Fifth Third Bancorp is a diversified financial services company headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. At December 31, 2015, the Bancorp had $141.1 billion in assets and operates 1,254 full-service banking centers, including 95 Bank Mart® locations, open seven days a week, inside select grocery stores and 2,593 ATMs in twelve 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 an approximate 18% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC. The carrying value of the Bancorp’s investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC was $360 million as of December 31, 2015.

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, refer to 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.

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, 2015, net interest income on an FTE basis and noninterest income provided 54% and 46% 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 was immaterial to the 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 of MD&A, 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, other 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 from service charges on deposits, investment advisory revenue, corporate banking revenue, mortgage banking net revenue, card and processing revenue, securities gains, net and other noninterest income. Noninterest expense includes personnel costs, net occupancy expense, technology and communication costs, card and processing expense, equipment expense and other noninterest expense.

Vantiv, Inc. and Vantiv Holding, LLC Transactions

During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Bancorp entered into an agreement with Vantiv, Inc. under which a portion of its TRA with Vantiv, Inc. was terminated and settled in full for a cash payment of approximately $49 million from Vantiv, Inc. Under the agreement, the Bancorp sold certain TRA cash flows it expected to receive from 2017 to 2030, totaling an estimated $140 million. Approximately half of the sold TRA cash flows related to 2025 and later. This sale did not impact the TRA payment recognized during the fourth quarter of 2015 and is not expected to impact the TRA payment to be recognized in the fourth quarter of 2016. In addition to the impact of the TRA termination discussed above, the Bancorp recognized $31 million, $23 million and $9 million in noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income associated with the TRA during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

The Bancorp agreed during the fourth quarter of 2015 to cancel rights to purchase approximately 4.8 million Class C units in Vantiv Holding, LLC, the wholly-owned principal operating subsidiary of Vantiv, Inc., underlying the Bancorp’s warrant in exchange for a cash payment of $200 million. Subsequent to this cancellation, the Bancorp exercised its right to purchase approximately 7.8 million Class C units underlying the Bancorp’s warrant at the $15.98 strike price. This exercise was settled on a net basis for approximately 5.4 million Class C units, which were then exchanged for approximately 5.4 million shares of Vantiv, Inc. Class A common stock that were sold in the secondary offering. The Bancorp recognized a gain of $89 million on the 62% of the warrant that was settled or net exercised.

Additionally, during the fourth quarter of 2015, the Bancorp exchanged 8 million Class B units of Vantiv Holding, LLC for 8 million Class A shares in Vantiv, Inc., which were also sold in the secondary offering, and on which the Bancorp recognized a gain of $331 million. The Bancorp’s remaining investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC continues to be accounted for under the equity method of accounting. For more information, refer to Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan

The Bancorp monitors changing customer preferences associated with the channels it uses for banking transactions to evaluate the efficiency, competitiveness and quality of the customer service experience in its consumer distribution network. As part of this ongoing assessment, the Bancorp may determine that it is no longer fully committed to maintaining full-service branches at certain of its existing banking center locations. Similarly, the Bancorp may also determine that it is no longer fully committed to building banking centers on certain parcels of land which had previously been held for future branch expansion.

On June 16, 2015, the Bancorp’s Board of Directors authorized management to pursue a plan to further develop its distribution strategy, including a plan to consolidate and/or sell certain operating branch locations and to sell certain parcels of undeveloped land that had been acquired by the Bancorp for future branch expansion (the “Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan”). The Bancorp expects to receive $60 million in annual savings from operating expenses upon completion of the Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan.

On September 3, 2015, the Bancorp announced the decision to enter into an agreement to sell branch banking locations, retail accounts, certain private banking deposits and related loan relationships in the Pittsburgh MSA to First National Bank of Pennsylvania. On September 30, 2015, the Bancorp announced the decision to enter into an agreement to sell its retail operations, including retail accounts, certain private banking deposits and related loan relationships in the St. Louis MSA to Great Southern Bank. Both transactions are part of the Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan and are expected to close in the first half of 2016. As of December 31, 2015, the Bancorp intended to consolidate and/or sell 107 operating branch locations and to sell an additional 32 parcels of undeveloped land that had been acquired by the Bancorp for future branch expansion. For further information on a subsequent event related to the Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan, refer to Note 31 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Bancorp performs assessments of the recoverability of long-lived assets when events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying values may not be recoverable. Impairment losses associated with such assessments and lower of cost or market adjustments were $109 million, $20 million and $6 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The recognized impairment losses were recorded in other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. For more information on the Branch Consolidation and Sales Plan, refer to Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Accelerated Share Repurchase Transactions

During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Bancorp entered into or settled 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 delivered at settlement was 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 agreements. For more information on the accelerated share repurchase program, refer to Note 23 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. For a summary of the Bancorp’s accelerated share repurchase transactions that were entered into or settled during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, refer to Table 2.

Senior Notes Offerings

On July 27, 2015, the Bancorp issued and sold $1.1 billion of 2.875% unsecured senior fixed-rate notes, with a maturity of five years, due on July 27, 2020. The notes are not subject to redemption at the Bancorp’s option at any time until 30 days prior to maturity.

        On August 20, 2015, the Bank issued and sold $1.3 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured senior bank notes, with a maturity of three years, due on August 20, 2018. The bank notes consisted of $1.0 billion of 2.15% senior fixed-rate notes and $250 million of senior floating-rate notes. The Bancorp entered into interest rate swaps to convert the fixed-rate notes to floating-rate, which resulted in an effective rate of three-month LIBOR plus 90 bps. Interest on the floating-rate notes is three-month LIBOR plus 91 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 up to, but excluding, the redemption date. For additional information on the senior notes offerings, refer to Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Automobile Loan Securitization

On November 5, 2015, the Bancorp transferred an aggregate amount of approximately $750 million in 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 this VIE and, therefore, has consolidated this VIE. For additional information on the automobile loan securitization refer to Note 11 and Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Legislative and Regulatory Developments

The FDIC published a notice of proposed rulemaking in October of 2015 which would implement a 4.5 bps surcharge on the quarterly FDIC insurance assessments of insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more. The surcharge would take effect at the same time the FDIC is required to lower the regular FDIC insurance assessments by approximately 2 bps under a rule adopted by the FDIC in 2011 that is triggered by the DIF reserve ratio reaching 1.15% of insured deposits. The FDIC estimates the DIF reserve ratio will reach 1.15% in 2016 and the surcharge would be sufficient to raise the DIF reserve ratio to the 1.35% minimum mandated by the DFA in approximately eight quarters. Fifth Third estimates the proposed changes to the FDIC assessments would result in a net increase in its FDIC insurance expense of approximately $25 million on an annual basis. The comment period for this proposal ended January 5, 2016.

On September 30, 2015, the Bancorp agreed to pay approximately $85 million to cover losses on approximately 500 loans for which HUD had paid FHA insurance claims, and an additional $2 million to HUD, in connection with the Bancorp’s entry into a Stipulation and Order of Settlement and Dismissal with the DOJ and HUD, which was approved by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on October 5, 2015, and a related Settlement Agreement with HUD. On September 28, 2015, the Bancorp entered into consent orders and agreed, without admitting or denying any of the findings of fact or conclusions of law (except to establish jurisdiction), to pay $18 million to consumers in a settlement with the DOJ and the CFPB related to an investigation into whether Fifth Third Bank engaged in any discriminatory practices in connection with the Bank’s indirect automobile loan portfolio. On September 28, 2015, the Bancorp agreed to pay an amount not less than $3 million in redress to consumers and a civil penalty of $500,000 to the CFPB in connection with its entry into a consent order with the CFPB related to the marketing and administration of the Bancorp’s debt protection credit card “add-on” product for those enrolled in the product from January 1, 2007 through November 11, 2013. For additional information on these legal and regulatory proceedings refer to Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

On March 11, 2015, the Bancorp announced the results of its capital plan submitted to the FRB as part of the 2015 CCAR. The FRB indicated to the Bancorp that it did not object to the following capital actions for the period beginning April 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016:

The BHCs that participated in the 2015 CCAR, including the Bancorp, were required to conduct mid-cycle company-run stress tests using data as of March 31, 2015. For more information on the 2015 CCAR results and 2015 mid-cycle stress test, refer to Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Fifth Third offers qualified deposit customers a deposit advance product if they choose to avail themselves of this product 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 of 2013 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. The Bancorp’s deposit advance balances are included in other consumer loans and leases in the Loans and Leases subsection of the Balance Sheet Analysis section of MD&A and in Table 9 in the Statements of Income Analysis section of MD&A. On January 17, 2014, given developments in industry practice, Fifth Third announced that it would no longer enroll new customers in its deposit advance product and expected to phase out the service to existing customers by the end of 2014. To avoid a disruption to its existing customers during the extension period while the banking industry awaits further regulatory guidance on the deposit advance product, on November 3, 2014, Fifth Third announced changes to its current deposit advance product for existing customers beginning January 1, 2015, including a lower transaction fee, an extended repayment period and a reduced maximum advance period. The Bancorp is continuing to offer the service to existing deposit advance customers until further regulatory guidance is finalized. These changes to the deposit advance product negatively impacted net interest income by $94 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

In July of 2013, U.S. banking regulators approved final enhanced regulatory capital requirements (Basel III Final Rule), which included modifications to the proposed rules. The Basel III Final Rule provided for certain banks, including the Bancorp, to opt out of including AOCI in regulatory capital and also retained the treatment of residential mortgage exposures consistent with the current Basel I capital rules. The Basel III Final Rule phases out the inclusion of certain TruPS as a component of Tier I capital. The Bancorp became subject to the Basel III Final Rule on January 1, 2015. The Bancorp made a one-time permanent election not to include AOCI in regulatory capital in the March 31, 2015 FFIEC 031 and FR Y-9C filings. For more information on the impact of the regulatory capital enhancements, refer to the Capital Management subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A.

On December 10, 2013, the U.S. banking agencies finalized section 619 of the DFA, known as the Volcker Rule, which became effective April 1, 2014. Though the Final Rule was effective April 1, 2014, the FRB granted the industry an extension of time until July 21, 2015 to conform certain of its activities related to proprietary trading to comply with the Volcker Rule. In addition, the FRB has granted the industry an extension of time until July 21, 2016, and announced its intention to grant a one year extension of the conformance period until July 21, 2017, to conform certain ownership interests in, sponsorship activities of and relationships with private equity or hedge funds as well as holding certain collateralized loan obligations that were in place as of December 31, 2013. 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 BHCs 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, as well as holding certain collateralized loan obligations that are deemed to contain ownership interests. 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.

At December 31, 2015, the Bancorp did not hold collateralized loan obligations. At December 31, 2015, the Bancorp had approximately $186 million in interests and approximately $37 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 dispose of these investments, however no formal plan to sell has been approved as of December 31, 2015. As a result of the announced conformance period extension, the Bancorp believes it is likely that these investments will be reduced over time in the ordinary course of events before compliance is required.

On October 10, 2014, the U.S. banking agencies published final rules implementing a quantitative liquidity requirement consistent with the LCR standard established by the BCBS 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. In addition, a modified LCR requirement was implemented for BHCs with $50 billion or more in total consolidated assets but that are not internationally active, such as Fifth Third. The Modified LCR became effective January 1, 2016 and requires BHCs to calculate its LCR on a monthly basis. Refer to the Liquidity Risk Management subsection of the Risk Management section of 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 DFA, 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 appealed this decision and on March 21, 2014, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion. The merchants have filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, on January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the Circuit Court reversal, thereby largely upholding the Current Rule and substantially reducing uncertainty surrounding debit card interchange fees the Bancorp is permitted to charge. 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, 2015 was $1.6 billion, or $2.01 per diluted share, which was net of $75 million in preferred stock dividends. The Bancorp’s net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2014 was $1.4 billion, or $1.66 per diluted share, which was net of $67 million in preferred stock dividends. Pre-provision net revenue was $2.8 billion and $2.3 billion for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Pre-provision net revenue is a non-GAAP measure. For further information, refer to the Non-GAAP Financial Measures section of MD&A.

Net interest income on an FTE basis was $3.6 billion for both the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Net interest income was negatively impacted by a decrease in the net interest rate spread, changes made to the Bancorp’s deposit advance product beginning

January 1, 2015 and an increase in average long-term debt of $1.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. These negative impacts were partially offset by increases in average taxable securities and average loans and leases of $5.2 billion and $2.2 billion, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. Net interest margin on an FTE basis was 2.88% and 3.10% for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Noninterest income increased $530 million from the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to increases in other noninterest income and mortgage banking net revenue partially offset by a decrease in corporate banking revenue. Other noninterest income increased $529 million from the year ended December 31, 2014. The increase included the impact of a gain of $331 million on the sale of Vantiv, Inc. shares in the fourth quarter of 2015 compared to a gain of $125 million during the second quarter of 2014.

The positive valuation adjustments on the stock warrant associated with Vantiv Holding, LLC were $236 million and $31 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Bancorp recognized a gain of $89 million on both the sale and exercise of a portion of the warrant associated with Vantiv Holding, LLC. Additionally, the Bancorp recognized a gain of $49 million from the payment from Vantiv, Inc. to terminate a portion of the TRA and also recognized a gain of $31 million associated with the annual TRA payment during the fourth quarter of 2015. The Bancorp recognized a gain of $23 million associated with the TRA during the fourth quarter of 2014. Mortgage banking net revenue increased $38 million from the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to increases in net mortgage servicing revenue and origination fees and gains on loan sales. Corporate banking revenue decreased $46 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily driven by decreases in syndication fees and lease remarketing fees.

Noninterest expense increased $66 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to increases in personnel costs, technology and communications expense and card and processing expense partially offset by a decrease in other noninterest expense. Personnel costs increased $65 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 driven by higher executive retirement and severance costs as well as an increase in base compensation and an increase in incentive compensation, primarily in the mortgage business. Technology and communications expense increased $12 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 driven primarily by increased investment in information technology associated with regulatory and compliance initiatives, system maintenance, and other growth initiatives. Card and processing expense increased $12 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 driven primarily by increased fraud prevention related expenses. Other noninterest expense decreased $34 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to a decrease in losses and adjustments partially offset by increases in the provision for the reserve for unfunded commitments, marketing expense, donations expense, impairment on affordable housing investments, FDIC insurance and other taxes and operating lease expense.

For more information on net interest income, noninterest income and noninterest expense, refer to the Statements of Income Analysis section of MD&A.

Credit Summary

The provision for loan and lease losses was $396 million and $315 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Net losses charged-off as a percent of average portfolio loans and leases decreased to 0.48% during the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to 0.64% during the year ended December 31, 2014. At December 31, 2015, nonperforming portfolio assets as a percent of portfolio loans and leases and OREO decreased to 0.70% compared to 0.82% at December 31, 2014. For further discussion on credit quality, refer to the Credit Risk Management subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A.

Capital Summary

The Bancorp’s capital ratios exceed the “well-capitalized” guidelines as defined by the PCA requirements of the U.S. banking agencies. As of December 31, 2015, as calculated under the Basel III

transition provisions, the CET1 capital ratio was 9.82%, the Tier I risk-based capital ratio was 10.93%, the Total risk-based capital ratio was 14.13% and the Tier I leverage ratio was 9.54%.

The following are non-GAAP measures which are important to the reader of the Consolidated Financial Statements but should be supplemental to primary U.S. GAAP measures.

The Bancorp considers many factors when determining the adequacy of its liquidity profile, including its LCR as defined by the U.S. banking agencies Basel III LCR Final Rule. Generally, the LCR is designed to ensure banks maintain an adequate level of unencumbered HQLA to satisfy the estimated net cash outflows under a 30-day stress scenario. The Bancorp is subject to the

Modified LCR whereby the net cash outflow under the 30-day stress scenario is multiplied by a factor of 0.7. The LCR Final Rule became effective for the Bancorp on January 1, 2016. The Bancorp believes there is no comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure to the LCR. The Bancorp believes providing an estimated Modified LCR is important for comparability to other financial institutions. For a further discussion on liquidity management and the LCR, refer to the Liquidity Risk Management subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A.

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 pre-tax earnings before the impact of provision expense.

The Bancorp believes return on average tangible common equity is an important measure for comparative purposes with other financial

institutions, but is not defined under U.S. GAAP, and therefore is considered a non-GAAP financial measure.

The Bancorp considers various measures when evaluating capital utilization and adequacy, including the tangible equity ratio and tangible 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. Additionally, the Bancorp became subject to the Basel III Final Rule on January 1, 2015. The CET1 capital ratio is a new

measure defined by the banking regulatory agencies under the Basel III Final Rule. The CET1 capital ratio has transition provisions that will be phased out over time. The Bancorp is presenting the CET1 capital ratio on a fully phased-in basis for comparative purposes with other organizations. 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 encourages readers to consider its Consolidated Financial Statements in their entirety and not to rely on any single financial measure.

Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements provides a discussion of the significant new accounting standards adopted

by the Bancorp during 2015 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, goodwill and legal contingencies. No material changes were made to the valuation techniques or models described below during the year ended December 31, 2015.

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. For an analysis of the Bancorp’s ALLL by portfolio segment and credit quality information by class, refer to 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 requires significant management judgement and 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.

Refer to the Allowance for Credit Losses subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A for a discussion on the Bancorp’s ALLL sensitivity analysis.

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 income tax laws of the jurisdictions in which the Bancorp operates are complex and may be subject to different interpretations. The Bancorp evaluates and assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions after considering relevant statutes, regulations, judicial decisions and other information. The Bancorp maintains tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these items.

Changes in the estimate of tax accruals occur periodically as a result of changes in tax rates, interpretation of tax laws and regulations, and other guidance issued by tax authorities and the status of examinations conducted by tax authorities, as well as the expiration of statutes of limitations. These changes may significantly impact the Bancorp’s tax accruals, deferred taxes and income tax expense and may significantly impact the operating results of the Bancorp.

Deferred taxes are determined using the balance sheet method. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is calculated based on the difference between the book and tax bases of the assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates. Significant management judgment is required to determine the realizability of deferred tax assets. Deferred tax assets are recognized when management believes that it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be realized. Where management has determined that it is not more likely than not that certain deferred tax assets will be realized, a valuation allowance is maintained. For additional information on income taxes, refer to 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 other-than-temporary impairment recognized through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance. Significant management judgement is necessary to identify key economic assumptions used in measuring any potential impairment of the servicing rights including the prepayment speeds of the underlying loans, the weighted-average life, the OAS spread 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. In order to assist in this assessment, the Bancorp obtains external valuations of the MSR portfolio from third parties and participates in peer surveys that provide additional confirmation of the

reasonableness of key assumptions utilized in the internal OAS model. For purposes of measuring impairment, the MSRs are stratified into classes based on the financial asset type (fixed-rate vs. adjustable-rate) and interest rates. For additional information on servicing rights, refer to Note 12 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. For additional information on the fair value hierarchy and fair value measurements, refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

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 level of management judgement necessary to determine fair value varies based upon the methods used in the determination of fair value. Financial instruments that are measured at fair value using quoted prices in active markets (Level 1) require minimal judgement. The valuation of financial instruments when quoted market prices are not available (Levels 2 and 3) may require significant management judgement to assess whether quoted prices for similar instruments exist, the impact of changing market conditions including reducing liquidity in the capital markets, and, the use of estimates surrounding significant unobservable inputs. Table 8 provides a summary of the fair value of financial instruments carried at fair value on a recurring basis and the amounts of financial instruments valued using Level 3 inputs.

Refer to Note 27 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on fair value measurements including a description of the valuation methodologies used for significant financial instruments.

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. Refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion on the methodology used by the Bancorp to assess goodwill for impairment.

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 to determine if it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If the two-step impairment test is required or the decision to bypass the qualitative assessment is elected, the Bancorp would be required to perform the first step (Step 1) of the impairment test by comparing 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. The determination of the fair value of a reporting unit is a subjective process that involves the use of estimates and judgments, particularly related to cash flows, the appropriate discount rates and an applicable control premium. 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. Significant management judgment is necessary in the preparation of each reporting unit’s forecasted cash flows surrounding expectations for earnings projections, growth and credit loss expectations and actual results may differ from forecasted results. 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. Significant management judgement is necessary in the identification and valuation of unrecognized intangible assets and the valuation of the reporting unit’s recorded assets and liabilities. 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 does it recognize previously unrecognized intangible assets in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a result of this assignment process. Refer to Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the Bancorp’s goodwill.

Legal Contingencies

The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are parties to numerous claims and lawsuits as well as threatened or potential actions or claims concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of claims or litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict and significant judgment may be required in the determination of both the probability of loss and whether the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. The Bancorp’s estimates are subjective and are based on the status of legal and regulatory proceedings, the merit of the Bancorp’s defenses and consultation with internal and external legal counsel. An accrual for a potential litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Refer to Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the Bancorp’s legal proceedings.

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, including within Fifth Third’s geographic footprint, has adversely affected Fifth Third in the past and may adversely affect Fifth Third in the future.

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. These factors could result in higher delinquencies, greater charge-offs and increased losses in future periods, which could materially adversely affect Fifth Third’s financial condition and results of operations.

Global financial conditions 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.

The global financial markets continue to be strained as a result of economic slowdowns, geopolitical concerns and the related path of commodity prices and interest rates. Divergence in economic growth in the U.S. and international economies and the resulting differences in monetary policy are placing strains on financial markets and strengthening the U.S. dollar. The relative strength of the U.S. dollar may continue to negatively impact the U.S. manufacturing sector. These factors could negatively impact the U.S. economy and affect the stability of global financial markets.

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 impact Fifth Third. Losses on behalf of its customers could expose Fifth Third to litigation, credit risks or loss of revenue from those clients and customers. Additionally, 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.

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

Fifth Third has exposure to counterparties in the financial services industry and other industries, and routinely executes transactions with such counterparties, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, and other institutional clients. Many of Fifth Third’s transactions with other financial institutions expose Fifth Third to credit risk in the event of default of a counterparty or client. In addition, Fifth Third’s credit risk may be affected when the collateral it holds cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure. 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.

Changes in retail distribution strategies and consumer behavior may adversely impact Fifth Third’s investments in its bank premises and equipment and other assets and may lead to increased expenditures to change its retail distribution channel.

Fifth Third has significant investments in bank premises and equipment for its branch network including its 1,254 full-service banking centers, 56 parcels of land held for the development of future banking centers, as well as its retail work force and other branch banking assets. Advances in technology such as e-commerce, telephone, internet and mobile banking, and in-branch self-service technologies including automatic teller machines and other equipment, as well as changing customer preferences for these other methods of accessing Fifth Third’s products and services, could affect the value of Fifth Third’s branch network or other retail distribution assets and may cause it to change its retail distribution strategy, close and/or sell certain branches or parcels of land held for development and restructure or reduce its remaining branches and work force. Further advances in technology and/or changes in customer preferences could have additional changes in Fifth Third’s retail distribution strategy and/or branch network. These actions could lead to losses on these assets or could adversely impact the carrying value of other long-lived assets and may lead to increased expenditures to renovate and reconfigure remaining branches or to otherwise reform its retail distribution channel.

RISKS RELATING TO FIFTH THIRD’S GENERAL BUSINESS

Deteriorating credit quality has adversely impacted Fifth Third in the past and may adversely impact Fifth Third in the future.

When Fifth Third lends money or commits to lend money the Bancorp incurs credit risk or the risk of loss 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 ALLL 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 ALLL and the reserve for unfunded commitments are adequate to cover inherent losses at December 31, 2015; 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 Credit Risk Management subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A and the Allowance for Loan and Losses and Reserve for Unfunded Commitments subsections of the Critical Accounting Policies section of 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 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 71% of average total assets at December 31, 2015). In addition to customer deposits, sources of liquidity include investments in the securities portfolio, Fifth Third’s sale or securitization of loans in secondary markets and the pledging of loans and investment securities 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.

Recent regulatory changes relating to liquidity and risk management may also negatively impact Fifth Third’s results of operations and competitive position. Various regulations recently adopted or proposed, and additional regulations under consideration, impose or could impose more stringent liquidity requirements for large financial institutions, including Fifth Third. These regulations address, among other matters, liquidity stress testing, minimum liquidity requirements and restrictions on short-term debt issued by top-tier holding companies. Given the overlap and complex interactions of these regulations with other regulatory changes, including the resolution and recovery framework applicable to Fifth Third, the full impact of the adopted and proposed regulations will remain uncertain until their full implementation.

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; then Fifth Third’s liquidity, operating margins, and 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 or industry 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 commodity 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 specified 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 Fifth Third’s 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 appropriately 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, and specialty finance, telecommunications, technology 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. Fifth Third may make strategic investments and may expand an existing line of

business or enter into new lines of business to remain competitive. If it does not execute the appropriate strategies to effectively compete with or does not do so in an appropriate or timely manner its business may suffer. Additionally, these strategies, products and lines of business may bring with them unforeseeable or unforeseen risks and may not generate the expected results or returns, which could adversely affect Fifth Third’s results of operations or future growth prospects.

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 Fifth Third’s 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. For further information refer to Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

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, telecommunications and technology 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, which may increase Fifth Third’s expenses and may result in Fifth Third not being able to hire these candidates or 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.

Compensation paid by financial institutions such as Fifth Third has become increasingly regulated, particularly under the DFA, which regulation affects the amount and form of compensation Fifth Third pays to hire and retain talented employees. 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 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 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 other-than-temporary 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. If new information arises that results in a material change to a reserve amount, such a change could result in a change to previously announced financial results. Refer to the Critical Accounting Policies section of MD&A for more information regarding management’s significant estimates.

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, or owns a minority stake in, as applicable, several non-strategic businesses that are not significantly synergistic with its core financial services businesses. Fifth Third has, from time to time, considered and undertaken (and, in the case of Vantiv, has announced its intention to continue) the sale of such businesses and/or interests, including, for example, portions of Fifth Third’s stake in Vantiv Holding, LLC. If it were to determine to sell such businesses and/or interests, 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 any of its businesses and/or interests in third parties, it would suffer the loss of income from the sold businesses and/or interests, including those accounted for under the equity method of accounting, and such loss of income could have an adverse effect on its future earnings and growth. Additionally, Fifth Third may encounter difficulties in separating the operations of any businesses it sells, which may affect its business or results of operations.

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 systems will not be inoperable. Fifth Third also has security to prevent unauthorized access to the systems. 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 systems 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).

Third parties with which the Bancorp does business, as well as retailers and other third parties with which the Bancorp’s customers do business, can also be sources of operational risk to the Bancorp, particularly where activities of customers are beyond the Bancorp’s security and control systems, such as through the use of the internet, personal computers, tablets, smart phones and other mobile services. Security breaches affecting the Bancorp’s customers, or systems breakdowns or failures, security breaches or employee misconduct affecting such other third parties, may require the Bancorp to take steps to protect the integrity of its own operational systems or to safeguard confidential information of the Bancorp or its customers, thereby increasing the Bancorp’s operational costs and potentially diminishing customer satisfaction. If personal, confidential or proprietary information of customers or clients in the Bancorp’s possession were to be mishandled or misused, the Bancorp could suffer significant regulatory consequences, reputational damage and financial loss. Such mishandling or misuse could include circumstances where, for example, such information was erroneously provided to parties who are not permitted to have the information, either through the fault of the Bancorp’s systems, employees or counterparties, or where such information was intercepted or otherwise compromised by third parties. The Bancorp may be subject to disruptions of its operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond the Bancorp’s control, which may include, for example, security breaches; electrical or telecommunications outages; failures of computer servers or other damage to the Bancorp’s property or assets; natural disasters or severe weather conditions; health emergencies; or events arising from local or larger-scale political events, including outbreaks of hostilities or terrorist acts. While the Bancorp believes that its current resiliency plans are both sufficient and adequate, there can be no assurance that such plans will fully mitigate all potential business continuity risks to the Bancorp or its customers and clients. Any failures or disruptions of the Bancorp’s systems or operations could give rise to losses in service to customers and clients, adversely affect the Bancorp’s business and results of operations by subjecting the Bancorp to losses or liability, or require the Bancorp to expend significant resources to correct the failure or disruption, as well as by exposing the Bancorp to litigation, regulatory fines or penalties or losses not covered by insurance.

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

Fifth Third relies heavily on communications and information systems to conduct its business. Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems could result in disruptions to its accounting, deposit, loan and other systems, and adversely affect its customer relationships. While Fifth Third has policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of these possible events, there can be no assurance that any such failure, interruption or security breach will not occur or, if any does occur, that it can be sufficiently remediated. There have been increasing efforts on the part of third parties, including through cyber attacks, to breach data security at financial institutions or with respect to financial transactions. There have been several recent instances involving financial services and consumer-based companies reporting the unauthorized disclosure of client or customer information or the destruction or theft of corporate data, by both private individuals and foreign governments. In addition, because the techniques used to cause such security breaches change frequently, often are not recognized until launched against a target and may originate from less regulated and remote areas around the world, Fifth Third may be unable to proactively address these techniques or to implement adequate preventative measures. Furthermore, 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. These events adversely affected the performance of Fifth Third’s website and in some instances prevented customers from accessing Fifth Third’s website. Future cyber-attacks could be more disruptive and damaging. 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 or in the investigation of such cyber-attacks or related to the protection of the Bancorp’s customers from identity theft as a result of such attacks. Despite this effort, the occurrence of any failure, interruption or security breach of Fifth Third’s systems or third-party service providers, particularly if widespread or resulting in financial losses to customers, could also seriously damage Fifth Third’s reputation, result in a loss of customer business, subject it to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose it to civil litigation and financial liability.

Fifth Third is exposed to operational and reputational risk.

Fifth Third is exposed to many types of operational risk, including but not limited to, business continuity risk, information management risk, fraud risk, model risk, third party service provider risk, human resources risk, and process risk.

Fifth Third’s actual or alleged conduct in activities, such as lending practices, data security, corporate governance and acquisitions, may result in negative public opinion and may damage Fifth Third’s reputation. Actions taken by government regulators and community organizations may also damage Fifth Third’s reputation. Additionally, whereas negative public opinion once was primarily driven by adverse news coverage in traditional media, the advent and expansion of social media facilitates the rapid dissemination of information. Though Fifth Third monitors social media channels, the potential remains for rapid and widespread dissemination of inaccurate, misleading or false information that could damage Fifth Third’s reputation. Negative public opinion can

adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to attract and keep customers and can increase the risk that it will be a target of 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 2013, 2014 and 2015, the Bancorp ownership share in Vantiv Holding, LLC as of December 31, 2015, is approximately 18%. The Bancorp’s investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC is currently accounted for under the equity method of accounting 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 and could negatively affect the operating results of Fifth Third. In addition, Fifth Third owns a warrant to acquire approximately 7.8 million Class C non-voting units of Vantiv Holding, LLC. Fifth Third participates in a multi-lender credit facility to Vantiv Holding, LLC and repayment of these loans is contingent on the future cash flows of Vantiv Holding, LLC.

Changes in Fifth Third’s ownership in Vantiv Holding, LLC could have an impact on Fifth Third’s stock price, operating results, financial condition, and future outlook.

Fifth Third expects that it will reduce its equity and derivative investments in Vantiv Holding, LLC and its publicly traded parent, Vantiv, Inc., in whole or in part, but there can be no assurance that such sales will occur or as to when they will occur or the value that might be received by Fifth Third. A reduction in Fifth Third’s Vantiv ownership interest may result from a series of sale transactions similar to transactions in Vantiv securities engaged in by Fifth Third to date, or could occur as a result of one or more larger transactions, depending on strategic considerations, market conditions, or other factors deemed important by Fifth Third. Additionally, Fifth Third’s ownership in Vantiv could be affected by transactions that Vantiv may undertake. The nature, terms, and timing of transactions engaged in by Vantiv may not be entirely within Fifth Third’s control, if at all. If and when Fifth Third’s ownership in Vantiv is reduced, such changes in ownership could have a material impact, positive or negative, on Fifth Third’s stock price, operating results, financial condition and future outlook.

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. These regions have 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, investment practices, dividend policy and growth. 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 July 2013, the Federal banking agencies issued final rules for the enhanced regulatory capital requirements for U.S. banking organizations, which implemented aspects of Basel III. The final rules provide the option for certain banking organizations, including the Bancorp, to opt out of including AOCI in regulatory capital and retain the treatment of residential mortgage exposures consistent with the current Basel I capital rules. The new capital rules became 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 could limit Fifth Third’s business activities, including lending, and the ability to expand, either organically or through acquisitions. 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 Bank must be 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, including merger with or acquisitions of other financial institutions) and could ultimately result in the loss of financial holding company status. The FRB conducted a regularly scheduled examination covering 2011 through 2013 to determine the Bancorp’s banking subsidiary’s compliance with the CRA. Although the FRB has not made a final determination, the Bancorp believes that the results of such CRA examination may result in a rating of “Needs to Improve”. If that would occur, such rating would last at least until the Bancorp’s banking subsidiary’s next CRA examination.

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.

Previous 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 DFA. 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.

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 government authorities, including bank regulatory authorities, stemming from broader systemic regulatory concerns, including with respect to stress testing, capital levels, asset quality, provisioning, AML/BSA, consumer compliance and other prudential matters and efforts to ensure that financial institutions take steps to improve their risk management and prevent future crises. In this regard, government authorities, including the bank regulatory agencies, are also pursuing aggressive enforcement actions with respect to compliance and other legal matters involving financial activities, which heightens the risks associated with actual and perceived compliance failures and may also adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to enter into certain transactions or engage in certain activities, or obtain necessary regulatory approvals in connection therewith.

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 negatively affect Fifth Third’s ability to engage in new activities and certain transactions, as well as 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, 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. Under a rule adopted by the FDIC in 2011, regular assessment rates for all banks will decline when the reserve ratio reaches 1.15%, which the FDIC expects will occur in early 2016. In October 2015, the FDIC issued a proposed rule which would impose on banks with at least $10 billion in assets, such as Fifth Third, a surcharge of 4.5 cents per $100 of their assessment base, after making certain adjustments. The Bancorp estimates the impact of these changes will increase Fifth Third’s FDIC premiums by approximately $25 million per year. Future deposit premiums paid by Fifth Third Bank depend on FDIC rules, which are subject to change, the level of the DIF and the magnitude and cost of future bank failures. Fifth Third Bank may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC premiums if market developments change such that the DIF balance is reduced or the FDIC changes its rules to require higher premiums.

Fifth Third is subject to extensive governmental regulation which 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 and depositors. 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.

        The DFA, enacted in 2010, is complex and broad in scope and several of its provisions are still being implemented. The DFA established the CFPB which has authority to regulate consumer financial products and services sold by banks and non-bank companies and to supervise banks with assets of more than $10 billion and their affiliates for compliance with Federal consumer protection laws. Since its formation, the CFPB has finalized a number of significant rules that could have a significant impact on Fifth Third’s business and the financial services industry more generally including integrated mortgage disclosures under the Truth

in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. Compliance with the rules and policies adopted by the CFPB may limit the products Fifth Third may permissibly offer to customers, or limit the terms on which those products may be issued, or may adversely affect Fifth Third’s ability to conduct its business as previously conducted. Fifth Third may also be required to add additional compliance personnel or incur other significant compliance-related expenses. Fifth Third’s business, results of operations or competitive position may be adversely affected as a result.

The reforms, both under the DFA and otherwise, are having a significant effect on the entire financial industry. Fifth Third believes compliance with the DFA and implementing its regulations and other initiatives will likely continue to 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 Fifth Third deals with in the course of 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.

Conforming Covered Activities to the Volcker Rule may require the expenditure of resources and management attention.

The DFA “Volcker Rule” provisions implementing the final rule generally restrict banks and their affiliated entities from investing in or sponsoring certain private equity and hedge funds. Fifth Third does not sponsor any private equity or hedge funds that it is prohibited from sponsoring. As of December 31, 2015, the Bancorp had approximately $186 million in interests and approximately $37 million in binding commitments to invest in private equity funds likely to be affected by the Volcker Rule. It is expected that the Bancorp may need to dispose of these investments although it is likely that these investments will be reduced over time in the ordinary course before compliance is required. In December 2014, the FRB extended the conformance period through July 2016 for investments in and relationships with such covered funds that were in place prior to December 31, 2013, and announced its intention to grant a one year extension of the conformance period until July 21, 2017. An ultimate forced sale of some of these investments could result in Fifth Third receiving less value than it would otherwise have received.

If an orderly liquidation of a systemically important bank holding company or non-bank financial company were triggered, Fifth Third could face assessments for the Orderly Liquidation Fund.

The DFA creates authority for the orderly liquidation of systemically important bank holding companies and non-bank financial companies and is based on the FDIC’s bank resolution model. The Secretary of the U.S. Treasury may trigger a liquidation under this authority only after consultation with the President of the United States and after receiving a recommendation from the boards of the FDIC and the Federal Reserve upon a two-thirds vote. Liquidation proceedings will be funded by the Orderly Liquidation Fund established under the DFA, which will borrow from the U.S. Treasury and impose risk-based assessments on covered financial companies. Risk-based assessments would be made, first, on entities that received more in the resolution than they would have received in the liquidation to the extent of such excess, and second, if necessary, on, among others, bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, such as Fifth Third. Any such assessments may adversely affect Fifth Third’s business, financial condition or results of operations.

Regulation of Fifth Third by the CFTC imposes additional operational and compliance costs.

Title VII of DFA imposes a new regulatory regime on the U.S. derivatives markets. While most of the provisions related to derivatives markets are now in effect, several additional requirements await final regulations from the relevant regulatory agencies for derivatives, the CFTC and the SEC. One aspect of this new regulatory regime for derivatives is that substantial oversight responsibility has been provided to the CFTC, which, as a result, now has a meaningful supervisory role with respect to some of Fifth Third’s businesses. In 2014, Fifth Third Bank registered as a swap dealer with the CFTC and became subject to new substantive requirements, including real time trade reporting and robust record keeping requirements, business conduct requirements (including daily valuations, disclosure of material risks associated with swaps and disclosure of material incentives and conflicts of interest), and mandatory clearing and exchange trading of all standardized swaps designated by the relevant regulatory agencies as required to be cleared. Although the ultimate impact will depend on the promulgation of all final regulations, Fifth Third‘s derivatives business will likely be further subject to new substantive requirements, including margin requirements in excess of current market practice and capital requirements specific to this business. These requirements will collectively impose implementation and ongoing compliance burdens on Fifth Third and will introduce additional legal risk (including as a result of newly applicable antifraud and anti-manipulation provisions and private rights of action). Once finalized, the rules may raise the costs and liquidity burden associated with Fifth Third’s derivatives businesses and adversely affect or cause Fifth Third to change its derivatives products.

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. The SEC may seek admissions of liability when settling cases, which could adversely impact the defense of private litigation. 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. Fifth Third’s stress testing results and 2016 capital plan will be submitted to the FRB by April 5, 2016.

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 CET1 ratio of 5% under baseline and stressful conditions throughout a nine-quarter planning horizon.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income is the interest earned on loans and leases (including yield-related fees), securities and other short-term investments less the interest paid for core deposits (includes transaction deposits and other time deposits) and wholesale funding (includes certificates $100,000 and over, other deposits, federal funds purchased, other 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 9 presents the components of net interest income, net interest margin and net interest rate spread for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013. 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 10 provides the relative impact of changes in the balance sheet and changes in interest rates on net interest income.

Net interest income on an FTE basis was $3.6 billion for both the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Net interest income was negatively impacted by a decrease in the net interest rate spread, changes made to the Bancorp’s deposit advance product beginning January 1, 2015 and an increase in average long-term debt of $1.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. These negative impacts were partially offset by increases in average taxable securities and average loans and leases of $5.2 billion and $2.2 billion, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. The net interest rate spread decreased to 2.69% during the year ended December 31, 2015 from 2.94% in 2014 driven by a 21 bps decrease in yields on average interest-earning assets coupled with a 3 bps increase in the rates paid on average interest-bearing liabilities.

Net interest margin on an FTE basis was 2.88% for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to 3.10% for the year ended December 31, 2014. The decrease from December 31, 2014 was driven primarily by the previously mentioned decrease in the net interest rate spread coupled with a $7.6 billion increase in average interest-earning assets partially offset by an increase in average free funding balances. The increase in average free funding balances was driven by increases in average demand deposits and average shareholders’ equity of $3.4 billion and $572 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014.

Interest income on an FTE basis from loans and leases decreased $147 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to a decrease of 24 bps in yields on average loans and leases partially offset by an increase of 2% in average loans and leases. The decrease in yields for the year ended December 31, 2015 was primarily due to a $93 million decline in interest income on other consumer loans and leases primarily due to changes made to the Bancorp’s deposit advance product beginning January 1, 2015. The decrease also included decreases in yields on average commercial and industrial loans, average residential mortgage loans and average automobile loans of 14 bps, 19 bps and 11 bps, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. The increase in average loans and

leases for the year ended December 31, 2015 was driven primarily by increases in average commercial loans and leases and average residential mortgage loans. For more information on the Bancorp’s loan and lease portfolio, refer to the Loans and Leases subsection of the Balance Sheet Analysis section of MD&A. Interest income from investment securities and other short-term investments increased $145 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily as a result of the aforementioned increase in average taxable securities.

Interest expense on core deposits decreased $15 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 as a decline in the cost of average interest-bearing core deposits more than offset an increase in average interest-bearing core deposits. The cost of average interest-bearing core deposits decreased to 24 bps for the year ended December 31, 2015 from 27 bps for the year ended December 31, 2014. Average interest-bearing core deposits increased $2.4 billion for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014. The increase was primarily due to increases in average money market deposits. Refer to the Deposits subsection of the Balance Sheet Analysis section of MD&A for additional information on the Bancorp’s deposits.

Interest expense on average wholesale funding increased $59 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily due to a $1.7 billion increase in average long-term debt coupled with a 18 bps increase in the rates paid on average long-term debt. Refer to the Borrowings subsection of the Balance Sheet Analysis section of MD&A for additional information on the Bancorp’s borrowings. During both the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, average wholesale funding represented 24% of average 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 subsection of the Risk Management section of MD&A.