchasing stock, may be restricted if we do not maintain the required Capital Conservation Buffer. In addition, we anticipate that our pro forma capital ratios as reflected in the stress test calculations under the required stress test scenarios, will be an important factor considered by the Federal Reserve in evaluating whether proposed payments of dividends or stock repurchases are consistent with its prudential expectations.

 

Insured institution failures leading up to and following the financial crisis, as well as deterioration in banking and economic conditions, significantly increased FDIC loss provisions, resulting in a decline of its deposit insurance fund to historical lows at the peak of the crisis. In response, the Dodd-Frank Act and FDIC regulations changed the assessment base for federal deposit insurance from the amount of insured deposits to average total consolidated assets less average tangible capital, eliminated the maximum size of the DIF, eliminated the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds, and increased the minimum reserve ratio of the DIF from 1.15% to 1.35%. These developments also caused our FDIC insurance premiums to increase. There is a risk that the banks' deposit insurance premiums will increase in the future if failures of insured depository institutions once again deplete the DIF. Any such increase may negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.

 

 

The USA PATRIOT Act and the BSA require financial institutions to develop programs to prevent financial institutions from being used for money laundering or the funding of terrorist activities. If such activities are detected, financial institutions are obligated

 

 

 

We provide financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums and life insurance premiums on a national basis through FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance, respectively, and financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums in Canada through our wholly-owned subsidiary, FIFC Canada. Commercial insurance premium finance loans involve a different, and possibly higher, risk of delinquency or collection than life insurance premium finance loans and the loan portfolios of our bank subsidiaries because these loans are issued primarily through relationships with a large number of unaffiliated insurance agents and because the borrowers are located nationwide. As a result, risk management and general supervisory oversight may be difficult. As of December 31, 2017,2018, we had $2.6$2.8 billion of commercial insurance premium finance loans outstanding, of which $2.3$2.5 billion were originated in the U.S. by FIRST Insurance Funding and $318.9$337.1 million were originated in Canada by FIFC Canada. Together, these loans represented 12% of our total loan portfolio as of such date.

 

FIRST Insurance Funding and FIFC Canada may also be more susceptible to third party fraud with respect to commercial insurance premium finance loans because these loans are originated and many times funded through relationships with unaffiliated insurance agents and brokers. In the second quarter of 2010, fraud perpetrated against a number of premium finance companies in the industry, including the property and casualty division of FIRST Insurance Funding, increased both the Company's net charge-offs and provision for credit losses by $15.7 million. Acts of fraud are difficult to detect and deter, and we cannot assure investors that our risk management procedures and controls will prevent losses from fraudulent activity.

 

Wintrust Life Finance may be exposed to the risk of loss in our life insurance premium finance business because of fraud. While Wintrust Life Finance maintains a policy prohibiting the known financing of stranger-originated life insurance and has established procedures to identify and prevent the company from financing such policies, Wintrust Life Finance cannot be certain that it will never provide loans with respect to such a policy. In the event such policies were financed, a carrier could potentially put at risk the cash surrender value of a policy, which serves as Wintrust Life Finance's primary collateral, by challenging the validity of the insurance contract for lack of an insurable interest.

 

See the below risk factor “Widespread financial difficulties or credit downgrades among commercial and life insurance providers could lessen the value of the collateral securing our premium finance loans and impair the financial condition and liquidity of FIRST Insurance Funding, Wintrust Life Finance and FIFC Canada” for a discussion of further risks associated with our insurance premium finance activities.

 

While FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance are licensed as required and carefully monitors compliance with regulation of each of its businesses, there can be no assurance that either will not be negatively impacted by material changes in the regulatory environment. FIFC Canada is not required to be licensed in most provinces of Canada, but there can be no assurance that future regulations which impact the business of FIFC Canada will not be enacted.

 

Additionally, to the extent that affiliates of insurance carriers, banks, and other lending institutions add greater service and flexibility to their financing practices in the future, our competitive position and results of operations could be adversely affected. Wintrust Life Finance's life insurance premium finance business could be materially negatively impacted by changes in the federal or state estate tax provisions. There can be no assurance that FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance will be able to continue to compete successfully in its markets.

 

 

FIRST Insurance Funding, Wintrust Life Finance and FIFC Canada's premium finance loans are primarily secured by the insurance policies financed by the loans. These insurance policies are written by a large number of insurance companies geographically dispersed throughout the country. Our premium finance receivables balances finance insurance policies which are spread among

 

 

Our wealth management business in general, and WHI'sWintrust Investments' brokerage operations in particular, present special risks not borne by community banks that focus exclusively on community banking. For example, the brokerage industry is subject to fluctuations in the stock market that may have a significant adverse impact on transaction fees, customer activity and investment portfolio gains and losses. Likewise, additional or modified regulations may adversely affect our wealth management operations. Each of our wealth management operations is dependent on a small number of professionals whose departure could result in the loss of a significant number of customer accounts. A significant decline in fees and commissions or trading losses suffered in the investment portfolio could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, we are subject to claim arbitration risk arising from customers who claim their investments were not suitable or that their portfolios were inappropriately traded. These risks

increase when the market, as a whole, declines. The risks associated with retail brokerage may not be supported by the income generated by our wealth management operations.

None.

The Company’s executive offices are located at 9700 W. Higgins Road, Rosemont, Illinois. The Company also leases office locations and retail space at 231 S. LaSalle Street in downtown Chicago.Chicago and at 731 N. Jackson Street in downtown Milwaukee. The Company’s banks operatecommunity banking segment operates through 157167 banking facilities, the majority of which are owned. The Company owns 212222 automatic teller machines, the majority of which are housed at banking locations. The banking facilities are located in communities throughout the Chicago metropolitan area, southern Wisconsin and northwest Indiana. Excess space in certain properties is leased to third parties.

The Company’s wealth management subsidiaries have two locations in 14 states,downtown Chicago, one in Appleton, Wisconsin, and one in Tampa Bay, Florida, all of which are leased, as well as office locations at several of our banks. FIRST Insurance Funding and Wintrust Life Finance have one location in Northbrook, Illinois which is owned and locations at 231 S. LaSalle Street in downtown Chicago, Jersey City, New Jersey, Long Island, New York and Newport Beach, California, all of which are leased. FIFC Canada has three locations in Canada that are leased, located in Toronto, Ontario,Ontario; Wainwright, AlbertaAlberta; and Vancouver, British Columbia. Wintrust Asset Finance is located in our corporate headquarters in Rosemont, Illinois and has locations in Frisco, Texas, and Mishawaka, Indiana, bothand Irvine, California, all of which are leased. Tricom has one location in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin which is owned. In addition, the Company owns other real estate acquired for further expansion that, when considered in the aggregate, is not material to the Company’s financial position.

On January 15, 2015, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (“Lehman Holdings”) sent a demand letter asserting that Wintrust Mortgage must indemnify it for losses arising from loans sold by Wintrust Mortgage to Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB under a Loan Purchase Agreement between Wintrust Mortgage, as successor to SGB Corporation, and Lehman Brothers Bank. The demand was the precursor for triggering the alternative dispute resolution process mandated by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Lehman Holdings triggered the mandatory alternative dispute resolution process on October 16, 2015. On February 3, 2016, following a ruling by the federal Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that was adverse to Lehman Holdings on the statute of limitations that is applicable to similar loan purchase claims, Lehman Holdings filed a complaint against Wintrust Mortgage and 150 other entities from which it had purchased loans in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The mandatory mediation was held on March 16, 2016, but did not result in a consensual resolution of the dispute. The court entered a case management order governing the litigation on November 1, 2016. Lehman Holdings filed an amended complaint against Wintrust Mortgage on December 29, 2016. On March 31, 2017, Wintrust Mortgage moved to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue or to transfer venue. ThisArgument on the motions to dismiss were heard on June 12, 2018. The motion remains pending beforeto dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was denied on August 14, 2018 and the court.defendants’ motion to transfer venue was denied on October 2, 2018. Wintrust Mortgage has appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss based on improper venue and the denial of its motion to transfer venue.

The Company has reserved an amount for the Lehman Holdings action that is immaterial to its results of operations or financial condition. Such litigation and threatened litigation actions necessarily involve substantial uncertainty and it is not possible at this time to predict the ultimate resolution or to determine whether, or to what extent, any loss with respect to these legal proceedings may exceed the amounts reserved by the Company.

On August 28, 2015,April 9, 2018, JPMorgan Chase & Co. as successor in interest to Bear Stearns and certain related Bear Stearns entities (collectively, “JPMC”) sent a demand letter to Wintrust Mortgage asserting an indemnification claim of approximately $4.6 million. JPMC alleges that it incurred this loss due to its reliance on misrepresentations in the loans Wintrust Mortgage originated, underwrote and sold to JPMC in the years prior to 2009. JPMC has not provided Wintrust Mortgage with sufficient information concerning the loans allegedly at issue to allow Wintrust Mortgage to assess the merits of JPMC’s allegations or to estimate either the likelihood or amount of any potential liability.

On October 17, 2018, a former Wintrust Mortgage employee filed a lawsuit against Wintrust Mortgage alleging violation of California wage payment statutes on behalf of herself and all other hourly, non-exempt employees of Wintrust Mortgage in California from October 17, 2014 through the present. Wintrust Mortgage received a demand from RFC Liquidating Trust asserting thatservice of the complaint on November 4, 2018. Wintrust Mortgage’s response to the complaint was filed on February 25, 2019. At this time, Wintrust Mortgage lacks sufficient information to assess the merits of the allegations or to estimate either the likelihood or amount of any potential liability.

On October 17, 2018, two individual plaintiffs filed suit against Northbrook Bank and Tamer Moumen on behalf of themselves and a class of approximately 42 investors in a hedge fund run by defendant Moumen. Plaintiffs allege that defendant Moumen ran a fraudulent Ponzi scheme and ran those funds through deposit accounts at Northbrook Bank. They allege the bank was negligent in failing to close the deposit accounts and that it intentionally aided and abetted defendant Moumen in the alleged fraud. They contend that Northbrook Bank is liable to it for losses arising from loans sold by Wintrust Mortgage orin excess of $6 million. Northbrook Bank filed its predecessorsmotion to Residential Funding Company LLC and/or related entities. Wintrust Mortgage recently negotiated a settlementdismiss the complaint on January 15, 2019, which remains pending before the court. Northbrook Bank believes the allegations to be legally and factually meritless and otherwise lacks sufficient information to estimate the amount of the RFC Liquidating Trust’s claim for an immaterial amount, which was finalized on October 30, 2017.any potential liability.

In addition, the Company and its subsidiaries, from time to time, are subject to pending and threatened legal action and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business.

Based on information currently available and upon consultation with counsel, management believes that the eventual outcome of any pending or threatened legal actions and proceedings described above, including our ordinary course litigation, will not have a material adverse effect on the operations or financial condition of the Company. However, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters, if unfavorable, may be material to the results of operations or financial condition for a particular period.

Not applicable.