Risks Related to Our Banking Operations

Our level of assets categorized as doubtful, substandard or special mention exposes us to increased lending risk. If our allowance for loan losses is insufficient to absorb losses in our loan portfolio, our earnings could decrease.

Lending money is a substantial part of our business, and each loan carries a certain risk that it will not be repaid in accordance with its terms or that any underlying collateral will not be sufficient to assure repayment. This risk is affected by, among other things:

At December 31, 2012, our allowance for loan losses totaled $25.8 million, which represents 1.20% of total loans not covered under the Loss Sharing Agreements with the FDIC. We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and loans covered under the Loss Sharing Agreements that did not exhibit evidence of deterioration in credit quality on the acquisition date and the probability of making payment, as well as the value of real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. Loans covered under the Loss Sharing Agreements totaled $107.5 million at December 31, 2012. In determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses, significant factors considered include loss experience in particular segments of the portfolio, trends and absolute levels of classified and criticized loans, trends and absolute levels in delinquent loans, trends in risk ratings, trends in industry charge-offs by particular segments and changes in existing general economic and business conditions affecting our lending areas and the national economy. If our assumptions are incorrect, our allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover losses inherent in our loan portfolio, resulting in additions to the allowance.

Material additions to our allowance could materially decrease net income. Our regulators, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our allowance for loan losses by recognizing additional provisions for loan losses charged to expense, or to decrease our allowance for loan losses by recognizing loan charge-offs, net of recoveries. Any such additional provisions for loan losses or charge-offs, as required by these regulatory agencies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our emphasis on commercial and mortgage warehouse lending may expose us to increased lending risks.

We intend to continue emphasizing the origination of commercial lending and specialty lending, including mortgage warehouse financing. Commercial loans generally expose a lender to greater risk of non-payment and loss than one- to four-family residential mortgage loans because repayment of the loans often depends on the successful operation of the property and the income stream of the borrowers. Such loans typically involve larger loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers compared to one- to four-family residential mortgage loans. In addition, since such loans generally entail greater credit risk than one- to four-family residential mortgage loans, we may need to increase our allowance for loan losses in the future to account for the likely increase in probable incurred credit losses associated with the growth of such loans. Also, we expect that many of our commercial borrowers will 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 mortgage loan.

As a mortgage warehouse lender, we provide a form of financing to mortgage bankers by purchasing the underlying residential mortgages on a short-term basis under a master repurchase agreement. We are subject to the risks associated with such lending, including, but not limited to, the risks of fraud, bankruptcy and default of the underlying residential borrower, any of which could result in credit losses. The risk of fraud associated with this type of lending includes, but is not limited to, the risk of financing nonexistent loans or fictitious mortgage loan transactions, or that the collateral delivered is fraudulent creating exposure that could result in the loss of the full amount financed on the underlying residential mortgage loan .

Decreased residential mortgage origination, volume and pricing decisions of competitors may adversely affect our profitability.

We currently operate a residential mortgage business but plan to dramatically expand to originate, sell and service residential mortgage loans in the future. When we do, changes in interest rates and pricing decisions by our loan competitors may adversely affect demand for our residential mortgage loan products, the revenue realized on the sale of loans and revenues received from servicing such loans for others, and ultimately reduce our net income. New regulations, increased regulatory reviews, and/or changes in the structure of the secondary mortgage markets which we would utilize to sell mortgage loans may be introduced and may increase costs and make it more difficult to operate a residential mortgage origination business.

18

Table of Contents

Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh may not pay dividends or repurchase capital stock in the future.

On December 23, 2008, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (“FHLB”) announced that it would voluntarily suspend the payment of dividends and the repurchase of excess capital stock until further notice. The FHLB announced at that time that it expected its ability to pay dividends and add to retained earnings to be significantly curtailed due to low short-term interest rates, an increased cost of maintaining liquidity, other than temporary impairment charges, and constrained access to debt markets at attractive rates. While FHLB announced on February 22, 2012 that a dividend would be paid and capital stock repurchase would resume, capital stock repurchases from member banks are reviewed on a quarterly basis by the FHLB. There is no guarantee that such dividends and capital stock repurchases will continue in the future. As of December 31, 2012, we held $24.6 million of FHLB capital stock.

The fair value of our investment securities can fluctuate due to market conditions outside of our control.

As of December 31, 2012, the fair value of our investment securities portfolio was approximately $129.1 million. We have historically taken a conservative investment strategy, with concentrations of securities that are backed by government sponsored enterprises. In the future, we may seek to increase yields through more aggressive strategies, which may include a greater percentage of corporate securities and structured credit products. 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 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 adverse effect on us. 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 in order to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security.

We may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of deposit withdrawals and other business needs or support earnings growth unless we maintain sufficient liquidity.

We need adequate liquidity to fund our balance sheet growth in order for us to be able to successfully grow our revenues, make loans and to repay deposit and other liabilities as they become due or are demanded by customers. This would require us to seek third party funding or other sources of liquidity. This liquidity can be gathered in both wholesale and non-wholesale funding markets. Our asset growth over the past few years has been funded with various forms of deposits and wholesale funding which is defined as wholesale deposits (primarily certificates of deposit and money market accounts) and borrowed funds (FHLB advances, Federal advances and Federal fund line borrowings). Wholesale funding at December 31, 2012 represented approximately 35.8% of total funding compared with approximately 17.6% at December 31, 2011. Wholesale funding generally costs more than deposits generated from our traditional branch system and is subject to certain practical limits such as the FHLB’s maximum borrowing capacity and our liquidity policy limits. Additionally, regulators might consider wholesale funding beyond certain points to be imprudent and might suggest that future asset growth be reduced or halted. In the absence of wholesale funding sources, we might need to reduce earning asset growth through the reduction of current production, sale of assets, and/or the participating out of future and current loans. This in turn might reduce our future net income. The amount loaned to us is generally dependent on the value of the collateral pledged and our financial condition. These lenders could reduce the percentages loaned against various collateral categories, eliminate certain types of collateral and otherwise modify or even terminate their loan programs, particularly to the extent they are required to do so because of capital adequacy or other balance sheet concerns, or if further disruptions in the capital markets occur. Any change or termination of our borrowings from the FHLB, the Federal Reserve Board or correspondent banks would have an adverse effect on our liquidity and profitability.

Downgrades in U.S. Government and federal agency securities could adversely affect Customers Bancorp and the Bank

The long-term impact of the downgrade of the U.S. Government and federal agencies from an AAA to an AA+ credit rating is currently unknown. However, in addition to causing economic and financial market disruptions, the recent downgrade, and any future downgrades and/or failures to raise the U.S. debt limit if necessary in the future, could, among other things, materially adversely affect the market value of the U.S. and other government and governmental agency securities that we hold, the availability of those securities as collateral for borrowing, and our ability to access capital markets on favorable terms, as well as have other material adverse effects on the operation of our business and our financial results and condition. In particular, it could increase interest rates and disrupt payment systems, money markets, and long-term or short-term fixed income markets, adversely affecting the cost and availability of funding, which could negatively affect profitability. Also, the adverse consequences as a result of the downgrade could extend to the borrowers of the loans the Bank makes and, as a result, could adversely affect its borrowers’ ability to repay their loans.

19

Table of Contents

We may not be able to retain or develop a strong core deposit base or other low-cost funding sources.

We expect to depend on checking, savings and money market deposit account balances and other forms of customer deposits as our primary source of funding for our lending activities. Our future growth will largely depend on our ability to retain and grow a strong, low-cost deposit base. Because 48.3% of our deposit base as of December 31, 2012 is time deposits, the large majority of which we acquired, it may prove harder to maintain and grow our deposit base than would otherwise be the case, especially since many of them currently pay interest at above-market rates. During the 12 months following December 31, 2012, $806.9 million of our time deposits are scheduled to mature.

We are working to transition certain of our customers to lower cost traditional banking services as higher cost funding sources, such as high interest time deposits, mature. Many banks in the United States are struggling to maintain depositors in light of the recent financial crisis, and there may be competitive pressures to pay higher interest rates on deposits, which could increase funding costs and compress net interest margins. Customers may not transition to lower yielding savings and investment products, which could materially and adversely affect us. In addition, with recent concerns about bank failures, customers have become concerned about the extent to which their deposits are insured by the FDIC, particularly customers that may maintain deposits in excess of insured limits. Customers may withdraw deposits in an effort to ensure that the amount that they have on deposit with us is fully insured and may place them in other institutions or make investments that are perceived as being more secure. Further, even if we are able to grow and maintain our deposit base, the account and deposit balances can decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If customers move money out of bank deposits, 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 lower loan originations, which could materially and adversely affect us.

We may not be able to maintain consistent earnings or profitability.

We have had periods in which we experienced operating losses, including in 2009, portions of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011. Although we made a profit for the years of 2011 and 2012, there can be no assurance that we will be able to remain profitable in future periods, or, if profitable, that our overall earnings will remain consistent or increase in the future. Our earnings also may be reduced by any increased expenses associated with increased assets, such as additional employee compensation expense, and increased interest expense on any liabilities incurred or deposits solicited to fund increases in assets. If earnings do not grow proportionately with our assets or equity, our overall profitability may be adversely affected.

Continued or worsening general business and economic conditions could materially and adversely affect us.

Our business and operations are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the United States, which remain guarded. If the U.S. economy is unable to steadily emerge from the recent recession that began in 2007 or we experience worsening economic conditions, such as a so-called “double-dip” recession, we could be materially and adversely affected. Weak economic conditions may be characterized by deflation, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, including a lack of liquidity and/or depressed prices in the secondary market for mortgage loans, increased delinquencies on loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines and lower home sales and commercial activity. All of these factors would be detrimental to our business. Our business is significantly affected by monetary and related policies of the U.S. federal government, its agencies and government-sponsored entities. Changes in any of these policies are influenced by macroeconomic conditions and other factors that are beyond our control and could have a material adverse effect on us.

The geographic concentration in the Northeast and Mid Atlantic region makes our business highly susceptible to downturns in the local economies and depressed banking markets, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Our loan and deposit activities are largely based in the Northeast and Mid Atlantic regions. As a result, our financial performance depends largely upon economic conditions in this region. This region has recently experienced deteriorating local economic conditions and a continued downturn in the regional real estate market that could harm our financial condition and results of operations because of the geographic concentration of loans within this region and because a large percentage of the loans are secured by real property. If there is further decline in real estate values, the collateral for our loans will provide less security. As a result, the ability to recover on defaulted loans by selling the underlying real estate will be diminished, and we will be more likely to suffer losses on defaulted loans. Additionally, a significant portion of our loan portfolio is invested in commercial real estate loans. Often in a commercial real estate transaction, repayment of the loan is dependent on rental income.

Economic conditions may affect the tenant’s ability to make rental payments on a timely basis, and may cause some tenants not to renew their leases, each of which may impact the debtor’s ability to make loan payments. Further, if expenses associated with commercial properties increase dramatically, the tenant’s ability to repay, and therefore the debtor’s ability to make timely loan payments, could be adversely affected. All of these factors could increase the amount of non-performing loans, increase our provision for loan losses and reduce our net income.

20

Table of Contents

Our business is highly susceptible to credit risk.

As a lender, we are exposed to the risk that our customers will be unable to repay their loans according to their terms and that the collateral securing the payment of their loans (if any) may not be sufficient to assure repayment. The risks inherent in making any loan include risks with respect to the ability of borrowers to repay their loans and, if applicable, the period of time over which the loan is repaid, risks relating to proper loan underwriting and guidelines, risks resulting from changes in economic and industry conditions, risks inherent in dealing with individual borrowers and risks resulting from uncertainties as to the future value of collateral. Similarly, we have credit risk embedded in our securities portfolio. Our credit standards, procedures and policies may not prevent us from incurring substantial credit losses, particularly in light of market developments in recent years.

Additionally, we may restructure originated or acquired loans if we believe the borrowers are likely to fully repay their restructured obligations. We may also be subject to legal or regulatory requirements for restructured loans. For our originated loans, if interest rates or other terms are modified subsequent to extension of credit or if terms of an existing loan are renewed because a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty and a concession is granted, we may be required to classify such action as a troubled debt restructuring (which we refer to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as “TDR”). With respect to restructured loans, we may grant concessions to borrowers experiencing financial difficulties in order to facilitate repayment of the loan by (1) reduction of the stated interest rate for the remaining life of the loan to lower than the current market rate for new loans with similar risk or (2) extension of the maturity date. In situations where a TDR is unsuccessful and the borrower is unable to satisfy the terms of the restructured loan, the loan would be placed on non-accrual status and written down to the underlying collateral value less estimated selling costs.

We depend on our executive officers and key personnel to implement our strategy and could be harmed by the loss of their services.

We believe that the implementation of our strategy will depend in large part on the skills of our executive management team and our ability to motivate and retain these and other key personnel. Accordingly, the loss of service of one or more of our executive officers or key personnel could reduce our ability to successfully implement our growth strategy and materially and adversely affect us. Leadership changes will occur from time to time, and if significant resignations occur, we may not be able to recruit additional qualified personnel. We believe our executive management team possesses valuable knowledge about the banking industry and that their knowledge and relationships would be very difficult to replicate. Although our Chief Executive Officer and President have entered into employment agreements with us, it is possible that they may not complete the term of their employment agreement or may choose not to renew it upon expiration. Our success also depends on the experience of our branch managers and lending officers and on their relationships with the customers and communities they serve. The loss of these key personnel could negatively impact our banking operations. The loss of key senior personnel, or the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future, could have a material adverse effect on us.

We face significant competition from other financial institutions and financial services providers, which may materially and adversely affect us.

Consumer and commercial banking is highly competitive. Our markets contain a large number of community and regional banks as well as a significant presence of the country’s largest commercial banks. We compete with other state and national financial institutions, including savings and loan associations, savings banks and credit unions, for deposits and loans. In addition, we compete with financial intermediaries, such as consumer finance companies, mortgage banking companies, insurance companies, securities firms, mutual funds and several government agencies, as well as major retailers, in providing various types of loans and other financial services. Some of these competitors may have a long history of successful operations in our markets, greater ties to local businesses and more expansive banking relationships, as well as better established depositor bases. Competitors may also have greater resources and access to capital and may possess an advantage by being capable of maintaining numerous banking locations in more convenient sites, operating more ATMs and conducting extensive promotional and advertising campaigns or operating a more developed Internet platform. Competitors may also exhibit a greater tolerance for risk and behave more aggressively with respect to pricing in order to increase their market share.

The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Increased competition among financial services companies due to the recent consolidation of certain competing financial institutions may adversely affect our ability to market our products and services. Technological advances have lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for banks to compete in our market without a retail footprint by offering competitive rates, as well as non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks. Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including, among others:

21

Table of Contents

Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken our competitive position, which could materially and adversely affect us.

Like other financial services institutions, our asset and liability structures are monetary in nature. Such structures are affected by a variety of factors, including changes in interest rates, which can impact the value of financial instruments held by us.

Like other financial services institutions, we have asset and liability structures that are essentially monetary in nature and are directly affected by many factors, including domestic and international economic and political conditions, broad trends in business and finance, legislation and regulation affecting the national and international business and financial communities, monetary and fiscal policies, inflation, currency values, market conditions, the availability and terms (including cost) of short-term or long-term funding and capital, the credit capacity or perceived creditworthiness of customers and counterparties and the level and volatility of trading markets. Such factors can impact customers and counterparties of a financial services institution and may impact the value of financial instruments held by a financial services institution.

Our earnings and cash flows largely depend upon the level of our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on loans, investments and other interest earning assets, and the interest we pay on interest bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Because different types of assets and liabilities may react differently and at different times to market interest rate changes, changes in interest rates can increase or decrease our net interest income. When interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest earning assets in a period, an increase in interest rates would reduce net interest income. Similarly, when interest earning assets mature or reprice more quickly, and because the magnitude of repricing of interest earning assets is often greater than interest bearing liabilities, falling interest rates would reduce net interest income.

Accordingly, changes in the level of market interest rates affect our net yield on interest earning assets and liabilities, loan and investment securities portfolios and our overall results. Changes in interest rates may also have a significant impact on any future loan origination revenues. Historically, there has been an inverse correlation between the demand for loans and interest rates. Loan origination volume and revenues usually decline during periods of rising or high interest rates and increase during periods of declining or low interest rates. Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on the carrying value of a significant percentage of the assets, both loans and investment securities, on our balance sheet. We may incur debt in the future and that debt may also be sensitive to interest rates and any increase in interest rates could materially and adversely affect us. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond our control, including general economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, particularly the Federal Reserve. Adverse changes in the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policies or other changes in monetary policies and economic conditions could materially and adversely affect us.

We are dependent on our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers, and systems failures, interruptions or breaches of security could have a material adverse effect on us.

Our business is highly dependent on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers. We outsource many of our major systems, such as data processing, loan servicing and deposit processing systems. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. If significant, sustained or repeated, a system failure or service denial could compromise our ability to operate effectively, damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, and/or subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on us.

In addition, we provide our customers with the ability to bank remotely, including online, over the Internet and over the telephone. The secure transmission of confidential information over the Internet and other remote channels is a critical element of remote banking. Our network could be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes and other security breaches. We may be required to spend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by security breaches or viruses. To the extent that our activities or the activities of our customers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches and viruses could expose us to claims, regulatory scrutiny, litigation and other possible liabilities. Any inability to prevent security breaches or computer viruses could also cause existing customers to lose confidence in our systems and could materially and adversely affect us.

Additionally, financial products and services have become increasingly technology-driven. Our ability to meet the needs of our customers competitively, and in a cost-efficient manner, is dependent on the ability to keep pace with technological advances and to invest in new technology as it becomes available. Many of our competitors have greater resources to invest in technology than

22

Table of Contents

we do and may be better equipped to market new technology-driven products and services. The ability to keep pace with technological change is important, and the failure to do so could have a material adverse impact on our business and therefore on our financial condition and results of operations.

Loss of, or failure to adequately safeguard, confidential or proprietary information may adversely affect the Bancorp’s operations, net income or reputation.

The Bancorp regularly collects, processes, transmits and stores significant amounts of confidential information regarding its customers, employees and others. This information is necessary for the conduct of the Bancorp’s business activities, including the ongoing maintenance of deposit, loan, investment management and other account relationships for our customers, and receiving instructions and affecting transactions for those customers and other users of the Bancorp’s products and services. In addition to confidential information regarding its customers, employees and others, the Bancorp compiles, processes, transmits and stores proprietary, non-public information concerning its own business, operations, plans and strategies. In some cases, this confidential or proprietary information is collected, compiled, processed, transmitted or stored by third parties on behalf of the Bancorp.

Information security risks have generally increased in recent years because of the proliferation of new technologies and the increased sophistication and activities of perpetrators of cyber-attacks. A failure in or breach of the Bancorp’s operational or information security systems, or those of the Bancorp’s third-party service providers, as a result of cyber-attacks or information security breaches or due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions could adversely affect our business, result in the disclosure or misuse of confidential or proprietary information, damage our reputation, increase our costs and/or cause losses. As a result, cyber security and the continued development and enhancement of the controls and processes designed to protect the Bancorp’s systems, computers, software, data and networks from attack, damage or unauthorized access remain a priority for the Bancorp.

If this confidential or proprietary information were to be mishandled, misused or lost, the Bancorp could be exposed to significant regulatory consequences, reputational damage, civil litigation and financial loss. Mishandling, misuse or loss of this confidential or proprietary information could occur, for example, if the confidential or proprietary information were erroneously provided to parties who are not permitted to have the information, either by fault of the systems or employees of the Bancorp, or the systems or employees of third parties which have collected, compiled, processed, transmitted or stored the information on the Bancorp’s behalf, where the information is intercepted or otherwise inappropriately taken by third parties or where there is a failure or breach of the network, communications or information systems which are used to collect, compile, process, transmit or store the information.

Although the Bancorp employs a variety of physical, procedural and technological safeguards to protect this confidential and proprietary information from mishandling, misuse or loss, these safeguards do not provide absolute assurance that mishandling, misuse or loss of the information will not occur, or that if mishandling, misuse or loss of the information did occur, those events would be promptly detected and addressed. Additionally, as information security risks and cyber threats continue to evolve, the Bancorp may be required to expend additional resources to continue to enhance its information security measures and/or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities.

Our directors and executive officers can influence the outcome of shareholder votes and, in some cases, shareholders may have no opportunity to evaluate and affect the investment decision regarding a potential investment or acquisition transaction.

As of December 31, 2012, the directors and executive officers of Customers Bancorp as a group owned a total of 718,685 shares of Voting Common Stock, 20,833 shares of Class B Non-Voting Common Stock, and exercisable options or warrants to purchase up to an additional 286,584 shares of Voting Common Stock, which potentially gives them, as a group, the ability to control approximately 7.1 % of the issued and outstanding Voting Common Stock. In addition, directors of Customers Bank who are not directors of Customers Bancorp own an additional 206,576 shares of Voting Common Stock and exercisable options or warrants to purchase up to an additional 12,324 shares of Voting Common Stock and exercisable options or warrants to purchase up to an additional 21,190 shares of Voting Common Stock, which if combined with the directors and officers of Customers Bancorp, potentially gives them, as a group, the ability to control approximately 8.7% of the issued and outstanding Voting Common Stock. We believe ownership of stock causes directors and officers to have the same interests as shareholders, but it also gives them the ability to vote as shareholders for matters that are in their personal interest, which may be contrary to the wishes of other shareholders. Shareholders will not necessarily be provided with an opportunity to evaluate the specific merits or risks of one or more target institutions. Any decision regarding a potential investment or acquisition transaction will be made by our board of directors. Except in limited circumstances as required by applicable law, consummation of an acquisition will not require the approval of holders of Voting Common Stock. Accordingly, you may not have an opportunity to evaluate and affect the investment decision regarding potential investment or acquisition transactions.

We intend to engage in acquisitions of other businesses from time to time. These acquisitions may not produce revenue or earnings enhancements or cost savings at levels or within timeframes originally anticipated and may result in unforeseen integration difficulties.

We regularly evaluate opportunities to strengthen our current market position by acquiring and investing in banks and in other complementary businesses, or opening new branches, and when appropriate opportunities arise, subject to regulatory approval, we

23

Table of Contents

plan to engage in acquisitions of other businesses and in opening new branches. Such transactions could, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on our operating results and financial condition, including short and long-term liquidity. Our acquisition activities could be material to our business. For example, we could issue additional shares of Voting Common Stock in a purchase transaction, which could dilute current shareholders’ value or ownership interest. These activities could require us to use a substantial amount of cash, other liquid assets and/or incur debt. In addition, if goodwill recorded in connection with acquisitions were determined to be impaired, then we would be required to recognize a charge against our earnings, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations during the period in which the impairment was recognized. Any potential charges for impairment related to goodwill would not impact cash flow, tangible capital or liquidity. Our acquisition activities could involve a number of additional risks, including the risks of:

Additionally, in evaluating potential acquisition opportunities we may seek to acquire failed banks through FDIC-assisted acquisitions. While the FDIC may, in such acquisitions, provide assistance to mitigate certain risks, such as sharing in exposure to loan losses, and providing indemnification against certain liabilities, of the failed institution, we may not be able to accurately estimate our potential exposure to loan losses and other potential liabilities, or the difficulty of integration, in acquiring such institutions.

Depending on the condition of any institutions or assets that are acquired, any acquisition may, at least in the near term, materially adversely affect our capital and earnings and, if not successfully integrated following the acquisition, may continue to have such effects. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with pending or potential acquisitions. Our inability to overcome these risks could have an adverse effect on levels of reported net income, return on equity and return on assets, and the ability to achieve our business strategy and maintain market value.

We are subject to certain risks related to FDIC-assisted acquisitions.

The success of past FDIC-assisted acquisitions, and any FDIC-assisted acquisitions in which we may participate in the future, will depend on a number of factors, including our ability to:

As with any acquisition involving a financial institution, particularly one involving the transfer of a large number of bank branches (as is often the case with FDIC-assisted acquisitions), there may be higher than average levels of service disruptions that would cause inconveniences or potentially increase the effectiveness of competing financial institutions in attracting our customers. Integrating the acquired branches could present unique challenges and opportunities because of the nature of the transactions. Integration efforts will also likely divert our management’s attention and resources. It is not known whether we will be able to integrate acquired branches successfully, and the integration process could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of ongoing business or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with clients, customers, depositors and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the FDIC-assisted acquisitions. We may also encounter unexpected difficulties or costs during integration that could materially adversely affect our earnings and financial condition. Additionally, we may be unable to compete effectively in the market areas previously served by the acquired branches or to manage any growth resulting from FDIC-assisted acquisitions effectively.

24

Table of Contents

Our willingness and ability to grow acquired branches following FDIC-assisted acquisitions depend on several factors, most importantly the ability to retain certain key personnel that we hire or transfer in connection with FDIC-assisted acquisitions. Our failure to retain these employees could adversely affect the success of FDIC-assisted acquisitions and our future growth.

Our ability to continue to receive benefits of our Loss Sharing Agreements with the FDIC is conditioned upon compliance with certain requirements under the Purchase and Assumption Agreements.

Pursuant to the Purchase and Assumption Agreements we signed in connection with our FDIC-assisted acquisitions of USA Bank and ISN Bank (“Purchase and Assumption Agreements”), we are the beneficiary of loss sharing arrangements with the FDIC (the “Loss Sharing Agreements”) that call for the FDIC to fund a portion of its losses on a majority of the assets acquired in connection with the transactions. Our ability to recover a portion of losses and retain the loss sharing protection is subject to compliance with certain requirements imposed on us in the Purchase and Assumption Agreements. The requirements of the Loss Sharing Agreements relate primarily to loan servicing standards concerning the assets covered by the Loss Sharing Agreements (the “Covered Assets”), as well as obtaining the consents of the FDIC to engage in certain corporate transactions that may be deemed under the agreements to constitute a transfer of the loss sharing benefits. For example, FDIC approval will be required for any merger we undertake that would result in the pre-merger shareholders of such entity owning less than sixty-six and two/thirds percent (66.66%) of the equity of the surviving entity.

As the loan servicing standards evolve, we may experience difficulties in complying with the requirements of the Loss Sharing Agreements, which could result in Covered Assets losing some or all of their loss sharing coverage. In accordance with the terms of the Loss Sharing Agreements, we are subject to audits by the FDIC through its designated agent. The required terms of the Loss Sharing Agreements are extensive and failure to comply with any of the guidelines could result in a specific asset or group of assets losing their loss sharing coverage.

In such instances in which the consent of the FDIC is required under the Purchase and Assumption Agreements, the FDIC may withhold its consent to such transactions or may condition its consent on terms that we do not find acceptable. There can be no assurance that the FDIC will grant its consent or condition its consent on terms that we find acceptable. If the FDIC does not grant its consent to a transaction we would like to pursue, or conditions its consent on terms that we do not find acceptable, this may cause us not to engage in a corporate transaction that might otherwise benefit shareholders or to pursue such a transaction without obtaining the FDIC’s consent, which could result in termination of the Loss Sharing Agreements with the FDIC.

FDIC-assisted acquisition opportunities may not become available and increased competition may make it more difficult for us to bid on failed bank transactions on terms considered to be acceptable.

Our near-term business strategy includes consideration of potential acquisitions of failing banks that the FDIC plans to place in receivership. The FDIC may not place banks that meet our strategic objectives into receivership. Failed bank transactions are attractive opportunities in part because of loss sharing arrangements with the FDIC that limit the acquirer’s downside risk on the purchased loan portfolio and, apart from our assumption of deposit liabilities, we have significant discretion as to the non-deposit liabilities that we assume. In addition, assets purchased from the FDIC are marked to their fair value and in many cases there is little or no addition to goodwill arising from an FDIC-assisted acquisition. The bidding process for failing banks could become very competitive, and the increased competition may make it more difficult for us to bid on terms we consider to be acceptable. Further, all FDIC-assisted acquisitions would require us to obtain applicable regulatory approval.

If we do not open new branches as planned or do not achieve profitability on new branches, earnings may be reduced.

We plan to open approximately four to six new branches each year over the next few years in and around our target markets of southeastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, Connecticut, Virginia and Delaware. These plans may change. The opening of new branches is subject to regulatory approvals. We cannot predict whether the banking regulators will agree with our growth plans or if or when they will provide the necessary branch approvals. Numerous factors contribute to the performance of a new branch, such as the ability to select a suitable location, competition, our ability to hire and retain qualified personnel, and the effectiveness of our marketing strategy. It takes time for a new branch to generate significant deposits and loan volume to offset expenses, some of which, like salaries and occupancy expense, are relatively fixed costs. The initial cost, including capital asset purchases, for each new branch to open would be in a range of approximately $200,000 to $250,000. Additionally, there can be no assurance that any of these new branches will ever become profitable. During the period of time before a branch can become profitable, operating a branch will negatively impact net income.

To the extent that we are unable to increase loans through organic loan growth, we may be unable to successfully implement our growth strategy, which could materially and adversely affect us.

In addition to growing our business through strategic acquisitions, we also intend to grow our business through organic loan growth. While loan growth has been strong and our loan balances have increased over the past two fiscal years, much of this growth has come from our warehouse lending business. This business tends to be volatile and we have seen strong growth due to the low interest rate environmental and strong refinancing activity. If the bank is unsuccessful with diversifying its loan originations, our results of operations and financial condition could be negatively impacted.

25

Table of Contents

We may not be able to effectively manage our growth.

Our future operating results depend to a large extent on our ability to successfully manage our rapid growth. Our rapid growth has placed, and it may continue to place, significant demands on our operations and management. Whether through additional acquisitions or organic growth, our current plan to expand our business is dependent upon our ability to:

We may not successfully implement improvements to, or integrate, our management information and control systems, procedures and processes in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. In particular, our controls and procedures must be able to accommodate an increase in loan volume in various markets and the infrastructure that comes with new banking centers and banks. Thus, our growth strategy may divert management from our existing franchises and may require us to incur additional expenditures to expand our administrative and operational infrastructure and, if we are unable to effectively manage and grow our banking franchise, we could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, if we are unable to manage future expansion in our operations, we may experience compliance and operational problems, have to slow the pace of growth, or have to incur additional expenditures beyond current projections to support such growth, any one of which could materially and adversely affect us. If we experience difficulties with the integration process, the anticipated benefits of the particular acquisition may not be realized fully, or at all, or may take longer to realize than expected. Additionally, we may be unable to recognize synergies, operating efficiencies and/or expected benefits within expected timeframes and cost projections, or at all. We may also not be able to preserve the goodwill of an acquired financial institution.

Our acquisitions generally will require regulatory approvals, and failure to obtain them would restrict our growth.

We intend to complement and expand our business by pursuing strategic acquisitions of community banking franchises. Generally, any acquisition of target financial institutions, banking centers or other banking assets by us will require approval by, and cooperation from, a number of governmental regulatory agencies, possibly including the Federal Reserve, the OCC and the FDIC, as well as state banking regulators. In acting on applications, federal banking regulators consider, among other factors:

Such regulators could deny our application based on the above criteria or other considerations, which would restrict our growth, or the regulatory approvals may not be granted on terms that are acceptable to us. For example, we could be required to sell banking centers as a condition to receiving regulatory approvals, and such a condition may not be acceptable to us or may reduce the benefit of any acquisition.

The success of future transactions will depend on our ability to successfully identify and consummate acquisitions of banking franchises that meet our investment objectives. Because of the intense competition for acquisition opportunities and the limited number of potential targets, we may not be able to successfully consummate acquisitions on attractive terms, or at all, that are necessary to grow our business.

Our acquisition history should be viewed in the context of the recent opportunities available to us as a result of the confluence of our access to capital at a time when market dislocations of historical proportions resulted in attractive asset acquisition opportunities. As conditions change, we may prove to be unable to execute our acquisition strategy, which would materially and adversely affect us. The success of future transactions will depend on our ability to successfully identify and consummate transactions with target banking franchises that meet our investment objectives. There are significant risks associated with our ability to identify and successfully consummate these acquisitions. There are a limited number of acquisition opportunities, and

26

Table of Contents

we expect to encounter intense competition from other banking organizations competing for acquisitions and also from other investment funds and entities looking to acquire financial institutions. Many of these entities are well established and have extensive experience in identifying and consummating acquisitions directly or through affiliates. Many of these competitors possess ongoing banking operations with greater financial, technical, human and other resources and access to capital than we do, which could limit the acquisition opportunities we pursue. Our competitors may be able to achieve greater cost savings, through consolidating operations or otherwise, than we could. These competitive limitations give others an advantage in pursuing certain acquisitions. In addition, increased competition may drive up the prices for the acquisitions we pursue and make the other acquisition terms more onerous, which would make the identification and successful consummation of those acquisitions less attractive to us. Competitors may be willing to pay more for acquisitions than we believe are justified, which could result in us having to pay more for them than we prefer or to forego the opportunity. As a result of the foregoing, we may be unable to successfully identify and consummate acquisitions on attractive terms, or at all, that are necessary to grow our business.

We will generally establish the pricing of transactions and the capital structure of banking franchises to be acquired by us on the basis of financial projections for such banking franchises. In general, projected operating results will be based on the judgment of our management team. In all cases, projections are only estimates of future results that are based upon assumptions made at the time that the projections are developed and the projected results may vary significantly from actual results. General economic, political and market conditions can have a material adverse impact on the reliability of such projections. In the event that the projections made in connection with our acquisitions, or future projections with respect to new acquisitions, are not accurate, such inaccuracies could materially and adversely affect us.

We may suffer losses due to minority investments in other financial institutions or related companies.

From time to time, we may make or consider making minority investments in other financial institutions or technology companies in the financial services business. If we do so, we may not be able to influence the activities of companies in which we invest, and may suffer losses due to these activities. Investments in foreign companies could pose additional risks as a result of distance, language barriers and potential lack of information (for example, foreign institutions, including foreign financial institutions, may not be obligated to provide as much information regarding their operations as those in the United States).

Some institutions we could acquire may have distressed assets and there can be no assurance that we will be able to realize the value predicted from these assets or that we will make sufficient provision for future losses in the value of, or accurately estimate the future write-downs taken in respect of, these assets.

The decline in real estate values in many markets across the United States and weakened general economic conditions may result in increases in delinquencies and losses in the loan portfolios and other assets of financial institutions that we acquire in amounts that exceed initial forecasts developed during the due diligence investigation prior to acquiring those institutions. In addition, asset values may be impaired, in the future due to factors that cannot currently be predicted, including significant deterioration in economic conditions and further declines in collateral values and credit quality indicators. Any of these events could adversely affect the financial condition, liquidity, capital position and value of institutions acquired and of our business as a whole. Further, as a registered bank holding company, if we acquire bank subsidiaries, they may become subject to cross-guaranty liability under applicable banking law. If we do so and any of the foregoing adverse events occur with respect to one subsidiary, they may adversely affect other subsidiaries. Current economic conditions have created an uncertain environment with respect to asset valuations and there is no certainty that we will be able to sell assets of target institutions, even if it is determined to be in our best interests to do so. The institutions we will target may have substantial amounts of asset classes for which there is currently limited or no marketability.

As a result of an investment or acquisition transaction, we may be required to take write-downs or write-offs, restructuring and impairment or other charges that could have a significant negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We conduct due diligence investigations of target institutions we intend to acquire. Intensive due diligence is time consuming and expensive due to the operations, accounting, finance and legal professionals who must be involved in the due diligence process. Even if extensive due diligence is conducted on a target institution with which we may be combined, this diligence may not reveal all material issues that may affect a particular target institution, and factors outside our control or the control of the target institution may later arise. If, during the diligence process, we fail to identify issues specific to a target institution or the environment in which the target institution operates, we may be forced to later write down or write off assets, restructure operations or incur impairment or other charges that could result in reporting losses. These charges may also occur if we are not successful in integrating and managing the operations of the target institution with which we combine. In addition, charges of this nature may cause us to violate net worth or other covenants to which we may be subject as a result of assuming preexisting debt held by a target institution or by virtue of obtaining debt financing.

Resources could be expended in considering or evaluating potential investment or acquisition transactions that are not consummated, which could materially and adversely affect subsequent attempts to locate and acquire or merge with another business.

27

Table of Contents

We anticipate that the investigation of each specific target institution and the negotiation, drafting and execution of relevant agreements, disclosure documents and other instruments will require substantial management time and attention and substantial costs for accountants, attorneys and others. If a decision is made not to complete a specific investment or acquisition transaction, the costs incurred up to that point for the proposed transaction likely would not be recoverable. Furthermore, even if an agreement is reached relating to a specific target institution, we may fail to consummate the investment or acquisition transaction for any number of reasons, including those beyond our control. Any such event will result in a loss of the related costs incurred, which could materially and adversely affect subsequent attempts to locate and acquire or merge with another institution.

Risks Relating to the Regulation of Our Industry

The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 may have a material adverse effect on our business.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (which we refer to as the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which imposes significant regulatory and compliance changes. The key effects of the Dodd-Frank Act on our business are:

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act restricts the ability of banks to engage in certain proprietary trading or to sponsor or invest in private equity or hedge funds. The Dodd-Frank Act also contains provisions designed to limit the ability of insured depository institutions, their holding companies and their affiliates to conduct certain swaps and derivatives activities and to take certain principal positions in financial instruments.

Some provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act became effective immediately upon its enactment. Many provisions, however, will require regulations to be promulgated by various federal agencies in order to be implemented, some of which have been proposed by the applicable federal agencies. The provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may have unintended effects, which will not be clear until implementation. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act could limit our business activities, require changes to certain of our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements or otherwise materially and adversely affect us. These changes may also require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes necessary to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements. Failure to comply with the new requirements could also materially and adversely affect us. Any changes in the laws or regulations or their interpretations could be materially adverse to investors in our Voting Common Stock. For a more detailed description of the Dodd-Frank Act, see “Supervision and Regulation – Changes in Laws, Regulations or Policies and the Dodd-Frank Act.”

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

We are subject to extensive regulation, supervision, and legislation that govern almost all aspects of our operations. Intended to protect customers, depositors and the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”), these laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on the business activities in which we can engage, limit the dividends or distributions that we can pay, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee our debt, and impose certain specific accounting requirements on us that may be more restrictive and may result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in our capital than GAAP. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional compliance costs. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure follows good faith effort or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to restrictions on our business activities, fines and other penalties, any of which could materially and adversely affect us. Further, any new laws, rules and regulations could make compliance more difficult or expensive and also materially and adversely affect us.

The FDIC’s restoration plan and the related increased assessment rate could materially and adversely affect us.

28

Table of Contents

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured depository institutions up to applicable limits. The amount of a particular institution’s deposit insurance assessment is based on that institution’s risk classification under an FDIC risk-based assessment system. An institution’s risk classification is assigned based on its capital levels and the level of supervisory concern the institution poses to its regulators. Market developments have significantly depleted the DIF of the FDIC and reduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits. As a result of recent economic conditions and the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC has increased the deposit insurance assessment rates and thus raised deposit insurance premiums for insured depository institutions. If these increases are insufficient for the DIF to meet its funding requirements, there may need to be further special assessments or increases in deposit insurance premiums. We are generally unable to control the amount of premiums that we are required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failures, we may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the recently increased levels. Any future additional assessments, increases or required prepayments in FDIC insurance premiums may materially and adversely affect us, including by reducing our profitability or limiting our ability to pursue certain business opportunities.

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

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

The Federal Reserve may require us to commit capital resources to support our subsidiary banks.

As a matter of policy, the Federal Reserve, which examines us and our subsidiaries, expects a bank holding company to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to a subsidiary bank and to commit resources to support such subsidiary bank. Under the “source of strength” doctrine, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank and may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for failure to commit resources to such a subsidiary bank. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act directs the federal bank regulators to require that all companies that directly or indirectly control an insured depository institution serve as a source of strength for the institution. Under this requirement, we could be required to provide financial assistance to Customers Bank or any other subsidiary banks we may own in the future should they experience financial distress.

A capital injection may be required at times when we do not have the resources to provide it and therefore we may be required to borrow the funds or raise additional equity capital from third parties. Any loans by a holding company to its subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee will assume any commitment by the holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank. Moreover, bankruptcy law provides that claims based on any such commitment will be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of the holding company’s general unsecured creditors, including the holders of its indebtedness. Any financing that must be done by the holding company in order to make the required capital injection may be difficult and expensive and may not be available on attractive terms, or at all, which likely would have a material adverse effect on us.

The short-term and long-term impact of the new regulatory capital standards and the forthcoming new capital rules on U.S. banks is uncertain.

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, announced an agreement to a strengthened set of capital requirements for internationally active banking organizations in the United States and around the world, known as Basel III. Basel III increases the requirements for minimum common equity, minimum tier 1 capital, and minimum total capital, to be phased in over time until fully phased in by January 1, 2019.

In November 2012, the Federal Reserve delayed the January 2013 effective date of Basel III’s proposed bank capital buffer rules, and did not provide a substitute date for effectiveness. This U.S. Regulator approved proposal would substantially amend the regulatory risk-based capital rules applicable to the Bancorp and the Bank. The proposed rules implement the “Basel III” regulatory capital reforms and changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act.

Various provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act increase the capital requirements of bank holding companies, such as Customers Bancorp, and non-bank financial companies that are supervised by the Federal Reserve. The leverage and risk-based capital ratios of these entities may not be lower than the leverage and risk-based capital ratios for insured depository institutions. In particular, bank holding companies, many of which have long relied on trust preferred securities as a component of their regulatory capital, will no longer be permitted to count trust preferred securities toward their tier 1 capital. While the Basel III changes and other regulatory capital requirements will likely result in generally higher regulatory capital standards, it is not known at this time how any new standards will ultimately be applied to us and any bank subsidiaries.

29

Table of Contents

We face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

The federal Bank Secrecy Act, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “PATRIOT Act”) and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, established by the U.S. Treasury Department to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements, and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Internal Revenue Service. There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (the “OFAC”). If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient or the policies, procedures and systems of the financial institutions that we have already acquired or may acquire in the future are deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions (such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including our acquisition plans), which could materially and adversely affect us. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us.

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

Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered “predatory.” These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. It is our policy not to make predatory loans, but these laws create the potential for liability with respect to our lending and loan investment activities. They increase our cost of doing business and, ultimately, may prevent us from making certain loans and cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that we do make.

Risks Relating to Our Voting Common Stock

There is currently no public market for our Voting Common Stock and an active, liquid market for our Voting Common Stock may not develop.

There is no established public market for our Voting Common Stock and an active, liquid trading market for our Voting Common Stock may not develop. Accordingly, shareholders may not be able to sell their shares of our Voting Common Stock at the volume, prices and times desired. We cannot predict the extent to which investor interest will lead to an active trading market in our Voting Common Stock or how liquid that market might become. A public trading market having the desired characteristics of depth, liquidity and orderliness depends upon the presence in the marketplace of willing buyers and sellers of our Voting Common Stock at any given time, which presence will be dependent upon the individual decisions of investors, over which we have no control. The lack of an established market could have a material adverse effect on the value of our Voting Common Stock.

Even if an established trading market develops, the market price of our Voting Common Stock may be highly volatile, which may make it difficult for shareholders to sell their shares of our Voting Common Stock at the volume, prices and times desired. There are many factors that may impact the market price of our Voting Common Stock, including, without limitation:

30

Table of Contents

The stock markets in general have experienced substantial fluctuations and volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance and prospects of particular companies. These broad market movements may materially and adversely affect the market price of our Voting Common Stock.

We do not expect to pay dividends on our Voting Common Stock in the foreseeable future, and our ability to pay dividends is subject to regulatory limitations.

We have not historically declared or paid dividends on our Voting Common Stock and we do not expect to do so in the near future. Any future determination relating to dividend policy will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including earnings and financial condition, liquidity and capital requirements, the general economic and regulatory climate, ability to service any equity or debt obligations senior to the Voting Common Stock, and other factors deemed relevant by the board of directors.

In addition, as a bank holding company, we are subject to general regulatory restrictions on the payment of cash dividends. Federal bank regulatory agencies have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from engaging in unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their business, which depending on the financial condition and liquidity of the holding company at the time, could include the payment of dividends. Further, various federal and state statutory provisions limit the amount of dividends that our bank subsidiaries can pay to us as its holding company without regulatory approval. See “Market Price of Common Stock and Dividends – Dividends on Voting Common Stock” below for further detail regarding restrictions on our ability to pay dividends.

We may issue additional shares of our common stock in the future which could adversely affect the value or voting power of the Voting Common Stock.

Actual or anticipated issuances or sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the future could cause the value of our Voting Common Stock to decline significantly and make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and on terms that we deem appropriate. The issuance of any shares of our common stock in the future also would, and equity-related securities could, dilute the percentage ownership interest held by shareholders prior to such issuance. Actual issuances of our Voting Common Stock could also significantly dilute the voting power of your Voting Common Stock. In 2012, we issued 7,111,819 shares of Voting Common Stock. Additionally, it is currently anticipated that we will issue approximately 3,255,000 shares of Voting Common Stock in connection with the Acacia acquisition, and also an approximate additional 1,100,000 shares of Voting Common Stock in connection with the CMS transaction.

We have also made grants of restricted stock units and stock options with respect to shares of Voting Common Stock and Class B Non-Voting Common Stock. We may also issue further equity-based awards in the future. As such shares are issued upon vesting and as such options may be exercised and the underlying shares are or become freely tradeable, the value or voting power of our Voting Common Stock may be adversely affected and our ability to sell more equity or equity-related securities could also be adversely affected.

Except for Stock Option Agreements with certain investors as described below under “Outstanding Options Granted to Unaffiliated Institutional Investors,” we are not required to offer any additional equity securities to existing holders of our Voting Common Stock on a preemptive basis. Therefore, additional common stock issuances, directly or through convertible or exchangeable securities, warrants or options, will generally dilute the holdings of our existing holders of Voting Common Stock and such issuances or the perception of such issuances may reduce the market price of our Voting Common Stock. Our preferred stock, if issued, would likely have a preference on distribution payments, periodically or upon liquidation, which could eliminate or otherwise limit our ability to make distributions to holders of our Voting Common Stock. Because our decision to issue debt or equity securities or incur other borrowings in the future will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, the amount, timing, nature or success of our future capital raising efforts is uncertain. Thus, holders of our Voting Common Stock bear the risk that our future issuances of debt or equity securities or our incurrence of other borrowings will negatively affect the value of our Voting Common Stock.

31

Table of Contents

Future issuances of debt or equity securities, which would rank senior to our Voting Common Stock upon our liquidation, and future issuances of equity securities, which would dilute the holdings of our existing holders of Voting Common and may be senior to our Voting Common Stock for the purposes of making distributions, periodically or upon liquidation, may negatively affect the market price of our Voting Common Stock.

In the future, we may issue debt or equity securities or incur other borrowings. Upon our liquidation, holders of our debt securities and other loans and preferred stock will receive a distribution of our available assets before holders of our Voting Common Stock. If we incur debt in the future, our future interest costs could increase, and adversely affect our liquidity, cash flows and results of operations.

Provisions in our articles of incorporation and bylaws may inhibit a takeover of us, which could discourage transactions that would otherwise be in the best interests of our shareholders and could entrench management.

Provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws, and applicable provisions of Pennsylvania law and the federal Change in Bank Control Act may delay, inhibit or prevent someone from gaining control of our business through a tender offer, business combination, proxy contest or some other method even though some of our shareholders might believe a change in control is desirable. They might also increase the costs of completing a transaction in which we acquire another financial services business, merge with another financial institution, or sell our business to another financial institution. These increased costs could reduce the value of the shares held by our shareholders upon completion of these types of transactions.

Shareholders may be deemed to be acting in concert or otherwise in control of us and our bank subsidiaries, which could impose prior approval requirements and result in adverse regulatory consequences for such holders.

We are a bank holding company regulated by the Federal Reserve. Any entity (including a “group” composed of natural persons) owning 25% or more of a class of our outstanding shares of voting stock, or a lesser percentage if such holder or group otherwise exercises a “controlling influence” over us, may be subject to regulation as a “bank holding company” in accordance with the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHCA”). In addition, (1) any bank holding company or foreign bank with a U.S. presence is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve under the BHCA to acquire or retain 5% or more of a class of our outstanding shares of voting stock, and (2) any person other than a bank holding company may be required to obtain prior regulatory approval under the Change in Bank Control Act to acquire or retain 10% or more of our outstanding shares of voting stock. Any shareholder that is deemed to “control” the Company for bank regulatory purposes would become subject to prior approval requirements and ongoing regulation and supervision. Such a holder may be required to divest amounts equal to or exceeding 5% of the voting shares of investments that may be deemed incompatible with bank holding company status, such as an investment in a company engaged in non-financial activities. Regulatory determination of “control” of a depository institution or holding company is based on all of the relevant facts and circumstances. Potential investors are advised to consult with their legal counsel regarding the applicable regulations and requirements.

Our common stock owned by holders determined by a bank regulatory agency to be acting in concert would be aggregated for purposes of determining whether those holders have control of a bank or bank holding company. Each shareholder obtaining control that is a “company” would be required to register as a bank holding company. “Acting in concert” generally means knowing participation in a joint activity or parallel action towards the common goal of acquiring control of a bank or a parent company, whether or not pursuant to an express agreement. The manner in which this definition is applied in individual circumstances can vary and cannot always be predicted with certainty. Many factors can lead to a finding of acting in concert, including where: (i) the shareholders are commonly controlled or managed; (ii) the shareholders are parties to an oral or written agreement or understanding regarding the acquisition, voting or transfer of control of voting securities of a bank or bank holding company; (iii) the shareholders each own stock in a bank and are also management officials, controlling shareholders, partners or trustees of another company; or (iv) both a shareholder and a controlling shareholder, partner, trustee or management official of such shareholder own equity in the bank or bank holding company.

The FDIC’s policy statement imposing restrictions and criteria on private investors in failed bank acquisitions will apply to us and our investors.

On August 26, 2009, the FDIC issued a policy statement imposing restrictions and criteria on private investors in failed bank acquisitions. The policy statement is broad in scope and both complex and potentially ambiguous in its application. In most cases it would apply to an investor with more than 5% of the total voting power of an acquired depository institution or its holding company, but in certain circumstances it could apply to investors holding fewer voting shares. The policy statement will be applied to us if we make additional failed bank acquisitions from the FDIC or if the FDIC changes its interpretation of the policy statement or determines at some future date that it should be applied because of our circumstances.

Investors subject to the policy statement could be prohibited from selling or transferring their interests for three years. They also would be required to provide the FDIC with information about the investor and all entities in the investor’s ownership chain,

32

Table of Contents

including information on the size of the capital fund or funds, its diversification, its return profile, its marketing documents, and its management team and business model. Investors owning 80% or more of two or more banks or savings associations would be required to pledge their proportionate interests in each institution to cross-guarantee the FDIC against losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund.

Under the policy statement, the FDIC also could prohibit investment through ownership structures involving multiple investment vehicles that are owned or controlled by the same parent company. Investors that directly or indirectly hold 10% or more of the equity of a bank or savings association in receivership also would not be eligible to bid to become investors in the deposit liabilities of that failed institution. In addition, an investor using ownership structures with entities that are domiciled in bank secrecy jurisdictions would not be eligible to own a direct or indirect interest in an insured depository institution unless the investor’s parent company is subject to comprehensive consolidated supervision as recognized by the Federal Reserve and the investor enters into certain agreements with the U.S. bank regulators regarding access to information, maintenance of records and compliance with U.S. banking laws and regulations. If the policy statement applies, we (including any failed bank we acquire) could be required to maintain a ratio of Tier 1 common equity to total assets of at least 10% for a period of 3 years, and thereafter maintain a capital level sufficient to be well capitalized under regulatory standards during the remaining period of ownership of the investors. Bank subsidiaries also may be prohibited from extending any new credit to investors that own at least 10% of our equity.

33

Table of Contents