Fifth Third Bancorp is a diversified financial services company headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. At December 31, 2012, the Bancorp had $122 billion in assets, operated 15 affiliates with 1,325 full-service Banking Centers, including 106 Bank Mart^® locations open seven days a week inside select grocery stores, and 2,415 ATMs in 12 states throughout the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United States. The Bancorp reports on four business segments: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer Lending and Investment Advisors. The Bancorp also has a 33% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC.

This overview of MD&A highlights selected information in the financial results of the Bancorp and may not contain all of the information that is important to you. For a more complete understanding of trends, events, commitments, uncertainties, liquidity, capital resources and critical accounting policies and estimates, you should carefully read this entire document. Each of these items could have an impact on the Bancorp’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, see the Glossary of Terms in this report for a list of acronyms included as a tool for the reader of this annual report on Form 10-K. The acronyms identified therein are used throughout this MD&A, as well as the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Bancorp believes that banking is first and foremost a relationship business where the strength of the competition and challenges for growth can vary in every market. The Bancorp believes its affiliate operating model provides a competitive advantage by emphasizing individual relationships. Through its affiliate operating model, individual managers at all levels within the affiliates are given the opportunity to tailor financial solutions for their customers.

Net interest income, net interest margin and the efficiency ratio are presented in MD&A on an FTE basis. The FTE basis adjusts for the tax-favored status of income from certain loans and securities held by the Bancorp that are not taxable for federal income tax purposes. The Bancorp believes this presentation to be the preferred industry measurement of net interest income as it provides a relevant comparison between taxable and non-taxable amounts.

The Bancorp’s revenues are dependent on both net interest income and noninterest income. For the year ended December 31, 2012, net interest income, on a FTE basis, and noninterest income provided 55% and 45% of total revenue, respectively. The Bancorp derives the majority of its revenues within the United States from customers domiciled in the United States. Revenue from foreign countries and external customers domiciled in foreign countries is immaterial to the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Changes in interest rates, credit quality, economic trends and the capital markets are primary factors that drive the performance of the Bancorp. As discussed later in the Risk Management section, risk identification, measurement, monitoring, control and reporting are important to the management of risk and to the financial performance and capital strength of the Bancorp.

Net interest income is the difference between interest income earned on assets such as loans, leases and securities, and interest expense incurred on liabilities such as deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt. Net interest income is affected by the general level of interest rates, the relative level of short-term and long-term interest rates, changes in interest rates and changes in the amount and composition of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. Generally, the rates of interest the Bancorp earns on its assets and pays on its liabilities are established for a period of time. The change in market interest rates over time exposes the Bancorp to interest rate risk through potential adverse changes to

net interest income and financial position. The Bancorp manages this risk by continually analyzing and adjusting the composition of its assets and liabilities based on their payment streams and interest rates, the timing of their maturities and their sensitivity to changes in market interest rates. Additionally, in the ordinary course of business, the Bancorp enters into certain derivative transactions as part of its overall strategy to manage its interest rate and prepayment risks. The Bancorp is also exposed to the risk of losses on its loan and lease portfolio, as a result of changing expected cash flows caused by borrower credit events, such as loan defaults and inadequate collateral due to a weakened economy within the Bancorp’s footprint.

Noninterest income is derived primarily from mortgage banking net revenue, service charges on deposits, corporate banking revenue, investment advisory revenue and card and processing revenue. Noninterest expense is primarily driven by personnel costs, net occupancy expenses, and technology and communication costs.

Senior Notes Offerings

On March 7, 2012, the Bancorp issued $500 million of senior notes to third party investors, and entered into a Supplemental Indenture with Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, which modified the existing Indenture for Senior Debt Securities dated as of April 30, 2008. The Supplemental Indenture and the Indenture define the rights of the senior notes, which senior notes are represented by a Global Security dated as of March 7, 2012. The senior notes bear a fixed rate of interest of 3.50% per annum. The notes are unsecured, senior obligations of the Bancorp. Payment of the full principal amount of the notes will be due upon maturity on March 15, 2022. The notes will not be subject to redemption at the Bancorp’s option at any time until 30 days prior to maturity. For additional information regarding long-term debt, see Note 15 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

CCAR Results

On March 13, 2012, the Bancorp announced the results of its capital plan submitted to the FRB as part of the 2012 CCAR. The FRB indicated to the Bancorp that it did not object to the following capital actions: a continuation of its quarterly common dividend of $0.08 per share; the redemption of up to $1.4 billion in certain TruPS and the repurchase of common shares in an amount equal to any after-tax gains realized by the Bancorp from the sale of Vantiv, Inc. common shares by either the Bancorp or Vantiv, Inc. The FRB indicated to the Bancorp that it did object to other elements of its capital plan, including potential increases in its quarterly common dividend and the initiation of other common share repurchases.

The Bancorp resubmitted its capital plan to the FRB in the second quarter of 2012. The resubmitted plan included capital actions and distributions for the covered period through March 31, 2013 that were substantially similar to those included in the original submission, with adjustments primarily reflecting the change in the expected timing of capital actions and distributions relative to the timing assumed in the original submission. On August 21, 2012, the Bancorp announced the FRB did not object to the Bancorp’s resubmitted capital plan which included potential increases to the quarterly common stock dividend and potential repurchases of common shares of up to $600 million through the first quarter of 2013, in addition to any incremental repurchase of common shares related to any after-tax gains realized by the Bancorp from the sale of Vantiv, Inc. common shares by either the Bancorp or Vantiv, Inc. As a result, the Board of Directors authorized the Bancorp to repurchase up to 100 million common shares in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. In addition, in the third quarter

of 2012 the Bancorp declared a quarterly common dividend of $0.10 per share, an increase of $0.02 per share from the second quarter of 2012.

Vantiv, Inc. IPO

On June 30, 2009, the Bancorp completed the sale of a majority interest in its processing business to Advent International. As part of this transaction, the processing business was contributed into a partnership now known as Vantiv Holding, LLC. Vantiv, Inc., formed by Advent International and owned by certain funds managed by Advent International, acquired an approximate 51% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC for cash and warrants. The Bancorp retained the remaining approximate 49% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC and accounted for it as an equity method investment in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

During the first quarter of 2012, Vantiv, Inc. priced an IPO of its shares and contributed the net proceeds to Vantiv Holding, LLC for additional ownership interests. As a result of this offering, the Bancorp’s ownership of Vantiv Holding, LLC was reduced to approximately 39% and the Bancorp’s investment continued to be accounted for as an equity method investment in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The impact of the capital contributions to Vantiv Holding, LLC and the resulting dilution in the Bancorp’s interest resulted in the recognition of a pre-tax gain of $115 million ($75 million after-tax) by the Bancorp in the first quarter of 2012.

Vantiv, Inc. Share Sale

During the fourth quarter of 2012, Vantiv, Inc. priced a secondary offering of 12,454,545 shares of Class A Common Stock of Vantiv, Inc. sold on behalf of the Bancorp. As a result of this offering, the Bancorp’s ownership of Vantiv Holding, LLC was reduced to approximately 33% and the Bancorp’s investment continued to be accounted for as an equity method investment in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The carrying value of the Bancorp’s investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC was $563 million as of December 31, 2012. The impact of the sale of the Bancorp’s interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC resulted in the recognition of a pre-tax gain of $157 million ($102 million after-tax) by the Bancorp in the fourth quarter of 2012.

As of December 31, 2012, the Bancorp continued to hold approximately 70 million units of Vantiv Holding, LLC and a warrant to purchase approximately 20 million incremental Vantiv Holding, LLC non-voting units, both of which may be exchanged for common stock of Vantiv, Inc. on a one for one basis or at Vantiv, Inc.’s option for cash. In addition, the Bancorp holds approximately 70 million Class B common shares of Vantiv, Inc. The Class B common shares give the Bancorp voting rights, but no economic interest in Vantiv, Inc. The voting rights attributable to the Class B common shares are limited to 18.5% of the voting power in Vantiv, Inc. at any time other than in connection with a stockholder vote with respect to a change in control in Vantiv, Inc. These securities are subject to certain terms and restrictions.

Accelerated Share Repurchase Transactions

Following the Vantiv, Inc. IPO, the Bancorp entered into an accelerated share repurchase transaction with a counterparty pursuant to which the Bancorp purchased 4,838,710 shares, or approximately $75 million, of its outstanding common stock on April 26, 2012. As part of this transaction, and all subsequent accelerated share repurchase transactions in 2012, the Bancorp entered into a forward contract in which the final number of shares to be delivered at settlement of the accelerated share repurchase transaction was based on a discount to the average daily volume-weighted average price of the Bancorp’s common stock during the

term of the Repurchase Agreement. The accelerated share repurchase was treated as two separate transactions (i) the acquisition of treasury shares on the acquisition date and (ii) a forward contract indexed to the Bancorp’s stock. At settlement of the April 2012 forward contract on June 1, 2012, the Bancorp received an additional 631,986 shares which were recorded as an adjustment to the basis in the treasury shares purchased on the acquisition date.

Consistent with the 2012 CCAR plan, on August 23, 2012, the Bancorp entered into an accelerated share repurchase transaction with a counterparty pursuant to which the Bancorp purchased 21,531,100 shares, or approximately $350 million, of its outstanding common stock on August 28, 2012. At settlement of the forward contract on October 24, 2012, the Bancorp received an additional 1,444,047 shares which were recorded as an adjustment to the basis in the treasury shares purchased on the acquisition date.

Additionally, on November 6, 2012, the Bancorp entered into an accelerated share repurchase transaction with a counterparty pursuant to which the Bancorp purchased 7,710,761 shares, or approximately $125 million, of its outstanding common stock on November 9, 2012. At settlement of the forward contract on February 12, 2013, the Bancorp received an additional 657,917 shares which were recorded as an adjustment to the basis in the treasury shares purchased on the acquisition date.

Following the sale of a portion of the Bancorp’s shares of Class A Vantiv, Inc. common stock, the Bancorp entered into an accelerated share repurchase transaction on December 14, 2012 with a counterparty pursuant to which the Bancorp purchased 6,267,410 shares, or approximately $100 million, of its outstanding common stock on December 19, 2012. The Bancorp expects the settlement of the transaction to occur on March 14, 2013.

Redemption of TruPS

On August 8, 2012, consistent with the 2012 CCAR plan, the Bancorp redeemed all $862.5 million of the outstanding TruPS issued by Fifth Third Capital Trust VI. These securities had a distribution rate of 7.25% and a scheduled maturity date of November 15, 2067. Pursuant to the terms of the TruPS, the securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI were redeemable within ninety days of a Capital Treatment Event. The Bancorp determined that a Capital Treatment Event occurred upon the authorization for publication in the Federal Register of a Joint Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency addressing, among other matters, Section 171 of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 and providing detailed information regarding the cessation of Tier I risk-based capital treatment for outstanding TruPS. The redemption price was $25 per security, which reflected 100% of the liquidation amount, plus accrued and unpaid distributions through the actual redemption date of $0.422917 per security. The Bancorp recognized a $9 million loss on extinguishment of these TruPS within other noninterest expense in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Statements of Income.

Additionally, on August 15, 2012, the Bancorp redeemed all $575 million of the outstanding TruPS issued by Fifth Third Capital Trust V. The Fifth Third Capital Trust V securities had a distribution rate of 7.25% and a scheduled maturity date of August 15, 2067, and were redeemable at any time on or after August 15, 2012. The redemption price was $25 per security, which reflected 100% of the liquidation amount, plus accrued and unpaid distributions through the actual redemption date of $0.453125 per security. The Bancorp recognized a $17 million loss on extinguishment within other noninterest expense in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Statements of Income.

Legislative Developments

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into federal law. This act implements changes to the financial services industry and affects the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The legislation establishes a CFPB responsible for implementing and enforcing compliance with consumer financial laws, changes the methodology for determining deposit insurance assessments, gives the FRB the ability to regulate and limit interchange rates charged to merchants for the use of debit cards, enacts new limitations on proprietary trading, broadens the scope of derivative instruments subject to regulation, requires on-going stress tests and the submission of annual capital plans for certain organizations and requires changes to regulatory capital ratios. This act also calls for federal regulatory agencies to conduct multiple studies over the next several years in order to implement its provisions.

The Bancorp was impacted by a number of the components of the Dodd-Frank Act which were implemented during 2011. The CFPB began operations on July 21, 2011. The CFPB holds primary responsibility for regulating consumer protection by enforcing existing consumer laws, writing new consumer legislation, conducting bank examinations, monitoring and reporting on markets, as well as collecting and tracking consumer complaints. The FRB final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act’s “Durbin Amendment”, which limits debit card interchange fees, was issued on July 21, 2011 for transactions occurring after September 30, 2011. The final rule establishes a cap on the fees banks with more than $10 billion in assets can charge merchants for debit card transactions. The fee was set at $.21 per transaction plus an additional 5 bps of the transaction amount and $.01 to cover fraud losses. The FRB repealed Regulation Q as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act on July 21, 2011. Regulation Q was implemented as part of the Glass-Steagall Act in the 1930’s and provided a prohibition against the payment of interest on commercial demand deposits. While the total impact of the fully-implemented Dodd-Frank Act on Fifth Third is not currently known, the impact is expected to be substantial and may have an adverse impact on Fifth Third’s financial performance and growth opportunities.

In December of 2010 and revised in June of 2011, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued Basel III, a global regulatory framework, to enhance international capital standards. In June of 2012, U.S. banking regulators proposed enhancements to the regulatory capital requirements for U.S. banks, which implement aspects of Basel III, such as re-defining the regulatory capital elements and minimum capital ratios, introducing regulatory capital buffers above those minimums, revising the agencies’ rules for calculating risk-weighted assets and introducing a new Tier I common equity ratio. The Bancorp continues to evaluate these proposals and their potential impact. For more information on the impact of the proposed regulatory capital enhancements, refer to the Capital Management section of the MD&A.

On October 9, 2012, the FRB published final stress testing rules that implement section 165(i)(1) and (i)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act. The 19 bank holding companies that participated in the 2009 SCAP and subsequent CCAR, which includes Fifth Third, are subject to the final stress testing rules. The rules require both supervisory and company-run stress tests, which provide forward-looking information to supervisors to help assess whether institutions have sufficient capital to absorb losses and support operations during adverse economic conditions.

The FRB launched the 2013 stress testing program and CCAR on November 9, 2012. The CCAR requires bank holding companies to submit a capital plan in addition to their stress testing results. The mandatory elements of the capital plan are an assessment of the expected use and sources of capital over the planning horizon, a description of all planned capital actions over the planning horizon, a discussion of any expected changes to the Bancorp’s business plan that are likely to have a material impact on its capital adequacy or liquidity, a detailed description of the Bancorp’s process for assessing capital adequacy and the Bancorp’s capital policy. The stress testing results and capital plan were submitted by the Bancorp to the FRB on January 7, 2013.

The FRB’s review of the capital plan will assess the comprehensiveness of the capital plan, the reasonableness of the assumptions and the analysis underlying the capital plan. Additionally, the FRB will review the robustness of the capital adequacy process, the capital policy and the Bancorp’s ability to maintain capital above the minimum regulatory capital ratios and above a Tier 1 common ratio of 5 percent on a pro forma basis under expected and stressful conditions throughout the planning horizon. The FRB will also assess the Bancorp’s strategies for addressing proposed revisions to the regulatory capital framework agreed upon by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and requirements arising from the Dodd-Frank Act.

The FRB has indicated that it expects to disclose on March 7, 2013 its estimates of participating institutions results under the FRB supervisory stress scenario, including capital results, which assume that all banks take certain consistently applied future capital actions. The FRB has indicated that it expects to disclose on March 14, 2013 its estimates of participating institutions results under the FRB supervisory severe stress scenarios including capital results based on each company’s own base scenario capital actions. The FRB will also issue an objection or non-objection to each participating institution’s capital plan submitted under CCAR. Additionally, as a CCAR institution, Fifth Third is required to disclose our own estimates of results under the supervisory severely adverse scenario using the same consistently applied capital actions noted above, and to provide information related to risks included in its stress testing; a summary description of the methodologies used; estimates of aggregate pre-provision net revenue, losses, provisions, and pro forma capital ratios at the end of the forward-looking planning horizon of at least nine quarters; and an explanation of the most significant causes of changes in regulatory capital ratios. These disclosures are required by March 31, 2013 and are to be sent to the FRB and publicly disclosed.

In January of 2013, the CFPB issued several final regulations and changes to certain consumer protections under existing laws. These regulations are intended to strengthen consumer protections for high-cost mortgages, amend escrow requirements under the Truth in Lending Act, require mortgage lenders to consider the consumers’ ability to repay home loans before extending them credit, implement mortgage servicing rules, amend the Equal Credit Opportunity Act regarding appraisals and other written valuations for first lien residential mortgage loans and revises the Truth in Lending Act to strengthen loan originator qualification requirements and regulate industry compensation practices. These regulations take effect in 2014 except for the escrow requirements and certain provisions of the compensation rules under the Truth in Lending Act which takes effect on June 1, 2013. The Bancorp is currently assessing the impact these new regulations will have on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

Earnings Summary

The Bancorp’s net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $1.5 billion, or $1.66 per diluted share, which was net of $35 million in preferred stock dividends. The Bancorp’s net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $1.1 billion, or $1.18 per diluted share, which was net of $203 million in preferred stock dividends. The preferred stock dividends during 2011 included $153 million in discount accretion resulting from the Bancorp’s repurchase of Series F preferred stock.

Net interest income was $3.6 billion for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. Net interest income was positively impacted by an increase in average loans and leases of $4.6 billion as well as a decrease in interest expense compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. Average interest-earning assets increased $4.0 billion while average interest-bearing liabilities were relatively flat compared to the prior year. In addition, net interest income in 2012 compared to the prior year was negatively impacted by a 28 bps decrease in average yield on average interest-earning assets partially offset by a 21 bps decrease in the average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities, coupled with a mix shift to lower cost deposits. Net interest margin was 3.55% and 3.66% for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Noninterest income increased $544 million, or 22%, in 2012 compared to 2011. The increase from the prior year was primarily due to an increase in mortgage banking net revenue, corporate banking revenue and other noninterest income partially offset by a decrease in card and processing revenue. Mortgage banking net revenue increased $248 million, or 41%, primarily due to an increase in origination fees and gains on loan sales partially offset by an increase in losses on net valuation adjustments on servicing rights and free-standing derivatives entered into to economically hedge the MSR portfolio. Corporate banking revenue increased $63 million, or 18%, primarily due to increases in syndication fees, business lending fees, lease remarketing fees and institutional sales. Other noninterest income increased $324 million primarily due to a $115 million gain from the Vantiv, Inc. IPO recognized in the first quarter of 2012 and a $157 million gain from the sale of Vantiv, Inc. shares in the fourth quarter of 2012. Card and processing revenue decreased $55 million, or 18%, primarily as the result of the full year impact of the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act’s debit card interchange fee cap in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Noninterest expense increased $323 million, or nine percent, in 2012 compared to 2011 primarily due to an increase of $170 million in total personnel costs (salaries, wages and incentives plus employee benefits); an increase of $53 million in the provision for representation and warranty claims related to residential mortgage loans sold to third parties; an increase of $177 million in debt extinguishment costs; and a $44 million decrease in the benefit from the provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit. This activity was partially offset by an $87 million decrease in FDIC insurance and other taxes.

Credit Summary

The Bancorp does not originate subprime mortgage loans and does not hold asset-backed securities backed by subprime mortgage loans in its securities portfolio. However, the Bancorp has exposure to disruptions in the capital markets and weakened economic conditions. Over the last few years, the Bancorp has continued to be negatively affected by high unemployment rates, weakened housing markets, particularly in Michigan and Florida, and a challenging credit environment. Credit trends have improved, and as a result, the provision for loan and lease losses decreased to $303 million in 2012 compared to $423 million in 2011. In addition, net charge-offs as a percent of average portfolio loans and leases decreased to 0.85% during 2012 compared to 1.49% during 2011. At December 31, 2012, nonperforming assets as a percent of loans, leases and other assets, including OREO (excluding nonaccrual loans held for sale) decreased to 1.49%, compared to 2.23% at December 31, 2011. For further discussion on credit quality, see the Credit Risk Management section in MD&A.

Capital Summary

The Bancorp’s capital ratios exceed the “well-capitalized” guidelines as defined by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. As of December 31, 2012, the Tier I risk-based capital ratio was 10.65%, the Tier I leverage ratio was 10.05% and the total risk-based capital ratio was 14.42%.

The Bancorp considers various measures when evaluating capital utilization and adequacy, including the tangible equity ratio, tangible common equity ratio and Tier I common equity ratio, in addition to capital ratios defined by banking regulators. These calculations are intended to complement the capital ratios defined by banking regulators for both absolute and comparative purposes. Because U.S. GAAP does not include capital ratio measures, the Bancorp believes there are no comparable U.S. GAAP financial measures to these ratios. These ratios are not formally defined by U.S. GAAP or codified in the federal banking regulations and, therefore, are considered to be non-GAAP financial measures. Since analysts and banking regulators may assess the Bancorp’s capital adequacy using these ratios, the Bancorp believes they are useful to provide investors the ability to assess its capital adequacy on the same basis.

The Bancorp believes these non-GAAP measures are important because they reflect the level of capital available to withstand unexpected market conditions. Additionally, presentation of these measures allows readers to compare certain aspects of the Bancorp’s capitalization to other organizations. However, because

there are no standardized definitions for these ratios, the Bancorp’s calculations may not be comparable with other organizations, and the usefulness of these measures to investors may be limited. As a result, the Bancorp encourages readers to consider its Consolidated Financial Statements in their entirety and not to rely on any single financial measure.

The banking regulators issued proposed capital rules (Basel III) in June of 2012 that would substantially amend the existing risk-based capital rules (Basel I) for banks. The Bancorp believes providing an estimate of its capital position based upon its interpretation of these proposed rules is important to complement the existing capital ratios and for comparability to other financial institutions. Since these rules are in proposal stage, they are considered non-GAAP measures and therefore are included in the following non-GAAP financial measures table.

Pre-provision net revenue is net interest income plus noninterest income minus noninterest expense. The Bancorp believes this measure is important because it provides a ready view of the Bancorp’s earnings before the impact of provision expense.

Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements provides a discussion of the significant new accounting standards adopted by the Bancorp during 2012 and the expected

impact of significant accounting standards issued, but not yet required to be adopted.

The Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Certain accounting policies require management to exercise judgment in determining methodologies, economic assumptions and estimates that may materially affect the Bancorp’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. The Bancorp’s critical accounting policies include the accounting for the ALLL, reserve for unfunded commitments, income taxes, valuation of servicing rights, fair value measurements and goodwill. No material changes were made to the valuation techniques or models described below during the year ended December 31, 2012.

ALLL

The Bancorp disaggregates its portfolio loans and leases into portfolio segments for purposes of determining the ALLL. The Bancorp’s portfolio segments include commercial, residential mortgage, and consumer. The Bancorp further disaggregates its portfolio segments into classes for purposes of monitoring and assessing credit quality based on certain risk characteristics. Classes within the commercial portfolio segment include commercial and industrial, commercial mortgage owner-occupied, commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied, commercial construction, and commercial leasing. The residential mortgage portfolio segment is also considered a class. Classes within the consumer portfolio segment include home equity, automobile, credit card, and other consumer loans and leases. For an analysis of the Bancorp’s ALLL by portfolio segment and credit quality information by class, see Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Bancorp maintains the ALLL to absorb probable loan and lease losses inherent in its portfolio segments. The ALLL is maintained at a level the Bancorp considers to be adequate and is based on ongoing quarterly assessments and evaluations of the collectability and historical loss experience of loans and leases. Credit losses are charged and recoveries are credited to the ALLL. Provisions for loan and lease losses are based on the Bancorp’s review of the historical credit loss experience and such factors that, in management’s judgment, deserve consideration under existing economic conditions in estimating probable credit losses. The Bancorp’s strategy for credit risk management includes a combination of conservative exposure limits significantly below legal lending limits and conservative underwriting, documentation and collections standards. The strategy also emphasizes diversification on a geographic, industry and customer level, regular credit examinations and quarterly management reviews of large credit exposures and loans experiencing deterioration of credit quality.

The Bancorp’s methodology for determining the ALLL is based on historical loss rates, current credit grades, specific allocation on loans modified in a TDR and impaired commercial credits above specified thresholds and other qualitative adjustments. Allowances on individual commercial loans, TDRs and historical loss rates are reviewed quarterly and adjusted as necessary based on changing borrower and/or collateral conditions and actual collection and charge-off experience. An unallocated allowance is maintained to recognize the imprecision in estimating and measuring losses when evaluating allowances for individual loans or pools of loans.

Larger commercial loans included within aggregate borrower relationship balances exceeding $1 million that exhibit probable or observed credit weaknesses, as well as loans that have been

modified in a TDR, are subject to individual review for impairment. The Bancorp considers the current value of collateral, credit quality of any guarantees, the guarantor’s liquidity and willingness to cooperate, the loan structure, and other factors when evaluating whether an individual loan is impaired. Other factors may include the industry and geographic region of the borrower, size and financial condition of the borrower, cash flow and leverage of the borrower, and the Bancorp’s evaluation of the borrower’s management. When individual loans are impaired, allowances are determined based on management’s estimate of the borrower’s ability to repay the loan given the availability of collateral and other sources of cash flow, as well as an evaluation of legal options available to the Bancorp. Allowances for impaired loans are measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, fair value of the underlying collateral or readily observable secondary market values. The Bancorp evaluates the collectability of both principal and interest when assessing the need for a loss accrual.

Historical credit loss rates are applied to commercial loans that are not impaired or are impaired, but smaller than the established threshold of $1 million and thus not subject to specific allowance allocations. The loss rates are derived from a migration analysis, which tracks the historical net charge-off experience sustained on loans according to their internal risk grade. The risk grading system utilized for allowance analysis purposes encompasses ten categories.

Homogenous loans and leases in the residential mortgage and consumer portfolio segments are not individually risk graded. Rather, standard credit scoring systems and delinquency monitoring are used to assess credit risks, and allowances are established based on the expected net charge-offs. Loss rates are based on the trailing twelve month net charge-off history by loan category. Historical loss rates may be adjusted for certain prescriptive and qualitative factors that, in management’s judgment, are necessary to reflect losses inherent in the portfolio. Factors that management considers in the analysis include the effects of the national and local economies; trends in the nature and volume of delinquencies, charge-offs and nonaccrual loans; changes in loan mix; credit score migration comparisons; asset quality trends; risk management and loan administration; changes in the internal lending policies and credit standards; collection practices; and examination results from bank regulatory agencies and the Bancorp’s internal credit reviewers.

The Bancorp’s primary market areas for lending are the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United States. When evaluating the adequacy of allowances, consideration is given to these regional geographic concentrations and the closely associated effect changing economic conditions have on the Bancorp’s customers.

Reserve for Unfunded Commitments

The reserve for unfunded commitments is maintained at a level believed by management to be sufficient to absorb estimated probable losses related to unfunded credit facilities and is included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The determination of the adequacy of the reserve is based upon an evaluation of the unfunded credit facilities, including an assessment of historical commitment utilization experience, credit risk grading and historical loss rates based on credit grade migration. This process takes into consideration the same risk elements that are analyzed in the determination of the adequacy of the Bancorp

ALLL, as discussed above. Net adjustments to the reserve for unfunded commitments are included in other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.

Income Taxes

The Bancorp estimates income tax expense based on amounts expected to be owed to the various tax jurisdictions in which the Bancorp conducts business. On a quarterly basis, management assesses the reasonableness of its effective tax rate based upon its current estimate of the amount and components of net income, tax credits and the applicable statutory tax rates expected for the full year. The estimated income tax expense is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income.

Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined using the balance sheet method and are reported in other assets and accrued taxes, interest and expenses, respectively, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is based on the tax effects of the differences between the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, and reflects enacted changes in tax rates and laws. Deferred tax assets are recognized to the extent they exist and are subject to a valuation allowance based on management’s judgment that realization is more likely than not. This analysis is performed on a quarterly basis and includes an evaluation of all positive and negative evidence to determine whether realization is more likely than not.

Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due to taxing jurisdictions and are reported in accrued taxes, interest and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Bancorp evaluates and assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions after considering statutes, regulations, judicial precedent and other information and maintains tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these relative risks and merits. Changes to the estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in tax rates, interpretations of tax laws, the status of examinations being conducted by taxing authorities and changes to statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance that impact the relative risks of tax positions. These changes, when they occur, can affect deferred taxes and accrued taxes as well as the current period’s income tax expense and can be significant to the operating results of the Bancorp. For additional information on income taxes, see Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Valuation of Servicing Rights

When the Bancorp sells loans through either securitizations or individual loan sales in accordance with its investment policies, it often obtains servicing rights. Servicing rights resulting from loan sales are initially recorded at fair value and subsequently amortized in proportion to, and over the period of, estimated net servicing revenue. Servicing rights are assessed for impairment monthly, based on fair value, with temporary impairment recognized through a valuation allowance and permanent impairment recognized through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance. Key economic assumptions used in measuring any potential impairment of the servicing rights include the prepayment speeds of the underlying loans, the weighted-average life, the discount rate, the weighted-average coupon and the weighted-average default rate, as applicable. The primary risk of material changes to the value of the servicing rights resides in the potential volatility in the economic assumptions used, particularly the prepayment speeds. The Bancorp monitors risk and adjusts its valuation allowance as necessary to adequately reserve for impairment in the servicing portfolio. For purposes of measuring impairment, the mortgage servicing rights are stratified into classes based on the financial asset type (fixed rate vs. adjustable rate) and

interest rates. For additional information on servicing rights, see Note 11 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Fair Value Measurements

The Bancorp measures certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Valuation techniques the Bancorp uses to measure fair value include the market approach, income approach and cost approach. The market approach uses prices or relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. The income approach involves discounting future amounts to a single present amount and is based on current market expectations about those future amounts. The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of the asset.

U.S. GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). A financial instrument’s categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the instrument’s fair value measurement. The three levels within the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:

Level 1 – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Bancorp has the ability to access at the measurement date.

Level 2 – Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include: quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

Level 3 – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability for which there is little, if any, market activity at the measurement date. Unobservable inputs reflect the Bancorp’s own assumptions about what market participants would use to price the asset or liability. The inputs are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances, which might include the Bancorp’s own financial data such as internally developed pricing models and discounted cash flow methodologies, as well as instruments for which the fair value determination requires significant management judgment.

The Bancorp’s fair value measurements involve various valuation techniques and models, which involve inputs that are observable, when available. Valuation techniques and parameters used for measuring assets and liabilities are reviewed and validated by the Bancorp on a quarterly basis. Additionally, the Bancorp monitors the fair values of significant assets and liabilities using a variety of methods including the evaluation of pricing runs and exception reports based on certain analytical criteria, comparison to previous trades and overall review and assessments for reasonableness. The following is a summary of valuation techniques utilized by the Bancorp for its significant assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis.

Available-for-sale and trading securities

Where quoted prices are available in an active market, securities are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Level 1 securities include government bonds and exchange traded equities. If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flows. Examples of such instruments, which are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy, include agency and non-agency mortgage-backed securities, other asset-backed securities, obligations of U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds. Agency mortgage-backed securities, obligations of U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds are generally valued using a market approach based on observable prices of securities with similar characteristics. Non-agency mortgage-backed securities and other asset-backed securities are generally valued using an income approach based on discounted cash flows, incorporating prepayment speeds, performance of underlying collateral and specific tranche-level attributes. In certain cases where there is limited activity or less transparency around inputs to the valuation, securities are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.

Residential mortgage loans held for sale and held for investment

For residential mortgage loans held for sale, fair value is estimated based upon mortgage-backed securities prices and spreads to those prices or, for certain ARM loans, discounted cash flow models that may incorporate the anticipated portfolio composition, credit spreads of asset-backed securities with similar collateral, and market conditions. The anticipated portfolio composition includes the effect of interest rate spreads and discount rates due to loan characteristics such as the state in which the loan was originated, the loan amount and the ARM margin. Residential mortgage loans held for sale that are valued based on mortgage-backed securities prices are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy as the valuation is based on external pricing for similar instruments. ARM loans classified as held for sale are also classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy due to the use of observable inputs in the discounted cash flow model. These observable inputs include interest rate spreads from agency mortgage-backed securities market rates and observable discount rates. For residential mortgage loans reclassified from held for sale to held for investment, the fair value estimation is based on mortgage-backed securities prices, interest rate risk and an internally developed credit component. Therefore, these loans are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.

Derivatives

Exchange-traded derivatives valued using quoted prices and certain over-the-counter derivatives valued using active bids are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Most of the Bancorp’s derivative contracts are valued using discounted cash flow or other models that incorporate current market interest rates, credit spreads assigned to the derivative counterparties, and other market parameters and, therefore, are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy. Such derivatives include basic and

structured interest rate swaps and options. Derivatives that are valued based upon models with significant unobservable market parameters are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. At December 31, 2012, derivatives classified as Level 3, which are valued using an option-pricing model containing unobservable inputs, consisted primarily of warrants associated with the sale of the processing business to Advent International and a total return swap associated with the Bancorp’s sale of its Visa, Inc. Class B shares. Level 3 derivatives also include interest rate lock commitments, which utilize internally generated loan closing rate assumptions as a significant unobservable input in the valuation process.

In addition to the assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, the Bancorp measures servicing rights, certain loans and long-lived assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. Refer to Note 26 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on fair value measurements.

Goodwill

Business combinations entered into by the Bancorp typically include the acquisition of goodwill. U.S. GAAP requires goodwill to be tested for impairment at the Bancorp’s reporting unit level on an annual basis, which for the Bancorp is September 30, and more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that there may be impairment. The Bancorp has determined that its segments qualify as reporting units under U.S. GAAP.

Impairment exists when a reporting unit’s carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. In testing goodwill for impairment, U.S. GAAP permits the Bancorp to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessing the totality of events and circumstances, the Bancorp determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test would be unnecessary. However, if the Bancorp concludes otherwise, it would then be required to perform the first step (Step 1) of the goodwill impairment test, and continue to the second step (Step 2), if necessary. Step 1 compares the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any.

The fair value of a reporting unit is the price that would be received to sell the unit as a whole in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Since none of the Bancorp’s reporting units are publicly traded, individual reporting unit fair value determinations cannot be directly correlated to the Bancorp’s stock price. To determine the fair value of a reporting unit, the Bancorp employs an income-based approach, utilizing the reporting unit’s forecasted cash flows (including a terminal value approach to estimate cash flows beyond the final year of the forecast) and the reporting unit’s estimated cost of equity as the discount rate. Additionally, the Bancorp determines its market capitalization based on the average of the closing price of the Bancorp’s stock during the month including the measurement date, incorporating an additional control premium, and compares this market-based fair value measurement to the aggregate fair value of the Bancorp’s reporting units in order to corroborate the results of the income approach.

When required to perform Step 2, the Bancorp compares the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount exceeds the implied fair value, an impairment loss equal to that excess amount is

recognized. A recognized impairment loss cannot exceed the carrying amount of that goodwill and cannot be reversed in future periods even if the fair value of the reporting unit recovers.

During Step 2, the Bancorp determines the implied fair value of goodwill for a reporting unit by assigning the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. The excess of the fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to its assets and liabilities is the implied fair value of goodwill. This assignment process is only performed for purposes of testing goodwill for impairment. The Bancorp does not adjust the carrying values of recognized assets or liabilities (other than goodwill, if appropriate), nor recognize previously unrecognized intangible assets in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a result of this assignment process. Refer to Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the Bancorp’s goodwill.

The risks listed below present risks that could have a material impact on the Bancorp’s financial condition, the results of its operations, or its business.

RISKS RELATING TO ECONOMIC AND MARKET CONDITIONS

Weakness in the U.S. economy and in the real estate market, including specific weakness within Fifth Third’s geographic footprint, has adversely affected Fifth Third and may continue to adversely affect Fifth Third.

If the strength of the U.S. economy in general or the strength of the local economies in which Fifth Third conducts operations declines or does not improve in a reasonable time frame, this could result in, among other things, a deterioration in credit quality or a reduced demand for credit, including a resultant effect on Fifth Third’s loan portfolio and ALLL and in the receipt of lower proceeds from the sale of loans and foreclosed properties. A portion of Fifth Third’s residential mortgage and commercial real estate loan portfolios are comprised of borrowers in Florida, whose markets have been particularly adversely affected by job losses, declines in real estate value, declines in home sale volumes, and declines in new home building. These factors could result in higher delinquencies, greater charge-offs and increased losses on foreclosed real estate in future periods, which could materially adversely affect Fifth Third’s financial condition and results of operations.

The global financial markets continue to be strained as a result of economic slowdowns and concerns, especially about the creditworthiness of the European Union member states and financial institutions in the European Union. These factors could have international implications, which could hinder the U.S. economic recovery and affect the stability of global financial markets.

Certain European Union member states have fiscal obligations greater than their fiscal revenue, which has caused investor concern over such countries’ ability to continue to service their debt and foster economic growth in their economies. During 2011, the European debt crisis caused spreads to widen in the fixed income debt markets and liquidity to be less abundant. The European debt crisis and measures adopted to address it have significantly weakened European economies. A weaker European economy may cause investors to lose confidence in the safety and soundness of European financial institutions and the stability of European member economies. A failure to adequately address sovereign debt concerns in Europe could hamper economic recovery or contribute to recessionary economic conditions and severe stress in the financial markets, including in the United States. Should the U.S. economic recovery be adversely impacted by these factors, the likelihood for loan and asset growth at U.S. financial institutions, like Fifth Third, may deteriorate.

Changes in interest rates could affect Fifth Third’s income and cash flows.

Fifth Third’s income and cash flows depend to a great extent on the difference between the interest rates earned on interest-earning assets such as loans and investment securities, and the interest rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowings. These rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond Fifth Third’s control, including general economic conditions and the policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies (in particular, the FRB). Changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, will influence the origination of loans, the prepayment speed of loans, the purchase of investments, the

generation of deposits and the rates received on loans and investment securities and paid on deposits or other sources of funding. The impact of these changes may be magnified if Fifth Third does not effectively manage the relative sensitivity of its assets and liabilities to changes in market interest rates. Fluctuations in these areas may adversely affect Fifth Third and its shareholders.

Potential changes in determining LIBOR could affect Fifth Third’s debt securities and other financial obligations.

Beginning in 2008, concerns have been raised about the accuracy of the calculation of the daily LIBOR, which is currently overseen by the BBA. Fifth Third was not and is not a LIBOR panelist surveyed for LIBOR estimates. The BBA has taken steps to change the process for determining LIBOR by increasing the number of banks surveyed to set LIBOR and to strengthen the oversight of the process. In addition a report published in September 2012, set forth recommendations relating to the setting and administration of LIBOR, and the United Kingdom government has announced that it intends to incorporate these recommendations in the new legislation.

At the present time, it is uncertain what changes, if any, may be required or made by the United Kingdom government or other governmental or regulatory authorities in the method for determining LIBOR. Accordingly, it is not apparent whether or to what extent any such changes would have an adverse impact on the value of any LIBOR-linked debt securities issued by Fifth Third or any loans, derivatives and other financial obligations or extensions of credit for which Fifth Third is an obligor, or whether or to what extent any such changes would have an adverse effect on the value of any LIBOR-linked securities, loans, derivatives and other financial obligations or extensions of credit held by or due to Fifth Third or on Fifth Third’s financial condition or results of operations.

Changes and trends in the capital markets may affect Fifth Third’s income and cash flows.

Fifth Third enters into and maintains trading and investment positions in the capital markets on its own behalf and manages investment positions on behalf of its customers. These investment positions include derivative financial instruments. The revenues and profits Fifth Third derives from managing proprietary and customer trading and investment positions are dependent on market prices. Market changes and trends may result in a decline in investment advisory revenue or investment or trading losses that may materially affect Fifth Third. Losses on behalf of its customers could expose Fifth Third to litigation, credit risks or loss of revenue from those customers. Additionally, substantial losses in Fifth Third’s trading and investment positions could lead to a loss with respect to those investments and may adversely affect cash flows and funding costs.

The removal or reduction in stimulus activities sponsored by the Federal Government and its agents may have a negative impact on Fifth Third’s results and operations.

The Federal Government has intervened in an unprecedented manner to stimulate economic growth. The expiration or rescission of any of these programs and actions may have an adverse impact on Fifth Third’s operating results by increasing interest rates, increasing the cost of funding, and reducing the demand for loan products, including mortgage loans.

Problems encountered by financial institutions larger than or similar to Fifth Third could adversely affect financial markets generally and have indirect adverse effects on Fifth Third.

The commercial soundness of many financial institutions may be closely interrelated as a result of credit, trading, clearing or other relationships between the institutions. As a result, concerns about, or a default or threatened default by, one institution could lead to significant market-wide liquidity and credit problems, losses or defaults by other institutions. This is sometimes referred to as “systemic risk” and may adversely affect financial intermediaries, such as clearing agencies, clearing houses, banks, securities firms and exchanges, with which the Bancorp interacts on a daily basis, and therefore could adversely affect Fifth Third.

Fifth Third’s stock price is volatile.

Fifth Third’s stock price has been volatile in the past and several factors could cause the price to fluctuate substantially in the future. These factors include:

The price for shares of Fifth Third’s common stock may fluctuate significantly in the future, and these fluctuations may be unrelated to Fifth Third’s performance. General market price declines or market volatility in the future could adversely affect the price for shares of Fifth Third’s common stock, and the current market price of such shares may not be indicative of future market prices.

RISKS RELATING TO FIFTH THIRD’S GENERAL BUSINESS

Deteriorating credit quality, particularly in real estate loans, has adversely impacted Fifth Third and may continue to adversely impact Fifth Third.

When Fifth Third lends money or commits to lend money the Bancorp incurs credit risk or the risk of losses if borrowers do not repay their loans. The credit performance of the loan portfolios significantly affects the Bancorp’s financial results and condition. If the current economic environment were to deteriorate, more customers may have difficulty in repaying their loans or other obligations which could result in a higher level of credit losses and reserves for credit losses. Fifth Third reserves for credit losses by establishing reserves through a charge to earnings. The amount of these reserves is based on Fifth Third’s assessment of credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio (including unfunded credit commitments). The process for determining the amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses and the reserve for unfunded commitments is critical to Fifth Third’s financial results and condition. It requires difficult, subjective and complex judgments about the environment, including analysis of economic or market conditions that might impair the ability of borrowers to repay their loans.

Fifth Third might underestimate the credit losses inherent in its loan portfolio and have credit losses in excess of the amount reserved. Fifth Third might increase the reserve because of changing economic conditions, including falling home prices or higher unemployment, or other factors such as changes in borrower’s behavior. As an example, borrowers may “strategically default,” or discontinue making payments on their real estate-secured loans if the value of the real estate is less than what they owe, even if they are still financially able to make the payments.

Fifth Third believes that both the allowance for loan and lease losses and reserve for unfunded commitments are adequate to cover inherent losses at December 31, 2012; however, there is no assurance that they will be sufficient to cover future credit losses, especially if housing and employment conditions worsen. In the event of significant deterioration in economic conditions, Fifth Third may be required to increase reserves in future periods, which would reduce earnings.

For more information, refer to the “Risk Management—Credit Risk Management,” “Critical Accounting Policies—Allowance for Loan and Leases,” and “Reserve for Unfunded Commitments” of the MD&A.

Fifth Third must maintain adequate sources of funding and liquidity.

Fifth Third must maintain adequate funding sources in the normal course of business to support its operations and fund outstanding liabilities, as well as meet regulatory expectations. Fifth Third primarily relies on bank deposits to be a low cost and stable source of funding for the loans Fifth Third makes and the operations of Fifth Third’s business. Core customer deposits, which include transaction deposits and other time deposits, have historically provided Fifth Third with a sizeable source of relatively stable and low-cost funds (average core deposits funded 70% of average total assets at December 31, 2012). In addition to customer deposits, sources of liquidity include investments in the securities portfolio, Fifth Third’s ability to sell or securitize loans in secondary markets and to pledge loans to access secured borrowing facilities through the FHLB and the FRB, and Fifth Third’s ability to raise funds in domestic and international money and capital markets.

Fifth Third’s liquidity and ability to fund and run the business could be materially adversely affected by a variety of conditions and factors, including financial and credit market disruptions and volatility or a lack of market or customer confidence in financial markets in general similar to what occurred during the financial crisis in 2008 and early 2009, which may result in a loss of customer deposits or outflows of cash or collateral and/or ability to access capital markets on favorable terms.

Other conditions and factors that could materially adversely affect Fifth Third’s liquidity and funding include a lack of market or customer confidence in Fifth Third or negative news about Fifth Third or the financial services industry generally which also may result in a loss of deposits and/or negatively affect the ability to access the capital markets; the loss of customer deposits to alternative investments; inability to sell or securitize loans or other assets, and reductions in one or more of Fifth Third’s credit ratings. A reduced credit rating could adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to borrow funds and raise the cost of borrowings substantially and could cause creditors and business counterparties to raise collateral requirements or take other actions that could adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to raise capital. Many of the above conditions and factors may be caused by events over which Fifth Third has little or no control such as what occurred during the financial crisis. While market conditions have stabilized and, in many cases, improved, there can be no assurance that significant disruption and volatility in the financial markets will not occur in the future.

Other material adverse effects could include a reduction in Fifth Third’s credit ratings resulting from a further decrease in the probability of government support for large financial institutions such as Fifth Third assumed by the ratings agencies in their current credit ratings.

If Fifth Third is unable to continue to fund assets through customer bank deposits or access capital markets on favorable terms or if Fifth Third suffers an increase in borrowing costs or otherwise fails to manage liquidity effectively; liquidity, operating margins, financial results and condition may be materially adversely affected. As Fifth Third did during the financial crisis, it may also need to raise additional capital through the issuance of stock, which could dilute the ownership of existing stockholders, or reduce or even eliminate common stock dividends to preserve capital.

Fifth Third may have more credit risk and higher credit losses to the extent loans are concentrated by location of the borrower or collateral.

Fifth Third’s credit risk and credit losses can increase if its loans are concentrated to borrowers engaged in the same or similar activities or to borrowers who as a group may be uniquely or disproportionately affected by economic or market conditions. Deterioration in economic conditions, housing conditions and real estate values in these states and generally across the country could result in materially higher credit losses.

Fifth Third may be required to repurchase residential mortgage loans or reimburse investors and others as a result of breaches in contractual representations and warranties.

Fifth Third sells residential mortgage loans to various parties, including GSEs and other financial institutions that purchase residential mortgage loans for investment or private label securitization. Fifth Third may be required to repurchase residential mortgage loans, indemnify the securitization trust, investor or insurer, or reimburse the securitization trust, investor or insurer for credit losses incurred on loans in the event of a breach of contractual representations or warranties that is not remedied within a period (usually 60 days or less) after Fifth Third receives notice of the breach. Contracts for residential mortgage loan sales to the GSEs include various types of specific remedies and penalties that could be applied to inadequate responses to repurchase requests. If economic conditions and the housing market do not recover or future investor repurchase demand and success at appealing repurchase requests differ from past experience, Fifth Third could continue to have increased repurchase obligations and increased loss severity on repurchases, requiring material additions to the repurchase reserve.

If Fifth Third does not adjust to rapid changes in the financial services industry, its financial performance may suffer.

Fifth Third’s ability to deliver strong financial performance and returns on investment to shareholders will depend in part on its ability to expand the scope of available financial services to meet the needs and demands of its customers. In addition to the challenge of competing against other banks in attracting and retaining customers for traditional banking services, Fifth Third’s competitors also include securities dealers, brokers, mortgage bankers, investment advisors, specialty finance and insurance companies who seek to offer one-stop financial services that may include services that banks have not been able or allowed to offer to their customers in the past or may not be currently able or allowed to offer. This increasingly competitive environment is primarily a result of changes in regulation, changes in technology and product delivery systems, as well as the accelerating pace of consolidation among financial service providers.

If Fifth Third is unable to grow its deposits, it may be subject to paying higher funding costs.

The total amount that Fifth Third pays for funding costs is dependent, in part, on Fifth Third’s ability to grow its deposits. If Fifth Third is unable to sufficiently grow its deposits, it may be subject to paying higher funding costs. Fifth Third competes with banks and other financial services companies for deposits. If competitors raise the rates they pay on deposits, Fifth Third’s funding costs may increase, either because Fifth Third raises rates to avoid losing deposits or because Fifth Third loses deposits and must rely on more expensive sources of funding. Higher funding costs reduce our net interest margin and net interest income. Fifth Third’s bank customers could take their money out of the bank and put it in alternative investments, causing Fifth Third to lose a lower cost source of funding. Checking and savings account balances and other forms of customer deposits may decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff.

The Bancorp’s ability to receive dividends from its subsidiaries accounts for most of its revenue and could affect its liquidity and ability to pay dividends.

Fifth Third Bancorp is a separate and distinct legal entity from its subsidiaries. Fifth Third Bancorp typically receives substantially all of its revenue from dividends from its subsidiaries. These dividends are the principal source of funds to pay dividends on Fifth Third Bancorp’s stock and interest and principal on its debt. Various federal and/or state laws and regulations, as well as regulatory expectations, limit the amount of dividends that the Bancorp’s banking subsidiary and certain nonbank subsidiaries may pay. Regulatory scrutiny of capital levels at bank holding companies and insured depository institution subsidiaries has increased since the financial crisis and has resulted in increased regulatory focus on all aspects of capital planning, including dividends and other distributions to shareholders of banks such as the parent bank holding companies. Also, Fifth Third Bancorp’s right to participate in a distribution of assets upon a subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization is subject to the prior claims of that subsidiary’s creditors. Limitations on the Bancorp’s ability to receive dividends from its subsidiaries could have a material adverse effect on its liquidity and ability to pay dividends on stock or interest and principal on its debt.

The financial services industry is highly competitive and creates competitive pressures that could adversely affect Fifth Third’s revenue and profitability.

The financial services industry in which Fifth Third operates is highly competitive. Fifth Third competes not only with commercial banks, but also with insurance companies, mutual funds, hedge funds, and other companies offering financial services in the U.S., globally and over the internet. Fifth Third competes on the basis of several factors, including capital, access to capital, revenue generation, products, services, transaction execution, innovation, reputation and price. Over time, certain sectors of the financial services industry have become more concentrated, as institutions involved in a broad range of financial services have been acquired by or merged into other firms. These developments could result in Fifth Third’s competitors gaining greater capital and other resources, such as a broader range of products and services and geographic diversity. Fifth Third may experience pricing pressures as a result of these factors and as some of its competitors seek to increase market share by reducing prices.

Fifth Third and/or the holders of its securities could be adversely affected by unfavorable ratings from rating agencies.

Fifth Third’s ability to access the capital markets is important to its overall funding profile. This access is affected by the ratings assigned by rating agencies to Fifth Third, certain of its subsidiaries and particular classes of securities they issue. The interest rates that Fifth Third pays on its securities are also influenced by, among other things, the credit ratings that it, its subsidiaries and/or its securities receive from recognized rating agencies. A downgrade to Fifth Third or its subsidiaries’ credit rating could affect its ability to access the capital markets, increase its borrowing costs and negatively impact its profitability. A ratings downgrade to Fifth Third, its subsidiaries or their securities could also create obligations or liabilities to Fifth Third under the terms of its outstanding securities that could increase Fifth Third’s costs or otherwise have a negative effect on its results of operations or financial condition. Additionally, a downgrade of the credit rating of any particular security issued by Fifth Third or its subsidiaries could negatively affect the ability of the holders of that security to sell the securities and the prices at which any such securities may be sold.

Fifth Third could suffer if it fails to attract and retain skilled personnel.

Fifth Third’s success depends, in large part, on its ability to attract and retain key individuals. Competition for qualified candidates in the activities and markets that Fifth Third serves is great and Fifth Third may not be able to hire these candidates and retain them. If Fifth Third is not able to hire or retain these key individuals, Fifth Third may be unable to execute its business strategies and may suffer adverse consequences to its business, operations and financial condition.

In June 2010, the federal banking agencies issued joint guidance on executive compensation designed to help ensure that a banking organization’s incentive compensation policies do not encourage imprudent risk taking and are consistent with the safety and soundness of the organization. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires those agencies, along with the SEC, to adopt rules to require reporting of incentive compensation and to prohibit certain compensation arrangements. The federal banking agencies and the SEC proposed such rules in April 2011. In addition, in June 2012, the SEC issued final rules to implement Dodd-Frank’s requirement that the SEC direct the national securities exchanges to adopt certain listing standards related to the compensation committee of a company’s board of directors as well as its compensation advisers. If Fifth Third is unable to attract and retain qualified employees, or do so at rates necessary to maintain its competitive position, or if compensation costs required to attract and retain employees become more expensive, Fifth Third’s performance, including its competitive position, could be materially adversely affected.

Fifth Third’s mortgage banking revenue can be volatile from quarter to quarter.

Fifth Third earns revenue from the fees it receives for originating mortgage loans and for servicing mortgage loans. When rates rise, the demand for mortgage loans tends to fall, reducing the revenue Fifth Third receives from loan originations. At the same time, revenue from MSRs can increase through increases in fair value. When rates fall, mortgage originations tend to increase and the value of MSRs tends to decline, also with some offsetting revenue effect. Even though the origination of mortgage loans can act as a “natural hedge,” the hedge is not perfect, either in amount or timing. For example, the negative effect on revenue from a decrease in the fair value of residential MSRs is immediate, but any offsetting revenue benefit from more originations and the MSRs relating to the new loans would accrue over time. It is also possible that, because of the

recession and deteriorating housing market, even if interest rates were to fall, mortgage originations may also fall or any increase in mortgage originations may not be enough to offset the decrease in the MSRs value caused by the lower rates.

Fifth Third typically uses derivatives and other instruments to hedge its mortgage banking interest rate risk. Fifth Third generally does not hedge all of its risks, and the fact that Fifth Third attempts to hedge any of the risks does not mean Fifth Third will be successful. Hedging is a complex process, requiring sophisticated models and constant monitoring. Fifth Third may use hedging instruments tied to U.S. Treasury rates, LIBOR or Eurodollars that may not perfectly correlate with the value or income being hedged. Fifth Third could incur significant losses from its hedging activities. There may be periods where Fifth Third elects not to use derivatives and other instruments to hedge mortgage banking interest rate risk.

Fifth Third uses financial models for business planning purposes that may not adequately predict future results.

Fifth Third uses financial models to aid in its planning for various purposes including its capital and liquidity needs, potential charge-offs, reserves, and other purposes. The models used may not accurately account for all variables that could affect future results, may fail to predict outcomes accurately and/or may overstate or understate certain effects. As a result of these potential failures, Fifth Third may not adequately prepare for future events and may suffer losses or other setbacks due to these failures.

Changes in interest rates could also reduce the value of MSRs.

Fifth Third acquires MSRs when it keeps the servicing rights after the sale or securitization of the loans that have been originated or when it purchases the servicing rights to mortgage loans originated by other lenders. Fifth Third initially measures all residential MSRs at fair value and subsequently amortizes the MSRs in proportion to, and over the period of, estimated net servicing income. Fair value is the present value of estimated future net servicing income, calculated based on a number of variables, including assumptions about the likelihood of prepayment by borrowers. Servicing rights are assessed for impairment monthly, based on fair value, with temporary impairment recognized through a valuation allowance and permanent impairment recognized through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance.

Changes in interest rates can affect prepayment assumptions and thus fair value. When interest rates fall, borrowers are usually more likely to prepay their mortgage loans by refinancing them at a lower rate. As the likelihood of prepayment increases, the fair value of MSRs can decrease. Each quarter Fifth Third evaluates the fair value of MSRs, and decreases in fair value below amortized cost reduce earnings in the period in which the decrease occurs.

The preparation of Fifth Third’s financial statements requires the use of estimates that may vary from actual results.

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make significant estimates that affect the financial statements. See the “Critical Accounting Policies” section of the MD&A for more information regarding management’s significant estimates. Additionally, Fifth Third’s litigation reserve is a management estimate which is regularly reviewed for accuracy.

Fifth Third regularly reviews its litigation reserve for adequacy considering its litigation risks and probability of incurring losses related to litigation. However, Fifth Third cannot be certain that its current litigation reserves will be adequate over time to cover its losses in litigation due to higher than anticipated settlement costs, prolonged litigation, adverse judgments, or other factors that are largely outside of Fifth Third’s control. If Fifth Third’s litigation

reserves are not adequate, Fifth Third’s business, financial condition, including its liquidity and capital, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, in the future, Fifth Third may increase its litigation reserves, which could have a material adverse effect on its capital and results of operations.

Changes in accounting standards or interpretations could impact Fifth Third’s reported earnings and financial condition.

The accounting standard setters, including the FASB, the SEC and other regulatory agencies, periodically change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of Fifth Third’s consolidated financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how Fifth Third records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, Fifth Third could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, which would result in the recasting of Fifth Third’s prior period financial statements.

Future acquisitions may dilute current shareholders’ ownership of Fifth Third and may cause Fifth Third to become more susceptible to adverse economic events.

Future business acquisitions could be material to Fifth Third and it may issue additional shares of stock to pay for those acquisitions, which would dilute current shareholders’ ownership interests. Acquisitions also could require Fifth Third to use substantial cash or other liquid assets or to incur debt. In those events, Fifth Third could become more susceptible to economic downturns and competitive pressures.

Difficulties in combining the operations of acquired entities with Fifth Third’s own operations may prevent Fifth Third from achieving the expected benefits from its acquisitions.

Inherent uncertainties exist when integrating the operations of an acquired entity. Fifth Third may not be able to fully achieve its strategic objectives and planned operating efficiencies in an acquisition. In addition, the markets and industries in which Fifth Third and its potential acquisition targets operate are highly competitive. Fifth Third may lose customers or the customers of acquired entities as a result of an acquisition. Future acquisition and integration activities may require Fifth Third to devote substantial time and resources and as a result Fifth Third may not be able to pursue other business opportunities.

After completing an acquisition, Fifth Third may find certain items are not accounted for properly in accordance with financial accounting and reporting standards. Fifth Third may also not realize the expected benefits of the acquisition due to lower financial results pertaining to the acquired entity. For example, Fifth Third could experience higher charge-offs than originally anticipated related to the acquired loan portfolio.

Fifth Third may sell or consider selling one or more of its businesses. Should it determine to sell such a business, it may not be able to generate gains on sale or related increase in shareholders’ equity commensurate with desirable levels. Moreover, if Fifth Third sold such businesses, the loss of income could have an adverse effect on its earnings and future growth.

Fifth Third owns several non-strategic businesses that are not significantly synergistic with its core financial services businesses. Fifth Third has, from time to time, considered the sale of such businesses. If it were to determine to sell such businesses, Fifth Third would be subject to market forces that may make completion of a sale unsuccessful or may not be able to do so within a desirable

time frame. If Fifth Third were to complete the sale of non-core businesses, it would suffer the loss of income from the sold businesses, and such loss of income could have an adverse effect on its future earnings and growth.

Fifth Third relies on its systems and certain service providers, and certain failures could materially adversely affect operations.

Fifth Third collects, processes and stores sensitive consumer data by utilizing computer systems and telecommunications networks operated by both Fifth Third and third party service providers. Fifth Third has security, backup and recovery systems in place, as well as a business continuity plan to ensure the system will not be inoperable. Fifth Third also has security to prevent unauthorized access to the system. In addition, Fifth Third requires its third party service providers to maintain similar controls. However, Fifth Third cannot be certain that the measures will be successful. A security breach in the system and loss of confidential information such as credit card numbers and related information could result in losing the customers’ confidence and thus the loss of their business as well as additional significant costs for privacy monitoring activities.

Fifth Third’s necessary dependence upon automated systems to record and process its transaction volume poses the risk that technical system flaws or employee errors, tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses and may be difficult to detect. Fifth Third may also be subject to disruptions of its operating systems arising from events that are beyond its control (for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages). Fifth Third is further exposed to the risk that its third party service providers may be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors as Fifth Third). These disruptions may interfere with service to Fifth Third’s customers and result in a financial loss or liability.

Fifth Third is exposed to cyber-security risks, including denial of service, hacking, and identity theft.

Recently, there has been a well-publicized series of apparently related distributed denial of service attacks on large financial services companies, including Fifth Third Bank. Distributed denial of service attacks are designed to saturate the targeted online network with excessive amounts of network traffic, resulting in slow response times, or in some cases, causing the site to be temporarily unavailable. To date these attacks have not been intended to steal financial data, but meant to interrupt or suspend a company’s Internet service. These events did not result in a breach of Fifth Third’s client data and account information remained secure; however, the attacks did adversely affect the performance of Fifth Third’s website and in some instances prevented customers from accessing Fifth Third’s website. While the event was resolved in a timely fashion and primarily resulted in inconvenience to our customers, future cyber-attacks could be more disruptive and damaging. Hacking and identity theft risks, in particular, could cause serious reputational harm. Cyber threats are rapidly evolving and Fifth Third may not be able to anticipate or prevent all such attacks. Fifth Third may incur increasing costs in an effort to minimize these risks and could be held liable for any security breach or loss.

Fifth Third is exposed to operational and reputational risk.

Fifth Third is exposed to many types of operational risk, including reputational risk, legal and compliance risk, environmental risks from its properties, the risk of fraud or theft by employees, customers or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by employees, operating system disruptions or operational errors.

Negative public opinion can result from Fifth Third’s actual or alleged conduct in activities, such as lending practices, data security, corporate governance and acquisitions, and may damage Fifth Third’s reputation. Additionally, actions taken by government regulators and community organizations may also damage Fifth Third’s reputation. This negative public opinion can adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to attract and keep customers and can expose it to litigation and regulatory action.

The results of Vantiv, LLC could have a negative impact on Fifth Third’s operating results and financial condition.

During the second quarter of 2009, Fifth Third sold an approximate 51% interest in its processing business, Vantiv, LLC (formerly Fifth Third Processing Solutions). As a result of the Vantiv, Inc. IPO, the Bancorp’s ownership of Vantiv Holding, LLC was reduced to approximately 39% in the first quarter of 2012. In addition, Fifth Third sold an approximate 6% interest during the fourth quarter of 2012. Based on Fifth Third’s current ownership share in Vantiv Holding, LLC, of approximately 33%, Vantiv Holding, LLC is accounted for under the equity method and is not consolidated. Poor operating results of Vantiv, LLC could negatively affect the operating results of Fifth Third. In addition, Fifth Third participates in a multi lender credit facility to Vantiv Holding, LLC and repayment of these loans is contingent on future cash flows from Vantiv Holding, LLC.

Weather related events or other natural disasters may have an effect on the performance of Fifth Third’s loan portfolios, especially in its coastal markets, thereby adversely impacting its results of operations.

Fifth Third’s footprint stretches from the upper Midwestern to lower Southeastern regions of the United States. This area has experienced weather events including hurricanes and other natural disasters. The nature and level of these events and the impact of global climate change upon their frequency and severity cannot be predicted. If large scale events occur, they may significantly impact its loan portfolios by damaging properties pledged as collateral as well as impairing its borrowers’ ability to repay their loans.

RISKS RELATED TO THE LEGAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT

As a regulated entity, the Bancorp is subject to certain capital requirements that may limit its operations and potential growth.

The Bancorp is a bank holding company and a financial holding company. As such, it is subject to the comprehensive, consolidated supervision and regulation of the FRB, including risk-based and leverage capital requirements. The Bancorp must maintain certain risk-based and leverage capital ratios as required by its banking regulators and which can change depending upon general economic conditions and the Bancorp’s particular condition, risk profile and growth plans. Compliance with the capital requirements, including leverage ratios, may limit operations that require the intensive use of capital and could adversely affect the Bancorp’s ability to expand or maintain present business levels.

Comprehensive revisions to the regulatory capital framework were proposed by the FRB, OCC, and FDIC in June 2012. Included within those revisions is the Basel III NPR, which incorporates changes made by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to the Basel Capital framework in addition to implementing relevant provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Basel III NPR specifically revises what qualifies as regulatory capital, raises minimum requirements and introduces the concept of additional capital buffers. The need to maintain more and higher quality capital as well

as greater liquidity going forward could limit our business activities, including lending, and our ability to expand, either organically or through acquisitions. In addition, the new liquidity standards could require us to increase our holdings of highly liquid short-term investments, thereby reducing our ability to invest in longer-term assets even if more desirable from a balance sheet management perspective. Moreover, although these new requirements are being phased in over time, U.S. Federal banking agencies have been taking into account expectations regarding the ability of banks to meet these new requirements, including under stressed conditions, in approving actions that represent uses of capital, such as dividend increases and share repurchases.

The Bancorp’s banking subsidiary must remain well-capitalized, well-managed and maintain at least a “Satisfactory” CRA rating for the Bancorp to retain its status as a financial holding company. Failure to meet these requirements could result in the FRB placing limitations or conditions on the Bancorp’s activities (and the commencement of new activities) and could ultimately result in the loss of financial holding company status. In addition, failure by the Bancorp’s banking subsidiary to meet applicable capital guidelines could subject the bank to a variety of enforcement remedies available to the federal regulatory authorities. These include limitations on the ability to pay dividends, the issuance by the regulatory authority of a capital directive to increase capital, and the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC.

Fifth Third’s business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by new or changed regulations and by the manner in which such regulations are applied by regulatory authorities.

Current economic conditions, particularly in the financial markets, have resulted in government regulatory agencies placing increased focus on and scrutiny of the financial services industry. The U.S. government has intervened on an unprecedented scale, responding to what has been commonly referred to as the financial crisis, by introducing various actions and passing legislations such as the Dodd-Frank Act. Such programs and legislation subject Fifth Third and other financial institutions to restrictions, oversight and/or costs that may have an impact on Fifth Third’s business, financial condition, results of operations or the price of its common stock.

New proposals for legislation and regulations continue to be introduced that could further substantially increase regulation of the financial services industry. Fifth Third cannot predict whether any pending or future legislation will be adopted or the substance and impact of any such new legislation on Fifth Third. Additional regulation could affect Fifth Third in a substantial way and could have an adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

During the third quarter of 2012, the OCC, a national bank regulatory agency, issued interpretive guidance that requires Chapter 7 non-reaffirmed loans to be accounted for as nonperforming TDRs and collateral dependent loans regardless of their payment history and capacity to pay in the future. The Bancorp’s banking subsidiary is a state chartered bank which therefore is not directly subject to the guidance of the OCC. At December 31, 2012, the Bancorp had loans with unpaid principal balances totaling approximately $175 million that could potentially be impacted by this guidance, of which approximately 87% are current with their original contractual payments and approximately one third are already classified as TDRs.

Fifth Third is subject to various regulatory requirements that may limit its operations and potential growth.

Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions and their holding

companies, the FRB, the CFPB, and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions have the authority to compel or restrict certain actions by Fifth Third and its banking subsidiary. Fifth Third and its banking subsidiary are subject to such supervisory authority and, more generally, must, in certain instances, obtain prior regulatory approval before engaging in certain activities or corporate decisions. There can be no assurance that such approvals, if required, would be forthcoming or that such approvals would be granted in a timely manner. Failure to receive any such approval, if required, could limit or impair Fifth Third’s operations, restrict its growth and/or affect its dividend policy. Such actions and activities subject to prior approval include, but are not limited to, increasing dividends paid by Fifth Third or its banking subsidiary, entering into a merger or acquisition transaction, acquiring or establishing new branches, and entering into certain new businesses.

In addition, Fifth Third, as well as other financial institutions more generally, have recently been subjected to increased scrutiny from regulatory authorities stemming from broader systemic regulatory concerns, including with respect to stress testing, capital levels, asset quality, provisioning and other prudential matters, arising as a result of the recent financial crisis and efforts to ensure that financial institutions take steps to improve their risk management and prevent future crises.

In some cases, regulatory agencies may take supervisory actions that may not be publicly disclosed, which restrict or limit a financial institution. Finally, as part of Fifth Third’s regular examination process, Fifth Third’s and its banking subsidiary’s respective regulators may advise it and its banking subsidiary to operate under various restrictions as a prudential matter. Such supervisory actions or restrictions, if and in whatever manner imposed, could have a material adverse effect on Fifth Third’s business and results of operations and may not be publicly disclosed.

Fifth Third and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, investigations and proceedings by government and self-regulatory agencies which may lead to adverse consequences.

Fifth Third and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the SEC, regarding their respective businesses. Such matters may result in material adverse consequences, including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of Fifth Third’s SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in its disclosure controls and procedures. The SEC is investigating and has made several requests for information, including by subpoena, and interviews of certain of our current and former officers and employees and others, concerning issues which Fifth Third understands relate to accounting and reporting matters involving certain of its commercial loans. This could lead to an enforcement proceeding by the SEC which, in turn, may result in one or more such material adverse consequences.

Deposit insurance premiums levied against Fifth Third may increase if the number of bank failures increase or the cost of resolving failed banks increases.

The FDIC maintains a DIF to resolve the cost of bank failures. The DIF is funded by fees assessed on insured depository institutions including Fifth Third. The magnitude and cost of resolving an increased number of bank failures have reduced the DIF. Future deposit premiums paid by Fifth Third depend on the level of the DIF and the magnitude and cost of future bank failures. Fifth Third also may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC premiums because market developments have significantly depleted the DIF of the FDIC and reduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits.

Legislative or regulatory compliance, changes or actions or significant litigation, could adversely impact Fifth Third or the businesses in which Fifth Third is engaged.

Fifth Third is subject to extensive state and federal regulation, supervision and legislation that govern almost all aspects of its operations and limit the businesses in which Fifth Third may engage. These laws and regulations may change from time to time and are primarily intended for the protection of consumers, depositors and the deposit insurance funds. The impact of any changes to laws and regulations or other actions by regulatory agencies may negatively impact Fifth Third or its ability to increase the value of its business. Additionally, actions by regulatory agencies or significant litigation against Fifth Third could cause it to devote significant time and resources to defending itself and may lead to penalties that materially affect Fifth Third and its shareholders. Future changes in the laws, including tax laws, or regulations or their interpretations or enforcement may also be materially adverse to Fifth Third and its shareholders or may require Fifth Third to expend significant time and resources to comply with such requirements.

On July 21, 2010 the President of the United States signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act. Many parts of the Dodd-Frank Act are now in effect, while others are in an implementation stage likely to continue for several years. A number of reform provisions are likely to significantly impact the ways in which banks and bank holding companies, including Fifth Third and its bank subsidiary, conduct their business:

It is clear that the reforms, both under the Dodd-Frank Act and otherwise, will have a significant effect on the entire financial industry. Although it is difficult to predict the magnitude and extent of these effects at this stage, Fifth Third believes compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations and other initiatives will likely negatively impact revenue and increase the cost of doing business, both in terms of transition expenses and on an ongoing basis, and may also limit Fifth Third’s ability to pursue certain desirable business opportunities. Any new regulatory requirements or changes to existing requirements could require changes to Fifth Third’s businesses, result in increased compliance costs and affect the profitability of such businesses. Additionally, reform could affect the behaviors of third parties that we deal with in the course of our business, such as rating agencies, insurance companies and investors. The extent to which Fifth Third can adjust its strategies to offset such adverse impacts also is not known at this time.

Fifth Third and other financial institutions have been the subject of litigation which could result in legal liability and damage to its reputation.

Fifth Third and certain of its directors and officers have been named from time to time as defendants in various class actions and other litigation relating to Fifth Third’s business and activities. Past, present and future litigation have included or could include claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages. Fifth Third is also involved from time to time in other reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by governmental and self-regulatory agencies regarding its business. These matters also could result in

adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. Like other large financial institutions and companies, Fifth Third is also subject to risk from potential employee misconduct, including non-compliance with policies and improper use or disclosure of confidential information. Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against Fifth Third could materially adversely affect its business, financial condition or results of operations and/or cause significant reputational harm to its business.

Fifth Third’s ability to pay or increase dividends on its common stock or to repurchase its capital stock is restricted.

Fifth Third’s ability to pay dividends or repurchase stock is subject to regulatory requirements and the need to meet regulatory expectations. The FRB launched the 2013 stress testing program and CCAR on November 9, 2012. The CCAR requires bank holding companies to submit a capital plan in addition to their stress testing results. The mandatory elements of the capital plan are an assessment of the expected use and sources of capital over the planning horizon, a description of all planned capital actions over the planning horizon, a discussion of any expected changes to the Bancorp’s business plan that are likely to have a material impact on its capital adequacy or liquidity, a detailed description of the Bancorp’s process for assessing capital adequacy and the Bancorp’s capital policy. The stress testing results and capital plan were submitted to the FRB on January 7, 2013.

The FRB’s review of the capital plan will assess the comprehensiveness of the capital plan, the reasonableness of the assumptions and the analysis underlying the capital plan. Additionally, the FRB will review the robustness of the capital adequacy process, the capital policy and the Bancorp’s ability to maintain capital above the minimum regulatory capital ratios and above a Tier 1 common ratio of 5 percent on a pro forma basis under expected and stressful conditions throughout the planning horizon. The FRB will also assess the Bancorp’s strategies for addressing proposed revisions to the regulatory capital framework agreed upon by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and requirements arising from the Dodd-Frank Act.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income is the interest earned on securities, loans and leases (including yield-related fees) and other interest-earning assets less the interest paid for core deposits (includes transaction deposits and other time deposits) and wholesale funding (includes certificates of deposit $100,000 and over, other deposits, federal funds purchased, short-term borrowings and long-term debt). The net interest margin is calculated by dividing net interest income by average interest-earning assets. Net interest rate spread is the difference between the average yield earned on interest-earning assets and the average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest margin is typically greater than net interest rate spread due to the interest income earned on those assets that are funded by noninterest-bearing liabilities, or free funding, such as demand deposits or shareholders’ equity.

Table 4 presents the components of net interest income, net interest margin and net interest rate spread for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010. Nonaccrual loans and leases and loans held for sale have been included in the average loan and lease balances. Average outstanding securities balances are based on amortized cost with any unrealized gains or losses on available-for-sale securities included in other assets. Table 5 provides the relative impact of changes in the balance sheet and changes in interest rates on net interest income.

Net interest income was $3.6 billion for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. Included within net interest income are amounts related to the accretion of discounts on acquired loans and deposits, primarily as a result of acquisitions in previous years, which increased net interest income by $31 million during 2012 and $40 million during 2011. The original purchase accounting discounts reflected the high discount rates in the market at the time of the acquisitions; the total loan discounts are being accreted into net interest income over the remaining period to maturity of the loans acquired. Based upon the remaining period to maturity, and excluding the impact of prepayments, the Bancorp anticipates recognizing approximately $9 million in additional net interest income during 2013 as a result of the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, net interest income was positively impacted by an increase in average loans and leases of $4.6 billion as well as a decrease in interest expense compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. In addition, net interest income benefited from the free funding provided by a $3.8 billion increase in average demand deposits in 2012 compared to 2011. Average interest-earning assets increased by $4.0 billion in 2012 while average interest-bearing liabilities were flat compared to the prior year. These benefits were offset by lower yields on the Bancorp’s interest-earning assets. The increase in average loans and leases for the year ended December 31, 2012 was driven primarily by an increase of 15% in average commercial and industrial loans and an increase of 18% in average residential mortgage loans. For more information on the Bancorp’s loan and lease portfolio, see the Loans and Leases section of the Balance Sheet analysis of MD&A. The decrease in interest expense was primarily the result of decreases in the rates paid on average interest-bearing liabilities of 21 bps, primarily due to lower rates offered on savings account balances and other time deposits, compared to the year ended December 31, 2011, coupled with a continued mix shift to lower cost core deposits. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the net interest rate spread decreased to 3.35% from 3.42% in 2011 as the benefit from a decrease in rates on average interest-bearing liabilities was more than offset by a 28 bps decrease in yield on average interest-earnings assets.

Net interest margin was 3.55% for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 3.66% for the year ended December 31, 2011. Net interest margin was impacted by the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits that resulted in an increase in net interest margin of 3 bps during 2012 compared to 5 bps during 2011. Exclusive of these amounts, net interest margin decreased 9 bps for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the prior year driven primarily by the previously mentioned decline in the yield on average interest-earning assets and higher average balances on interest-earning assets, partially offset by a mix shift to lower cost core deposits, the decline in rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities and an increase in free funding balances.

Interest income from loans and leases decreased $37 million, or one percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 driven primarily by a 29 bps decrease in average loans and leases yields attributable to loan repricing, mainly in the commercial and industrial loan portfolio as well as in the automobile and residential mortgage portfolios, partially offset by a six percent increase in average loans and leases. Interest income from investment securities and short-term investments decreased $74 million, or 12%, from the prior year primarily as the result of a 44 bps decrease in the average yield of taxable securities due to paydowns and the sale of higher yielding agency mortgage-backed securities coupled with the reinvestment into lower yielding securities.

Average core deposits increased $3.8 billion, or five percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 primarily due to an increase in average interest checking deposits and average demand deposits partially offset by a decrease in average foreign office deposits and average other time deposits. The cost of average core deposits decreased to 21 bps for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 36 bps from the prior year. This decrease was primarily the result of a mix shift to lower cost core deposits as a result of runoff of higher priced CDs combined with a 64 bps decrease in the rates paid on average other time deposits and a 14 bps decrease in the rate paid on average savings deposits compared to year ended December 31, 2011.

Interest expense on average wholesale funding for the year ended December 31, 2012 decreased $38 million, or 10%, compared to the prior year, primarily as the result of a 49 bps decrease in the rate paid on average certificates $100,000 and over and a $554 million decrease in average certificates $100,000 and over, coupled with a $1.1 billion decrease in average long-term debt. These impacts were partially offset by a 16 bps increase in the rate paid on average long-term debt. Refer to the Borrowings section of MD&A for additional information on the Bancorp’s changes in average borrowings. During the year ended December 31, 2012, wholesale funding represented 24% of interest-bearing liabilities compared to 23% during the prior year. For more information on the Bancorp’s interest rate risk management, including estimated earnings sensitivity to changes in market interest rates, see the Market Risk Management section of MD&A.