Item 1. Business
General
First Financial Northwest, Inc. (“First Financial Northwest” or the “Company”), a Washington corporation, was formed on June 1, 2007, for the purpose of becoming the holding company for First Financial Northwest Bank (“the Bank”) in connection with the Bank’s conversion from a mutual holding company structure to a stock holding company structure which was completed on October 9, 2007. At December 31, 2020, the Company had total assets of $1.4 billion, net loans of $1.1 billion, deposits of $1.1 billion and stockholders’ equity of $156.3 million. First Financial Northwest’s business activities generally are limited to passive investment activities and oversight of its investment in First Financial Northwest Bank. Accordingly, the information set forth in this report, including consolidated financial statements and related data, relates primarily to First Financial Northwest Bank.
The Bank was organized in 1923 as a Washington state-chartered savings and loan association, converted to a federal mutual savings and loan association in 1935 and to a Washington state-chartered mutual savings bank in 1992. In 2002, First Savings Bank reorganized into a two-tier mutual holding company structure, became a stock savings bank, and the wholly-owned subsidiary of First Financial of Renton, Inc. In connection with the 2002 conversion, First Savings Bank changed its name to First Savings Bank Northwest. Subsequently, in August 2015, the Bank changed its name to First Financial Northwest Bank to better reflect the commercial banking services it provides beyond those typically provided by a traditional savings bank. In February 2016, the Bank officially changed its charter from a Washington chartered stock savings bank to a Washington chartered commercial bank.
First Financial Northwest became a bank holding company, after converting from a savings and loan holding company on March 31, 2015, and is subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board” or “Federal Reserve”) through the FRB. The change was consistent with First Financial Northwest Bank’s shift in focus from a traditional savings and loan association towards a full service, commercial bank. Additionally, First Financial Northwest Bank is examined and regulated by the DFI and by the FDIC. First Financial Northwest Bank is required to maintain reserves at a level set by the Federal Reserve Board. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) of Des Moines, which is one of the 11 regional banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System (“FHLB System”). For additional information, see “How We are Regulated - Regulation and Supervision of First Financial Northwest Bank - Federal Home Loan Bank System.”
In February 2016, First Financial Northwest Bank converted its charter from a community-based savings bank to a commercial bank as a way of better serving its customer needs. The Bank’s largest concentration of customers is in King County, with additional concentrations in Snohomish, Pierce, and Kitsap counties, Washington. The Bank is headquartered in Renton, in King County, where it has a full-service branch as well as a smaller branch located in a commercial development known as “The Landing”. The Bank has additional smaller branches in King County located in Bellevue, Woodinville, Bothell, Kent and Kirkland. In Snohomish County, Washington, the Bank has five additional smaller branches located in Mill Creek, Edmonds, Clearview, Smokey Point, and Lake Stevens. In addition, the Bank opened two Pierce County, Washington branches, with University Place in March 2020 and Gig Harbor in October 2020. The Bank’s fifteenth branch opened in Issaquah, in King County, Washington, in March 2021. These smaller branches are focused on efficiency through the extensive use of the latest banking technology. First Financial Northwest Bank’s business consists of attracting deposits from the public and utilizing these funds to originate one-to-four family residential, multifamily, commercial real estate, construction/land, business and consumer loans.
The principal executive office of First Financial Northwest is located at 201 Wells Avenue South, Renton, Washington, 98057; our telephone number is (425) 255-4400.
Market Area
We consider our primary market area to be the Puget Sound Region that consists primarily of King, Snohomish, Pierce and, to a lesser extent, Kitsap counties. During 2020, the region experienced stronger appreciation in residential real estate prices compared to the increases experienced in 2019. Price appreciation was strongest in areas outside the Seattle core and in less expensive areas. Price appreciation in more expensive areas of King County such as Seattle and Bellevue have also strengthened over 2020 due to low interest rates and population growth. Home prices in King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties have continued to experience price appreciation higher than the national average. Lower mortgage rates helped stimulate demand in the fourth quarter of 2020 with sales up over last year and a decline in housing inventory at the end of the
year. The number of homes listed for sale in King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties has continued to drop and are down from the end of 2019. The declines range from 14% in King County to a decline of 63% in Snohomish County, and all counties have less than one month of inventory available.
King County has the largest population of any county in the state of Washington and covers approximately 2,100 square miles. It has a population of approximately 2.25 million residents and a median household income of approximately $95,000, according to U.S. Census estimates. King County has a diversified economic base with many nationally recognized firms including Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks, Nordstrom, Costco and Paccar. According to the Washington State Employment Security Department, the unemployment rate for King County was 6.8% at December 31, 2020, compared to 2.1% at December 31, 2019, and the national average of 6.7% at December 31, 2020. The median sales price of a residential home in King County for December 2020 was $676,000, an increase of 9.9% from December 2019, according to the Northwest Multiple Listing Service ("MLS"). Residential sales volumes increased 4.9% in 2020 compared to 2019 and inventory levels as of December 31, 2020 were at 0.6 months according to the MLS.
Pierce County, covering approximately 1,700 square miles, has the second largest population of any county in the state of Washington. It has approximately 905,000 residents and a median household income of approximately $72,100, according to U.S. Census estimates. The Pierce County economy is diversified with the presence of military-related government employment (Joint Base Lewis-McChord), transportation and shipping employment (Port of Tacoma), and aerospace-related employment (Boeing). According to the Washington State Employment Security Department, the unemployment rate for Pierce County was 7.6% in December 2020, compared to 4.8% at year-end 2019. The median sales price of a residential home in Pierce County was $430,000 for December 2020, a 16.5% increase compared to December 2019, according to the MLS. Residential sales volumes decreased by 0.4% in 2020 compared to 2019 and inventory levels as of December 31, 2020 were at 0.3 months according to the MLS.
Snohomish County has the third largest population of any county in the state of Washington and covers approximately 2,090 square miles. It has approximately 822,000 residents and a median household income of approximately $86,700, according to U.S. Census estimates. The economy of Snohomish County is diversified with the presence of military-related government employment (Naval Station Everett), aerospace-related employment (Boeing), and retail trade. According to the Washington State Employment Security Department, the unemployment rate for Snohomish County was 7.8% in December 2020 compared to 2.4% in December 2019. The median sales price of a residential home in Snohomish County was $535,000 for December 2020, an 8.1% increase compared to December 2019, according to the MLS. Residential sales volumes rose by 4.3% in 2020 compared to 2019 and inventory levels as of December 31, 2020 were at 0.3 months according to the MLS.
Kitsap County has the seventh largest population of any county in the state of Washington and covers approximately 395 square miles. It has approximately 271,000 residents and a median household income of approximately $75,400, according to U.S. Census estimates. The Kitsap County economy is diversified with the presence of military-related government employment (Naval Base Kitsap, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard), health care, retail trade and education. According to the Washington State Employment Security Department, the unemployment rate for Kitsap County was 6.3% in December 2020, compared to 4.1% for December 2019. The median sales price of a residential home was $426,000 for December 2020 an increase of 10.6% over December 2019, according to the MLS. Residential sales volumes increased by 0.6% in 2020 compared to 2019 and inventory levels as of December 31, 2020 were at 0.5 months according to the MLS.
For a discussion regarding competition in our primary market area, see “- Competition” later in Item 1 of this report.
Lending Activities
General. We focus our lending activities primarily on loans secured by commercial real estate, construction/land, first mortgages on one-to-four family residences, multifamily, and business lending. We offer a variety of secured consumer loans, including savings account loans, auto loans and home equity loans that include lines of credit and second mortgage term loans. As of December 31, 2020, our net loan portfolio totaled $1.1 billion and represented 79.3% of our total assets.
During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Bank participated in the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), a guaranteed unsecured loan program enacted under the CARES Act to provide near-term relief to help small businesses impacted by COVID-19 sustain operations. The deadline for PPP loan applications to the SBA was initially August 8, 2020. Under this program we funded 462 applications totaling $52.1 million of loans in our market areas and began processing applications for loan forgiveness in the fourth quarter of 2020. As of December 31, 2020, we were approved for SBA forgiveness on 146 PPP loans totaling $11.2 million resulting in 372 PPP loans with an aggregate balance of $41.3 million outstanding. The CAA, 2021 enacted in December 2020 renewed and extended the PPP until March 31, 2021 by
authorizing an additional $284.5 billion for the program for eligible small businesses and nonprofits. As a result, the Bank began originating PPP loans again in January 2021.
Our current loan policy generally limits the maximum amount of loans we can make to one borrower to 15% of the Bank’s total risk-based capital, or $22.9 million at December 31, 2020. Exceptions to this policy are allowed only with the prior approval of the Board of Directors and if the borrower exhibits financial strength or sufficient, measurable compensating factors exist after consideration of the loan-to-value ratio, borrower’s financial condition, net worth, credit history, earnings capacity, installment obligations, and current payment history. The regulatory limit of loans we can make to one borrower is 20% of total risk-based capital plus the balance of the allowance for loan and lease losses (“ALLL”), or $31.2 million, at December 31, 2020. At this date, our single largest lending relationship, totaled $26.8 million.
During 2020, the concentration of loans to our five largest lending relationships increased. At December 31, 2020, loans to our five largest lending relationships totaled $96.3 million compared to $86.9 million at December 31, 2019, an increase of $9.4 million, or 10.8%. In addition to the increase in the total of these relationships during 2020, their percentage of total loans, net of loans in process (“LIP”) also increased to 8.6% at December 31, 2020, from 7.7% at 2019. However, the total number of loans comprising these relationships decreased slightly to 13 at December 31, 2020 from 16 at December 31, 2019. The following table details the types of loans to our five largest lending relationships at December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrower (1)
|
|
Number of Loans
|
|
One-to-Four Family Residential(2)
|
|
Multifamily
|
|
Commercial Real Estate(2)
|
|
Business
|
|
Aggregate Balance of Loans
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Real estate investor
|
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
12,250
|
|
|
$
|
14,500
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
26,750
|
|
Real estate investor
|
|
7
|
|
|
420
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
20,191
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
20,611
|
|
Real estate investor
|
|
2
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
18,366
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
18,366
|
|
Real estate investor
|
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
15,426
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
15,426
|
|
Real estate investor
|
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
15,110
|
|
|
15,110
|
|
Total
|
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
420
|
|
|
$
|
12,250
|
|
|
$
|
68,483
|
|
|
$
|
15,110
|
|
|
$
|
96,263
|
|
________
(1) The composition of borrowers represented in the table may change between periods.
(2) The single one-to-four family residential loan is owner occupied. The commercial real estate loans are for non-owner occupied, income producing properties.
The composition of loans to our five largest borrowers has changed at December 31, 2020, as compared to December 31, 2019, with an increase in multifamily loans of $3.8 million and an increase in business loans of $15.1 million. Partially offsetting this increase, one-to-four family loans decreased by $12,000 and commercial real estate loans decreased by $9.5 million. At December 31, 2020, all of the borrowers listed in the table above were in compliance with the original repayment terms of their respective loans.
Loan Portfolio Analysis. The following table sets forth the composition of our loan portfolio by type of loan at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
One-to-four family residential:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanent owner occupied
|
$
|
206,323
|
|
|
18.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
210,898
|
|
|
18.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
194,141
|
|
|
18.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
148,304
|
|
|
14.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
137,834
|
|
|
16.6
|
%
|
Permanent non-owner occupied
|
175,637
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
|
161,630
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
147,825
|
|
|
14.3
|
|
|
130,351
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
111,601
|
|
|
13.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
381,960
|
|
|
34.2
|
|
|
372,528
|
|
|
33.2
|
|
|
341,966
|
|
|
33.0
|
|
|
278,655
|
|
|
27.8
|
|
|
249,435
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multifamily real estate
|
136,694
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
|
172,915
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
|
169,355
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
184,902
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
123,250
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
385,265
|
|
|
34.5
|
|
|
395,152
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
373,798
|
|
|
36.0
|
|
|
361,299
|
|
|
36.0
|
|
|
303,694
|
|
|
36.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction/land: (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
33,396
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
44,491
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
51,747
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
40,522
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
34,909
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Multifamily
|
51,215
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
40,954
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
40,502
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
66,210
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
72,030
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
5,783
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
19,550
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
9,976
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
2,481
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Land
|
1,813
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
8,670
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
6,629
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
36,405
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
29,983
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
92,207
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
113,665
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
108,854
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
145,618
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
136,922
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Business
|
80,663
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
37,779
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
30,486
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
23,087
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
7,938
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Consumer
|
40,621
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
30,199
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
12,970
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
9,133
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
6,922
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Total loans
|
1,117,410
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,122,238
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,037,429
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,002,694
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
828,161
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred loan fees, net
|
1,654
|
|
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
|
1,178
|
|
|
|
|
1,150
|
|
|
|
|
2,167
|
|
|
|
ALLL
|
15,174
|
|
|
|
|
13,218
|
|
|
|
|
13,347
|
|
|
|
|
12,882
|
|
|
|
|
10,951
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable, net
|
$
|
1,100,582
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,108,462
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,022,904
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
988,662
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
815,043
|
|
|
|
_____________
(1) Included in the construction/land category are “rollover” loans, which are loans that will convert upon completion of the construction period to permanent loans. At December 31, 2020, we included rollover loans of $51.2 million of multifamily loans and $5.8 million of commercial real estate loans in the construction/land category. In addition, the construction/land category included $1.8 million of loans for raw land or buildable lots where the Company does not intend to finance the construction.
The following table shows the composition of our loan portfolio by fixed- and adjustable-rate loans at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
FIXED-RATE LOANS
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
169,560
|
|
|
15.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
184,174
|
|
|
16.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
185,755
|
|
|
18.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
177,086
|
|
|
17.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
169,523
|
|
|
20.5
|
%
|
Multifamily
|
45,441
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
54,762
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
68,737
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
77,824
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
72,593
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
177,000
|
|
|
15.8
|
|
|
185,503
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
|
179,838
|
|
|
17.3
|
|
|
208,899
|
|
|
20.8
|
|
|
211,054
|
|
|
25.5
|
|
Construction/land
|
55,123
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
32,880
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
22,552
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
29,516
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
28,287
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Total real estate
|
447,124
|
|
|
40.0
|
|
|
457,319
|
|
|
40.7
|
|
|
456,882
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
493,325
|
|
|
49.2
|
|
|
481,457
|
|
|
58.1
|
|
Business
|
64,398
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
18,787
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
13,760
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
9,097
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
640
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Consumer
|
30,724
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
19,422
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
1,018
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Total fixed-rate loans
|
542,246
|
|
|
48.5
|
|
|
495,528
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
471,660
|
|
|
45.5
|
|
|
502,558
|
|
|
50.1
|
|
|
482,529
|
|
|
58.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADJUSTABLE-RATE LOANS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
212,400
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
188,354
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
156,211
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
|
101,569
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
79,912
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
Multifamily
|
91,253
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
118,153
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
100,618
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
107,078
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
|
50,657
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
208,265
|
|
|
18.6
|
|
|
209,649
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
|
193,960
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
|
152,400
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
92,640
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
Construction/land
|
37,084
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
80,785
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
86,302
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
116,102
|
|
|
11.6
|
|
|
108,635
|
|
|
13.1
|
|
Total real estate
|
549,002
|
|
|
49.1
|
|
|
596,941
|
|
|
53.2
|
|
|
537,091
|
|
|
51.8
|
|
|
477,149
|
|
|
47.6
|
|
|
331,844
|
|
|
40.0
|
|
Business
|
16,265
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
18,992
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
16,726
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
13,990
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
7,298
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Consumer
|
9,897
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
10,777
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
11,952
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
8,997
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
6,490
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Total adjustable-rate loans
|
575,164
|
|
|
51.5
|
|
|
626,710
|
|
|
55.9
|
|
|
565,769
|
|
|
54.5
|
|
|
500,136
|
|
|
49.9
|
|
|
345,632
|
|
|
41.7
|
|
Total loans
|
1,117,410
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,122,238
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,037,429
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
1,002,694
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
828,161
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred loan fees, net
|
1,654
|
|
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
|
1,178
|
|
|
|
|
1,150
|
|
|
|
|
2,167
|
|
|
|
ALLL
|
15,174
|
|
|
|
|
13,218
|
|
|
|
|
13,347
|
|
|
|
|
12,882
|
|
|
|
|
10,951
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable, net
|
$
|
1,100,582
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,108,462
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,022,904
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
988,662
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
815,043
|
|
|
|
Geographic Distribution of our Loans. The following table shows the geographic distribution of our loan portfolio in dollar amounts and percentages at December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puget Sound Region (1)
|
|
Other Washington Counties
|
|
Total in Washington State
|
|
All Other States (2)
|
|
Total
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Category
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Category
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Category
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Category
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Category
|
Real estate:
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
One-to-four family
residential
|
$
|
367,541
|
|
|
96.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,358
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
378,899
|
|
|
99.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,061
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
381,960
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Multifamily
|
90,184
|
|
|
66.0
|
|
|
23,382
|
|
|
17.1
|
|
|
113,566
|
|
|
83.1
|
|
|
23,128
|
|
|
16.9
|
|
|
136,694
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Commercial
|
260,822
|
|
|
67.7
|
|
|
48,812
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
309,634
|
|
|
80.4
|
|
|
75,631
|
|
|
19.6
|
|
|
385,265
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Construction/land
|
92,207
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
92,207
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
92,207
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Total real estate
|
810,754
|
|
|
81.4
|
|
|
83,552
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
894,306
|
|
|
89.8
|
|
|
101,820
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
|
996,126
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Business
|
68,921
|
|
|
85.3
|
|
|
758
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
69,679
|
|
|
86.4
|
|
|
10,984
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
80,663
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Consumer
|
12,672
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
12,758
|
|
|
31.4
|
|
|
27,863
|
|
|
68.6
|
|
|
40,621
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Total Loans
|
$
|
892,347
|
|
|
79.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
84,396
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
976,743
|
|
|
87.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
140,667
|
|
|
12.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,117,410
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
____________
(1) Includes King, Snohomish, Pierce and Kitsap counties.
(2) Includes loans in California, Utah, Oregon, Georgia, and 39 other states.
One-to-Four Family Residential Lending. As of December 31, 2020, $382.0 million, or 34.2% of our total loan portfolio consisted of loans secured by one-to-four family residences.
First Financial Northwest Bank is a traditional portfolio lender when it comes to financing residential home loans. In 2020, we originated $107.6 million and purchased $1.5 million in one-to-four family residential loans. At December 31, 2020, $206.3 million, or 54.0% of our one-to-four family residential portfolio consisted of owner occupied loans with the remaining $175.6 million, or 46.0% consisting of non-owner occupied loans. In addition, at December 31, 2020, $169.6 million, or 44.4% of our one-to-four family residential loan portfolio consisted of fixed-rate loans. Substantially all of our one-to-four family residential loans require monthly principal and interest payments.
Our fixed-rate, one-to-four family residential loans are generally originated with 15 to 30 year terms, although such loans typically remain outstanding for substantially shorter periods, particularly in the current low interest rate environment. We also originate hybrid loans with initial fixed-rate terms of five to ten years that convert to variable-rate which adjusts annually thereafter. In addition, substantially all of our one-to-four family residential loans contain due-on-sale clauses that allow us to declare the unpaid amount due and payable upon the sale of the property securing the loan. Typically, we enforce these due‑on‑sale clauses to the extent permitted by law and as a standard course of business. The average period of time a loan is outstanding is a function of, among other factors, the level of purchase and sale activity in the real estate market, prevailing interest rates, and the interest rates payable on outstanding loans.
Our lending policy generally limits the maximum loan-to-value ratio on mortgage loans secured by one-to-four family residential properties to 85% of the lesser of the appraised value or the purchase price. Properties securing our one-to-four family residential loans are appraised by independent appraisers approved by us. We require the borrowers to obtain title insurance and if necessary, flood insurance. We generally do not require earthquake insurance due to competitive market factors.
Loans secured by rental properties represent potentially higher risk and, as a result, we adhere to more stringent underwriting guidelines. Of primary concern in non-owner occupied real estate lending is the consistency of rental income of the property. Payments on loans secured by rental properties depend primarily on the tenants’ continuing ability to pay rent to the property owner, the character of the borrower or, if the property owner is unable to find a tenant, the property owner’s ability to repay the loan without the benefit of a rental income stream. In addition, successful operation and management of non-owner occupied properties, including property maintenance standards, may affect repayment. As a result, repayment of such loans may be subject to adverse conditions in the real estate market or the economy. We request that borrowers and loan guarantors, if any, provide annual financial statements, a budget factoring in a rental income cash flow analysis of the borrower as well as the net operating income of the property, information concerning the borrower’s expertise, credit history and profitability, and the value of the underlying property. These loans are generally secured by a first mortgage on the underlying collateral property along with an assignment of rents and leases. If the borrower has multiple rental property loans with us, the loans are typically not cross‑collateralized. At December 31, 2020, there were no one-to-four family loans in nonaccrual status.
Multifamily and Commercial Real Estate Lending. As of December 31, 2020, $136.7 million, or 12.2% of our total loan portfolio was secured by multifamily and $385.3 million, or 34.5% of our loan portfolio was secured by commercial real estate properties. Our commercial real estate loans are typically secured by office and medical buildings, retail shopping centers, hotels, mini-storage facilities, industrial use buildings and warehouses. Commercial real estate and multifamily loans are subject to similar underwriting standards and processes. These loans are viewed primarily as cash flow loans and secondarily as loans secured by real estate.
Typically, multifamily and commercial real estate loans have higher balances, are more complex to evaluate and monitor, and involve a greater degree of risk than one-to-four-family residential loans. In an attempt to compensate for and mitigate this risk, these loans are generally priced at higher interest rates than one-to-four family residential loans and generally have a maximum loan-to-value ratio of 80% of the lesser of the appraised value or purchase price. We generally require loan guarantees by any parties with a property ownership interest of 20% or more. If the borrower is a corporation or partnership, we generally require personal guarantees from the principals based upon a review of their personal financial statements and individual credit reports.
The following table presents a breakdown of our multifamily and commercial real estate loan portfolio at December 31, 2020, and 2019:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2020
|
|
December 31, 2019
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Portfolio
|
|
Amount
|
|
% of Total in Portfolio
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Multifamily real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multifamily, general
|
$
|
125,328
|
|
|
91.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
159,106
|
|
|
92.0
|
%
|
Micro-unit apartments
|
11,366
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
13,809
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Total multifamily
|
$
|
136,694
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
172,915
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
|
$
|
114,117
|
|
|
29.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
133,094
|
|
|
33.7
|
%
|
Office
|
84,311
|
|
|
22.0
|
|
|
100,744
|
|
|
25.5
|
|
Hotel / motel
|
69,304
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
42,971
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Storage
|
33,671
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
37,190
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
Mobile home park
|
28,094
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
26,099
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
Warehouse
|
17,484
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
17,595
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Nursing home
|
12,868
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
11,831
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Other non-residential
|
25,416
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
25,628
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
Total non-residential
|
$
|
385,265
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
395,152
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
The average loan size in our multifamily and commercial real estate loan portfolios was $917,000 and $1.9 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2020. At this date, $46.5 million, or 34.0%, of our multifamily loans and $124.4 million, or 32.3%, of our commercial real estate loans were located outside of the Puget Sound Region. We currently target individual multifamily and commercial real estate loans between $1.0 million and $5.0 million. The largest multifamily loan as of December 31, 2020, was a 74-unit apartment complex with a net outstanding principal balance of $12.3 million located in King County, Washington, which was performing in accordance with its loan repayment terms at that date. As of December 31, 2020, the largest commercial real estate loan had a net outstanding balance of $15.4 million that was secured by a hotel located in King County, Washington. This commercial loan is on impaired status but was performing in accordance with its loan repayment terms at December 31, 2020.
The credit risk related to multifamily and commercial real estate loans is considered to be greater than the risk related to one-to-four family residential loans because the repayment of multifamily and commercial real estate loans typically is dependent on the income stream from the real estate securing the loan as collateral and the successful operation of the borrower’s business, that can be significantly affected by adverse conditions in the real estate markets or in the economy. For example, if the cash flow from the borrower’s project is reduced due to leases not being obtained or renewed, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. In addition, many of our multifamily and commercial real estate loans are not fully amortizing and contain large balloon payments upon maturity. These balloon payments generally require the borrower to either refinance or occasionally sell the underlying property in order to make the balloon payment.
If we foreclose on a multifamily or commercial real estate loan, our holding period for the collateral typically is longer than for one-to-four family residential mortgage loan foreclosures because there are fewer potential purchasers of the collateral. Our multifamily and commercial real estate loans generally have relatively large balances to single borrowers or related groups of borrowers. Accordingly, if we make any errors in judgment in the collectability of our multifamily or commercial real estate loans, any resulting charge-offs may be larger on a per loan basis than those incurred in our one-to-four family residential or consumer loan portfolios. At December 31, 2020, there were no commercial real estate loans and a $2.1 million multifamily loan in nonaccrual status. Subsequent to December 31, 2020, the borrower entered into a purchase and sale agreement on the property, which is expected to close in March 2021. The Bank does not expect to incur a loss on this loan. There were no multifamily or commercial real estate loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest at December 31, 2020. In addition, there were no multifamily or commercial real estate loans charged-off during the years ended December 31, 2020, and 2019.
Construction/Land Loans. We originate construction/land loans primarily to residential builders for the construction of single-family residences, condominiums, townhouses, multifamily properties and residential developments located in our market area. Land loans include land non-development loans for the purchase or refinance of unimproved land held for future residential development, improved residential lots held for speculative investment purposes or lines of credit secured by land, and land development loans. Construction/land loans to builders generally require the borrower to have an existing relationship with the Bank and a proven record of successful projects. At December 31, 2020, our total construction/land loans decreased to $92.2 million, or 8.3% of our total loan portfolio, from $113.7 million, or 10.1% of our total loans, at December 31, 2019. The Company’s strategic plan projects slight growth in construction loan origination activity in 2021 in support of our loan growth. The Bank’s lending policy sets forth the guideline that the balance of our net acquisition, development, and construction loans and deferred fees and costs, not exceed 100% of the Bank’s risk-based capital. The Bank was in compliance with this policy at December 31, 2020, with a balance equal to 61.6% of the Bank’s risk-based capital. Management intends to maintain levels near this guideline, however the uncertainty of the timing associated with construction loan draws occasionally results in the actual concentration exceeding the guideline. There were no construction/land loans classified as nonaccrual at either December 31, 2020 or 2019. There were no construction/land loan charge-offs during the years ended December 31, 2020, and 2019. At December 31, 2020, the LIP balance on construction/land loans was $59.8 million.
Following is the composition of our total construction/land loan portfolio, that are net of LIP, at the dates indicated. All of the loans represented were performing:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Construction speculative:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
33,396
|
|
|
$
|
40,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multifamily
|
—
|
|
|
2,394
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
—
|
|
|
1,227
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total construction speculative
|
33,396
|
|
|
44,614
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction permanent: (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
—
|
|
|
3,498
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multifamily
|
51,215
|
|
|
38,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
5,783
|
|
|
18,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total construction permanent
|
56,998
|
|
|
60,381
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land non-development
|
1,813
|
|
|
8,670
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total land
|
1,813
|
|
|
8,670
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total construction/land loans
|
$
|
92,207
|
|
|
$
|
113,665
|
|
|
|
|
|
_____________
(1) Includes loans where the builder does not intend to sell the property after the construction phase is completed.
The following table includes construction/land loans by county at December 31, 2020:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County
|
|
Loan Balance
|
|
Percent of Construction/Land Loan Balance
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
King
|
|
$
|
83,130
|
|
|
90.2
|
%
|
Snohomish
|
|
1,300
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
Pierce
|
|
5,527
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
Kitsap
|
|
2,250
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
92,207
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Loans to finance the construction of single-family homes, subdivisions and land loans are generally offered to builders in our primary market areas. Loans that are termed “speculative” are those where the builder does not have, at the time of loan origination, a signed contract with a buyer for the home or lot who has a commitment for permanent financing with either us or
another lender. The buyer may be identified either during or after the construction period, with the risk that the builder may have to fund the debt service on the speculative loan along with real estate taxes and other carrying costs for the project for a significant period of time after completion of the project until a buyer is identified. The maximum loan-to-value ratio applicable to these loans is generally 100% of the actual cost of construction, provided that the loan-to-completed value does not exceed 80%, with approval required from the Chief Credit Officer (“CCO”) for loan-to-value ratios over 80%. In addition, a minimum of 20% verified equity is generally also required. Verified equity refers to cash equity invested in the project. Development plans are required from builders prior to committing to the loan. We require that builders maintain adequate title insurance and other appropriate insurance coverage, and, if applicable, appropriate environmental data report(s) that the land is free of hazardous or toxic waste. While maturity dates for residential construction loans are largely a function of the estimated construction period of the project and typically do not exceed one year, land loans generally are for 12 to 18 months. Substantially all of our residential construction loans have adjustable-rates of interest based on The Wall Street Journal prime rate. During the term of construction, the accumulated interest on the loan is either added to the principal of the loan through an interest reserve or billed monthly. At December 31, 2020, the LIP balance on construction/land loans included $5.0 million set aside for interest reserves. When these loans exhaust their original reserves set up at origination, no additional reserves are permitted unless the loan is re-analyzed and it is determined that the additional reserves are appropriate, based on the updated analysis. Construction loan proceeds are disbursed periodically as construction progresses and as inspections by our approved inspectors warrant. At December 31, 2020, our three largest construction/land loans consisted of multifamily construction/land loans of $12.1 million, $8.3 million, and $6.9 million. All three loans will rollover to a permanent loan upon completion of the construction period and all three properties are located in King County.
Certain of our residential construction loans to borrowers for one-to-four family, non-owner occupied residences are structured to be converted to fixed-rate permanent loans at the end of the construction phase with one closing for both the construction loan and the permanent financing. Prior to making a commitment to fund a construction loan, we require an appraisal of the post‑construction value of the project by an independent appraiser. During the construction phase, which typically lasts 12 to 18 months, an approved inspector or designated Bank employee makes periodic inspections of the construction site to certify construction has reached the stated percentage of completion. Typically, disbursements are made in monthly draws and interest-only payments are required. At December 31, 2020, there were no loans requiring a rollover to a permanent loan with the Bank at the completion of the construction phase.
We also make construction loans for commercial development projects. The projects include multifamily, retail, office/warehouse, hotels and office buildings. These loans typically have an interest-only payment phase during construction and generally convert to permanent financing when construction is complete. Disbursement of funds is at our sole discretion and is based on the progress of construction. The Bank uses an independent third party or Bank employee to conduct monthly inspections to certify that construction has reached the stated percentage of completion and that previous disbursements are reflected in the degree of work performed to date. Generally, the maximum loan-to-value ratio applicable to these loans is 90% of the actual cost of construction or 80% of the prospective value at completion. At December 31, 2020, $51.2 million and $5.8 million of multifamily and commercial real estate construction loans, respectively, will rollover to permanent loans with the Bank at the end of their construction period.
Land development loans are generally made to builders for preparation of a building site and do not include the construction of buildings on the property. The maximum loan-to-value ratio for these loans is 75%. Land non-development loans are generally for raw land where we do not finance the cost of preparing the site for building and are subject to a maximum loan‑to‑value ratio of 65%.
Our construction/land loans are based upon estimates of costs in relation to values associated with the completed project. Construction/land lending involves additional risks when compared with permanent residential lending because funds are advanced upon the collateral for the project based on an estimate of costs that will produce a future value at completion. Because of the uncertainties inherent in estimating construction costs, as well as the market value of the completed project and the effects of governmental regulation on real property, it is relatively difficult to evaluate accurately the total funds required to complete a project and the completed project loan-to-value ratio. Changes in the demand, such as for new housing and higher than anticipated building costs may cause actual results to vary significantly from those estimated. For these reasons, this type of lending also typically involves higher loan principal amounts and is often concentrated with a small number of builders. These loans often involve the disbursement of funds with repayment substantially dependent on the success of the ultimate project and the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property or obtain permanent take-out financing, rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest. If our appraisal of the value of a completed project proves to be overstated, we may have inadequate security for the repayment of the loan upon completion of construction of the project and may incur a loss. Because construction loans require active monitoring of the building process, including cost comparisons and on-site inspections, these loans are more difficult and costly to monitor. Increases in market rates of interest may have a more
pronounced effect on construction loans by rapidly increasing the end-purchasers’ borrowing costs, thereby reducing the overall demand for the project. Properties under construction are often difficult to sell and typically must be completed in order to be successfully sold which also complicates the process of working out problem construction loans. This may require us to advance additional funds and/or contract with another builder to complete construction. Furthermore, in the case of speculative construction loans, there is the added risk associated with identifying an end-purchaser for the finished project. Land loans also pose additional risk because of the lack of income being produced by the property and the potential illiquid nature of the collateral. These risks can also be significantly influenced by supply and demand conditions.
Business Lending. Business loans (including PPP loans) totaled $80.7 million, or 7.2% of the loan portfolio at December 31, 2020. Conventional business loans (loans other than PPP loans) are generally secured by business equipment, accounts receivable, inventory or other property. Loan terms typically vary from one to five years. The interest rates on such loans are either fixed-rate or adjustable-rate. The interest rates for the adjustable‑rate loans are indexed to the prime rate published in The Wall Street Journal plus a margin. Our business lending policy includes credit file documentation and requires analysis of the borrower’s background, capacity to repay the loan, the adequacy of the borrower’s capital and collateral, as well as an evaluation of other conditions affecting the borrower. Analysis of the borrower’s past, present and future cash flows is also an important aspect of our credit analysis. We generally obtain personal guarantees on our conventional business loans. The largest conventional business loan had an outstanding balance of $15.1 million at December 31, 2020 and was performing according to its repayment terms. At December 31, 2020, we did not have any business loans delinquent in excess of 90 days or in nonaccrual status.
Beginning in the second quarter of 2020, we began to offer PPP loans which are fully guaranteed by the SBA, to existing and new customers as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. These PPP loans are subject to the provisions of the CARES Act as well as complex and evolving rules and guidance issued by the SBA and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The entire principal amount of the borrower's PPP loan, including any accrued interest, is eligible to be forgiven and repaid by the SBA if the borrower meets the PPP conditions. Under this program, as of December 31, 2020, there were 372 PPP loans outstanding totaling $41.3 million. As of December 31, 2020, a total of 146 PPP loans totaling $11.2 million had been approved for forgiveness, with $434,000 of this amount included in our outstanding balance at December 31, 2020. The CAA, 2021 renewed and extended the PPP until March 31, 2021 by authorizing an additional $284.5 billion for the program. As a result, in January 2021, the Bank began accepting and processing loan applications under this second PPP program. The Bank earns 1% interest on PPP loans as well as a fee from the SBA to cover processing costs, which is amortized over the life of the loan. The Bank expects the majority of its PPP borrowers will seek full or partial forgiveness of their loan obligations. For additional information regarding these loans, see Item 1A. Risk Factors- “Risks Related to Our Lending- Loans originated under the SBA Paycheck Protection Program subject us to credit, forgiveness and guarantee risk.” The Bank also originates loans under other SBA lending programs, which are partially guaranteed by the SBA. At December 31, 2020, the Bank’s portfolio included $928,000 of these SBA loans, of which $729,000 is guaranteed by the SBA. At that date, these SBA loans were not held for sale, however, the Company may elect to sell off the guaranteed portion of these loans in the future.
At December 31, 2020, the Bank’s aircraft loan portfolio had an outstanding balance of $10.8 million, or 13.4% of total business loans. These loans are collateralized by new or used, single‑engine piston aircraft to light jets for business or personal use. Our aircraft loans will generally range in size from $250,000 to $3.0 million with the primary focus of our underwriting guidelines on the asset value of the collateral rather than the ability of the borrower to repay the loan. The average loan size in our aircraft loan portfolio was $601,000 and the largest loan was $2.7 million at December 31, 2020. For additional information regarding these loans, see Item 1A. Risk Factors- “Risks Related to Our Lending - We engage in aircraft and classic car financing transactions, in which high-value collateral is susceptible to potential catastrophic loss. If any of these transactions becomes nonperforming, we could suffer a loss on some or all of our value in the assets.”
Repayments of conventional business loans are often dependent on the cash flows of the borrower, which may be unpredictable, and the collateral securing these loans may fluctuate in value. Our business loans, other than aircraft and PPP loans, are originated primarily based on the identified cash flow of the borrower and secondarily on the underlying collateral provided by the borrower. Credit support provided by the borrower for most of these loans and the probability of repayment is based on the liquidation of the pledged collateral and enforcement of a personal guarantee, if any. As a result, in the case of loans secured by accounts receivable, the availability of funds for the repayment of these loans may be substantially dependent on the ability of the borrower to collect amounts due from its customers. The collateral securing business loans may depreciate over time, may be difficult to appraise, or may fluctuate in value based on the success of the business.
Consumer Lending. We offer a limited variety of consumer loans to our customers, consisting primarily of home equity loans and savings account loans. Generally, consumer loans have shorter terms to maturity and higher interest rates than
one‑to‑four family residential loans. Consumer loans are offered with both fixed and adjustable interest rates and with varying terms. At December 31, 2020, consumer loans were $40.6 million, or 3.6% of the total loan portfolio.
At December 31, 2020, the largest component of the consumer loan portfolio consisted of purchased indirect consumer loans to finance classic and collectible cars with a balance of $29.4 million, or 72.3% of the total consumer loan portfolio. The Bank will lend up to 90% of the estimated value of the car. Due to the unique nature of these cars, the estimated value often does not align with listed values, therefore, approval of the loan purchase is based on the borrower’s ability to repay. These fixed rate loans typically have maturity periods of five to twelve years. The Bank intends to grow this portfolio of loans up to an internal limit of $40.0 million. Included in these loans are classic cars, defined as a vehicle in excess of 25 years old, and collectible cars, with a retail price in excess of $150,000. At December 31, 2020, our largest car loan was $592,000 and the average loan size was $81,000. For additional information regarding these loans see Item 1A. Risk Factors- “Risks Related to Our Lending - We engage in aircraft and classic or collectible car financing transactions, in which high-value collateral is susceptible to potential catastrophic loss. If any of these transactions becomes nonperforming, we could suffer a loss on some or all of our value in the assets.”
At December 31, 2020, home equity loans, primarily home equity lines of credit totaled $9.8 million, or 24.1% of the total consumer loan portfolio. The home equity lines of credit include $1.3 million of equity lines of credit in first lien position and $8.5 million of second liens on residential properties. At December 31, 2020, unfunded commitments on our home equity lines of credit totaled $15.5 million. Home equity loans are made for purposes such as the improvement of residential properties, debt consolidation and education expenses. At origination, the loan-to-value ratio is generally 90% or less, when taking into account both the balance of the home equity loans and the first mortgage loan. Home equity loans are originated on a fixed-rate or adjustable-rate basis. The interest rate for the adjustable-rate second lien loans is indexed to the prime rate published in The Wall Street Journal and may include a margin. Home equity loans generally have a 10 to 30- year term, with a 10- year draw period, and either convert to principal and interest payments with no further draws or require a balloon payment due at maturity.
Consumer loans entail greater risk than one-to-four family residential mortgage loans, particularly in the case of consumer loans that are unsecured or secured by rapidly depreciating assets. In these cases, any repossessed collateral for a defaulted consumer loan may not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance as a result of the greater likelihood of damage, loss or depreciation. The remaining deficiency often does not warrant further collection efforts against the borrower beyond obtaining a deficiency judgment. In addition, consumer loan collections are dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability and are more likely to be adversely affected by job loss, divorce, illness or personal bankruptcy. Furthermore, the application of various federal and state laws, including federal and state bankruptcy and insolvency laws, may limit the amount that can be recovered on these loans. Home equity lines of credit have greater credit risk than one-to-four family residential mortgage loans because they are generally secured by mortgages subordinated to the existing first mortgage on the property that we may or may not hold in our portfolio. We do not have private mortgage insurance coverage on these loans. Classic car loans have greater risk than other consumer loans primarily due to their high value which may fluctuate significantly. Adjustable-rate loans may experience a higher rate of default in a rising interest rate environment due to the increase in payment amounts when interest rates reset higher. If current economic conditions deteriorate for our borrowers and their home prices fall, we may also experience higher credit losses from this loan portfolio. For our home equity loans that are in a second lien position, it is unlikely that we will be successful in recovering our entire loan principal outstanding in the event of a default. At December 31, 2020, no consumer loans were in nonaccrual status. At that date, a $38,000 classic auto loan was delinquent between 30-59 days. During the year ended December 31, 2020, a $2,000 unsecured line of credit was charged off. For the years ended December 31, 2019, and 2018, there were no consumer loans charged-off.
Loan Maturity and Repricing. The following table sets forth certain information at December 31, 2020, regarding the amount of total loans in our portfolio based on their contractual terms to maturity, not including prepayments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within One Year
|
|
After One Year Through Three Years
|
|
After Three Years Through Five Years
|
|
After Five Years Through Ten Years
|
|
Beyond Ten Years
|
|
Total
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
9,892
|
|
|
$
|
4,903
|
|
|
$
|
1,830
|
|
|
$
|
14,002
|
|
|
$
|
351,333
|
|
|
$
|
381,960
|
|
Multifamily
|
5,067
|
|
|
7,017
|
|
|
21,529
|
|
|
61,782
|
|
|
41,299
|
|
|
136,694
|
|
Commercial
|
28,080
|
|
|
19,862
|
|
|
92,137
|
|
|
204,712
|
|
|
40,474
|
|
|
385,265
|
|
Construction/land
|
25,646
|
|
|
34,487
|
|
|
31,074
|
|
|
1,000
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
92,207
|
|
Total real estate
|
68,685
|
|
|
66,269
|
|
|
146,570
|
|
|
281,496
|
|
|
433,106
|
|
|
996,126
|
|
Business
|
21,537
|
|
|
48,024
|
|
|
5,325
|
|
|
5,777
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
80,663
|
|
Consumer
|
1,013
|
|
|
241
|
|
|
743
|
|
|
8,656
|
|
|
29,968
|
|
|
40,621
|
|
Total
|
$
|
91,235
|
|
|
$
|
114,534
|
|
|
$
|
152,638
|
|
|
$
|
295,929
|
|
|
$
|
463,074
|
|
|
$
|
1,117,410
|
|
The following table sets forth the amount of total loans due after December 31, 2021, with fixed or adjustable interest rates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-Rate
|
|
Adjustable-Rate
|
|
Total
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
167,620
|
|
|
$
|
204,448
|
|
|
$
|
372,068
|
|
Multifamily
|
42,267
|
|
|
89,360
|
|
|
131,627
|
|
Commercial
|
160,958
|
|
|
196,227
|
|
|
357,185
|
|
Construction/land
|
52,873
|
|
|
13,688
|
|
|
66,561
|
|
Total real estate
|
423,718
|
|
|
503,723
|
|
|
927,441
|
|
Business
|
58,188
|
|
|
938
|
|
|
59,126
|
|
Consumer
|
29,713
|
|
|
9,895
|
|
|
39,608
|
|
Total
|
$
|
511,619
|
|
|
$
|
514,556
|
|
|
$
|
1,026,175
|
|
Loan Solicitation and Processing. The majority of our consumer and residential mortgage loan originations are generated through the Bank and from time to time through outside brokers and correspondent relationships we have established with select mortgage companies or other financial institutions. We originate multifamily, commercial real estate, construction/land and business loans primarily using the Bank’s loan officers, with referrals coming from builders, brokers and existing customers.
Upon receipt of a loan application from a prospective borrower, we obtain a credit report and other data to verify specific information relating to the loan applicant’s employment, income, and credit standing. All real estate loans requiring an appraisal are done by an independent third-party appraiser. All appraisers are approved by us, and their credentials are reviewed annually, as is the quality of their appraisals.
We use a multi-level approval matrix which establishes lending targets and tolerance levels depending on the loan type being approved. The matrix also sets minimum credit standards and approval limits for each of the loan types.
Lending Authority. The Directors’ Loan Committee consists of at least three members of the Board of Directors. The Directors’ Loan Committee recommends for approval by the Board of Directors exceptions to the aggregate loan limit to one borrower of 15% of total risk-based capital, or $22.9 million at December 31, 2020. The Board of Directors approves exceptions to such aggregate loan limit to one borrower up to 20% of total risk-based capital, or $30.5 million at December 31, 2020.
Officer Lending Authority. Individual signing authority has been delegated to two lending officers. Our Senior Credit Approval Officer (“SCAO”) has authority from the Board of Directors to approve loans and aggregate relationships up to and including $8.0 million. The Board of Directors has given our Chief Credit Officer (“CCO”) authority to approve credit to one borrower not to exceed the legal lending limit of 20% of total risk-based capital.
Loan Originations, Servicing, Purchases, Sales and Repayments. For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, our total loan originations and purchases were $317.9 million, $396.8 million, and $370.8 million, respectively.
One-to-four family residential loans are generally originated in accordance with the guidelines established by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, with the exception of our special community development loans originated to satisfy compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act. Our loans are underwritten by designated real estate loan underwriters internally in accordance with standards as provided by our Board-approved loan policy. We require title insurance on all loans and fire and casualty insurance on all secured loans and home equity loans where real estate serves as collateral. Flood insurance is also required on all secured loans when the real estate is located in a flood zone.
The following table shows total loans originated, purchased, repaid and other changes during the years indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Loan originations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
107,609
|
|
|
$
|
91,811
|
|
|
$
|
119,946
|
|
Multifamily
|
27,873
|
|
|
39,967
|
|
|
8,363
|
|
Commercial
|
33,588
|
|
|
74,283
|
|
|
47,332
|
|
Construction/land
|
62,444
|
|
|
109,989
|
|
|
118,237
|
|
Total real estate
|
231,514
|
|
|
316,050
|
|
|
293,878
|
|
Business (2)
|
59,001
|
|
|
10,031
|
|
|
21,361
|
|
Consumer
|
5,308
|
|
|
24,325
|
|
|
14,524
|
|
Total loans originated
|
295,823
|
|
|
350,406
|
|
|
329,763
|
|
Loan purchases and participations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
1,467
|
|
|
653
|
|
|
1,230
|
|
Multifamily
|
—
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
3,705
|
|
Commercial
|
1,208
|
|
|
17,408
|
|
|
21,546
|
|
Construction/land
|
—
|
|
|
8,727
|
|
|
4,582
|
|
Business
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
Consumer
|
19,390
|
|
|
19,553
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total loan purchases and participations (1)
|
22,065
|
|
|
46,369
|
|
|
41,063
|
|
Principal repayments
|
(352,460)
|
|
|
(308,849)
|
|
|
(342,136)
|
|
Charge-offs
|
(2)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Loans transferred to other real estate owned (“OREO”)
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Change in LIP
|
29,746
|
|
|
(3,117)
|
|
|
6,045
|
|
Change in net deferred fees, and ALLL
|
(3,052)
|
|
|
749
|
|
|
(493)
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in loans
|
$
|
(7,880)
|
|
-7880000
|
$
|
85,558
|
|
|
$
|
34,242
|
|
_______________
(1) There were no loan participations in 2020. Totals include $8.4 million, and $21.2 million in loan participations during 2019, and 2018, respectively.
(2) Includes $52.1 million in PPP loans originated during 2020.
Loan Origination and Other Fees. In some instances, we receive loan origination fees on real estate-related products. Loan fees generally represent a percentage of the principal amount of the loan and are paid by the borrower. The amount of fees
charged to the borrower on one-to-four family residential loans and multifamily and commercial real estate loans can range from 0% to 2%. In addition to the 1.0% interest earned on PPP loans, the SBA pays processing fees for PPP loans of either 1%, 3%, or 5%, based on the size of the loan. Banks may not collect any fees from the loan applicants. United States generally accepted accounting principles require that certain fees received, net of certain origination costs, be deferred and amortized over the contractual life of the loan. Net deferred fees or costs associated with loans that are prepaid or sold are recognized in income at the time of prepayment or sale. We had $1.7 million and $558,000 of net deferred loan fees at December 31, 2020, and 2019, respectively.
Loan purchases generally include a premium, which is deferred and amortized into interest income with net deferred fees over the contractual life of the loan. During 2020, total premiums of $790,000, or 3.6% of the purchased principal, were paid on purchased loans. In comparison, premiums of $1.4 million, or 2.9% of the purchased principal were paid on purchased loans during 2019.
One-to-four family residential and consumer loans are generally originated without a prepayment penalty. The majority of our multifamily and commercial real estate loans, however, have prepayment penalties associated with the loans. Most of the multifamily and commercial real estate loan originations with interest rates fixed for the first five years will adjust thereafter and have a prepayment penalty of 2% - 3% of the principal balance in year one, with decreasing penalties in subsequent years. Longer initial fixed rate terms generally have correspondingly longer prepayment penalty periods.
Asset Quality
As of December 31, 2020, we had $2.7 million of loans past due 30 days or more. These loans represented 0.24% of total loans receivable. We generally assess late fees or penalty charges on delinquent loans of up to 5.0% of the monthly payment. The borrower is given up to a 15 day grace period from the due date to make the loan payment.
The Company actively manages delinquent loans and non-performing assets by aggressively pursuing the collection of debts and marketing saleable properties we foreclosed or repossessed, work-outs of classified assets and loan charge-offs. We handle collection procedures internally or with the assistance of outside legal counsel. Late charges are incurred when the loan exceeds 10 to 15 days past due depending upon the loan product. When a delinquent loan is identified, corrective action takes place immediately. The first course of action is to determine the cause of the delinquency and seek cooperation from the borrower in resolving the issue. Additional corrective action, if required, will vary depending on the borrower, the collateral, if any, and whether the loan requires specific handling procedures as required by the Washington State Deed of Trust Act.
If the borrower is chronically delinquent and all reasonable means of obtaining payments have been exhausted, we will seek to foreclose on the collateral securing the loan according to the terms of the security instrument and applicable law. The following table shows our delinquent loans by the type of loan and the number of days delinquent at December 31, 2020:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans Delinquent
|
|
Total
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
90 Days and Greater
|
|
Delinquent Loans
|
|
Number
of Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
|
|
Number
of Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
|
|
Number
of Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
One-to-four family residential:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owner occupied
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
Non-owner occupied
|
1
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
159
|
|
Multifamily
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2,104
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2,104
|
|
Total real estate
|
3
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2,104
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
2,340
|
|
Business
|
1
|
|
|
275
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
275
|
|
Consumer
|
1
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
38
|
|
Total
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
549
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
2,104
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
2,653
|
|
Construction/land, commercial real estate, and multifamily loans generally have larger individual loan amounts that have a greater single impact on asset quality in the event of delinquency or default. Loans that were modified in accordance with the CARES Act and related regulatory guidance are not considered delinquent at December 31, 2020. We continue to monitor our loan portfolio and believe additions to nonperforming loans, charge-offs, provisions for loan losses, and/or OREO
are possible in the future, particularly if the housing market and other economic conditions decline, including as a result of COVID-19.
The following table sets forth information with respect to our nonperforming assets and troubled debt restructured loans (“TDRs”) for the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Loans accounted for on a nonaccrual basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
$
|
382
|
|
|
$
|
128
|
|
|
$
|
798
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multifamily
|
|
2,104
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Consumer
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
60
|
|
Total loans accounted for on a nonaccrual basis
|
|
2,104
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
752
|
|
|
179
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming loans
|
|
2,104
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
752
|
|
|
179
|
|
|
858
|
|
OREO
|
|
454
|
|
|
454
|
|
|
483
|
|
|
483
|
|
|
2,331
|
|
Total nonperforming assets
|
|
$
|
2,558
|
|
|
$
|
549
|
|
|
$
|
1,235
|
|
|
$
|
662
|
|
|
$
|
3,189
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TDRs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual (1)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
174
|
|
Performing
|
|
3,869
|
|
|
5,246
|
|
|
9,399
|
|
|
17,805
|
|
|
30,083
|
|
Total TDRs
|
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
|
$
|
5,246
|
|
|
$
|
9,399
|
|
|
$
|
17,805
|
|
|
$
|
30,257
|
|
Nonperforming loans as a percent of total loans
|
|
0.19
|
%
|
|
0.01
|
%
|
|
0.07
|
%
|
|
0.02
|
%
|
|
0.10
|
%
|
Nonperforming loans as a percent of total assets
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
0.08
|
|
Nonperforming assets as a percent of total assets
|
|
0.18
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
0.10
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
0.31
|
|
Total loans
|
|
$
|
1,117,410
|
|
$
|
1,122,238
|
|
$
|
1,037,429
|
|
$
|
1,002,694
|
|
$
|
828,161
|
Foregone interest on nonaccrual loans
|
|
82
|
|
12
|
|
18
|
|
26
|
|
51
|
_______
(1) These loans are also included in the appropriate loan category above under the caption: “Loans accounted for on a nonaccrual basis.”
Nonperforming Loans. When a loan becomes 90 days past due, we generally place the loan on nonaccrual status unless the credit is well secured and in the process of collection. Loans may be placed on nonaccrual status prior to being 90 days past due if there is an identified problem such as an impending foreclosure or bankruptcy or if the borrower is unable to meet their scheduled payment obligations. We had one nonperforming loan of $2.1 million at December 31, 2020, as compared to $95,000 at December 31, 2019. This loan is currently in foreclosure, however, the process is on hold as there is a purchase and sale agreement on the underlying collateralized property, which is expected to close in March 2021. The Bank does not expect to incur a loss on this loan.
Other Real Estate Owned. Real estate acquired by us as a result of foreclosure or by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure is classified as OREO until it is sold. When the property is acquired, it is recorded at the lower of its cost or fair market value of the property, less selling costs. We had $454,000 of OREO at both December 31, 2020, and 2019, comprised of undeveloped lots. Our special assets department’s primary focus is the prompt and effective management of our troubled, nonperforming assets, and expediting their disposition to minimize any potential losses. During 2020 and 2019, we did not foreclose or accept deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure on any loans. In the future, we may experience foreclosure, deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, and short sale activity while we work with our nonperforming loan customers to minimize our loss exposure.
Because of our structure, we believe we are able to make decisions regarding offers on OREO and the real estate underlying our nonperforming loans very quickly compared to larger institutions where decisions could take six to twelve months. This distinction has historically worked to our benefit in reducing our nonperforming assets and disposing of OREO.
Troubled Debt Restructured Loans. We account for certain loan modifications or restructurings as TDRs. In general, the modification or restructuring of a debt is considered a TDR if, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties, we grant a concession to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. These loans are all considered to be impaired loans. At December 31, 2020, we had $3.9 million in TDRs as compared to $5.2 million at December 31, 2019. In late March 2020, the Bank announced loan modification programs to support and provide relief for its borrowers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Company has followed the CARES Act and interagency guidance from the federal banking agencies when determining if a borrower's modification is subject to TDR classification. Loans subject to payment forbearance under the Bank's COVID-19 loan modification program are not reported as delinquent or as a TDR during the forbearance time period. For additional information, see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – “COVID-19 Related Information,” and Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
The largest TDR relationship at December 31, 2020 was a $1.2 million commercial property located in King County. At December 31, 2020, there was no LIP in connection with our TDRs.
The following table summarizes our total TDRs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing TDRs:
|
|
|
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
2,627
|
|
|
$
|
3,979
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
1,242
|
|
|
1,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total performing TDRs
|
3,869
|
|
|
5,246
|
|
Total TDRs
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
|
$
|
5,246
|
|
Classified Assets. Federal regulations provide for the classification of lower quality loans and other assets as substandard, doubtful or loss. An asset is considered substandard if it is inadequately protected by the current net worth and payment capacity of the borrower or of any collateral pledged. Substandard assets include those characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected. Assets classified as doubtful have all the weaknesses inherent in those classified substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses present make collection or liquidation in full highly questionable and improbable, on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions and values. Assets classified as loss are those considered uncollectible and of such little value that their continuance as assets without the establishment of a specific loss reserve is not warranted.
When we classify problem assets as either substandard or doubtful, we may establish a specific allowance in an amount we deem prudent. General allowances represent loss allowances that have been established to recognize the inherent risk associated with lending activities, but unlike specific allowances, have not been specifically allocated to particular problem assets. When an insured institution classifies problem assets as a loss, it is required to charge-off those assets in the period in which they are deemed uncollectible. Our determinations as to the classification of our assets and the amount of our valuation allowances are subject to review by the FDIC and the DFI that can order the establishment of additional loss allowances or the charge-off of specific loans against established loss reserves. Assets that do not currently expose us to sufficient risk to warrant classification in one of the aforementioned categories but possess weaknesses are designated as special mention. At December 31, 2020, special mention loans totaled $16.5 million including a $15.9 million commercial real estate loan that was previously classified as a construction loan. The Bank is closely monitoring the loan, however, it is well collateralized and the Bank does not expect to incur a loss. At December 31, 2020, the loan was current on its payments and was in compliance with the original loan terms.
In connection with the filing of periodic reports with the FDIC and in accordance with our loan policy, we regularly review the problem loans in our portfolio to determine whether any loans require classification in accordance with applicable regulations. The increase in our classified loans during the year ended December 31, 2020 was primarily the result of a $2.1 million multifamily loan that is on nonaccrual status and is currently in foreclosure, however, the process is on hold pending the borrower’s sale of the underlying collateral on this loan.
Classified loans consisting solely of substandard loans, were as follows at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
(In thousands)
|
One-to-four family residential
|
$
|
527
|
|
|
$
|
629
|
|
Multifamily
|
2,104
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total classified loans
|
$
|
2,631
|
|
|
$
|
629
|
|
With the exception of these substandard loans, of which $2.1 million was accounted for as a nonaccrual loan at December 31, 2020, management is not aware of any loans as of December 31, 2020, where the known credit problems of the borrower would cause us to have serious doubts as to the ability of such borrowers to comply with their present loan repayment terms and which may result in the future inclusion of such loans in the nonperforming loan categories.
Allowance for Loan Losses. Management recognizes that loan losses may occur over the life of a loan and that the ALLL must be maintained at a level necessary to absorb specific losses on impaired loans and probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Management reviews the adequacy of the ALLL on a quarterly basis. Our methodology for analyzing the ALLL consists of two components: general and specific allowances. The general allowance is determined by applying factors to our various groups of loans. Management considers factors such as charge-off history, the prevailing economy, the borrower’s ability to repay, the regulatory environment, competition, geographic and loan type concentrations, policy and underwriting standards, nature and volume of the loan portfolio, managements’ experience level, our loan review and grading systems, the value of underlying collateral, and the level of problem loans in assessing the ALLL. The specific allowance component is created when management believes that the collectability of a specific loan has been impaired and a loss is probable. The specific reserves are computed using current appraisals, listed sales prices and other available information, less costs to complete, if any, and costs to sell the property. This evaluation is inherently subjective as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available or as future events differ from predictions. In addition, specific reserves may be created upon a loan’s restructuring, based on a discounted cash flow analysis comparing the present value of the anticipated repayments under the restructured terms to the outstanding principal balance of the loan. When determining the appropriate ALLL during 2020, management took into consideration the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on such factors as the national and state unemployment rates and related trends, the amount of and timing of financial assistance provided by the government, consumer spending levels and trends, industries significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, a review of the Bank's largest commercial loan relationships, and the Bank's COVID-19 loan modification program.
Based on this review, management increased historical loss factors and qualitative factors for all loan categories during the year ended December 31, 2020 and increased qualitative factors to the Bank's loan portfolio, due to deterioration of economic conditions as a result of the COVD-19 pandemic. The increase in the factors resulted in an increase in the allowance for loan losses during the current year. Management will continue to closely monitor economic conditions and will work with borrowers as necessary to assist them through this challenging economic climate. If economic conditions worsen or do not improve in the near term, and if future government programs, if any, do not provide adequate relief to borrowers, it is possible the Bank's ALLL will need to increase in future periods. Uncertainties relating to our ALLL are heightened as a result of the risks surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic as described in further detail in Item 1A. Risk Factors- “Risks Related to Macroeconomic Conditions-The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the way we conduct business which may adversely impact our financial results and those of our customers. The ultimate impact will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the scope and duration of the pandemic and actions taken by governmental authorities in response to the pandemic.”
Quarterly, our Board of Directors’ Internal Asset Review Committee reviews and recommends approval of the allowance for loan losses and any provision or recapture of provision for loan losses, and the full Board of Directors approves the provision or recapture after considering the Committee’s recommendation. The ALLL is increased by the provision for loan losses which is charged against current period earnings. If the analysis of our loan portfolio indicates the risk of loss is less than the balance of the ALLL, a recapture of provision of loan loss is added to current period earnings.
For the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded a $1.9 million provision for loan losses, as compared to a $300,000 recapture of provision for loan losses for the year ended December 31, 2019. The provision for loan losses in 2020 was primarily a result of the downgrade of $61.0 million of commercial real estate loans combined with increases in forecasted credit deterioration for all loan categories in response to the economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, with higher potential impact allocated to commercial real estate and construction/land portfolios. The $41.3 million balance of PPP
loans was omitted from the ALLL calculation at December 31, 2020, as these loans are fully guaranteed by the SBA and management expects that the great majority of PPP borrowers will seek full or partial forgiveness of their loan obligations from the SBA within a short time frame, which will in turn reimburse the Bank for the amount forgiven. In addition, the risk classification of loans totaling $61.0 million receiving additional COVID-19 related loan payment deferrals were downgraded during the year ended December 31, 2020. The majority of the downgrades were to a lower “pass” grade and therefore were not classified as potential problem loans. The ALLL was $15.2 million, or 1.36% of total loans at December 31, 2020, as compared to $13.2 million, or 1.18% at December 31, 2019. The level of the ALLL is based on estimates and the ultimate losses may vary from the estimates. Management reviews the adequacy of the ALLL on a quarterly basis.
A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable we will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due, according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value, market conditions, rent rolls, and the borrower’s and guarantor’s, if any, financial strength. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays and shortfalls on a case‑by‑case basis, taking into consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record and the amounts of the shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed. Loans are evaluated for impairment on a loan-by-loan basis. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, impaired loans were $21.4 million and $20.0 million, respectively. The increase in 2020 was primarily due to the $2.1 million multifamily loan placed on nonaccrual status during the year. At December 31, 2020, the loan was well collateralized and the Bank does not expect to incur a loss on this loan.
The following table summarizes the distribution of the ALLL by loan category, at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
Loan
Balance
|
|
Allowance
by Loan Category
|
|
Percent of Loans
to Total Loans
|
|
Loan
Balance
|
|
Allowance
by Loan Category
|
|
Percent of Loans
to Total Loans
|
|
Loan
Balance
|
|
Allowance
by Loan Category
|
|
Percent of Loans
to Total Loans
|
|
Loan
Balance
|
|
Allowance
by Loan Category
|
|
Percent of Loans
to Total Loans
|
|
Loan
Balance
|
|
Allowance
by Loan Category
|
|
Percent of Loans
to Total Loans
|
Real estate:
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
One-to-four family
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
residential
|
$
|
381,960
|
|
|
$
|
3,181
|
|
|
34.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
372,528
|
|
|
$
|
3,034
|
|
|
33.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
341,966
|
|
|
$
|
3,387
|
|
|
33.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
278,655
|
|
|
$
|
2,837
|
|
|
27.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
249,435
|
|
|
$
|
2,551
|
|
|
30.1
|
%
|
Multifamily
|
136,694
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
|
172,915
|
|
|
1,607
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
|
169,355
|
|
|
1,680
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
184,902
|
|
|
1,820
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
123,250
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
Commercial real
estate
|
385,265
|
|
|
6,127
|
|
|
34.5
|
|
|
395,152
|
|
|
4,559
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
373,798
|
|
|
4,777
|
|
|
36.0
|
|
|
361,299
|
|
|
4,418
|
|
|
36.0
|
|
|
303,694
|
|
|
3,893
|
|
|
36.7
|
|
Construction/land
|
92,207
|
|
|
2,189
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
113,665
|
|
|
2,222
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
108,854
|
|
|
2,331
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
145,618
|
|
|
2,816
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
136,922
|
|
|
2,792
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Total real estate
|
996,126
|
|
|
12,863
|
|
|
89.2
|
|
|
1,054,260
|
|
|
11,422
|
|
|
93.9
|
|
|
993,973
|
|
|
12,175
|
|
|
95.8
|
|
|
970,474
|
|
|
11,891
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
813,301
|
|
|
10,435
|
|
|
98.2
|
|
Business
|
80,663
|
|
|
1,242
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
37,779
|
|
|
1,140
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
30,486
|
|
|
936
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
23,087
|
|
|
694
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
7,938
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Consumer
|
40,621
|
|
|
1,069
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
30,199
|
|
|
656
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
12,970
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
9,133
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
6,922
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Total
|
$
|
1,117,410
|
|
|
$
|
15,174
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,122,238
|
|
|
$
|
13,218
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,037,429
|
|
|
$
|
13,347
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,002,694
|
|
|
$
|
12,882
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
828,161
|
|
|
$
|
10,951
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Based on its comprehensive analysis, management believes that the ALLL as of December 31, 2020 was adequate to absorb the probable and inherent losses in the loan portfolio at that date. While we believe the estimates and assumptions used in our determination of the adequacy of the ALLL are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such estimates and assumptions will be proven correct in the future, or that the actual amount of future provisions will not exceed the amount of past provisions, or that any increased provisions that may be required will not adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations. Future additions to the ALLL may become necessary based upon changing economic conditions, the level of problem loans, business conditions, credit concentrations, increased loan balances or changes in the underlying collateral of the loan portfolio. In addition, the determination of the amount of the ALLL is subject to review by bank regulators as part of the routine examination process that may result in the establishment of additional loss reserves or the charge-off of specific loans against established loss reserves based upon their judgment of information available to them at the time of their examination. A further decline in national and local economic conditions, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic or other factors, could result in a material increase in the allowance for loan losses and may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.
The following table sets forth an analysis of our ALLL at the dates and for the years indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At or For the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
ALLL at beginning of period
|
$
|
13,218
|
|
|
$
|
13,347
|
|
|
$
|
12,882
|
|
|
$
|
10,951
|
|
|
$
|
9,463
|
|
Provision (recapture of provision) for loan losses
|
1,900
|
|
|
(300)
|
|
|
(4,000)
|
|
|
(400)
|
|
|
1,300
|
|
Charge-offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer
|
(2)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(83)
|
|
Total charge-offs
|
(2)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(83)
|
|
Total recoveries
|
58
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
4,465
|
|
|
2,331
|
|
|
271
|
|
Net recoveries (charge-offs)
|
56
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
4,465
|
|
|
2,331
|
|
|
188
|
|
ALLL at end of period
|
$
|
15,174
|
|
|
$
|
13,218
|
|
|
$
|
13,347
|
|
|
$
|
12,882
|
|
|
$
|
10,951
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ALLL as a percent of total loans
|
1.36
|
%
|
|
1.18
|
%
|
|
1.29
|
%
|
|
1.28
|
%
|
|
1.32
|
%
|
Net recoveries to average loans receivable
|
—
|
%
|
|
(0.02)
|
%
|
|
(0.45)
|
%
|
|
(0.27)
|
%
|
|
(0.02)
|
%
|
ALLL as a percent of nonperforming loans
|
721.17
|
%
|
|
13,913.68
|
%
|
|
1,774.87
|
%
|
|
7,196.65
|
%
|
|
1,276.34
|
%
|
Investment Activities
General. Under Washington State law, commercial banks are permitted to invest in various types of liquid assets, including U.S. Treasury obligations, securities of various federal agencies, certain certificates of deposit of insured banks and savings institutions, banker’s acceptances, repurchase agreements, federal funds, commercial paper, investment grade corporate debt securities, and obligations of states and their political sub-divisions.
The Investment, Asset/Liability Committee (“ALCO”), consisting of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Controller of First Financial Northwest Bank, other members of management and the Board of Directors, has the authority and responsibility to administer our investment policy, monitor portfolio strategies, and recommend appropriate changes to policy and strategies to the Board of Directors. On a monthly basis, management reports to the Board a summary of investment holdings with respective market values and all purchases and sales of investment securities. The Chief Financial Officer has the primary responsibility for the management of the investment portfolio and considers various factors when making decisions, including the marketability, maturity, liquidity, and tax consequences of proposed investments. The maturity structure of investments will be affected by various market conditions, including the current and anticipated slope of the yield curve, the level of interest rates, the trend of new deposit inflows, and the anticipated demand for funds via deposit withdrawals and loan originations and purchases.
The general objectives of the investment portfolio are to provide liquidity when loan demand is high, to assist in maintaining earnings when loan demand is low, and to maximize earnings while satisfactorily managing risk, including credit risk, reinvestment risk, liquidity risk and interest rate risk.
At December 31, 2020, our investment portfolio consisted principally of mortgage-backed securities, municipal bonds, U.S. government agency obligations, and corporate bonds. From time to time, investment levels may increase or decrease depending upon yields available on investment opportunities and management’s projected demand for funds for loan originations, net deposit flows, and other activities. At December 31, 2020, we did not hold securities of any single issuer (other than government-sponsored entities) that exceeded 10% of our shareholders’ equity. At December 31, 2020, the Bank held three annuity contracts, totaling $2.4 million, as held-to-maturity investments. These annuity contracts were purchased to satisfy the benefit obligation associated with certain supplemental executive retirement plan agreements. At December 31, 2019, and 2018, there were no investments held to maturity.
Mortgage-Backed Securities. The mortgage-backed securities in our portfolio were primarily comprised of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae issued mortgage-backed securities. These issuers guarantee the timely payment of principal and interest in the event of default. In addition, at December 31, 2020, our mortgage-backed securities included $10.7 million of other “private label” mortgage-backed securities. The mortgage-backed securities portfolio had a weighted-average yield of 2.69% at December 31, 2020.
U.S. Government Agency Obligations. The agency securities in our portfolio were comprised of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, SBA and FHLB agency securities. These issuers guarantee the timely payment of principal and interest in the event of default. At December 31, 2020, the portfolio of government agency securities had a weighted-average yield of 1.44%.
The guarantees of the SBA, as a U.S. government agency and Ginnie Mae, as part of a U.S. government agency are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks are U.S. government-sponsored entities. Although their guarantees are not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, they may borrow from the U.S. Treasury, which has taken other steps to ensure these U.S. government-sponsored entities can fulfill their financial obligations.
Corporate Bonds. The corporate bond portfolio was primarily comprised of variable rate securities issued by various financial institutions. At December 31, 2020, the corporate bond portfolio had a weighted-average yield of 5.70%.
Municipal Bonds. The municipal bond portfolio is comprised of taxable and tax-exempt municipal bonds. The pre-tax weighted-average yield on the municipal bond portfolio was 2.56% at December 31, 2020.
Federal Home Loan Bank Stock. As a member of the FHLB Des Moines, we are required to own capital stock. The required amount of capital stock is based on a percentage of our previous year-end assets and our outstanding FHLB advances. The redemption of any excess stock we hold is at the discretion of the FHLB Des Moines. During 2020, our FHLB of Des Moines stock holdings decreased by $599,000, primarily as a result of the $17.7 million decrease in our FHLB advances during 2020. The carrying value of our FHLB of Des Moines stock totaled $6.4 million at December 31, 2020. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we received FHLB of Des Moines cash dividends of $320,000 and $362,000, respectively.
The following table sets forth the composition of our investment securities available-for-sale at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
Amortized
Cost
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Amortized
Cost
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fannie Mae
|
$
|
12,797
|
|
|
$
|
13,288
|
|
|
$
|
15,605
|
|
|
$
|
15,629
|
|
|
$
|
24,276
|
|
|
$
|
23,643
|
|
Freddie Mac
|
4,116
|
|
|
4,316
|
|
|
4,196
|
|
|
4,292
|
|
|
6,351
|
|
|
6,287
|
|
Ginnie Mae
|
16,513
|
|
|
17,127
|
|
|
23,239
|
|
|
23,050
|
|
|
23,311
|
|
|
22,061
|
|
Other
|
10,691
|
|
|
10,729
|
|
|
11,407
|
|
|
11,448
|
|
|
8,983
|
|
|
8,979
|
|
Municipal bonds
|
16,483
|
|
|
17,446
|
|
|
10,675
|
|
|
10,911
|
|
|
10,615
|
|
|
10,544
|
|
U.S. government agencies
|
41,084
|
|
|
40,635
|
|
|
46,672
|
|
|
45,750
|
|
|
48,190
|
|
|
47,438
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
24,001
|
|
|
24,010
|
|
|
25,500
|
|
|
25,521
|
|
|
23,490
|
|
|
23,218
|
|
Total available-for-sale
|
$
|
125,685
|
|
|
$
|
127,551
|
|
|
$
|
137,294
|
|
|
$
|
136,601
|
|
|
145,216
|
|
|
142,170
|
|
During the year ended December 31, 2020, gross proceeds from the call, maturity and sale of investments was $12.1 million, with net realized gains of $86,000.
Management reviews investment securities on an ongoing basis for the presence of other than temporary impairment (“OTTI”) or permanent impairment, taking into consideration current market conditions, fair value in relationship to cost, extent and nature of the change in fair value, issuer rating changes and trends, whether management intends to sell a security or if it is likely that we will be required to sell the security before recovery of the amortized cost basis of the investment, which may be maturity, and other factors. For debt securities, if management intends to sell the security or it is likely that we will be required to sell the security before recovering its cost basis, the entire impairment loss would be recognized in earnings as an OTTI. If management does not intend to sell the security and it is not likely that we will be required to sell the security, but management does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security, only the portion of the impairment loss representing credit losses would be recognized in earnings. The credit loss on a security is measured as the difference between the amortized cost basis and the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected. Projected cash flows are discounted by the original or current effective interest rate, depending on the nature of the security being measured for potential OTTI. The remaining impairment related to all other factors, the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and fair value, is recognized as a charge to other comprehensive income (loss). Impairment losses related to all other factors are presented as separate categories within other comprehensive income (loss). There were no losses related to OTTI at December 31, 2020 and 2019. For additional information regarding our investments, see Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
The table below sets forth information regarding the carrying value and weighted-average yield by contractual maturity of our investment portfolio at December 31, 2020. Mortgage-backed securities are presented in the totals column as a result of the variable nature of their principal reductions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2020
|
|
Within One Year
|
|
After One Year
Through Five Years
|
|
After Five
Through Ten Years
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
Totals
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Yield
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Yield
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Yield
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Yield
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Yield
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
45,460
|
|
|
2.69
|
%
|
Municipal bonds
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1,947
|
|
|
2.47
|
|
|
15,499
|
|
|
2.57
|
|
|
17,446
|
|
|
2.56
|
|
U.S. government agencies
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
496
|
|
|
8.24
|
|
|
2,907
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
37,232
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
40,635
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
8,409
|
|
|
2.55
|
|
|
13,615
|
|
|
4.65
|
|
|
1,986
|
|
|
1.96
|
|
|
24,010
|
|
|
5.70
|
|
Total available-for-sale
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,905
|
|
|
7.93
|
%
|
|
$
|
18,469
|
|
|
3.92
|
%
|
|
$
|
54,717
|
|
|
1.76
|
%
|
|
$
|
127,551
|
|
|
2.86
|
%
|
Deposit Activities and Other Sources of Funds
General. Deposits and loan repayments are the major sources of our funds for lending and other investment purposes. Scheduled loan repayments are a relatively stable source of funds, while deposit inflows and outflows and loan prepayments are influenced significantly by general interest rates and market conditions. Borrowings from the FHLB are used to supplement the availability of funds from other sources and also as a source of term funds to assist in the management of interest rate risk.
Our deposit composition reflects a mixture of various deposit products. We rely on marketing activities, customer service, and the availability of a broad range of products and services to attract and retain customer deposits.
Deposits. We offer a competitive range of deposit products within our market area, including noninterest bearing accounts, interest-bearing demand accounts, money market accounts, statement savings accounts, and certificates of deposit. Deposit account terms vary according to the minimum balance required, the time periods the funds must remain on deposit, and the interest rate, among other factors. In determining the terms of our deposit accounts, we consider the development of long-term profitable customer relationships, current market interest rates, current maturity structures, deposit mix, our customer preferences, and the profitability of acquiring customer deposits compared to alternative funding sources. As part of our strategy to shift our deposit mix to lower cost funds, we continued to better align our pricing with competitors in our local market to meet our goals. To supplement local deposits, funds are also generated as needed through national brokered certificates of deposit. The Bank’s portfolio of brokered certificates of deposits were reduced to zero at December 31, 2020, from $94.5 million at December 31, 2019. Continued growth in retail deposits with our expanded branch network allowed the Bank to reduce brokered deposits upon maturity as a source of funds. In addition, $24.5 million of callable brokered certificates of deposit were redeemed early. In the future, the Bank may utilize brokered deposits again to supplement our retail deposits and assist in our interest rate risk management efforts.
The following table sets forth our total deposit activity for the years indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Total deposits, beginning balance
|
$
|
1,033,534
|
|
|
$
|
939,032
|
|
|
$
|
839,502
|
|
Increase in retail deposits
|
154,571
|
|
|
97,855
|
|
|
77,193
|
|
(Decrease) increase in brokered funds
|
(94,472)
|
|
|
(3,353)
|
|
|
22,337
|
|
Net increase in deposits
|
60,099
|
|
|
94,502
|
|
|
99,530
|
|
Total deposits, ending balance
|
$
|
1,093,633
|
|
|
$
|
1,033,534
|
|
|
$
|
939,032
|
|
At December 31, 2020, deposits totaled $1.1 billion. We had $345.0 million of jumbo (greater than or equal to $100,000) certificates of deposit, which were 31.5% of total deposits at December 31, 2020. Of these jumbo deposits, $135.6 million were greater than or equal to $250,000. At that date, included in the jumbo certificates of deposit, were public funds totaling $31.7 million, or 2.9% of total deposits, of which $30.6 million was in excess of the $250,000 standard FDIC insurance coverage. Under Washington State law, in order to participate in the public funds program, we are required to pledge eligible securities of a minimum of 50% of the public deposits in excess of $250,000.
The following table sets forth information regarding our certificates of deposit and other deposits at December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average Interest Rate
|
|
Term
|
|
Category
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percentage
of Total
Deposits
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
—
|
%
|
|
N/A
|
|
Noninterest bearing demand deposits
|
|
$
|
91,285
|
|
|
8.3
|
%
|
0.06
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Interest-bearing demand
|
|
108,182
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Statement savings
|
|
19,221
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
0.37
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Money market
|
|
465,369
|
|
|
42.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit, retail
|
|
|
|
|
1.28
|
|
|
Three months or less
|
|
|
|
1,322
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
0.60
|
|
|
Over three through six months
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
—
|
|
0.47
|
|
|
Over six through twelve months
|
|
|
|
57,739
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
2.27
|
|
|
Over twelve months
|
|
|
|
350,217
|
|
|
32.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail certificates of deposit, fair value adjustment
|
|
(12)
|
|
|
—
|
|
2.01
|
|
|
|
|
Total certificates of deposit, retail
|
|
409,576
|
|
|
37.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits
|
|
$
|
1,093,633
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Certificates of Deposit. The following table sets forth the amount and maturities of certificates of deposit at December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within
One Year
|
|
After One Year Through Two Years
|
|
After Two Years Through Three Years
|
|
After Three Years Through Four Years
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
Total
|
|
(In thousands)
|
0.00 - 1.00%
|
$
|
69,326
|
|
|
$
|
13,289
|
|
|
$
|
7,821
|
|
|
$
|
2,794
|
|
|
$
|
352
|
|
|
$
|
93,582
|
|
1.01 - 2.00%
|
64,426
|
|
|
12,700
|
|
|
4,575
|
|
|
3,206
|
|
|
1,238
|
|
|
86,145
|
|
2.01 - 3.00%
|
123,519
|
|
|
29,257
|
|
|
16,378
|
|
|
11,579
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
180,733
|
|
3.01 - 4.00%
|
10,359
|
|
|
8,045
|
|
|
29,781
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
49,128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail certificates
of deposit, fair
value adjustment
|
(9)
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(12)
|
|
Total
|
$
|
267,621
|
|
|
$
|
63,288
|
|
|
$
|
58,555
|
|
|
$
|
18,522
|
|
|
$
|
1,590
|
|
|
$
|
409,576
|
|
The following table sets forth the amount of our jumbo certificates of deposit by remaining maturity as of December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity Period
|
|
Certificates of Deposit
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
Three months or less
|
|
$
|
73,991
|
|
Over three months through six months
|
|
70,851
|
|
Over six months through twelve months
|
|
84,607
|
|
Over twelve months
|
|
115,587
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
345,036
|
|
Deposits by Type. The following table sets forth the deposit balances by the types of accounts we offered at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent of Total
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent of Total
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent of Total
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Noninterest bearing
|
$
|
91,285
|
|
|
8.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
52,849
|
|
|
5.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
46,108
|
|
|
4.9
|
%
|
Interest-bearing demand
|
108,182
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
65,897
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
40,079
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Statement savings
|
19,221
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
17,447
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
24,799
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
Money market
|
465,369
|
|
|
42.5
|
|
|
377,766
|
|
|
36.6
|
|
|
339,047
|
|
|
36.1
|
|
Certificates of deposit, retail:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00 - 1.00%
|
93,582
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
7,428
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
15,790
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
1.01 - 2.00%
|
86,145
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
131,252
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
191,294
|
|
|
20.4
|
|
2.01 - 3.00%
|
180,733
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
|
230,405
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
131,328
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
3.01 - 4.00%
|
49,128
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
56,046
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
52,820
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail certificates of deposit, fair value adjustment
|
(12)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(28)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(58)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total certificates of deposit, retail
|
409,576
|
|
|
37.5
|
|
|
425,103
|
|
|
41.1
|
|
|
391,174
|
|
|
41.7
|
|
Certificates of deposit, brokered
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00 - 1.00%
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
—
|
|
1.01 - 2.00%
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
70,510
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
43,221
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
2.01 - 3.00%
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
23,962
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
45,835
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
3.01 - 4.00%
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
8,648
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Total certificates of deposit, brokered
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
94,472
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
97,825
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Total deposits
|
$
|
1,093,633
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,033,534
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
939,032
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Borrowings. Customer deposits are the primary source of funds for our lending and investment activities. We use advances from the FHLB and to a lesser extent federal funds (“Fed Funds”) purchased to supplement our supply of lendable funds, to meet short-term deposit withdrawal requirements and to provide longer term funding to assist in the management of our interest rate risk by matching the duration of selected loan and investment maturities.
As a member of the FHLB, we are required to own capital stock in the FHLB and are authorized to apply for advances on the security of that stock and certain of our mortgage loans, provided that certain creditworthiness standards have been met. Advances are individually made under various terms pursuant to several different credit programs, each with its own interest rate and range of maturities. Depending on the program, limitations on the amount of advances are based on the financial condition of the member institution and the adequacy of collateral pledged to secure the credit. We maintain a credit facility with the FHLB that provides for immediately available advances, subject to acceptable collateral. At December 31, 2020, our remaining FHLB credit capacity was $494.4 million and outstanding advances from the FHLB totaled $120.0 million. In addition, at December 31, 2020, we had supplemental funding sources of $82.2 million available at the FRB and $75.0 million available between two other financial institutions.
The following table sets forth information regarding FHLB advances at the end of and during the years indicated. The table includes both long- and short-term borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At or for the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Maximum amount of borrowings outstanding at any month end
|
$
|
160,000
|
|
|
$
|
184,500
|
|
|
$
|
224,000
|
|
Average borrowings outstanding
|
125,392
|
|
|
129,899
|
|
|
183,667
|
|
Average rate paid during the year
|
1.31
|
%
|
|
2.09
|
%
|
|
1.92
|
%
|
Balance outstanding at end of the year
|
$
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
137,700
|
|
|
$
|
146,500
|
|
Weighted-average rate paid at end of the year
|
0.36
|
%
|
|
1.84
|
%
|
|
2.62
|
%
|
Other than our utilization of interest rate swaps, we do not currently participate in other hedging programs, stand-alone contracts for interest rate caps or floors or other activities involving the use of off-balance sheet derivative financial instruments, however, these options are evaluated on occasion. As of December 31, 2020, we had six interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional amount of $120.0 million and a fair value loss of $2.9 million. In addition, during 2020, the Company entered into two forward-starting swap agreements to commence in October 2021 with an aggregate notional amount of $25.0 million and a fair value at December 31, 2020 of $64,000. For additional information, see Item 1A. Risk Factors -“Risks Related to Market and Interest Rate Changes - If the interest rate swaps we entered into prove ineffective, it could result in volatility in our operating results, including potential loses, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows,” Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Asset and Liability Management,” and Note 10 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
Subsidiaries and Other Activities
First Financial Northwest, Inc. First Financial Northwest has two wholly-owned subsidiaries, First Financial Northwest Bank and First Financial Diversified Corporation. First Financial Diversified previously held a small portfolio of loans. Subsequent to these loans paying off in 2019, the company had minimal activity.
First Financial Northwest Bank. First Financial Northwest Bank is a community-based commercial bank. The Bank primarily serves the greater Puget Sound region of King and to a lesser extent, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap Counties, Washington through our full-service banking office in Renton, Washington and thirteen additional branches in King, Pierce and Snohomish Counties, Washington. In addition, the Bank opened a new branch office in Issaquah, Washington in March 2021. We are in the business of attracting deposits from the public and utilizing those deposits to originate loans.
Competition
The Bank operates in the highly competitive Puget Sound region of Western Washington. We face competition in originating loans and attracting deposits within our geographic market area. The competitive environment is impacted by changes in the regulatory environment, technology and product delivery systems as well as consolidation in the industry creating larger, more diversified competitors. We compete by consistently delivering high-quality personal service to our customers seeking to achieve a high level of customer satisfaction.
The Bank attracts deposits primarily through its branch office system. The competition is primarily from commercial banks, savings institutions and credit unions in the same geographic area. Based on the most current FDIC market share data dated June 30, 2020, the top five banks in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metropolitan statistical area (comprised of Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, US Bancorp and KeyBank) controlled 72% of the deposit market. In addition to the FDIC insured competitors, credit unions, insurance companies and brokerage firms also compete for consumer deposit relationships. According to FDIC statistical data, the Bank’s share of aggregate deposits in the market area is less than 1%.
Our competition for loans comes principally from commercial banks, mortgage brokers, thrift institutions, credit unions and finance companies. Several other financial institutions compete with us for banking business in our market area. These institutions have substantially more resources than the Bank and, as a result, are able to offer a broader range of services, such as trust departments and enhanced retail services. Among the advantages of some of these institutions are their ability to make larger loans, initiate extensive advertising campaigns, access lower cost funding sources, and allocate their investable assets in regions of highest yield and demand. The challenges posed by such large competitors may impact our ability to originate loans secure low cost deposits and establish product pricing levels that support our net interest margin goals that may limit our future growth and earnings potential.
Human Capital
First Financial Northwest Bank continually strives to recruit the most talented, motivated employees in their respective fields. By providing opportunities for personal and professional growth plus an environment that values teamwork and work-life balance, we are able to attract and retain outstanding individuals. We pride ourselves on providing excellent benefits, competitive salaries and the opportunity for participation in the company's long-term success.
Workforce. At December 31, 2020, we had 151 full-time employees. Our employees are not represented by any collective bargaining group. First Financial Northwest Bank is committed to providing equality of opportunity in all aspects of employment through a comprehensive affirmative action plan that is updated annually.
The following chart depicts the percentage of self-identified females and minorities in our workforce at December 31, 2020, by job classification as defined by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Female
|
|
Minority
|
|
Distribution by EEOC Job Classification
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive / Senior level officers
|
|
35.7
|
%
|
|
28.6
|
%
|
|
9.3
|
%
|
Mid-level officers and managers
|
|
62.2
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
30.0
|
|
Professionals
|
|
56.7
|
|
|
26.7
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
Sales workers
|
|
40.0
|
|
|
44.4
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
Administrative support
|
|
80.4
|
|
|
42.6
|
|
|
34.0
|
|
Total
|
|
64.7
|
%
|
|
33.1
|
%
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Benefits. The Company provides competitive comprehensive benefits to employees. The Company values the health and well-being of its employees and strives to provide programs to support this. Benefit programs available to eligible employees may include 401(k) savings plan, employee stock ownership plan, health and life insurance, employee assistance program, paid holidays, paid time off, and other leave as applicable.
Response to COVID-19 pandemic. As an essential business, the Company responded quickly to implement procedures to assist employees in navigating the challenging impact from the pandemic, as well as protect the safety of both employees and customers. In response to Washington State’s stay at home order, the Company moved eligible positions to remote work status. Safety measures were promptly implemented to protect employees working on site, which included installation of protective partitions and fully equipping locations with personal safety supplies. Employees who experienced a reduction in hours due to reduced branch operating hours continued to receive their full pay. Additional sick time was authorized for employees impacted directly by the COVID-19 virus. As Washington state mandates change, the Company will continue to make adjustments to support employees and prioritize employee safety.
Training and education. The Company recognizes that the skills and knowledge of its employees are critical to the success of the organization, and promotes training and continuing education as an ongoing function for employees. The Bank’s compliance training program provides annual training courses to assure that all employees and officers know the rules applicable to their jobs.
How We Are Regulated
The following is a brief description of certain laws and regulations that are applicable to First Financial Northwest and First Financial Northwest Bank. On March 31, 2015, First Financial Northwest converted from a registered savings and loan holding company to a bank holding company. As a bank holding company, First Financial Northwest is subject to examination and supervision by, and is required to file certain reports with the FRB. First Financial Northwest also is subject to the rules and regulations of the SEC under the federal securities laws. First Financial Northwest Bank, which changed its charter from a Washington-chartered savings bank to a Washington-chartered commercial bank effective on February 11, 2016, is subject to regulation and oversight by the DFI, the applicable provisions of Washington law and by the regulations of the DFI adopted thereunder. First Financial Northwest Bank also is subject to regulation and examination by the FDIC, which insures its deposits to the maximum extent permitted by law.
The laws and regulations governing us may be amended from time to time by the relevant legislative bodies and regulators. Any such legislative action or regulatory changes in the future could adversely affect us. We cannot predict whether any such changes may occur.
Regulation and Supervision of First Financial Northwest Bank
General. As a state-chartered commercial bank, First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to applicable provisions of Washington state law and regulations of the DFI in addition to federal law and regulations of the FDIC applicable to state banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System. State law and regulations govern First Financial Northwest Bank’s ability to take deposits and pay interest, to make loans on or invest in residential and other real estate, to make consumer loans, to invest in securities, to offer various banking services to its customers and to establish branch offices. Under state law, commercial banks in Washington also generally have all of the powers that federal commercial banks have under federal laws and regulations. First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to periodic examination by and reporting requirements of the DFI.
Insurance of Accounts and Regulation by the FDIC. First Financial Northwest Bank’s deposits are insured up to $250,000 per separately insured deposit ownership right or category by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC. As insurer, the FDIC imposes deposit insurance premiums and is authorized to conduct examinations of, and to require reporting by, FDIC-insured institutions. The FDIC also may prohibit any insured institution from engaging in any activity the FDIC determines by regulation or order to pose a serious risk to the DIF. The FDIC also has the authority to initiate enforcement actions against commercial institutions and may terminate the deposit insurance if it determines that the institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices or is in an unsafe or unsound condition.
Under the FDIC’s rules, the assessment base for a bank is equal to its total average consolidated assets less average tangible equity capital. Currently, the FDIC’s base assessment rates are 3 to 30 basis points and are subject to certain adjustments. For institutions with less than $10 billion in assets, rates are determined based on supervisory ratings and certain financial ratios. No institution may pay a dividend if it is in default on its federal deposit insurance assessment. The FDIC has authority to increase insurance assessments, and any significant increases may have an adverse effect on the operating expenses and results of operations of the Company. Management cannot predict what assessment rates will be in the future. In a banking industry emergency, the FDIC may also impose a special assessment.
The FDIC announced that the DIF reserve ratio surpassed 1.35% as of September 30, 2018 which triggered two changes under the regulations: surcharges on large banks (total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more) ended and small banks (total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion, which includes the Bank) were awarded assessment credits for the portion of their assessments that contributed to the growth in the reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35% to be applied when the reserve ratio is at least 1.35%. The Bank applied the $282,000 small bank credits received to its quarterly deposit insurance assessments paid during 2019, reducing the Bank’s FDIC expense for the year to $307,000. The Bank paid $561,000 in FDIC assessments for the year ending December 31, 2020.
As insurer, the FDIC is authorized to conduct examinations of and to require reporting by FDIC-insured institutions. It also may prohibit any FDIC-insured institution from engaging in any activity the FDIC determines by regulation or order to pose a serious threat to the DIF. The FDIC also has the authority to take enforcement actions against banks and savings associations. Management is not aware of any existing circumstances which would result in termination of the Bank's deposit insurance.
Standards for Safety and Soundness. The federal banking regulatory agencies have prescribed, by regulation, guidelines for all insured depository institutions relating to: internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings and compensation, fees and benefits. The guidelines set forth the safety and soundness standards that the federal banking agencies use to identify and address problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. Each insured depository institution must implement a comprehensive written information security program that includes administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the institution’s size and complexity and the nature and scope of its activities. The information security program also must be designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, protect against any unanticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information, protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer and ensure the proper disposal of customer and consumer information. Each insured depository institution must also develop and implement a risk-based response program to address incidents of unauthorized access to customer information in customer information systems. If the FDIC determines that an institution fails to meet any of these guidelines, it may require an institution to submit to the FDIC an
acceptable plan to achieve compliance. We are not aware of any conditions relating to these safety and soundness standards that would require submission of a plan of compliance by First Financial Northwest Bank.
Capital Requirements. Federally insured financial institutions, such as First Financial Northwest Bank, and their holding companies, are required to maintain a minimum level of regulatory capital.
First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to capital regulations adopted by the FDIC, which establish minimum required ratios for common equity Tier 1 capital (“CET1”), Tier 1 capital and total capital, and the leverage ratio; set out risk-weights for assets and certain off-balance sheet items for purposes of the risk-based capital ratios, require an additional capital conservation buffer over the minimum risk-based ratios’ and define what qualifies as capital for purposes of meeting the capital requirements. Consolidated regulatory capital requirements identical to those applicable to subsidiary banks generally apply to bank holding companies. However, the Federal Reserve Board has provided a “Small Bank Holding Company” exception to its consolidated capital requirements, and bank holding companies with less than $3.0 billion of consolidated assets are not subject to the consolidated holding company capital requirements unless otherwise directed by the Federal Reserve Board.
Under the capital regulations, the minimum capital ratios are: (1) a CET1 capital ratio of 4.5% of risk-weighted assets; (2) a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.0% of risk-weighted assets; (3) a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% of risk-weighted assets; and (4) a leverage ratio (the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average total adjusted assets) of 4.0%. CET1 generally consists of common stock, retained earnings, accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) unless an institution has elected to exclude AOCI from regulatory capital, and certain minority interests, all subject to applicable regulatory adjustments and deductions. Tier 1 capital generally consists of CET1 and noncumulative perpetual preferred stock. Tier 2 capital generally consists of other preferred stock and subordinated debt meeting certain conditions plus an amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses up to 1.25% of assets. Total capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital.
Mortgage servicing assets and deferred tax assets over designated percentages of CET1 are deducted from capital. In addition, Tier 1 capital includes AOCI, which includes all unrealized gains and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities. However, because of our asset size, we were eligible for the one-time option of permanently opting out of the inclusion of unrealized gains and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities in our capital calculations. We elected this option in the first quarter of 2015.
For purposes of determining risk-based capital, assets and certain off-balance sheet items are risk-weighted from 0% to 1,250%, depending on the risk characteristics of the asset or item. These risk weights include, for example, a 150% risk weight for certain high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans and for non‑residential mortgage loans that are 90 days past due or otherwise in nonaccrual status; and a 20% credit conversion factor for the unused portion of a commitment with an original maturity of one year or less that is not unconditionally cancellable.
In addition to the minimum CET1, Tier 1, and total capital ratios, the capital regulations require a capital conservation buffer consisting of additional CET1 capital greater than 2.5% of risk-weighted assets above the required minimum levels in order to avoid limitations on paying dividends, engaging in share repurchases, and paying discretionary bonuses.
To be considered “well capitalized,” a depository institution must have a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 8%, a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%, a CET1 capital ratio of at least 6.5% and a leverage ratio of at least 5%, and not be subject to an individualized order, directive or agreement under which its primary federal banking regulator requires it to maintain a specific capital level. As of December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest Bank met the requirements to be “well capitalized” and met the fully phased-in capital conservation buffer requirement.
The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act (“EGRRCPA”), enacted in May 2018, required the federal banking agencies, including the FDIC, to establish for institutions with assets of less than $10 billion a “community bank leverage ratio” of between 8 to 10%. Institutions with capital meeting or exceeding the ratio and otherwise complying with the specified requirements (including off-balance sheet exposures of 25% or less of total assets and trading assets and liabilities of 5% or less of total assets) and electing the alternative framework are considered to comply with the applicable regulatory capital requirements, including the risk-based requirements. The community bank leverage ratio was established at 9% Tier 1 capital to total average assets, effective January 1, 2020. A qualifying institution may opt in and out of the community bank leverage ratio framework on its quarterly call report. An institution that temporarily ceases to meet any qualifying criteria is provided with a two- quarter grace period to again achieve compliance. Failure to meet the qualifying criteria within the grace period or maintain a leverage ratio of 8% or greater requires the institution to comply with the generally applicable capital requirements. Although the Bank qualified to make this election, on January 1, 2020, management did not
elect the community bank leverage ratio as the Bank’s margin above the current minimum levels to be well-capitalized is greater than our margin would be under the community bank leverage ratio.
The table below sets forth First Financial Northwest Bank’s capital position at December 31, 2020 and 2019, based on FDIC thresholds to be well-capitalized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2020
|
|
2019
|
|
Amount
|
|
Ratio
|
|
Amount
|
|
Ratio
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
Bank equity capital under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(“GAAP”)
|
$
|
140,114
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
135,656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 leverage capital
|
$
|
140,319
|
|
|
10.29
|
%
|
|
$
|
135,170
|
|
|
10.27
|
%
|
Tier 1 leverage capital requirement
|
68,189
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
65,787
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
Excess
|
$
|
72,130
|
|
|
5.29
|
%
|
|
$
|
69,383
|
|
|
5.27
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common equity tier 1
|
$
|
140,319
|
|
|
14.32
|
%
|
|
$
|
135,170
|
|
|
13.13
|
%
|
Common equity tier 1 capital requirement
|
63,705
|
|
|
6.50
|
|
|
66,917
|
|
|
6.50
|
|
Excess
|
$
|
76,614
|
|
|
7.82
|
%
|
|
$
|
68,253
|
|
|
6.63
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital
|
$
|
140,319
|
|
|
14.32
|
%
|
|
$
|
135,170
|
|
|
13.13
|
%
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital requirement
|
78,406
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
|
82,359
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
Excess
|
$
|
61,913
|
|
|
6.32
|
%
|
|
$
|
52,811
|
|
|
5.13
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total risk-based capital
|
$
|
152,610
|
|
|
15.57
|
%
|
|
$
|
148,048
|
|
|
14.38
|
%
|
Total risk-based capital requirement
|
98,008
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
102,949
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
Excess
|
$
|
54,602
|
|
|
5.57
|
%
|
|
$
|
45,099
|
|
|
4.38
|
%
|
The FDIC also has authority to establish individual minimum capital requirements in appropriate cases upon a determination that an institution’s capital level is or may become inadequate in light of particular risks or circumstances.
For a complete description of First Financial Northwest Bank’s required and actual capital levels on December 31, 2020, see Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board has adopted a new accounting standard for US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles that will be effective for us for our first fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2022. This standard, referred to as Current Expected Credit Loss, or CECL, requires FDIC-insured institutions and their holding companies (banking organizations) to recognize credit losses expected over the life of certain financial assets. CECL covers a broader range of assets than the current method of recognizing credit losses and generally results in earlier recognition of credit losses. Upon adoption of CECL, a banking organization must record a one-time adjustment to its credit loss allowances as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption equal to the difference, if any, between the amount of credit loss allowances under the current methodology and the amount required under CECL. For a banking organization, implementation of CECL is generally likely to reduce retained earnings, and to affect other items, in a manner that reduces its regulatory capital.
The federal banking regulators (the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC) have adopted a rule that gives a banking organization the option to phase in over a three-year period the day-one adverse effects of CECL on its regulatory capital.
Prompt Corrective Action. Federal statutes establish a supervisory framework for FDIC-insured institutions based on five capital categories: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. An institution’s category depends upon where its capital levels are in relation to relevant capital measures. The well-capitalized category is described above. An institution that is not well capitalized is subject to certain restrictions on
brokered deposits, including restrictions on the rates it can offer on its deposits, generally. To be considered adequately capitalized, an institution must have the minimum capital ratios described above. Any institution which is neither well capitalized nor adequately capitalized is considered undercapitalized. The previously referenced final rule establishing an elective “community bank leverage ratio” regulatory capital framework provides that a qualifying institution whose capital exceeds the community bank leverage ratio and opts to use that framework will be considered “well capitalized” for purposes of prompt corrective action.
Undercapitalized institutions are subject to certain prompt corrective action requirements, regulatory controls and restrictions which become more extensive as an institution becomes more severely undercapitalized. Failure by First Financial Northwest Bank to comply with applicable capital requirements would, if unremedied, result in progressively more severe restrictions on its activities and lead to enforcement actions, including, but not limited to, the issuance of a capital directive to ensure the maintenance of required capital levels and, ultimately, the appointment of the FDIC as receiver or conservator. Banking regulators will take prompt corrective action with respect to depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. Additionally, approval of any regulatory application filed for their review may be dependent on compliance with capital requirements.
At December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest Bank was categorized as “well capitalized” under the prompt corrective action regulations of the FDIC. For additional information, see Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
Federal Home Loan Bank System. First Financial Northwest Bank is a member of the FHLB of Des Moines, one of 11 regional FHLBs that administer the home financing credit function of savings institutions. The FHLBs are subject to the oversight of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) and each FHLB serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region. The FHLBs are funded primarily from proceeds derived from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB System and make loans or advances to members in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors of the FHLB, which are subject to the oversight of the FHFA. All advances from the FHLB of Des Moines are required to be fully secured by sufficient collateral as determined by the FHLB of Des Moines. In addition, all long-term advances are required to provide funds for residential home financing. See “Business – Deposit Activities and Other Sources of Funds – Borrowings.”
As a member, the Bank is required to purchase and maintain stock in the FHLB of Des Moines based on the Bank's asset size and level of borrowings from the FHLB. At December 31, 2020, the Bank held $6.4 million in FHLB of Des Moines stock that was in compliance with the holding requirements. The FHLB pays dividends quarterly, and First Financial Northwest Bank received $320,000 in dividends during the year ended December 31, 2020.
The FHLBs continue to contribute to low- and moderately-priced housing programs through direct loans or interest subsidies on advances targeted for community investment and low- and moderate-income housing projects. These contributions have adversely affected the level of FHLB dividends paid and could continue to do so in the future. These contributions could also have an adverse effect on the value of FHLB of Des Moines stock in the future. A reduction in value of First Financial Northwest Bank’s FHLB of Des Moines stock may result in a decrease in net income and possibly capital.
Commercial Real Estate Lending Concentrations. The federal banking agencies have issued guidance on sound risk management practices for concentrations in commercial real estate lending. The particular focus is on exposure to commercial real estate loans that are dependent on the cash flow from the real estate held as collateral and that are likely to be sensitive to conditions in the commercial real estate market (as opposed to real estate collateral held as a secondary source of repayment or as an abundance of caution). The purpose of the guidance is not to limit a bank’s commercial real estate lending but to guide banks in developing risk management practices and capital levels commensurate with the level and nature of real estate concentrations. The guidance directs the FDIC and other federal bank regulatory agencies to focus their supervisory resources on institutions that may have significant commercial real estate loan concentration risk. A bank that has experienced rapid growth in commercial real estate lending, has notable exposure to a specific type of commercial real estate loan, or is approaching or exceeding the following supervisory criteria may be identified for further supervisory analysis with respect to real estate concentration risk:
•Total reported loans for construction, land development and other land represent 100% or more of the bank’s total regulatory capital; or
•Total commercial real estate loans (as defined in the guidance) represent 300% or more of the bank’s total regulatory capital and the outstanding balance of the bank’s commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased 50% or more during the prior 36 months.
The guidance provides that the strength of an institution’s lending and risk management practices with respect to such concentrations will be taken into account in supervisory guidance on evaluation of capital adequacy. As of December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest Bank’s aggregate recorded loan balances for construction, land development and land loans were 61.6% of regulatory capital. In addition, at December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest Bank’s loans on commercial real estate, as defined by the FDIC, were 390.1% of regulatory capital.
Activities and Investments of Insured State-Chartered Financial Institutions. Federal law generally limits the activities and equity investments of FDIC-insured, state-chartered banks to those that are permissible for national banks. An insured state bank is not prohibited from, among other things, (1) acquiring or retaining a majority interest in a subsidiary, (2) investing as a limited partner in a partnership the sole purpose of which is direct or indirect investment in the acquisition, rehabilitation or new construction of a qualified housing project, provided that such limited partnership investments may not exceed 2% of the bank’s total assets, (3) acquiring up to 10% of the voting stock of a company that solely provides or reinsures directors’, trustees’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage or bankers’ blanket bond group insurance coverage for insured depository institutions and (4) acquiring or retaining the voting shares of a depository institution owned by another FDIC-insured institution if certain requirements are met.
Washington State has enacted a law regarding financial institution parity. Primarily, the law affords Washington state‑chartered commercial banks the same powers as Washington state-chartered savings banks and provides that Washington chartered commercial banks may exercise any of the powers that the Federal Reserve has determined to be closely related to the business of banking and the powers of national banks, subject to the approval of the Director of the DFI in certain situations. Finally, the law provides additional flexibility for Washington state-chartered commercial and savings banks with respect to interest rates on loans and other extensions of credit. Specifically, they may charge the maximum interest rate allowable for loans and other extensions of credit by federally-chartered financial institutions to Washington residents.
Environmental Issues Associated With Real Estate Lending. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) is a federal statute that generally imposes strict liability on all prior and present “owners and operators” of sites containing hazardous waste. However, Congress acted to protect secured creditors by providing that the term “owner and operator” excludes a person whose ownership is limited to protecting its security interest in the site. Since the enactment of the CERCLA, this “secured creditor exemption” has been the subject of judicial interpretations that have left open the possibility that lenders could be liable for cleanup costs on contaminated property that they hold as collateral for a loan. To the extent that legal uncertainty exists in this area, all creditors, including First Financial Northwest Bank, that have made loans secured by properties with potential hazardous waste contamination (such as petroleum contamination) could be subject to liability for cleanup costs that often are substantial and can exceed the value of the collateral property.
Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve Act authorizes the Federal Reserve Board to establish cash reserve requirements on depository institutions based on transaction accounts and non-personal time deposits. These reserves may be in the form of cash or deposits with the regional Federal Reserve Bank. Interest-bearing demand accounts and other types of accounts that permit payments or transfers to third parties fall within the definition of transaction accounts and are subject to reserve requirements, as are any non-personal time deposits at a savings bank. On March 15, 2020, the Federal Reserve Board reduced reserve requirement ratios to zero percent, effective March 26, 2020, thereby eliminating reserve requirements for all depository institutions.
Affiliate Transactions. First Financial Northwest and First Financial Northwest Bank are separate and distinct legal entities. First Financial Northwest (and any non-bank subsidiary of First Financial Northwest) is an affiliate of First Financial Northwest Bank. Federal laws strictly limit the ability of banks to engage in certain transactions with their affiliates. Transactions deemed to be a “covered transaction” under Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act and between a bank and an affiliate are limited to 10% of the bank’s capital and surplus and, with respect to all affiliates, to an aggregate of 20% of the bank’s capital and surplus. Further, covered transactions that are loans and extensions of credit generally are required to be secured by eligible collateral in specified amounts. Federal law also requires that covered transactions and certain other transactions listed in Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act between a bank and its affiliates be on terms as favorable to the bank as transactions with nonaffiliates. For additional information, see “– Regulation and Supervision of First Financial Northwest – Limitations on Transactions with Affiliates” below.
In addition, Sections 22(g) and (h) of the Federal Reserve Act place restrictions on loans to executive officers, directors and principal shareholders. Under Section 22(h), loans to a director, executive officer or greater than 10% shareholder of a bank and certain affiliated interests, generally may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such person and affiliated interests, 15% of the institution’s unimpaired capital and surplus. Section 22(h) also requires that loans to directors, executive officers and principal shareholders be made on terms substantially the same as offered in comparable transactions to other persons unless the loans are made pursuant to a benefit or compensation program that (1) is widely available to employees of the institution and (2) does not give preference to any director, executive officer or principal shareholder, or certain affiliated interests, over other employees of the bank. Section 22(h) also requires prior board approval for certain loans. In addition, the aggregate amount of extensions of credit by a bank to all insiders cannot exceed the bank’s unimpaired capital and surplus. Furthermore, Section 22(g) places additional restrictions on loans to executive officers. At December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest Bank was in compliance with these restrictions.
Community Reinvestment Act. First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (“CRA”), which require the appropriate federal bank regulatory agency to assess a bank’s performance under the CRA in meeting the credit needs of the community serviced by the bank, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. The regulatory agency’s assessment of the bank’s record is made available to the public. Further, a bank’s CRA performance must be considered in connection with a bank’s application, to among other things, establish a new branch office that will accept deposits, relocate an existing office or merge or consolidate with, or acquire the assets or assume the liabilities of, a federally regulated financial institution. An unsatisfactory rating may be the basis for denial of certain applications. First Financial Northwest Bank received a “satisfactory” rating during its most recent CRA examination.
Dividends. The amount of dividends payable by First Financial Northwest Bank to First Financial Northwest depends upon First Financial Northwest Bank’s earnings and capital position, and is limited by federal and state laws, regulations and policies. According to Washington law, First Financial Northwest Bank may not declare or pay a cash dividend on its capital stock if it would cause its net worth to be reduced below (1) the amount required for liquidation accounts or (2) the net worth requirements, if any, imposed by the Director of the DFI. In addition, dividends may not be declared or paid if First Financial Northwest Bank is in default in payment of any assessments due to the FDIC. Dividends on First Financial Northwest Bank’s capital stock may not be paid in an aggregate amount greater than the aggregate retained earnings of First Financial Northwest Bank, without the approval of the Director of the DFI.
The amount of dividends actually paid during any one period is affected by First Financial Northwest Bank’s policy of maintaining a strong capital position. Federal law further restricts dividends payable by an institution that does not meet the capital conservation buffer requirement and provides that no insured depository institution may pay a cash dividend if it would cause the institution to be “undercapitalized,” as defined in the prompt corrective action regulations. Moreover, the federal bank regulatory agencies also have the general authority to limit the dividends paid by insured banks if such payments are deemed to constitute an unsafe and unsound practice.
Privacy Standards. First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to FDIC regulations implementing the privacy protection provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. These regulations require First Financial Northwest Bank to disclose its privacy policy, including informing consumers of its information sharing practices and informing consumers of their rights to opt out of certain practices.
Anti-Money Laundering and Customer Identification. The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA Patriot Act) was signed into law on October 26, 2001. The USA PATRIOT Act and the Bank Secrecy Act requires financial institutions to develop programs to prevent financial institutions from being used for money laundering and terrorist activities. If such activities are detected, financial institutions are obligated to file suspicious activity reports with the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. These rules require financial institutions to establish procedures for identifying and verifying the identity of customers seeking to open new financial accounts, and, effective in 2018, the beneficial owners of accounts. Bank regulators are directed to consider a holding company’s effectiveness in combating money laundering when ruling on Bank Holding Company Act and Bank Merger Act applications.
Other Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations. The Dodd-Frank Act established the CFPB and empowered it to exercise broad regulatory, supervisory and enforcement authority with respect to both new and existing consumer financial protection laws. First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to consumer protection regulations issued by the CFPB, but as a financial institution with assets of less than $10 billion, First Financial Northwest Bank is generally subject to supervision and enforcement by the FDIC with respect to its compliance with federal consumer financial protection laws and CFPB regulations.
First Financial Northwest Bank is subject to a broad array of federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations that govern almost every aspect of its business relationships with consumers. While not exhaustive, these laws and regulations include the Truth-in-Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Right to Financial Privacy Act, the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act, the Consumer Leasing Act, the Fair Credit Billing Act, the Homeowners Protection Act, the Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act, laws governing flood insurance, laws governing consumer protections in connection with the sale of insurance, federal and state laws prohibiting unfair and deceptive business practices and various regulations that implement some or all of the foregoing. 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, collecting loans and providing other services. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject First Financial Northwest Bank to various penalties, including but not limited to, enforcement actions, injunctions, fines, civil liability, criminal penalties, punitive damages and the loss of certain contractual rights.
Regulation and Supervision of First Financial Northwest
General. First Financial Northwest, as sole shareholder of First Financial Northwest Bank, is a bank holding company registered with the Federal Reserve. Bank holding companies are subject to comprehensive regulation by the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHCA”), and the regulations of the FRB. Accordingly, First Financial Northwest is required to file semi-annual reports with the Federal Reserve and provide additional information as the Federal Reserve may require. The Federal Reserve may examine First Financial Northwest, and any of its subsidiaries, and charge First Financial Northwest for the cost of the examination. The Federal Reserve also has extensive enforcement authority over bank holding companies, including, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease and desist or removal orders and to require that a holding company divest subsidiaries (including its bank subsidiaries). In general, enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of law and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. First Financial Northwest is also required to file certain reports with, and otherwise comply with the rules and regulations of the SEC.
The Bank Holding Company Act. Under the BHCA, First Financial Northwest is supervised by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve has a policy that a bank holding company is required to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary bank and may not conduct its operations in an unsafe or unsound manner. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act and earlier Federal Reserve policy provide that a bank holding company should serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary bank by having the ability to provide financial assistance to its subsidiary bank during periods of financial distress to the bank. A bank holding company’s failure to meet its obligation to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary bank will generally be considered by the Federal Reserve to be an unsafe and unsound banking practice or a violation of the Federal Reserve’s regulations or both. No regulations have yet been proposed by the Federal Reserve to implement the source of strength provisions required by the Dodd-Frank Act. First Financial Northwest and any subsidiaries that it may control are considered “affiliates” within the meaning of the Federal Reserve Act, and transactions between First Financial Northwest Bank and affiliates are subject to numerous restrictions. With some exceptions, First Financial Northwest and its subsidiaries are prohibited from tying the provision of various services, such as extensions of credit, to other services offered by First Financial Northwest or by its affiliates.
Acquisitions. The BHCA prohibits a bank holding company, with certain exceptions, from acquiring ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company that is not a bank or bank holding company and from engaging in activities other than those of banking, managing or controlling banks, or providing services for its subsidiaries. Under the BHCA, the Federal Reserve may approve the ownership of shares by a bank holding company in any company, the activities of which the Federal Reserve has determined to be so closely related to the business of banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. These activities include: operating a savings institution, mortgage company, finance company, credit card company or factoring company; performing certain data processing operations; providing certain investment and financial advice; underwriting and acting as an insurance agent for certain types of credit-related insurance; leasing property on a full-payout, non-operating basis; selling money orders, travelers’ checks and U.S. Savings Bonds; real estate and personal property appraising; providing tax planning and preparation services; and, subject to certain limitations, providing securities brokerage services for customers. The Federal Reserve must approve the acquisition (or acquisition of control) of a bank or other FDIC-insured depository institution by a bank holding company, and the appropriate federal banking regulator must approve a bank’s acquisition (or acquisition of control) of another bank or other FDIC-insured institution.
Acquisition of Control of a Bank Holding Company. Under federal law, a notice or application must be submitted to the appropriate federal banking regulator if any person (including a company), or group acting in concert, seeks to acquire “control” of a bank holding company. An acquisition of control can occur upon the acquisition of 10% or more of the voting
stock of a bank holding company or as otherwise defined by federal regulations. In considering such a notice or application, the Federal Reserve takes into consideration certain factors, including the financial and managerial resources of the acquirer and the anti-trust effects of the acquisition. Any company that acquires control becomes subject to regulation as a bank holding company. Depending on circumstances, a notice or application may be required to be filed with appropriate state banking regulators and may be subject to their approval or non-objection.
Regulatory Capital Requirements. As discussed above, pursuant to the “Small Bank Holding Company” exception, effective August 30, 2018, bank holding companies with less than $3 billion in consolidated assets were generally no longer subject to the Federal Reserve’s capital regulations, which are generally the same as the capital regulations applicable to First Financial Northwest Bank. At the time of this change, First Financial Northwest was considered “well capitalized” (as defined for a bank holding company), with a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or more and a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or more, and was not subject to an individualized order, directive or agreement under which the Federal Reserve requires it to maintain a specific capital level.
Restrictions on Dividends. The Federal Reserve has issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies which expresses its view that a bank holding company must maintain an adequate capital position and generally should not pay cash dividends unless the company’s net income for the past year is sufficient to fully fund the cash dividends and that the prospective rate of earnings appears consistent with the company’s capital needs, asset quality, and overall financial condition. The Federal Reserve policy statement also indicates that it would be inappropriate for a company experiencing serious financial problems to borrow funds to pay dividends. For additional information, see Item 1.A. “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Regulatory and Compliance Matters-Non-compliance with the USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, or other laws and regulations could result in fines or sanctions” in this report.
Stock Repurchases. A bank holding company, except for certain “well-capitalized” and highly rated bank holding companies, is required to give the Federal Reserve prior written notice of any purchase or redemption of its outstanding equity securities if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when combined with the net consideration paid for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding twelve months, is equal to 10% or more of its consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve order or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve. During the year ended December 31, 2020, First Financial Northwest repurchased 544,626 shares of its common stock.
Federal Securities Laws. First Financial Northwest’s common stock is registered with the SEC under Section 12(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”). We are subject to information, proxy solicitation, insider trading restrictions and other requirements under the Exchange Act.
Recent Regulatory Reform. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States Congress, through the enactment of the CARES Act and the CAA, 2021, and the federal banking agencies, though rulemaking, interpretive guidance and modifications to agency policies and procedures, have taken a series of actions to provide national emergency economic relief measures including, among others, the following:
•The CARES Act, as amended by the CAA, 2021, allows banks to elect to suspend requirements under GAAP for loan modifications related to the COVID-19 pandemic (for loans that were not more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019) that would otherwise be categorized as a TDR, including impairment for accounting purposes, until the earlier of 60 days after the termination date of the national emergency or, January 1, 2022. The suspension of GAAP is applicable for the entire term of the modification. The federal banking agencies also issued guidance to encourage banks to make loan modifications for borrowers affected by COVID-19 by providing that short-term modifications made in response to COVID-19, such as payment deferrals, fee waivers, extensions of repayment terms, or other delays in payment that are insignificant related to the loans in which the borrower is less than 30 days past due on its contractual payments at the time a modification is implemented is not a TDR. The Bank is applying this guidance to qualifying COVID-19 modifications. See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – COVID-19 Related Information” for further information about the COVID-19 modifications completed by the Bank.
•The CARES Act amended the SBA’s loan program, in which the Bank participates, to create a guaranteed, unsecured loan program, the PPP, to fund payroll and operational costs of eligible businesses, organizations and self-employed persons during COVID-19. The loans are provided through participating financial institutions, such as the Bank, that process loan applications and service the loans and are eligible for SBA repayment and loan forgiveness if the
borrower meets the PPP conditions. The application period for a PPP loan closed on August 8, 2020. The SBA began approving PPP forgiveness applications and remitting forgiveness payments to PPP lenders on October 2, 2020. The CAA, 2021 which was signed into law on December 27, 2020, renews and extends the PPP until March 31, 2021. As a result, as a participating lender, the Bank began originating PPP loans again in January 2021 and will continue to monitor legislative, regulatory, and supervisory developments related to the PPP.
•Pursuant to the CARES Act, the federal banking agencies authorities adopted in April 2020 an interim rule, effective until the earlier of the termination of the coronavirus emergency declaration by the president and December 31, 2020, to (i) reduce the minimum CBLR from 9% to 8%, and (ii) give community banks a two-quarter grace period to satisfy such ratio if such ratio falls out of compliance by no more than 1%. Effective October 1, 2020, the final rule adopted by the federal banking agencies authorities lowers the CBLR as set forth in the interim rule and provides a gradual transition back to the prior level. Under the final rule, the CBLR was 8% for 2020, and will be 8.5% for 2021, and 9% beginning January 1, 2022. The final rule also retains the grace period. A community banking organization that falls below the CBLR will still be deemed to be well capitalized during a two-quarter grace period so long as the banking organization maintains a CBLR greater than 7.5% during 2021, and greater than 8% thereafter .
As the on-going COVID-19 pandemic evolves, federal regulatory authorities continue to issue additional guidance with respect to the implementation, lifecycle, and eligibility requirements for the various CARES Act programs as well as industry-specific recovery procedures for COVID-19. In addition, it is possible that the United States Congress will enact supplementary COVID-19 response legislation. The Company continues to assess the impact of the CARES Act and other statues, regulations and supervisory guidance related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Taxation
Federal Taxation
General. First Financial Northwest and First Financial Northwest Bank are subject to federal income taxation in the same general manner as other corporations, with some exceptions discussed below. The following discussion of federal taxation is intended only to summarize certain pertinent federal income tax matters and is not a comprehensive description of the tax rules applicable to First Financial Northwest or First Financial Northwest Bank. The tax years still open for review by the Internal Revenue Service are 2017 through 2020.
First Financial Northwest files a consolidated federal income tax return with First Financial Northwest Bank. Accordingly, any cash distributions made by First Financial Northwest to its shareholders are considered to be taxable dividends and not as a non-taxable return of capital to shareholders for federal and state tax purposes.
Method of Accounting. For federal income tax purposes, First Financial Northwest currently reports its income and expenses on the accrual method of accounting and uses a fiscal year ending on December 31 for filing its federal income tax return.
Net Operating Loss Carryovers. A financial institution may carryforward net operating losses indefinitely. The Company had no net operating loss carryforwards at December 31, 2020.
Corporate Dividends-Received Deduction. First Financial Northwest may eliminate from its income dividends received from First Financial Northwest Bank as a wholly-owned subsidiary of First Financial Northwest that files a consolidated return with First Financial Northwest Bank. The corporate dividends-received deduction is 100%, or 80%, in the case of dividends received from corporations with which a corporate recipient does not file a consolidated tax return, depending on the level of stock ownership of the payer of the dividend. Corporations that own less than 20% of the stock of a corporation distributing a dividend may deduct 70% of dividends received or accrued on their behalf.
For additional information regarding our federal income taxes, see Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
State Taxation
First Financial Northwest and its subsidiaries are subject to a business and occupation tax imposed under Washington state law at the rate of 1.75% of gross receipts. In addition, various municipalities also assess business and occupation taxes at differing rates. Interest received on loans secured by first lien mortgages or deeds of trust on residential properties, rental
income from properties, and certain investment securities are exempt from this tax. An audit by the Washington State Department of Revenue was completed for the years 2010 through 2013, resulting in no material tax revisions.
The Bank has purchased and originated loans in California. The Company no longer had employees or real estate located in California in 2018, so therefore, filed its final California state tax return for 2018.
Executive Officers of First Financial Northwest, Inc.
The business experience for at least the past five years for the executive officers of First Financial Northwest and its primary subsidiary First Financial Northwest Bank is set forth below.
Joseph W. Kiley III, age 65, has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of First Financial and First Financial Diversified since September 2013; as director of First Financial and First Financial Diversified since December 2012; and as President, Chief Executive Officer and director of First Financial Northwest Bank since September 2012. He previously served as President, Chief Executive Officer, and director of Frontier Bank, F.S.B., Palm Desert, California, and its holding company, Western Community Bancshares, Inc. Mr. Kiley has over 30 years of executive experience at banks, thrifts and their holding companies that includes, but is not limited to, serving as president, chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and director. Mr. Kiley holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration (Accounting) from California State University, Chico, and is a former California certified public accountant. Mr. Kiley is a member of the Renton Rotary Club, City of Renton Mayor’s Business Executive Forum, City of Renton Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Panel, and past Chair of the Board of Directors of the Renton Chamber of Commerce. He is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Washington Bankers Association (WBA). In addition, Mr. Kiley currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Western Bankers Association and its Executive Committee.
Richard P. Jacobson, age 57, has served as Chief Operating Officer of First Financial Northwest Bank since July 2013, and as Chief Financial Officer of First Financial Northwest, First Financial Diversified, and the Bank since August 2013. He was appointed as a director of First Financial, First Financial Diversified and the Bank effective September 2013. Mr. Jacobson served as a consultant to First Financial from April 2010 to April 2012. Subsequently, he worked as a mortgage loan originator in Palm Desert, California from July 2012 to July 2013. Previously, he had been employed by Horizon Financial Corp. and Horizon Bank, Bellingham, Washington, for 23 years, and had served as President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Horizon Financial Corp. and Horizon Bank from January 2008 to January 2010. Mr. Jacobson also served as Chief Financial Officer of Horizon Financial Corp. and Horizon Bank from March 2000 until October 2008. Between 1985 and 2008, Mr. Jacobson served in several other positions at Horizon Financial Corp. and Horizon Bank and spent two years as a Washington state licensed real estate appraiser from 1992 to 1994. Mr. Jacobson received his Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration (Finance) from the University of Washington. In addition, Mr. Jacobson graduated with honors from the American Bankers Association’s National School of Banking. Mr. Jacobson is a past president of the Whatcom County North Rotary Club and has served on the boards of his church, the United Way, Boys and Girls Club, and Junior Achievement.
Simon Soh, age 56, was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Credit Officer of First Financial Northwest Bank in December 2019, a position he held on an interim basis since November 2019, and between August 2017 and December 2018. Mr. Soh served as Senior Vice President and Chief Lending Officer from October 2012 to December 2019. From August 2010 until October 2012, Mr. Soh served as Vice President and Loan Production Manager of First Financial Northwest Bank. Prior to that, he was First Vice President and Commercial Lending Manager at East West Bank. In 1998, Mr. Soh was a founding member of Pacifica Bank in Bellevue, Washington that merged with United Commercial Bank in 2005, later becoming East West Bank in 2009. Mr. Soh has over 30 years of experience in commercial banking.
Ronnie J. Clariza, age 40, was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer of First Financial Northwest Bank in November 2013. Mr. Clariza previously served as Vice President and Risk Management Officer since May 2008, and prior to that, as Assistant Vice President and Compliance Officer, as well as serving in various other compliance and internal audit roles since he began with the Bank in 2003. Mr. Clariza is a graduate of the University of Washington where he received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Administration, Finance, and is a certified regulatory Compliance Officer. Mr. Clariza is an active member of the Washington Bankers’ Association Education Committee. He is also a past member of the Washington Bankers’ Association Enterprise Risk Management Committee, and served as a Volunteer Compliance Manager for the Seattle Children’s Hospital Guild Association.
Dalen D. Harrison, age 61, was promoted to appointed Chief Banking Officer of First Financial Northwest Bank in December 2019. She was appointed Senior Vice President in July 2014 and previously served as Chief Deposit Officer of First Financial Northwest Bank from March 2014 to December 2019. Ms. Harrison served as Senior Vice President and Director of
Retail Banking at Peoples Bank in Bellingham, Washington from 2010 until 2014. Prior to that, she served as Vice President of Rainier Pacific Bank, Tacoma, Washington, from 1994 until 2010. Ms. Harrison received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Administration from Saint Mary’s College in Moraga, California. Ms. Harrison has served on the boards of Rainier Pacific Foundation, First Place for Children, Gig Harbor Rotary Foundation, Renton Downtown Partnership, and Renton Area Youth and Family Services.
Christine A. Huestis, age 55, is First Vice President, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer of First Financial Northwest and First Financial Northwest Bank. Prior to joining First Financial Northwest in October 2013, she was employed by Realty in Motion, LLC, a holding company for several mortgage default service companies in Bellevue, Washington. From 1999 until joining First Financial Northwest, Ms. Huestis held key accounting positions at affiliated companies within Realty in Motion, with her most recent position being that of Controller. Ms. Huestis received a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting from Central Washington University. She is a certified public accountant and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
An investment in our common stock is subject to risks inherent in our business. Before making an investment decision, you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information included in this report and our other filings with the SEC. In addition to the risks and uncertainties described below, other risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, capital levels, cash flows, liquidity, results of operations and prospects. The risks discussed below also include forward-looking statements, and our actual results may differ substantially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. The market price of our common stock could decline significantly due to any of these identified or other risks and you could lose some or all of your investment. This report is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors.
Risks Related to Macroeconomic Conditions
The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted our ability to conduct business which has adversely impacted our financial results and those of our customers. The ultimate impact will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the scope and duration of the pandemic and actions taken by governmental authorities in response to the pandemic.
The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has caused major economic disruption and volatility in the financial markets both in the United States and globally and has negatively affected our operations and the banking and financial services we provide, primarily to businesses and individuals in the states of Washington where all of our branches are located. In our market areas, stay-at-home orders, social distancing and travel restrictions, and similar orders imposed across the United States to restrict the spread of COVID-19, resulted in significant business and operational disruptions, including business closures, supply chain disruptions, and significant layoffs and furloughs. While the stay-at-home orders have terminated or been phased-out along with reopening of businesses in certain markets, most localities in which we operate still apply capacity restrictions and health and safety recommendations that encourage continued social distancing and working remotely, limiting the ability of businesses to return to pre-pandemic levels of activity. As an essential business, we continue to provide banking and financial services to our customers at all of our branch locations. In addition, we continue to provide access to banking and financial services through online banking, ATMs and by telephone. To further the well-being of staff and customers, we have implemented measures to allow employees to work from home to the extent practicable. Despite these efforts, if the COVID-19 pandemic worsens it could limit or disrupt our ability to provide banking and financial services to our customers.
Currently some of our employees are working remotely to enable us to continue to provide banking services to our customers. Heightened cybersecurity, information security and operational risks may, however, result from these work-from-home arrangements. We also could be adversely affected if key personnel or a significant number of employees were to become unavailable due to the effects and restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, we also rely upon our third-party vendors to conduct business and to process, record and monitor transactions. If any of these vendors are unable to continue to provide us with these services, it could negatively impact our ability to serve our customers. We have business continuity plans and other safeguards in place, however, there is no assurance that such plans and safeguards will be effective.
To date, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in declines in loan demand and loan originations, other than through government sponsored programs such as the PPP, and has impacted both deposit availability and market interest rates and negatively impacted many of our business and consumer borrowers’ ability to make their loan payments. Because the length of the pandemic and the efficacy of the extraordinary measures being put in place to address the economic consequences are
unknown, including a continued low targeted federal funds rate, until the pandemic subsides, we expect our net interest income and net interest margin will continue to be adversely affected.
The impact of the pandemic is expected to continue to adversely affect us during 2021 as the ability of many of our borrowers to make loan payments has been significantly affected. Many of our borrowers have become unemployed or may face unemployment, and certain businesses are at risk of insolvency as revenue declined precipitously, especially in businesses related to travel, hospitality, leisure, and physical personal services. Businesses may ultimately not reopen as there is a significant level of uncertainty regarding the level of economic activity that will return to our markets over time, the impact of governmental assistance, the speed of economic recovery, the resurgence of COVID-19 in subsequent seasons and changes to demographic and social norms that will take place.
Consistent with guidance provided by banking regulators, we have modified loans by providing various loan payment deferral options to our borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Notwithstanding these modifications, these borrowers may not be able to resume making full payments on their loans once the COVID-19 pandemic is resolved. If COVID-19 continues to spread or the responses to contain it are unsuccessful, it may result in increased loan delinquencies, adversely classified loans and loan charge-offs. As a result, our ALLL may prove to be insufficient to absorb losses in our loan portfolio, which would cause our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition to be adversely affected.
In accordance with GAAP, we record assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their fair value with the excess of the purchase consideration over the net assets acquired resulting in the recognition of goodwill. If adverse economic conditions or the related decrease in our stock price and market capitalization as a result of the pandemic were to be deemed sustained rather than temporary, it may significantly affect the fair value of our goodwill and may trigger impairment charges. Any impairment charge could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
The ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business, results of operations and financial condition, as well as our regulatory capital and liquidity ratios, will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including the scope and duration of the pandemic and actions taken by governmental authorities in response to the pandemic, including recent vaccination efforts. Even after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides, the U.S. economy may experience a recession, and we anticipate our business would be materially and adversely affected by a prolonged recession. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business, financial condition, liquidity or results of operations, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risk factors described in this section.
Our business may be adversely affected by downturns in the national economy and in the economies in our market areas.
Our loans are primarily to businesses and individuals in the state of Washington with 87.4% of loans to borrowers or secured by properties located in Washington and 12.6% of loans to borrowers or secured by properties in other states. Through our efforts to geographically diversify our loan portfolio, our portfolio includes $140.7 million of loans to borrowers or secured by properties located in 43 other states, including at December 31, 2020, $34.8 million, or 3.1% of loans secured by properties or to borrowers in California. A decline in the national economy or the economies of the four counties which we consider to be our primary market area could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Weakness in the global economy has adversely affected many businesses operating in our markets that are dependent upon international trade and it is not known how tariffs being imposed on international trade may also affect these businesses. Changes in agreements or relationships between the United States and other countries may also affect these businesses.
A deterioration in economic conditions in the market areas we serve, could result in the following consequences, any of which could have a materially adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations:
•loan delinquencies, problem assets and foreclosures may increase;
•we may increase our allowance for loan losses;
•demand for our products and services may decline resulting in a decrease in our total loans or assets;
•collateral for loans, especially real estate, may decline in value, exposing us to increased risk of loss on existing loans, reducing customers’ borrowing power, and reducing the value of assets and collateral associated with existing loans;
•the net worth and liquidity of loan guarantors may decline, impairing their ability to honor commitments to us; and
•the amount of our low-cost or noninterest-bearing deposits may decrease and the composition of our deposits may be adversely affected.
A decline in local economic conditions may have a greater effect on our earnings and capital than on the earnings and capital of larger financial institutions whose real estate loan portfolios are geographically diverse. Many of the loans in our portfolio are secured by real estate. Deterioration in the real estate markets where collateral for a mortgage loan is located could negatively affect the borrower’s ability to repay the loan and the value of the collateral securing the loan. Real estate values are affected by various other factors, including changes in general or regional economic conditions, governmental rules or policies and natural disasters such as earthquakes and tornadoes. If we are required to liquidate a significant amount of collateral during a period of reduced real estate values, our financial condition and profitability could be adversely affected.
In this regard, The Boeing Company has a significant presence in our market area and the production facility for the 737 MAX commercial jet aircraft is located in Renton. The 2019 grounding and decline in production of the 737 MAX commercial jet aircraft (production of which was suspended entirely in January 2020), has adversely affected Boeing, its employees and its suppliers, as well as other local businesses and their employees. Although production and new orders have resumed, until volumes return to pre-grounding levels, there may be an adverse impact on the ability of those borrowers impacted by the suspension of the production of the 737 MAX commercial jet to repay their existing loans to the Bank and demand for new loans may be reduced which could adversely affect the level of our nonperforming loans, deposits, financial condition and profitability.
Adverse changes in the regional and general economy could reduce our growth rate, impair our ability to collect loans and generally have a negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Lending
Our construction/land loans are based upon estimates of costs and the value of the completed project.
We make construction/land loans to contractors and builders primarily to finance the construction of single and multifamily homes, subdivisions, as well as commercial properties. We originate these loans whether or not the collateral property underlying the loan is under contract for sale. At December 31, 2020, construction/land loans totaled $92.2 million, or 8.3% of our total loan portfolio, a decrease of $21.5 million or 18.9% since December 31, 2019. At December 31, 2020, $33.4 million were one-to-four family construction loans, $51.2 million were multifamily construction loans, and $5.8 million were commercial construction loans. Land loans, which are loans made with land as security, totaled $1.8 million, or less than one percent of our total loan portfolio at December 31, 2020. Land loans include land non-development loans for the purchase or refinance of unimproved land held for future residential development, improved residential lots held for speculative investment purposes and lines of credit secured by land, and land development loans.
Construction/land lending involves additional risks when compared with permanent residential lending because funds are advanced upon the collateral for the project based on an estimate of costs that will produce a future value at completion. The uncertainties inherent in estimating construction costs, as well as the market value of the completed project and the effects of governmental regulation on real property, make it difficult to evaluate accurately the total funds required to complete a project and the completed project loan-to-value ratio. Changes in the demand, such as for new housing and higher than anticipated building costs, may cause actual results to vary significantly from those estimated. For these reasons, this type of lending also typically involves higher loan principal amounts and is often concentrated with a small number of builders. A downturn in housing, or the real estate market, could increase loan delinquencies, defaults and foreclosures, and significantly impair the value of our collateral and our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure. Some of our builders have more than one loan outstanding with us and also have residential mortgage loans for rental properties with us. Consequently, an adverse development with respect to one loan or one credit relationship can expose us to a significantly greater risk of loss.
In addition, during the term of most of our construction loans, no payment from the borrower is required since the accumulated interest is added to the principal of the loan through an interest reserve. As a result, these loans often involve the disbursement of funds with repayment substantially dependent on the success of the ultimate project and the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property or obtain permanent take-out financing, rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest. If our appraisal of the value of a completed project proves to be overstated, we may have inadequate security for the repayment of the loan upon completion of construction of the project and may incur a loss. Because construction loans require active monitoring of the building process, including cost comparisons and on-site inspections, these loans are more difficult and costly to monitor. Increases in market rates of interest may have a more pronounced effect on construction loans by rapidly increasing the end-purchasers’ borrowing costs, thereby reducing the overall demand for the project. Properties under construction are often difficult to sell and typically must be completed in order to be
successfully sold which also complicates the process of working out problem construction loans. This may require us to advance additional funds and/or contract with another builder to complete construction. Furthermore, in the case of speculative construction loans, there is the added risk associated with identifying an end-purchaser for the finished project. Land loans also pose additional risk because of the lack of income being produced by the property and the potential illiquid nature of the collateral. These risks can also be significantly impacted by supply and demand conditions.
At December 31, 2020, $33.4 million of our construction/land loans were for speculative construction loans. All of our permanent construction loans have a take-out commitment for a permanent loan with us. At December 31, 2020, all of our construction/land loans were classified as performing.
Our level of commercial and multifamily real estate loans may expose us to increased lending risks.
While commercial and multifamily real estate lending may potentially be more profitable than single-family residential lending, it is generally more sensitive to regional and local economic conditions, making loss levels more difficult to predict. Collateral evaluation and financial statement analysis in these types of loans requires a more detailed analysis at the time of loan underwriting and on an ongoing basis. At December 31, 2020, we had $385.3 million of commercial real estate loans, representing 34.5% of our total loan portfolio and $136.7 million of multifamily loans, representing 12.2% of our total loan portfolio. These loans typically involve higher principal amounts than other types of loans and some of our commercial borrowers have more than one loan outstanding with us. Consequently, an adverse development with respect to one loan or one credit relationship can expose us to a significantly greater risk of loss compared to an adverse development with respect to a one‑to‑four family residential loan. Repayment on these loans is 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 that may be adversely affected by changes in the economy or local market conditions. For example, if the cash flow from the borrower’s project is reduced as a result of leases not being obtained or renewed, the borrower’s ability to repay the loan may be impaired. Commercial and multifamily loans also expose a lender to greater credit risk than loans secured by one-to-four family residential real estate because the collateral securing these loans typically cannot be sold as easily as residential real estate. In addition, many of our commercial and multifamily real estate loans are not fully amortizing and contain large balloon payments upon maturity. Such balloon payments may require the borrower to either sell or refinance the underlying property in order to make the payment that may increase the risk of default or non-payment.
A secondary market for most types of commercial and multifamily real estate loans is not readily available, so we have less opportunity to mitigate credit risk by selling part or all of our interest in these loans. As a result of these characteristics, if we foreclose on a commercial or multifamily real estate loan, our holding period for the collateral typically is longer than for one‑to‑four family residential loans because there are fewer potential purchasers of the collateral. Accordingly, charge-offs on commercial real estate loans may be larger on a per loan basis than those incurred with our residential or consumer loan portfolios.
The level of our commercial real estate loan portfolio may subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny.
The FDIC, the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have promulgated joint guidance on sound risk management practices for financial institutions with concentrations in commercial real estate lending. Under this guidance, a financial institution that, like us, is actively involved in commercial real estate lending should perform a risk assessment to identify concentrations. A financial institution may have a concentration in commercial real estate lending if, among other factors (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 residential properties, loans for construction, land development and other land, and loans otherwise sensitive to the general commercial real estate market, including loans to commercial real estate related entities, represent 300% or more of total capital. Based on the FDIC criteria, the Bank has a concentration in commercial real estate lending as total loans for multifamily, non-farm/non-residential, construction, land development and other land represented 390.1% of total risk-based capital at December 31, 2020. The particular focus of the guidance is on exposure to commercial real estate loans that are dependent on the cash flow from the real estate held as collateral and that are likely to be at greater risk to conditions in the commercial real estate market (as opposed to real estate collateral held as a secondary source of repayment or as an abundance of caution). The purpose of the guidance is to guide banks in developing risk management practices and capital levels commensurate with the level and nature of real estate concentrations. The guidance states that management should employ heightened risk management practices including board and management oversight and strategic planning, development of underwriting standards, risk assessment and monitoring through market analysis and stress testing. While we believe we have implemented policies and procedures with respect to our commercial real estate lending consistent with this guidance, bank regulators could require us to implement additional policies and procedures consistent with their interpretation of the guidance that may result in additional costs to us.
Expansion of our business loans may expose the Company to greater risk of loss.
The Company’s strategic plan includes growth in originations of business loans that are collateralized by non-real estate assets. Our business loans are primarily made based on the cash flow of the borrower and secondarily on the underlying collateral provided by the borrower. The borrowers’ cash flow may prove to be unpredictable, and collateral securing these loans may fluctuate in value. Most often, this collateral is accounts receivable, inventory, or equipment. In the case of loans secured by accounts receivable, the availability of funds for the repayment of these loans may be substantially dependent on the ability of the borrower to collect amounts due from its customers. Other collateral securing loans may depreciate over time, may be difficult to appraise, may be illiquid and may fluctuate in value based on the success of the business. Further, the borrowers’ ability to repay these loans may be impacted more from general economic conditions as compared to real estate secured loans.
Our non-owner occupied real estate loans may expose us to increased credit risk.
At December 31, 2020, $175.6 million, or 46.0% of our one-to-four family residential loan portfolio and 15.7% of our total loan portfolio, consisted of loans secured by non-owner occupied residential properties. At December 31, 2020, one of our non-owner occupied one-to-four family residential loans, with a balance of $159,000, was past due 30-59 days. Loans secured by non-owner occupied properties generally expose a lender to greater risk of non-payment and loss than loans secured by owner occupied properties because repayment of such loans depend primarily on the tenant’s continuing ability to pay rent to the property owner, who is our borrower, or, if the property owner is unable to find a tenant, the property owner’s ability to repay the loan without the benefit of a rental income stream. In addition, the physical condition of non-owner occupied properties is often below that of owner occupied properties due to lenient property maintenance standards that negatively impact the value of the collateral properties. Furthermore, some of our non-owner occupied residential loan borrowers have more than one loan outstanding with us. At December 31, 2020, we had 95 non-owner occupied residential loan relationships with an outstanding balance over $500,000 and an aggregate balance of $141.4 million. Consequently, an adverse development with respect to one credit relationship may expose us to a greater risk of loss compared to an adverse development with respect to an owner occupied residential mortgage loan.
Loans originated under the SBA Paycheck Protection Program subject us to credit, forgiveness and guarantee risk.
As of December 31, 2020, we hold and service a portfolio of 372 loans originated under the PPP with a balance of $41.3 million. The PPP loans are subject to the provisions of the CARES Act and CAA, 2021 and to complex and evolving rules and guidance issued by the SBA and other government agencies. We expect that the great majority of our PPP borrowers will seek full or partial forgiveness of their loan obligations. We have credit risk on PPP loans if the SBA determines that there is a deficiency in the manner in which we originated, funded or serviced loans, including any issue with the eligibility of a borrower to receive a PPP loan. We could face additional risks in our administrative capabilities to service our PPP loans, and risk with respect to the determination of loan forgiveness, depending on the final procedures for determining loan forgiveness. 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 we originated, funded or serviced a PPP loan, the SBA may deny its liability under the guaranty, reduce the amount of the guaranty or, if the SBA has already paid under the guaranty, seek recovery of any loss related to the deficiency from us.
Our business may be adversely affected by credit risk associated with residential property.
At December 31, 2020, $382.0 million, or 34.2% of our total loan portfolio, was secured by first liens on one‑to‑four family residential loans. In addition, at December 31, 2020, our home equity lines of credit totaled $9.8 million. A significant portion of our one‑to‑four family residential real estate loan portfolio consists of jumbo loans that do not conform to secondary market mortgage requirements, and therefore are not immediately salable to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac because such loans exceed the maximum balance allowable for sale (generally $548,000 to $776,000 for single‑family homes in our primary market areas in 2021). Jumbo one‑to‑four family residential loans may expose us to increased risk because of their larger balances, and because they cannot be immediately sold to government sponsored enterprises.
In addition, one-to-four family residential loans are generally sensitive to regional and local economic conditions that significantly impact the ability of borrowers to meet their loan payment obligations, making loss levels difficult to predict. A decline in residential real estate values resulting from a downturn in the housing market may reduce the value of the real estate collateral securing these types of loans and increase our risk of loss if borrowers default on their loans. Recessionary conditions or declines in the volume of real estate sales and/or the sales prices coupled with elevated unemployment rates may result in higher than expected loan delinquencies or problem assets, and a decline in demand for our products and services. These
potential negative events may cause us to incur losses, adversely affect our capital and liquidity and damage our financial condition and business operations.
To meet our growth objectives we may originate or purchase loans outside of our market area which could affect the level of our net interest margin and nonperforming loans.
In order to achieve our desired loan portfolio growth, we have and may continue to opportunistically originate or purchase loans outside of our market area either individually, through participations, or in bulk or “pools”. We perform certain due diligence procedures and may re-underwrite these loans to our underwriting standards prior to purchase, and anticipate acquiring loans subject to customary limited indemnities, however, we may be exposed to a greater risk of loss as we acquire loans of a type or in geographic areas where management may not have substantial prior experience and which may be more difficult for us to monitor. Further, when determining the purchase price we are willing to pay to acquire loans, management will make certain assumptions about, among other things, how borrowers will prepay their loans, the real estate market and our ability to collect loans successfully and, if necessary, to dispose of any real estate that may be acquired through foreclosure. To the extent that our underlying assumptions prove to be inaccurate or the basis for those assumptions change (such as an unanticipated decline in the real estate market), the purchase price paid may prove to have been excessive, resulting in a lower yield or a loss of some or all of the loan principal. For example, if we purchase “pools” of loans at a premium and some of the loans are prepaid before we anticipate, we will earn less interest income on the acquired loans than expected. Our success in increasing our loan portfolio through loan purchases will depend on our ability to price the loans properly and on general economic conditions in the geographic areas where the underlying properties or collateral for the loans acquired are located. Inaccurate estimates or declines in economic conditions or real estate values in the markets where we purchase loans could significantly adversely affect the level of our nonperforming loans and our results of operations. At December 31, 2020, our loan portfolio included $84.4 million, or 7.6% of total loans, located in counties within Washington State that are outside of our primary market area. In addition, our portfolio included $140.1 million, or 12.6% of total loans, in loans located outside of Washington State.
If the lead institutions on our loan participation agreements do not keep us informed about the changes in credit quality on the underlying loans in a timely manner, we could be subject to misstatement in our ALLL, or possibly losses on these loans.
The lead institution in our participation agreements is responsible for obtaining necessary credit information related to the underlying loans in these agreements. If there is credit deterioration on the loans in these agreements that results in a downgrade, and this information is not provided to us in a timely manner, we will not have the loans appropriately graded, which will result in an understatement of our ALLL. If the credit downgrade was significant, and our ALLL was not adequate, we could incur a loss on these loans.
We engage in aircraft, classic and collectible car financing transactions, in which high-value collateral is susceptible to potential catastrophic loss. Consequently, if any of these transactions becomes nonperforming, we could suffer a loss on some or all of our value in the assets.
Because our primary focus for aircraft loans is on the asset value of the collateral, the collectability of these loans ultimately may be dependent on the value of the underlying collateral. Aircraft values have from time to time experienced sharp decreases due to a number of factors including, but not limited to, the availability of used aircraft, decreases in passenger and air cargo demand, increases in fuel costs, government regulation and the comparative value of newly manufactured similar aircraft. Classic and collectible car values are similarly affected by availability and demand. As a result of the unique nature of classic and collectible cars, their estimated value often does not align with their listed values. An aircraft, classic or collectible car as collateral also presents unique risks because of its high-value and being susceptible to rapid movement across different locations and potential catastrophic loss. Although the loan documentation for these transactions will include insurance covenants and other provisions to protect us against risk of loss, there can be no assurance that the insurance proceeds would be sufficient to ensure our full recovery of the loan. Moreover, a relatively small number of nonperforming loans could have a significant negative impact on the value of our loan portfolio. If we are required to liquidate a significant amount of aircraft or classic car collateral during a period of reduced values, our financial condition and profitability could be adversely affected. At December 31, 2020, our loan portfolio included $29.4 million in classic and collectible car loans and $10.8 million in aircraft loans.
Our ALLL may prove to be insufficient to absorb losses in our loan portfolio. Future additions to our ALLL, as well as charge-offs in excess of reserves, will reduce our earnings.
Our business depends on the creditworthiness of our customers. As with most financial institutions, we maintain an ALLL to reflect potential defaults and nonperformance, which represents management's best estimate of probable incurred losses inherent in the loan portfolio. The determination of the appropriate level of the ALLL inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. In determining the amount of the ALLL, we review our loans and the loss and delinquency experience and evaluate economic conditions and make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. If our estimates are incorrect, the ALLL may not be sufficient to cover losses inherent in our loan portfolio, resulting in the need for increases in our provision for loan losses which is charged against income. Deterioration in economic conditions, including as a result of COVID-19, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans or relationships, and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may increase our loan charge‑offs and/or may otherwise require an increase in the ALLL. Management also recognizes that significant new growth in loan portfolios, new loan products and the refinancing of existing loans can result in portfolios comprised of unseasoned loans that may not perform in a historical or projected manner and will increase the risk that our allowance may be insufficient to absorb losses without significant additional provisions. In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in the provision for possible loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge‑offs based on their judgment about information available to them at the time of their examination. Any increases in the provision for loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and capital.
In addition, the Financial Accounting Standards Board has adopted a new accounting standard referred to as Current Expected Credit Loss, or CECL, which will require financial institutions to determine periodic estimates of lifetime expected credit losses on loans, and recognize the expected credit losses as allowances for credit losses. This will change the current method of providing allowances for credit losses only when they have been incurred and are probable, which may require us to increase our allowance for loan losses, and may greatly increase the types of data we would need to collect and review to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for credit losses. This accounting pronouncement is expected to be applicable to us for our first fiscal year after December 15, 2022. We are evaluating the impact the CECL accounting model will have on our accounting, but expect to recognize a onetime cumulative-effect adjustment to the allowance for loan losses as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the new standard is effective. We cannot yet determine the magnitude of any such one-time cumulative adjustment or of the overall impact of the new standard on our financial condition or results of operations. The federal banking regulators, including the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, have adopted a rule that gives a banking organization the option to phase in over a three-year period the day-one adverse effects of CECL on its regulatory capital. For more on this new accounting standard, see Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Item 8 of this report.
Risks Related to Market and Interest Rate Changes
Our results of operations, liquidity and cash flows are subject to interest rate risk.
Our earnings and cash flows are largely dependent upon our net interest income. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control, including general economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies and, in particular, the Federal Reserve. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic the Federal Reserve reduced the targeted federal funds rate 150 basis points to a range of 0.00% to 0.25%. The reduction in the targeted federal funds rate has resulted in a decline in overall interest rates which has negatively impacted our net interest income. If the Federal Reserve continues to hold the targeted federal funds rates at the current level, overall interest rates will likely decline, which may additionally negatively impact our net interest income. If the Federal Reserve increases the targeted federal funds rates, overall interest rates will likely rise, which will positively impact our net interest income but may negatively impact both the housing market by reducing refinancing activity and new home purchases and the U.S. economy. In addition, deflationary pressures, while possibly lowering our operational costs, could have a significant negative effect on our borrowers, especially our business borrowers, and the values of collateral securing loans which could negatively affect our financial performance.
We principally manage interest rate risk by managing our volume and mix of our earning assets and funding liabilities. Changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, could influence not only the interest we receive on loans and investments and the amount of interest we pay on deposits and borrowings, but these changes could also affect (i) our ability to originate and/or sell loans and obtain deposits, (ii) the fair value of our financial assets and liabilities, which could negatively impact shareholders’ equity, and our ability to realize gains from the sale of such assets, (iii) our ability to obtain and retain deposits in competition with other available investment alternatives, (iv) the ability of our borrowers to repay adjustable or
variable rate loans, and (v) the average duration of our investment securities portfolio and other interest-earning assets. In a changing interest rate environment, we may not be able to manage this risk effectively. If we are unable to manage interest rate risk effectively, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially affected.
Changes in interest rates could also have a negative impact on our results of operations by reducing the ability of borrowers to repay their current loan obligations or by reducing our margins and profitability. Our net interest margin is the difference between the yield we earn on our assets and the interest rate we pay for deposits and our other sources of funding. Changes in interest rates—up or down—could adversely affect our net interest margin and, as a result, our net interest income. Although the yield we earn on our assets and our funding costs tend to move in the same direction in response to changes in interest rates, one can rise or fall faster than the other, causing our net interest margin to expand or contract. Our liabilities tend to be shorter in duration than our assets, so they may adjust faster in response to changes in interest rates. As a result, when interest rates decline, the yield we earn on our assets may decline faster than our funding costs, causing our net interest margin to contract until the funding costs catch up. Changes in the slope of the “yield curve”—or the spread between short-term and long-term interest rates—could also reduce our net interest margin. Normally, the yield curve is upward sloping, meaning short-term rates are lower than long-term rates. Because our liabilities tend to be shorter in duration than our assets, when the yield curve flattens or even inverts, we could experience pressure on our net interest margin as our cost of funds increases relative to the yield we can earn on our assets. Also, interest rate decreases can lead to increased prepayments of loans and mortgage-backed securities as borrowers refinance their loans to reduce borrowing costs. Under these circumstances, we are subject to reinvestment risk as we may have to redeploy such repayment proceeds into lower yielding investments, which would likely hurt our income.
A sustained increase in market interest rates could adversely affect our earnings. As is the case with many banks our emphasis on increasing core deposits has resulted in an increasing percentage of our deposits being comprised of deposits bearing no or a relatively low rate of interest and having a shorter duration than our assets. We would incur a higher cost of funds to retain these deposits in a rising interest rate environment. If the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings increase at a faster rate than the interest rates received on loans and other investments, our net interest income, and therefore earnings, could be adversely affected.
In addition, a portion of our adjustable-rate loans have interest rate floors below which the loan’s contractual interest rate may not adjust. At December 31, 2020, 51.5% of our net loans were comprised of adjustable-rate loans. At that date, $362.8 million, or 63.1%, of these loans with an average interest rate of 4.54% were at their floor interest rate. The inability of our loans to adjust downward can contribute to increased income in periods of declining interest rates, although this result is subject to the risks that borrowers may refinance these loans during periods of declining interest rates. Also, when loans are at their respective floor, which is above the fully-indexed rate, there is a further risk that our interest income may not increase as rapidly as our cost of funds during periods of increasing interest rates and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Changes in interest rates also affect the value of our interest-earning assets and in particular our securities portfolio. Generally, the fair value of fixed-rate securities fluctuates inversely with changes in interest rates. Unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale are reported as a separate component of equity, net of tax. Decreases in the fair value of securities available for sale resulting from increases in interest rates could have an adverse effect on stockholders’ equity.
Although management believes it has implemented effective asset and liability management strategies to reduce the potential effects of changes in interest rates on our results of operations, any substantial, unexpected, prolonged change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Also, our interest rate risk modeling techniques and assumptions may not fully predict or capture the impact of actual interest rate changes on our balance sheet or projected operating results. For further discussion of how changes in interest rates could impact us, see Part II, Item 7A. “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk" for additional information about our interest rate risk management.
If interest rate swaps we entered into prove ineffective, it could result in volatility in our operating results, including potential losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.
We are exposed to the effects of interest rate changes as a result of the borrowings we use to maintain liquidity and fund our expansion and operations. To limit the impact of interest rate changes on earnings, prepayment penalties and cash flows and to lower overall borrowing costs while taking into account variable interest rate risk, we may borrow at fixed rates or
variable rates depending upon prevailing market conditions. We may also enter into derivative financial instruments such as interest rate swaps in order to mitigate our interest rate risk on a related financial instrument.
Our interest rate contracts expose us to:
•basis or spread risk, which is the risk of loss associated with variations in the spread between the interest rate contract and the hedged item;
•credit or counter-party risk which is the risk of the insolvency or other inability of another party to the transaction to perform its obligations;
•interest rate risk;
•volatility risk which is the risk that the expected uncertainty relating to the price of the underlying asset differs from what is anticipated; and
•liquidity risk.
If we suffer losses on our interest rate contracts, our business, financial condition and prospects may be negatively affected, and our net income will decline.
We record the swaps at fair value and designate them as an effective cash flow hedge under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 815, Derivatives and Hedging. Each quarter, we measure hedge effectiveness using the “hypothetical derivative method” and record in earnings any gains or losses resulting from hedge ineffectiveness. The hedge provided by our swaps could prove to be ineffective for a number of reasons, including early retirement of the debt, as is allowed under the debt, or in the event the counterparty to the interest rate swaps were determined to not be creditworthy. Any determination that the hedge created by the swaps was ineffective could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows and result in volatility in our operating results. In addition, any changes in relevant accounting standards relating to the swaps, especially ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, could materially increase earnings volatility.
As of December 31, 2020, we had interest rate swaps outstanding with an aggregate notional amount of $120.0 million. At December 31, 2020, the fair value of our interest rate swaps was a $2.8 million loss. For additional information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Asset and Liability Management”.
We may incur losses on our securities portfolio as a result of changes in interest rates.
Factors beyond our control can significantly influence the fair value of securities in our portfolio and can cause potential adverse changes to the fair value of these securities. These factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency actions in respect of the securities, defaults by, or other adverse events affecting, the issuer or with respect to the underlying securities, and changes in market interest rates and continued instability in the capital markets. Any of these factors, among others, could cause other-than-temporary impairments and realized and/or unrealized losses in future periods and declines in other comprehensive income, which could have a material effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The process for determining whether impairment of a security is other-than-temporary usually requires complex, subjective judgments about the future financial performance and liquidity of the issuer and any collateral underlying the security to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security. There can be no assurance that the declines in market value will not result in other-than-temporary impairments of these assets, and would lead to accounting charges that could have a material adverse effect on our net income and capital levels. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not incur any other-than-temporary impairments on our securities portfolio.
If limitations arise in our ability to utilize the national brokered deposit market or to replace short-term deposits, our ability to replace maturing deposits on acceptable terms could be adversely impacted.
First Financial Northwest Bank utilizes the national brokered deposit market for a portion of our funding needs. During 2020, the Company liquidated the portfolio of brokered certificates of deposit through calls and maturities and carried a zero balance at December 31, 2020. However, the Company may utilize these deposits in the future to meet our funding needs. Under FDIC regulations, in the event we are deemed to be less than well-capitalized, we would be subject to restrictions on our use of brokered deposits and the interest rate we can offer on our deposits. If this happens, our use of brokered deposits and the rates we would be allowed to pay on deposits may significantly limit our ability to use deposits as a funding source. If we are
unable to participate in this market for any reason in the future, our ability to replace these deposits at maturity could be adversely impacted.
Further, there may be competitive pressures to pay higher interest rates on deposits, which would increase our funding costs. If deposit clients move money out of the Bank deposits and into other investments (or into similar 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 such loss of funds could result in reduced loan originations, which could materially negatively impact our growth strategy and results of operations.
Our limited branch locations limit our ability to attract deposits and as a result, a large portion of our deposits are certificates of deposit, including “jumbo” certificates that may not be as stable as other types of deposits.
With fourteen branch locations in operation during 2020, our ability to compete with larger institutions for noninterest bearing deposits is limited as these institutions have a larger branch network providing greater convenience to customers. As a result, we are dependent on more interest rate sensitive deposits. At December 31, 2020, $409.6 million, or 37.4%, of our total deposits were retail certificates of deposit and, of that amount, $345.0 million were “jumbo” certificates greater than or equal to $100,000, with $135.6 million of these certificates greater than or equal to $250,000. In addition, deposit inflows are significantly influenced by general interest rates. Our money market accounts and jumbo certificates of deposit and the retention of these deposits are particularly sensitive to general interest rates, making these deposits traditionally a more volatile source of funding than other deposit accounts. In order to retain our money market accounts and jumbo certificates of deposit, we may have to pay a higher rate, resulting in an increase in our cost of funds. In a rising rate environment, we may be unwilling or unable to pay a competitive rate because of the resulting compression in our interest rate spread. To the extent that such deposits do not remain with us, they may need to be replaced with borrowings or other deposits that could increase our cost of funds and negatively impact our interest rate spread and financial condition.
Risks Related to our Business Strategy
Our branching strategy may cause our expenses to increase faster than revenues.
During 2020, we opened two new branch offices in University Place, Washington and Gig Harbor, Washington. In addition, the Bank opened our fifteenth branch in March 2021, in Issaquah, Washington. Our current business strategy includes continued similar branch expansion in areas to enhance our market presence. These offices are much smaller than traditional bank branch offices, utilizing the improved technology available with our core data processor. This allows us to maintain management’s focus on efficiency, while working to expand the Bank’s presence into new markets. The success of our expansion strategy into new markets, however, is contingent upon numerous factors, such as our ability to select suitable locations, assess each market’s competitive environment, secure managerial resources, hire and retain qualified personnel and implement effective marketing strategies. The opening of new offices may not increase the volume of our loans and deposits as quickly or to the degree that we hope, and opening new offices will increase our operating expenses. On average, de novo branches do not become profitable until three to four years after opening. We currently expect to lease rather than own the additional branch properties. Further, the projected time line and the estimated dollar amounts involved in opening de novo branches could differ significantly from actual results. The success of our acquired branches is dependent on retention of existing customers’ deposits as well as expanding our market presence in these locations. We may not successfully manage the costs and implementation risks associated with our branching strategy. Accordingly, any new branch may negatively impact our earnings for some period of time until the branch reaches certain economies of scale. Finally, there is a risk that our new branches will not be successful even after they have been established or acquired.
Risks Related to Regulatory and Compliance Matters
Non-compliance with the USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, or other laws and regulations could result in fines or sanctions.
The USA PATRIOT Act and Bank Secrecy Acts and related regulations require financial institutions to develop programs to prevent financial institutions from being used for money laundering and terrorist activities. Failure to comply with these regulations could result in fines or sanctions. During the last few years, several banking institutions have received large fines for non-compliance with these laws and regulations. While we have developed policies and procedures designed to assist in compliance with these laws and regulations, no assurance can be given that these policies and procedures will be effective in preventing violations of these laws and regulations. If our policies and procedures are deemed deficient, we would be subject to
liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the denial of regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including acquisitions.
Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us. Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.
If our enterprise risk management framework is not effective at mitigating risk and loss to us, we could suffer unexpected losses and our results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Our enterprise risk management framework seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between risk and return, which is critical to optimizing stockholder value. We have established processes and procedures intended to identify, measure, monitor, report, analyze and control the types of risk to which we are subject. These risks include liquidity risk, credit risk, market risk, interest rate risk, operational risk, legal and compliance risk, and reputational risk, among others. We also maintain a compliance program designed to identify, measure, assess, and report on our adherence to applicable laws, policies and procedures. While we assess and improve these programs on an ongoing basis, there can be no assurance that our risk management or compliance programs, along with other related controls, will effectively mitigate all risk and limit losses in our business. However, as with any risk management framework, there are inherent limitations to our risk management strategies as there may exist, or develop in the future, risks that we have not appropriately anticipated or identified. If our risk management framework proves ineffective, we could suffer unexpected losses and our business financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Risks Related to Cybersecurity, Data and Fraud
We are subject to certain risks in connection with our use of technology.
Our security measures may not be sufficient to mitigate the risk of a cyber-attack. Communications and information systems are essential to the conduct of our business, as we use such systems to manage our customer relationships, our general ledger and virtually all other aspects of our business. Our operations rely on the secure processing, storage, and transmission of confidential and other information in our computer systems and networks. Although we take protective measures and endeavor to modify them as circumstances warrant, the security of our computer systems, software, and networks may be vulnerable to breaches, fraudulent or unauthorized access, denial or degradation of service attacks, misuse, computer viruses, malware or other malicious code and cyber-attacks that could have a security impact. If one or more of these events occur, this could jeopardize our or our customers’ confidential and other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, our computer systems and networks, or otherwise cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations or the operations of our customers or counterparties. We may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures or to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures, and we may be subject to litigation and financial losses that are either not insured against or not fully covered through any insurance maintained by us. We could also suffer significant reputational damage.
Security breaches in our internet banking activities could further expose us to possible liability and damage our reputation. Increases in criminal activity levels and sophistication, advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries, vulnerabilities in third party technologies (including browsers and operating systems), or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology, processes and controls that we use to prevent fraudulent transactions and to protect data about us, our clients and underlying transactions. Any compromise of our security also could deter customers from using our internet banking services that involve the transmission of confidential information. We rely on standard internet security systems to provide the security and authentication necessary to effect secure transmission of data. Although we have developed and continue to invest in systems and processes that are designed to detect and prevent security breaches and cyber-attacks and periodically test our security, these precautions may not protect our systems from compromises or breaches of our security measures, and could result in losses to us or our customers, our loss of business and/or customers, damage to our reputation, the incurrence of additional expenses, disruption to our business, our inability to grow our online services or other businesses, additional regulatory scrutiny or penalties, or our exposure to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our security measures may not protect us from system failures or interruptions. While we have established policies and procedures to prevent or limit the impact of systems failures and interruptions, there can be no assurance that such events will not occur or that they will be adequately addressed if they do. In addition, we outsource certain aspects of our data processing and other operational functions to certain third-party providers. While we select third-party vendors carefully, we do
not control their actions. If our third-party providers encounter difficulties, including those resulting from breakdowns or other disruptions in communication services provided by a vendor, failure of a vendor to handle current or higher transaction volumes, cyber-attacks and security breaches, or if we otherwise have difficulty in communicating with them, our ability to adequately process and account for transactions could be affected, and our ability to deliver products and services to our customers and otherwise conduct business operations could be adversely impacted. Replacing these third-party vendors could also entail significant delay and expense. Threats to information security also exist in the processing of customer information through various other vendors and their personnel.
We cannot assure you that such breaches, failures or interruptions will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed by us or the third parties on which we rely. We may not be insured against all types of losses as a result of third party failures and insurance coverage may be inadequate to cover all losses resulting from breaches, system failures or other disruptions. If any of our third-party service providers experience financial, operational or technological difficulties, or if there is any other disruption in our relationships with them, we may be required to identify alternative sources of such services, and we cannot assure you that we could negotiate terms that are as favorable to us, or could obtain services with similar functionality as found in our existing systems without the need to expend substantial resources, if at all. Further, the occurrence of any systems failure or interruption could damage our reputation and result in a loss of customers and business, could subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or could expose us to legal liability. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
The board of directors oversees the risk management process including the risk of cybersecurity and engages with management on cybersecurity issues.
We are subject to certain risks in connection with our data management or aggregation.
We are reliant on our ability to manage data and our ability to aggregate data in an accurate and timely manner to ensure effective risk reporting and management. Our ability to manage data and aggregate data may be limited by the effectiveness of our policies, programs, processes and practices that govern how data is acquired, validated, stored, protected and processed. While we continuously update our policies, programs, processes and practices, many of our data management and aggregation processes are manual and subject to human error or system failure. Failure to manage data effectively and to aggregate data in an accurate and timely manner may limit our ability to manage current and emerging risks, as well as to manage changing business needs.
Our business may be adversely affected by an increasing prevalence of fraud and other financial crimes.
As a bank, we are susceptible to fraudulent activity that may be committed against us or our customers which may result in financial losses or increased costs to us or our customers, disclosure or misuse of our information or our customer’s information, misappropriation of assets, privacy breaches against our customers, litigation, or damage to our reputation. Such fraudulent activity may take many forms, including check fraud, electronic fraud, wire fraud, phishing, social engineering and other dishonest acts. Nationally, reported incidents of fraud and other financial crimes have increased. We have also experienced losses due to apparent fraud and other financial crimes. While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent such losses, there can be no assurance that such losses will not occur.
Risks related to our Business and Industry Generally
We rely on other companies to provide key components of our business infrastructure.
We rely on numerous external vendors to provide us with products and services necessary to maintain our day-to-day operations. Accordingly, our operations are exposed to risk that these vendors will not perform in accordance with the contracted arrangements under service level agreements. The failure of an external vendor to perform in accordance with the contracted arrangements under service level agreements because of changes in the vendor's organizational structure, financial condition, support for existing products and services or strategic focus or for any other reason, could be disruptive to our operations, which in turn could have a material negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations. We also could be adversely affected to the extent a service agreement is not renewed by the third-party vendor or is renewed on terms less favorable to us. Additionally, the bank regulatory agencies expect financial institutions to be responsible for all aspects of our vendors’ performance, including aspects which they delegate to third parties.
Uncertainty relating to the LIBOR calculation process and potential phasing out of LIBOR may adversely affect our results of operations.
We have certain FHLB advances, loans, interest rate swaps and investment securities, indexed to LIBOR to calculate the interest rate. The continued availability of the LIBOR index is not guaranteed after 2021. We cannot predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted. At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates may become acceptable alternatives to LIBOR (with the exception of overnight repurchase agreements, which are expected to be based on the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or SOFR) and it is impossible to predict the effect of any such alternatives on the value of LIBOR-based securities and variable rate loans, subordinated debentures, or other securities or financial arrangements, given LIBOR's role in determining market interest rates globally. SOFR is observed and backward looking, which stands in contrast with LIBOR under the current methodology, which is an estimated forward-looking rate and relies, to some degree, on the expert judgment of submitting panel members. Given that SOFR is a secured rate backed by government securities, it will be a rate that does not take into account bank credit risk (as is the case with LIBOR). SOFR is therefore likely to be lower than LIBOR and is less likely to correlate with the funding costs of financial institutions. Whether or not SOFR attains market traction as a LIBOR replacement tool remains in question and the future of LIBOR remains uncertain at this time. Uncertainty as to the nature of alternative reference rates and as to potential changes or other reforms to LIBOR may adversely affect LIBOR rates and the value of LIBOR-based loans, and to a lesser extent securities in our portfolio, and may impact the availability and cost of hedging instruments and borrowings. If LIBOR rates are no longer available, and we are required to implement substitute indices for the calculation of interest rates under our loan agreements with our borrowers or our existing borrowings, we may incur significant expenses in effecting the transition, and may be subject to disputes or litigation with customers and creditors over the appropriateness or comparability to LIBOR of the substitute indices, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.
Ineffective liquidity management could adversely affect our financial results and condition.
Effective liquidity management is essential to our business. 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 general financial market stress. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans or investment securities and other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. We rely on customer deposits and at times, borrowings from the FHLB of Des Moines and certain other wholesale funding sources to fund our operations. Deposit flows and the prepayment of loans and mortgage-related securities are strongly influenced by such external factors as the direction of interest rates, whether actual or perceived, and the competition for deposits and loans in the markets we serve. Further, changes to the FHLB of Des Moines's underwriting guidelines for wholesale borrowings or lending policies may limit or restrict our ability to borrow, and could therefore have a significant adverse impact on our liquidity. Although we have historically been able to replace maturing deposits and borrowings if desired, we may not be able to replace such funds in the future if, among other things, our financial condition, the financial condition of the FHLB of Des Moines, or market conditions change. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities or on terms which are acceptable could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry or economy in general, such as a disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry or deterioration in credit markets. Additional factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity as a result of a downturn in the markets in which our loans are concentrated, negative operating results, or adverse regulatory action against us. Any decline in available funding in amounts adequate to finance our activities or on terms which are acceptable 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.
Our growth or future losses may require us to raise additional capital in the future, but that capital may not be available when it is needed, or the cost of that capital may be very high.
We are required by federal regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations. At some point, we may need to raise additional capital to support our growth or replenish future losses. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside our control, and on our financial condition and performance. Accordingly, we cannot make assurances that we will be able to raise additional capital if needed on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, our ability to further expand our operations could be materially impaired and our financial condition and liquidity could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, any additional capital we obtain may result in the dilution of the interests of existing holders of
our common stock. Further, if we are unable to raise additional capital when required by our bank regulators, we may be subject to adverse regulatory action.
We are dependent on key personnel and the loss of one or more of those key personnel may materially and adversely affect our prospects.
Competition for qualified employees and personnel in the banking industry is intense and there are a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of, and experience in, the community banking industry where First Financial Northwest Bank conducts its business. The process of recruiting personnel with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out our strategies is often lengthy. Our success depends to a significant degree upon our ability to attract and retain qualified management, loan origination, finance, administrative, marketing, and technical personnel and upon the continued contributions of our management and personnel. In particular, our success has been and continues to be highly dependent upon the abilities of key executives, including our President, and certain other employees. In addition, our success has been and continues to be highly dependent upon the services of our directors, many of whom are at or nearing retirement age, and we may not be able to identify and attract suitable candidates to replace such directors.
We participate in a multiple employer defined benefit pension plan for the benefit of our employees. If we were to withdraw from this plan, or if Pentegra, the multiple employer defined benefit pension plan sponsor, requires us to make additional contributions, we could incur a substantial expense in connection with the withdrawal or the request for additional contributions.
We participate in the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions, a multiple employer pension plan for the benefit of our employees. Effective March 31, 2013, we did not allow additional employees to participate in this plan. On March 31, 2013, we froze the future accrual of benefits under this plan with respect to those participating employees. In connection with our decision to freeze our benefit accruals under the plan, and since then, we considered withdrawing from the plan.
The actual expense that would be incurred in connection with a withdrawal from the plan is primarily dependent upon the timing of the withdrawal, the total value of the plan’s assets at the time of withdrawal, general market interest rates at that time, expenses imposed on withdrawal, and other conditions imposed by Pentegra as set forth in the plan. If we choose to withdraw from the plan in the future, we could incur a substantial expense in connection with the withdrawal.
Even if we do not withdraw from the plan, Pentegra, as sponsor of the plan, may request that we make an additional contribution to the plan, in addition to contributions that we are regularly required to make, or obtain a letter of credit in favor of the plan, if our financial condition worsens to the point that it triggers certain criteria set out in the plan. If we fail to make the contribution or obtain the requested letter of credit, then we may be forced to withdraw from the plan and establish a separate, single employer defined benefit plan that we anticipate would be underfunded to a similar extent as under the multiple employer plan.
We rely on dividends from the Bank for substantially all of our revenue at the holding company level.
We are an entity separate and distinct from our principal subsidiary, First Financial Northwest Bank, and derive substantially all of our revenue at the holding company level in the form of dividends from that subsidiary. Accordingly, we are, and will be, dependent upon dividends from the Bank to pay the principal of and interest on our indebtedness, to satisfy our other cash needs and to pay dividends on our common stock. First Financial Northwest Bank’s ability to pay dividends is subject to its ability to earn net income and to meet certain regulatory requirements, including the capital conservation buffer requirement. In the event the Bank is unable to pay dividends to us, we may not be able to pay dividends on our common stock or continue our stock repurchases. Also, our right to participate in a distribution of assets upon a subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization is subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary’s creditors.