We will continue to focus on our daily execution, making sound credit decisions and maintaining cost discipline, which have beenis the hallmark offoundation for our success. Our customers will remainare our top priority asand we focus on efficiently providing tailored banking products and services to business owners and entrepreneurs, with a goal of generating robustconsistent growth and delivering exceptional returns to our shareholders.  Additionally, our bank will continue towe continually position itselfourselves for future growth both organically and through strategic acquisitions.

Cost Discipline and Efficiency

We constantly monitor expenditures, and, when appropriate, we use automation, technology and repeatable processes to drive profitability through industry leading efficiencies. We operateprofitability. The Bank operates as few branches as practical, and the branches we do operate are smaller and more cost efficient than many of our peers’ branches. The Bank’s efficiency ratio for the year ended December 31, 2018 was the fourth lowest efficiency ratio among all 150 commercial banks with between $500 million and $5 billion in total assets headquartered in Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas, according to data obtained through S&P Global.a traditional branch. As we continue to grow, we expect our utilization of automation, technology, and repeatable processes will continue to drive efficiencies throughout the Bank. Combining talented people with process automation will enable us to scale even further, and will also enable us to deliver consistently superior customer service.

Organic Growth

Much of our historic asset growth has been driven organically and within our current markets, in particularparticularly the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area, and Oklahoma City, contain ample opportunities for us to grow our customer base and increase our loans and deposits.Tulsa. Although our expansion with brick and mortar branches will be limited, we believe operating strategically placed branches will be important, and therefore we will continue to selectively build our presence in key markets. We currently operate twelve branches. We also intend to continually enhance our internet and mobile banking products to remain competitive in the marketplace.

We are headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and we operate threeseven additional branches in Oklahoma. We also operate one branchtwo branches in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area and two branches in southwest Kansas.

The banking and financial services industry is highly competitive, and we compete with a wide range of financial institutions within our markets, including local, regional and national commercial banks and credit unions. We also compete with mortgage companies, trust companies, brokerage firms, consumer finance companies, mutual funds, securities firms, insurance companies, third-party payment processors, financial technology, or Fintech, companies and other financial intermediaries for certain of our products and services. Some of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions and level of regulatory supervision applicable to us.

Interest rates on loans and deposits, as well as prices on fee-based services, are typically significant competitive factors within the banking and financial services industry. Many of our competitors are much larger financial institutions that have greater financial resources than we do and compete aggressively for market share. These competitors attempt to gain market share through their financial product mix, pricing strategies and banking center locations. Other important competitive factors in our industry and markets include office locations and hours, quality of customer service, community reputation, continuity of personnel and services, capacity and willingness to extend credit, and ability to offer excellent banking products and services. While we seek to remain competitive with respect to fees charged, interest rates and pricing, we believe that our broad suite of financial solutions, our high-quality customer service culture, our positive reputation and our long-standing community relationships enable us to compete successfully within our markets and enhance our ability to attract and retain customers.

We are represented by any collective bargaining unit orcommitted and focused on the health and safety of our employees, customers, and communities and are partiescommitted to providing a collective bargaining agreement.safe and secure work environment in accordance with applicable labor, safety, health, anti-discrimination and other workplace laws. We consider our relationship withstrive for all of our employees to be goodfeel safe at work. To that end, we maintain a whistleblower hotline that allows associates and have not experienced interruptions of operations dueothers to labor disagreements.anonymously voice concerns. We prohibit retaliation against an individual who reported a concern or assisted with an inquiry or investigation.

General

We are extensively regulated under U.S. federal and state law. As a result, our growth and earnings performance may be affected not only by management decisions and general economic conditions, but also by federal and state statutes and by the regulations and policies of various bank regulatory agencies, including the Oklahoma Banking Department (“OBD”), the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). Furthermore, tax laws administered by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and state taxing authorities, accounting rules developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), securities laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and state securities authorities and Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) laws enforced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury or Treasury,(“Treasury”) also impact our business. The effect of these statutes, regulations, regulatory policies and rules are significant to our financial condition and results of operations. Further, the nature and extent of future legislative, regulatory or other changes affecting financial institutions are impossible to predict with any certainty.

Federal and state banking laws impose a comprehensive system of supervision, regulation and enforcement on the operations of banks, their holding companies and their affiliates. These laws are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, customers and the Depositor Insurance Fund of the FDIC (“DIF”) rather than for shareholders. Federal and state laws, and the related regulations of the bank regulatory agencies, affect, among other things, the scope of business, the kinds and amounts of investments banks may make, reserve requirements, capital levels relative to operations, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, the ability to merge, consolidate and acquire, dealings with insiders and affiliates andaffiliates. the payment of dividends.dividends and redemption of securities.

This supervisory and regulatory framework subjects banks and bank holding companies to regular examination by their respective regulatory agencies, which results in examination reports and ratings that, while not publicly available, can affect the conduct and growth of their businesses. These examinations consider not only compliance with applicable laws and regulations, but also capital levels, asset quality and risk, management’s ability and performance, earnings, liquidity sensitivity to market risk and various other factors. These regulatory agencies have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity and exercise enforcement powers over a regulated entity (including terminating deposit insurance, imposing orders, fines and other civil and criminal penalties, removing officers and directors and appointing supervisors and conservators) 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.

Regulatory Capital Requirements

The federal banking agencies require that banking organizations meet several risk-based capital adequacy requirements. TheseThe current risk-based capital adequacy requirementsstandards applicable to the Company and the Bank are intended to provide a measure of capital adequacy that reflects the perceived degree of risk associated with a banking organization’s operations, both for transactions reportedbased on the banking organization’s balance sheet as assets and for transactions that are recorded as off-balance sheet items, such as letters of credit and recourse arrangements. In 2013, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued final rules, or the Basel III Capital Rules establishing a new comprehensive capital framework for banking organizations.established by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”). The Basel III Capital Rules implementCommittee is a committee of central banks and bank supervisors/regulators from the Basel Committee’s December 2010 frameworkmajor industrialized countries that develops broad policy guidelines for strengthening internationaluse by each country’s supervisors in determining the supervisory policies they apply. The requirements are intended to ensure that banking organizations have adequate capital standardsgiven the risk levels of assets and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Basel III Capital Rules became effective on January 1, 2015.off-balance sheet financial instruments.

The Basel III Capital Rules require the Bank and the Company to comply with four minimum capital standards: a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 4.0%; a CET1 to risk-weighted assets ratio of 4.5%; a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 6.0%; and a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8.0%. CET1 capital is generally comprised of common shareholders’ equity and retained earnings. Tier 1 capital is generally comprised of CET1 and Additional Tier 1 capital. Additional Tier 1 capital generally includes certain noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and related surplus and minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries. Total capital includes Tier 1 capital (CET1 capital plus Additional Tier 1 capital) and Tier 2 capital. Tier 2 capital is generally comprised of capital instruments and related surplus meeting specified requirements, and may include cumulative preferred stock and long-term perpetual preferred stock, mandatory convertible securities, intermediate preferred stock and subordinated debt. Also included in Tier 2 capital is the allowance for loan loss, which is limited to a maximum of 1.25% of risk-weighted assets and, for institutions that have exercised an opt-out election regarding the treatment of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, or AOCI, up to 45% of net unrealized gains on available-for-sale equity securities with readily determinable fair market values. Institutions that have not exercised the AOCI opt-out have AOCI incorporated into CET1 capital (including unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale-securities). The calculation of all types of regulatory capital is subject to definitions, deductions and adjustments specified in the regulations.

The Basel III Capital Rules also establishrequire a “capital conservation buffer” of 2.5% above the regulatory minimum risk-based capital requirements. An institutionThe capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress and effectively increases the minimum required risk-weighted capital ratios. Banking institutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets below the effective minimum (4.5% plus the capital conservation buffer) is subject to limitations on certain activities, including payment of dividends, share repurchases and discretionary bonuses to executive officers if its capital level is below the capital conservation buffer ratio.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, the Company’s and the Bank’s capital ratios exceeded the minimum capital adequacy guideline percentage requirements under the Basel III Capital Rules on a fully phased-in basis.

Prompt Corrective Action

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act requires federal banking agencies to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. For purposes of prompt corrective action, the law establishes five capital tiers: “well-capitalized,“well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” and “critically undercapitalized.” A depository institution’s capital tier depends on its capital levels and certain other factors established by regulation. TheUnder the applicable FDIC regulations have been amended to incorporate the increased capital requirements required by the Basel III Capital Rules that became effective on January 1, 2015. Under the amended regulations, an institution is deemed to be “well-capitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or greater, a CET1 ratio of 6.5% or greater and a leverage ratio of 5.0% or greater.

At each lower capital category, a bank is subject to increased restrictions on its operations. For example, a bank is generally prohibited from making capital distributions and paying management fees to its holding company if doing so would make the bank “undercapitalized.” Asset growth and branching restrictions apply to undercapitalized banks, which are required to submit written capital restoration plans meeting specified requirements (including a guarantee by the parent holding company, if any). “Significantly undercapitalized” banks are subject to broad regulatory restrictions, including among other things, capital directives, forced mergers, restrictions on the rates of interest they may pay on deposits, restrictions on asset growth and activities, and prohibitions on paying bonuses or increasing compensation to senior executive officers without FDIC approval. “Critically undercapitalized” are subject to even more severe restrictions, including, subject to a narrow exception, the appointment of a conservator or receiver within 90 days after becoming critically undercapitalized.

The appropriate federal banking agency may determine (after notice and opportunity for a hearing) that the institution is in an unsafe or unsound condition or deems the institution to be engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice. The appropriate agency is also permitted to require an adequately capitalized or undercapitalized institution to comply with the supervisory provisions as if the institution were in the next lower category (but not treat a significantly undercapitalized institution as critically undercapitalized) based on supervisory information other than the capital levels of the institution.

The capital classification of a bank affects the frequency of regulatory examinations, the bank’s ability to engage in certain activities and the deposit insurance premium paid by the bank. A bank’s capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying prompt correct action regulations and the capital category may not accurately reflect the bank’s overall financial condition or prospects.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, the Bank met the requirements for being deemed “well-capitalized” for purposes of the prompt corrective action regulations.

The Company

Subject to certain conditions (including deposit concentration limits established by the BHCA and the Dodd-Frank Act), the Federal Reserve may allow a bank holding company to acquire banks located in any state of the United States. In approving interstate acquisitions, the Federal Reserve is required to give effect to applicable state law limitations on the aggregate amount of deposits that may be held by the acquiring bank holding company and its insured depository institution affiliates in the state in which the target bank is located (provided that those limits do not discriminate against out-of-state depository institutions or their holding companies) and state laws that require that the target bank have been in existence for a minimum period of time (not to exceed five years) before being acquired by an out-of-state bank holding company. Furthermore, in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act, bank holding companies must be well-capitalized and well-managed in order to complete interstate mergers or acquisitions. For a discussion of the capital requirements, see “—Regulatory Capital Requirements” above.

It is the Federal Reserve’s policy that bank holding companies should generally pay dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year, and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition.  It is also the Federal Reserve’s policy that bank holding companies should not maintain dividend levels that undermine their ability to be a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries. Additionally, the Federal Reserve has indicated that bank holding companies should carefully review their dividend policy and has discouraged payment ratios that are at maximum allowable levels unless both asset quality and capital are very strong. The Federal Reserve possesses enforcement powers over bank holding companies and their nonbank subsidiaries to prevent or remedy actions that represent unsafe or unsound practices or violations of applicable statutes and regulations. Among these powers is the ability to proscribe the payment of dividends by banks and bank holding companies.

Bank holding companies must consult with the Federal Reserve before redeeming any equity or other capital instrument included in Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital (or, for small bank holding companies like the Company, before redeeming any instruments included in equity as defined under GAAP) prior to stated maturity, if such redemption could have a material effect on the level or composition of the organization’s capital base.  In addition, bank holding companies are unable to repurchase shares equal to 10% or more of its net worth if it would not be well-capitalized (as defined by the Federal Reserve) after giving effect to such repurchase. Bank holding companies experiencing financial weaknesses, or that are at significant risk of developing financial weaknesses, must consult with the Federal Reserve before redeeming or repurchasing common stock or other regulatory capital instruments.

The Bank

The OBD supervises and regulates all areas of the Bank’s operations including, without limitation, the making of loans, the issuance of securities, the conduct of the Bank’s corporate affairs, the satisfaction of capital adequacy requirements, the payment of dividends, and the establishment or closing of banking offices. The Federal Reserve is the Bank’s primary federal regulatory agency, and periodically examines the Bank’s operations and financial condition and compliance with federal law. In addition, the Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the DIF, to the maximum extent provided under federal law and FDIC regulations, and the FDIC has certain enforcement powers over the Bank.

Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act altered the minimum designated reserve ratio of the DIF, increasing the minimum from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits, and eliminating the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The FDIC has until September 3, 2020 to meet the 1.35% reserve ratio target. At least semi-annually, the FDIC updates its loss and income projections for the DIF and, if needed, may increase or decrease the assessment rates, following notice and comment on proposed rulemaking. As a result, the Bank’s FDIC deposit insurance premiums could increase. During the year ended December 31, 2018, the Bank paid $440,000 in FDIC deposit insurance premiums.

The payment of dividends by any financial institution is affected by the requirement to maintain adequate capital pursuant to applicable capital adequacy guidelines and regulations, and a financial institution generally is prohibited from paying any dividends if, following payment thereof, the institution would be undercapitalized. As described above, the Bank exceeded its minimum capital requirements under applicable regulatory guidelines as of December 31, 2018.2023.

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

Section 109 of the Interstate Act prohibits a bank from establishing or acquiring a branch or branches outside of its home state primarily for the purpose of deposit production. To determine compliance with Section 109, the appropriate Federal banking agency first compares a bank’s estimated statewide loan-to-deposit ratio to the estimated host state loan-to-deposit ratio for a particular state. If a bank’s statewide loan-to-deposit ratio is at least one-half of the published host state loan-to-deposit ratio, the bank has complied with Section 109. A second step is conducted if a bank’s estimated statewide loan-to-deposit ratio is less than one-half of the published ratio for that state. The second step requires the appropriate agency to determine whether the bank is reasonably helping to meet the credit needs of the communities served by the bank’s interstate branches. A bank that fails both steps is in violation of Section 109 and subject to sanctions by the appropriate agency. Those sanctions may include requiring the bank’s interstate branches in the non-compliance state be closed or not permitting the bank to open new branches in the non-compliance state.

The federal banking agencies have adopted regulations which measure a bank’s compliance with its CRA obligations on a performance-based evaluation system. This system bases CRA ratings on an institution’s actual lending service and investment performance rather than the extent to which the institution conducts needs assessments, documents community outreach or complies with other procedural requirements. The ratings range from a high of “outstanding” to a low of “substantial noncompliance.” The Bank had a CRA rating of “satisfactory” as of its most recent CRA assessment.

Likewise, OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries and regimes under authority of various laws, including designated foreign countries, nationals and others. OFAC publishes lists of specially designated targets and countries.  Financial institutions are responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of and transactions with such targets and countries, prohibiting unlicensed trade and financial transactions with them and reporting blocked transactions after their occurrence.

Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate AML and OFAC programs, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution.institution, including causing applicable bank regulatory authorities not to approve merger or acquisition transactions when regulatory approval is required or to prohibit such transactions even if approval is not required.

Consumer Financial Services

We are subject to a number of federal and state consumer protection laws that extensively govern our relationship with our customers. These laws include the ECOA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Service Members Civil Relief Act, the Military Lending Act, and these laws’ respective state law counterparts, as well as state usury laws and laws regarding unfair and deceptive acts and practices. These and other federal laws, among other things, require disclosures of the cost of credit and terms of deposit accounts, provide substantive consumer rights, prohibit discrimination in credit transactions, regulate the use of credit report information, provide financial privacy protections, prohibit unfair, deceptive and abusive practices and subject us to substantial regulatory oversight. Violations of applicable consumer protection laws can result in significant potential liability from litigation brought by customers, including actual damages, restitution and attorneys’ fees. Federal bank regulators, state attorneys general and state and local consumer protection agencies may also seek to enforce consumer protection requirements and obtain these and other remedies, including regulatory sanctions, customer rescission rights, action by the state and local attorneys general in each jurisdiction in which we operate and civil money penalties. Failure to comply with consumer protection requirements may also result in failure to obtain any required bank regulatory approval for mergers or acquisitions or prohibition from engaging in such transactions even if approval is not required.

Rulemaking authority for most federal consumer protection laws was transferred from the prudential regulators to the CFPB on July 21, 2011.  In some cases, regulators such as the Federal Trade Commission and the DOJ also retain certain rulemaking or enforcement authority. The CFPB also has broad authority to prohibit unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices, or UDAAP, and to investigate and penalize financial institutions that violate this prohibition. While the statutory language of the Dodd-Frank Act sets forth the standards for acts and practices that violate the prohibition on UDAAP, certain aspects of these standards are untested, and thus it is currently not possible to predict how the CFPB will exercise this authority.

The consumer protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and the examination, supervision and enforcement of those laws and implementing regulations by the CFPB have created a more intense and complex environment for consumer finance regulation. The CFPB has significant authority to implement and enforce federal consumer protection laws and new requirements for financial services products provided for in the Dodd-Frank Act, as well as the authority to identify and prohibit UDAAP. The review of products and practices to prevent such acts and practices is a continuing focus of the CFPB, and of banking regulators more broadly. The ultimate impact of this heightened scrutiny is uncertain but could result in changes to pricing, practices, products and procedures. It could also result in increased costs related to regulatory oversight, supervision and examination, additional remediation efforts and possible penalties. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act provides the CFPB with broad supervisory, examination and enforcement authority over various consumer financial products and services, including the ability to require reimbursements and other payments to customers for alleged legal violations and to impose significant penalties, as well as injunctive relief that prohibits lenders from engaging in allegedly unlawful practices. The CFPB also has the authority to obtain cease and desist orders providing for affirmative relief or monetary penalties. The Dodd-Frank Act does not prevent states from adopting stricter consumer protection standards. State regulation of financial products and potential enforcement actions could also adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

The CFPB has examination and enforcement authority over providers with more than $10 billion in assets. Banks and savings institutions with $10 billion or less in assets, like the Bank, will continue to be examined by their applicable bank regulators.

The federal bank regulatory agencies have issued comprehensive guidance intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of those organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The incentive compensation guidance sets expectations for banking organizations concerning their incentive compensation arrangements and related risk-management,risk management, control and governance processes. The incentive compensation guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon three primary principles: (1) balanced risk-taking incentives; (2) compatibility with effective controls and risk management; and (3) strong corporate governance. Any deficiencies in compensation practices that are identified may be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect its ability to make acquisitions or take other actions. In addition, under the incentive compensation guidance, a banking organization’s federal supervisor may initiate enforcement action if the organization’s incentive compensation arrangements pose a risk to the safety and soundness of the organization. Further, the Basel III capital rules limit discretionary bonus payments to bank executives if the institution’s regulatory capital ratios fail to exceed certain thresholds. Although the federal bank regulatory agencies proposed additional rules in 2016 related to incentive compensation for all banks with more than $1.0 billion in assets, which would include the Company and the Bank, those rules have not yet been finalized. Thefinalized and the scope and content of the U.S. banking regulators’ policies on executive compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in the near future.

Financial Privacy

The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted rules that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. These limitations require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to a non-affiliated third party. These regulations affect how consumer information is transmitted through financial services companies and conveyed to outside vendors. In addition, consumers may also prevent disclosure of certain information among affiliated companies that is assembled or used to determine eligibility for a product or service, such as that shown on consumer credit reports and asset and income information from applications. Consumers also have the option to direct banks and other financial institutions not to share information about transactions and experiences with affiliated companies for the purpose of marketing products or services.

Impact of Monetary Policy

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

Other legislative and regulatory initiatives which could affect the Company, the Bank and the banking industry in general may be pending, proposed or introduced before the U.S. Congress, the Oklahoma Legislature and other governmental bodies in the future.from time to time. Such proposals, if enacted, may further alter the structure, regulation and competitive relationship among financial institutions, and may subject the Company or the Bank to increased regulation, disclosure and reporting requirements. In addition, the various banking regulatory agencies often adopt new rules and regulations to implement and enforce existing legislation. It cannot be predicted whether, or in what form, any such legislation or regulations may be enacted or the extent to which the business of the Company or the Bank would be affected thereby.

Our business is primarily affected by the economyeconomies of Oklahoma, Texas and to a smaller degree the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area and Kansas, our primary markets.State of Kansas. Our success depends to a significant extent upon the business activity, population, income levels, employment trends, deposits and real estate activity in these markets. The Oklahoma economy has been generally steady, if not increasing,

As of December 31, 2023, the substantial majority of the loans in our loan portfolio were made to borrowers who live and/or conduct business in our markets and the past few years. The housing market remains strongsubstantial majority of our secured loans were secured by collateral located in our markets.  Accordingly, we are exposed to risks associated with prices having increased through 2018. Vacancy rates for commercial properties remain lowa lack of geographic diversification as any regional or local economic downturn that affects our markets, our existing or prospective borrowers, or property values in our markets may affect us and small business ownersour profitability more significantly and more adversely than our competitors whose operations are increasingly considering bank borrowings in order to grow.less geographically focused.

In addition, market developments may affect consumer confidence levels and may cause adverse changes in payment patterns, causing increases in delinquencies and default rates, which could impact our charge-offs and provision for credit losses. Adverse changes in economic conditions in these markets could reduce our growth in loans and deposits, impair our ability to collect our loans, increase our problem loans and charge-offs and otherwise negatively affect our performance and financial condition.

The energy industry is a significant sector in our Oklahoma market, and to a lesser extent, Kansas and the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area. A downturn or lack of growth in the energy industry and energy-related business, including sustained low oil or gas prices or the failure of oil or gas prices to rise in the future, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. As of December 31, 2018,2023, our energy loans, which include loans to exploration and production companies, midstream companies, purchasers of mineral and royalty interests and service providers totaled $110.0$190.6 million, or 18.4%14.0% of total loans, as compared to $104.7$182.8 million, or 18.6%14.4% of total loans as of December 31, 2017 and $60.7 million, or 12.1% of total loans, as of December 31, 2016.2022. In addition to our direct exposure to energy loans, we also have indirect exposure to energy prices, as some of our non-energy customers’customers' businesses are directly affected by volatility with the oil and gas industry and energy prices and otherwise are dependent on energy-related businesses. As of December 31, 2018,2023, we had $133.4$55.1 million in loanunfunded commitments of which $23.4 million was unfunded debt, to borrowers in the oil and gas industry. Prolonged or further pricing pressure on oil and gas could lead to increased credit stress in our energy portfolio, increased losses associated with our energy portfolio, increased utilization of our contractual obligations to extend credit and weaker demand for energy lending. Such a decline or general uncertainty resulting from continued volatility could have other adverse impacts, such as job losses in industries tied to energy, increased spending habits, lower borrowing needs, higher transaction deposit balances or a number of other effects that are difficult to isolate or quantify, particularly in markets with significant dependence on the energy industry like Oklahoma, and to a lesser extent Kansas and the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area, all of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company has loan exposure to the hospitality industry, primarily through loans made to construct or finance the operation of hotels. At December 31, 2018,2023, this exposure was approximately $123$298.5 million, or 20.5%21.9%, of the total loan portfolio, along with an additional $28.3$5.7 million in unfunded debt.debt, as compared to $244.3 million, or 19.2%, of the total loan portfolio, along with an additional $15.5 million in unfunded debt as of December 31, 2022. The hospitality industry is subject to changes in the travel patterns of business and leisure travelers, both of which are affected by the strength of the economy, as well as other factors. The performance of the hospitality industry has traditionally been closely linked with the performance of the general economy and, specifically, growth in gross domestic product. Changes in travel patterns of both business and leisure travelers, particularly during periods of economic contraction or low levels of economic growth, may create difficulties for the industry over the long-term. Although we have made a large portion of our hospitality loans to long-term, well-established hotel operators in strategic locations, a general downturn in the supply growth of such markets or hotel occupancy or room rates could negatively impact the borrowers’ ability to repay. A significant loss in this portfolio could materially and adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

We have a concentration in commercial real estate lending that could cause our regulators to restrict our ability to grow.

As a part of their regulatory oversight, the federal regulators have issued guidance on Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices, or the CRE Concentration Guidance, with respect to a financial institution’s concentrations in CRE lending activities. This guidance was issued in response to the agencies’ concerns that rising CRE concentrations might expose institutions to unanticipated earnings and capital volatility in the event of adverse changes in the CRE market. This guidance reinforces and enhances existing regulations and guidelines for safe and sound real estate lending by providing supervisory criteria, including numerical indicators to assist in identifying institutions with potentially significant CRE loan concentrations that may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny. The guidance does not limit banks’ CRE lending, but rather guides institutions in developing risk management practices and levels of capital that are commensurate with the level and nature of their CRE concentrations. The CRE Concentration Guidance identifies certain concentration levels that, if exceeded, will expose the institution to additional supervisory analysis with regard to the institution’s CRE concentration risk. The CRE Concentration Guidance is designed to promote appropriate levels of capital and sound loan and risk management practices for institutions with a concentration of CRE loans. In general, the CRE Concentration Guidance establishes the following supervisory criteria as preliminary indications of possible CRE concentration risk: (1) the institution’s total construction, land development and other land loans represent 100% or more of total capital; or (2) total CRE loans as defined in this guidance, or Regulatory CRE, represent 300% or more of total capital, and the institution’s Regulatory CRE has increased by 50% or more during the prior 36-month period. Pursuant to the CRE Concentration Guidance, loans secured by owner occupied CRE are not included for purposes of the CRE concentration calculation. We believe that the CRE Concentration Guidance is applicable to us. As of December 31, 2018,2023, our Regulatory CRE represented 263.8%290.69% of our total Bank capital and our construction, land development and other land loans represented 93.1%73.97% of our total Bank capital, as compared to 256.5%304.72% and 130.0%101.20% as of December 31, 2017,2022, respectively. During the prior 36-month period, our Regulatory CRE has increased 114.2%decreased 53.10%. We are actively working to manage our Regulatory CRE concentration, and we believe that our underwriting policies, management information systems, independent credit administration process, and monitoring of real estate loan concentrations are currently sufficient to address the CRE Concentration Guidance. We have implementedutilize enhanced CRE monitoring techniques as expected by banking regulators as our concentrations have approached or exceeded the regulatory guidance. Nevertheless, the Federal Reserve could become concerned about our CRE loan concentrations, and it could limit our ability to grow by restricting its approvals for the establishment or acquisition of branches, or approvals of mergers or other acquisition opportunities, or by requiring us to raise additional capital, reduce our loan concentrations or undertake other remedial actions.

Adverse developments affecting real estate values, particularly in Oklahoma City and the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area, could increase the credit risk associated with our real estate loan portfolio. Real estate values may experience periods of fluctuation, and the market value of real estate can fluctuate significantly in a short period of time. Adverse changes affecting real estate values and the liquidity of real estate in one or more of our markets could increase the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio, and could result in losses that adversely affect credit quality, financial condition and results of operation. Negative changes in the economy affecting real estate values and liquidity in our market areas could significantly impair the value of property pledged as collateral on loans and affect our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure without a loss or additional losses. Collateral may have to be sold for less than the outstanding balance of the loan, which could result in losses on such loans. Such declines and losses could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and growth prospects. If real estate values decline, it is also more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, we had approximately $588.2 million$1.35 billion of commercial purpose loans, which include general commercial, energy, agricultural, and CRE loans, representing approximately 97.7%98.9% of our gross loan portfolio. Commercial purpose loans are often larger and involve greater risks than other types of lending. Because payments on these loans are often dependent on the successful operation or development of the property or business involved, their repayment is more sensitive than other types of loans to adverse conditions in the real estate market or the general economy.

Accordingly, a downturn in the real estate market or the general economy could heighten our risk related to commercial purpose loans, particularly energy and CRE loans. Unlike residential mortgage loans, which generally are made on the basis of the borrowers’ ability to make repayment from their employment and other income and which are secured by real property whose value tends to be more easily ascertainable, commercial purpose loans typically are made on the basis of the borrowers’ ability to make repayment from the cash flow of the commercial venture. If the cash flow from business operations is reduced, the borrowers’ ability to repay the loan may be impaired. As a result of the larger average size of each commercial purpose loan as compared with other loans such as residential loans, as well as the collateral which is generally less readily marketable, losses incurred on a small number of commercial purpose loans could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, our 20 largest borrowing relationships ranged from approximately $8.7$16.7 million to $25$38.7 million (including unfunded commitments) and totaled approximately $263.8$533.1 million in total commitments (representing, in the aggregate, 35.8%32.8% of our total outstanding commitments as of December 31, 2018)2023). Of these 20 relationships, $174.8 million were originated from the Oklahoma market, with the remaining $89.0 million extended to borrowers located in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area. Each of the loans associated with these relationships has been underwritten in accordance with our underwriting policies and limits. Along with other risks inherent in these loans, such as the deterioration of the underlying businesses or property securing these loans, this concentration of borrowers presents a risk that, if one or more of these relationships were to become delinquent or suffer default, we could be exposed to material losses. The allowance for loancredit losses may not be adequate to cover losses associated with any of these relationships, and any loss or increase in the allowance would negatively affect our earnings and capital. Even if these loans are adequately collateralized, an increase in classified assets could harm our reputation with our regulators and inhibit our ability to execute our business plan.

At December 31, 2018,2023, our 20 largest deposit relationships accounted for 25.2%24.0% of our total deposits. Withdrawals of deposits by any one of our largest depositors or by one of our related customer groups could force us to rely more heavily on borrowings and other sources of funding for our business and withdrawal demands, adversely affecting our net interest margin and results of operations. We may also be forced, as a result of withdrawals of deposits, to rely more heavily on other, potentially more expensive and less stable funding sources. Additionally, such circumstances could require us to raise deposit rates in an attempt to attract new deposits, which would adversely affect our results of operations. Under applicable regulations, if the Bank were no longer “well capitalized,” the Bank would not be able to accept brokered deposits without the approval of the FDIC.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, approximately 45.3%40.0% of our gross loans were maturing within one year, compared to approximately 49.6%37.6% of our gross loans that were maturing within one year as of December 31, 2017.2022. As a result, we will either need to renew or replace these loans during the course of the year. There is no guarantee that these loans will be originated or renewed by borrowers on the same terms or at all, as demand for such loans may decrease. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that borrowers will qualify for new loans or that existing loans will be renewed by us on the same terms or at all, as collateral values may be insufficient or the borrowers’ cash flow may be materially less than when the loan was initially originated. This could result in a significant decline in the size of our loan portfolio.

We maintain an allowance for credit losses in an amount that we believe is appropriate to provide for losses inherent in the period in which it takes place.

Our profitability depends in substantial part on our net interest income. Net interest income is the difference between the amounts received by us on our interest-earning assets and the interest paid by us on our interest-bearing liabilities. Our net interest income depends on many factors that are partly or completely outside of our control, including competition, federal economic, monetary and fiscal policies and economic conditions generally. Our net interest income will be adversely affected if market interest rates change so that the interest we pay on deposits and borrowings increases faster than the interest we earn on loans and investments.

Changes in interest rates could affect our ability to originate loans and deposits. Historically, there has been an inverse correlation between the demand for loans and interest rates. Loan origination volume usually declines during periods of rising or high interest rates and increases during periods of declining or low interest rates. Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on the carrying value of certain of our assets, including loans and other assets, on our balance sheet.

Interest rate increases often result in larger payment requirements for our borrowers, which increase the potential for default. At the same time, the marketability of any underlying property that serves as collateral for such loans may be adversely affected by any reduced demand resulting from higher interest rates. An increase in interest rates that adversely affects the ability of borrowers to pay the principal or interest on loans may lead to an increase in nonperforming assets and a reduction of income recognized, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Further, when we place a loan on nonaccrual status, we reverse any accrued but unpaid interest receivable, which decreases interest income. Subsequently, we continue to have a cost to fund the loan, which is reflected as interest expense, without any interest income to offset the associated funding expense. Thus, an increase in the amount of nonaccrual loans would have an adverse impact on net interest income.

The ratio of variable- to fixed-rate loans in our loan portfolio, the ratio of short-term (maturing at a given time within 12 months) to long-term loans, and the ratio of our demand, money market and savings deposits to certificates of deposit (and their time periods), are the primary factors affecting the sensitivity of our net interest income to changes in market interest rates. The composition of our rate-sensitive assets or liabilities is subject to change and could result in a more unbalanced position that would cause market rate changes to have a greater impact on our earnings. Fluctuations in market rates and other market disruptions are neither predictable nor controllable and may adversely affect our financial condition and earnings.

As of December 31, 2018,2023, approximately $480.8 million,$1.33 billion, or 71.1%83.9%, of our deposits consisted of demand, savings, money market and negotiable order of withdrawal, or NOW, accounts. The approximately $195.2Approximately $256.8 million of the remaining balance of deposits consists of certificates of deposit, of which approximately $167.7$224.8 million, or 24.8%87.6% of our totalremaining deposits, was due to mature within one year. Based on our experience, we believe that our savings, money market and non-interest-bearing accounts are relatively stable sources of funds. Historically, a majority of non-brokered certificates of deposit are renewed upon maturity as long as we pay competitive interest rates. Many of these customers are, however, interest-rate conscious and may be willing to move funds into higher-yielding investment alternatives. Our ability to attract and maintain deposits, as well as our cost of funds, has been, and will continue to be significantly affected by general economic conditions. In addition, as market interest rates rise, we will have competitive pressure to increase the rates we pay on deposits. If we increase interest rates paid to retain deposits, our earnings may be adversely affected.

Liquidity is essential to our business. Liquidity risk is the potential that we will be unable to meet our obligations as they come due because of an inability to liquidate assets or obtain adequate funding. The Bank’s primary funding source is customer deposits. In addition, the Bank has historically had access to advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Topeka, or the FHLB, the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, or the FRB, discount window and other wholesale sources, such as internet-sourced deposits to fund operations. We participate in the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service, or CDARS, where customer funds are placed into multiple certificates of deposit, each in an amount under the standard FDIC insurance maximum of $250,000, and placed at a network of banks across the United States. Although the Bank has historically been able to replace maturing deposits and advances as necessary, it might not be able to replace such funds in the future. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans and other sources could have a substantial negative effect on liquidity.

Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities or on acceptable terms could be impaired by factors that affect our organization specifically or the financial services industry or economy in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity as a result of a downturn in the markets in which our loans are concentrated or adverse regulatory actions against us. The Bank’s ability to borrow or attract and retain deposits in the future could be adversely affected by the Bank’s financial condition or regulatory restrictions, or impaired by factors that are not specific to it, such as FDIC insurance changes, disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the banking industry. Borrowing capacity from the FHLB or FRB may fluctuate based upon the condition of the Bank or the acceptability and risk rating of loan collateral and counterparties could adjust discount rates applied to such collateral at the lender’s discretion.

The FRB or FHLB could restrict or limit the Bank’s access to secured borrowings. Correspondent banks can withdraw unsecured lines of credit or require collateralization for the purchase of fed funds. Liquidity also may be affected by the Bank’s routine commitments to extend credit. Market conditions or other events could also negatively affect the level or cost of funding, affecting our ongoing ability to accommodate liability maturities and deposit withdrawals, meet contractual obligations and fund asset growth and new business transactions at a reasonable cost, in a timely manner and without adverse consequences.

Any substantial, unexpected or prolonged change in the level or cost of liquidity could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations, and could impair our ability to fund operations and meet our obligations as they become due and could jeopardize our financial condition.