Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to Hancock Whitney Corporation's third quarter 2022 earnings conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question and answer session, and instructions will follow at that time. As a reminder, this call may be recorded. I would now like to introduce your host for today's conference, Trisha Carlson, Investor Relations Manager. You may begin. Thank you and good afternoon. During today's call, we may make forward-looking statements. We would like to remind everyone to carefully review the safe harbor language that was published with the earnings release and presentation and in the company's most recent 10-K and 10-Q, including the risks and uncertainties identified therein. You should keep in mind that any forward-looking statements made by Hancock Whitney speak only as of the date on which they were made. As everyone understands, the current economic environment is rapidly evolving and changing. Hancock Whitney's ability to accurately project results or predict the effects of future plans or strategies or predict market or economic developments is inherently limited. We believe that the expectations reflected or implied by any forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, but are not guarantees of performance or results, and our actual results and performance could differ materially from those set forth in our forward-looking statements. Hancock Whitney undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. Some of the remarks contain non-GAAP financial measures. You can find reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP measures in our earnings release and financial tables. The presentation slides included in our 8-K are also posted with the conference call webcast link on the investor relations website. We will reference some of these slides in today's call. Participating in today's call are John Hairston, President and CEO, Mike Acri, CFO, and Chris DeLuca, Chief Credit Officer. I will now turn the call over to John Hairston. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us late in the day. Today's results reflect one of the highest performing quarters in the history of our company. Results were straightforward with no noise, just another solid quarter. EPS of $1.55 was up $0.17 linked quarter, with net income up $14 million and PPNR up $28 million. Similar to last quarter, loan growth exceeded our expectations, ending the quarter at $22.6 billion, up $739.5 million or 14% linked quarter annualized. As noted on slide 6, the growth was across our footprint and across all lines of business, reflecting fewer payoffs and higher line utilization. Loan growth in the quarter was partially funded by the remaining excess liquidity on our balance sheet. This shift in earning asset mix, coupled with the most recent Fed rate increases, drove a 50 basis point widening in our net interest margin. Our asset quality metrics remain near historically low levels with net charge-offs of only $1.3 million. Criticized loans up only slightly, and non-performing loans basically unchanged linked quarter. We booked a provision of $1.4 million this quarter and continue to report a strong reserve at 1.50%. Last quarter, we exceeded our goal of getting under a 55% efficiency ratio, and this quarter the team delivered an impressive improvement to 51.6%, which we believe is the best in our company's history. Rates helped drive the revenue component of the measure and well offset the slight increase in personnel related expenses. With additional rate hikes projected in November and December, we have an opportunity to report an efficiency ratio of 50% or better, perhaps in the fourth quarter. Overall, our capital remains solid with leverage up 59 basis points. CET1 up 4 basis points and total risk-based capital was stable. The rate environment once again impacted our AOCI and was the main driver of the 48 basis points decline in TCE. Our top capital priority continues to be earning support for the common dividend and organic balance sheet growth. We are mindful of macroeconomic events and trends which may impact us. Today we believe we are well positioned for those possibilities. Our balance sheet has natural hedges to absorb interest rate volatility and should a recessionary period begin, we enter with excellent asset quality, a strong ACL, solid capital and a diverse loan portfolio. We have a great deal of momentum both in core banking and improving efficiency, effectiveness and positioning the company for organic growth. Technology innovation continues and is impactful to our improvement priorities. Coupled with today's results, we hope you see a company focused on improving shareholder value. With that, we'll turn to Mike for further comments. Thanks, John, and good afternoon, everyone. As John mentioned, this was one of the best quarters in our company's history and we are very pleased with the results. EPS for the quarter was $1.55. PPNR was up 19%, ROA at 1.56%, ROTCE above 20%, NIM over 3.5%, and good stable asset quality with no significant issues. I'll begin my comments with the balance sheet. During the quarter, we grew loans $740 million, added $98 million to the bond portfolio, and funded $915 million of deposit runoff. We started the third quarter with about $871 million of excess liquidity. To fund our earning asset growth and deposit runoff, we did increase our FHLB borrowings $800 million, net of $200 million of advances that were called earlier in the quarter. While we did see a greater than expected decline in deposits, our mix remained best in class. About a quarter of the decline was in DDA and primarily due to continued spending and deployment of excess liquidity by our customers. Another quarter of the decline was related to seasonality in our public fund book with the balance of the runoff in interest-bearing deposits and related to consumer spending and higher rates. Going forward, our expectation in the fourth quarter is to fund the guided loan growth of $200 million-$450 million with seasonal deposit growth. Fees and expenses I think are self-explanatory with nothing especially remarkable. I will call out that of the quarter's expense growth of $6.4 million, most was related to higher incentive compensation and also higher spend related to ongoing technology projects. Our third quarter NIM was up a very impressive 50 basis points from last quarter and came in at 3.54%. We expect the NIM will continue to widen as rate increases, albeit at a slower pace going forward. As we've said before, given our current level of asset sensitivity and current low deposit betas, the NIM responds very quickly to large and frequent rate hikes such as those we've seen recently. Stability in our core deposit mix, especially DDAs, was helpful as well. With our loan book at 58% variable, we continue to be modestly asset sensitive. Certainly with both the frequency and magnitude of the recent Fed rate hikes, you see that asset sensitivity reflected in the third quarter NIM expansion. Most of our variable loans reprice with thirty-day LIBOR and will react quickly to rate hikes. A growing level are also now tied to SOFR and AMERIBOR. Slides 13 and 18 in the earnings deck provide a pretty good roadmap of how we expect to be impacted by rising rates. Our September NIM came in at 3.62%. With 150 basis points of rate hikes projected through the December Fed meeting, we're giding for teo-3 basis points of NIM expansion for every 25 basis points of rate hikes. Applying the math gives us a potential fourth quarter NIM between 3.74% and 3.8%. Allowing that a lot of this is hard to predict, the assumptions that can materially move the needle are around deposit mix and betas and our ability to fund most of the projected loan growth with our expected seasonal fourth quarter deposit increases. Our cost of deposits for the third quarter was 18 basis points, up only 11 basis points linked quarter. That's a total deposit beta of 8% for the quarter and about 6% cycle to date. We expect deposit costs to be up meaningfully in the fourth quarter and could see a fourth quarter deposit beta in the 16%-17% range. That translates into a cost of deposits of around the range of mid-40 basis points. Overall for the cycle, we continue to believe that we should do no worse than the 25% we saw with the last uprate cycle, and certainly hope to beat that level. During our meetings with many of you the past quarter, we were asked about 2023 and also about updating our CSOs. As per our normal practice, we'll provide guidance for 2023 as well as updated CSOs on the fourth quarter earnings call in January. Our guidance, essentially for the fourth quarter of 2022, is on slide 17 of the earnings deck and starts with Fed funds at the current level of 3.25%. Again, we're assuming 275 basis point hikes in November and then December to arrive at 4.75% by the end of 2022. With that, I'll turn the call back to John. Thank you, Mike, and let's open the call for questions. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. If for any reason at all you would like to remove that question, please press star followed by two. Again, to ask a question, press star one. As a reminder, if you are using a speakerphone, please remember to pick up your handset before asking your question. We will pause here briefly as questions are registered. The first question comes from Jennifer Demba with Truist Securities. Your line is open. Thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Question for you noted loan growth is likely to be slower in the fourth quarter. Are you seeing any slowdown in demand here in October? Or are you just kind of being more selective with your loans at this point? A little bit of a blend of both, Jennifer. I think one item just for transparency's sake is we did have about a $75 million line utilization or line draw that occurred literally in the last days of September that we knew would only be around for a couple of weeks or so. We start out October down the 75 and have that to make up. That's part of the difference. The remainder is a blend of exactly what you said. We are a little bit more selective in the areas of, in loan segments that typically find themselves under a little more pressure in recessionary periods, we are being a little bit more jaundiced towards. The remainder was a slight compression in the pipeline that began in September. It doesn't appear to really be because of cash flow issues. It seems to be just more, I think, the impact of a higher cost of debt and people using their own money for expenditures versus borrowings. That's really the purpose of the range being a little lower. I will also just note the range is a little wider than normally, and that's in the fourth quarter. Typically, we see line utilization increase a bit more in the fourth quarter. This being an unusual period given the slope of the short-term rates going up, we have a range of what we expect in utilization that was a big driver for the 200-450. I don't know what's harder to predict, utilization or payoffs because each of the last couple of quarters, we expected more payoffs or pay downs than we received, and the third quarter was exceptionally unimpactful from a payoff perspective. That's kind of everything that led to the math. There's no estimates in there. It's literally just the math of all our different assumptions and pipeline rolled together to give that range of $200-$450. Was that enough information, or would you care to ask a clarifying point? Yeah. Okay. That helps a lot. Second question is, what's your buyback appetite at this point? Mike, you want to address that one? Yeah. Hi, Jennifer. This is Mike. Hi Certainly, our buyback appetite continues to remain opportunistic. Certainly, you can see that in the third quarter, we stepped down quite a bit from the 800,000 shares or so that we purchased in the second quarter to just 50,000 in the third quarter. You know, part of that was there wasn't as much disruption in our stock price, so not as much of an opportunity we thought to buy back shares. But certainly, we're very cognizant of where our TCE ratio is right now. It's not driving the decision on the buyback, but certainly we're cognizant of that number below 7%. Also cognizant of a desire to kind of build capital as we go into next year. I think all those factors together combine to continue to be opportunistic, but certainly mindful of those factors. Great. Thanks so much. You bet. Thank you for the questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from Kathryn Mistich with KBW. Please proceed. Thanks. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Kathryn. I wonder if you could just give us updated thoughts on the size of your bond book. Looks like there is another quarter where there's a big delta between the end-of-period balance versus the average balance, and just how we should think about modeling that in the near term. Yeah. I would certainly use, Kathryn, the end-of-period balance so that the bond portfolio came in at about $9.2 billion for the quarter. You might recall that we did buy some bonds a little bit later in the quarter. The $9.2 billion is the number to use kind of going forward. As we've kind of talked about in both the opening comments and in the earnings deck itself, our strategy around the bond book, at least for now, is to keep that level flat at around $9.2 billion going forward. Got it. Okay. I'm looking at end of period at 8.3% versus the average at 9.2%. Is there something else that's a delta between those two? It might be the unrealized loss in the bond portfolio. That would be the only difference that I could think of. Got it. That's right. Okay. I I see that in the footnote. I see it. Got it. Okay, perfect. My next question is just on the deposit betas. It's incredible how low your beta was relative to what we're seeing at some other companies. I know you mentioned that you think that beta will increase as you move into next quarter. If you could just kind of talk anecdotally about what you're seeing maybe in customer behavior. You know, when you're growing deposits, where are you seeing most of that growth coming from and what the incremental rate of new deposits are, and just kind of give us a little bit of color around where you're gonna see most of that increase come from, next quarter. Thanks. Yeah. As far as the implication of growth next quarter, really a lot of that's gonna come from kind of our normal seasonal inflows of public fund deposits. Typically, we see that level increase in the month of December around $200 million or so. Again, in terms of how we're thinking about managing the balance sheet, you know, it may be aspirational, but certainly what we would like to do in the fourth quarter and really going forward is to fund our loan growth with as much deposit growth as we can. Certainly in the fourth quarter, we have again these seasonal inflows of deposits that'll certainly be helpful, I think, to match off what we think the loan growth will be in the fourth quarter. You know, as John Hairston kind of mentioned, we're looking at a range of $200 to about $450, which we admit is a pretty big range. Certainly the objective is to match off again the loan growth with funding from deposits. To do that, we do think that we'll meaningfully increase our cost of deposits in the fourth quarter as we kind of indicated from the opening remarks. There's certainly the cadence and how this is choreographed over the past couple of quarters going into the fourth quarter is pretty much exactly how we thought it would pan out. Certainly, I think how we've kind of talked about over the last couple of quarters. Certainly in the fourth quarter, what we see is a higher cost of deposits, and certainly deposit betas beginning the process of catching up. We have started off pretty low with our deposit betas, but again, do see those catching up at least somewhat in the fourth quarter to the levels that we kind of talked about. Great. One more if I could just stay on the margin topic on loan yields. Sure. The loan beta was also really strong this quarter. You know, you've mentioned that you think the deposit beta should be similar to last cycle. Any reason to believe that the loan beta should be better or worse than last cycle? That's all I got. We think a little bit better. On the loan beta, we think we'll top out a little bit better. Last cycle, it came in or topped out at about 48% cumulative. We think that this cycle will come in the 50% to maybe 52% range. So certainly a little bit better. Then on the deposit side, as we've indicated, we think we'll do no worse than last time at 25%, and certainly strive to do better. Great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Michael Rose with Raymond James. Your line is open. Hey, thanks for taking my questions. You called out an increase, I know it's small, in criticized balances, but I didn't see much color in there. Can you just give some color? You know, just more broadly, are there any sort of asset classes or loan categories that you're maybe getting a little bit more cautious on? I've heard some banks that are pulling back in construction lending. Anything like that at this point? Thanks. Yeah, Michael, it's Chris Ziluca. Yeah, we, you know, obviously leading into the pandemic, we spent a lot of time kind of scrubbing our portfolio because that created a lot of uncertainty that turned out, you know, okay. We built a lot of routines around that. You know, what we've been seeing is because of the inflationary pressures, some of our customers have had increased costs and labor costs. As you pointed out in the contractor space, it's an area that we've you know, kind of narrowed our focus on to be a bit more careful about. You know, that's really the primary driver is some of the increased cost to operate that's creating some margin pressure for certain customers. You know, other than that, you know, we're really just being a little bit more cautious about what might be pressure sectors in a recessionary environment at this point. Okay. Maybe just to follow up on that. It looks like you're only using a 25% weighting towards, I think, the baseline scenario, now 75% towards kind of slower growth. I guess you guys have a very healthy reserve. Would you expect to grow that, assuming that the backdrop continues to soften here? I would think that you would. You want to start that, Mike? Yeah. Hi, Mike. This is Mike. Yeah, you're correct. As far as the macroeconomic assumptions that we're currently using in our ACL model, we're at 25% baseline, 75% S2, which is the slower growth scenario. Actually, that mix of scenarios is exactly the same that we used in the second quarter, so that hasn't changed. How we think about that on a go-forward basis obviously depends on a lot of factors. You know, certainly the most significant of which is, you know, where the economy seems to be going as we head into the fourth quarter next year. As far as building reserves going forward, I don't know that you'll see a big build in the fourth quarter. As far as what happens and what we do in 2023, I think certainly depends on the economy and whether we do have a credit cycle or a recession of some sort. If the latter two, you know, happen, then I think it'd be reasonable to expect some sort of reserve build as we go through the year, especially if we, you know, have obviously loan growth to match that off with. We'll talk much more about 2023 at next quarter's call in mid-January as we usually do. Those are just a couple of thoughts about the reserve going forward, I think. Okay, great. Thanks for taking my questions. You bet, Mike. Good to hear from you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Brett Rabatin with Hovde Group. Please proceed. Hey, good afternoon, everyone. Hey, Brett. Wanted to first talk about the guidance and just make sure I understand these numbers. I might be a little rough here, but if I back into, you know, the PPNR of 20% growth, you know, I get an efficiency ratio a little higher than the 50% guidance that you're giving. If I get closer to the 50% efficiency ratio, the PPNR number goes, you know, a little higher than 20. You know, is there a way to think about the levers there? Maybe you could talk a little bit about any expense spend you intend to continue on the technology side. Yeah. Brett, I'll go ahead and start. With respect to the guidance, what you may be running into is just simply rounding of pretty big numbers as we think about the year as a whole. Again, has that translates into the fourth quarter. So as far as the efficiency ratio is concerned, it doesn't take a whole lot to move that either above or below, you know, kind of the 50%-51% level. But I think certainly, you know, within a respectable range, what you kind of recited is accurate. John, do you want to give some thoughts on the technology spend? Sure. It's not a big factor for Q4, but as we've talked about on this call the last year or so, we have continued to invest heavily in technology with the three priorities being efficiency, effectiveness, and a more frictionless experience for our clients, particularly in the digital space. This quarter being fourth quarter, we will wrap up the complete uplift of the retail organization that started last year as we've been rolling out different releases of technology in different geographies. Next year we will move on to a fairly significant modernization of our ATMs and digital front office, particularly when it comes to sales and account aggregation on the deposit and the loan side. All the tech spend, which has been absorbed through the expense savings that we generated has been fairly benign of an impact in the expense base, and I would expect that to continue. It'll be a modest uptick, but right now, all of our expense pressure, it isn't 100%, but it sort of rounds there. It's really in personnel, which is, I think, no different than any other industry or player in our industry is experiencing. The tech upgrades will continue throughout next year and probably beyond, just as we continue our quest for more efficiency and effectiveness, and to continue having a peer-ish or better efficiency ratio down the road. Okay. That's helpful. Just want to go back to the deposit beta question again, just kind of given you've been so successful with the deposit costs so far, and obviously 4Q is going to be, you know, a little bit of a catch-up. As we think about 2023, I'm curious if your thought process is that as you continue to need to fund growth, that you somewhat cannibalize your low-cost rates with higher pricing, or if you think you'll be able to maintain, to some extent, the advantage that you presently have to peers in your markets. Yeah. Brad, I'm presuming that you're talking about our deposit mix primarily. Obviously where we are now at 49% DDA is certainly enviable and certainly, you know, a trait that we're extremely proud of, and certainly think that's a hallmark of a core deposit franchise. We think that as we go through 2023, assuming, you know, rates continue to trek up a bit over the course of that year. You know, certainly, we expect to probably see some migration in that mix from the current 49% or so to something a little bit less than that as we kind of go through that rate environment. At the same time, you know, we are pivoting up this quarter, the fourth quarter, to higher deposit rates. Certainly think and believe, again, as I mentioned earlier, that we'll be able to complete this cycle with the deposit beta really no worse than we did last time. Hopefully that helps. Okay. Great. Appreciate all the color. Okay. Yep. You bet. Thank you. Thanks so much. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Kevin Fitzsimmons with D.A. Davidson. Your line is open. Hey, good afternoon, everyone. Hey, Kevin. I just wanna on the deposit level. It was definitely a large linked-quarter decline in deposits and the guide. I appreciate the guide on the seasonality of the public fund deposits coming up. The decline that you saw in the other deposit categories in third quarter, I mean, is it the things that were driving that, have they simply run its course or is it simply a matter of pricing up? Like you've lagged and now you're going to step up even more and that's gonna kind of bring to a halt that level of outflow in those other kind of deposits going forward. Yeah, very good question, Kevin, and I'll get started, and John can certainly add some color. Again, when we think about the deposit outflows that we had, you know, during the third quarter, again, about a quarter of those were seasonal outflows related to public fund deposits. So completely expected and predicted. Another quarter or so were in DDA deposits, and again, as John mentioned in his opening remarks, a lot of that was really related to customers spending money and, you know, using some of their own working capital in their own businesses and households. But certainly a little bit less than half of the deposit outflows during the quarter were in interest-bearing deposit categories, whether that's to some extent time, but obviously mostly money market and savings accounts. Certainly, we think that some of that was rate related. We think that certainly some of those deposits that left during the quarter were likely more of the higher rate sensitive type money in customers. The pivot in the fourth quarter to higher deposit rates, as we've kind of been talking about, you know, through this cycle, is really right on cue. Certainly I think we should do a real good job, and I think You know, will certainly help to retain any more of the rate-sensitive money that remains on our balance sheet. At least that's how we're thinking about the fourth quarter and, the reason for the pivot up in deposit rates. And again, you know, the objective is to fund as much of our quarter's loan growth with deposit growth as we can, and then on an aspirational basis, same thing kind of going forward. John, anything you want to add to that? I guess the only color I'd add would be, you know, and I know it seems like it was forever ago that we were in what we would call a normal environment, but our normal loan-to-deposit ratio hovers between 85%-87%. Our average for 3Q was 76%. We really have quite a long way to go as we ease our mix and earning asset mix back to, I guess, a more normal mix between the bond portfolio and the loan portfolio. We're not really in a position to have to be a leading rate-rising organization and probably won't be for a long while. The guidance that Mike shared earlier around fourth quarter is built around the notion that we want to close the gap a bit between movement in the overall loan book and movement in the overall deposit book, but we will still see the Loan-to-Deposit Ratio continue to increase, which is a tailwind for NIM over the next several quarters. If you think about it just in terms of puts and takes, the earning asset mix improvement will continue to be beneficial to interest income, and then whatever deposit beta migration we see upward would be the offset to that. Our intent is to preserve as much of that favorable NIM as we can for as long as we can. Hopefully that color gives you a little bit more theme behind why we're doing what we're doing and why. Yeah. this structure. Yeah, that's helpful. I guess with the goal being to fund as much of the loan growth with deposits, it's probably gonna be that loan-to-deposit ratio maybe grinds higher. It's not gonna be in leaps and bounds in the near term, I would suspect. No. We don't want it to be. I mean, we'd like it to be a nice, steady migration that's really nothing remarkable. Yeah. Got it. Gotcha. In terms of the loan growth that you're looking at going forward, I know mortgage has been more of a source of just putting more mortgages on the balance sheet. It makes sense. Is that something you're gonna keep doing as much of or a little less going forward? I don't know if you have a certain target of what you want that to be relative to the Yeah. the overall loan book. Yeah, good question. You know, there was a time when we were awash with excess liquidity, and portfolio mortgage was a way of deploying that money to help us with support of net interest income. Obviously, that. We're in a different environment now. You know, the closing time from authorization of a mortgage credit is, I guess has never been any longer than it is right now, just as long as it takes appraisals and surveys and whatnot to happen. We would expect the portfolio for mortgage to grow a little more for a quarter or two longer, and then as we get toward either the second quarter, absolutely by the second half of 2023, it'll plateau and may drift downwards a little bit depending on what the rate environment is. We would rather grow what we'd rather grow in credit, and it'll be working hard to do, is in revolving credit that's lines only and you know continue our asset sensitivity for a little while longer. We can push the sensitivity further with hedging strategies that have been pretty successful so far. Mortgage will plateau probably early to mid next year and then begin to decline a bit over time. Okay. One last one on credit. You guys praised the modest charge-offs and provision in fourth quarter. Is what you had in third quarter what you would characterize as modest? I know that's difficult, but I'm just trying to get some kind of range around what you view as modest for provisioning, how wide that range could be. Yeah, this is Chris Ziluca. I mean, I guess I'll talk about it in terms of, you know, how we did with charge-offs, and Mike can kind of talk about, you know, the provisioning element of that. You know, we don't really have a line of sight to anything significant at this point in time. You know, obviously, we're really at the beginning of the period, so it's really hard to say for sure. You know, if you think about our historic average charge-off levels, you know, we're gonna certainly be better than that, you know, during the upcoming period or two. I just want to remind you as well, I mean, we're really at historically low levels in terms of charge-offs, in terms of criticized loan levels, and in terms of NPLs. You know, anything, you know, up is gonna look more significant, even if it's not really that material. Yeah. The only thing I would add to that, Kevin, is if you look at the $1.3 million of net charge-offs this quarter, I'd probably categorize that as low. As far as modest, it would be something a little bit more than $1.3 million. Not to be evasive, but you know, using those kinds of terms are pretty general. But I think you get the picture around what we mean by low and certainly something at the modest level. As far as the overall provision is concerned, it'll depend on all the factors we've already talked about. You know, where our commercial criticized NPLs are, what kind of loan growth we have in any given quarter, and really where the economy is as much as anything else. We'll always strive, you know, to at least cover our charge-offs and then put something extra aside to compensate for the quarter's loan growth. The delta really just becomes all the other factors that I mentioned. It's certainly very dynamic. I would describe it that way. Okay. Thanks, Mike. You bet. Good to hear from you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Brad Milsaps. Please proceed. Hey, good afternoon. Hi there. Mike, just maybe a quick follow-up on the balance sheet. You mentioned the FHLB borrowings that you added in the quarter. Can you describe what, maybe, are those all short-term kind of overnight advances? Might you use cash flows from the bond portfolio to pay those off? Or do we need to think about that kind of being a more permanent part of your funding? Just kind of curious how you plan to use the bond portfolio vis-à-vis wholesale funding resources. Sure. Absolutely. As far as the FHLB borrowings that we have on the balance sheet at the end of the quarter, it's right at $1 billion. And actually, instead of, you know, pursuing kind of the overnight market, we've kind of termed those out. They're really in two pieces. The first is $600 million that matures in mid-November, and the second piece is $400 million, and that one matures in mid-December. We have both of those priced at a little bit of a discount to the overnight Fed funds rate. I think going forward, you know, we'll tend to use kind of that structured approach to the short-term borrowings as opposed to just straight overnight. That's certainly dependent upon where rates go and what our balance sheet needs are in terms of additional funding. Related to the bond portfolio, again, the guidance that we gave was at least for the foreseeable future, call it the next couple of quarters, we're looking to keep the size of the bond portfolio kind of flat at the current $9.2 billion. Really two reasons for that. First and foremost, the reinvestment yields right now are certainly very attractive. Secondly, I mean, we're looking to extend our asset duration and continuing to reinvest in the bond portfolio with fixed rate instruments at those levels is certainly a good way we think to do that. That's kind of how we think about those two items. Hopefully, that was helpful. Yeah. Thanks, Mike. Just one follow-up. You guys have done an excellent job on expenses this year, and I know you're not prepared to give guidance for 2023, but I know you use a lot of cost savings to fund a lot of investments in technology and lenders. Mike, in your mind, are there still buckets of cost savings that are still out there that you guys might not have tapped into yet? Or do you think you'll sort of be, you know, at the mercy, so to speak, of the inflationary environment that we're in? Just kind of, you know, bigger picture, how you're thinking about expenses going forward. Sure. Be glad to. We would certainly prefer to not be at the mercy of inflation going forward. I don't think anybody really would want to be. Wouldn't we all. I certainly understand you. Yeah. I certainly understand the context of your question. Having said that, you know, look, I think we've talked about this on prior calls a couple of times that, you know, really going back a number of years, since we put our two companies together, you know, some 12 years or so ago. I think one of the things that we really have institutionalized at our company is this notion of cost control and really making sure that we're getting value for the dollars that we're spending. You know, certainly we've done a lot of very hard work over the past couple of years in getting the company to the point where we really have become, I think one of the more efficient banking companies out there. You know, certainly with the tailwind of higher rates, we've been able to push our efficiency ratio down to, we think, pretty impressive levels. You know, we're not looking to give that back. Having said that, we're certainly cognizant of the need to continue to reinvest in our company, and certainly we've done that, and we'll continue to do that going forward. One of the things that we invested in a year or so ago was this notion of strategic procurement. You know, that is at the point where we think it's paying some nice dividends. I think those dividends will begin to really grow and become more significant as we go through the next couple of years. We look in an area like that as a way to kind of continue to cut expenses, where that's appropriate to do so, which puts us in a position to take those savings and reinvest them back in the company. I think that's kind of how we think about that particular item going forward. John, anything you want to add to that? Yeah. I think you explained it well. The only thing I'd add to it is, like Mike said, we've been playing the same hand of making smart investments to improve our efficiency really for several years. The strategic procurement group really just got online about a quarter or so ago to have an opportunity. They really don't get to show their value until you have contracts renewing or consolidation opportunities occur. That'll happen on a full run rate basis for next year and the year after. We look forward to good news from there. In addition, I mean, this has been a really terrific year, right? One of the primary increases in personnel costs for us have been incentives as our bankers have done a terrific job, and the back of the house has done a terrific job supporting all that growth and tech rollouts. Incentive pay for this year has been probably the highest we've ever had. In a slowing environment, that's not the way we wanna save money, but if the environment does slow down a bit next year, it might be a little tougher for the incentive payments to be as big as they were this year. It just depends on the macro. As our workforce has changed, the ability to harvest occupancy expense reductions through the consolidation of some buildings and the reduction of floors that we have in lease space, those opportunities will continue to happen over the next year or two. Finally, there's a lot of runway left in improving efficiency from all the technology work that we've done. I mentioned earlier, we're near the end of the retail side. There's a good bit more of that work to do over the next two or three years. While it may not be a headline, one big huge quarter where you see, you know, big one-time expenses and then lots of savings afterwards, you know, every one of those smaller projects yields a reduction in cost that we can invest back in the company, or use it to combat some of the inflationary pressure. I think we still got a fair amount of runway to improve efficiency. When the rate environment slows down and deposit betas catch up, we get to a normalized NIM in that environment, then I think harvesting those efficiencies through some of the work we're doing is gonna become more important. It's been happening throughout the year, but I think top line revenue kind of seized all the focus, but all the work that's been done so far didn't really get to shine as much as I think it will in the latter part of 2023 and 2024. Hopefully, I gave you some more context. Yeah. Thank you, guys. Appreciate taking the questions. Sure. You bet. Thank you. Our follow-up question is from Christopher Marinac with Janney Montgomery Scott. Your line is open. Hey, thanks. Good afternoon, and we appreciate you hosting the call. Just wanted to follow up, I guess, on a question from a couple callers ago as it relates to the DDA ratio. When we go back in time to the, you know, 2016 to 2019 timeframe, the DDA ratio was a lot lower. Is it possible that it gets back into that high thirties, Mike? Is there anything structural that's kind of keeping you from going back to where it would've been kind of pre-COVID? Just want to get a little deeper on just history on and what it applies to today. Yeah. A great observation, Chris. Again, you know, coming into the kind of the pre-COVID period, our deposit mix as it relates to DDAs was probably in the 36%-38% range. It would obviously, you know, kind of vary within that range. In the COVID years, we have stepped up pretty dramatically to where we are now at the 49% or even 50% level. I think as we've talked about, you know, a good deal in other venues and in prior calls, not sure that the 49% in this rate environment is something that's completely sustainable. We do think that 49% is likely to kind of track down, certainly in the context of the current high rate environment and likely to get higher as we go through, you know, the next couple of quarters. You know, where it lands is really hard to predict, and so many different factors at play there. It's hard to see it going down to the pre-pandemic levels. We think it probably settles maybe somewhere, you know, in the low- to mid-40% range. That's how we kind of think about that. Obviously, you know, what we're built to do is to continue to grow that deposit category. We would absolutely love to keep the mix where it is, but certainly think that there are factors at work that will likely decrease that a bit over time. Chris, this is John. The only thing I'd add to Mike's comments. You asked the question, is anything structurally different? I don't know if it rises to the level of the structural word, but a number of years ago, we endeavored to increase our lending focus primarily in C&I and operating companies and lines of credit. We, at the same time, invested fairly heavily in the treasury part of our business to provide services to depository relationships that allowed us to compete with organizations a good bit bigger than ourselves. That effort was very successful. You know, part of the reason that our variable rate componentry is so high was that effort. Part of the reason that we got more than our fair share of DDAs as deposits flowed into banking the last several years was, I think, the skillful rollout of a lot of different products and a really high quality team in our treasury group. That's really what's the only thing that's different. That's enabled us to be a lot less dependent on wholesale funding, on brokered CDs, and really on even retail CDs. I think the mix of deposits really is fundamentally different, and our ability to settle in that low- to mid-40s that Mike mentioned earlier will be tied to how much we can continue that success as we get into a little higher rate environment. I hope that color was helpful. No, it is, and I thank you both for that. I guess just a quick follow-up. If we think about on the other side of the balance sheet or same side, but just the debt component, it would be normal for the debt to rise over time. I know it's not a prediction about the next couple quarters, but just if you've used debt to a slightly greater degree, that really would not be out of line with kind of how you've run the bank over the longer haul. Is that fair to think about that? Yeah, I think that's right, Chris. I think certainly you could see the borrowing component of our overall funding mix likely to increase, you know, as we go through the current environment. Great. Thanks again for the background this afternoon. We appreciate it. You bet. Thanks for staying on the late call. Thank you. As a quick reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Matt Olney with Stephens. Please proceed. Hey, thanks guys. I think all my questions have been addressed. Just a bigger picture question. Your legacy markets are still in some sensitive areas for market disruption from some pending and recently announced bank M&A deals. I'm curious what you're seeing with this. Anything out there that's impactful through, you know, new hires, producers or back office or. Or I guess, you know, thinking about higher rates and higher deposit costs, anything to note from the market disruption standpoint? Thanks. Sure. Good question. Thanks for the last question being a layup question. That's a good one. On slide 28, you can sort of see the history of our banker hires, the last several quarters. We added another five this quarter. The focus obviously of who we're hiring is coming from banks that are, you know, our size or larger that bring value to the table very rapidly. The focus of both our acquired and our current folks will be turning us a little bit more towards liquidity gathering than liquidity deployment in the coming quarters. Typically, disruption makes that a little easier to do, right? I would think the benefit of disruption over the next four to eight quarters may be more in gathering deposit accounts and particularly commercial deposit than in liquidity deployment. I think next year will be a more disruptive year than this past one has been. We look forward and our bankers are quite aware of those opportunities and take advantage of it where they can. Yep, makes sense. Congrats on the quarter. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Thanks for hanging in there. Thank you. There are no questions waiting at this time, so we'll now pass it back to John Hairston for closing remarks. Thank you to me, and thanks for moderating the call today. Thanks everyone for your interest, and we look forward to seeing you soon on the road. Thanks, John.