Fifth Third Bancorp is a diversified financial services company headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. At December 31, 2013, the Bancorp had $130.4 billion in assets, operated 17 affiliates with 1,320 full-service Banking Centers, including 104 Bank Mart® locations open seven days a week inside select grocery stores, and 2,586 ATMs in 12 states throughout the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the U.S. The Bancorp reports on four business segments: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer Lending and Investment Advisors. The Bancorp also has a 25% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC. The carrying value of the Bancorp’s investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC was $423 million as of December 31, 2013.

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 Abbreviations and Acronyms in this report for a list of terms included as a tool for the reader of this annual report on Form 10-K. The abbreviations and 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, 2013, net interest income, on a FTE basis, and noninterest income provided 53% and 47% of total revenue, respectively. The Bancorp derives the majority of its revenues within the U.S. 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, card and processing revenue and other noninterest income. Noninterest expense is primarily driven by personnel costs, net occupancy expenses, and technology and communication costs.

Vantiv, Inc. Share Sales

The Bancorp’s ownership position in Vantiv Holding, LLC was reduced in the second quarter of 2013 when the Bancorp sold an approximate five percent interest and recognized a $242 million gain. The Bancorp’s ownership position was further reduced in the third quarter of 2013 when the Bancorp sold an approximate three percent interest and recognized an $85 million gain. The Bancorp’s remaining approximate 25% ownership in Vantiv Holding, LLC continues to be accounted for as an equity method investment in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements and had a carrying value of $423 million as of December, 31, 2013.

As of December 31, 2013, the Bancorp continued to hold approximately 48.8 million Class B units of Vantiv Holding, LLC and a warrant to purchase approximately 20.4 million Class C non-voting units of Vantiv Holding, LLC, both of which may be exchanged for Class A 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 48.8 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.

Redemption of TruPS

The Bancorp redeemed all $750 million of the outstanding TruPS issued by Fifth Third Capital Trust IV on December 30, 2013. For more information on the redemption of these instruments, see the Capital Management section of MD&A.

Accelerated Share Repurchase Transactions

During 2013 and 2012, the Bancorp entered into a number of accelerated share repurchase transactions. As part of these transactions, the Bancorp entered into forward contracts in which the final number of shares to be delivered at settlement was or will be based generally on a discount to the average daily volume-weighted average price of the Bancorp’s common stock during the term of the Repurchase Agreement. For more information on the accounting for these instruments, see the Capital Management section of the MD&A. For a summary of all accelerated share repurchase transactions during 2013 and 2012 please refer to Table 2.

Preferred Stock Offerings and Conversion

During 2013, the Bancorp had two preferred stock offerings and converted the outstanding Series G preferred stock into Fifth Third common stock. A description of the preferred stock offerings and conversion is below. For more information, see Note 23 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

As contemplated by the 2013 CCAR, on May 16, 2013 the Bancorp issued in a registered public offering 600,000 depositary shares, representing 24,000 shares of 5.10% fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative Series H perpetual preferred stock, for net proceeds of $593 million. The Series H preferred shares are not convertible into Bancorp common shares or any other securities. On June 11, 2013, the Bancorp’s Board of Directors authorized the conversion into common stock, no par value, of all outstanding shares of the Bancorp’s 8.50% non-cumulative convertible perpetual preferred stock, Series G. On July 1, 2013, the Bancorp converted the remaining 16,442 outstanding shares of Series G preferred stock, which represented 4,110,500 depositary shares, into shares of Fifth Third’s common stock. On December 9, 2013, the Bancorp issued, in a registered public offering, 18,000,000 depositary shares, representing 18,000 shares of 6.625% fixed-to-floating rate non-cumulative Series I perpetual preferred stock, for net proceeds of $441 million. The Series I preferred shares are not convertible into Bancorp common shares or any other securities.

Senior Notes and Subordinated Notes Offering

On February 25, 2013, the Bancorp’s banking subsidiary updated and amended its existing global bank note program. The amended global bank note program increased the Bank’s capacity to issue its senior and subordinated unsecured bank notes from $20 billion to $25 billion. Additionally, on February 28, 2013, the Bank issued and sold, under its amended bank notes program, $1.3 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured senior bank notes. The bank notes consisted of: $600 million of 1.45% senior fixed rate notes due on February 28, 2018; $400 million of 0.90% senior fixed rate notes due on February 26, 2016; and $300 million of senior floating rate notes. Interest on the floating rate notes is 3-month LIBOR plus 41 bps due on February 26, 2016. The bank notes will be redeemable by the Bank, in whole or in part, on or after the date that is 30 days prior to the maturity date at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest through the redemption date.

On November 20, 2013, the Bancorp issued and sold $750 million of 4.30% unsecured subordinated fixed rate notes with a maturity date of January 16, 2024. These fixed rate notes will be redeemable by the Bancorp, in whole or in part, on or after the date that is 30 days prior to the maturity date at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest

up to, but excluding, the redemption date.

Additionally, on November 20, 2013, the Bank issued and sold, under its amended bank notes program, $1.8 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured senior bank notes. The bank notes consisted of: $1 billion of 1.15% senior fixed rate notes due on November 18, 2016 and $750 million of senior floating rate notes due on November 18, 2016. Interest on the floating rate notes is 3-month LIBOR plus 51 bps. These bank notes will be redeemable by the Bank, in whole or in part, on or after the date that is 30 days prior to the maturity date at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest through the redemption date.

Automobile Loan Securitizations

In March of 2013, the Bancorp recognized an immaterial loss on the securitization and sale of certain automobile loans with a carrying amount of approximately $509 million. As part of the sale, the Bancorp obtained servicing responsibilities and recognized a servicing asset with an initial fair value of $6 million.

In August of 2013, the Bancorp transferred approximately $1.3 billion in fixed-rate consumer automobile loans to a bankruptcy remote trust which was deemed to be a VIE. The Bancorp concluded that it is the primary beneficiary of the VIE and, therefore, has consolidated this VIE. For additional information on the automobile loan securitizations, refer to the Liquidity Risk Management section of MD&A.

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. While the total impact of the fully implemented Dodd-Frank Act on the Bancorp is not currently known, the impact is expected to be substantial and may have an adverse impact on the Bancorp’s financial performance and growth opportunities.

The Bancorp was impacted by a number of components of the Dodd-Frank Act which were implemented in 2012 and 2013. 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 BHC’s that participated in the 2009 SCAP and subsequent CCAR, which includes the Bancorp, 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 capital planning and stress testing program on November 9, 2012. The program includes the CCAR, which included the 19 BHCs that participated in the 2009 SCAP, as well as the CapPR which includes an additional 11 BHCs with $50 billion or more of total consolidated assets. The mandatory elements of the capital plan were 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. In March of 2013, the FRB disclosed its estimates of participating institutions’ results under the FRB supervisory stress scenario, including capital results, which assume all banks take certain consistently applied future capital actions. In addition, the FRB disclosed 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’s review of the capital plan assessed the comprehensiveness of the capital plan, the reasonableness of the assumptions and the analysis underlying the capital plan. Additionally, the FRB reviewed 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 I common ratio of five percent on a pro forma basis under expected and stressful conditions throughout the planning horizon. The FRB assessed the Bancorp’s strategies for addressing proposed revisions to the regulatory capital framework agreed upon by the BCBS and requirements arising from the Dodd-Frank Act.

In March 2013, the FRB announced it had completed the 2013 CCAR. For BHCs that proposed capital distributions in their plan, the FRB either objected to the plan or provided a non-objection whereby the FRB concurred with the proposed 2013 capital distributions. The FRB indicated to the Bancorp that it did not object to the following proposed capital actions for the period beginning April 1, 2013 and ending March 31, 2014:

Beginning in 2013, the Bancorp and other large bank holding companies were required to conduct a separate mid-year stress test using financial data as of March 31^st under three company-derived macro-economic scenarios (base, adverse and severely adverse). The Bancorp submitted the results of its mid-year stress test to the FRB in July of 2013 and the Bancorp published a summary of the results under the severely adverse scenario in September of 2013 which is available on Fifth Third’s website at https://www.53.com. The FRB launched the 2014 stress testing program and CCAR on November 1, 2013. The stress testing results and capital plan were submitted by the Bancorp to the FRB on January 6, 2014. For further discussion on the 2013 and 2014 Stress Tests and CCAR, see the Capital Management section in MD&A.

Fifth Third offers qualified deposit customers a deposit advance product if they choose to avail themselves of this service to meet short term, small-dollar financial needs. In April of 2013, the CFPB issued a “White Paper” which studied financial services industry offerings and customer use of deposit advance products as well as payday loans and is considering whether rules governing these products are warranted. At the same time, the OCC and FDIC each issued proposed supervisory guidance for public comment to institutions they supervise which supplements existing OCC and FDIC guidance, detailing the principles they expect financial institutions to follow in connection with deposit advance products and supervisory expectations for the use of deposit advance products. The Federal Reserve also issued a statement in April to state member banks like Fifth Third for whom the Federal Reserve is the primary regulator. This statement encouraged state member banks to respond to customers’ small-dollar credit needs in a responsible manner; emphasized that they should take into consideration the risks associated with deposit advance products, including potential consumer harm and potential elevated compliance risk; and reminded them that these product offerings must comply with applicable laws and regulations. Fifth Third’s deposit advance product is designed to fully comply with the applicable federal and state laws and use of this product is subject to strict eligibility requirements and advance restriction guidelines to limit dependency on this product as a borrowing source. Fifth Third believes this product provides customers with a relatively low-cost alternative for such needs. On January 17, 2014, given developments in industry practice, Fifth Third announced that it will no longer enroll new customers in its deposit advance product and will phase out the service to existing customers by the end of 2014. These advance balances are included in other consumer loans and leases in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and represent substantially all of the revenue reported in interest and fees on other consumer loans and leases in the Bancorp’s Consolidated Statements of Income and in Table 5 in the Statements of Income Analysis section of the MD&A. Fifth Third has been monitoring industry developments and is working to develop and implement alternative products and services in order to address the needs of its customers. The Bancorp is currently in the process of evaluating the impact to the Bancorp’s Consolidated Financial Statements of both the phase out of our deposit advance product and our development of alternative products and services.

In December of 2010 and revised in June of 2011, the BCBS 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. In July of 2013, U.S. banking regulators approved the final enhanced regulatory capital rules (Basel III Final Rule), which included modifications to the proposed rules. The Bancorp continues to evaluate the Basel III Final Rule and its potential impact. For more information on the impact of the regulatory capital enhancements, refer to the Capital Management section of MD&A.

On December 10, 2013, the banking agencies finalized section 619 of the DFA known as the Volcker Rule, which becomes effective April 1, 2014. Though the final rule is effective April 1, 2014, the Federal Reserve has granted the industry an extension of time until July 21, 2015 to conform activities to be in compliance with the Volcker Rule. It is possible that additional conformance period extensions could be granted either to the entire industry, or, upon request, to requesting banking organizations on a case-by-case basis. The final rule prohibits banks and bank holding companies from engaging in short-term proprietary trading of certain securities, derivatives, commodity futures and options on these instruments for their own account. The Volcker Rule also restricts banks and their affiliated entities from owning, sponsoring or having certain relationships with private equity and hedge funds. Exemptions are provided for certain activities such as underwriting, market making, hedging, trading in certain government obligations and organizing and offering a hedge fund or private equity fund. Fifth Third does not sponsor any private equity or hedge funds that, under the final rule, it is prohibited from sponsoring. As of December 31, 2013, the Bancorp had approximately $181 million in interests and approximately $80 million in binding commitments to invest in private equity funds that are affected by the Volcker Rule. It is expected that over time the Bancorp may need to sell or redeem these investments although it is likely that these investments will be reduced over time in the ordinary course before compliance is required.

In November 2010, the FDIC implemented a final rule amending its deposit insurance regulations to implement section 343 of the Dodd-Frank Act providing for unlimited deposit insurance for noninterest-bearing transaction accounts for two years starting December 31, 2010. The FDIC did not charge a separate assessment for the insurance unlike the previous Transaction

Account Guarantee Program. Beginning January 1, 2013, noninterest-bearing transaction accounts are no longer insured separately from depositors’ other accounts at the same insured depository institution.

On January 7, 2013, the BCBS issued a final international standard for the LCR for large, internationally active banks, which would phase in the LCR beginning in 2015 with full implementation in 2019. In addition, the BCBS plans on introducing the NSFR final standard in the next two years. On October 24, 2013, the U.S. banking agencies issued an NPR that would implement a LCR requirement for U.S. banks that is generally consistent with the international LCR standards for large, internationally active banking organizations, generally those with $250 billion or more in total consolidated assets or $10 billion or more in on-balance sheet foreign exposure, and a Modified LCR for BHCs with at least $50 billion in total consolidated assets that are not internationally active, like Fifth Third. The NPR was open for public comment until January 31, 2014. Refer to the Liquidity Risk Management section in MD&A for further discussion on these ratios.

On July 31, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order granting summary judgment to the plaintiffs in a case challenging certain provisions of the FRB’s rule concerning electronic debit card transaction fees and network exclusivity arrangements (the “Current Rule”) that were adopted to implement Section 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Act, known as the Durbin Amendment. The Court held that, in adopting the Current Rule, the FRB violated the Durbin Amendment’s provisions concerning which costs are allowed to be taken into account for purposes of setting fees that are reasonable and proportional to the costs incurred by the issuer and therefore the Current Rule’s maximum permissible fees were too high. In addition, the Court held that the Current Rule’s network non-exclusivity provisions concerning unaffiliated payment networks for debit cards also violated the Durbin Amendment. The Court vacated the Current Rule, but stayed its ruling to provide the FRB an opportunity to replace the invalidated portions. The FRB has appealed this decision. If this decision is ultimately upheld and/or the FRB re-issues rules for purposes of implementing the Durbin Amendment in a manner consistent with this decision, the amount of debit card interchange fees the Bancorp would be permitted to charge likely would be reduced. Refer to the Noninterest Income subsection of the Statements of Income Analysis section of MD&A for further information regarding the Bancorp’s debit card interchange revenue.

Earnings Summary

The Bancorp’s net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2013 was $1.8 billion, or $2.02 per diluted share, which was net of $37 million in preferred stock dividends. 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. Pre-provision net revenue was $2.8 billion and $2.5 billion for the years ended 2013 and 2012, respectively. Pre-provision net revenue is a non-GAAP measure. For further information, see the Non-GAAP Financial Measures section in the MD&A.

Net interest income was $3.6 billion for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. Net interest income was negatively impacted by a decline of 36 bps in yields on the Bancorp’s interest-earning assets, partially offset by a $4.3 billion increase in average loans and leases due primarily to increases in average commercial and industrial loans and average residential mortgage loans. In addition, interest expense decreased primarily due to a decrease in rates paid on average long-term debt and a reduction in higher cost average long-term debt. Net interest margin was 3.32% and 3.55% for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Noninterest income increased $228 million, or eight percent, in 2013 compared to 2012. The increase from the prior year was primarily due to increases in other noninterest income partially offset by decreases in mortgage banking net revenue. Other noninterest income increased $305 million compared to the prior year, primarily due to positive valuation adjustments on the stock warrant associated with Vantiv Holding, LLC. In addition, the Bancorp recognized gains of $242 million and $85 million, on the sales of Vantiv, Inc. shares in the second and third quarters of 2013, respectively, compared to gains of $115 million related to the Vantiv, Inc. IPO recorded in the first quarter of 2012 and a $157 million gain on the sale of Vantiv shares during the fourth quarter of 2012. Mortgage banking net revenue decreased $145 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the prior year primarily due to a decrease in origination fees and gains on loan sales partially offset by an increase in positive net valuation adjustments on mortgage servicing rights and free-standing derivatives entered into to economically hedge the MSR portfolio.

Noninterest expense decreased $120 million, or three percent, in 2013 compared to 2012 primarily due to a decrease in other noninterest expense driven by a decrease in debt extinguishment costs and a decrease in the provision for representation and warranty claims partially offset by an increase in litigation expense.

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. During 2013, credit trends have improved, and as a result, the provision for loan and lease losses decreased to $229 million in 2013 compared to $303 million in 2012. In addition, net charge-offs as a percent of average portfolio loans and leases decreased to 0.58% during 2013 compared to 0.85% during 2012. At December 31, 2013, nonperforming assets as a percent of loans, leases and other assets, including OREO (excluding nonaccrual loans held for sale) decreased to 1.10%, compared to 1.49% at December 31, 2012. 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, 2013, the Tier I risk-based capital ratio was 10.36%, the Tier I leverage ratio was 9.64% and the total risk-based capital ratio was 14.08%.

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.

U.S. banking regulators approved final capital rules (Basel III Final Rule) in July of 2013 that substantially amend the existing risk-based capital rules (Basel I) for banks. The Bancorp believes providing an estimate of its capital position based upon the final rules is important to complement the existing capital ratios and for comparability to other financial institutions. Since these rules are not effective for the Bancorp until January 1, 2015, 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 2013 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, 2013.

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 non-owner 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’s

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, such as the limitation on the use of any net operating losses, 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 20 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 and the weighted-average coupon 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, 2013, derivatives classified as Level 3, which are valued using an option-pricing model containing unobservable inputs, consisted primarily of the warrant associated with the initial sale of the Bancorp’s 51% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC 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 27 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. In this qualitative assessment, the Bancorp evaluates events and circumstances which may include, but are not limited to, the general economic environment, banking industry and market conditions, the overall financial performance of the Bancorp, the performance of the Bancorp’s stock, the key financial performance metrics of the reporting units, and events affecting the reporting units. 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 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. 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.

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, 2013; 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, 2013). 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, increased regulatory requirements, 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.

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 borrowers 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 deteriorate or future investor repurchase demand and success at appealing repurchase requests differ from past experience, Fifth Third could 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 to meet liquidity objectives, 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 and regulatory investigation risks and probability of incurring losses related to litigation and regulatory investigations. However, Fifth Third cannot be certain that its current litigation reserves will be adequate over time to cover its losses in litigation or regulatory proceedings 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. In addition, if a material change to a reserve amount is made to reflect new information, such a change could result in a change to previously announced financial results.

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.

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

In 2009, Fifth Third sold an approximate 51% interest in its processing business, Vantiv Holding, LLC (formerly Fifth Third Processing Solutions). As a result of additional share sales completed by Fifth Third in 2012 and 2013, the Bancorp’s current ownership share in Vantiv Holding, LLC is approximately 25%. Vantiv Holding, LLC is accounted for under the equity method and is not consolidated based on Fifth Third’s remaining ownership share in Vantiv Holding, LLC. Vantiv Holding, LLC’s operating results could be poor or favorable and could disproportionately 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 the FRB 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.

In June 2012, Federal banking agencies proposed enhancements to the regulatory capital requirements for U.S. banking organizations, which implemented 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 1 common equity ratio. In July 2013, the Federal banking agencies issued final rules for the enhanced regulatory capital requirements, which included modifications to the proposed rules. The final rules provide the option for certain banking organizations, including the Bancorp, to opt out of including AOCI in Tier 1 capital and retain the treatment of residential mortgage exposures consistent with the current Basel I capital rules. The new capital rules are effective for the Bancorp on January 1, 2015, subject to phase-in periods for certain components and other provisions. 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 legislation 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.

On November 21, 2013, the OCC and FDIC separately issued guidance on deposit advance loans. The guidance establishes numerous expectations for institutions that offer such products. It covers matters such as consumer eligibility, capital adequacy, fees, compliance, management oversight, and third-party relationships. Fifth Third’s deposit advance product was designed to fully comply with all applicable federal and state laws. However, given industry developments, Fifth Third determined to cease enrolling customers in its deposit advance product as of January 31, 2014 and will phase out its service to existing deposit advance customers by December 31, 2014.

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 FDIC, 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 various governmental regulatory agencies and law enforcement authorities, as well as 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 governmental regulatory agencies and law enforcement authorities, as well as 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.

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

The FDIC maintains a DIF to protect insured depositors in the event of bank failures. The DIF is funded by fees assessed on insured depository institutions including Fifth Third Bank. The magnitude and cost of resolving an increased number of bank failures have reduced the DIF. Future deposit premiums paid by Fifth Third Bank depend on the level of the DIF and the magnitude and cost of future bank failures. Fifth Third Bank 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/or its affiliates are or may become the subject of litigation which could result in legal liability and damage to Fifth Third’s 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. These matters could result in material adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief, 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. 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. Fifth Third is subject to an annual assessment by the FRB as part of CCAR. 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 capital plan must reflect the revised capital framework that the FRB adopted in connection with the implementation of the Basel III accord, including the framework’s minimum regulatory capital ratios and transition arrangements. Fifth Third’s stress testing results and 2014 capital plan were submitted to the FRB on January 6, 2014.

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 under baseline and stressful conditions throughout a nine-quarter planning horizon.

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 5 presents the components of net interest income, net interest margin and net interest rate spread for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. 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 6 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, 2013 and 2012. Included within net interest income are amounts related to the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits, primarily as a result of acquisitions in previous years, which increased net interest income by $17 million during 2013 and $31 million during 2012. 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 $5 million in additional net interest income during 2014 as a result of the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits.

For the year ended December 31, 2013, net interest income was negatively impacted by a 36 bps decline in yields on the Bancorp’s interest-earning assets compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in yields on interest earning assets was partially offset by an increase in average loans and leases of $4.3 billion as well as a decrease in interest expense compared to the prior year. The decrease in interest expense was primarily the result of a 59 bps decrease in the rate paid on average long-term debt coupled with a $1.1 billion decrease in average long-term debt for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. For the year ended December 31, 2013, the net interest rate spread decreased to 3.15% from 3.35% in 2012 as the benefit of the decreases in rates on interest-bearing liabilities was more than offset by a decrease in yield on average interest-earning assets.

Net interest margin was 3.32% for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 3.55% for the year ended December 31, 2012. 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 2 bps during 2013 compared to 3 bps during 2012. Exclusive of these amounts, net interest margin decreased 22 bps for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the prior year driven primarily by the previously mentioned decline in the yield on average interest-earning assets coupled with an increase in average interest-earning assets, partially

offset by a decrease in interest expense primarily related to long-term debt.

Interest income from loans and leases decreased $126 million, or four percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2012 primarily due to a decrease of 34 bps in yields on average loans and leases partially offset by an increase of five percent in average loans and leases for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 2012. The increase in average loans and leases for the year ended December 31, 2013 was driven primarily by an increase of 15% in average commercial and industrial loans and an increase of eight percent in average residential mortgage loans compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. For more information on the Bancorp’s loan and lease portfolio, see the Loans and Leases section of the Balance Sheet Analysis of the MD&A. In addition, interest income from investment securities and other short-term investments decreased $6 million, or one percent, compared to the year ended 2012 primarily due to a 29 bps decrease in the average yield on taxable securities partially offset by an increase of $1.1 billion in average taxable securities.

Average core deposits increased $4.3 billion, or five percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2012 primarily due to an increase in average money market deposits and average demand deposits partially offset by a decrease in average savings deposits. The cost of interest bearing core deposits decreased to 27 bps for the year ended December 31, 2013 from 31 bps for the year ended December 31, 2012. This decrease was primarily the result of a mix shift to lower cost interest bearing core deposits as a result of run-off of higher priced CDs combined with decreases of 5 bps in the rate paid on average savings deposits and a decrease of 26 bps on average other time deposits compared to the year ended December 31, 2012.

Interest expense on average wholesale funding for the year ended December 31, 2013 decreased $83 million, or 24%, compared to the prior year, primarily due to a decrease in the rates paid on average long-term debt of 59 bps for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 2012 coupled with a decrease of $1.1 billion in average long-term debt. The reduction in higher cost long-term debt was primarily the result of the full year impact of the redemption of outstanding TruPS and FHLB debt in the second half of 2012. In the third quarter of 2012, the Bancorp redeemed $1.4 billion of outstanding TruPS which had a 7.25% distribution rate. Additionally, in the fourth quarter of 2012, the Bancorp terminated $1.0 billion of FHLB debt with a fixed rate of 4.56%. These decreases were partially offset by the issuance of $1.3 billion of unsecured senior bank notes in the first quarter of 2013. Refer to the Borrowings section of MD&A for additional information on the Bancorp’s changes in average borrowings. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, wholesale funding represented 24% of interest-bearing liabilities. 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.