Good morning, and welcome to the Umpqua Holdings Corporation second quarter 2022 earnings call. At this time, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there'll be a question and answer session. As a reminder, this call is being recorded. At this time, I would like to introduce Jacque Bohlen, Investor Relations Director for Umpqua, to begin the conference call. Thank you, Michelle. Good morning and good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today on our second quarter 2022 earnings call. With me this morning are Cort O'Haver, the President and CEO of Umpqua Holdings Corporation; Tory Nixon, President of Umpqua Bank, Ron Farnsworth; our Chief Financial Officer; and Frank Namdar, our Chief Credit Officer. After our prepared remarks, we will take your questions. Yesterday afternoon, we issued an earnings release discussing our second quarter 2022 results. We've also prepared a slide presentation which we will refer to during our remarks this morning. Both these materials can be found on our website at umpquabank.com in the Investor Relations section. During today's call, we will make forward-looking statements which are subject to risks and uncertainties and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions of federal securities law. For a list of factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from expectations, please refer to slides two and three of our earnings presentation, as well as the disclosures contained within our SEC filings. We will also reference non-GAAP financial measures alongside our discussion of GAAP results. We encourage you to review the GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliation provided in the earnings presentation appendix. We'll now turn the call over to Cort. Okay. Thank you, Jacque. I'll provide a brief recap of our performance, then pass to Ron to discuss financials. Frank will discuss credit, and then we'll take your questions. For the second quarter, we've reported earnings available to shareholders of $79 million. This represents EPS of $0.36 per share compared to the $0.42 reported last quarter and the $0.53 reported in the second quarter of last year. On an operating basis, which excludes a number of interest rate-driven items and merger expenses that Ron will review, EPS of $0.37 compares to $0.36 last quarter and $0.55 in the second quarter of last year. The return of a provision for credit losses compared to 2021's recapture was the primary driver of the annual variance. Notably, rising interest rates and portfolio loan growth enabled higher net interest income to exceed lower mortgage banking revenue. Customer tax payments contributed to a 2% decline in deposits for the quarter, but we are seeing growth in the third quarter to date. Loan balances grew $1.5 billion in the second quarter, representing a quarterly growth rate of 6.3%, an annualized growth rate of 25%. The second quarter's growth reflects an anticipated pickup in activity relative to the first quarter that spanned business lines, portfolio classes, and geography has given favorable market conditions and the continued momentum of our associates in both new and existing markets. The loan portfolio is up 8% this year, meeting the mid to upper single-digit levels of annual expansion we have been discussing over the past few quarters. Slower payoff activity relative to 2021 and a small increase in net advances in the second quarter favorably impacted net portfolio growth in the first half of the year. At this point, market trends in our existing pipelines indicate continued loan growth through the second half of the year, but likely slower pace than the second quarter's significant volume. We remain acutely focused on the health of our new and existing borrowers, and our new loan production mirrors the high-quality metrics exhibited by our overall loan portfolio. In June of this year, we published our Annual Business Barometer, which measures the mood, mindset, and strategic priorities of leaders at small and middle market companies across the United States. Inflation and rising interest rates are driving an increase in the cost of goods, talent, and capital for these businesses. Our customers managed through the pandemic and then gained knowledge over the past two years, enabling them to adjust strategies and adapt to challenges in front of them. While many business leaders reported more cautious views of the overall economy compared to the prior year, they remain confident in their resilience and ability to continue to grow their businesses to expand revenue, improve profitability. We remain focused on being the business bank of choice for these existing and prospective customers, and our bankers and support teams will continue to focus on providing a distinguishing level of service that enables us to win business with strong companies throughout our markets. Now moving on to a handful of other initiatives. Our ongoing advancements in payments technology, most recently through two commercial card solutions in collaboration with Visa, continued to produce tangible results as commercial card spend set new records during the quarter and was up 50% in June compared to the year ago period. The pipeline is strong across all fee-based businesses, which includes treasury management, cards, merchant, and international. Our teams continue to implement enhancements to our product offerings and service capabilities, and we expect a busy second half of the year as many of the initiatives currently under development are brought live. As an industry, home lending is facing significant headwinds given the sharp increase in mortgage rates and the impact on volume and margins. As previously announced, we reduced headcount earlier in the second quarter, and we implemented other strategy measures to shift production towards saleable volume, which is a more profitable business segment. We will continue to take necessary steps to adjust the business model in light of the current operating environment, which we expect to persist for the foreseeable future, and we are evaluating multiple options. Everything is on the table with regard to our mortgage business. Regarding capital, yesterday, we declared a $0.21 per share dividend payable to our shareholders of record as of August 1st. While the amount is consistent with historical payments, the timing is accelerated compared to our prior cadence as we continue to plan for our pending combination with Columbia Banking System. We currently target a close date during the third quarter, where the timing will ultimately be determined by the receipt of all regulatory approvals, which we have not received to date. As we detail on slides six and seven of the deck, we continue to make headway with our integration planning and our scheduled Q1 of 2023 core system conversion date remains achievable at this point, given our ability to separate conversion planning activities from the legal close date. As we have discussed on prior calls, the Integration Management Office, which includes senior executive leaders from both Columbia and Umpqua, enables Umpqua's bankers to have an undisturbed focus on generating business and serving customers. The separation of our integration planning activities from our growth objectives has enabled us to successfully drive our business forward. We continue to attract and hire exceptional talent, which has enabled us to build deeper presence in existing markets and expand in new desirable areas like Colorado and Arizona. Proven local leaders who know their regions are joining Umpqua. They are embracing our expertise-driven and personalized team-based approach to customer relationships, and their success is highlighted by the growth momentum exhibited over the past several quarters. Our operating markets and top-tier banking teams support my expectations for net expansion through 2022 and into 2023 outside significant economic deterioration, which we have not seen yet today. With that, Ron, take it away. All right. Thank you, Cort. For those on the call who want to follow along, I'll be referring to certain page numbers from our earnings presentation. Starting on page 12 of the slide presentation, which contains our summary quarterly P&L. Our GAAP earnings for Q2 were $79 million or $0.36 per share. The adjustments to our internal operating measures with various fair value changes from interest rate volatility, along with merger and exit and disposal costs, which are detailed in the appendix on slide 31. On an operating basis, we earned $80 million or $0.37 per share. For the moving parts, as compared to Q1, net interest income increased $19.4 million or 8%, representing the power of our interest-bearing cash, securities bonds, and waterfalling down into loans this quarter, combined with the recent Fed rate increases. We had a Provision for Credit Loss of $18.7 million, driven primarily by continued strong loan growth. Non-interest income declined $24.7 million, reflecting lower home lending gain on sale revenue, along with the fair value adjustments driven by the significant bond market sell-off and higher yields, namely MSR and swap CVA gains, mostly offset by rate-driven fair value losses on bonds and loans held at fair value, as detailed later on the right side of slide 31. Non-interest expense declined $2.9 million or 2% from lower mortgage banking and payroll tax expenses. As for the balance sheet on slide 13, interest-bearing cash was used to fund the significant loan growth and deposit decline. The decline in Investments AFS related primarily to the unrealized loss resulting from higher market yields this quarter as new purchases offset maturing cash flows. Overall loans held for investment increased $1.5 billion or 6% during the quarter. This was net of $71 million in PPP loan forgiveness. This makes five quarters in a row of robust loan growth, meaning the total non-PPP growth over the past year was $3.6 billion or 17.3%. At quarter end, we have $102 million in remaining PPP loans. Deposits were off 2%, driven in part by seasonal tax payment trends and continued reduction in time deposits. Our total available liquidity, including off-balance sheet sources, ended the quarter at $14.3 billion, representing 48% of total assets and 55% of total deposits. Noted on the bottom of slide 13, our tangible book value declined due to the AOCI rate mark on AFS investments. We've also added measures for this on the TCE ratio, both including and excluding AOCI for reference. Slide 15 highlights net interest income and the declining effects of PPP and acquired loan accretion. Noting the base increase again due to the recent rate increases, along with reducing cash funding record loan growth. From a rate volume standpoint, increasing rates led to $13 million of the $19 million increase, with volume and mix making up the $6 million difference. Following that on slide 16 of the presentation are the trends for our net interest margin. Noting our NIM increased 27 basis points in total to 3.41% in Q2. We present a waterfall on the margin change on the right of the page. The NIM excluding the impact of PPP loans and discount accretion was up 32 basis points in Q2, which is great to see the impact of continued non-PPP loan growth. Our cost of interest-bearing deposits increased slightly to 11 basis points in Q2, though the spot rate at June 30 was 10 basis points, equivalent to Q1's average level. Key for me here is following the 125 basis point increase to the federal funds rate during Q2. Our NIM for the month of June was 3.60%. Another 19 basis points higher than the full Q2 amount, which bodes well for the remainder of the year. The next two slides include information which investors may find helpful on continued rate sensitivity. First, on slide 17, we provide the repricing and maturity characteristics of our loan portfolio. The first table on the upper left breaks down the pricing drivers on loans, noting as of quarter end, 35% of the portfolio is fixed, 31% is in floating rate, and 34% are in adjustable rates over time. The lower left table shows the maturity schedule by category. The upper right table shows loan rate floor buckets for floating and adjustable rate loans, noting only 8% of the combined total are at their floor, meaning 92% have no floor or are above it. For the $1.3 billion in floating and adjustable rate loans at their floor, the lower right table breaks down the balances by rate change, band, along with the weighted average rate change required for these loans to move above their floor. Hopefully, investors and analysts will find this information useful in assessing the beneficial impact on net interest income of future potential rate hikes. Next, on slide 18. On the left, we've included our projected net interest income sensitivity for future rate changes in both ramp and shock scenarios over two years. This is a simulation we run and backtest quarterly, and it assumes a static balance sheet. The deposit beta used in this simulation is 45% on interest-bearing deposits. For sensitivity on our model results, every 10% change in the absolute beta is ±1.2% on the +100 basis point shock results. The table on the right shows our deposit beta from the last rising rate cycle, starting Q3 2015 and running through Q3 2019 to catch the lag effect. Our beta then was 42% on interest-bearing deposits. Okay, now to our segment disclosures. Starting with the core banking segment on slide 21 of the presentation. Net interest income increased $20 million over Q1, given the higher rates and loan growth discussed previously. I'll talk about CECL and the provision in detail in a few minutes, but you'll see here we had $18.7 million provision this quarter, primarily related to continued loan growth. The next few rows show the fair value changes due to rising interest rates. Knowing as a group, we're at $10 million loss in Q2 compared to a $17 million fair value loss in Q1. Managed income of $34.5 million was down from Q1 due to lower gain on sale gains not fully being offset by continued growth in card-based fees. In the managed expense section, you'll see the merger expense recognized to date on the combinations, along with exit and disposal costs related to lease exits on recent store consolidations. The direct managed expense for the core banking segment was up slightly this quarter, primarily related to some non-recurring project costs. The efficiency ratio for the segment improved to 57%, noting this would be 54% excluding non-operating fair value changes and merger exit costs. In the operating disclosure for the core banking segment back in the appendix, and also on page 24 of the release, it's good to see the operating PPNR increased year-over-year, which is great to see the benefit of continued loan growth and rate increases more than offsetting the significant decline in PPP fees over the past year. This is significant and bodes well for future core banking revenue with forecasted Fed funds rate increases. Turning now to slide 22 of the presentation, we show the mortgage banking segment five-quarter trends. To start, the continued increase in longer-term yields led to volatility in our volume, gain on sale margin, and MSR valuation. We had $577 million in total loans held for sale volume this quarter, down 11% from Q1, due entirely to lower activity with higher rates. The gain on sale margin was 2.62%, up slightly from Q1. These two items resulted in the $15.1 million of origination and sale revenue noted towards the top left of the page. Our servicing revenue was stable, and for the change in MSR fair value, the passage of time piece was stable, while the change due to valuation inputs was a gain of $10.9 million, due again to the increase in long-term interest rates on the quarter. Managed expense totaled $24 million for the quarter. Again, this represents held for sale origination costs, servicing costs, along with administrative and allocated costs. The direct expense component of this was $13.2 million, as noted on the right side of the page, representing 2.3% of production volume, up slightly in basis points from the last few quarters with the lower volume. As noted towards the bottom of the page, the MSR is at a record high valuation of 1.39% as of quarter end. We are working through the governance and risk management process to hedge the MSR assets in an effort to reduce future net volatility. We expect to have this in place over the next few months, and we'll keep you updated. Couple final items before I turn it over to Frank. On slide 24, we've included the quarterly loan balance roll forward. Quarterly non-PPP loan growth was driven by $2.6 billion in new originations and net advances, offset by $1.2 billion in payoffs. Next, let me take your attention to slide 26 on CECL and our allowance for credit loss. As a reminder, our CECL process incorporates a life of loan reasonable and supportable period for the economic forecast for all portfolios, with the exception of C&I, which uses a 12-month reasonable and supportable period, reverting gradually to the output mean thereafter. We used the consensus economic forecast this quarter updated in May. Overall, the forecast showed improvement in some areas, offset by higher expected inflation and interest rates. We recognized a $19 million Provision for Credit Loss, with about 2/3 of that for the quarter's strong loan growth, and 1/3 for slightly deteriorating economic variables. The ACL at quarter end was 1.12%. As these are economic forecasts driving the reserve, it will simply take the passage of time to see if net charge-offs follow this model. To date, the models have simply overestimated the actual net charge-offs, given a lag of at least eight quarters. Our day one CECL level was right at 1% on the ACL, which is about $30 million lower on the ACL for non-PCD loans than we are at currently. All else equal, this excess ACL will either be charged off in future periods if the models are eventually proven correct, or be recaptured and/or used for providing for future loan growth if the economic forecasts improve. Time will tell. Lastly, I want to highlight capital on page 28, noting that all the regulatory ratios remain in excess of well-capitalized levels. Our tier one common ratio is 10.9%, and our total risk-based capital ratio is 13.5%. The bank level total risk-based capital ratio is 12.6%. With that, I will now turn the call over to Frank Namdar to discuss credit. Thank you, Ron. I want to call your attention to slide 25. We have provided expanded disclosure on the characteristics of our loan portfolio to highlight how new loan generation in the second quarter compares to the overall loan book. The average size of new loans is larger than the existing portfolio averages, given higher real estate values, the mix of loans within those portfolios, and our intentional focus and investment in middle-market banks. Moving on to slide 27. Our non-performing assets to total assets ratio of 0.15% was relatively steady with the prior quarter, and our classified loans to total loans ratio declined to 0.75% after last quarter's modest increase. Our annualized net charge-off percentage to average loans and leases was only 11 basis points in the quarter, reflecting continued below-average net charge-off activity in the FinPac portfolio. The FinPac portfolio's ratio came in at 1.47%, notably below its historical 3%-3.5% range for the fourth consecutive quarter, still reflective of higher levels of customer liquidity and the impact of strategic credit tightening implemented last year. My expectation continues to be a gradual migration to historical norms over the coming quarters in this space. Essentially, all of the quarter's charge-off activity was in the FinPac portfolio as the bank's activity was de minimis. We continue to be very pleased with our credit quality metrics. Charge-off activity is minimal. Non-performing and classified loan ratios are low. Delinquency migration continues to cure. This latter metric remains great to see, as it's a positive signal of stability within the portfolio. We remain confident in the quality of our loan book, and we look forward to continued high-quality growth balanced with effective and active risk management practices. Back to you, Cort. Okay. Thank you, Frank and Ron, for your comments. We will now take your questions. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star then one. Our first question comes from Jeff Rulis with D.A. Davidson. Your line is open. Thanks. Good morning. Morning, Jeff. Question on the kind of the management of deposits and a bit of a hypothetical here, but I guess as you look at managing a loan-to-deposit ratio, do you take into account the assumption of the Columbia merger? I guess, in other words, would you press harder to retain deposits absent the merger? Or is it you're truly running on an isolated basis? Any thoughts on sort of deposits retention with or without the merger? Hey, Jeff, Cort. It's a good question. You know, quite frankly, you know, we are still, you know, Umpqua Bank. We're still, you know, on our own, slugging it out, and we will continue to manage until we get approvals and close this bank on an independent fashion. To answer your question, you know, we're just doing what we've been doing all over the last five to seven years, which is a balanced growth philosophy of loans and deposits. We'll continue down that road. Like we mentioned, or I mentioned in my comments, we have seen a bounce back in deposits based on all the good work that have gone on over the prior quarters, and we'll continue to do that, as we get closer to a close. Gotcha. Fair enough. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I guess the other part, other question I had was, maybe for Ron. You'd mentioned the June margin average. What was the timing of the cash drawdown through the quarter? In other words, does the margin for the quarter or for the month of June reflect kind of the full cash deployment? Or is this sort of a lag into the third quarter for the cash impact only? Good question, Jeff. It was pretty ratable over the course of the quarter, so, you know, not exactly a third, third by month, but pretty close. So we will definitely see some lift in margin and on a quarterly basis in Q3 compared to Q2. Again, the wildcard will be what happens on the deposit beta side. Got it. Thank you. Maybe a last one just on the expenses. You know, the drop in comp expenses, what portion of that was kind of variable or mortgage or and/or what piece was maybe structural savings, if any? Yeah, Jeff, this is Ron again. There's a good slide in the presentation deck. I wanna say it's probably page 20 of the deck. I'd say about $2 million was on the home lending side for the quarter. I mean, there is some lag there, and there's another just under $2 million payroll tax related, the two primary drivers of the drop in comp. I guess maybe quantifying that a bit more on the NextGen savings, you know, left to come in 2022. Is there much more there or is that kind of complete for the year? I'd say we're pretty close to that run, right? Because right now we're right maxed out. I mean, if you back out merger and exit and disposal costs, we're basically, you know, ballpark in the middle of that $690-$710 range I gave on expenses for the year if you annualize this. Feel pretty good about where we're at. All right. Thank you. Yep, you bet. Our next question comes from Jared Shaw with Wells Fargo. Your line is open. Hi there. Good morning. Good afternoon. Thanks. Go ahead, Jared. Hey, just following up on the deposit question. You know, as we see this, the loan to deposit ratio moving higher, should we think that, you know, maybe we get to that sort of full 45% deposit beta faster as you sort of fight for deposit retention at this point? I guess how should we be thinking about sort of building into that 45% beta? Hey, Jared, this is Ron. I'd say I fully don't expect to see that hit right away. That of course is a muddled amount based off past experience. We'll see how it plays out over the course of the second half of this year. My expectation would be for some NIM lift early in Q3 just based off of the math from the month of June versus the quarter in Q2 looking forward. Again, the key is gonna be growing deposits slightly more than loans for the second half of the year. If we're able to execute on that, then my guess would be it would be under the 45% beta. Hey, Jared, let me just throw in. We have a different philosophy than maybe prior deposit cycles, if you will, about how we look at relationships. You've heard Tory and I talk about ad nauseam about our balanced growth philosophy. I think we've seen that in the run up of deposits, the way we're continuing to grow C&I customers which carry much higher deposit balances relative to borrowing levels. It's a completely different company than it was when we go into a rising rate environment. I just want to make sure everyone keeps that in mind. Yep. That's a good highlight. Thanks. Then on the commercial real estate side, you know, there was solid growth this quarter. Are you starting to see the impact of higher rates yet on sort of that incremental demand, you know, maybe that pipeline in terms of, you know, how they're evaluating incremental purchases? Or is it, you know, right now things are still pretty good on CRE as we go into third quarter? Hey, Jared, this is Tory Nixon. I think the place where we're seeing interest rates impact real estate, commercial real estate the most is in the multifamily division. You know, we had a really strong Q2 in multifamily, and some of that is just a result of borrowers getting financing done and in place before you know, this continued rise in interest rates. Certainly, it was a very robust quarter there for that reason. As much as anything, the pipeline for the entire company is very strong. The pipeline for the multifamily division is down a bit and for obvious reasons and rates being that one. Okay. That's good color. Thanks. Just final question for me. You know, you said that you're still looking to not move the integration date for the deal if we get approval here in the near term. I guess, what's the latest approval could come before you have to actually start thinking about changing the conversion integration date? We've got some time. Jared, this is Cort. You know, obviously you get closer to the holidays, we would probably, you know, issue some type of a statement. We've got time. Okay. Thanks for taking the questions. Yep. Thank you. Our next question comes from Matthew Clark with Piper Sandler. Your line is open. Hey, good morning. Morning. Trying to get a sense for how much of the loan growth this quarter was kind of a pull forward in anticipation of higher rates. Still comfortable with mid to high single digit loan growth, given higher rates scenario. Yeah, Matt, it's Tory Nixon again. Just a lot of feedback going on here. Feedback there. The loan growth for the quarter was quite spectacular actually. Interestingly enough, we had growth in every line of business in the bank over the quarter. That's actually very, very nice to see such a lot of diversification in the growth. I think there's three primary factors for it. One is as I alluded to and talked about earlier in the multifamily division. Part was getting loans done and booked and funded prior to increasing rates if it's a fixed rate product. Although that's not a lot of what we do, but that is certainly a bit of it. I think the other reason for growth is just because of rates a little less on the payoff side than historically we see. You know, that also provides a little bit of a lift for us. I think just lastly is some very robust efforts by all the folks in the bank, both you know, all the RMs that are customer-facing and back office folks. As Cort talked about earlier, this focus around balance growth and relationship banking, us spending time with our customers and continuing to prospect. We've got a very robust sales effort in the company and pipelines continue to look strong. I feel very confident that as we are into quarter three, that we'll have some nice loan growth, albeit not at the same level, I think, as what we had in Q2. We do have very strong growth in all different parts of the bank forecasted. Can you ask them? We're just not prepared to. Sorry about that. Just last question from me. Do you have a guesstimate for where you think your pro forma CET1 ratio will shake out with Columbia based on your latest results, and your estimated rate marks? Hey, Matthew, this is Ron. I'd say overall, obviously, when we announced the deal last fall, rates were much lower. Most of the marks were premium marks, and now they flip with higher rates to be discount marks. Overall, though, you know, it's really going to be a function of where it'll be at when we close this. I'm not going to speculate where that might be. We do have healthy capital, you know, cushion here today, which is one of the reasons for having that healthy capital cushion. Any rate mark discount would also creep back in income pretty quickly. We'll give updates as we get closer. Okay. Thank you. Yep. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star then one. Our next question comes from Andrew Terrell with Stephens. Your line is open. Hey, good morning. Morning. Cort, I wanted to go back to some of your comments earlier in the call around the mortgage division and maybe everything being on the table. Just trying to get a sense, I'd love some color on, I guess, at this point in the rate cycle, what type of efficiency ratio you would view as acceptable in the mortgage division? Let me start with, you know, mortgage has been an important product for the company and will continue to be an important product for the company. It does, you know, serve us well. You know, clearly the mortgage market, both, you know, refinance and, new purchase is pretty much, you know, gone through the floor. You know, as we've talked about in the years that I've been CEO, you know, we have a scalable model both up and down. We do anticipate that with rates being up, specifically in the markets that we sit in right here with the lack of available inventory, we don't see mortgage getting back to the levels it was, you know, three, four quarters ago. That being said, we're going to have to continue to look at the model and reduce costs. To give you an actual efficiency number, I'm not able to do that. I am telling you that we are looking very, very hard at the model. It has served us well to this point. I think on a go-forward basis, the capital and the, you know, I'll say the burden it places on the company is something that we need to take into account as we look at its pure profitability, and we're going to do that. I'm not going to get on a call and announce a dramatic shift in the business model without communicating with our people, but we are looking at the model. Like I mentioned, everything is on the table. It's just not going to be where it was, and we understand that, and we'll make moves. We'll communicate that with you all as soon as we get to the point where we have a model that we're willing to talk about. Okay. Great. That, that's really helpful color. I appreciate it. Yep. Maybe one for Ron. I mean, we all know the production picture is going to be challenged, but looking at the gain on sale margin in the mortgage business, I think it was pretty stable around close to a 2.5% number quarter-over-quarter. Any reason to think there would be any margin degradation going forward on the gain on sale side? Or do you think it'll be pretty stable near this 2.5% level? Well, I'd say bigger picture, it's hard to give guidance on something when there's such volatility in the rate markets, which causes that, you know, headwind on the gain on sale margin. I'd like to think it'd be higher than that. It has been historically over time, but it's probably more detail on where you think rates are going to be, and I can give you a better answer. Yeah, I hear you. Okay. If I could sneak one last one in as well, just with Frank on some of your comments around just a really low level of FinPac charge-offs we've seen so far. Is there any way to think about or have you done any analysis on just how much more liquid these borrowers are versus kind of pre-pandemic levels? Kind of so far in the third quarter, have you seen any of that kind of normalization higher in charge-off come to fruition at all? Andrew, yeah, it's just with the volume of individual lessees within that portfolio, that number is just too hard to get at in terms of a dollar figure for customer liquidity. So we really focus on that delinquency number. To this point, you know, that delinquency number has really held pretty steady. You know, so far so good. You know, and it's with inflation the way it is, you know, my expectation is that that liquidity within those small businesses will Will gradually continue to decrease and payments will be more difficult to make, and delinquencies will rise. As those rise, they likely will migrate through the delinquency bands and return to that, closer to that normalized, historical number. Okay. Great. Thank you all for taking my questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from Chris McGratty with KBW. Your line is open. Hey, great. Thanks. Excuse me. Ron, can you remind us the monthly cash flows or the quarterly cash flows off the bond book, and also what the strategy might be from here, given the growth, the loan growth accelerating? Should we just assume this portfolio continues to fund loan growth? Hey, Chris, it's Ron. Yeah, I'd say on the cash flow side, obviously prepay has slowed down to, you know, damn near six on the CPR side, right? Which is basically nothing. It's probably gonna be, you know, tens of millions a month on the lower end of that, compared to where we were, you know, a year and a half back with much higher prepays. I'm not looking at that specifically to fund loan growth. I'm looking at continued deposit growth, right? Balanced deposit growth just north of the loan growth, which seasonally we usually see in the second half of the year. That's the plan of attack at this point. Expect the bond portfolio to be relatively static aside from fair value changes with rates moving around. Okay, that's helpful. Finally, on the acquisition. You cite in the release just the regulatory world that we're in. Anything additional you can share? I mean, it feels like it's just taking a long time, and the HHI issue is something I field the questions with. Just any color on what might be driving the little bit of a slower approval process? First of all, it's a merger, not an acquisition. You know, we're not gonna comment on individual examiners and where they're at. There is a process you all know. You know, there was a series of deals ahead of us going into the year, which I think you all know, and some of those got cleaned out right around the first of the year. There was a backup, if you will, in the entire process. We're just kinda working through the process. We feel, you know, good about where we're at with all of our regulators. We talk to them on a regular basis. Going back to the question on core integration, you know, we don't feel like we need to move that date at this point. We've separated, like we've talked about before, the approval and the close from the core integration, which is really the tipping point and the beginning point of all the cost saves associated with and revenue synergies with the merger. You know, so we feel good about it. Obviously, if something changes, we will certainly let you know immediately. Right now, it may be a little longer than we anticipated, but such is life, right? We just work through it. Great. Thank you. You got it. There are no further questions. I'd like to turn the call back over to Jacquelynne Bohlen for any closing remarks. Thank you, Michelle. We would like to thank you for your interest in Umpqua Holdings Corporation and participation on our second quarter 2022 earnings call. Please contact me if you would like clarification on any of the items discussed today or provided in our presentation materials. This will conclude our call. Goodbye. This concludes today's call. You may now disconnect. Everyone, disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.