Thanks, Jonah, and good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today to discuss First Commonwealth Financial Corporation's second quarter financial results.

Participating on today's call will be Mike Price, President and CEO; Jim Reske, Chief Financial Officer; Mike McEwen, Chief Banking Officer; and Brian Sohocki, Chief Credit Officer. As a reminder, a copy of yesterday's earnings release can be accessed by logging onto fcbanking.com and selecting the Investor Relations link at the top of the page.

We have also included a slide presentation on our Investor Relations website with supplemental information that will be referenced during today's call. Before we begin, I need to caution listeners that this call will contain forward-looking statements.

Please refer to our forward-looking statements disclaimer on page 3 of the slide presentation for description of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements. Today's call will also include non-GAAP financial measures.

Non-GAAP financial measures should be viewed in addition to and not as an alternative for our reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Reconciliation of these measures can be found in the appendix of today's slide presentation.

With that, I will turn the call over to Mike.

Thank you, Ryan. Second quarter financial performance at First Commonwealth and highlights include core earnings per share of 44 cents, up 7 cents over the first quarter; a core ROA of 1.46%; and core pre-tax pre-provision ROA of 2.14%; a core efficiency ratio of 52.24%; and a net interest margin of 4.01%, which expanded 9 basis points as a function of lower deposit and funding costs, higher loan yields, and securities purchases.

All key income statement categories moved positively quarter-over-quarter to include net interest income, provision expense, non-interest or fee income, and non-interest expense. Second quarter loan growth of 1.97 annualized percent was matched by average deposit growth of 2.03%.

Loan growth for the quarter was led by equipment finance, commercial construction, branch-based home equity loan lending, and our indirect lending business, all of which offset contraction in commercial real estate and C&I lending. The quarter was notable due to a record quarter of commercial loan payoffs of roughly $740 million following a record first quarter of commercial loan payoffs of roughly $630 million.

Commercial loan originations increased to approximately $693 million in the second quarter. Although charge-offs remain elevated as we continued to resolve identified problem credits, credit quality improved modestly in the second quarter with lower non-performing loan balances alongside stable delinquency and allowance levels.

Other items that may be of interest to investors include for the year, Community PA and Cincinnati, two of our five regions, have led the way with both deposit and loan growth. Fee income grew in part year-over-year due to nice traction in mortgage and wealth management businesses.

The team continues to find uses for AI. We've felt like we're on our front foot with IT and technology for years, particularly with our fintech partnerships, but let me just give you one AI example.

In our call center, our vendor turned on a feature where AI listens to the call and pops the policy and procedure to the employee to help navigate a solution for our clients. Often times they're navigating up to six different systems at one time.

Just one small example of probably a dozen or more. With that, I will turn it over to Jim Reske, our CFO.

Thanks, Mike. Mike has already summarized the second quarter's financial performance, I'll try to provide some additional detail around the margin, fee income, and expenses, as usual.

The net interest margin improved by 9 basis points to 4.01%. While average deposits grew by 2.03%, period-end deposits were down at an annualized rate of 5.77%, with about two-thirds of the decline coming from time deposits.

With excess cash on hand and limited loan growth, we priced time deposit promotions less aggressively compared to competitors in the second quarter, resulting in outflows towards the end of the quarter. That tighter deposit pricing obviously helped the NIM.

About 6 basis points of the 9 basis points of improvement came from lower funding costs, with the cost of deposits falling by 5 basis points to 1.74%. The other 3 basis points came from the asset side of the balance sheet, driven by a combination of higher loan yields and the investment of excess cash into securities.

The rate environment continues to allow us to reprice our loan book upward, with fixed-rate loans repricing upward by 61 basis points. The yield on the loan portfolio improved by 4 basis points from 6.03 to 6.07%.

The expiration of $150 million in macro swaps on May 1st contributed to the increase in loan yields. Looking ahead to the second half of 2026, we see net loan growth picking up as production continues and payoffs normalize, returning loan growth closer to our mid-single-digit guidance, while the NIM will benefit from the rate environment, but suffer from stiffer deposit competition.

We expect that will leave the NIM in the low 4% range. Fee income was up by $2.3 million from last quarter.

Fee income benefited from an $806,000 gain from the redemption of a $6.6 million sub-debt instrument inherited from a prior acquisition, along with a $450,000 BOLI death claim, which together accounted for about $1.3 million of the $2.3 million of improvement. We also had an increase of about half a million dollars in interchange and deposit service charges.

Our previous guidance for fee income to range from $24 to $25 million per quarter for the remainder of this year remains unchanged. Non-interest expense improved by $1.3 million from last quarter.

Salary and hospitalization expense did go up in the second quarter, offset somewhat by a vendor rebate of approximately $450,000. The quarter-over-quarter comparison benefits from a few discrete expense items that hit us in the first quarter, including about half a million dollars of snow removal costs in the first quarter and a half-million-dollar FHLB prepayment penalty in the first quarter.

Our previous expense guidance of about $74 to $76 million per quarter remains unchanged for the remainder of 2026. We repurchased approximately $12 million in stock last quarter at a weighted average price of $18.66.

We had approximately $13 million remaining in repurchase authorization at the end of the second quarter, and yesterday, our board approved an additional $75 million in repurchase authorization. We intend to continue share repurchase activity in the third quarter.

Tangible book value per share grew to $11.58, up from $11.34 $11.34 last quarter and $10.63 a year ago. Compared to last quarter, our CET1 ratio has improved from 12.5% to 12.6%, and our tangible common equity ratio increased from 9.7% to 9.9%.

With that, we'll take any questions you may have.

Thank you. Good afternoon, guys.

Maybe we start on the credit side. Just curious if you could provide some details.

I guess the bigger increase, and neither was a huge increase, but a little bit of an increase in classified loans, if you could kind of give us some color on what was driving that in the quarter.

Daniel, I can jump in. Maybe just taking a look at criticized overall to start, as a whole, the overall trend remained relatively stable.

We ended the quarter at 3% of loans, essentially unchanged. Within that portfolio, however, we saw some migration between special mention and substandard.

It was really about $10 million and two credits. That resulted in the modest increase in classified assets that you saw.

Importantly, the migration occurred within the previously identified criticized relationships, rather than a broad influx of new problem credits. As a result, the classified balances increased, but we didn't see a corresponding increase in the overall level of criticized assets, which was a positive.

As Mike said in his comments, at the same time, the indicators that we view as leading measures of the portfolio direction improved during the quarter. Watch balances decreased by some $30 million.

Delinquency was stable, and the other portfolio asset metrics improved as well as we dug down into the portfolios. All that said, classified assets and non-performing loans remain elevated above our long-term objectives, and we'll continue to work through those in the future quarters and expect a little bit of a degree of variability in charge-offs and problem loans as we go through those categories.

Thanks for that. That was my next question was just on the charge-off side.

I'm just curious if you can put a little finer point on that in terms of what we may see in terms of charge-offs near term before they come back to somewhat normalized levels.

It it's hard to put an exact number on it. You saw that we we increased reserves in the first quarter.

If you go back to last quarter, we had three commercial credits, with reserves kind totaling about $11 million. One of those worked through the process in the second quarter and was part of the charge-offs.

We had a a individual credit that had a $3.4 million charge-off and a prior period reserve of $3.25. As we go through that, we'd expect a little bit of action from those charge-off us from those reserves in individual credits, before we revert back to kind of where we've seen our charge-offs.

If you look at a a three- and five-year history, we've been right about 30 basis points to 32 basis points. We'll see ourselves revert back to that norm over time.

Okay. Thank you.

That's helpful. Then maybe just quickly for you, Jim, on the margin guidance.

Appreciate the low fours thoughts. It sounds like that means maybe you're expecting a little bit of expansion here in the back half.

As you think about it holistically, is that about the levels, you think, that you might stay in the low fours as these kind of competing factors on both sides start to stabilize, or you think there's the potential for continued expansion in '27?

I'm hesitant at this point to give that guidance into '27, Daniel. I just try to look just for the remainder of this year.

The most recent runs we did, did have the margin drifting up for the second half of this year. I can tell you even explicitly, the last run had the margin, with no rate increases at all, going to 4.08 in the fourth quarter and 4.13 if there was one hike in September.

That latest run I've taken with a grain of salt for my guidance because it didn't include the latest and greatest information we have about deposit competition, which is really really heating up in our market. We were able to bring deposit costs down in the second quarter in a really healthy way, which is good, especially after having lagged some peers doing that.

We were able to bring that down, but we saw an outflow of CDs, and now we see deposit pricing competition picking up. All that works together to bring that guidance to the low fours, but at this point, the crystal ball doesn't go out to 2027 yet.

Understood. Right.

Appreciate you going over those. The pushes and the pulls.

Appreciate the answers, guys. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mike, you touched on the record payoffs again this quarter. I guess, could you frame up maybe what you see as a more normalized range?

Then, do you have visibility into that in the third quarter and maybe a little bit into the fourth quarter as well?

We do expect them to subside somewhat. We think we've had probably a half a dozen or so larger ones that were more one-offs, and just outright sales and getting out of real estate.

A lot of them obviously are constructions, a lot of them are planned going to the permanent market. That being said, we just feel regarding loan growth, we have good growth in construction funding, we've hit the tipping point there.

Business banking in our corporate bank, we have good momentum in each market. Our consumer is growing, and probably most importantly, talent and execution just continues to improve.

The first half of the year, we grew two of our five regions. We expect to grow all of them in the second half of the year.

Just momentum and just getting beyond this. That's not perfect, but that's kind of my best take from the vantage point in July.

Okay. Appreciate that.

Then, I know this comes up on every quarterly call, but on the buyback, you've gone over kind of your framework before, but the authorization's a little bit larger than you've had. Anything you want to message with the bigger number out there this quarter?

Thank you.

We are just drifting up all the time. Jim and I put our heads together, and at 9.7 and 9.8, and it's going to continue to drift even if we start to hit our loan growth targets.

We just thought it might be prudent to get a little larger authorization in place, Jim. I don't know if you had...

Just exactly that. The capital ratio keeps drifting upward and upward.

Like Mike said, we have plenty of capital to first and foremost capitalize organic growth, which is a first priority. Even then, if the TCE ratio gets to where it's pushing 10%, it goes beyond 10%, it's very hard to earn a respectable return on equity.

Now, we were really pleased to see the ROTCE go over 15% this quarter, but it's harder and harder to do that if you have excess capital. We bought back some shares.

When I look back now in the second quarter, the purchases at $18.66, wish we bought back a whole lot more, given the price today. We'll probably be a little more aggressive going forward.

Thank you both.

Thank you.

Hi. Good afternoon.

Thanks for the question. I think putting together some of your margin commentary, one thing you noted was the increased deposit competition.

I was hoping you could provide color as to what you're seeing in your markets, one, and then two, your balance sheet flexibility allowed you to be a little bit more discerning. Just wondering how you're thinking about that loan-to-deposit ratio and the additional flexibility you may have there.

Thank you.

Specifically, and I'll let Jim amplify, but on the deposit side, our money market, we feel very competitive, but more in the CD side. We felt that pressure really just in the last month or so, Jim?

That's right. That's right.

The competition, Kelly, is really in the time deposits. If we look back in COVID, way back, we didn't have a very large time deposit book.

We ran some of that down, but now it's a fairly decent-sized time deposit book of $1.7 billion. We have to price it to maintain that deposit book and grow it.

We had so much excess cash in the second quarter that we felt like we didn't need to be so aggressive, and we pulled back a little bit. Lo and behold, right towards the end of the quarter, late in June, as Mike was saying, the deposit competition heated up, and we saw the outflows.

We did react to that. To bring you up to the minute, we saw even just yesterday a couple more competitors raising CD rates to rates that have four handles on them.

The competition really is not, so far anyway, in the money market product. That's still in the mid-threes, but the CD competition is heating up, and it's across the board.

It's not just online banks. It's not just credit unions.

It's not just smaller banks. It's everybody.

You cannot ignore that and maintain your CD book. We've raised rates already to do that, and we'll continue to do that to grow our deposits to fund our loan growth.

Kelly, the second part of your question?

Just the flexibility on balance sheet, and you did have a bit more flexibility this quarter to let some deposits go, wondering where you're comfortable with taking that loan-to-deposit ratio.

That's right. We like it where it is in the low 90s.

It's not binding. Go ahead,

Mike. We've worked hard to get there.

After Silicon Valley, we really have grown our deposits about 5% a year each year. We've worked it down from 96, 97, and so it feels like a good place to be, and we don't want to give that away.

Quite frankly, our customers didn't have rate with us. They were just loyal customers, and they were getting rates somewhere else, and we've worked hard to gather the CD book.

We appreciate it. It's come mostly from our own customers, and we just don't want to give that away.

It remained a nice way to continue to grow deposits, and our loan yields are good.

Got it. That's helpful.

Then on the growth and the payoffs you saw, you noted that there was pressure on CRE, which I think you had touched on earlier, and also C&I. Can you provide color as to where line utilization stands and how that compares to normalized levels and any dynamics factoring in there?

Thank you.

It's drifted up. We've been monitoring that and watching that.

The line utilization of revolving commercial lines and C&I lines drifting up over the last three quarters. The one commentary I'd give you, Kelly, is the production's been really good.

The payoff crescendo has continued and gotten stronger. If that crescendo of the payoffs slows down even a little bit, we'll have really good loan growth.

Now, of course, that'll put pressure on the deposit growth and make sure we fund that loan growth with the deposits, but it'll all work together. We're really pleased with just the production side.

Kelly, we also feel like we have six buckets of lending: commercial real estate, C&I, equipment finance, mortgage, branch-based consumer lending, and indirect auto. Now, in the second half of the year, just going in, we have four of those six growing between equipment finance, indirect auto, HELOC, HE loan, and probably going to get there with C&I and commercial.

Just we're pretty broad-based, and we just feel like we have momentum in those key businesses. Mortgage, we're still selling most everything we originate.

By the way, mortgage is a good story year-over-year on the fee side, up almost a million dollars, I believe, and we just have good pipelines despite the rate environment. We just feel good about loans and where we're at.

A

last question if I could just slip it in, it sounds like everything on the production is very constructive. What do you think is driving that?

What are you seeing as you're talking to your borrowers? Are they just more comfortable where we are now?

Just any color would be really helpful as we think about what's been impacting that uptick. Thank you.

On mortgage or on all?

I was talking mostly commercial, but I'm happy with whatever color you're can get. Thanks.

I just think our regional model is coalesced with really good leadership and new leaders over the course of the last two years, and just better and better teams that are just getting more sophisticated. We really like the fact that our business banking, which is the lower end of commercial, has really gathered momentum in the last year and a half to two years.

We've added a lot of professionals to that space. That's obviously very granular on the lower end.

It comes with a lot of deposits. At the end of the day, it does depend on talent and execution.

We've added talent on that team. The other thing is we've complemented with just a pretty strong and a TM function that's getting better and has more capability because our borrowers need more than just a loan.

They have deposit relationship. Then even we're doing a better job of cross-selling our wealth management, our insurance.

You see that in the numbers and how we've recouped what we've lost with the $13.5 million of crossing $10 billion. It's just all coming together, and we feel like the best years are ahead of us with the team we have now.

Got it. Thank you so much for all the color.

I'll step back.

It looks like you guys have some nice confidence on the production levels in terms of loan growth. How fast can you see loan growth kind of get back to mid-single digits?

Is it as soon as third quarter? Do you need it to build a bit more?

Just kind of some thoughts on the pipeline here into the near term, back half of the year.

Good question. Last quarter we sold a $200 million portfolio, and we had an down draft of another $100 million, it was quite a climb from that spot and the payoffs we had with more payoffs to get to 2% annualized.

We do feel like we have some momentum, and that the mid-single digit is good guidance for us. As you've seen over the years, we really believe deeply in the concept of operating leverage, we manage with a lot of cost discipline, and we feel like 4, 5, 6% is enough to really leverage into good earnings per share growth and value creation.

Another lever we like is we just feel like we can do a better and better job with fee income, and that's one of the reasons we really moved pretty decisively to a regional model. We report by line of business, but we execute and we win in discreet regions throughout the company.

That's the conclusion we came to. It's a little bit more expensive model, but we have good leaders and we're confident that it'll create differentiation over time.

What's your appetite for continued talent acquisition? Does that pipeline continue or you kind of seeing it try to produce now and taking a step back?

I'll share you an anecdote is that one of our very wise leaders put in a ghost position. What he meant by that was, "I want to be able to hire the right person at any time that I find her or him."

I love that. I love the confidence, and that's the way we feel.

When we find good people, we got to find a way to get them on the payroll and move the company forward with the right kind of rainmakers. Consequently, we've lost very few of them over the years.

That speaks to the culture and the good leaders that we have. Not everybody has caught on yet, but after this call, I guess they will.

I thought that was cool.

I appreciate the color. Can I shift over to NIM for a moment?

What are kind of new loan yields coming on at and I'm just trying to think of the marginal aspects to it. How big of a shift?

I guess you say CD books more like 4.5% at competitors. Kind of where is your marginal deposit cost right now?

If you can kind of walk through those near-term kind of drivers of NIM, please.

I'll try to answer this, but if I forget part of the question, just refresh my memory. I think the new cost of deposits blended overall coming on was 3% for a good part of the quarter, but that changed more towards the end of the quarter.

With the deposit competition, that's going to drift upwards. That's if you take the blended average of all the deposit growth categories, including NIB.

You get kind of a 3% cost of deposit acquisition cost overall. Like I said, the promotional rates are going to be in the fours going forward.

New loans coming on in the mid-6s, 6.4. Loans coming off a little bit lower than that, so that's why you get positive replacement yield so far.

The differential is much wider in the fixed-rate loans. The variable-rate loans, if you think of all the production, variable is about two-thirds of production, fixed is about a third of production roughly.

The positive replacement yields that I mentioned in my prepared remarks was 61, that's on the fixed-rate. The variable-rate, if the spreads maintain the same level, then the replacement yields are net to about zero.

It fluctuates a little bit quarter-over-quarter, but it's not much. That's the dynamic there.

Can you talk a little bit about the repricing potential on the fixed-rate side over time? Maybe the rest of this year into next year?

Yeah. If the Fed holds where they are now, we're really happy with 61 basis points on the fixed-rate side.

That's on the loan side. On the securities side it was better, but it's skewed a little bit because we accelerated some securities purchases with the excess cash.

The securities portfolio yield is low compared to the opportunity right now of new rates. We're able to purchase these securities in the low 5s right now, so that replacement yield there is pretty strong.

If the Fed just holds where they are for a while, we'll eventually reprice the whole loan book, except for the low-rate mortgages that are hanging on that aren't prepaying until they move or the house burns down. But...

Is the fixed-rate volume still about a third of the overall volume?

Overall.

That's

all categories, that's not just commercial, that's everything, HELOCs and equipment finance, everything. Hope that helps a little bit.

No, it definitely helps. Thank you for the commentary.

I'll jump back into the queue.

Thanks, Manuel.

Yes. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I guess I don't know who's fully to answer this, but what gives you confidence that we're going to see a slow down in payoffs?

Is it just that the current pace is unsustainably high and the normal such a lower amount that we've got to get there at some point, reversion to the mean? Then, the other question I have is, if you strip away equipment C&I growth, it looks like non-equipment-based C&I growth has been down for maybe four consecutive quarters.

Is that expected to turn around as well? What does the pipeline look like there?

Great questions. I think the anecdote around each payoff is an important factor, and our guidance on that, and in the size of the payoffs.

We just don't have that many loans over $15 million anymore. On the C&I side, we're working really hard to grow it and to grow it granularly with business banking and middle-market loans.

We've worked from a decade ago, we had all the SNCs. We don't have $100 million of SNCs left, if that.

The composition of the C&I book over the years has changed. When you talk about the last four quarters, just the pipelines, and particularly the pipelines in business banking and really that under $5 million range has grown as we've invested in that team the last year, year plus.

I hope that's helpful. Yep.

Jim, maybe just thinking through I know securities aren't your first option,

but

let's just say loan growth is on the lower end, mid-single digits, and capital is building, do we continue to see some securities purchases, and where would you like to see that as a percentage of assets?

It's a great question. Depends on the funding side.

We really don't believe in balance sheet leverage, like, let's go out and borrow a lot of money overnight and buy securities with that to leverage the balance sheet. We just rather not do that.

We'd rather have a more concentrated balance sheet with less leverage, where we really make our money by taking deposits and making loans. If we had great deposit growth and excess cash, and slower loan growth like we did in the second quarter, then, yeah, securities are a good option, especially when we can get rates where they are now in the low 5s.

It's not our go-to option, and We really don't believe in borrowing excess funds just to purchase securities and get that kind of balance sheet leverage. It dilutes NIM, it dilutes ROA, it gets you a little EPS, but it's, in the long run, it's not a winning strategy for a bank like ours.

Was there another part of your question? Really

we saw this quarter was really kind of a pre-funding of stuff that's maturing.

That's right. Then we saw with the way we were pricing CDs, we had these outflows towards the end of the quarter.

We've got to react to that. If everything goes right, we have the mid-single-digit loan growth, we have the mid-single-digit deposit growth, and loans and deposits will grow.

As capital grows, we retire some shares and leave the capital ratios more in line with norms so the capital ratios don't grow to the sky, and then we can earn a respectable return on that capital. That's the balance we're shooting for.

Okay. Within expenses, one area I noticed is just that your FDIC insurance expense has been like clockwork between $1.4 and $1.7 million per quarter.

It dipped to 1.1, and I'm curious just kind of what happened there, and if anything within it's kind of one-time or non-recurring in any way.

No, that's more of a new run rate. That's based on our new assessments.

We're very happy about that. Can't say a whole lot more about it, but it's very very positive.

Okay. I don't know if you provided it, but did you have the spot cost of deposits for the month of June or at the end of June, just to give us some idea of where this thing might be heading?

Did not provide that, but I don't mind providing that. I can get it for you in a minute.

It'll take me a second. You see, look at the total cost of...

I'll give you one more question while you pull it up.

Ask somebody else. Go ahead.

Yeah.

Obviously, Waller left rates unchanged today, but it feels like the bias is towards hikes. If we do get a hike or two this year, kind of what's the reaction to the NIM?

I think, Jim, you had mentioned 4.08 by the end of the year, but with a hike, we got to 4.03. That seemed a little backwards to me, and I was hoping you could flesh it out.

Oh. Thank you so much for letting me clarify.

No. With the hike, it was 4.13.

The adjustment I'm making is that I know that those forecasts we did do not take into account the latest thinking on deposit pricing. That's why I backed off to NIM guide to the low 4s.

The relationship is about the same. If we get a hike, we get about a 5-basis-point lift for a 25-basis-point hike in a 5-basis-point lift in the NIM.

It's been that way for a while, it's, we're still asset sensitive, and that's a benefit to us.

That's all I have. If you happen to have the spot cost, I'll take it.

If not, I'm all set. Thank you.

Okay. It might take me a second or two.

Sorry. Oh, 1.71.

1.71 in June.

Okay. All right.

It's a step in the right direction then. Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Yeah. Thank you.

Appreciate your interest in our company. Appreciate the questions.

It's fun running a bank, a commercial and a consumer bank, and we feel like we're very relevant to our customers here in Central and Western PA and Ohio, and we also feel like we're a good bank. We do a lot of the right things for our client, and first and foremost, we listen to them.

Thank you, and look forward to seeing a number of you over the course of the next quarter in the field.