Third Coast Bancshares, Inc. [TCBX] Filings

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

OR

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number 001-41028

THIRD COAST BANCSHARES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (281) 446-7000

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

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ NO ☐

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

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES ☐ NO ☒

As of June 30, 2022, the aggregate market value of the registrant's common stock held by non-affiliates was approximately $278.2 million.

The number of shares of registrant’s common stock outstanding as of March 15, 2023 was 13,579,498.

Table of Contents

Important Notice about Information in this Annual Report

Unless we state otherwise or the context otherwise requires, references in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “we,” “our,” “us,” “ourselves,” “the Company,” “Third Coast,” and “TCBX” refer to Third Coast Bancshares, Inc., a Texas corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries. All references to “Third Coast Bank”, “the Bank”, or “our Bank” refer to Third Coast Bank, SSB, a Texas state savings bank and our wholly owned bank subsidiary. All references to “TCCC” and “Third Coast Commercial Capital” refer to Third Coast Commercial Capital, Inc., a Texas corporation, and wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank.

The information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is accurate only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and as of the dates specified herein.

1

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These forward-looking statements reflect our current views with respect to, among other things, future events and our financial performance. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “may,” “should,” “could,” “predict,” “potential,” “believe,” “will likely result,” “expect,” “continue,” “will,” “anticipate,” “seek,” “estimate,” “intend,” “plan,” “projection,” “would” and “outlook,” or the negative version of those words or other comparable words or phrases of a future or forward-looking nature. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts, and are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our industry, management’s beliefs and certain assumptions made by management, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and beyond our control. Accordingly, we caution you that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, assumptions and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable as of the date made, actual results may prove to be materially different from the results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

There are or will be important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those indicated in these forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, the following:

2

If one or more events related to these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may differ materially from what we anticipate. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and we do not undertake any obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as otherwise required by applicable laws. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict which will arise. In addition, we cannot assess the impact of each factor on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. For additional information with respect to factors that could cause actual results to differ from the expectations stated in the forward-looking statements, see "Risk Factors" under Part I—Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

3

PART I

Item 1. Business.

General

We are a bank holding company with headquarters in Humble, Texas that operates through our wholly owned subsidiary, the Bank, and the Bank’s wholly owned subsidiary, TCCC. We focus on providing commercial banking solutions to small and medium-sized businesses and professionals with operations in our markets. Our market expertise, coupled with a deep understanding of our customers’ needs, allows us to deliver tailored financial products and services. We currently operate fifteen branches in the Greater Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Austin-San Antonio markets, and one branch in Detroit, Texas. We have experienced significant organic growth since commencing banking operations in 2008 as well as growth through our merger with Heritage Bancorp, Inc. (“Heritage”). As of December 31, 2022, we had, on a consolidated basis, total assets of $3.77 billion, total loans of $3.11 billion, total deposits of $3.24 billion and total shareholders' equity of $381.8 million.

COVID-19 Update

The Company has been, and may continue to be, impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Uncertainty remains about the timing and strength of the global economy’s recovery. To address the economic impact of the pandemic in the U.S., multiple stimulus packages were enacted to provide economic relief to individuals and businesses, including the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”), which established the Paycheck Protection Program (the “PPP”), and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, enacted in March 2021.

We continue to evaluate protocols and processes in place to execute our business continuity plans while promoting the health and safety of our employees and continuing to support our customers and communities.

We have been an active participant in all phases of the PPP, administered by the SBA, and have helped many of our customers obtain loans through the program. PPP loans have a two or five-year term and earn interest at 1.0%. At December 31, 2022, outstanding PPP loans have decreased to $537,000, net of deferred loan fees of $24,000, and are included in commercial and industrial loans. Assuming compliance with PPP origination and documentation requirements, loans funded through the PPP program are fully guaranteed by the U.S. government.

The Company also participated in the Main Street Lending Program (the “MSLP”), created by the Federal Reserve to support lending to small and medium-sized businesses and nonprofit organizations that were in sound financial condition before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. At December 31, 2022, outstanding MSLP loans, excluding the 95% portion sold to the Federal Reserve and net of deferred loan fees of $432,000, were $3.2 million which are included in commercial and industrial loans.

Market Area

We currently operate primarily in three distinct but complementary metropolitan markets, the Greater Houston market, the Dallas-Fort Worth market, and the Austin-San Antonio market. We have eight branches in the Greater Houston market, including six branches located in the Houston – The Woodlands – Sugar Land, Texas Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”) and two branches in the neighboring Beaumont MSA. We have three branches in the Dallas-Fort Worth market, with one location in the North Dallas area, one in Plano, and one in Fort Worth. We also have four branches in the Austin-San Antonio market, with one location in Georgetown, one in La Vernia, one in Nixon, and one in San Antonio and a loan production office in Austin. In addition, we have one branch in Detroit, Texas, located approximately 120 miles northeast of Dallas, Texas. We believe our footprint positions us for continued growth in and around the markets we serve.

Competition

The banking business is highly competitive, and our profitability depends upon our ability to compete with other banks and non-bank financial institutions located in each of our markets for lending opportunities, deposit funds, bankers and acquisition candidates. Our banking competitors in our target markets include various community banks and national and regional banks. We compete with other commercial banks, savings associations, credit unions, finance companies and money market mutual funds operating in our markets.

We are subject to vigorous competition in all aspects of our business from banks, savings banks, savings and loan associations, finance companies, credit unions and other providers of financial services, such as money market mutual funds, brokerage firms, consumer finance companies, asset-based non-bank lenders, insurance companies and certain other non-financial entities, including retail stores which may maintain their own credit programs and certain governmental organizations which may offer more favorable financing than we can. Many of the banks and other financial institutions with which we compete have significantly greater financial resources, marketing capability and name recognition than us and operate on a local, statewide, regional or nationwide basis.

4

Our business has capitalized on our team-oriented culture and diverse product and service offerings to successfully execute our high-touch, relationship driven approach to banking. We strive to know our customers better than our competition and believe our greatest opportunities for organic growth stem from the ability of our relationship managers to provide a greater level of attentiveness to customers and prospects than larger banks and our peers. As a result of consolidation among Texas metropolitan banks, we believe we are one of the few remaining locally-based banks in our markets that are dedicated to providing personalized service to small and medium-sized businesses with sophisticated banking needs.

Lending Activities

Lending limits. Our lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by state and federal law. In general, we are subject to a legal limit on loans to a single borrower equal to 25% of the Bank’s Tier 1 capital. This limit increases or decreases as the Bank’s capital increases or decreases. As of December 31, 2022, our legal lending limit was $114.1 million, and our largest relationship was $45.0 million. In order to ensure compliance with legal lending limits and in accordance with our strong risk management culture, we maintain internal lending limits that are significantly less than the legal lending limits. We are able to sell participations in our larger loans to other financial institutions, which allows us to manage the risk involved in these loans and to meet the lending needs of our customers requiring extensions of credit in excess of these limits.

Credit Department. The Bank’s credit department is overseen by the Bank’s Chief Credit Officer. The credit department consists of the following areas: Underwriting, Loan Monitoring, Special Assets, and Credit Analytics. Underwriters provide analytical and underwriting services in support of the loan officers developing their respective loan portfolios. The Bank’s underwriters are further trained to be our future lending officers. Loan monitoring specialists review borrower financial reports to determine compliance with covenants and borrowing bases. The Special Assets Officer works to minimize losses in the resolution of problem loan workouts, foreclosures and the disposition of other real estate owned. Credit administration personnel prepare and the Chief Credit Officer provides in-depth credit administration reporting to the Bank’s board of directors on a monthly and quarterly basis to aid the Bank’s board of directors in monitoring and adjusting the Bank’s loan focus as it grows.

Loan Review. The Bank has developed an internal loan risk rating system which utilizes risk rating worksheets based upon the type of loan and collateral. Currently, the Bank has risk rating worksheets within the community bank vertical for commercial and industrial loans, individual loans, non-owner occupied real estate loans, owner-occupied real estate loans, and 1-4 family construction loans. The middle market/corporate vertical has a risk rating worksheet tailored to its type of credits. The builder finance vertical has a risk rating worksheet for homebuilder lines and risk rating worksheet for acquisition and development loans. Risk rating worksheets are completed for substantially all new loan and renewal requests. In addition, an annual loan review form is completed on real estate loans of $2 million or greater, given that these loans tend to have longer terms than loans that are not secured by real estate. The loan officer will prepare the annual loan review form that updates the credit file with new financials, review of the collateral status, and provide any meaningful commentary that documents changes in the borrower’s overall condition. Upon completion of the annual loan review form, the loan officer must present the form to the Regional Credit Officer for final review, appropriate grade change if needed and then approval to place in the credit file for future reference. We believe this process gives the Chief Credit Officer and executive management strong insight into the underlying performance of the Bank’s loan portfolio, allowing for accurate and proper real-time grading of the loan portfolio.

The Bank also has a Special Assets Committee, which generally meets monthly to review loans graded substandard or worse, past due loans, overdrafts, and other real estate owned, and considers and approves other loan grade changes. On a quarterly basis, the meeting includes the review of loans graded special mention. For all loans graded special mention or worse, the loan officer is required to complete a problem asset report, which is submitted to the Special Assets Committee.

Additionally, we employ, from time to time, an external third-party loan review team to review up to a 30% penetration of the Bank’s entire loan portfolio. This review will generally include all large loan relationships, insider loans, and criticized loans.

Deposits

Our core deposits include checking accounts, money market accounts, savings accounts, a variety of certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. To attract deposits, we employ a relationship-based marketing approach in our primary service areas and feature a broad product line and competitive offerings. Many of our depositors are residents and businesses located in the markets we serve. We obtain these deposits through in-person, direct mailing, and digital marketing solicitation by our branch staff, lenders, officers, directors, and marketing department.

We also employ a national wholesale deposit strategy to attract and maintain large, relatively low-cost stable deposits through a number of core, fiduciary, and institutional deposit programs. In addition to traditional bank products and services, the deposit strategy includes the utilization of customer digital solutions to broaden the reach of our customer base.

Other Banking Services

We offer a broad array of financial products and services that we believe are easy to use and easy to understand. Our customers enjoy traditional bank products such as checking, savings, money markets, and CD accounts, as well as a full range of competitive

5

banking services including retail and commercial online banking platforms, mobile banking apps, debit cards, credit cards, a suite of treasury management solutions, merchant card services and customer digital solutions.

Investments

As of December 31, 2022, our investment portfolio consisted of state and municipal securities, mortgage-backed securities, agency collateralized mortgage obligations, U.S. treasury bonds, and corporate bonds classified as available for sale. In the future, we may invest in, among other things, U.S. Treasury bills and notes, as well as in securities of federally sponsored agencies, such as Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) bonds. We may also invest in federal funds, negotiable certificates of deposit, banker’s acceptances, and tax-free bonds. No investment in any of those instruments will exceed any applicable limitation imposed by law or regulation. The Bank’s Asset Liability and Investment Committee (“ALCO”) reviews the investment portfolio on an ongoing basis in order to ensure that the investments conform to our internal policy set by our board of directors.

Borrowings

To supplement our core deposits, we maintain borrowings consisting of advances from the FHLB of Dallas, a holding company line of credit with a third-party lender, and subordinated notes issued to certain qualified institutional buyers and institutional accredited investors. At December 31, 2022, we had no FHLB advances, borrowings under the line of credit totaled $30.9 million, or 0.9% of total liabilities, and subordinated notes totaled $80.3 million, or 2.4% of total liabilities. At December 31, 2022, we had $19.1 million available to be drawn on the line of credit with a third-party lender.

Information Technology Systems

We have made significant investments in our information technology systems for our banking and lending operations and treasury management activities. We believe information technology system investments are important to enhance our capabilities to offer new products and overall customer experience, to provide scale for future growth and acquisitions, and to increase controls and efficiencies in our back office operations. We outsource our core data processing services to a nationally recognized bank software vendor providing us with capabilities to support the continued growth of the Bank. Our internal network and e-mail systems are maintained in-house. We leverage the capabilities of a third-party service provider to provide the technical expertise around network design and architecture that is required for us to operate as an effective and efficient organization. We actively manage our business continuity plan, and we follow recommendations outlined by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council to ensure that we have effectively identified our risks and documented contingency plans for key functions and systems including providing for back up sites for all critical applications. We also perform tests to ensure the adequacy of these contingency plans.

The majority of our other systems, including our electronic funds transfer, transaction processing and online banking services, are also hosted by the vendor to whom we outsource our core data processing services. The scalability of this infrastructure is designed to support our growth strategy. These critical business applications and processes are included in the business continuity plans referenced above.

Enterprise Risk Management

We place significant emphasis on risk mitigation as an integral component of our organizational culture. We believe that our emphasis on risk management is manifested in our asset quality statistics and in our history of low charge-offs and losses on deposit-related services due to debit card, ACH or wire fraud. With respect to our lending philosophy, our risk management focuses on structuring credits to provide for multiple sources of repayment, coupled with strong underwriting and monitoring undertaken by the Bank’s experienced officers and credit policy personnel.

Our risk mitigation techniques include weekly Officers' Loan Committee and Directors’ Loan Committee meetings where loan approvals and pricing are reviewed and discussed for relationships under $10 million and over $10 million, respectively. In addition, the Bank’s board of directors reviews the allowance for loan losses methodology and level, loan concentrations, and portfolio composition reports on a quarterly basis. The Special Assets Committee also meets monthly to discuss criticized assets and set action plans for those borrowers who display deteriorating financial condition, to monitor those relationships and to implement corrective measures on a timely basis to minimize losses. We also perform an annual stress test on our loan portfolio, in which we evaluate the impact on the portfolio of declining economic conditions.

We also focus on risk management in numerous other areas throughout our organization, including asset/liability management, regulatory compliance and strategic and operational risk. We have implemented an extensive asset/liability management process, and utilize a well-known and experienced third-party to run our interest rate risk model on a quarterly basis.

We also annually engage an experienced third-party to review and assess our controls with respect to technology, as well as to perform penetration and vulnerability testing to assist us in managing the risks associated with information security.

6

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

The following is a general summary of the material aspects of certain statutes and regulations that are applicable to us. These summary descriptions are not complete, and you should refer to the full text of the statutes, regulations, and corresponding guidance for more information. These statutes and regulations are subject to change, and additional statutes, regulations, and corresponding guidance may be adopted. We are unable to predict these future changes or the effects, if any, that these changes could have on our business or our revenues.

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 Texas Department of Savings and Mortgage Lending (“TDSML”), the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”). Furthermore, tax laws administered by the Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, and state taxing authorities, accounting rules developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, securities laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), and state securities authorities and anti-money laundering, or AML, laws enforced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or the 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 Deposit Insurance Fund, or the 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 and the payment of dividends.

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 and various other factors. These 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 summary of the material elements of the supervisory and regulatory framework applicable to the Company and the Bank. It does not describe all of the statutes, regulations and regulatory policies that apply, nor does it restate all of the requirements of those that are described. The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provision.

Financial Services Industry Reform

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Act imposed significant regulatory and compliance requirements, including the changing roles of credit rating agencies, the imposition of increased capital, leverage, and liquidity requirements, and numerous other provisions designed to improve supervision and oversight of, and strengthen safety and soundness within, the financial services sector.

Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act established a new framework of authority to conduct systemic risk oversight within the financial system to be distributed among new and existing federal regulatory agencies, including the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC.

On May 24, 2018, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, or the EGRRCPA, was enacted. The EGRRCPA repealed or modified several provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and included a number of burden reduction measures for community banks, including, among other things: (i) designating mortgages held in portfolio as “qualified mortgages” for banks with less than $10 billion in assets, subject to certain documentation and product limitations; (ii) exempting banks with less than $10 billion in assets (and total trading assets and trading liabilities of 5% or less of total assets) from Volcker Rule requirements relating to proprietary trading; (iii) simplifying capital calculations for banks with less than $10 billion in assets by requiring federal banking agencies to establish a community bank leverage ratio of tangible equity to average consolidated assets of not less than 8% or more than 10%, and providing that banks that maintain tangible equity in excess of such ratio will be deemed to be in compliance with risk-based capital and leverage requirements; (iv) assisting smaller banks with obtaining stable funding by providing an exception for reciprocal deposits from FDIC restrictions on acceptance of brokered deposits; (v) raising the eligibility for use of short-form Call Reports from $1 billion to $5 billion in assets; (vi) clarifying definitions pertaining to high-volatility commercial real estate, or HVCRE, which require higher capital allocations, so that only loans with increased risk are subject to higher risk weightings; and (vii)

7

directing the Federal Reserve to raise the asset threshold under the Small Bank Holding Company and Savings and Loan Holding Company Policy Statement, or the SBHC Policy Statement, from $1 billion to $3 billion.

Regulatory Capital Requirements and Capital Adequacy

The federal banking agencies require that banking organizations meet several risk-based capital adequacy requirements. These risk-based capital adequacy requirements 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 reported 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. The Basel III Capital Rules implement the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s December 2010 framework for strengthening international capital standards and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Basel III Capital Rules became effective on January 1, 2015.

The Basel III Capital Rules require the Bank to comply with four minimum capital standards: (1) a tier 1 capital to total consolidated assets ratio of at least 4.0%; (2) a common equity tier 1, or CET1, capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 4.5%; (3) a tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 6.0%; and (4) 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 capital and “additional tier 1 capital,” which 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 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). We determined to opt-out of this requirement. The calculation of all types of regulatory capital is subject to deductions and adjustments specified in the regulations.

The Basel III Capital Rules also establish a “capital conservation buffer” of 2.5% above the regulatory minimum risk-based capital requirements. The capital conservation buffer requirement was phased in beginning in January 2016 and, as of January 2019, is now fully implemented. An institution 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 buffered ratio.

The minimum capital ratios under the Basel III Capital Rules as applicable to the Bank after the full phase-in period of the capital conservation buffer are summarized in the table below.

In determining the amount of risk-weighted assets for purposes of calculating risk-based capital ratios, a banking organization’s assets, including certain off-balance sheet assets (e.g., recourse obligations, direct credit substitutes, residual interests), are multiplied by a risk weight factor assigned by the regulations based on perceived risks inherent in the type of asset. As a result, higher levels of capital are required for asset categories believed to present greater risk. For example, a risk weight of 0% is assigned to cash and U.S. government securities, a risk weight of 50% is generally assigned to prudently underwritten first lien 1-4 family residential mortgages, a risk weight of 100% is assigned to commercial and consumer loans, a risk weight of 150% is assigned to certain past due loans and a risk weight of between 0% to 600% is assigned to permissible equity interests, depending on certain specified factors. The Basel III Capital Rules increased the risk weights for a variety of asset classes, including certain commercial real estate mortgages. Additional aspects of the Basel III Capital Rules’ risk-weighting requirements include:

8

As of December 31, 2022, the Bank’s capital ratios exceeded the minimum capital ratio requirements under the Basel III Capital Rules on a fully phased-in basis.

On September 17, 2019, the FDIC finalized a rule that provides certain banking organizations with the option to elect out of complying with the Basel III Capital Rules. Under the rule, a qualifying community banking organization, or a QCBO, would be eligible to elect the community bank leverage ratio, or CBLR, framework. A QCBO is defined as a banking organization that is not an advanced approaches banking organization and that has:

A QCBO that elects to use the CBLR framework and that maintains a leverage ratio of greater than 9% is considered to have satisfied the risk-based and leverage capital requirements in the Basel III Capital Rules and to have met the well-capitalized ratio requirements under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, described below. The final rule became effective as of January 1, 2020. The Company did not elect to opt in to the CBLR framework.

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,” “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. 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 capital ratio of 6.5% or greater and a leverage ratio of 5.0% or greater.

At each successively 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, 2022, the Bank met the requirements for being deemed “well-capitalized” for purposes of the prompt corrective action regulations.

9

Enforcement Powers of Federal and State Banking Agencies

The federal bank regulatory agencies have broad enforcement powers, including the power to terminate deposit insurance, impose substantial fines and other civil and criminal penalties, and appoint a conservator or receiver for financial institutions. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could subject us and our officers and directors to administrative sanctions and potentially substantial civil money penalties. In addition to the grounds discussed above under “—Prompt Corrective Action,” the appropriate federal bank regulatory agency may appoint the FDIC as conservator or receiver for a depository institution (or the FDIC may appoint itself, under certain circumstances) if any one or more of a number of circumstances exist, including, without limitation, the fact that the depository institution is undercapitalized and has no reasonable prospect of becoming adequately capitalized, fails to become adequately capitalized when required to do so, fails to submit a timely and acceptable capital restoration plan or materially fails to implement an accepted capital restoration plan. The TDSML also has broad enforcement powers over us, including the power to impose orders, remove officers and directors, impose fines and appoint supervisors and conservators.

The Company

General. As a registered bank holding company, the Company is subject to regulation and supervision by the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, or the BHCA. Under the BHCA, the Company is subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve. The Company is required to file with the Federal Reserve periodic reports of its operations and such additional information as the Federal Reserve may require.

Acquisitions, Activities and Change in Control. The BHCA generally requires the prior approval by the Federal Reserve for any merger involving a bank holding company or a bank holding company’s acquisition of more than 5% of a class of voting securities of any additional bank or bank holding company or to acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any additional bank or bank holding company. In reviewing applications seeking approval of merger and acquisition transactions, the Federal Reserve considers, among other things, the competitive effect and public benefits of the transactions, the capital position and managerial resources of the combined organization, the risks to the stability of the U.S. banking or financial system, the applicant’s performance record under the CRA and the effectiveness of all organizations involved in the merger or acquisition in combating money laundering activities. In addition, failure to implement or maintain adequate compliance programs could cause bank regulators not to approve an acquisition where regulatory approval is required or to prohibit an acquisition even if approval is not required.

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 and Capital Adequacy” above.

Federal law also prohibits any person or company from acquiring “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or its holding company without prior notice to the appropriate federal bank regulator. “Control” is conclusively presumed to exist upon the acquisition of 25% or more of the outstanding voting securities of a bank or bank holding company, but may arise under certain circumstances between 5.00% and 24.99% ownership.

Permitted Activities. The BHCA generally prohibits the Company from controlling or engaging in any business other than that of banking, managing and controlling banks or furnishing services to banks and their subsidiaries. This general prohibition is subject to a number of exceptions. The principal exception allows bank holding companies to engage in, and to own shares of companies engaged in, certain businesses found by the Federal Reserve prior to November 11, 1999 to be “so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto.” This authority would permit the Company to engage in a variety of banking-related businesses, including the ownership and operation of a savings association, or any entity engaged in consumer finance, equipment leasing, the operation of a computer service bureau (including software development) and mortgage banking and brokerage. The BHCA generally does not place territorial restrictions on the domestic activities of non-bank subsidiaries of bank holding companies. The Federal Reserve has the power to order any bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any activity or to terminate its ownership or control of any subsidiary when the Federal Reserve has reasonable grounds to believe that continuing such activity, ownership or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial soundness, safety or stability of any bank subsidiary of the bank holding company.

Additionally, bank holding companies that meet certain eligibility requirements prescribed by the BHCA and elect to operate as financial holding companies may engage in, or own shares in companies engaged in, a wider range of non-banking activities, including securities and insurance underwriting and sales, merchant banking and any other activity that the Federal Reserve, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, determines by regulation or order is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity or that the Federal Reserve determines by order to be complementary to any such financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally. The Company has not elected

10

to be a financial holding company, and we have not engaged in any activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be financial in nature or incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature.

If the Company should elect to become a financial holding company, the Company and the Bank must be well-capitalized, well-managed, and have a least a satisfactory Community Reinvestment Act, or CRA, rating. If the Company were to become a financial holding company and the Federal Reserve subsequently determined that the Company, as a financial holding company, is not well-capitalized or well-managed, the Company would have a period of time during which to achieve compliance, but during the period of noncompliance, the Federal Reserve may place any limitations on the Company that the Federal Reserve believed to be appropriate. Furthermore, if the Company became a financial holding company and the Federal Reserve subsequently determined that the Bank, as a financial holding company subsidiary, had not received a satisfactory CRA rating, the Company would not be able to commence any new financial activities or acquire a company that engages in such activities.

Source of Strength. Federal Reserve policy historically required bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. The Dodd-Frank Act codified this policy as a statutory requirement. Under this requirement the Company is expected to commit resources to support the Bank, including at times when the Company may not be in a financial position to provide it. The Company must stand ready to use its available resources to provide adequate capital to the Bank during periods of financial stress or adversity. The Company must also maintain the financial flexibility and capital raising capacity to obtain additional resources for assisting the Bank. The Company’s failure to meet its source of strength obligations may constitute an unsafe and unsound practice or a violation of the Federal Reserve’s regulations or both. The source of strength obligation most directly affects bank holding companies where a bank holding company’s subsidiary bank fails to maintain adequate capital levels. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to the subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. The BHCA provides that in the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy any commitment by a bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of its subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

Safe and Sound Banking Practices. Bank holding companies and their non-banking subsidiaries are prohibited from engaging in activities that represent unsafe and unsound banking practices or that constitute a violation of law or regulations. Under certain conditions the Federal Reserve may conclude that certain actions of a bank holding company, such as a payment of a cash dividend, would constitute an unsafe and unsound banking practice. The Federal Reserve also has the authority to regulate the debt of bank holding companies, including the authority to impose interest rate ceilings and reserve requirements on such debt. Under certain circumstances the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to file written notice and obtain its approval prior to purchasing or redeeming its equity securities, unless certain conditions are met.

Anti-tying Restrictions. Bank holding companies and their affiliates are prohibited from tying the provision of certain services, such as extensions of credit, to other nonbanking services offered by the bank holding company or its affiliates.

Dividend Payments, Stock Redemptions and Repurchases. The Company’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders is affected by both general corporate law considerations and the regulations and policies of the Federal Reserve applicable to bank holding companies, including the Basel III Capital Rules. Generally, a Texas corporation may not make distributions to its shareholders if (i) after giving effect to the dividend, the corporation would be insolvent, or (ii) the amount of the dividend exceeds the surplus of the corporation. Dividends may be declared and paid in a corporation’s own treasury shares that have been reacquired by the corporation out of surplus. Dividends may be declared and paid in a corporation’s own authorized but unissued shares out of the surplus of the corporation upon the satisfaction of certain conditions.

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 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.

11

The Bank

General. The Bank is a Texas state savings bank and state member bank of the Federal Reserve. As such, the Bank is subject to examination, supervision and regulation by the TDSML and the Federal Reserve. The TDSML, which is the chartering authority for Texas state savings banks, 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, as the Bank’s primary federal regulator, also supervises and regulates the Bank’s operations and periodically examines the Bank’s operational safety and soundness and compliance with federal law. The TDSML and the Federal Reserve have the power to enforce compliance with applicable banking statutes and regulations. Those regulations include requirements to maintain reserves against deposits, restrictions on the nature and amount of loans that may be made and the interest that may be charged on loans, and restrictions relating to investments and other activities of the Bank. In addition, the Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the FDIC up to applicable limits. This gives the FDIC additional enforcement authority over the Bank, such as the ability to terminate the Bank’s deposit insurance under certain circumstances.

As a Texas state savings bank, the Bank is empowered by statute, subject to the limitations contained in those statutes, to take and pay interest on savings and time deposits, to accept demand deposits, to make loans on residential and other real estate, to make consumer and commercial loans, to invest, with certain limitations, in equity securities and in debt obligations of banks and corporations, and to provide various other banking services for the benefit of the Bank’s clients. Various state consumer laws and regulations also affect the operations of the Bank, including state usury laws and consumer credit laws.

The Texas Finance Code further provides that, subject to the limitations established by rule of the Texas Finance Commission, a Texas state savings bank may make any loan or investment or engage in any activity permitted under state law for a bank or savings and loan association or under federal law for a federal savings and loan association, savings bank or national bank if such institution’s principal office is located in Texas. This provision is commonly referred to as the “Expansion of Powers” provision of the Texas Finance Code applicable to Texas state savings banks.

Under federal law, a Texas state savings bank is treated as a state bank. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (the “FDICIA”) provides that no state bank or subsidiary thereof may engage as a principal in any activity not permitted for national banks, unless the institution complies with applicable capital requirements and the FDIC determines that the activity poses no significant risk to the Deposit Insurance Fund, or the DIF.

Qualified Thrift Lender Test. As a Texas state savings bank, the Bank is required to meet a Qualified Thrift Lender test to avoid certain restrictions on its activities. Specifically, Texas state savings banks are required to maintain at least 50% of their portfolio assets in qualified thrift investments as defined by 12 U.S.C. § 1467a(m)(4)(C) and other assets determined by the commissioner of the TDSML under rules adopted by the Finance Commission, to be substantially equivalent to qualified thrift investments or which further residential lending or community development.

Depositor Preference. In the event of the “liquidation or other resolution” of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the institution, including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors, and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver, will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If an insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, non-deposit creditors including the parent bank holding company with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to that insured depository institution.

Brokered Deposit Restrictions. Well-capitalized institutions are not subject to limitations on brokered deposits, while adequately capitalized institutions are able to accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits only with a waiver from the FDIC and subject to certain restrictions on the yield paid on such deposits. Undercapitalized institutions are generally not permitted to accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits. As of December 31, 2022, the Bank was eligible to accept brokered deposits without a waiver from the FDIC.

Deposit Insurance. FDIC-insured depository institutions are required to pay deposit insurance assessments to the FDIC to fund the DIF. The amount of a particular institution’s deposit insurance assessment is based on that institution’s risk classification under an FDIC risk-based assessment system. The FDIC’s method for determining the assessment rate for a bank with less than $10 billion in assets is generally based on a formula using financial data and assigned Uniform Financial Institutions Rating System ratings. While in the past an insured depository institution’s assessment base was determined by its deposit base, amendments to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act revised the assessment base so that it is calculated using average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity.

Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act raised the minimum designated reserve ratio of the DIF from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits and eliminated the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The DIF reserve ratio reached 1.36 percent on September 30, 2018, exceeding the statutorily required minimum reserve ratio of 1.35 percent ahead of the September 30, 2020, deadline under the Dodd-Frank Act.

12

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, 2022, the Bank paid $2.8 million in FDIC deposit insurance premiums.

Audits. For insured institutions with total assets of $500 million or more, financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP, as well as management’s certifications concerning management’s responsibility for the financial statements, must be submitted to the FDIC. If the insured institution has consolidated total assets of more than $1 billion, it must additionally submit an attestation by the auditors regarding the institution’s internal controls. Insured institutions with total assets of $500 million or more must also have an audit committee consisting exclusively of outside directors (the majority of whom must be independent of management), and insured institutions with total assets of $1 billion or more must have an audit committee that is entirely independent. The committees of institutions with total assets of more than $3 billion must include members with experience in banking or financial management, must have access to outside counsel and must not include representatives of large customers.

FICO Assessments. In addition to paying basic deposit insurance assessments, insured depository institutions must pay Financing Corporation, or FICO, assessments. FICO is a mixed-ownership governmental corporation chartered by the former Federal Home Loan Bank Board to recapitalize the former Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. FICO issued 30-year non-callable bonds of approximately $8.1 billion. The last of the remaining FICO bonds matured in September 2019. Since 1996, federal legislation requires that all FDIC-insured depository institutions pay assessments to cover interest payments on FICO’s outstanding obligations. During the year ended December 31, 2022, the Bank paid no FICO assessments.

Examination Assessments. Texas state savings banks are required to pay assessments to the TDSML to fund its operations. During the year ended December 31, 2022, the Bank paid examination assessments to the TDSML totaling $147,000.

Capital Requirements. Banks are generally required to maintain minimum capital ratios. For a discussion of the capital requirements applicable to the Bank, see “Regulatory Capital Requirements and Capital Adequacy” above.

Bank Reserves. The Federal Reserve requires all depository institutions to maintain reserves against some transaction accounts (primarily NOW and Super NOW checking accounts). The balances maintained to meet the reserve requirements imposed by the Federal Reserve may be used to satisfy liquidity requirements. An institution may borrow from the Federal Reserve “discount window” as a secondary source of funds if the institution meets the Federal Reserve’s credit standards.

Liquidity Requirements. Historically, regulation and monitoring of bank and bank holding company liquidity has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required formulaic measures. The Basel III liquidity framework requires banks and bank holding companies to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests. The federal banking agencies adopted final Liquidity Coverage Ratio rules in September 2014 and proposed Net Stable Funding Ratio rules in May 2016. These rules introduced two liquidity related metrics: Liquidity Coverage Ratio is intended to require financial institutions to maintain sufficient high-quality liquid resources to survive an acute stress scenario that lasts for one month; and Net Stable Funding Ratio is intended to require financial institutions to maintain a minimum amount of stable sources relative to the liquidity profiles of the institution’s assets and contingent liquidity needs over a one-year period.

While the Liquidity Coverage Ratio and the proposed Net Stable Funding Ratio rules apply only to the largest banking organizations in the country, certain elements may filter down and become applicable to or expected of all insured depository institutions and bank holding companies.

Dividend Payments. The primary source of funds for the Company is dividends from the Bank. The ability of the Bank, as a Texas state savings bank, to pay dividends is restricted under the Texas Finance Code. Pursuant to the Texas Finance Code, a Texas state savings bank may declare and pay a dividend out of current or retained earnings, in cash or additional stock, to the holders of record of the stock outstanding on the date the dividend is declared. However, without the prior approval of the TDSML, a cash dividend may not be declared by the board of a Texas state savings bank that the TDSML considers to be in an unsafe condition or to have less than zero total retained earnings on the date of the dividend declaration.

The Bank is also subject to certain restrictions on the payment of dividends as a result of the requirement that the Bank maintain an adequate level of capital in accordance with federal laws and regulations and with guidelines promulgated from time to time by the federal banking agencies.

The present and future dividend policy of the Bank is subject to the discretion of its board of directors. In determining whether to pay dividends to the Company and, if made, the amount of the dividends, the board of directors of the Bank considers many of the same factors discussed above. The Bank cannot guarantee that it will have the financial ability to pay dividends to the Company, or if dividends are paid, that they will be sufficient for the Company to make distributions to shareholders. The Bank is not obligated to pay dividends.

Transactions with Affiliates. The Bank is subject to sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, or the Affiliates Act, and the Federal Reserve’s implementing Regulation W. An affiliate of a bank is any company or entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the bank. Accordingly, transactions between the Company, the Bank and any non-bank subsidiaries will be subject to a number of restrictions. The Affiliates Act imposes restrictions and limitations on the Bank from making extensions of

13

credit to, or the issuance of a guarantee or letter of credit on behalf of, the Company or other affiliates, the purchase of, or investment in, stock or other securities thereof, the taking of such securities as collateral for loans and the purchase of assets of the Company or other affiliates. Such restrictions and limitations prevent the Company or other affiliates from borrowing from the Bank unless the loans are secured by marketable obligations of designated amounts. Furthermore, such secured loans and investments by the Bank to or in the Company or to or in any other non-banking affiliate are limited, individually, to 10% of the Bank’s capital and surplus, and such transactions are limited in the aggregate to 20% of the Bank’s capital and surplus. All such transactions, as well as contracts entered into between the Bank and affiliates, must be on terms that are no less favorable to the Bank than those that would be available from non-affiliated third parties. Federal Reserve policies also forbid the payment by bank subsidiaries of management fees which are unreasonable in amount or exceed the fair market value of the services rendered or, if no market exists, actual costs plus a reasonable profit.

Financial Subsidiaries. Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or the GLBA, subject to certain conditions imposed by their respective banking regulators, national and state-chartered banks are permitted to form “financial subsidiaries” that may conduct financial activities or activities incidental thereto, thereby permitting bank subsidiaries to engage in certain activities that previously were impermissible. The GLBA imposes several safeguards and restrictions on financial subsidiaries, including that the parent bank’s equity investment in the financial subsidiary be deducted from the bank’s assets and tangible equity for purposes of calculating the bank’s capital adequacy. In addition, the GLBA imposed new restrictions on transactions between a bank and its financial subsidiaries similar to restrictions applicable to transactions between banks and non-bank affiliates.

Loans to Directors, Executive Officers and Principal Shareholders. The authority of the Bank to extend credit to its directors, executive officers and principal shareholders, including their immediate family members and corporations and other entities that they control, is subject to substantial restrictions and requirements under the Federal Reserve’s Regulation O, as well as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. These statutes and regulations impose limits on the amount of loans the Bank may make to directors and other insiders and require that the loans must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with persons not affiliated with the Company or the Bank, that the Bank must follow credit underwriting procedures at least as stringent as those applicable to comparable transactions with persons who are not affiliated with the Company or the Bank, and that the loans must not involve a greater than normal risk of non-payment or include other features not favorable to the Bank. Furthermore, the Bank must periodically report all loans made to directors and other insiders to the bank regulators.

Limits on Loans to One Borrower. The Bank is subject to limits on the amount of loans it can make to one borrower. With certain limited exceptions, loans and extensions of credit from the Bank to any borrower (including certain related entities of the borrower) at any one time may not exceed 25% of the tier 1 capital of the Bank. The Bank may lend an additional amount if the loan is fully secured by certain types of collateral, like bonds or notes of the United States. Certain types of loans are exempted from the lending limits, including loans secured by segregated deposits held by the Bank.

Safety and Soundness Standards / Risk Management. The federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines establishing operational and managerial standards to promote the safety and soundness of federally insured depository institutions. The guidelines set forth standards for internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, compensation, fees and benefits, asset quality and earnings.

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.

During the past decade, the bank regulatory agencies have increasingly emphasized the importance of sound risk management processes and strong internal controls when evaluating the activities of the financial institutions they supervise. 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 a banking institution including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, legal and reputational risk. In particular, recent 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 current environment. The Bank is expected to have active board and senior management oversight; adequate policies, procedures and limits; adequate risk measurement, monitoring and management information systems; and comprehensive internal controls.

14

Branching Authority. Deposit-taking banking offices of the Bank must be approved by the Federal Reserve and the TDSML, which consider a number of factors including financial history, capital adequacy, earnings prospects, character of management, needs of the community and consistency with corporate power. The Dodd-Frank Act permits insured state banks to engage in interstate branching if the laws of the state where the new banking office is to be established would permit the establishment of the banking office if it were chartered by a bank in such state. Finally, the Company may also establish banking offices in other states by merging with banks or by purchasing banking offices of other banks in other states, subject to certain restrictions.

Interstate Deposit Restrictions. The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, or the Riegle-Neal Act, together with the Dodd-Frank Act, relaxed prior branching restrictions under federal law by permitting, subject to regulatory approval, banks to establish branches in states where the laws permit banks chartered in such states to establish branches.

Section 109 of the Riegle-Neal 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. 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-compliant state be closed or not permitting the bank to open new branches in the non-compliant state.

Community Reinvestment Act. The CRA is intended to encourage insured depository institutions, while operating safely and soundly, to help meet the credit needs of their communities. The CRA specifically directs the federal bank regulatory agencies, in examining insured depository institutions, to assess their record of helping to meet the credit needs of their entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound banking practices. The CRA further requires the agencies to take a financial institution’s record of meeting its community credit needs into account when evaluating applications for, among other things, domestic branches, consummating mergers or acquisitions or holding company formations.

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.

Anti-Money Laundering and the Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation. The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, or the USA PATRIOT Act, is designed to deny terrorists and criminals the ability to obtain access to the U.S. financial system and has significant implications for depository institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the transfer of money. The USA PATRIOT Act substantially broadened the scope of United States AML laws and regulations by imposing significant compliance and due diligence obligations, created new crimes and penalties and expanded the extra territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Financial institutions are also prohibited from entering into specified financial transactions and account relationships, must use enhanced due diligence procedures in their dealings with certain types of high risk customers and must implement a written customer identification program. Financial institutions must take certain steps to assist government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering and report certain types of suspicious transactions. Regulatory authorities routinely examine financial institutions for compliance with these obligations and failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or to comply with the USA PATRIOT Act or its regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the 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. Regulatory authorities have imposed cease and desist orders and civil money penalties against institutions found to be in violation of these obligations.

Among other requirements, the USA PATRIOT Act and implementing regulations require banks to establish AML programs that include, at a minimum:

15

Additionally, the USA PATRIOT Act requires each financial institution to develop a customer identification program, or the CIP, as part of its AML program. The key components of the CIP are identification, verification, government list comparison, notice and record retention. The purpose of the CIP is to enable the financial institution to determine the true identity and anticipated account activity of each customer. To make this determination, among other things, the financial institution must collect certain information from customers at the time they enter into the customer relationship with the financial institution. This information must be verified within a reasonable time through documentary and non-documentary methods. Furthermore, all customers must be screened against any CIP-related government lists of known or suspected terrorists. Financial institutions are also required to comply with various reporting and recordkeeping requirements. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC consider an applicant’s effectiveness in combating money laundering, among other factors, in connection with an application to approve a bank merger or acquisition of control of a bank or bank holding company.

Likewise, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or 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.

Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate. The federal banking agencies have promulgated guidance governing financial institutions with concentrations in commercial real estate lending. The guidance provides that a bank has a concentration in commercial real estate lending if (i) total reported loans for construction, land development, and other land represent 100% or more of total capital or (ii) total reported loans secured by multifamily and non-farm nonresidential properties (excluding loans secured by owner-occupied properties) and loans for construction, land development, and other land represent 300% or more of total capital and the bank’s commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased 50% or more during the prior 36 months. If a concentration is present, management must employ heightened risk management practices that address the following key elements: including board and management oversight and strategic planning, portfolio management, development of underwriting standards, risk assessment and monitoring through market analysis and stress testing, and maintenance of increased capital levels as needed to support the level of commercial real estate lending. On December 18, 2015, the federal banking agencies jointly issued a “statement on prudent risk management for commercial real estate lending.”

Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations. The Bank is subject to numerous federal laws and regulations intended to protect consumers in transactions with the Bank, including but not limited to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Military Lending Act, the Real Estate Procedures Act of 1974, the S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act and laws prohibiting unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices in connection with consumer financial products and services. Many states and local jurisdictions have consumer protection laws analogous, and in addition, to those enacted under federal law. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans and conducting other types of transactions. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could give rise to regulatory sanctions, customer rescission and registration rights, action by state and local attorneys general and civil or criminal liability.

Rulemaking authority for most federal consumer protection laws was transferred from the federal banking regulators to the CFPB on July 21, 2011. The CFPB also has broad authority to prohibit unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices and to investigate and penalize financial institutions that violate this prohibition. The CFPB has examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to depository institutions with $10 billion or more in assets. Smaller institutions are subject to rules promulgated by the CFPB but continue to be examined and supervised by federal banking regulators for consumer compliance purposes. The creation of the CFPB by the Dodd-Frank Act has led to enhanced enforcement of consumer financial protection laws.

Incentive Compensation Guidance

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, 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.

16

Although the federal bank regulatory agencies proposed additional rules in 2016 related to incentive compensation for all banks with more than $1 billion in assets, those rules have not yet been finalized. 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.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires public companies to include, at least once every three years, a separate non-binding “say-on-pay” vote in their proxy statement by which shareholders may vote on the compensation of the public company’s named executive officers. In addition, if such public companies are involved in a merger, acquisition, or consolidation, or if they propose to sell or dispose of all or substantially all of their assets, shareholders have a right to an advisory vote on any golden parachute arrangements in connection with such transaction (frequently referred to as “say-on-golden parachute” vote). Although we will be exempt from these requirements while we are an emerging growth company, other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may impact our corporate governance. For instance, the SEC adopted rules prohibiting the listing of any equity security of a company that does not have a compensation committee consisting solely of independent directors, subject to certain exceptions. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC to adopt rules requiring all exchange-traded companies to adopt claw-back policies for incentive compensation paid to executive officers in the event of accounting restatements based on material non-compliance with financial reporting requirements. Those rules, however, have not yet been finalized. 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.

Impact of Current Laws and Regulations

The cumulative effect of these laws and regulations, while providing certain benefits, adds significantly to the cost of our operations and thus may have a negative impact on our profitability. There has also been a notable expansion in recent years of financial service providers that are not subject to the examination, oversight and other rules and regulations to which we are subject. Those providers, because they are not so highly regulated, may have a competitive advantage over us and may continue to draw large amounts of funds away from traditional banking institutions, with a continuing adverse effect on the banking industry in general.

Future Legislation and Regulatory Reform

In recent years, regulators have increased their focus on the regulation of financial institutions. From time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures. New regulations and statutes are regularly proposed that contain wide-ranging proposals for altering the structures, regulations and competitive relationships of financial institutions operating in the United States. We cannot predict whether or in what form any proposed regulation or statute will be adopted or the extent to which our business may be affected by any new regulation or statute. Future legislation, regulation and policies and the effects of such legislation, regulation and policies, may have a significant influence on our operations and activities, financial condition, results of operations, growth plans or future prospects and the overall growth and distribution of loans, investments and deposits. Such legislation, regulation and policies have had a significant effect on the operations and activities, financial condition, results of operations, growth plans and future prospects of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so.

Human Capital

The Company's success depends on its ability to attract and retain highly qualified management and other skilled employees. The Company focuses on identifying and selecting the best candidates for positions based on their qualifications and skill set. Locating candidates with the necessary qualifications can be difficult and competition for these individuals is often intense. The Company

17

invests in its workforce by offering competitive wages and benefits, continually working to create a strong company culture, and nurturing its talent through training and retention programs.

The Company believes a diverse, equitable and inclusive workforce is critical to its success. The Company is committed to attracting, retaining and promoting top quality talent regardless of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, color, national origin, age, religion and physical ability. The Company is dedicated to creating an environment where its employees feel inspired to do their best work. The Company is committed to providing a diverse, equitable and inclusive organization where everyone feels valued and respected for their unique capabilities and where everyone is engaged in the Company's strategic vision of continued strong growth.

During 2022, the Company furthered its commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion by providing unconscious bias training for managers and staff, launching a Women in Banking employee resource group, and establishing the Company's Diversity Council. Through the Diversity Council, the Company plans to foster an environment of respect and acceptance as well as build awareness and education regarding diversity issues, among other initiatives. Each of the Council members brings diverse, professional experiences that support the group's mission.

As of December 31, 2022, the Company employed 368 employees.

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

The Company’s website address is www.tcbssb.com. The Company makes available free of charge on or through its website, under the investors tab, its annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Information contained on the Company’s website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K and is not part of this or any other report that the Company files with or furnishes to the SEC. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy statements and other information that the Company files with or furnishes to the SEC and these reports may be accessed at https://www.sec.gov.

Additionally, our corporate governance policies, including the charters of the Audit, Compensation and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committees, and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Whistleblower Policy and Corporate Governance Guidelines may also be found under the “Investors” tab of our website. A written copy of each of the foregoing corporate governance documents is available upon request. Except as explicitly provided, information furnished by the Company and information on, or accessible through, the SEC’s or the Company’s website is not incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K or our other securities filings and is not part of them.

18

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Our business and results of operations are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control. The material risks and uncertainties that management believes affect the Company are described below. Additional risks and uncertainties that management is not aware of, or that management currently deems immaterial, may also impair the Company’s business operations. This report 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. Some statements in the following risk factors constitute forward-looking statements. Please refer to "Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Summary of Risk Factors

The following is a summary of the principal risks that we believe could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations:

Risks Related to our Business and Operations

Risks Related to the Economy and our Industry

19

Risks Related to Cybersecurity, Third-Parties and Technology

Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Industry

Risks Related to an Investment in Our Common Stock

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

We are subject to interest rate risk and fluctuations in interest rates may adversely affect our earnings.

Changes in interest rates could have an adverse effect on our net interest income and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Many factors outside our control impact interest rates, including governmental monetary policies, inflation, recession, changes in unemployment, the money supply and international economic conditions and volatility and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets.

The majority of our banking assets and liabilities are monetary in nature and subject to risk from changes in interest rates. Like most financial institutions, our earnings are significantly dependent on our net interest income. Different types of assets and liabilities may react differently and at different times to market rate changes. We may periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa. In either event, if market interest rates should move contrary to our position, this “gap” will negatively impact our earnings. The impact on earnings is more adverse when short-term interest rates increase more than long-term interest rates or when long-term interest rates decrease more than short-term interest rates.

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 the property securing a loan may be adversely affected by any reduced demand resulting from higher interest rates. An increase in interest rates can adversely impact the ability of borrowers to pay the principal or interest on loans, and may lead to an increase in loans on nonaccrual status and a reduction of interest income recognized. Further, when we place a loan on nonaccrual status, we reverse any accrued but unpaid interest receivable, which decreases interest income. At the same time, we

20

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.

In a low interest rate environment, loan customers often pursue long-term fixed rate credits, which could adversely affect our earnings and net interest margin if rates increase. If short-term interest rates remain at low levels for a prolonged period and longer-term interest rates fall, we could experience net interest margin compression as our interest-earning assets would continue to reprice downward while our interest-bearing liability rates could fail to decline in tandem.

Interest rate increases may also reduce the demand for loans and increase competition for deposits. Changes in interest rates also can affect the value of loans, securities and other assets.

Our largest deposit relationships currently make up a material percentage of our deposits and the withdrawal of deposits by our largest depositors could force us to fund our business through more expensive and less stable sources.

As of December 31, 2022, our fifteen largest depositors (including related entities, but excluding brokered deposits) accounted for $1.68 billion in deposits, or approximately 51.8% of our total deposits. Further, our brokered deposit account balance was $188.3 million, or approximately 5.8% of our total deposits, as of December 31, 2022, and $188.3 million, or 5.8% of our total deposits, was through one brokered deposit relationship as of December 31, 2022.

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 any withdrawal of deposits, to rely more heavily on other, potentially more expensive and less stable funding sources. Consequently, the occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may not be able to grow or maintain our deposit base, which could adversely impact our funding costs.

Our principal sources of liquidity include earnings, deposits, repayment by clients of loans we have made to them, and the proceeds from sales by us of our equity and debt securities or from borrowings that we may obtain. In addition, from time to time, we borrow from the FHLB of Dallas. Our future growth will largely depend on our ability to grow and maintain our deposit base, which we may not be able to achieve. As of December 31, 2022, we had a loan to deposit ratio of 96.0%. The account and deposit balances can decrease when clients perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market or real estate, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If clients move money out of bank deposits and into investments (or similar deposit products at other institutions that may provide a higher rate of return), we could lose a relatively low cost source of funds, increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income. Additionally, any loss of funds could result in lower loan originations, which could materially negatively impact our growth strategy and results of operations.

We may not be able to implement our expansion strategy, which may adversely affect our ability to maintain our historical earnings trends.

Our expansion strategy focuses on organic growth, supplemented by strategic acquisitions and expansion of the Bank’s banking location network, or de novo branching. We may not be able to execute on aspects of our expansion strategy, which may impair our ability to sustain our historical rate of growth or prevent us from growing at all. More specifically, we may not be able to generate sufficient new loans and deposits within acceptable risk and expense tolerances, obtain the personnel or funding necessary for additional growth or find suitable acquisition candidates. Various factors, such as economic conditions and competition with other financial institutions, may impede or prohibit the growth of our operations, the opening of new banking locations and the consummation of acquisitions. Further, we may be unable to attract and retain experienced bankers, which could adversely affect our growth. The success of our strategy also depends on our ability to effectively manage growth, which is dependent upon a number of factors, including our ability to adapt our credit, operational, technology and governance infrastructure to accommodate expanded operations. If we fail to implement one or more aspects of our strategy, we may be unable to maintain our historical earnings trends, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may not be able to manage the risks associated with our anticipated growth and expansion through de novo branching, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business strategy includes evaluating strategic opportunities to grow through de novo branching, and we believe that banking location expansion has been meaningful to our growth since inception. De novo branching carries with it certain potential risks, including significant startup costs and anticipated initial operating losses; an inability to gain regulatory approval; an inability to secure the services of qualified senior management to operate the de novo banking locations and successfully integrate and promote our corporate culture; poor market reception for de novo banking locations established in markets where we do not have a preexisting reputation; challenges posed by local economic conditions; challenges associated with securing attractive locations at a reasonable cost; and the additional strain on management resources and internal systems and controls. Failure to adequately manage the risks associated with our anticipated growth through de novo branching could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

21

We rely heavily on our executive management team and other key employees, and we could be adversely affected by the unexpected loss of their services.

Our success depends in large part on the performance of our executive management team and other key personnel, as well as on our ability to attract, motivate and retain highly qualified senior and middle management and other skilled employees. Competition for qualified employees is intense, and the process of locating key personnel with the combination of skills, attributes and business relationships required to execute our business plan may be lengthy. We may not be successful in retaining our key employees, and the unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could have an adverse effect on our business because of their skills, knowledge of and business relationships within our primary markets, years of industry experience and the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel. If the services of any of our key personnel should become unavailable for any reason, we may not be able to identify and hire qualified persons on terms acceptable to us, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We may not be able to adequately measure and limit our credit risk, which could lead to unexpected losses.

The business of lending is inherently risky, including risks that the principal of or interest on any loan will not be repaid timely or at all or that the value of any collateral supporting the loan will be insufficient to cover our outstanding exposure. These risks may be affected by the strength of the borrower’s business sector and local, regional and national market and economic conditions. Many of our loans are made to small- to medium-sized businesses that may be less able to withstand competitive, economic and financial pressures than larger borrowers. Our risk management practices, such as monitoring the concentration of our loans within specific industries and our credit approval practices, may not adequately reduce credit risk, and our credit administration personnel, policies and procedures may not adequately adapt to changes in economic or any other conditions affecting customers and the quality of our loan portfolio. A failure to effectively measure and limit the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio could lead to unexpected losses and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our allowance for loan losses may prove to be insufficient to absorb potential losses in our loan portfolio, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We maintain an allowance for loan losses that represents management’s judgment of probable losses and risks inherent in our loan portfolio. As of December 31, 2022, our allowance for loan losses totaled $30.4 million, which represents approximately 0.98% of our total loans. The level of the allowance reflects management’s continuing evaluation of general economic conditions, diversification and seasoning of our loan portfolio, historic loss experience, identified credit problems, delinquency levels and adequacy of collateral. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses is inherently highly subjective and requires us to make significant estimates of and assumptions regarding current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. Inaccurate management assumptions, deterioration of economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification or deterioration of additional problem loans, acquisition of problem loans and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may require us to increase our allowance for loan losses.

Additional loan losses will likely occur in the future and may occur at a rate greater than we have previously experienced or than we anticipate. We may be required to make additional provisions for loan losses to further supplement our allowance for loan losses, due either to our management’s decision or as a regulatory requirement. In addition, bank regulatory agencies will periodically review our allowance for loan losses and the value attributed to nonaccrual loans or to real estate acquired through foreclosure. Such regulatory agencies may require us to recognize future charge-offs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Finally, the measure of our allowance for loan losses will be subject to new accounting standards. The Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, has adopted a new accounting standard that will be effective for us, as a smaller reporting company, for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022. This new standard, referred to as Current Expected Credit Loss, or CECL, will require financial institutions to determine periodic estimates of lifetime expected credit losses on loans, and recognize the expected credit losses as allowances for loan losses. This will change the current method of providing allowances for loan losses that are probable. CECL will also greatly increase the types of data we would need to collect and review to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses. The CECL model likely will create more volatility in the level of our allowance for loan losses. Any increase in our allowance for loan losses or expenses incurred to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Based on our analysis, the adoption of ASU 2016-13 on January 1, 2023 resulted in an increase in our allowance for credit losses of approximately $4.0 million.

The amount of nonperforming and classified assets may increase significantly, resulting in additional losses and costs and expenses that will negatively affect our operations and financial condition.

Our nonperforming assets include nonperforming loans and assets acquired through foreclosure. Nonperforming loans include nonaccrual loans, loans past due 90 days or more, and loans renegotiated or restructured because of a debtor’s financial difficulties and performing under the new terms. Loans are generally placed on nonaccrual status if any of the following events occur: (a) the classification of a loan as nonaccrual internally or by regulatory examiners; (b) delinquency on principal for 90 days or more unless we are in the process of collection; (c) a balance remains after repossession of collateral; (d) notification of bankruptcy; or (e) we

22

determine that nonaccrual status is appropriate. At December 31, 2022, we had $12.3 million of nonperforming assets, or 0.32% of total assets.

Should the amount of nonperforming assets or classified assets increase in the future, we may incur losses and the costs and expenses to maintain such assets can be expected to increase and potentially negatively affect earnings. An increase in the level of nonperforming assets increases our risk profile and may impact the capital levels regulators believe are appropriate considering the ensuing risk profile. An additional increase in losses due to such assets could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Nonperforming assets take significant time and resources to resolve and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Nonperforming assets adversely affect our net income in various ways. We generally do not record interest income on other real estate owned, or OREO, or on nonperforming loans, thereby adversely affecting our income and increasing loan administration costs. When we take collateral in foreclosures and similar proceedings, we are required to mark the related asset to the then fair value of the collateral, which may ultimately result in a loss. An increase in the level of nonperforming assets increases our risk profile and may impact the capital levels regulators believe are appropriate in light of the ensuing risk profile. While we seek to reduce problem assets through loan workouts, restructurings, and otherwise, decreases in the value of the underlying collateral, or in these borrowers’ performance or financial condition, whether or not due to economic and market conditions beyond our control, could have a material effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the resolution of nonperforming assets requires significant commitments of time from management, which may materially and adversely impact their ability to perform their other responsibilities. We may not experience future increases in the value of nonperforming assets.

The small- to medium-sized businesses that we lend to may have fewer resources to endure adverse business developments, which may impair our borrowers’ ability to repay loans.

We focus some of our business development and marketing strategy on small- to medium-sized businesses. Small- to medium-sized businesses frequently have smaller market shares than their competition, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience substantial volatility in operating results, any of which may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a loan. In addition, the success of a small- and medium-sized business often depends on the management skills, talents and efforts of a small group of people, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these people could have an adverse effect on the business and its ability to repay its loan. If our borrowers are unable to repay their loans, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

A portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of commercial loans secured by receivables, inventory, equipment or other commercial collateral, which we refer to generally as commercial and industrial loans, and the deterioration in value of which could expose us to credit losses.

As of December 31, 2022, commercial and industrial loans represented approximately $1.06 billion, or 34.1%, of our gross loans. In general, these loans are collateralized by general business assets, including, among other things, accounts receivable, inventory and equipment, and most are backed by a personal guaranty of the borrower or principal. These commercial and industrial loans are typically larger in amount than loans to individuals and, therefore, have the potential for larger losses on a single loan basis. Additionally, the repayment of commercial and industrial loans is subject to the ongoing business operations of the borrower. The collateral securing such loans generally includes movable property such as equipment and inventory, which may decline in value more rapidly than we anticipate; thus exposing us to increased credit risk. In addition, a portion of our customer base, including customers in the energy and real estate business, may be in industries which are particularly sensitive to commodity prices or market fluctuations, such as energy and real estate prices. Accordingly, negative changes in commodity prices and real estate values and liquidity could impair the value of the collateral securing these loans. Significant adverse changes in the economy or local market conditions or adverse weather events in the markets in which our commercial and industrial lending customers operate could cause rapid declines in loan collectability and the values associated with general business assets resulting in inadequate collateral coverage that may expose us to credit losses and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our commercial real estate and real estate construction and development loan portfolio exposes us to credit risks that may be greater than the risks related to other types of loans.

As of December 31, 2022, approximately $999.8 million, or 32.2%, of our gross loans were nonresidential real estate loans (including owner-occupied commercial real estate loans) and approximately $567.9 million, or 18.3%, of our total loans were construction and development loans. These loans typically involve repayment dependent upon income generated, or expected to be generated, by the property securing the loan in amounts sufficient to cover operating expenses and debt service. The availability of such income for repayment may be adversely affected by changes in the economy or local market conditions. Owner-occupied commercial real estate is generally less dependent upon income generated directly from the property but still carries risks from the successful operation of the underlying business or adverse economic conditions. These loans expose a lender to greater credit risk than loans secured by other types of collateral because the collateral securing these loans is typically more difficult to liquidate due to the fluctuation of real estate values. Additionally, non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans generally involve relatively large

23

balances to single borrowers or related groups of borrowers. Unexpected deterioration in the credit quality of our non-owner occupied commercial real estate loan portfolio could require us to increase our allowance for loan losses, which would reduce our profitability and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Construction and development loans also involve risks because loan funds are secured by a project under construction and the project is of uncertain value prior to its completion. It can be difficult to accurately evaluate the total funds required to complete a project, and construction and development lending often involves the disbursement of substantial funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the ultimate project rather than the ability of a borrower or guarantor, if any, to repay the loan. If we are forced to foreclose on a project prior to completion, we may be unable to recover the entire unpaid portion of the loan. In addition, we may be required to fund additional amounts to complete a project, incur taxes, maintenance and compliance costs for a foreclosed property and may have to hold the property for an indeterminate period of time, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Because a significant portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of real estate loans, negative changes in the economy affecting real estate values and liquidity could impair the value of collateral securing our real estate loans and result in loan and other losses.

As of December 31, 2022, approximately $1.90 billion, or 61.1%, of our gross loans were loans with real estate as a primary component of collateral. The market value of real estate can fluctuate significantly in a short period of time. As a result, adverse developments affecting real estate values and the liquidity of real estate in our primary markets or in Texas generally 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 operations. 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 effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. If real estate values decline, it is also more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance for loan losses, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, adverse weather events, including hurricanes and flooding, can cause damages to the property pledged as collateral on loans, which could result in additional losses upon a foreclosure.

Our largest loan relationships currently make up a material percentage of our total loan portfolio.

As of December 31, 2022, our ten largest loan relationships (including related entities) totaled approximately $346.7 million in loans, or 11.2% of the total loan portfolio. The concentration risk associated with having a small number of large loan relationships is that, if one or more of these relationships were to become delinquent or suffer default, we could be at serious risk of material losses. The allowance for loan 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 the loans are collateralized, the large increase in classified assets could harm our reputation with our regulators and inhibit our ability to execute our business plan.

Appraisals and other valuation techniques we use in evaluating and monitoring loans secured by real property, other real estate owned and repossessed personal property may not accurately describe the net value of the asset.

In considering whether to make a loan secured by real property, we generally require an appraisal of the property. However, an appraisal is only an estimate of the value of the property at the time the appraisal is made, and, as real estate values may change significantly in relatively short periods of time (especially in periods of heightened economic uncertainty), this estimate may not accurately describe the net value of the real property collateral after the loan is made. As a result, we may not be able to realize the full amount of any remaining indebtedness when we foreclose on and sell the relevant property. In addition, we rely on appraisals and other valuation techniques to establish the value of our OREO, and personal property that we acquire through foreclosure proceedings and to determine certain loan impairments. If any of these valuations are inaccurate, our combined and consolidated financial statements may not reflect the correct value of our OREO, and our allowance for loan losses may not reflect accurate loan impairments. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. As of December 31, 2022, we held no OREO or repossessed property and equipment.

We engage in lending secured by real estate and may be forced to foreclose on the collateral and own the underlying real estate, subjecting us to the costs and potential risks associated with the ownership of the real property, and consumer protection initiatives or changes in state or federal law may substantially raise the cost of foreclosure or prevent us from foreclosing at all.

Since we originate loans secured by real estate, we may have to foreclose on the collateral property to protect our investment and may thereafter own and operate such property, in which case we would be exposed to the risks inherent in the ownership of real estate. As of December 31, 2022, we held no OREO. The amount that we, as a mortgagee, may realize after a default is dependent upon factors outside of our control, including, but not limited to general or local economic condition, environmental cleanup liability, assessments, interest rates, real estate tax rates, operating expenses of the mortgaged properties, ability to obtain and maintain adequate occupancy of the properties, zoning laws, governmental and regulatory rules, and natural disasters. Our inability to manage

24

the amount of costs or size of the risks associated with the ownership of real estate, or write-downs in the value of other real estate owned, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Additionally, consumer protection initiatives or changes in state or federal law, including initiatives or changes implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, may substantially increase the time and expense associated with the foreclosure process or prevent us from foreclosing at all. While Texas foreclosure laws have historically been favorable to lenders, a number of states in recent years have either considered or adopted foreclosure reform laws that make it substantially more difficult and expensive for lenders to foreclose on properties in default, and we cannot be certain that Texas will not adopt similar legislation in the future. Additionally, federal regulators have prosecuted a number of mortgage servicing companies for alleged consumer law violations. If new state or federal laws or regulations are ultimately enacted that significantly raise the cost of foreclosure or raise outright barriers, such cost barriers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation.

SBA lending is an important part of our business. Our SBA lending program is dependent upon the federal government and our status as a participant in the SBA’s Preferred Lenders Program, and we face specific risks associated with SBA loans.

We participate in the SBA’s Preferred Lenders Program. As an SBA Preferred Lender, we are able to provide our clients with access to SBA loans without being subject to the potentially lengthy SBA approval process necessary for lenders that are not SBA Preferred Lenders. The SBA periodically reviews the lending operations of participating management. When weaknesses are identified, the SBA may request corrective actions or impose enforcement actions, including revocation of our Preferred Lender status. If we lose our status as a Preferred Lender, we may lose some or all of our customers to lenders who are SBA Preferred Lenders, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

On occasion, we may sell the guaranteed portion of our SBA 7(a) loans in the secondary market. If we sell the guaranteed portion of our SBA 7(a) loans, we will incur credit risk on the unguaranteed portion of the loans, and if a customer defaults on the unguaranteed portion of a loan, we would share any loss and recovery related to the loan pro-rata with the SBA.

The laws, regulations and standard operating procedures that are applicable to SBA loan products may change in the future. We cannot predict the effects of these changes on our business and profitability. Because government regulation greatly affects the business and financial results of all commercial banks and bank holding companies and especially our organization, changes in the laws, regulations and procedures applicable to SBA loans could adversely affect our ability to operate profitably. In addition, the aggregate amount of SBA 7(a) and 504 loan guarantees by the SBA must be approved each fiscal year by the federal government. We cannot predict the amount of SBA 7(a) loan guarantees in any given fiscal year. If the federal government were to reduce the amount of SBA loan guarantees, such reduction could adversely impact our SBA lending program.

The SBA may not honor its guarantees if we do not originate loans in compliance with SBA guidelines.

As of December 31, 2022, SBA 7(a) loans (excluding PPP loans) of $69.1 million comprised 2.2% of our loan portfolio. SBA lending programs typically guarantee 75% of the principal on an underlying loan. If the SBA establishes that a loss on an SBA guaranteed loan is attributable to significant technical deficiencies in the manner in which the loan was originated, funded or serviced by us, the SBA may seek recovery of the principal loss related to the deficiency from us notwithstanding that a portion of the loan was guaranteed by the SBA, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. While we follow the SBA’s underwriting guidelines, our ability to do so depends on the knowledge and diligence of our employees and the effectiveness of controls we have established. If our employees do not follow the SBA guidelines in originating loans and if our loan review and audit programs fail to identify and rectify such failures, the SBA may reduce or, in some cases, refuse to honor its guarantee obligations and we may incur losses as a result.

We may be adversely impacted by the transition from LIBOR as a reference rate.

The United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority and the administrator of LIBOR have announced that the publication of the most commonly used U.S. dollar London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) settings will cease to be published or cease to be representative after June 30, 2023. The publication of all other LIBOR settings ceased to be published as of December 31, 2021. Given consumer protection, litigation, and reputation risks, the bank regulatory agencies indicated that entering into new contracts that use LIBOR as a reference rate after December 31, 2021, could create safety and soundness risks and that they would examine bank practices accordingly. The Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act, enacted in March 2022, provides a statutory framework to replace U.S. dollar LIBOR with a benchmark rate based on the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) for contracts governed by U.S. law that have no or ineffective fallbacks, and in December 2022, the Federal Reserve adopted related implementing rules. Although governmental authorities have endeavored to facilitate an orderly discontinuation of LIBOR, no assurance can be provided that this aim will be achieved or that the use, level, and volatility of LIBOR or other interest rates or the value of LIBOR-based securities will not be adversely affected. As a result, and despite the enactment of the LIBOR Act, for the most commonly used LIBOR settings, the use or selection of a successor rate could expose us to risks associated with disputes and litigation with our customers and counterparties and other market participants in connection with implementing LIBOR fallback provisions. We made one LIBOR-based loan after December 31, 2021 and are now negotiating loans using our preferred replacement indexes SOFR and BSBY, a benchmark developed by Bloomberg Index Services.

25

At December 31, 2022, we had 14 loans totaling $64.8 million that have adjustable rates indexed to LIBOR. We continue to work with those customers, the MSLP and/or the originating bank for loan participations purchased to revise those documents to address the applicable index.

The transition from LIBOR has resulted in and could continue to result in added costs and employee efforts and could present additional risk. We are subject to litigation and reputational risks if we are unable to renegotiate and amend existing contracts with counterparties that are dependent on LIBOR, including contracts that do not have fallback language. The timing and manner in which each customer’s contract transitions to an alternative reference rate will vary on a case-by-case basis. There continues to be substantial uncertainty as to the ultimate effects of the LIBOR transition. Since SOFR and BSBY rates are calculated differently, payments under contracts referencing new rates will differ from those referencing LIBOR, which may lead to increased volatility as compared to LIBOR. Furthermore, failure to adequately manage this transition process with our customers could adversely impact our reputation. Although we are currently unable to assess what the ultimate impact of the transition from LIBOR will be, failure to adequately manage the transition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our auto finance portfolio exposes us to increased credit risks.

At December 31, 2022, our auto finance portfolio (excluding floor plan loans and indirect auto loans included in commercial and industrial loans) consisted of $34.9 million, or 1.1% of our loan portfolio. We originate these auto loans and leases through our indirect lending department to individuals who live in our market areas. The leases are made through well-known third party leasing companies and underwriting and approval is performed by the indirect lending department in accordance with our policies. We serve customers that cover a range of creditworthiness and the required terms and rates are reflective of those risk profiles. Auto loans are inherently risky as they are often secured by assets that may be difficult to locate and can depreciate rapidly. In some cases, repossessed collateral for a defaulted auto loan may not provide an adequate source of repayment for the outstanding loan and the remaining deficiency may not warrant further substantial collection efforts against the borrower. Auto loan collections depend on the borrower’s continuing financial stability, and therefore, are more likely to be adversely affected by job loss, divorce, illness, or personal bankruptcy. Additional risk elements associated with indirect lending include the limited personal contact with the borrower as a result of indirect lending through non-bank channels, namely automobile dealers.

We also originate automobile dealer floor plan loans for both new and used automobiles. Floor plan loans are inherently risky as they are collateralized by the automobiles that are being sold, and can depreciate rapidly. We monitor floor plan loans closely to ensure that funds are received to paydown the loan as automobiles are sold, and require periodic curtailments if the automobiles stay on the line for an extended period of time. Periodic independent third party inspections are required to ensure that the automobiles securing the loan are maintained on the lot and in salable condition. At December 31, 2022, outstanding floor plan loans were $1.3 million which are included in commercial and industrial loans.

Our commercial finance clients, particularly with respect to our commercial finance and asset-based lending product lines, may lack the operating history, cash flows or balance sheet necessary to support other financing options and may expose us to additional credit risk, especially if our additional controls for such products are ineffective in mitigating such additional risks.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio consists of commercial finance products. Some of these commercial finance products, particularly asset-based loans and our factored receivables (which totaled $28.0 million, or 0.9% of loans, as of December 31, 2022), arise out of relationships with clients who lack the operating history, cash flows or balance sheet necessary to qualify for more traditional bank financing options. We attempt to control for the additional credit risk in these relationships through credit management processes employed in connection with these transactions. However, if such controls are ineffective in controlling this additional risk or if we fail to follow the procedures we have established for managing this additional risk, we could be exposed to additional losses with respect to such product lines that could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our asset-based lending and commercial finance products may expose us to an increased risk of fraud.

We rely on the structural features embedded in our asset-based lending and commercial finance products to mitigate the credit risk associated with such products. With respect to our asset-based loans, we limit our lending to a percentage of the customer’s borrowing base assets that we believe can be readily liquidated in the event of financial distress of the borrower. With respect to our commercial finance products, we purchase the underlying invoices of our customers and become the direct payee under such invoices, thus transferring the credit risk in such transactions from our customers to the underlying account debtors on such invoices. In the event one or more of our customers fraudulently represents the existence or valuation of borrowing base assets in the case of an asset-based loan, or the existence or validity of an invoice we purchase in the case of a commercial finance transaction, we may advance more funds to such customer than we otherwise would and lose the benefit of the structural protections of our products with respect to such advances. In such event we could be exposed to material additional losses with respect to such loans or commercial finance products. Although we believe we have controls in place to monitor and detect fraud with respect to our asset-based lending and commercial finance products, there is no guarantee such controls will be effective. Losses from such fraudulent activity could have a material impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

26

New lines of business or new products and services may subject us to additional risks.

From time to time, we may implement or may acquire new lines of business or offer new products and services within existing lines of business. There are substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances where the markets are not fully developed. In developing and marketing new lines of business and new products and services, we may invest significant time and resources. We may not achieve target timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business and new products or services and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible. External factors, such as regulatory compliance obligations, 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 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, results of operations and financial condition.

If we fail to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately and timely, in which case our business may be harmed, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, we could be subject to regulatory penalties and the price of our common stock may decline.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting and for evaluating and reporting on that system of internal control. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. As a public company, we are required to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other rules that govern public companies. In particular, we are required to certify our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires us to furnish annually a report by management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. In addition, unless we remain an emerging growth company and elect additional transitional relief available to emerging growth companies, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

We will continue to periodically test and update, as necessary, our internal control systems, including our financial reporting controls. Our actions, however, may not be sufficient to result in an effective internal control environment, and any future failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could impair the reliability of our financial statements which in turn could harm our business, impair investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, impair our access to the capital markets, and cause the price of our common stock to decline and subject us to regulatory penalties.

We are dependent on the use of data and modeling in our management’s decision-making, and faulty data or modeling approaches could negatively impact our decision-making ability or possibly subject us to regulatory scrutiny in the future.

The use of statistical and quantitative models and other quantitative analyses is endemic to bank decision-making, and the employment of such analyses is becoming increasingly widespread in our operations. Liquidity stress testing, interest rate sensitivity analysis, and the identification of possible violations of anti-money laundering regulations are all examples of areas in which we are dependent on models and the data that underlies them. The use of statistical and quantitative models is also becoming more prevalent in regulatory compliance. While we are not currently subject to annual Dodd-Frank Act stress testing (DFAST) and the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) submissions, we anticipate that model-derived testing may become more extensively implemented by regulators in the future.

We anticipate data-based modeling will penetrate further into bank decision-making, particularly risk management efforts, as the capacities developed to meet rigorous stress testing requirements can be employed more widely and in differing applications. While we believe these quantitative techniques and approaches improve our decision-making, they also create the possibility that faulty data or flawed quantitative approaches could negatively impact our decision-making ability or, if we become subject to regulatory stress testing in the future, adverse regulatory scrutiny. Further, because of the complexity inherent in these approaches, misunderstanding or misuse of their outputs could similarly result in suboptimal decision-making.

We have pledged all of the stock of the Bank as collateral for a loan and if the lender forecloses, you could lose your investment.

We have pledged all of the stock of the Bank as collateral for our senior debt - line of credit. As of December 31, 2022, the line of credit had an outstanding balance of approximately $30.9 million. If we were to default, the lender could foreclose on the Bank’s stock and we would lose our principal asset. In that event, if the value of the Bank’s stock is less than the amount of the indebtedness, you could lose the entire amount of your investment.

A lack of liquidity could impair our ability to fund operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Liquidity is essential to our business. Liquidity risk is the potential that we will be unable to meet our obligations as they become due because of an inability to liquidate assets or obtain adequate funding. We require sufficient liquidity to meet customer loan requests, customer deposit maturities and withdrawals, payments on our debt obligations as they come due and other cash commitments under both normal operating conditions and other unpredictable circumstances, including events causing industry or

27

general financial market stress. We rely on our ability to generate deposits and effectively manage the repayment and maturity schedules of our loans and investment securities, respectively, to ensure that we have adequate liquidity to fund our operations. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of our investment securities, the sale of loans, and other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. Our most important source of funds is deposits. As of December 31, 2022, approximately $3.02 billion, or 93.3%, of our total deposits were noninterest-bearing deposits, negotiable order of withdrawal, or NOW, savings and money market accounts. Historically our savings, money market deposit accounts, NOW and demand accounts have been stable sources of funds. However, these deposits are subject to potentially dramatic fluctuations in availability or price due to factors that may be outside of our control, such as a loss of confidence by customers in us or the banking sector generally, customer perceptions of our financial health and general reputation, increasing competitive pressures from other financial services firms for consumer or corporate customer deposits, changes in interest rates and returns on other investment classes. As a result, there could be significant outflows of deposits within short periods of time or significant changes in pricing necessary to maintain current customer deposits or attract additional deposits, increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income.

As of December 31, 2022, the $216.0 million remaining balance of deposits consisted of certificates of deposit, of which $181.9 million, or 5.6% of our total deposits, were due to mature within one year. Historically, a majority of our certificates of deposit are renewed upon maturity as long as we pay competitive interest rates. These customers are, however, interest-rate conscious and may move funds into higher-yielding investment alternatives. If customers transfer money out of the Bank’s deposits and into other investments such as money market funds, we would lose a relatively low-cost source of funds, increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income.

Other primary sources of funds consist of cash flows from operations, and proceeds from the issuance and sale of our equity and debt securities to investors. Additional liquidity is provided by our ability to borrow from the FHLB. We also may borrow funds from third-party lenders, such as other financial institutions. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our activities, or on terms that are acceptable to us, could be impaired by factors that affect us directly or the financial services industry or economy in general, such as disruptions in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry. Our access to funding sources could also be affected by a decrease in the level of our business activity as a result of a downturn in the Texas economy or by one or more adverse regulatory actions against us.

Any decline in available funding could adversely impact our ability to originate loans, invest in securities, meet our expenses, or fulfill obligations such as repaying our borrowings or meeting deposit withdrawal demands, any of which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

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

We may need to raise additional capital, in the form of additional debt or equity, in the future to have sufficient capital resources and liquidity to meet our commitments and fund our business needs and future growth, particularly if the quality of our assets or earnings were to deteriorate significantly. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial condition. Economic conditions and a loss of confidence in financial institutions may increase our cost of funding and limit access to certain customary sources of capital or make such capital only available on unfavorable terms, including interbank borrowings, repurchase agreements and borrowings from the discount window of the Federal Reserve. We may not be able to obtain capital on acceptable terms—or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets, such as a decline in the confidence of debt purchasers, depositors of our Bank or counterparties participating in the capital markets or other disruption in capital markets, may adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, in turn, our liquidity. Further, if we need to raise capital in the future, we may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would then have to compete with those institutions for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The borrowing needs of our clients may increase, especially in a challenging economic environment, which could result in increased borrowing against our contractual obligations to extend credit.

A commitment to extend credit is a formal agreement to lend funds to a client as long as there is no violation of any condition established under the agreement. The actual borrowing needs of our clients under these credit commitments have historically been lower than the contractual amount of the commitments. A significant portion of these commitments expire without being drawn upon. Because of the credit profile of our clients, we typically have a substantial amount of total unfunded credit commitments, which is not reflected on our balance sheet. As of December 31, 2022, we had $1.17 billion in unfunded credit commitments and standby letters of credit to our clients. Actual borrowing needs of our clients may exceed our expectations, especially in a challenging economic environment when our clients’ companies may be more dependent on our credit commitments due to the lack of available credit elsewhere, the increasing costs of credit, or the limited availability of financings from venture firms. This could adversely affect our liquidity, which could impair our ability to fund operations and meet obligations as they become due and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Operations—A lack of liquidity could impair our ability to fund operations and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.”

28

We face strong competition from financial services companies and other companies that offer banking services.

We operate in the highly competitive financial services industry and face significant competition for customers from financial institutions located both within and beyond our principal markets. We compete with commercial banks, savings banks, credit unions, nonbank financial services companies and other financial institutions operating within or near the areas we serve. Additionally, certain large banks headquartered outside of our markets and large community banking institutions target the same customers we do. In addition, as customer preferences and expectations continue to evolve, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for banks to expand their geographic reach by providing services over the internet and mobile devices and for nonbanks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. The banking industry has experienced rapid changes in technology, and, as a result, our future success may depend in part on our ability to address our customers’ needs by using technology. Customer loyalty can be influenced by a competitor’s new products, especially offerings that could provide cost savings or a higher return to the customer. Increased lending activity of competing banks can also lead to increased competitive pressures on loan rates and terms for high-quality credits. We may not be able to compete successfully with other financial institutions in our markets, and we may have to pay higher interest rates to attract deposits, accept lower yields to attract loans and pay higher wages for new employees, resulting in lower net interest margins and reduced profitability.

Many of our nonbank competitors are not subject to the same extensive regulations that govern our activities and may have greater flexibility in competing for business. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. In addition, some of our current commercial banking customers may seek alternative banking sources as they develop needs for credit facilities larger than we may be able to accommodate. Our inability to compete successfully in the markets in which we operate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

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

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

Negative public opinion regarding our company or failure to maintain our reputation in the communities we serve could adversely affect our business and prevent us from growing our business.

Our reputation within the communities we serve is critical to our success. We believe we have set ourselves apart from our competitors by building strong personal and professional relationships with our customers and being active members of the communities we serve. As such, we strive to enhance our reputation by recruiting, hiring and retaining employees who share our core values of being an integral part of the communities we serve and delivering superior service to our customers. If our reputation is negatively affected by the actions of our employees or otherwise, we may be less successful in attracting new talent and customers or may lose existing customers, and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Further, negative public opinion can expose us to litigation and regulatory action and delay and impede our efforts to implement our expansion strategy, which could further adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may not be able to overcome the integration and other risks associated with acquisitions, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to implement our business strategy.

Although we plan to continue to grow our business organically and through de novo branching, we also intend to pursue acquisition opportunities that we believe will be accretive to our earnings per share, enhance our existing market presence, expand our markets of operation or strengthen our balance sheet, with an emphasis on the acquisition of banks with a strong deposit franchise and high-quality funding profiles to augment our core deposit base. Our acquisition activities could be material to our business and involve a number of risks, including the following:

29

Depending on the condition of any institution or assets or liabilities that we may acquire, that acquisition may, at least in the near term, adversely affect our capital and earnings and, if not successfully integrated with our organization, may continue to have such effects over a longer period. We may not be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with pending or potential acquisitions, and any acquisition we may consider will be subject to prior regulatory approval. Our inability to overcome these risks could have an adverse effect on our ability to implement our business strategy, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The accuracy of our financial statements and related disclosures could be affected if the judgments, assumptions or estimates used in our critical accounting policies are inaccurate.

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with GAAP requires us to make judgments, assumptions and estimates that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Our critical accounting policies, which are included in the section captioned “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Policies” in this Annual Report on Form 10K, describe those significant accounting policies and methods used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements that we consider “critical” because they require judgments, assumptions and estimates that materially affect our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures. As a result, if future events or regulatory views concerning such analysis differ significantly from the judgments, assumptions and estimates in our critical accounting policies, those events or assumptions could have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures, in each case resulting in our needing to revise or restate prior period financial statements, cause damage to our reputation and the price of our common stock, and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

There could be material changes to our financial statements and disclosures if there are changes in accounting standards or regulatory interpretations of existing standards.

From time to time the FASB or the SEC change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. Such changes may result in us being subject to new accounting and reporting standards or change existing accounting and reporting standards. For example, in June 2016, the FASB issued revised guidance for impairments on financial instruments which requires the use of CECL models which might increase our allowance for loan losses for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2022. For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Operations—Our allowance for loan losses may prove to be insufficient to absorb potential losses in our loan portfolio, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.” In addition, the bodies that interpret the accounting standards (such as banking regulators or outside auditors) may change their interpretations or positions on how new or existing standards should be applied. These changes may be beyond our control, 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 standard, revise an existing standard or change the application of an existing standard in such a way that financial statements for periods previously reported are revised. Such changes could materially change our financial statements and related disclosures and, depending on the nature of the revision, could cause damage to our reputation and the price of our common stock and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to certain operational risks, including, but not limited to, customer, employee or third-party fraud and data processing system failures and errors.

Because we are a financial institution, employee errors and employee or customer misconduct could subject us in particular to financial losses or regulatory sanctions and seriously harm our reputation. Misconduct by our employees could include hiding unauthorized activities from us, improper or unauthorized activities on behalf of our customers or improper use of confidential information each of which can be particularly damaging for financial institutions. It is not always possible to prevent employee errors and misconduct, and the precautions we take to prevent and detect this activity may not be effective in all cases. Employee errors could also subject us to financial claims for negligence.

We maintain a system of internal controls to mitigate operational risks, including data processing system failures and errors and customer or employee fraud, as well as insurance coverage designed to protect us from material losses associated with these risks, including losses resulting from any associated business interruption. If our internal controls fail to prevent or detect an occurrence, or

30

if any resulting loss is not insured or exceeds applicable insurance limits, it could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information provided to us by our borrowers and counterparties and any misrepresented or fraudulent information could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In deciding whether to approve loans or to enter into other transactions with borrowers and counterparties, we rely on information furnished to us by, or on behalf of, borrowers and counterparties, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information. We also rely on representations of borrowers and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. If any of this information is intentionally or negligently misrepresented or fraudulent and such misrepresentation or fraud is not detected prior to loan funding, the value of the loan may be significantly lower than expected and we may be subject to regulatory action. Whether a misrepresentation is made by the loan applicant, another third party, or one of our employees, we generally bear the risk of loss associated with the misrepresentation or fraud. Our controls and processes may not have detected, or may not detect all, misrepresented or fraudulent information in our loan originations or from our business clients. Any such misrepresented or fraudulent information could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may be subject to environmental liabilities in connection with the real properties we own and the foreclosure on real estate assets securing our loan portfolio.

In the course of our business, we may purchase real estate in connection with our acquisition and expansion efforts, or we may foreclose on and take title to real estate or otherwise be deemed to be in control of property that serves as collateral on loans we make. As a result, we could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to those properties. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or we may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or 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.

The cost of removal or abatement may substantially exceed the value of the affected properties or the loans secured by those properties, we may not have adequate remedies against the prior owners or other responsible parties and we may not be able to resell the affected properties either before or after completion of any such removal or abatement procedures. If material environmental problems are discovered before foreclosure, we generally will not foreclose on the related collateral or will transfer ownership of the loan to a subsidiary formed for such purpose. It should be noted, however, that the transfer of the property or loans to a subsidiary may not protect us from environmental liability. Furthermore, despite these actions on our part, the value of the property as collateral will generally be substantially reduced or we may elect not to foreclose on the property and, as a result, we may suffer a loss upon collection of the loan. Any significant environmental liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to claims and litigation pertaining to intellectual property in addition to other litigation in the ordinary course of business.

Banking and other financial services companies, such as our Company, rely on technology companies to provide information technology products and services necessary to support their day-to-day operations. Technology companies frequently enter into litigation based on allegations of patent infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights. In addition, patent holding companies seek to monetize patents they have purchased or otherwise obtained. Competitors of our vendors, or other individuals or companies, may from time to time claim to hold intellectual property sold to us by our vendors. Such claims may increase in the future as the financial services sector becomes more reliant on information technology vendors. The plaintiffs in these actions frequently seek injunctions and substantial damages.

Regardless of the scope or validity of such patents or other intellectual property rights, or the merits of any claims by potential or actual litigants, we may have to engage in protracted litigation. Such litigation is often expensive, time-consuming, disruptive to our operations and distracting to management. If we are found to infringe one or more patents or other intellectual property rights, we may be required to pay substantial damages or royalties to a third party. In certain cases, we may consider entering into licensing agreements for disputed intellectual property, although no assurance can be given that such licenses can be obtained on acceptable terms or that litigation will not occur. These licenses may also significantly increase our operating expenses. If legal matters related to intellectual property claims were resolved against us or settled, we could be required to make payments in amounts that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition to litigation relating to intellectual property, we are regularly involved in litigation matters in the ordinary course of business. While we believe that these litigation matters should not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or future prospects, we may be unable to successfully defend or resolve any current or future litigation matters, in which case those litigation matters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

31

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and measures intended to prevent its spread could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition, and such effects will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and are difficult to predict.

Global health concerns relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and related government actions taken to reduce the spread of the virus have been weighing on the macroeconomic environment, and the pandemic has significantly increased economic uncertainty and reduced economic activity. The United States government has taken steps to attempt to mitigate some of the more severe anticipated economic effects of the virus, including the passage of the CARES Act in 2020, the PPP that was part of the CARES Act, and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. However, there can be no assurance that such steps will be as effective as intended or achieve their desired results in a timely fashion.

The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business, results of operations and financial condition will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and are difficult to predict, including, but not limited to, the timing and extent of the economic recovery, the permanence of certain operating conditions that emerged during the pandemic and long-term changes in the industries in which our customers operate. Even after the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided, we may continue to experience materially adverse impacts to our business as a result of the virus’s global economic impact, including the availability of credit, adverse impacts on our liquidity and any recession that has occurred or may occur in the future.

We participate in the small business loan program under the CARES Act, which may further expose us to credit losses from borrowers under such programs.

Among other components, the CARES Act provides for payment forbearance on mortgages or loans to borrowers experiencing a hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have offered deferral and forbearance plans and have participated in the PPP under the CARES Act by making loans to small businesses consistent with the CARES Act that are fully guaranteed by the SBA. Various governmental programs such as the PPP are complex and our participation may lead to additional litigation and governmental, regulatory and third-party scrutiny, negative publicity and damage to our reputation. PPP loans are fixed, low interest rate loans, and if the borrower under the PPP loan fails to qualify for loan forgiveness, we are at the heightened risk of holding these loans at unfavorable interest rates as compared to the loans to clients that we would have otherwise extended credit.

We have additional credit risk with respect to PPP loans if a determination is made by the SBA that there is a deficiency in the manner in which the loan was originated, funded or serviced, such as an issue with the eligibility of a borrower to receive a PPP loan, which may or may not be related to the ambiguity in the laws, rules and guidance regarding the operation of the PPP. In the event of a loss resulting from a default on a PPP loan and a determination by the SBA that there was a deficiency in the manner in which the PPP loan was originated, funded, or serviced by us, the SBA may deny its liability under the guarantee, reduce the amount of the guarantee or, if it has already paid under the guarantee, seek recovery of any loss related to the deficiency from the Bank.

Risks Related to the Economy and Our Industry

Inflationary pressures and rising prices may affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Inflation rose in 2022 at levels not seen for over 40 years, and such inflationary pressures are currently expected to continue in 2023. Inflation could lead to increased costs to our customers, making it more difficult for them to repay their loans or other obligations increasing our credit risk. In general, the impact of inflation on the banking industry differs significantly from that of other industries in which a large portion of total resources are invested in fixed assets such as property, plant and equipment. Assets and liabilities of financial institutions are primarily all monetary in nature, and therefore are principally impacted by interest rates rather than changing prices. While the general level of inflation underlies most interest rates, interest rates react more to changes in the expected rate of inflation and to changes in monetary and fiscal policy. Sustained high inflation could result in market volatility and higher interest rates.

Sustained higher interest rates by the Federal Reserve may be needed to tame persistent inflationary price pressures, which could depress asset prices and weaken economic activity. A deterioration in economic conditions in the United States and our markets could result in an increase in loan delinquencies and non-performing assets, decreases in loan collateral values and a decrease in demand for our products and services, all of which, in turn, would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is concentrated in, and largely dependent upon, the continued growth and welfare of our primary markets of the Greater Houston market, Dallas-Fort Worth market, and Austin-San Antonio market, and adverse economic conditions in these markets could negatively impact our operations and customers.

Our business, financial condition and results of operations are affected by changes in the economic conditions of our primary markets of the Greater Houston market, Dallas-Fort Worth market, and Austin-San Antonio market. Our success depends to a significant extent upon the business activity, population, income levels, employment trends, deposits and real estate activity in our primary markets. Economic conditions within our primary markets, and the state of Texas in general, are influenced by, among other things, real estate prices and commodity prices, including the price of oil and gas specifically. Although our customers’ business and financial interests may extend well beyond our primary markets, adverse conditions that affect our primary markets could reduce our growth rate, affect the ability of our customers to repay their loans, affect the value of collateral underlying our loans, affect our ability

32

to attract deposits and generally affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects. Due to our geographic concentration within our primary markets, we may be less able than other larger regional or national financial institutions to diversify our credit risks across multiple markets.

Our primary markets are susceptible to natural disasters and other catastrophes that could negatively impact the economies of our markets, our operations or our customers, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A significant portion of our business is generated from the Greater Houston market, which is susceptible to damage by hurricanes, such as Hurricane Harvey, which struck the Greater Houston market in 2017, and Hurricane Laura, which struck the Greater Houston market in 2020. We are also subject to tornadoes, floods, droughts and other natural disasters and adverse weather. In addition to natural disasters, man-made events, such as acts of terror and governmental response to acts of terror, malfunction of the electronic grid and other infrastructure breakdowns, could adversely affect economic conditions in our primary markets. These catastrophic events can disrupt our operations, cause widespread property damage, and severely depress the local economies in which we operate. If the economies in our primary markets experience an overall decline as a result of a catastrophic event, demand for loans and our other products and services could be reduced. In addition, the rates of delinquencies, foreclosures, bankruptcies and losses on loan portfolios may increase substantially after events such as hurricanes, as uninsured property losses or sustained job interruption or loss may materially impair the ability of borrowers to repay their loans. Moreover, the value of real estate or other collateral that secures the loans could be materially and adversely affected by a catastrophic event. A natural disaster or other catastrophic event could, therefore, result in decreased revenue and loan losses that have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Climate change, and related legislative and regulatory initiatives, have the potential to disrupt our business and adversely impact the operations and creditworthiness of our customers.

Climate change may lead to more frequent and more extreme weather events, such as prolonged droughts or flooding, hurricanes, wildfires and extreme seasonal weather, which could disrupt operations at one or more of our locations and our ability to provide financial products and services to our customers. Such events could also have a negative effect on the financial status and creditworthiness of our customers, which may decrease revenues and business activities from those customers and increase the credit risk associated with loans and other credit exposures to such customers. In addition, weather disasters, shifts in local climates and other disruptions related to climate change may adversely affect the value of real properties securing our loans, which could diminish the value of our loan portfolio. Such events may also cause reductions in regional and local economic activity that may have an adverse effect on our customers, which could limit our ability to raise and invest capital in these areas and communities, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Political and social attention to the issue of climate change has increased. The federal and state legislatures and regulatory agencies have proposed legislative and regulatory initiatives seeking to mitigate the effects of climate change. These agreements and measures may result in the imposition of taxes and fees, the required purchase of emission credits, and the implementation of significant operational changes. In addition, the federal banking agencies may address climate-related issues in their agendas in various ways, including by increasing supervisory expectations with respect to banks’ risk management practices, accounting for the effects of climate change in stress testing scenarios and systemic risk assessments, revising expectations for credit portfolio concentrations based on climate-related factors, and encouraging investment by banks in climate-related initiatives and lending to communities disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. We may incur compliance, operating, maintenance and remediation costs.

Increasing scrutiny and evolving expectations from customers, regulators, investors, and other stakeholders with respect to our environmental, social and governance practices may impose additional costs on us or expose us to new or additional risks.

Companies are facing increasing scrutiny from customers, regulators, investors, and other stakeholders related to their environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) practices and disclosure. Investor advocacy groups, investment funds and influential investors are also increasingly focused on these practices, especially as they relate to the environment, health and safety, diversity, labor conditions and human rights. Increased ESG related compliance costs could result in increases to our overall operational costs. Failure to adapt to or comply with regulatory requirements or investor or stakeholder expectations and standards could negatively impact our reputation, ability to do business with certain partners, and our stock price. New government regulations could also result in new or more stringent forms of ESG oversight and expanding mandatory and voluntary reporting, diligence, and disclosure.

We could recognize losses on investment securities held in our securities portfolio, particularly if interest rates increase or economic and market conditions deteriorate.

While we invest a significant majority of our total assets in loans and currently invest a small portion of our total assets in investment securities, we may in the future invest a larger portion of our assets in investment securities with the objective of providing a source of liquidity, providing an appropriate return on funds invested, managing interest rate risk, meeting pledging requirements and meeting regulatory capital requirements. Factors beyond our control can significantly and adversely influence the fair value of securities in our portfolio. For example, fixed-rate securities are generally subject to decreases in market value when interest rates rise.

33

Additional factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults by the issuer or individual borrowers with respect to the underlying securities, and instability in the credit markets. Any of the foregoing factors could cause other-than-temporary impairment in future periods and result in realized losses. The process for determining whether impairment is other-than-temporary usually requires difficult, subjective judgments about the future financial performance of the issuer and any collateral underlying the security in order to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security. Although we have not recognized other-than-temporary impairment related to our investment portfolio as of December 31, 2022, changing economic and market conditions affecting interest rates, the financial condition of issuers of the securities and the performance of the underlying collateral, among other factors, may cause us to recognize realized and/or unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Market conditions and economic trends may adversely affect the banking industry and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations in the future.

Market conditions and economic trends nationally and locally, such as uncertain regulatory conditions, real estate and commodity prices, and changing interest rates could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. We have direct exposure to the real estate markets in Texas and thus are impacted by declines in real estate values. In addition, while we have limited direct exposure to the oil and gas industry, the economy of the state of Texas is influenced by and financial institutions may be negatively affected by, among other things, volatility in the real estate and oil and gas industries. Our markets are also susceptible to hurricanes and other natural disasters and adverse weather conditions.

Our ability to assess the creditworthiness of customers and to estimate the losses inherent in our loan portfolio is made more complex by market and economic conditions. A national economic downturn or deterioration of conditions in our markets could adversely affect our borrowers and cause losses beyond those that are provided for in our allowance for loan losses and lead to the following consequences:

Risks Related to Cybersecurity, Third-Parties and Technology

We depend on our information technology and telecommunications systems of third parties, and any systems failures, interruptions or data breaches involving these systems could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

Our business depends on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems including with third-party servicers and financial intermediaries. We outsource many of our major systems. Specifically, we rely on third parties for certain services, including, but not limited to, core systems processing, website hosting, internet services, monitoring our network and other processing services. The failure of these systems, a cybersecurity breach involving any of our third-party service providers, or the termination or change in terms of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. Replacing vendors or addressing other issues with our third-party service providers could entail significant delay, expense and disruption of service.

As a result, if these third-party service providers experience difficulties, are subject to cybersecurity breaches, or terminate their services, and we are unable to replace them with other service providers, particularly on a timely basis, our operations could be interrupted. If an interruption were to continue for a significant period of time, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Even if we are able to replace third-party service providers, it may be at a higher cost to us, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the Bank’s primary federal regulator, the Federal Reserve, has issued guidance outlining the expectations for third-party service provider oversight and monitoring by financial institutions. The federal banking agencies, including the Federal Reserve, have recently issued enforcement actions against financial institutions for failure in oversight of third-party providers and violations of federal banking law by such providers when performing services for financial institutions. Accordingly, our operations could be interrupted if any of our third-party service providers experience difficulty, are subject to cybersecurity breaches, terminate their services or fail to comply with banking regulations, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, our failure to adequately oversee the actions of our third-party service providers could result in regulatory actions against the Bank, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The occurrence of fraudulent activity, breaches of our information security, and cybersecurity attacks could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business, manage our exposure to risk or expand our businesses, result in the disclosure or misuse of confidential or proprietary information, increase our costs to maintain and update our operational and security systems and

34

infrastructure, and adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, as well as cause legal or reputational harm.

As a financial institution, we are susceptible to fraudulent activity, information security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents that may be committed against us, our clients, or third parties with whom we interact and that may result in financial losses or increased costs to us or our clients, disclosure or misuse of confidential information belonging to us or personal or confidential information belonging to our clients, misappropriation of assets, litigation, or damage to our reputation. Our industry has seen increases in electronic fraudulent activity, hacking, security breaches, sophisticated social engineering and cyber-attacks within the financial services industry, including in the commercial banking sector, as cyber-criminals have been targeting commercial bank and brokerage accounts on an increasing basis.

Our business is highly dependent on the security and efficacy of our infrastructure, computer and data management systems, as well as those of third parties with whom we interact or on whom we rely. Our business relies on the secure processing, transmission, storage and retrieval of confidential, 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. All of these factors increase our risks related to cyber-threats and electronic disruptions.

In addition to well-known risks related to fraudulent activity, which take many forms, such as check “kiting” or fraud, wire fraud, and other dishonest acts, information security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents have become a material risk in the financial services industry. These threats may include fraudulent or unauthorized access to data processing or data storage systems used by us or by our clients, electronic identity theft, “phishing”, account takeover, denial or degradation of service attacks, and malware or other cyber-attacks. These electronic viruses or malicious code are typically designed to, among other things:

In recent periods, several governmental agencies and large corporations, including financial service organizations and retail companies, have suffered major data breaches, in some cases exposing not only their confidential and proprietary corporate information, but also sensitive financial and other personal information of their clients and their employees or other third-parties, and subjecting those agencies and corporations to potential fraudulent activity and their clients and other third-parties to identity theft and fraudulent activity in their credit card and banking accounts. Therefore, security breaches and cyber-attacks can cause significant increases in operating costs, including the costs of compensating clients and customers for any resulting losses they may incur and the costs and capital expenditures required to correct the deficiencies in and strengthen the security of data processing and storage systems.

Unfortunately, it is not always possible to anticipate, detect or recognize these threats to our systems, or to implement effective preventative measures against all breaches, whether those breaches are malicious or accidental. Cybersecurity risks for banking organizations have significantly increased in recent years and have been difficult to detect before they occur because of the following, among other reasons:

While we invest in systems and processes that are designed to detect and prevent security breaches and cyber-attacks and we conduct periodic tests of our security systems and processes, we may not succeed in anticipating or adequately protecting against or

35

preventing all security breaches and cyber-attacks from occurring. Even the most advanced internal control environment may be vulnerable to compromise. Targeted social engineering attacks are becoming more sophisticated and are extremely difficult to prevent. Additionally, the existence of cyber-attacks or security breaches at third parties with access to our data, such as vendors, may not be disclosed to us in a timely manner. 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.

As is the case with non-electronic fraudulent activity, 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. Although we have not experienced any material fraudulent activity, breaches of our information security or cybersecurity attacks, a successful penetration or circumvention of system security could cause us negative consequences, including loss of customers and business opportunities, disruption to our operations and business, misappropriation or destruction of our confidential information and/or that of our customers, or damage to our customers’ and/or third parties’ computers or systems, and could expose us to additional regulatory scrutiny and 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, additional compliance costs, and could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition.

We have a continuing need for technological change and we may not have the resources to effectively implement new technology or we may experience operational challenges when implementing new technology or technology needed to compete effectively with larger institutions may not be available to us on a cost effective basis.

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. In addition to better serving customers, the effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to reduce costs. Our future success will depend, at least in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands for convenience as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations as we continue to grow and expand our products and service offerings. We may experience operational challenges as we implement these new technology enhancements or products, which could impair our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from such new technology or require us to incur significant costs to remedy any such challenges in a timely manner.

Many of our larger competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. Third-parties upon which we rely for our technology needs may not be able to develop on a cost effective basis systems that will enable us to keep pace with such developments. As a result, they may be able to offer additional or superior products compared to those that we will be able to provide, which would put us at a competitive disadvantage. We may lose customers seeking new technology-driven products and services to the extent we are unable to provide such products and services. Accordingly, the ability to keep pace with technological change is important and the failure to do so could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Industry

We operate in a highly regulated environment and the laws and regulations that govern our operations, corporate governance, executive compensation and accounting principles, or changes in them, or our failure to comply with them, could adversely affect us.

Banking is highly regulated under federal and state law. As such, we are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and legal requirements that govern almost all aspects of our operations. These laws and regulations are not intended to protect our shareholders. Rather, these laws and regulations are intended to protect customers, depositors, the DIF and the overall financial stability of the United States. These laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on the business activities in which we can engage, limit the dividends or distributions that the Bank can pay to us, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee our debt and impose certain specific accounting requirements on us that may be more restrictive and may result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in our capital than GAAP would require. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional operating costs. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure follows good faith effort or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to restrictions on our business activities, enforcement actions and fines and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations, regulatory capital levels and the price of our securities. Further, any new laws, rules and regulations, such as the Dodd-Frank Act, could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The ongoing implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law, and the process of implementation is ongoing. The Dodd-Frank Act imposes significant regulatory and compliance changes on many industries, including ours. There remains significant uncertainty

36

surrounding the manner in which the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will ultimately be implemented by the various regulatory agencies and the full extent of the impact of the requirements on our operations is unclear. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of our business activities, require changes to certain of our business practices, require the development of new compliance infrastructure, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business. These changes may also require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes necessary to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements. Failure to comply with the new requirements or with any future changes in laws or regulations could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Banking agencies periodically conduct examinations of our business, including compliance with laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with any supervisory actions to which we are or become subject as a result of such examinations could adversely affect us.

As part of the bank regulatory process, the TDSML and the Federal Reserve periodically conduct examinations of our business, including compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, one of these banking agencies were to determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, asset sensitivity, risk management or other aspects of any of our operations have become unsatisfactory, or that our Company, the Bank or their respective management were in violation of any law or regulation, it may take a number of different remedial actions as it deems appropriate. These actions include the power to enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, to require affirmative actions to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in our capital levels, to restrict our growth, to assess civil monetary penalties against us, the Bank or their respective officers or directors, to remove officers and directors and, if it is concluded that such conditions cannot be corrected or there is an imminent risk of loss to depositors, to terminate the Bank’s deposit insurance. If we become subject to such regulatory actions, our business, financial condition, results of operations and reputation could be adversely affected.

Basel III established a stricter regulatory capital framework that requires banking organizations to hold more and higher-quality capital to act as a financial cushion to absorb losses and help banking organizations better withstand periods of financial stress. The final rule increased capital ratios for all banking organizations and introduced a “capital conservation buffer” which is in addition to each capital ratio. If a banking organization fails to exceed its capital conservation buffer, it may be restricted in its ability to pay dividends and discretionary bonus payments to its executive officers. The final rule assigned a higher risk weight (150%) to exposures that are more than 90 days past due or are on nonaccrual status and to certain commercial real estate facilities that finance the acquisition, development or construction of real property. The final rule also required unrealized gains and losses on certain “available for sale” securities holdings to be included for purposes of calculating regulatory capital requirements unless a one-time opt-out is exercised. We exercised this opt-out right in our March 31, 2015 quarterly financial filing. As of December31, 2022, we met all of these new requirements, including the full capital conservation buffer.

Although we currently cannot predict the specific impact and long-term effects that the Dodd-Frank Act, Basel III and associated rulemaking will have on our Company and the banking industry more generally, the Company will be required to maintain higher regulatory capital levels which could impact our operations, net income and ability to grow. Furthermore, the Company’s failure to comply with current or future minimum capital requirements could result in our regulators taking formal or informal actions against us which could restrict our future growth or operations.

Many of our new activities and expansion plans require regulatory approvals, and failure to obtain them may restrict our growth.

We intend to complement and expand our business by pursuing strategic acquisitions of financial institutions and other complementary businesses, and expansion of the Bank’s banking location network, or de novo branching. Generally, we must receive federal and state regulatory approvals before we can acquire a depository institution or related business insured by the FDIC, or before we open a de novo branch. In determining whether to approve a proposed acquisition, banking regulators will consider, among other factors, the effect of the acquisition on competition, our financial condition, our future prospects, and the impact of the proposal on U.S. financial stability. The regulators also review current and projected capital ratios and levels, the competence, experience and integrity of management and its record of compliance with laws and regulations, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served (including the acquiring institution’s record of compliance under CRA) and the effectiveness of the acquiring institution in combating money laundering activities. Such regulatory approvals may not be granted on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. We may also be required to sell banking locations as a condition to receiving regulatory approval, which condition may not be acceptable to us or, if acceptable to us, may reduce the benefit of any acquisition.

We are subject to laws regarding the privacy, information security and protection of personal information and any violation of these laws or another incident involving personal, confidential or proprietary information of individuals could damage our reputation and otherwise adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

Our business requires the collection and retention of large volumes of customer data, including personally identifiable information in various information systems that we maintain and in those maintained by third parties with whom we contract to provide data services. We also maintain important internal company data such as personally identifiable information about our employees and information relating to our operations. We are subject to complex and evolving laws and regulations governing the

37

privacy and protection of personal information of individuals (including customers, employees, suppliers and other third parties). For example, our business is subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which, among other things: (i) imposes certain limitations on our ability to share nonpublic personal information about our customers with nonaffiliated third parties; (ii) requires that we provide certain disclosures to customers about our information collection, sharing and security practices and afford customers the right to “opt out” of any information sharing by us with nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions); and (iii) requires that we develop, implement and maintain a written comprehensive information security program containing appropriate safeguards based on our size and complexity, the nature and scope of our activities, and the sensitivity of customer information we process, as well as plans for responding to data security breaches. Various state and federal banking regulators and states have also enacted data security breach notification requirements with varying levels of individual, consumer, regulatory or law enforcement notification in certain circumstances in the event of a security breach. Ensuring that our collection, use, transfer and storage of personal information complies with all applicable laws and regulations can increase our costs.

Furthermore, we may not be able to ensure that all of our clients, suppliers, counterparties and other third parties have appropriate controls in place to protect the confidentiality of the information that they exchange with us, particularly where such information is transmitted by electronic means. If personal, confidential or proprietary information of customers or others were to be mishandled or misused (in situations where, for example, such information was erroneously provided to parties who are not permitted to have the information, or where such information was intercepted or otherwise compromised by third parties), we could be exposed to litigation or regulatory sanctions under personal information laws and regulations. Concerns regarding the effectiveness of our measures to safeguard personal information, or even the perception that such measures are inadequate, could cause us to lose customers or potential customers for our products and services and thereby reduce our revenues. Accordingly, any failure or perceived failure to comply with applicable privacy or data protection laws and regulations may subject us to inquiries, examinations and investigations that could result in requirements to modify or cease certain operations or practices or in significant liabilities, fines or penalties, and could damage our reputation and otherwise adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

Financial institutions, such as the Bank, face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or the Treasury Department, to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the sanctions programs and rules administered and enforced by OFAC.

In order to comply with regulations, guidelines and examination procedures in this area, we have dedicated significant resources to our anti-money laundering program. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we could be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the inability to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plans, including acquisitions and de novo branching.

We are subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including the Community Reinvestment Act and fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions.

The CRA, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. The CFPB was created under the Dodd-Frank Act to centralize responsibility for consumer financial protection with broad rulemaking authority to administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of federal consumer financial laws with respect to all financial institutions that offer financial products and services to consumers. The CFPB is also authorized to prescribe rules applicable to any covered person or service provider, identifying and prohibiting acts or practices that are “unfair, deceptive, or abusive” in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service. In recent years there has been an increase in the frequency of enforcement actions brought by federal banking regulators, such as the CFPB, dealing with consumer compliance matters such as indirect auto lending, fair lending, account fees, loan servicing and other products and services provided to customers. The ongoing broad rulemaking and enforcement powers of the CFPB have the potential to have a significant impact on the operations of financial institutions offering consumer financial products or services. The CFPB has indicated that it may propose new rules on overdrafts and other consumer financial products or services, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations if any such rules limit our ability to provide such financial products or services.

A successful regulatory challenge to an institution’s performance under the CRA, fair lending laws or regulations, or consumer lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity, restrictions on expansion, and restrictions on entering new business lines.

38

Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Failure to comply with economic and trade sanctions or with applicable anti-corruption laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

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. We are responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of, and transactions with, such persons and countries, prohibiting unlicensed trade and financial transactions with them and reporting blocked transactions after their occurrence. Through our Company and the Bank, and our agents and employees, we are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, which prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action or otherwise gain an unfair business advantage. The Company is also subject to applicable anti-corruption laws in the jurisdictions in which it may operate. The Company has implemented policies, procedures, and internal controls that are designed to comply with economic and trade sanctions or with applicable anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA. Failure to comply with economic and trade sanctions or with applicable anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for us.

Federal, state and local consumer lending laws may restrict our ability to originate certain mortgage loans or increase our risk of liability with respect to such loans and could increase our cost of doing business.

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. It is our policy not to make predatory loans, but these laws create the potential for 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.

The expanding body of federal, state and local regulations and/or the licensing of loan servicing, collections or other aspects of our business and our sales of loans to third parties may increase the cost of compliance and the risks of noncompliance and subject us to litigation.

We service most of our own loans, and loan servicing is subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities, as well as various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions on those activities. The volume of new or modified laws and regulations has increased in recent years and, in addition, some individual municipalities have begun to enact laws that restrict loan servicing activities, including delaying or temporarily preventing foreclosures or forcing the modification of certain mortgages. If regulators impose new or more restrictive requirements, we may incur additional significant costs to comply with such requirements, which may further adversely affect us. In addition, were we to be subject to regulatory investigation or regulatory action regarding our loan modification and foreclosure practices, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

In addition, we have sold loans to third-parties. In connection with these sales, we make or have made various representations and warranties, breaches of which may result in a requirement that we repurchase the loans, or otherwise make whole or provide other remedies to counterparties. These aspects of our business or our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could possibly lead to: civil and criminal liability; loss of licensure; damage to our reputation in the industry; fines and penalties and litigation, including class action lawsuits; and administrative enforcement actions. Any of these outcomes could materially and adversely affect us.

The Federal Reserve may require us to commit capital resources to support the Bank.

As a matter of policy, the Federal Reserve expects a bank holding company to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to a subsidiary bank and to commit resources to support such subsidiary bank. The Dodd-Frank Act codified the Federal Reserve’s policy on serving as a source of financial strength. Under the “source of strength” doctrine, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank and may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for failure to commit resources to such a subsidiary bank. A capital injection may be required at times when the holding company may not have the resources to provide and therefore may be required to borrow the funds or raise capital. Any loans by a holding company to its subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary bank. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee will assume any commitment by the holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank. Moreover, bankruptcy law provides that claims based on any such commitment will be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of the institution’s general unsecured creditors, including the holders of its note obligations. Thus, any borrowing by us in order to make the required capital injection becomes more difficult and expensive and will adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, or future prospects.

39

Monetary policies and regulations of the Federal Reserve could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition to being affected by general economic conditions, our earnings and growth are affected by the policies of the Federal Reserve. An important function of the Federal Reserve is to regulate the U.S. money supply and credit conditions. Among the instruments used by the Federal Reserve to implement these objectives are open market purchases and sales of securities by the Federal Reserve, adjustments of both the discount rate and the federal funds rate and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits. These instruments are used in varying combinations to influence overall economic growth and the distribution of credit, bank loans, investments and deposits. Their use also affects interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits.

The monetary policies and regulations of the Federal Reserve have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the future. Although we cannot determine the effects of such policies on us at this time, such policies could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to an Investment in Our Common Stock

An active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained.

We completed the initial public offering of our common stock and the Company’s common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in November 2021. An active trading market for shares of our common stock may not be sustained. If an active trading market is not sustained, you may have difficulty selling your shares of our common stock at an attractive price, or at all. Consequently, you may not be able to sell your shares of common stock at or above an attractive price at the time that you would like to sell.

The market price of our common stock may be subject to substantial fluctuations, which may make it difficult for you to sell your shares at the volume, prices and times desired.

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile, which may make it difficult for you to resell your shares at the volume, prices and times desired. There are many factors that may affect the market price and trading volume of our common stock, including, without limitation: