Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us to discuss BOK Financial's third quarter 2026 results. Our CEO, Stacy Kymes, will provide opening remarks, cover the loan portfolio, and related credit metrics.

Scott Grauer, Executive Vice President of Wealth Management, will review our fee-based businesses. Our CFO, Marty Grunst, will then walk through our financial performance for the quarter, as well as our forward guidance.

The slide presentation and press release are available on our website at bokf.com. We refer you to the disclaimers on slide 2 regarding any forward-looking statements made during this call.

I will now turn the call over to Stacy Kymes, who will begin on slide 4.

Thank you, Heather. We appreciate you joining the call this afternoon.

We are pleased to report earnings of $159.9 million, or EPS of $2.64 per diluted share for the third quarter, reflecting another period of solid performance despite a challenging interest rate environment. Four key factors drove our results.

First, quality loan growth. Loan growth remained a standout contributor again this quarter.

Total loans grew 2.4% linked quarter, representing annualized growth of 9.5%, and grew 11.5% year over year. Second, meaningful margin expansion.

Net interest margin increased 9 basis points to 3%. We continue to benefit from the repricing of fixed-rate assets.

Third, disciplined expense management. We continue to invest where we see attractive opportunities for long-term growth, and prudently manage our expense base.

We are not managing the company for one quarter; we are focused on producing sustainable growth and profitability over time. Fourth, exceptional credit quality.

We continue to see very strong performance across the portfolio, with no meaningful deterioration that would change our view about the underlying credit environment. Together, these strengths demonstrate the durability of our business model.

They reflect the benefits of decisions we have made over many years to diversify our business, manage risk prudently, and position the company to perform well across a wide range of economic environments. I also want to spend a moment on the rate environment.

It highlights an important differentiator for BOK Financial. We have not seen a 10-year Treasury yield at these levels since 2007.

This rate move also happened very quickly, with similar velocity to what the market experienced in 2023. Our securities portfolio has a relatively short duration of about three years, which helps limit our exposure to changes in interest rates.

We've managed the balance sheet this way for decades, maintaining risk limits around tangible common equity and tangible common equity in stress. As part of that discipline, we regularly monitor how our capital would change if interest rates across the yield curve rose by 300 basis points.

Our current TCE is 9.2%, well above the TCE for the broader KRX Index. This is by design, and reflects how we have managed the balance sheet over many years.

That consistency gives us flexibility to continue serving clients and investing in growth across a range of market conditions. The higher rate environment is a headwind for our more rate-sensitive fee-based businesses, particularly fixed income trading and mortgage banking.

Industry activity levels declined meaningfully during the quarter, and our results reflected that environment, consistent with what other market participants experienced. We view those businesses through the cycle, where they provide an important source of diversification to our overall earnings profile.

Now we'll cover our loan portfolio in more detail, starting on slide 6. Loan growth remained a particular source of strength.

We have invested heavily in our people, markets, and capabilities, and those investments are now contributing across the organization. As I mentioned before, total outstanding loans grew $646 million, or 2.4% this quarter, and were up 11.5% year over year.

Importantly, this growth continues to be well balanced across our businesses and markets. Our core C&I loan portfolio, which represents our combined services and general business portfolios, grew slightly linked quarter, but is up 10.9% over the prior year.

Energy lending experienced an outstanding quarter, increasing $264 million, or 8.6%, driven by both higher utilization across existing relationships and solid new production. This is a business where we have deep expertise and long-standing client relationships.

The elevated payoff activity we experienced last year was largely driven by industry consolidation and an accommodating debt capital markets environment. As market activity normalized, volumes returned, and we are benefiting from the strength of our relationships and reputation in the sector.

Healthcare loans declined 1.4% this quarter, but were still up 3.8% year over year with healthy future pipelines. Mortgage finance also contributed meaningfully to loan growth during the quarter, with current outstanding balances of $589 million, an increase of $137 million.

Active warehouse commitments increased more than $500 million during the quarter to $1.4 billion, and loans funded on our warehouse lines grew 23%. This is a remarkable result given the challenging US mortgage origination environment.

Our commercial real estate portfolio grew 4.2% over the prior quarter. Growth in this portfolio was broad-based, spanning industrial, retail, and other real estate loans.

We remain well below our internal concentration limits. Moving to slide 7, once again, credit quality remains strong.

Nonperforming assets not guaranteed by the US government increased $3.3 million to $58 million. The resulting nonperforming assets to period-end loans and repossessed assets increased 1 basis point to 21 basis points.

Committed criticized assets increased this quarter, but remained very low relative to historical standards. We had net charge-offs of $886,000 during the quarter, averaging 2 basis points over the last 12 months.

We continue to have only de minimis exposure to private credit facilities and no direct lending to data centers. Consistent with the prior quarter, no provision was required.

Improvement in economic forecast assumptions was offset by the impact of loan growth. Our combined allowance for credit losses is a healthy $322 million, or 1.16% of outstanding loans.

In all, credit quality remains exceptionally strong, with no meaningful signs of broad-based stress emerging in the portfolio. Over time, we would expect credit performance to normalize.

However, normalization should not be confused with deterioration. Our underwriting standards, portfolio diversification, and risk management approach are designed to perform throughout the credit cycle, and we continue to feel very good about the quality of the book.

With that, I'll turn it over to Scott.

Thank you, Stacy. Turning to our operating results for the quarter on slides 9 and 10, I want to start with the interest rate environment because it had a meaningful impact on several of our market-sensitive businesses this quarter.

During the quarter, interest rates moved up significantly, with the 10-year Treasury increasing nearly 80 basis points. The increase in longer-term rates creates a challenging backdrop for both mortgage activity and fixed income markets.

Importantly, this is a theme we have seen across the industry. Higher mortgage rates slow origination activity, which in turn reduces the volumes that support both our mortgage production and fixed income trading businesses.

We take a long-term view of these businesses, and recognize that activity levels will fluctuate with market conditions. History has shown that these businesses can provide significant earnings momentum when rates decline and mortgage activity rebounds.

That long-term countercyclical benefit is a key component of our diversified business model. It's one of the reasons these businesses remain such an important part of our franchise.

Against that backdrop, total fees and commissions were $188 million, declining $14 million sequentially. The majority of that decline was concentrated in our markets and securities businesses, where revenue declined $15.2 million to $36.2 million.

Within trading, the best way to evaluate the business is to look at total trading revenue, which includes both trading fees and trading-related net interest income. We've discussed this distinction over the last several quarters, as the shape of the yield curve has shifted revenue between those two categories.

Total trading revenue was $15 million this quarter compared to $25 million in the second quarter. Trading fees were negative $6.3 million, while trading-related net interest income was $21.3 million.

This quarter, you saw a decline in trading fees, reflecting the market dynamics just discussed, partially offset with a small increase in trading-related net interest income, as the steeper curve shifted some revenue into that line item. It was a strong quarter for investment banking revenue, which grew $4.3 million, driven by municipal bond underwriting activity.

This was partially offset by a reduction of $3.4 million in syndication fees, which returned to more normal levels following a very strong second quarter. Turning to slide 10 to discuss our asset management and transactions businesses, these businesses continue to perform well, generating recurring fee income, broadening our revenue mix, and reinforcing the earnings diversity that distinguishes our franchise.

Our fiduciary and asset management business delivered another very strong quarter, contributing $69.9 million to revenue. While that was down slightly linked quarter, the second quarter benefited from seasonal tax preparation fees.

Excluding that seasonal comparison, the third quarter represents our highest revenue quarter on record. AUMA was stable at $129.3 billion.

Transaction card contributed $32.2 million to revenue this quarter, representing a new quarterly record. Collectively, these businesses represent an important part of what makes our franchise unique.

They are built on long-term relationships, recurring sources of revenue, and specialized expertise that have consistently produced value across market environments. With that, I'll hand the call over to Marty to cover the financials.

Thank you, Scott. Turning to slide 12, net interest income increased $18.1 million, and net interest margin grew 9 basis points.

Excluding trading, core net interest income increased $15.1 million, and core margin increased 8 basis points. Core margin and net interest income continued to benefit from loan growth and fixed-rate asset repricing.

Given the short duration of our securities portfolio, we typically have the opportunity to reinvest between $600 to $700 million of quarterly securities cash flows. This provides a durable benefit as lower-yielding assets mature and are reinvested at current market rates.

In the third quarter, portfolio run-off was $770 million at an average yield of approximately 3.3%. Those cash flows were reinvested at an average yield slightly over 5.1%, representing a yield pickup of more than 180 basis points.

Third quarter also benefited from loan fees, the portfolio restructure we completed back in the second quarter, and a small improvement in energy derivative margin. Turning to slide 13, total expenses were largely unchanged compared to the prior quarter.

Excluding changes in deferred compensation, personnel expense increased $6.5 million. This increase reflects strategic talent investments, including the addition of proven revenue producers as we capitalized on recruiting opportunities from market disruption.

In addition, strong loan production during the quarter resulted in higher incentive compensation, and healthcare costs increased. Total non-personnel expense was flat versus the prior quarter.

Slide 14 provides our outlook for full year 2026. Our guidance assumes one additional rate hike in the fourth quarter, and longer-term rates aligned with the current forward curve.

Loan growth and pipelines are tracking well with our expectations, and our growth guidance remains over 10%. Our outlook for total revenue growth is unchanged at mid-single digits.

Net interest income is expected to be $1.43 to $1.44 billion, while fee income is expected to exceed $800 million. As we commonly note, future variability in curve steepness can shift trading revenue between those two categories.

On expenses, we have tightened our guidance, and anticipate growth to be roughly 1% versus the prior year. We continue to expect the full year efficiency ratio to be approximately 62%, reflecting the Visa gain we recognized in the second quarter.

If adjusted for the Visa gain, our guidance for that ratio would be near 63%. Turning to credit, portfolio credit quality remains very strong.

We continue to see very low levels of nonperforming assets and no tangible evidence of broad-based normalization at this point. We believe provision expense will be below $10 million for the full year 2026.

With that, I would like to hand the call back to the operator for Q&A, which will be followed by closing remarks from Stacy.

Hi, thanks for taking the questions. Starting on the net interest margin, very strong bounce in the third quarter.

How should we think about the trajectory from here along with the drivers, as well as touch on the rate sensitivity as we look forward?

Thanks for the question, David. We were happy with how the margin turned out.

That was consistent with how we were thinking about it a quarter ago. The drivers from here as we think about finishing out the year, basically the fixed-rate asset repricing will be the big positive component there, we'll continue to see both the securities portfolio, fixed-rate loans add to that.

Energy derivative margin, if you recall, it gave us a drag of 3 basis points in the second quarter, turned out to be a drag of 2 basis points in the third. We'll still get that back.

It's hard to tell if that'll be a neutral or a drag going into next quarter. Then competitive loan and deposit pricing environments, those are still just as competitive as they were, and so far that hasn't really shown up in the margin for us, but we certainly recognize that that's a driver.

From a rate risk perspective, we're very rate risk neutral, we don't think that that will be anything that changes things from quarter to quarter. All in, we think about the margin stable as our near-term outlook.

While we are rate neutral, this is Stacy, David. The shape of the yield curve does matter, if there was any steepening along the way or flattening, obviously that could impact us a little bit too.

Great, thanks for that. Then shifting over to the loan side, can you talk about the pipelines this quarter?

Growth driven by energy and mortgage finance. Should we expect similar areas to drive growth going forward?

A key theme this quarter is if higher rates are impacting loan demand.

Thus far, I haven't seen the impact of higher rates impacting loan demand. I think that, in our footprint, you still have a lot of strong economic activity.

Keep in mind, all the rate movements been in the longer end of the curve. 25 basis point move in short-term rates isn't going to make a huge difference there, and I don't think that the longer-term view has a huge rate move even on the short end.

We're not seeing changes in borrower appetite at this point, understanding that could change. The nature of having a diverse portfolio is that some quarters one area shines more than another, and so this quarter it was energy, and certainly mortgage finance has been a stalwart for us since inception.

We're very excited about what's happening in C&I. A little bit of a slow down this quarter, but we think that's just kind of a blip.

We think we'll continue to move forward and achieve the guidance that we've provided to the Street as we move into the fourth quarter.

Very helpful, thank you.

Hey, good afternoon, guys. Thanks for taking my questions.

Maybe just following up on the NIM discussion. Obviously, very good NII growth this quarter, but it looks like based on the guide that that's going to slow fairly materially, quarter over quarter.

I really wanted to get into the deposit side, because deposits did shrink. You guys obviously have a low loan-to-deposit ratio.

Just how should we think about the progression of deposit growth from here as it relates to kind of the NIM discussion that you just laid out moving into next year along with earning asset growth? Just trying to put it all together as we set up for next year.

Thanks.

Michael, let me just comment on the NII growth. We expect to continue to grow earning assets through growing loans, and combine the earning asset growth and relatively stable net interest margin, we feel good about the NII trajectory as we finish out the year.

Then I think it's an important point to look at on the deposit growth. You're right.

We certainly do have a very strong loan-to-deposit ratio, and that gives us the flexibility to be thoughtful about how we respond to market pricing pressures. If you spend a little extra time looking at the differences between Q2 and Q3 on an average and ending basis, it'll help you see what's signal and what's noise.

If you look at average balance in Q3 and ending balance in Q3 for deposits, they're basically the same. If you look at ending balance in Q2 versus average balance, ending was over $600 million higher.

There's a little bit of a run-up right at the end of June that affected that ending balance. If you look at average balances, you see a growth trend.

If you look at average balances in every single line of business that we disclose, you see growth quarter over quarter. I think it's probably more accurate to say that fundamentally we've got a growth trend going on in the deposits.

You've got a little signal versus noise issue when you look at the ending balances. At the end of the day, we feel good about our ability to continue to grow the deposit portfolio.

We've done a great job of that over the last several years, and we'll maintain a very strong loan-to-deposit ratio going forward.

I appreciate the color, Marty. Maybe just a follow-up on loan growth.

I know you like others have been fairly active in hiring new producers. Do you have a sense for how much of this quarter's growth was maybe driven by some of those new producers versus maybe just draws on existing lines?

Then, what does the hiring outlook as we think about the next couple quarters look like for you guys specifically? Obviously, we've had some bigger deals in Texas close, and I think last quarter you mentioned that, I think 20 of the 25 hires were in Texas.

Just trying to frame the opportunities we move forward. Thanks.

Sure. This quarter, if you think about at the top of the house, utilization was essentially flat from the second quarter, the growth really wasn't utilization driven, it was really continued to add customers to the base.

I think that from a talent acquisition perspective, we continue to be focused on that. The growth this quarter was not driven by the talent.

We expect to see that begin to show up in the fourth quarter, and then certainly in 2027. We continue to be very active there across all of our markets, not just Texas.

We continue to look to add talent. We think that is the best way for us to grow in the current environment.

We have become an employer of choice for many who want to do business a certain way, that very relationship-driven, and that's been effective for us. I think that's a part of the future story, for sure.

We're excited about the people who've come on board, but the results that they will drive are going to be in the future, not reflected in the third quarter.

Thanks, Stacy. I'll sit back.

Thanks for taking my questions.

Hey, thanks. Good afternoon.

Hey, John.

Hey, a couple of rate-related questions. On slide 6, Stacy, that mortgage finance line, it's up nicely, and I think we all get that it's growing, but my guess is the balances are probably somewhat depressed.

I'm just kind of curious if you can talk about what you're seeing in terms of new business wins there, and if the mortgage market normalizes a little bit, what kind of expectations do you have for potential balances there, if that makes sense?

Want to talk about it kind of in general terms. We're still pretty nascent in that business, and so you still have a lot of customer acquisition that's happening.

Utilization is not where it will be when the business is more mature. I would say our utilization there is kind of in the low 30 percentile.

Some of that's just a factor of the time it takes to get customers on-boarded and for systems to integrate and if they become active. From that perspective, I think as you begin to mature out the business, you're probably looking at utilization closer to 50%.

Certainly, in this type of mortgage environment, I'm very impressed with the team and how they're continuing to grow and add commitments at a significant clip. I think if you think about a more normal mortgage environment, this business looks even better.

We're really happy with where it's at today in a difficult environment, but whatever normal is for mortgage, if you find that, I think this business looks even better for us. I'll tell you, we talk about it's about a relationship, not a transaction for us, and this business is a really good example of that.

We don't have a single customer who is a loan-only customer inside of our mortgage warehouse business. Every single customer that we have has at least one other product with us, whether that be they are an active trader in our TBA business, or whether they're a treasury customer, or both.

We continue to be very good at selling the whole bank and having a relationship, and not just a transaction.

John, it's Marty. I would add one thing to that.

Just note that that business, as we mature it out, there will be seasonality trends in there. Of course, summer versus winter is kind of the driver there, but given the momentum we have in originations, we think we'll be able to grow through the seasonality that we would see here in the near-term quarter.

Yep. Good.

Then, Scott, question for you. I kind of feel like I'm picking on you periodically on trading fees, but obviously, you can't control what interest rates do, but a couple of tougher quarters in a row due to the rate environment.

What needs to happen for that business to I think get back to some normalcy? Is it just rates staying steady in the same range, or do rates have to come back down, or how do you want us to think through this?

It's a great question, fair question, and I'd characterize really two things need to happen to create a more optimal environment. Obviously, we continue to do business, continue to have significant trading volumes there.

They're just not what we would like them to be with the rapid change in rates. What we need to see are two things: stability and acclimation.

It's not the absolute rates and the rate levels, because we have been in that business for over 25 years and have seen these rates and, in fact, higher in the past and generated quite effectively and efficiently. It's merely the uncertainty and the instability with the speed of change and the upward pressure on rates, I think, that has caused the biggest challenge to both buyers in the mortgage securities market as well as the origination piece.

As the mortgage buyers acclimate to this type of a rate range, we'll continue to take more than our share of that business. During this environment, it creates challenges both in the confidence levels of our asset buyers as well as the mortgage origination piece itself.

We need stability and acclimation to this type of a rate range, which we don't find necessarily out of longer-term historic norms.

John, this is Stacy. Think about for us the last six weeks of the quarter.

So 10-year rose about 80 basis points, pretty quick move in the long end of the curve. If you're a buyer of fixed income instruments, the last thing you want to do is buy a bond today and it be worth less tomorrow.

I think what we've seen over the last few weeks is the 10-year has kind of settled out, the pace of the change has changed and stabilized tremendously. That business will be just fine in a stable environment.

If we think about where we are through the first two or three weeks of October, we like what we've seen there. It's not about the rate, it's about the pace of change.

Now that that pace has stabilized quite a bit, we think that business will also stabilize. Now, the mortgage business itself is a different story.

It's going to take longer, but the fixed income trading business will come back to us once the pace of change is slowed. At least thus far this quarter, that has proven to be the case.

Yep. That's helpful.

That's a good comment on the 10-year kind of rolling over. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thanks. Good afternoon.

When I look at expenses, you guys have done really an excellent job managing expenses this year. Updated guidance is 1%.

The question is, what would you consider a more normal growth rate, and is there room to further improve the efficiency ratio? I realize you operate a little higher than peers, just given the mix of your fee income businesses.

Peter, I think that, long run, there is room for that efficiency ratio to improve from where it is, but we're not the sort of company, just given the strength and size of our fee businesses, we're not somebody that's going to be in the upper 50s. We're going to be in the lower 60s as kind of the long run, what would make sense for us.

I think that ultimately there is room there to make improvement. I think that we appreciate the commentary about the year, and we've done a tremendous job of being thoughtful about making investments in the company that ultimately drive greater efficiency, and that's important long run.

We're pretty proud of the fact that we've brought the efficiency ratio down probably close to 300 basis points over the last 12 months, while still making significant investments in new revenue producers and key infrastructure investments that we think will propel us for many years into the future. The mix of fee businesses that we have is unique for a regional bank, and so that results in a higher efficiency ratio than most, but we look at each of those lines of business and kind of has a target efficiency ratio, it's easy for us to manage and kind of know where we are by each distinct line of business.

I think, Peter, you know us well, and you know that we don't manage to that ratio for the company, because we're always thinking about long-term investments, and if there's investments that are important to make that are really going to pay off long term, we'll make those. The efficiency ratio is ultimately something that comes out of that set of decisions in the short run.

Got it. That's really helpful.

Also just separately, nice to see another solid quarter of loan growth in the energy portfolio. Can you talk about the pipeline in energy?

Are you starting to see more willingness to drill as energy prices really might be staying at these elevated levels for longer?

I'm not going to be happy with you if you jinx it, Peter, but it appears that way. We just met with our team yesterday and talked about for a long time, I would say that the severe backwardation of the curve didn't make it very interesting, because you really need a longer-term price rise.

If you look out 12 months from now, you're still seeing pretty healthy prices. I think the market is beginning to believe that even post-resolution of the conflict, that there will continue to be a political risk premium embedded in the price of oil.

As a result of that, we're starting to see customers begin to look at and begin to implement more broader drilling programs, which means the use of debt to be able to help them facilitate that. It'll be lumpy.

I wish it was always up and to the right every quarter. Over the last 18 months, energy, actually because of consolidation in the industry and much lower utilization, had been a headwind for us.

Now it's great to have it as a tailwind, and we're very hopeful that it will continue to be that way for a while.

Great. Thanks, Stacy.

Thank you, Peter.

Hi. Good afternoon, guys.

I hate to sort of beat a dead horse on the NIM, but just a question there. When I think about the investment securities portfolio run-off that you've outlined and the reinvestment there, the variability of the loan portfolio, the ability to lag deposit pricing, even if we're using sort of that high 60s deposit beta that you've talked about previously, it seems like there's still some opportunity for a little more margin expansion, at least in the near term, especially if the Fed's going to tighten, let's say, one or two more times in the near term.

I guess the question is, are you just being a little conservative in terms of your NIM outlook because the NIM is always a little difficult to fine-tune and forecast specifically, or would you agree that there's a little more opportunity for NIM expansion over the next quarter or two before it sort of settles out and stabilizes?

Ed, I appreciate the question, and you're right. If you look at the long-run history, over the last nine quarters, core NIM has expanded 3 basis points per quarter, and that's been a function of fixed-rate asset repricing and then some of the other items that you articulated.

When we think through where the margin really gravitates to over time, we've said in the past, if you just took the securities portfolio and replaced it with current market levels, you'd be north of 3%. Over long periods of time, you're always going to gravitate to something that is kind of your natural level, and then in any given year or quarter, you might be above or below that for various, mostly market-driven reasons.

I think that, long run, we do see continued margin expansion as part of what's possible here. I'd just note that there certainly will be some level of overlay of competitive pressure given that there's plenty of demand for loans within the industry, and we feel very comfortable talking about stable in the near term as we round out the year, but I think you're right on the long-term message of where that ultimately goes.

I think you're thinking about the short-term dynamic probably correctly if you think about how deposit pricing tends to lag. We kind of would prefer to talk about the margin over a longer cycle so that you kind of even out those lags.

You're not wrong in how you think about it. I think that the other thing to think about is demand deposits are going to be a bit tougher in this environment given higher rates, and so as we think about it collectively, we feel pretty optimistic, but we don't want to overpromise here either.

Right. Okay.

Great answer. Understood.

Then just two really quick housekeeping questions. When you talk about the 1% expense growth for this year, that's all-in for both years?

You're not taking out any kind of deferred comp or anything like that? That's GAAP versus GAAP, correct?

GAAP versus GAAP is right.

Okay. Then on the NII guide, that's a non-FTE number, correct?

That is an SEC not FTE number. That's correct.

Perfect. Thank you very much.

Good quarter, guys.

Thank you.

Hey, good afternoon. Wanted to touch on the CRE segment.

Y'all saw nice growth in the quarter. Could you just talk about the growth opportunities you're seeing in the segment?

Is that a trend that could continue from here?

I think that CRE's very difficult for us to forecast. I think that the nature of the portfolio is, let's pick on multifamily.

You identify a developer, they build a multifamily apartment, it seasons, it matures, it gets to occupancy, and then it sells. That happens over a three- to four-year period of time.

Rates have a pretty big impact there. If you think about longer-term rates running up, that could have an impact, and folks may choose to use a mini-perm structure or something like that, and not necessarily sell it on a non-recourse, fixed-rate basis outside of the banking system.

That could make some of those loans a little stickier and then allow CRE to grow. We're still trying to figure out what that looks like as we think about next year.

We've got plenty of room to grow from a concentration limit. We really like the team that we've got on the field.

We're smart about how we do it. We focus on recourse.

We're successful in getting that's a big part of how we think about that business. That's why our credit outcomes there have been so strong.

We're optimistic, and the only thing that ever makes us less optimistic is really understanding the impact of paydowns in the book. With a higher level of the 10-year, that probably makes the book a little bit stickier and allows it to grow.

I appreciate the color there. Just as a follow-up, maybe touching on credit, and as you mentioned, credit's been super clean.

I guess as it relates to the reserve percentage, you've had close to zero provision over the past couple years, and that's even in light of really strong growth. Given it sounds like growth should continue strong here in the near term, how are you thinking about the reserve on a percentage basis?

Are we close to a trough, or given the expectations that mortgage finance should grow, would that naturally push the reserve down on a percentage basis?

That's kind of a nuanced answer, and it's kind of facts and circumstances at the point in the time that we make, depends on what the economic outlook is, it depends on the level of charge-offs and criticized and classified levels. I will tell you, as we think about next year, we'll start to think about the reserve ex-mortgage warehouse.

I think that as that portfolio grows, we kind of have to think about that as a percentage of loans differently than we do the rest of the portfolio. Credit has been incredibly strong.

We clearly can't sustain $1 million in charge-offs a quarter, but we'll take it while it's here, and obviously when you have this strong of credit, you don't need to provide even when we've had this kind of growth. As time goes along, we'll continue to evaluate that and make the best decision in the quarter that we can based on the information that we have.

Got it. All right, well, I appreciate y'all taking my questions.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. Just one follow-up on the last two questions.

If you look at the other side of higher rates, if rates go higher into next year, could you start to see some credit pressure within CRE? If so, how do you get ahead of that?

What are your thoughts on loan modifications and term extension? Within those four larger segments of CRE that you call out on page 6, are there any specific areas that you think are most at risk to higher interest rates?

Thank you.

Obviously, higher interest rates is a big input into debt repayment for a commercial real estate borrower, and if rates go up, then that's an additional stress for them. I think it really depends on what happens with economic growth and where are the projects.

Most all of our projects are in our footprint where there's economic net infill activity that's positive. If you look at, this isn't the first time rates have gone up.

You've seen us perform through that. You may get some credit migration, but because we have such a large percentage of our portfolio that has recourse, the project sponsors work through that and work on it over time, and the outcomes are very strong.

Look at our real estate losses over the last 10 years. They're very, very, very low, and certainly, we had a rising rate environment that was more substantial, frankly, than this one from a short-term perspective.

I think we went up 500 basis points in the short term in a 15-month or less period of time. We can work through that.

We don't have any overt concerns about that portfolio, but clearly there could be some credit migration and things that would have to be worked through if rates continue to migrate higher.

Great. Appreciate you taking my questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hey, thanks, guys. I'll ask about capital.

Don't think we saw any buyback activity this quarter. We are seeing a little pull back in valuations in the industry, curious about your appetite from here on the buyback, and then on the M&A front, it's been a while since we've talked about this, just curious about the opportunities that you see out there, whether it's on the depository side or the non-depository side.

Thanks.

Matt, thanks for the question. Our commentary on capital and really share buyback more specifically is pretty consistent with the message that we've talked about before.

We're certainly aware of the fact that we have a very strong capital base and excess capital. However, we are very thoughtful about the capital deployment decisions we make and making sure that those are ones that make sense over a very long period of time.

We're very opportunistic about that and continue to be willing to be patient, but there's a point where that opportunity gets attractive, and we'll just play that out through the quarter.

From an M&A perspective, this is Stacy. Obviously, we're interested in using our capital in M&A, but it needs to be the right opportunity.

We're doing so well at acquiring talent and growing organically, we don't need M&A to continue to propel us forward. It really for us is kind of the cherry on top of the sundae.

If there's something that is attractive and that works, we're going to be interested in it. Obviously what we're focused on is not just buying something for the sake of buying something.

It has to have both strategic value and be financially inside of the metrics that are important to us, particularly our cash-on-cash IRR. I would tell you, there's not a large pipeline.

We would look at bank deals, we would look at non-bank deals, but the discipline around how we think about that and how we ensure that they're shareholder friendly and that the returns that are promised in the deal announcement are what is realized are very important to us. We'll be thoughtful about that, but it's certainly something that we're interested in, but not just for the sake of doing it.

Understood. Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

Hey, guys. Good afternoon.

The only question that I haven't really heard an answer to is just wanted to talk about slide 19 on the securities portfolio. The duration is fairly short at 3.4 years, which only extends to 3.8 if rates increase 200 basis points.

I was a little surprised with the AOCI quarter-to-quarter change. Any thoughts on that, and just why the increase was fairly outsized relative to the duration of the portfolio?

If you back into the math, I think that AOCI is consistent with the rates that apply to that part of the curve and the securities that we have. In fact, more broadly, our AOCI change relative to other peers, first of all, that's a more favorable outcome just because we do have a shorter securities portfolio, and the proof is in the pudding of looking at the TCE ratios.

If you look at our TCE at 9.2%, whatever peer group you want to pick, that's at the upper end of the peer group, both in terms of the amount of change and, more importantly, the absolute level of where that TCE landed. That is a function of how we run that securities portfolio.

Happy to talk with you more offline about some of the puts and takes of that if you'd like.

Brett, the other piece of that is, if you look at particularly larger regionals, is the use of held-to-maturity, which shields these banks from the AOCI mark. I think that we have really stayed away from using held-to-maturity for the most part.

We continue to allow that portfolio in held-to-maturity to just run off. We like the economic optionality that we have, including things in AFS.

I think we probably have a bigger percentage of our portfolio in AFS than most do, because we think long term that gives us the most optionality to do something if we want to do that. I think that's the other piece of that equation as you think about that.

Okay. That's helpful.

Then I guess the other related kind of question is just around the trading portfolio, which the average size was just slightly higher linked quarter, but I kind of figured it might decrease a little bit. Any thoughts on the size of that portfolio from here, and if you think it might be about the same, or any thoughts on size relative to the balance sheet?

I think, if you look over the last couple quarters, it's been pretty steady in that 5 to 6, but closer to $6 billion average balance. I think it's important, Brett, that you think about that portfolio in an average balance context, not ending balance, because just any one given day for a trading book isn't really insightful.

Kind of think of that 5 to 6 range on average and think about that probably at the higher end.

I would think that, to tag on to Marty there, that's where it will be given a sustained environment that we have today. Should the environment change, as Stacy and I talked about earlier, then certainly that size could change.

Yep.

Okay. Appreciate the color, guys.

I'm proud of the grit and determination of our team to deliver another solid quarter. Strong loan growth, an expanding margin, disciplined expense management, and excellent credit quality all reflect the underlying strength of our franchise.

Market conditions will continue to evolve, but we'll stay focused on what we can control: serving our clients well, managing risk prudently, investing thoughtfully in growth, and creating long-term value for our shareholders. Before we close today's call, I'd like to take a moment to recognize our Specialized Industry Banking Executive, Brad Vincent, who will retire next month after nearly 30 years with the company.

Throughout his career, Brad has been a trusted leader, an exceptional teammate, a mentor to many, and one of the finest examples of servant leadership in our organization. On behalf of myself and the organization, Brad, thank you for your leadership, your friendship, your dedication to BOK Financial.

Congratulations on an outstanding career and a well-deserved retirement. Thank you for your interest in BOK Financial and for spending time with us this afternoon.

If you have any questions, please reach out to Heather King at [email protected].