Risk Factors Dashboard

Segment and Wealth Management Segment. The principal products produced and services rendered by TB and Trustmark’s other subsidiaries are as follows:

Trustmark Bank

Commercial Banking – TB provides a full range of commercial banking services to corporations and other business customers. Loans are provided for a variety of general corporate purposes, including financing for commercial and industrial projects, income producing commercial real estate, owner-occupied real estate and construction and land development. TB also provides deposit services, including checking, savings and money market accounts and certificates of deposit as well as treasury management services.

Consumer Banking – TB provides banking services to consumers, including checking, savings, and money market accounts as well as certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. Consumer Banking – TNB provides banking services to consumers, including checking, savings, and money market accounts as well as certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. In addition, TB provides consumer customers with installment and real estate loans and lines of credit.

Mortgage Banking – TB provides mortgage banking services, including construction financing, production of conventional and government insured mortgages, secondary marketing and mortgage servicing. Mortgage Banking – TNB provides mortgage banking services, including construction financing, production of conventional and government insured mortgages, secondary marketing and mortgage servicing.

Wealth Management – TB offers specialized fiduciary services and expertise in the areas of wealth management, trust, investment, brokerage, qualified and non-qualified retirement plan services and custodial services for corporate and individual customers. These services include the administration of personal trusts and estates as well as the management of investment and individual retirement accounts for individuals, employee benefit plans and charitable foundations. These services include the administration of personal trusts and estates as well as the management of investment accounts for individuals, employee benefit plans and charitable foundations. TB also provides institutional custody for large governmental entities and foundations, financial and estate planning and retirement plan services. TNB also provides corporate trust and institutional custody, securities brokerage, financial and estate planning and retirement plan services.

New Market Tax Credits (NMTC) – TB provides an intermediary vehicle for the provision of loans or investments in Low-Income Communities (LICs) through its subsidiary Southern Community Capital, LLC (SCC). New Market Tax Credits (NMTC) – TNB provides an intermediary vehicle for the provision of loans or investments in Low-Income Communities (LICs) through its subsidiary Southern Community Capital, LLC (SCC). SCC is a Mississippi single member limited liability company, a certified Community Development Entity (CDE) and a wholly-owned subsidiary of TB. The primary mission of SCC is to provide investment capital for LICs, as defined by Section 45D of the Internal Revenue Code, or for Low-Income Persons (LIPs). As a certified CDE, SCC is able to apply to the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund) to receive NMTC allocations to offer investors in exchange for equity investments in qualified projects.

Capital Trust

Trustmark Preferred Capital Trust I (the Trust) is a Delaware trust affiliate and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Trustmark formed in 2006 to facilitate a private placement of $60.0 million in trust preferred securities. As defined in applicable accounting standards, the Trust is considered a variable interest entity for which Trustmark is not the primary beneficiary. Accordingly, the accounts of the Trust are not included in Trustmark’s consolidated financial statements.

Strategy

Trustmark seeks to be a premier diversified financial services company in its markets, providing a broad range of banking and wealth management solutions to its customers. Trustmark’s products and services are designed to strengthen and expand customer relationships and enhance the organization’s competitive advantages in its markets as well as to provide cross-selling opportunities that will enable Trustmark to continue to diversify its revenue and earnings streams.

The following table sets forth summary data regarding Trustmark’s securities, loans, assets, deposits, equity and revenue over the past three years ($ in thousands):

(1) Revenue is defined as net interest income plus noninterest income (loss).

For additional information regarding the general development of Trustmark’s business, see Part II. For additional information regarding the general development of Trustmark’s business, see Part II. Item 6. – Selected Financial Data and Item 7. – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of this report.

Overview of Lending Business

Trustmark categorizes loans on its balance sheet into two categories. These categories are described in more detail in Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies included in Part II. Item 8. – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this report.

Trustmark reports LHFI by its six geographic market regions based on the location of the loan origination with the exception of loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties (representing traditional mortgages) and credit cards. Loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties and credit cards are reported in the Mississippi market region because they are centrally analyzed and approved as part of a specific line of business located at Trustmark’s headquarters in Jackson, Mississippi. The related construction project, property or collateral may be located outside of Trustmark's six geographic market regions but are primarily within its defined trade area. Equipment finance loans and leases are primarily reported in the Georgia market region because they are centrally analyzed and approved as part of the Equipment Finance line of business which is a nationwide line of business located in Atlanta, Georgia.

The following discussion briefly summarizes Trustmark’s lending business by focusing on LHFI and LHFS and includes a discussion of the risks inherent in these loans, Trustmark’s underwriting policies for its loans and the characteristics of the real estate loan component of these loans. The following discussion briefly summarizes Trustmark’s lending business by focusing on LHFI and LHFS and includes a discussion of the risks inherent in these loans, Trustmark’s underwriting policies for its loans and the characteristics of the real estate loan component of these loans.

As a general matter, extending credit to businesses and consumers exposes Trustmark to credit risk, which is the risk that the principal balance and any related interest may not be collected according to the original terms due to the inability or unwillingness of the borrower

to repay the loan. Trustmark mitigates credit risk through a set of internal controls, which includes adherence to conservative lending practices and underwriting guidelines, collateral monitoring, and oversight of its borrower’s financial performance and collateral. The risks inherent in specific subsets of lending are discussed below.

LHFI Secured by Construction, Land Development, and Other Land – Construction and land development loans include loans for both commercial and residential properties to builders/developers, other commercial borrowers and consumers. This category also includes loans secured by vacant land, except land known to be used or usable for agricultural purposes, such as crop and livestock production. Repayment is normally derived from the sale of the underlying property or from permanent financing, which refinances Trustmark’s initial loan. Trustmark’s engagement in this type of lending is generally extended to those builders and developers exhibiting the highest credit quality with significant equity invested in the projects which are primarily located within Trustmark’s defined trade area. The underwriting process for these loans includes analysis of the financial position and strength of both the borrower and guarantor, experience with similar projects in the past, market demand and prospects for successful completion of the proposed project within the established budget and schedule, values of underlying collateral and availability of permanent financing. Risk within this portfolio is mitigated through adherence to policies and lending limits, periodic target credit reviews of the different segments of this portfolio, inspection of projects throughout the life of the loan and routine monitoring of financial information and collateral values as they are updated.

Inherent in real estate construction lending is the risk that the full value of the collateral does not exist at the time the loan is granted. Inherent in real estate construction lending is the risk that the full value of the collateral does not exist at the time the loan is granted. Construction lending also inherently includes the risk associated with a borrower’s ability to successfully complete a proposed project on time and within budget. Further, adverse changes in the market occurring between the start of construction and completion of the projects can result in slower sales or rental rates and lower sales prices than originally anticipated, which could impact the underlying real estate collateral values and timely and full repayment of these loans. Rising interest rates can adversely affect the cost of construction and the financial viability of real estate projects. Higher interest rates may also result in higher capitalization rates, thereby reducing a property’s value. As a result of this risk profile, LHFI secured by construction, land development and other land are considered to be higher risks than other real estate loans.

LHFI and LHFS Secured by Residential Properties – Residential real estate loans consist of first and junior liens on residential properties that are primarily extended in the defined trade area in which Trustmark operates as well as mortgage products, originated and purchased, that are underwritten to secondary market standards. Credit underwriting standards include evaluation of the borrower’s credit history and repayment capacity, including verification of income and valuation of collateral. Portfolio performance is continuously evaluated through monitoring of repayment performance.

Credit performance of consumer residential real estate loans is highly dependent on housing values and household income which, in turn are highly dependent on national, regional and local economic factors. Credit performance of consumer residential real estate loans is highly dependent on housing values and household income which, in turn are highly dependent on national, regional and local economic factors. Rising interest rates, rising unemployment rates and other adverse changes in these economies may have a negative effect on the ability of Trustmark’s borrowers to repay these loans and negatively affect value of the underlying residential real estate collateral.

LHFI Secured by Nonfarm, Nonresidential Properties (NFNR LHFI) – Trustmark provides financing for both owner-occupied commercial real estate as well as income-producing commercial real estate. Trustmark seeks to maintain a balance of owner-occupied and income-producing real estate loans that moderates its risk to the specific risks of each type of loan. Commercial real estate term loans are typically collateralized by liens on real property. Both types of commercial real estate loans are underwritten to lending policies that include maximum loan-to-value ratios, minimum equity requirements, acceptable amortization periods and minimum debt service coverage requirements, based on property type. Income-producing commercial real estate loans also generally require substantial equity and are subject to exposure limits for a single project. All exceptions to established guidelines are subject to stringent internal review and require specific approval. As with commercial loans, the borrower’s financial strength and capacity to repay their obligations remain the primary focus of underwriting. Financial strength is evaluated based upon analytical tools that consider historical and projected cash flows and performance in addition to analysis of the proposed project for income-producing properties. Additional support offered by guarantors is also considered.

Risk for owner-occupied commercial real estate is driven by the creditworthiness of the underlying borrowers, particularly cash flow from the borrowers’ business operations as well as the risk of a shortfall in collateral. Risk for owner-occupied commercial real estate is driven by the creditworthiness of the underlying borrowers, particularly cash flow from the borrowers’ business operations as well as the risk of a shortfall in collateral. Credit performance of loans secured by commercial income-producing real estate can be negatively affected by national, regional and local economic conditions, which may result in deteriorating tenant credit profiles, tenant losses, reduced rental/lease rates and higher than anticipated vacancy rates, all contributing to declines in value or liquidity of the underlying real estate collateral. Other factors, such as increasing interest rates, may result in higher capitalization rates, thereby reducing a property’s value.

Commercial and Industrial LHFI – Commercial loans (other than commercial loans related to real estate assets, which are summarized above) are made to many types of businesses for various purposes, such as short-term working capital loans that are usually secured by accounts receivable and inventory, equipment and fixed asset purchases that are secured by those assets and term financing for those

within Trustmark’s defined trade area. Trustmark’s credit underwriting process for commercial loans includes analysis of historical and projected cash flows and performance, evaluation of financial strength of both borrowers and guarantors as reflected in current and detailed financial information and evaluation of underlying collateral to support the credit. Credit risk within the commercial loan portfolio is managed through adherence to specific commercial lending policies and internally established lending authorities, diversification within the portfolio and monitoring of the portfolio on a continuing basis.

Credit risk in commercial and industrial loans can arise due to fluctuations in borrowers’ financial condition, deterioration in collateral values and changes in market conditions. Credit risk in commercial and industrial loans can arise due to fluctuations in borrowers’ financial condition, deterioration in collateral values and changes in market conditions. The credit risk inherent in these loans depends on, to a significant degree, the general economic conditions of these areas. Further, credit risk can increase if Trustmark’s loans are concentrated to borrowers engaged in the same or similar activities, or to groups of borrowers who may be uniquely or disproportionately affected by market or economic conditions.

Consumer LHFI – Consumer credit includes loans to individuals for household and personal items, automobile purchases, unsecured loans, personal lines of credit and credit cards. All consumer loans are subject to a standardized underwriting process through Trustmark’s consumer loan center, with emphasis placed upon the borrower’s credit evaluation and historical performance, income evaluation and valuation of collateral (where applicable).

Similar to residential real estate loan portfolios, an inherent risk factor in consumer loans is that they are dependent on national, regional and local economic factors that affect employment in the markets where these loans are originated. Similar to residential real estate loan portfolios, an inherent risk factor in consumer loans is that they are dependent on national, regional and local economic factors that affect employment in the markets where these loans are originated. Generally, consumer loan portfolios consist of a large number of relatively small-balance loans, some of which are originated as unsecured credit (credit cards and some personal lines of credit), and as such, do not have collateral as a secondary source of repayment. Consumer loans generally pose heightened risks of collectability and loss when compared to other loan types.

Other Commercial LHFI – Other loans include loans to non-depository financial institutions, such as mortgage companies, finance companies and other financial intermediaries, loans to state and political subdivisions, and loans to non-profit and charitable organizations. These loans are underwritten based on the specific nature or purpose of the loan and underlying collateral with special consideration given to the specific source of repayment for the loan. Other commercial LHFI also include leases of machinery and equipment to commercial customers. These leases are underwritten based on the specific nature or purpose of the lease and underlying collateral with special consideration given to the specific source of repayment for the lease. These loans are underwritten based on the specific nature or purpose of the loan and underlying collateral with special consideration given to the specific source of repayment for the loan.

Similar to commercial and industrial loans, inherent risk in other commercial loans and leases can arise due to fluctuations in the borrower's or lessee's financial condition, deterioration in collateral values and changes in market and economic conditions. Similar to commercial and industrial loans, inherent risk in other loans can arise due to fluctuations in borrowers’ financial condition, deterioration in collateral values and changes in market and economic conditions. Loans to state and political subdivisions have the added inherent risk of being somewhat dependent on the ability and capacity of those entities to generate tax and other revenue to repay the loans. Loans to non-profit and charitable organizations are dependent on those organizations’ ability to generate revenue through their fundraising efforts and other forms of financial support, which can be susceptible to economic downturns.

Recent Economic and Industry Developments

Economic activity improved slightly during 2025, but was characterized by mixed signals, notably, strong equity market performance, continued consumer spending and FRB rate cuts, but also a softening labor market and persistent inflationary pressures, driven partly by new tariffs. United States stocks performed strongly during the second half of 2025, supported by optimistic sentiment around lower interest rates, better-than-expected corporate earnings and strong performance in the technology and artificial intelligence (AI) sectors. However, economic concerns remain as a result of the cumulative weight of uncertainty regarding the potential economic impact of geopolitical developments, such as conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, the current United States presidential administration's policies, inflationary and broader pricing pressures and other economic and industry volatility. Concerns surrounding the direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. Doubts surrounding the near-term direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. Doubts surrounding the near-term direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. While Trustmark's customer base is wholly domestic, international economic conditions affect domestic economic conditions, and thus may have an impact upon Trustmark's financial condition or results of operations.

For most of 2025, the FRB left the target federal funds rate unchanged at a range of 4.25% to 4.50% and maintained the rate it pays on reserves at 4.40%. However, beginning with the September 2025 meeting of the FRB's Federal Open Market Committee, the FRB noted increases in unemployment and inflation shifting the balance of risks to achieving its goals. As a result, the FRB decreased the target federal funds rate and the rate it pays on reserves multiple times during the fourth quarter of 2025, lowering the target federal funds rate to a range of 3.50% to 3.75% and the rate it pays on reserves to 3.65% as of December 2025. At the most recent meeting of the FRB's Federal Open Market Committee (in January 2026), the FRB determined to leave the target federal funds rate and the rate it pays on reserves unchanged. Prior period rate increases increased the competitive pressures on the deposit cost of funds. While rate cuts potentially reduced those competitive pressures, they increased pressure on Trustmark's net interest margin, a key component to its financial results. It is not possible to predict the direction, pace or magnitude of further changes, if any, in interest rates, or the impact any such rate changes will have on Trustmark's results of operations.

In the November 2025 and January 2026 “Summary of Commentary on Current Economic Conditions by Federal Reserve District,” the twelve Federal Reserve Districts’ reports suggested that during the reporting periods (covering the period from October 6, 2025 through November 17, 2025 and November 18, 2025 through January 5, 2026) economic activity increased at a slight to modest pace. Reports by the twelve Federal Reserve Districts (Districts) noted the following during the reporting periods:

Reports by the Federal Reserve’s Sixth District, Atlanta (which includes Trustmark’s Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi market regions), Eighth District, St. Reports by the Federal Reserve’s Sixth District, Atlanta (which includes Trustmark’s Alabama, Florida and Mississippi market regions), Eighth District, St. Louis (which includes Trustmark’s Tennessee market region), and Eleventh District, Dallas (which includes Trustmark’s Texas market region), noted similar findings for the reporting periods as those discussed above. The Federal Reserve’s Sixth District also noted modest loan growth, with the largest increases in the credit card segment, and declines in auto and other consumer loans reflecting consumer uncertainty. The Federal Reserve’s Sixth District reported that delinquencies continued to fall in aggregate, though several financial institutions reported a marginal uptick, and cash to total assets ratios increased moderately on balance, allowing for ample liquidity to meet customers' needs. The Federal Reserve’s Sixth District also noted lending increased during the reporting period, especially for multifamily and home equity loans; however, consumer lending contracted overall, alongside a rise in delinquencies in credit cards, auto loans and unsecured personal loans. The Federal Reserve’s Eighth District also reported banking activity increased modestly with overall loan activity much stronger than one year ago, particularly among real estate loans and home-equity lines of credit, and modest growth in commercial and industrial loans, while consumer lending was slightly lower than one year ago. The Federal Reserve’s Eighth District also noted that commercial and industrial loan growth decreased slightly despite an increase in overall loan volume, demand for loans continues to be lower than the prior year and an ongoing modest decline in real estate loan growth. The Federal Reserve’s Eighth District also noted that contacts reported meaningfully tighter lending standards on business loans and overall deposits ended the year modestly higher than one year ago. The Federal Reserve’s Eighth District also reported that loan growth slowed at a modest pace during the reporting period, but banking conditions and lending activity remained healthy. The Federal Reserve’s Eleventh District also reported loan volume and demand increased in December 2025 after decreasing in November 2025, driven by increases in commercial real estate loans, credit standards and terms tightened, though loan pricing continued to decline, loan performance deteriorated at a slower pace overall and bankers reported increasing general business activity. The Federal Reserve’s Eleventh District also reported loan volumes stabilized during the reporting period and the pace of credit tightening decelerated, loan demand continued to decline, though at a slower pace, loan nonperformance continued to rise, still largely driven by consumer loans, and loan pricing continued to increase but at a slower rate. The Federal Reserve’s Eleventh District noted that outlooks leaned optimistic, with contacts expecting growth in loan demand and business activity in the next six months but a slight deterioration in loan performance. Trustmark continues to invest in technology to facilitate the ability of its customers to engage in financial transactions, and otherwise enhance the customer experience with respect to its products and services.

Trustmark is intently monitoring the impact of tariffs and other administrative policies on its customer base, interest rates and credit-related issues. Economic uncertainty or disruptions in the marketplace as a result of such policies could reduce loan demand or increase

loan nonperformance. It is not possible to predict the timing or magnitude of changes to policies by the current United States presidential administration, if any, or the impact any such policy changes could have on Trustmark's customer base, credit quality or results of operations. It is not possible to predict how climate change may impact Trustmark’s financial condition and operations; however, Trustmark operates in areas where its business and the activities of its customers could be impacted by the effects of climate change. It is not possible to predict how climate change may impact Trustmark’s financial condition and operations; however, Trustmark operates in areas where its business and the activities of its customers could be impacted by the effects of climate change.

For additional discussion of the impact of the current economic environment on the financial condition and results of operations of Trustmark and its subsidiaries, see Part II. Item 7. – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of this report.

Competition

There is significant competition within the banking and financial services industry in the markets in which Trustmark operates. Changes in regulation, technology and product delivery systems have resulted in an increasingly competitive environment. Trustmark expects to continue to face increasing competition from online and traditional financial institutions seeking to attract customers by providing access to similar services and products.

Trustmark and its subsidiaries compete with national and state-chartered banking institutions of comparable or larger size and resources and with smaller community banking organizations. Trustmark and its subsidiaries compete with national and state-chartered banking institutions of comparable or larger size and resources and with smaller community banking organizations. Trustmark has numerous local, regional and national nonbank competitors, including savings and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, finance companies, financial service operations of major retailers, investment brokerage and financial advisory firms and mutual fund companies. Trustmark has numerous local, regional and national nonbank competitors, including savings and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, insurance companies, finance companies, financial service operations of major retailers, investment brokerage and financial advisory firms and mutual fund companies. Because nonbank financial institutions are not subject to the same regulatory restrictions as banks and bank holding companies, they can often operate with greater flexibility and lower cost structures. Currently, Trustmark does not face meaningful competition from international banks in its markets, although that could change in the future.

At June 30, 2025, Trustmark’s deposit market share ranked within the top three positions in 52.0% of the 56 counties served and within the top five positions in 68.0% of the counties served. At June 30, 2023, Trustmark’s deposit market share ranked within the top three positions in 56.0% of the 55 counties served and within the top five positions in 69.0% of the counties served. The following table presents Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) deposit data regarding TB’s deposit market share by state as of June 30, 2025. The FDIC deposit market share data presented below does not align with Trustmark’s reported geographic market regions, which in some instances cross state lines, and Trustmark’s geographic coverage within certain states presented below is not statewide (see the section captioned “Description of Business” above).

Services provided by the Wealth Management Segment face competition from many national, regional and local financial institutions. Companies that offer broad services similar to those provided by Trustmark, such as other banks, trust companies and full-service brokerage firms, as well as companies that specialize in particular services offered by Trustmark, such as investment advisors and mutual fund providers, all compete with Trustmark’s Wealth Management Segment.

Trustmark’s ability to compete effectively is a result of providing customers with desired products and services in a convenient and cost-effective manner. Trustmark’s ability to compete effectively is a result of providing customers with desired products and services in a convenient and cost-effective manner. Customers for commercial, consumer and mortgage banking as well as wealth management services are influenced by convenience, quality of service, personal contacts, availability of products and services and competitive pricing. Customers for commercial, consumer and mortgage banking as well as wealth management and insurance services are influenced by convenience, quality of service, personal contacts, availability of products and services and competitive pricing. Trustmark continually reviews its products, locations, alternative delivery channels, and pricing strategies to maintain and enhance its competitive position. While Trustmark’s position varies by market, Management believes it can compete effectively as a result of the quality of Trustmark’s products and services, local market knowledge and awareness of customer needs.

Supervision and Regulation

The following discussion sets forth material elements of the regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies and their subsidiaries and provides specific information relevant to Trustmark. The discussion is a summary of detailed statutes, regulations and policies. The descriptions are not intended to be complete summaries of the statutes, regulations and policies referenced therein. Such statutes, regulations and policies are continually under the review of the United States Congress and state legislatures as well as federal and state regulatory agencies. A change in statutes, regulations or policies could have a material impact on the business of Trustmark and its subsidiaries.

Regulation of Trustmark

Trustmark is a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHC Act). Trustmark and its nonbank subsidiaries are therefore subject to the supervision, examination, enforcement and reporting requirements of the BHC Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act), the regulations of the FRB and certain of the requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), as amended by the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA).

Federal Oversight Over Mergers and Acquisitions, Investments and Branching

The BHC Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the prior approval of the FRB before: (i) it may acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank if, after such acquisition, the bank holding company will directly or indirectly own or control 5.0% or more of the voting shares of the bank; (ii) it or any of its subsidiaries, other than a bank, may acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any bank; or (iii) it may merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. The BHC Act further requires the FRB to consider the competitive impact of the transaction, the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding companies and banks concerned and the convenience and needs of the community to be served, including the applicant’s record of performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The FRB is also required to take into account in evaluating such a transaction the effectiveness of the parties in combating money laundering activities. Provisions of the FDI Act known as the Bank Merger Act impose similar approval standards for an insured depository institution to merge with another insured depository institution.

In September 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) withdrew from its 1995 Bank Merger Guidelines and announced that it will instead evaluate the competitive impact of bank mergers using its 2023 Merger Guidelines that apply across all industries. Compared to the 1995 Bank Merger Guidelines, the 2023 Merger Guidelines set forth more stringent concentration limits and add several largely qualitative bases on which the DOJ may challenge a merger. This change in the DOJ’s bank merger antitrust policy creates uncertainty regarding the types of transactions that the DOJ may challenge as anticompetitive.

The BHC Act, as amended by the interstate banking provisions of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (Riegle-Neal Act), permits a bank holding company, such as Trustmark, to acquire a bank located in any other state, regardless of state law to the contrary, subject to certain deposit-percentage, aging requirements, and other restrictions, if the company is well-capitalized. The Riegle-Neal Act also generally permits national and state-chartered banks to branch interstate through acquisitions of banks in other states, if the resulting institution would be well-capitalized and well-managed.

In addition, the FRB has the authority to approve applications by state member banks to establish de novo branches, including, under the Riegle-Neal Act, in states other than the bank’s home state if the law of the state in which the branch is located, or is to be located, would permit establishment of the branch if the bank were a state bank chartered by such state.

The BHC Act also generally requires FRB approval for a bank holding company’s acquisition of a company that is not an insured depository institution. The BHC Act also generally requires FRB approval for a bank holding company’s acquisition of a company that is not an insured depository institution. Bank holding companies generally may engage, directly or indirectly, only in banking and such other activities as are determined by the FRB to be closely related to banking. Additionally, a provision of the BHC Act known as the Volcker Rule places limits on the ability of Trustmark and TB to acquire or retain ownership interests in, or act as sponsor to, certain investment funds, including hedge funds and private equity funds, or to engage in proprietary trading (i.e., engaging as principal in any purchase or sale of one or more financial instruments for a trading account).

Certain acquisitions of Trustmark’s voting stock may be subject to regulatory approval or notice under federal law. Certain acquisitions of Trustmark’s voting stock may be subject to regulatory approval or notice under federal law. Under the Change in Bank Control Act and BHC Act, a person or company that directly or indirectly acquires control of a bank holding company or bank must obtain the non-objection or approval of the institution’s appropriate federal banking agency in advance of the acquisition. For a publicly-traded bank holding company such as Trustmark, control for purposes of the Change in Bank Control Act is presumed to exist if the acquirer will have 10% or more of any class of the company’s voting securities.

Source of Strength

Under the FDI Act, Trustmark is expected to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to TB. Under this policy, a bank holding company is expected to commit resources to support its bank subsidiary, including at times when the holding company may not be inclined or in a financial position to provide it.

Capital Adequacy

Bank holding companies and banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal bank regulatory agencies. Capital adequacy regulations involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting and other factors. The FRB has established substantially similar minimum risk-based capital ratio and leverage ratio requirements for bank holding companies and banks.

Under capital requirements applicable to Trustmark and TB, Trustmark and TB are required to meet a common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 7.0% (a minimum of 4.5% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8.5% (a minimum of 6.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10.5% (a minimum of 8.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), and a leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total consolidated assets of at least 4.0%.

For purposes of calculating the denominator of the risk-based capital ratios, a banking institution’s assets and some of its specified off-balance sheet commitments and obligations are assigned to various risk categories. For purposes of calculating the denominator of the risk-based capital ratios, a banking institution’s assets and some of its specified off-balance sheet commitments and obligations are assigned to various risk categories. For purposes of calculating the numerator of the capital ratios, capital, at both the holding company and bank level, is classified in one of three tiers depending on the “quality” and loss-absorbing features of the capital instrument. Common equity Tier 1 capital is predominantly comprised of common stock instruments (including related surplus) and retained earnings, net of treasury stock, and after making necessary capital deductions and adjustments. Tier 1 capital is comprised of common equity Tier 1 capital and additional Tier 1 capital, which includes non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock and similar instruments meeting specified eligibility criteria (including related surplus). Newly issued trust preferred securities and cumulative perpetual preferred stock may not be included in Tier 1 capital. Smaller depository institution holding companies (those with assets of less than $15 billion as of year-end 2009, including Trustmark) and most mutual holding companies are generally allowed to continue to count as Tier 1 capital most outstanding trust preferred securities and other non-qualifying securities that were issued prior to May 19, 2010 (up to a limit of 25% of Tier 1 capital, excluding non-qualifying capital instruments) rather than phasing such securities out of regulatory capital. However, a smaller depository institution holding company that has $15 billion or more in assets following an acquisition of another depository institution holding company generally is no longer allowed to count outstanding non-qualifying capital instruments toward its Tier 1 capital. Trustmark currently has outstanding trust preferred securities that are permitted to continue to count as Tier 1 capital up to the regulatory limit. Total capital is comprised of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital, which includes certain subordinated debt with a minimum original maturity of five years (including related surplus) and a limited amount of allowance for loan losses. Newly issued trust preferred securities and cumulative perpetual preferred stock generally may be included in Tier 2 capital, provided they do not include features that are disallowed by the capital rules, such as the acceleration of principal other than in the event of a bankruptcy, insolvency, or receivership of the issuer. Newly issued trust preferred securities and cumulative perpetual preferred stock generally 10 may be included in Tier 2 capital, provided they do not include features that are disallowed by the capital rules, such as the acceleration of principal other than in the event of a bankruptcy, insolvency, or receivership of the issuer.

Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could subject a bank to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC and certain other restrictions on its business. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could subject a bank to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC and certain other restrictions on its business. An institution’s failure to exceed the capital conservation buffer with common equity Tier 1 capital would result in limitations on an institution’s ability to make capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments.

In addition, the FDI Act’s “prompt corrective action” framework identifies five capital categories for insured depository institutions: well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. In addition, the FDI Act’s “prompt corrective action” framework identifies five capital categories for insured depository institutions: well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. For an insured depository institution to be “well-capitalized,” it must have a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 6.5%, a Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 8.0%, a total capital ratio of at least 10.0% and a leverage ratio of at least 5.0%, and must not be subject to any written agreement, order or capital directive or prompt corrective action directive issued by its primary federal regulator to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure. An insured depository institution is subject to differential regulation corresponding to the capital category within which the institution falls. For example, an insured depository institution is generally prohibited from making capital distributions, including paying dividends, or paying management fees to a holding company, if the institution would thereafter be undercapitalized.

At December 31, 2025, Trustmark exceeded its minimum capital requirements with common equity Tier 1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital equal to 11.72%, 12.11% and 14.41% of its total risk-weighted assets, respectively. At December 31, 2023, Trustmark exceeded its minimum capital requirements with common equity Tier 1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital equal to 10.04%, 10.44% and 12.29% of its total risk-weighted assets, respectively. At December 31, 2025, TB also exceeded these requirements with common equity Tier 1 capital, Tier 1 capital and total capital equal to 12.33%, 12.33% and 13.52% of its total risk-weighted assets, respectively. At December 31, 2025, the leverage ratios for Trustmark and TB were 10.18% and 10.37%, respectively. At December 31, 2025, TB was well-capitalized based on the ratios and guidelines described above.

In December 2018, the federal banking agencies issued a final rule that allowed institutions to elect to phase in the regulatory capital effects of the Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL) accounting standard over three years. In December 2018, the federal banking agencies issued a final rule that allows institutions to elect to phase in the regulatory capital effects of the Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL) accounting standard over three years. In addition, as a result of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act) enacted on March 27, 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued rules that allowed banking organizations that implemented CECL in 2020 to elect to mitigate

the effects of the CECL accounting standard on their regulatory capital for two years. This two-year delay was in addition to the three-year transition period that the agencies had already made available. Trustmark elected to defer the regulatory capital effects of CECL in accordance with these rules, which largely delayed the effects of the adoption of CECL on its regulatory capital through December 31, 2021. The effects were phased-in over a three-year period from January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024.

Payment of Dividends and Stock Repurchases

Trustmark is limited in its ability to pay dividends or repurchase its stock by the FRB, including if doing so would be an unsafe or unsound banking practice. In addition, the FRB has adopted the policy that a bank holding company should pay cash dividends only to the extent that the company’s net income for the past year is sufficient to cover the cash dividends, and that the company’s rate of earning retention is consistent with the company’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. In addition, a bank holding company is required to consult with or notify the FRB prior to purchasing or redeeming its outstanding equity securities in certain circumstances, including if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when aggregated with the net consideration paid by the company for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding twelve months, is equal to 10% or more of the company’s consolidated net worth. A bank holding company that is well-capitalized, well-managed and not the subject of any unresolved supervisory issues is exempt from this notice requirement.

Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Initiatives and Sanctions Compliance

Trustmark and TB are subject to extensive laws and regulations aimed at combating money laundering and terrorist financing, including the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (USA Patriot Act) and the Bank Secrecy Act. Regulations implementing these statutes impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing and to verify the identity of their customers and of beneficial owners of their legal entity customers. Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and financial consequences for the institution. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury, in addition to federal bank regulatory agencies, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of these requirements, and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with state and federal banking regulators, the DOJ, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. Violations of AML requirements can also lead to criminal penalties. In addition, the federal banking agencies are required to consider the effectiveness of a financial institution’s AML activities when reviewing proposed bank mergers and bank holding company acquisitions.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is responsible for helping to ensure that U.S. entities do not engage in transactions with certain prohibited parties, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions programs, including publishing lists of persons, organizations, and countries suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. OFAC regulations generally require either the blocking of accounts or other property of specified entities or individuals, but they may also require the rejection of certain transactions involving specified entities or individuals. Trustmark maintains policies, procedures and other internal controls designed to comply with these sanctions programs.

Other Federal Regulation of Trustmark

In addition to being regulated as a bank holding company, Trustmark is subject to regulation by the State of Mississippi under its general business corporation laws. Trustmark is also subject to the disclosure and other regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as administered by the SEC.

Regulation of TB

TB is a Mississippi state-chartered bank and a member of the Federal Reserve System and its deposits are insured by the FDIC. As such, TB is subject to extensive regulation by the FRB, the MDBCF and, to a lesser extent, by the FDIC. In addition, as a large provider of consumer financial services, TB is subject to regulation, supervision, enforcement and examination by the CFPB. Almost every area of the operations and financial condition of TB is subject to extensive regulation and supervision and to various requirements and restrictions under federal and state law including loans, reserves, investments, issuance of securities, establishment of branches, capital adequacy, liquidity, earnings, dividends, management practices and the provision of services. TB is subject to supervision, examination, enforcement and reporting requirements under the Federal Reserve Act, the FDI Act, regulations of the FRB and certain of the requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act. TNB is subject to supervision, examination, enforcement and reporting requirements under the National Bank Act, the Federal Reserve Act, the FDI Act, regulations of the OCC and certain of the requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act. Trustmark and TB are also subject to a wide range of consumer protection laws and regulations.

Restrictions on Lending, Insider Transactions and Affiliate Transactions

TB is limited by state and/or federal law in the amounts it may lend to one borrower, to insiders and to affiliates. In addition, the FDI Act imposes restrictions on TB's purchases of assets from insiders. In addition, the FDI Act imposes restrictions on insured depository institutions’ purchases of assets from insiders.

Mississippi law generally limits a Mississippi state-chartered bank’s total extensions of credit to any one person or company to 20% of the bank’s aggregate unimpaired capital and surplus, and limits total extensions of credit to a single director or executive officer to 15% of unimpaired capital and surplus, or 20% when secured. Section 22 of the Federal Reserve Act, as implemented by the FRB’s Regulation O, similarly limits extensions of credit by a bank to its executive officers, directors, principal shareholders and their related interests, and to similar individuals at the holding company or affiliates. Under section 22 of the Federal Reserve Act, as implemented by the FRB’s Regulation O, restrictions also apply to extensions of credit by a bank to its executive officers, directors, principal shareholders and their related interests, and to similar individuals at the holding company or affiliates. In general, such extensions of credit (i) may not exceed certain dollar limitations, (ii) must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with third parties and (iii) must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.

Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act establish parameters for an insured bank to conduct “covered transactions” with its affiliates, generally (i) limiting the extent to which the bank or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10% of the bank’s capital stock and surplus, and limiting the aggregate of all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20% of the bank’s capital stock and surplus, and (ii) requiring that all such transactions be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable, to the bank or subsidiary as those that would be provided to a non-affiliate. Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act establish parameters for an insured bank to conduct “covered transactions” with its affiliates, generally (i) limiting the extent to which the bank or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10% of the bank’s capital stock and surplus, and limiting the aggregate of all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20% of the bank’s capital stock and surplus, and (ii) requiring that all such transactions be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable, to the bank or subsidiary as those that would be provided to a non-affiliate. In addition, an insured bank’s loans to affiliates must be fully collateralized. The term “covered transaction” includes the making of loans to the affiliate, purchase of assets from the affiliate, issuance of a guarantee on behalf of the affiliate and several other types of transactions.

Payment of Dividends

The principal source of Trustmark’s cash revenue is dividends from TB. As a Mississippi state-chartered banking corporation, TB must obtain the approval of the MDBCF prior to declaring or paying a dividend on its common stock.

Community Reinvestment Act

The CRA requires an insured depository institution’s appropriate federal banking regulator to evaluate the institution's record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, and to consider this record in its evaluation of certain applications to banking regulators, such as an application for approval of a merger or the establishment of a branch. A rating of less than “Satisfactory” may provide a basis for denial of such an application. TB received a rating of “Outstanding” in its most recent CRA performance evaluation, which covered activities in the period from January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2023.

On October 24, 2023, the federal banking agencies released a final rule revising their framework for evaluating banks’ records of community reinvestment under the CRA. On July 16, 2025, the agencies issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to rescind the October 2023 final rule and restore the CRA framework that existed prior to the October 2023 final rule. TB's most recent performance evaluation was conducted using the CRA framework that existed prior to the October 2023 final rule.

Consumer Protection Laws

TB is subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect customers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. These consumer protection laws apply to a broad range of TB’s activities and to various aspects of its business, and include laws relating to interest rates, fair lending, disclosures of credit terms and estimated transaction costs to consumer borrowers, debt collection practices, the use of and the provision of information to consumer reporting agencies and the prohibition of unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices in connection with the offer, sale or provision of consumer financial products and services. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and their state law counterparts. At the federal level, most consumer financial protection laws are administered by the CFPB, which supervises TB. The CFPB also has authority to issue regulations and has proposed several rules that would restrict various fees that financial institutions can charge consumers, including credit card late fees, overdraft fees and certain insufficient funds (NSF) fees.

Violations of applicable consumer protection laws can result in significant potential liability, including actual damages, restitution and injunctive relief, from litigation brought by customers, state attorneys general and other plaintiffs, as well as enforcement actions by banking regulators and reputational harm. Violations of applicable consumer protection laws can result in significant potential liability, including actual damages, restitution and injunctive relief, from litigation brought by customers, state attorneys general and other plaintiffs, as well as enforcement actions by banking regulators and reputational harm.

Many states and local jurisdictions have consumer protection laws analogous, and in addition to, those listed above. Many states and local jurisdictions have consumer protection laws analogous, and in addition to, those listed above. While TB’s activities are governed primarily by federal law, states may adopt their own consumer protection laws that exceed the requirements of

federal law. In addition, under the Dodd-Frank Act, state attorneys general are authorized to bring civil actions to enforce regulations prescribed by the CFPB or to secure other remedies. In addition, under the Dodd-Frank Act, state attorneys general are authorized to bring civil actions against federally-chartered institutions, like TNB, to enforce regulations prescribed by the CFPB or to secure other remedies.

Financial Privacy Laws and Cybersecurity

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (GLB Act) imposed requirements related to the privacy of customer financial information. In accordance with the GLB Act, federal bank regulators adopted rules that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. The GLB Act also requires disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allows consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to a nonaffiliated third party. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial companies and conveyed to outside vendors. Trustmark recognizes the need to comply with legal and regulatory requirements that affect its customers’ privacy.

In addition, the federal banking agencies pay close attention to the cybersecurity practices of banks, and the agencies include review of an institution’s information technology and its ability to thwart cyberattacks in their examinations. In addition, the federal banking agencies pay close attention to the cybersecurity practices of banks, and the agencies include review of an institution’s information technology and its ability to thwart cyberattacks in their examinations. An institution’s failure to have adequate cybersecurity safeguards in place can result in supervisory criticism, monetary penalties and/or reputational harm. Additionally, banking organizations are required to notify their primary federal regulator of significant computer security incidents within 36 hours of determining that such an incident has occurred.

On October 22, 2024, the CFPB released a final rule to implement Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the final rule, a financial institution would be required, upon request, to make available to a consumer or third party authorized by the consumer certain information the institution has concerning a consumer financial product or service covered by the rule, such as a credit card or a deposit account. Industry organizations challenged the final rule in court. On July 29, 2025, the district court granted a motion by the CFPB to stay the proceedings while the CFPB conducts a rulemaking to revise the final rule substantially. On August 22, 2025, the CFPB issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to solicit comments and data on several issues as part of a reconsideration of the final rule. On October 29, 2025, the district court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the CFPB from enforcing the final rule until the CFPB has completed its reconsideration of the rule. Management is monitoring the status of the litigation and evaluating the impact of this rule.

Debit Interchange Regulation

The FRB has issued rules under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA), as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, to limit interchange fees that an issuer with $10.0 billion or more in assets, such as TB, may receive or charge for an electronic debit card transaction. Under the FRB’s rules, the maximum permissible interchange fee that an issuer may receive for an electronic debit transaction is the sum of 21 cents per transaction and five basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction. In addition, the FRB’s rules allow for an upward adjustment of no more than one cent to an issuer’s debit card interchange fee if the issuer develops and implements policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve the fraud-prevention standards set out in the rule.

In October 2023, the FRB proposed changes to its EFTA rules that would decrease the maximum interchange fees that an issuer may receive for an electronic debit transaction to the sum of 14.4 cents and four basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction and increase the fraud prevention adjustment to 1.3 cents. In October 2023, the FRB proposed changes to its EFTA rules that would decrease the maximum interchange fees that an issuer may receive for an electronic debit transaction to the sum of 14.4 cents and four basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction and increase the fraud prevention adjustment to 1.3 cents. If finalized as proposed, the proposal could reduce interchange revenue for banks with $10 billion or more in assets, such as TB.

The FRB also has established rules governing routing and exclusivity that require debt card issuers to offer two unaffiliated networks for routing transactions on each debit or prepaid product. The FRB also has established rules governing routing and exclusivity that require debt card issuers to offer two unaffiliated networks for routing transactions on each debit or prepaid product.

FDIC Deposit Insurance Assessments

The deposits of TB are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF), as administered by the FDIC, and, accordingly, are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the DIF at minimum levels required by statute.

The FDIC uses a risk-based assessment system that imposes insurance premiums as determined by multiplying an insured bank’s assessment base by its assessment rate. The FDIC uses a risk-based assessment system that imposes insurance premiums as determined by multiplying an insured bank’s assessment base by its assessment rate. A bank’s deposit insurance assessment base is generally equal to the bank’s total assets minus its average tangible equity during the assessment period.

The FDIC determines a bank’s assessment rate within a range of base assessment rates using a risk scorecard that takes into account the bank’s financial ratios and supervisory rating (the CAMELS composite rating), among other factors. The FDIC determines a bank’s assessment rate within a range of base assessment rates using a risk scorecard that takes into account the bank’s financial ratios and supervisory rating (the CAMELS composite rating), among other factors. The CAMELS rating system is a supervisory rating system developed to classify a bank’s overall condition by taking into account capital adequacy, assets, management capability, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to market and interest rate risk. The methodology that the FDIC uses to calculate

assessment amounts is also based on the FDIC’s designated reserve ratio, which is currently 2.0%. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the amount of total estimated insured deposits grew rapidly while the funds in the DIF grew at a normal rate, causing the DIF reserve ratio to fall below the statutory minimum of 1.35%. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the amount of total estimated insured deposits has grown rapidly while the funds in the DIF have grown at a normal rate, causing the DIF reserve ratio to fall below the statutory minimum of 1.35%. The FDIC adopted a restoration plan in September 2020, which it amended in June 2022, to restore the DIF reserve ratio to at least 1.35% by September 30, 2028. On October 18, 2022, the FDIC adopted a final rule to increase initial base deposit insurance assessment rates for insured depository institutions by 2 basis points, which began with the first quarterly assessment period of 2023 and will remain in effect unless and until the DIF reserve ratio meets or exceeds 2.00%.

In November 2023, the FDIC adopted a final rule to implement a special deposit insurance assessment for eight quarters starting with the first quarter of 2024, to recover losses to the DIF arising from the bank failures of Spring 2023. In December 2025, the FDIC updated its estimate of the DIF’s losses and reduced the final assessment rate for the eighth collection quarter. The special assessment was not material to Trustmark's financial condition or results of operations. The special assessment is not expected to be material to Trustmark's financial condition or results of operations.

The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution, including the TB, if the FDIC determines after a hearing that the institution has engaged or is engaging in unsafe or unsound banking practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, order or any condition imposed by an agreement with the FDIC. The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution, including the TNB, if the FDIC determines after a hearing that the institution has engaged or is engaging in unsafe or unsound banking practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, order or any condition imposed by an agreement with the FDIC. The FDIC also may suspend deposit insurance temporarily during the hearing process for the permanent termination of insurance if the institution has no tangible capital.

In 2025, TB’s expenses related to deposit insurance premiums totaled $15.7 million.

TB Subsidiaries

TB’s nonbanking subsidiaries are subject to a variety of state and federal laws and regulations. SCC is subject to the supervision and regulation of the CDFI Fund and the State of Mississippi.

Available Information

Trustmark’s internet address is www.trustmark.com. Information contained on this website is not a part of this report. Trustmark makes available through this address, free of charge, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed, or furnished to, the SEC.

Employees

At December 31, 2025, Trustmark employed 2,543 full-time equivalent associates, none of which are represented by a collective bargaining agreement. Trustmark believes its employee relations to be satisfactory.

Information about Executive Officers of Trustmark

As of the filing date, the executive officers of Trustmark and its primary bank subsidiary, TB, including their ages, positions and principal occupations for the last five years are as follows:

Duane A. Dewey, 67

Trustmark Corporation

President and Chief Executive Officer since January 2021

Trustmark Bank

Chief Executive Officer since January 2021

President since January 2020

George T. Chambers, Jr., 66

Trustmark Corporation

Principal Accounting Officer since March 2021

Trustmark Bank

Executive Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer since March 2021

Senior Vice President and Controller from March 2009 to February 2021

Monica A. Day, 65

Trustmark Bank

President – Institutional Banking since April 2019

Robert Barry Harvey, 66

Trustmark Bank

Chief Credit and Operations Officer since June 2021

Chief Credit Officer from March 2010 to May 2021

Executive Vice President since March 2010

Thomas C. Owens, 61

Trustmark Corporation

Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer since March 2021

Trustmark Bank

Chief Financial Officer since March 2021

Bank Treasurer from September 2013 to February 2021

Executive Vice President since 2013

W. Arthur Stevens, 61

Trustmark Bank

President – Retail Banking since September 2011

Maria Luisa "Ria" Sugay, 44

Trustmark Bank

Bank Treasurer since March 2021

Bank Co-Treasurer from July 2020 to February 2021

Executive Vice President since July 2020

Granville Tate, Jr., 69

Trustmark Corporation

Secretary since December 2015

Trustmark Bank

Chief Administrative Officer since January 2021

Chief Risk Officer from June 2016 to November 2021

General Counsel from December 2015 to November 2021

Executive Vice President and Secretary since December 2015

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Trustmark and its subsidiaries could be adversely impacted by various risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. As a financial institution, Trustmark has significant exposure to market risks, including interest rate risk, liquidity risk and credit risk. This section includes a description of the risks, uncertainties and assumptions identified by Management that could, individually or in combination, materially affect Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations, as well as the value of Trustmark’s financial instruments in general, and Trustmark common stock, in particular. This 16 section includes a description of the risks, uncertainties and assumptions identified by Management that could, individually or in combination, materially affect Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations, as well as the value of Trustmark’s financial instruments in general, and Trustmark common stock, in particular. Additional risks and uncertainties that Management currently deems immaterial or is unaware of may also impair Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations. This report is qualified in its entirety by the risk factors that are identified below.

Risks Related to Trustmark’s Business

Interest Rate Risks

Trustmark’s largest source of revenue (net interest income) is subject to interest rate risk.

Trustmark’s profitability depends to a large extent on net interest income, which is the difference between income on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and expense on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Trustmark’s profitability depends to a large extent on net interest income, which is the difference between income on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and expense on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Trustmark is exposed to interest rate risk in its core banking activities of lending and deposit taking, since assets and liabilities reprice at different times and by different amounts as interest rates change. Trustmark is unable to predict changes in market interest rates, which are affected by many factors beyond Trustmark’s control, including inflation, recession, unemployment, money supply, domestic and international events and changes in the United States and other financial markets. For most of 2025, the FRB left the target federal funds rate unchanged at a range of 4.25% to 4.50% and maintained the rate it pays on reserves at 4.40%. However, beginning with the

September 2025 meeting of the FRB's Federal Open Market Committee, the FRB noted increases in unemployment and inflation shifting the balance of risks to achieving its goals. As a result, the FRB decreased the target federal funds rate and the rate it pays on reserves multiple times during the fourth quarter of 2025, lowering the target federal funds rate to a range of 3.50% to 3.75% and the rate it pays on reserves to 3.65% as of December 2025. Prior period rate increases increased the competitive pressures on the deposit cost of funds. While rate cuts potentially reduced those competitive pressures, they increased pressure on Trustmark's net interest margin, a key component to its financial results. It is not possible to predict the direction, pace or magnitude of further changes, if any, in interest rates, or the impact any such rate changes will have on Trustmark's results of operations.

Financial simulation models are the primary tools used by Trustmark to measure interest rate exposure. Financial simulation models are the primary tools used by Trustmark to measure interest rate exposure. Using a wide range of scenarios, Management is provided with extensive information on the potential impact to net interest income caused by changes in interest rates. Models are structured to simulate cash flows and accrual characteristics of Trustmark’s balance sheet. Assumptions are made about the direction and volatility of interest rates, the slope of the yield curve and the changing composition of Trustmark’s balance sheet, resulting from both strategic plans and customer behavior. In addition, the model incorporates Management’s assumptions and expectations regarding such factors as loan and deposit growth, pricing, prepayment speeds and spreads between interest rates. Trustmark’s simulation model using static balances at December 31, 2025 estimated that in the event of a hypothetical 200 basis point increase in interest rates, net interest income may increase 3.1%, while a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in interest rates may increase net interest income 1.5%. Trustmark’s simulation model using static balances at December 31, 2023, estimated that in the event of a hypothetical 200 basis point increase in interest rates, net interest income may increase 0.5%, while a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in interest rates, may increase net interest income 0.3%. In the event of a hypothetical 100 basis point decrease in interest rates using static balances at December 31, 2025, it is estimated net interest income may decrease 2.1%, while a hypothetical 200 basis point decrease in interest rates may decrease net interest income 4.8%. In the event of a hypothetical 100 basis point decrease in interest rates using static balances at December 31, 2023, it is estimated net interest income may decrease by 0.4%, while a hypothetical 200 basis point decrease in interest rates, may decrease net interest income 1.0%.

Net interest income is Trustmark’s largest revenue source, and it is important to discuss how Trustmark’s interest rate risk may be influenced by the various factors shown below:

Financial instruments do not respond in a parallel fashion to rising or falling interest rates. Financial instruments do not respond in a parallel fashion to rising or falling interest rates. This causes asymmetry in the magnitude of changes in net interest income, net economic value and investment income resulting from the hypothetical increases and decreases in interest rates. Therefore, Management monitors interest rate risk and adjusts Trustmark’s investment, funding and hedging strategies to mitigate adverse effects of interest rate shifts on Trustmark’s balance sheet.

Trustmark utilizes derivative contracts to hedge the mortgage servicing rights (MSR) in order to offset changes in fair value resulting from changes in interest rate environments. 17 Trustmark utilizes derivative contracts to hedge the mortgage servicing rights (MSR) in order to offset changes in fair value resulting from changes in interest rate environments. In spite of Trustmark’s due diligence in regard to these hedging strategies, significant risks are involved that, if realized, may prove such strategies to be ineffective, which could adversely affect Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations. Risks associated with these strategies include the risk that counterparties in any such derivative and other hedging transactions may not perform; the risk that these hedging strategies rely on Management’s assumptions and projections regarding these assets and general market factors, including prepayment risk, basis risk, market volatility and changes in the shape of the yield curve, and that these assumptions and projections may prove to be incorrect; the risk that these hedging strategies do not adequately mitigate the impact of changes in interest rates, prepayment speeds or other forecasted inputs to the hedging model; and the risk that the models used to forecast the effectiveness of hedging instruments may project expectations that differ from actual results. In addition, increased regulation of the derivative markets may increase the cost to Trustmark to implement and maintain an effective hedging strategy.

Trustmark closely monitors the sensitivity of net interest income and investment income to changes in interest rates and attempts to limit the variability of net interest income as interest rates change. Trustmark closely monitors the sensitivity of net interest income and investment income to changes in interest rates and attempts to limit the variability of net interest income as interest rates change. Trustmark makes use of both on- and off-balance sheet financial instruments to mitigate exposure to interest rate risk.

Credit and Lending Risks

Trustmark is subject to lending risk, which could impact the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses and results of operations.

There are inherent risks associated with Trustmark’s lending activities. There are inherent risks associated with Trustmark’s lending activities. If trends in the housing and real estate markets were to decline appreciably, Trustmark may experience higher than normal delinquencies and credit losses. If trends in the housing and real estate markets were to revert to or decline below recession levels, Trustmark may experience higher than normal delinquencies and credit losses. Moreover, if the United States economy were to enter into a recession, Management expects that this scenario could severely affect economic conditions in Trustmark’s market areas and that Trustmark could experience significantly higher delinquencies and credit losses. Moreover, if the United States economy returns to a recessionary state, Management expects that it could severely affect economic conditions in Trustmark’s market areas and that Trustmark could experience significantly higher delinquencies and credit losses.

In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review Trustmark’s allowance for credit losses and may require an increase in the provision for credit losses or the recognition of further charge-offs, based on judgments different from those of Management. In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review Trustmark’s allowance for credit losses and may require an increase in the provision for credit losses or the recognition of further charge-offs, based on judgments different from those of Management. As a result, Trustmark may elect, or be required, to make further increases in its provision for credit losses in the future, particularly if economic conditions deteriorate.

Trustmark may also rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties in deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions. Additionally, Trustmark may rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties in deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions. This information could include financial statements, credit reports, business plans, and other information. Trustmark may also rely on representations of those customers, counterparties or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports or other information could have a material adverse impact on Trustmark’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Trustmark is subject to environmental liability risk associated with lending activities. Trustmark is subject to environmental liability risk associated with lending activities.

A significant portion of Trustmark’s loan portfolio is secured by real property. A significant portion of Trustmark’s loan portfolio is secured by real property. During the ordinary course of business, Trustmark forecloses on and takes title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, Trustmark may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage, civil fines and criminal penalties regardless of when the hazardous conditions or toxic substances first affected any particular property. Environmental laws may require Trustmark to incur substantial expenses and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit Trustmark’s ability to use or ability to sell the affected property or to repay the indebtedness secured by the property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations or enforcement policies with respect to existing laws may increase Trustmark’s exposure to environmental liability. Environmental reviews of nonresidential real estate before initiating foreclosure actions may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Declines in asset values may result in credit losses and adversely affect the value of Trustmark’s investments. Declines in asset values may result in credit losses and adversely affect the value of Trustmark’s investments.

Trustmark maintains an investment portfolio that includes, among other asset classes, obligations of states and municipalities, agency debt securities and agency mortgage-related securities. Trustmark maintains an investment portfolio that includes, among other asset classes, obligations of states and municipalities, agency debt securities and agency mortgage-related securities. The market value of investments in Trustmark’s investment portfolio may be affected by factors other than interest rates or the underlying performance of the issuer of the securities, such as ratings downgrades, adverse changes in the business climate and a lack of pricing information or liquidity in the secondary market for certain investment securities. In addition, government involvement or intervention in the financial markets or the lack thereof or market perceptions regarding the existence or absence of such activities could affect the market and the market prices for these securities.

On a quarterly basis, Trustmark evaluates investments and other assets for expected credit losses. On a quarterly basis, Trustmark evaluates investments and other assets for expected credit losses. At December 31, 2025, gross unrealized losses on securities for which an allowance for credit losses has not been recorded totaled $14.5 million. Trustmark may be required to record credit loss expense if these investments suffer a decline in value that is the result of a credit loss. If Trustmark determines that a credit loss exists, the credit portion of the allowance would be measured using a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis using the effective interest rate as of the security’s purchase date. The amount of credit loss Trustmark may record is limited to the amount by which the amortized cost exceeds the fair value, which could have a material adverse effect on results of operations in the period in which a credit loss, if any, occurs.

Liquidity Risk

Trustmark is subject to liquidity risk, which could disrupt its ability to meet its financial obligations.

Liquidity refers to Trustmark’s ability to ensure that sufficient cash flow and liquid assets are available to satisfy current and future financial obligations, including demand for loans and deposit withdrawals, funding operating costs and other corporate purposes. Liquidity refers to Trustmark’s ability to ensure that sufficient cash flow and liquid assets are available to satisfy current and future financial obligations, including demand for loans and deposit withdrawals, funding operating costs and other corporate purposes. Liquidity risk arises whenever the maturities of financial instruments included in assets and liabilities differ or when assets cannot be liquidated at fair market value as needed. Trustmark obtains funding through deposits and various short-term and long-term wholesale borrowings, including federal funds purchased and securities sold under repurchase agreements, the Federal Reserve Discount Window

(Discount Window) and Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances. Any significant restriction or disruption of Trustmark’s ability to obtain funding from these or other sources could have a negative effect on Trustmark’s ability to satisfy its current and future financial obligations, which could materially affect Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

In addition to the risk that one or more of the funding sources may become constrained due to market conditions unrelated to Trustmark, there is the risk that Trustmark’s credit profile may decline such that one or more of these funding sources becomes partially or wholly unavailable to Trustmark. In addition to the risk that one or more of the funding sources may become constrained due to market conditions unrelated to Trustmark, there is the risk that Trustmark’s credit profile may decline such that one or more of these funding sources becomes partially or wholly unavailable to Trustmark.

Trustmark attempts to quantify such credit event risk by modeling bank specific and systemic scenarios that estimate the liquidity impact. Trustmark attempts to quantify such credit event risk by modeling bank specific and systemic scenarios that estimate the liquidity impact. Trustmark estimates such impact by attempting to measure the effect on available unsecured lines of credit, available capacity from secured borrowing sources and securitizable assets. To mitigate such risk, Trustmark maintains available lines of credit with the FRBA and the FHLB of Dallas that are secured by loans and investment securities. To mitigate such risk, Trustmark maintains available lines of credit with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and the FHLB of Dallas that are secured by loans and investment securities. Management continuously monitors Trustmark’s liquidity position for compliance with internal policies.

External and Market-Related Risks

Trustmark’s business may be adversely affected by conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions in general.

Economic activity improved slightly during 2025, but was characterized by mixed signals, notably, strong equity market performance, continued consumer spending and FRB rate cuts, but also a softening labor market and persistent inflationary pressures, driven partly by new tariffs. United States stocks performed strongly during the second half of 2025, supported by optimistic sentiment around lower interest rates, better-than-expected corporate earnings and strong performance in the technology and AI sectors. However, economic concerns remain as a result of the cumulative weight of uncertainty regarding the potential economic impact of geopolitical developments, such as the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, the current United States presidential administration's policies, inflationary and broader pricing pressures and other economic and industry volatility. Concerns surrounding the direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. Doubts surrounding the near-term direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. Doubts surrounding the near-term direction of global markets and the potential impact on the United States economy are expected to persist for the near term. While Trustmark's customer base is wholly domestic, international economic conditions affect domestic economic conditions, and thus may have an impact upon Trustmark's financial condition or results of operations.

Strategic risk, including threats to business models from increasing pressures on net interest margins and modest economic growth, remains high. Management’s ability to plan, prioritize and allocate resources in this environment will be critical to Trustmark’s ability to sustain earnings that will attract capital. Because of the complexities presented by current economic conditions, Management will continue to be challenged in identifying alternative sources of revenue, prudently diversifying assets, liabilities and revenue and effectively managing the costs of compliance.

Trustmark is intently monitoring the impact of tariffs and other administrative policies on its customer base, interest rates and credit-related issues. Economic uncertainty or disruptions in the marketplace as a result of such policies could reduce loan demand or increase loan nonperformance. It is not possible to predict the timing or magnitude of changes to policies by the current United States presidential administration, if any, or the impact any such policy changes could have on Trustmark's customer base, credit quality or results of operations. It is not possible to predict how climate change may impact Trustmark’s financial condition and operations; however, Trustmark operates in areas where its business and the activities of its customers could be impacted by the effects of climate change. It is not possible to predict how climate change may impact Trustmark’s financial condition and operations; however, Trustmark operates in areas where its business and the activities of its customers could be impacted by the effects of climate change.

Trustmark does not assume that current uncertain conditions in the economy will improve significantly in the near future. Trustmark does not assume that current uncertain conditions in the economy will improve significantly in the near future. A weakened economy could affect Trustmark in a variety of substantial and unpredictable ways. In particular, Trustmark may face the following risks in connection with these events:

While the banking industry has stabilized since the disruptions associated with bank failures in Spring 2023, there remains heightened awareness around liquidity, uninsured deposits, deposit composition, unrecognized investment losses and capital among counterparties, customers and regulators. It is difficult to predict the extent to which these conditions will persist or whether recent progress in the economic recovery will instead shift to the potential for further decline. It is difficult to predict the extent to which these challenging economic conditions will persist or whether recent progress in the economic recovery will instead shift to the potential for further decline. If the economy does weaken in the future, it is uncertain how Trustmark’s business would be affected and whether Trustmark would be able to successfully mitigate any such effects on its business. Accordingly, these factors in the United States (and, indirectly, global) economy could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations.

Trustmark operates in a highly competitive financial services industry. Trustmark operates in a highly competitive financial services industry.

Trustmark faces substantial competition in all areas of its operations from a variety of different competitors, many of which are larger and may have greater financial resources. Trustmark faces substantial competition in all areas of its operations from a variety of different competitors, many of which are larger and may have greater financial resources. Such competitors primarily include banks, as well as community banks operating nationwide and regionally within the various markets in which Trustmark operates. Trustmark also faces competition from many other types of financial institutions, including savings and loans, credit unions, finance companies, brokerage firms, factoring companies and other financial intermediaries. Additionally, fintech developments, such as blockchain and other distributed ledger technologies, have the potential to disrupt the financial industry and change the way banks do business. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation.

Some of Trustmark’s competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. 20 Some of Trustmark’s competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. Additionally, due to their size, many of Trustmark’s larger competitors may be able to achieve economies of scale and, as a result, may offer a broader range of products and services as well as better pricing for those products and services than Trustmark.

Trustmark’s ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including: the ability to develop, maintain and build upon long-term customer relationships based on top quality service, high ethical standards and safe, sound assets; the ability to continue to expand Trustmark’s market position through organic growth and acquisitions; the scope, relevance and pricing of products and services offered to meet customer needs and demands; the rate at which Trustmark introduces new products and services relative to its competitors; and industry and general economic trends. Trustmark’s ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including: the ability to develop, maintain and build upon long-term customer relationships based on top quality service, high ethical standards and safe, sound assets; the ability to continue to expand Trustmark’s market position through organic growth and acquisitions; the scope, relevance and pricing of products and services offered to meet customer needs and demands; the rate at which Trustmark introduces new products and services relative to its competitors; and industry and general economic trends. Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken Trustmark’s competitive position, which could adversely affect Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect Trustmark. The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect Trustmark.

Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. As a result, defaults by, or questions or rumors about, one or more financial services institutions or the financial services industry in general, could lead to market-wide liquidity problems, which could, in turn, lead to defaults or losses by Trustmark and by other institutions. Trustmark has exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely executes transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks, mutual funds, and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose Trustmark to credit risk in the event of default of its counterparty or client. In addition, Trustmark’s credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral it holds cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the credit or derivative exposure owed to Trustmark. Losses related to these credit risks could materially and adversely affect Trustmark’s results of operations.

Compliance and Regulatory Risks

Trustmark is subject to extensive government regulation and supervision and possible enforcement and other legal actions.

Trustmark, primarily through TB and certain nonbank subsidiaries, is subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision, which vests a significant amount of discretion in the various regulatory authorities. Trustmark, primarily through TNB and certain nonbank subsidiaries, is subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision, which vests a significant amount of discretion in the various regulatory authorities. Banking regulations are primarily intended to protect depositors’ funds, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not security holders. These regulations and supervisory guidance affect Trustmark’s lending practices, capital structure, investment practices, dividend policy and growth, among other things. Congress and federal and state regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Congress and federal regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies or supervisory guidance, including changes in interpretation or implementation or statutes, regulations, policies and supervisory guidance, could affect Trustmark in substantial and unpredictable ways. Such changes could subject Trustmark to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products Trustmark may offer and/or increase the ability of nonbanks to offer competing financial services and products, among other things. Failure to comply with laws, regulations, policies or supervisory guidance could result in enforcement and other legal actions by Federal or state authorities, including criminal and civil penalties, the loss of FDIC insurance, the revocation of a banking charter, civil money penalties, other sanctions by

regulatory agencies and/or reputational damage. In this regard, government authorities, including bank regulatory agencies, have the authority to pursue enforcement agendas with respect to compliance and other legal matters involving financial activities, which heightens the risks associated with actual and perceived compliance failures. In this regard, government authorities, including bank regulatory agencies, continue to pursue enforcement agendas with respect to compliance and other legal matters involving financial activities, which heightens the risks associated with actual and perceived compliance failures. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

Trustmark is subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions. Trustmark is subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The DOJ and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. The Department of Justice and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful regulatory challenge to an institution’s performance under fair lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of direct or indirect negative consequences, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity, restrictions on geographic expansion and restrictions on entering new business lines. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s business, financial condition or results of operations.

In addition, financial institutions face scrutiny on actions and policies that are deemed to adversely impact consumers under the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibition against unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act’s prohibition against unfair or deceptive acts and practices. In addition, financial institutions face scrutiny on actions and policies that are deemed to adversely impact consumers under the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibition against unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act’s 21 prohibition against unfair or deceptive acts and practices. Bank regulators and the CFPB are responsible for enforcing these prohibitions against banking organizations. These prohibitions have been applied to prohibit perceived customer abuse in connection with a range of products, services, and practices, including account openings and fees charged where inadequate or no services are rendered for which charges were imposed, as well as other instances where consumers may have been misled through bank disclosures. In addition, the enforcement priorities of the agencies enforcing consumer protection laws have evolved over time and may continue to do so.

Failure by Trustmark to perform satisfactorily on its CRA evaluations could make it more difficult for Trustmark’s business to grow.

The performance of a bank under the CRA in meeting the credit needs of its community is a factor that must be taken into consideration when the federal banking agencies evaluate applications related to mergers and acquisitions, as well as branch opening and relocations. The performance of a bank under the CRA in meeting the credit needs of its community is a factor that must be taken into consideration when the federal banking agencies evaluate applications related to mergers and acquisitions, as well as branch opening and relocations. As of its last examination, TB received a CRA rating of “Outstanding,” which represented an improvement from its previous CRA rating of “Needs to Improve. As of its last examination, TNB received a CRA rating of “Needs to Improve,” which is downgraded from its prior rating of “Satisfactory. ” TB’s failure to maintain at least a “Satisfactory” CRA rating in the future could adversely affect its ability to complete the acquisition of another financial institution or open a new branch. If TB were to receive an overall CRA rating of less than “Satisfactory” in the future, the FRB would not re-evaluate the CRA rating until TB’s next CRA examination, which may not occur for several years. It is possible that a low CRA rating would not improve in the future.

Trustmark is subject to stringent capital requirements. Trustmark is subject to stringent capital requirements.

Under the regulatory capital rules of the FRB, OCC, and FDIC that implement a set of capital requirements issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision known as Basel III, Trustmark and TB are required to maintain a common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 7.0% (a minimum of 4.5% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8.5% (a minimum of 6.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10.5% (a minimum of 8.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%) and a leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total consolidated assets of at least 4.0%. Under the regulatory capital rules of the FRB, OCC, and FDIC that implement a set of capital requirements issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision known as Basel III, Trustmark and TNB are required to maintain a common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 7.0% (a minimum of 4.5% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8.5% (a minimum of 6.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%), a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10.5% (a minimum of 8.0% plus a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%) and a leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total consolidated assets of at least 4.0%. In addition, for TB to be “well-capitalized” under the banking agencies’ prompt corrective action framework, it must have a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 6.5%, a Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 8.0%, a total capital ratio of at least 10.0% and a leverage ratio of at least 5.0%, and must not be subject to any written agreement, order or capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive issued by its primary federal regulator to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure.

The capital rules also include stringent criteria for capital instruments to qualify as Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital. The capital rules also include stringent criteria for capital instruments to qualify as Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital. For instance, the rules effectively disallow newly issued trust preferred securities to be a component of a holding company’s Tier 1 capital. Trustmark will continue to count $60.0 million in outstanding trust preferred securities issued by the Trust as Tier 1 capital up to the regulatory limit, as permitted by a grandfather provision in the capital rules, but this grandfather provision may cease to apply if Trustmark consummates an acquisition of a depository institution holding company.

Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) Topic 326, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” requires Trustmark to recognize all expected credit losses over the life of a loan based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. FASB ASC Topic 326 generally results in earlier recognition of credit losses, which would increase reserves and decrease capital. FASB ASC Topic 326 generally is expected to result in earlier recognition of credit losses, which would increase reserves and decrease capital. Additionally, the allowance for credit losses model could be materially impacted by changes in current and forecasted macroeconomic conditions. It is not possible to predict the timing or magnitude of changes in macroeconomic conditions or the impact such changes could have on Trustmark’s

allowance for credit losses; however, material changes in the allowance for credit losses could have a material impact on Trustmark’s reserves and capital.

The regulatory capital rules applicable to Trustmark and TB may continue to evolve as a result of new requirements established by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision or legislative, regulatory or accounting changes in the United States. The regulatory capital rules applicable to Trustmark and TNB may continue to evolve as a result of new requirements established by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision or legislative, regulatory or accounting changes in the United States. Management cannot predict the effect that any changes to current capital requirements would have on Trustmark and TB.

Trustmark’s use of third-party service providers and Trustmark’s other ongoing third-party business relationships are subject to increasing regulatory requirements and attention. Trustmark’s use of third-party service providers and Trustmark’s other ongoing third-party business relationships are subject to increasing regulatory requirements and attention.

Trustmark regularly uses third-party service providers and subcontractors as part of its business. Trustmark regularly uses third-party service providers and subcontractors as part of its business. Trustmark also has substantial ongoing business relationships with partners and other third-parties and relies on certain third-parties to provide products and services necessary to maintain day-to-day operations. These types of third-party relationships are subject to increasingly demanding regulatory requirements and attention by regulators, including the FRB, OCC, CFPB and FDIC. Under interagency regulatory guidance issued in 2023, Trustmark is required to apply stringent due diligence, conduct ongoing monitoring and maintain effective control over third-party service providers and subcontractors and other ongoing third-party business relationships. Under regulatory guidance, Trustmark is required to apply stringent due diligence, conduct ongoing monitoring and maintain effective control over third-party service providers and subcontractors and other ongoing third-party business relationships. These regulatory expectations may continue to evolve and become more rigorous over time. Trustmark expects that the regulators will hold Trustmark responsible for deficiencies in its oversight and control of its third-party relationships and in the performance of the parties with which Trustmark has these relationships. Trustmark maintains a system of policies and procedures designed to ensure adequate due diligence is performed and to monitor vendor risks. While Trustmark believes these policies and procedures effectively mitigate risk, if the regulators conclude that Trustmark has not exercised adequate oversight and control over third-party service providers and subcontractors or other ongoing third-party business relationships or that such third-parties have not performed appropriately, Trustmark could be subject to enforcement actions, including civil monetary penalties or other administrative or judicial penalties or fines as well as requirements for customer remediation.

Trustmark's ability to declare and pay dividends is subject to restriction by various laws and regulations and other factors.

Trustmark is a separate and distinct legal entity from TB, and receives substantially all of its cash stream from dividends from TB. These dividends are the principal source of funds to pay dividends on Trustmark's common stock and interest on its debt. Various federal and state laws and regulations limit the amount of dividends that TB may pay to Trustmark. In the event TB is unable to declare dividends, or is limited in the amount of any dividend it may be able to declare, Trustmark may not be able to declare dividends on its common stock or meet other financial obligations. Any inability to receive dividends from TB could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark's business, financial condition and results of operations. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark's business, financial condition and results of operations. The information under the section captioned “Supervision and Regulation” included in Part I. Item 1. – Business in this report provides further discussion about the restrictions governing TB’s ability to transfer funds to Trustmark.

Operational Risks

There may be risks resulting from the extensive use of models in Trustmark’s business.

Trustmark relies on statistical and quantitative models to measure risks and to estimate certain financial values. Trustmark relies on statistical and quantitative models to measure risks and to estimate certain financial values. Models may be used in such processes as determining the pricing of various products, assessing potential acquisition opportunities, developing presentations made to market analysts and others, creating loans and extending credit, measuring interest rate and other market risks, predicting losses, assessing capital adequacy, calculating regulatory capital levels and estimating the fair value of financial instruments and balance sheet items. These models reflect assumptions that may not be accurate, particularly in times of market stress or other unforeseen circumstances. Even if these assumptions are adequate, the models may prove to be inadequate or inaccurate because of other flaws in their design or their implementation. If models for determining interest rate risk and asset-liability management are inadequate, Trustmark may incur increased or unexpected losses upon changes in market interest rates or other market measures. If models for determining expected credit losses are inadequate, the allowance for credit losses may not be sufficient to support future charge-offs. If models to measure the fair value of financial instruments are inadequate, the fair value of such financial instruments may fluctuate unexpectedly or may not accurately reflect what Trustmark could realize upon sale or settlement of such financial instruments. Any such failure in the analytical or forecasting models could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

Also, information Trustmark provides to its regulators based on poorly designed or implemented models could be inaccurate or misleading. Also, information Trustmark provides to its regulators based on poorly designed or implemented models could be inaccurate or misleading. Certain decisions that the regulators make, including those related to capital distributions and dividends to Trustmark’s shareholders, could be adversely affected due to the regulator’s perception that the quality of Trustmark’s models used to generate the relevant information is insufficient.

Trustmark could be required to write down goodwill and other intangible assets.

If Trustmark consummates an acquisition, a portion of the purchase price would generally be allocated to goodwill and other identifiable intangible assets. If Trustmark consummates an acquisition, a portion of the purchase price would generally be allocated to goodwill and other identifiable intangible assets. The amount of the purchase price that is allocated to goodwill and other intangible assets is determined by the excess of the purchase price over the net identifiable assets acquired. At December 31, 2025, goodwill was $334.6 million. Trustmark's other identifiable intangible assets, net were fully amortized as of December 31, 2025. Under current accounting standards, if Trustmark determines goodwill or other intangible assets are impaired, Trustmark would be required to write down the carrying value of these assets. Trustmark’s annual goodwill impairment evaluation performed during the fourth quarter of 2025 indicated no impairment of goodwill for any reporting segment. Management cannot provide assurance, however, that Trustmark will not be required to take an impairment charge in the future. Any impairment charge would have an adverse effect on Trustmark’s shareholders’ equity and financial condition and could cause a decline in Trustmark’s stock price.

Trustmark holds other real estate and may acquire and hold significant additional amounts, which could lead to increased operating expenses and vulnerability to additional declines in real property values. Trustmark holds other real estate and may acquire and hold significant additional amounts, which could lead to increased operating expenses and vulnerability to additional declines in real property values.

As business necessitates, Trustmark forecloses on and takes title to real estate serving as collateral for loans. As business necessitates, Trustmark forecloses on and takes title to real estate serving as collateral for loans. At December 31, 2025, Trustmark held $7.0 million of other real estate. The amount of other real estate held by Trustmark may increase in the future as a result of, among other things, business combinations, increased uncertainties in the housing market or increased levels of credit stress in residential real estate loan portfolios. Increased other real estate balances could lead to greater expenses as Trustmark incurs costs to manage, maintain and dispose of real properties as well as to remediate any environmental cleanup costs incurred in connection with any contamination discovered on real property on which Trustmark has foreclosed and to which Trustmark has taken title. As a result, Trustmark’s earnings could be negatively affected by various expenses associated with other real estate owned, including personnel costs, insurance and taxes, completion and repair costs, valuation adjustments and other expenses associated with real property ownership, as well as by the funding costs associated with other real estate assets. The expenses associated with holding a significant amount of other real estate could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

If Trustmark is required to repurchase a significant number of mortgage loans that it had previously sold, such repurchases could negatively affect earnings. 23 If Trustmark is required to repurchase a significant number of mortgage loans that it had previously sold, such repurchases could negatively affect earnings.

One of Trustmark’s primary business operations is mortgage banking, under which residential mortgage loans are sold in the secondary market under agreements that contain representations and warranties related to, among other things, the origination and characteristics of the mortgage loans. One of Trustmark’s primary business operations is mortgage banking under which residential mortgage loans are sold in the secondary market under agreements that contain representations and warranties related to, among other things, the origination and characteristics of the mortgage loans. Trustmark may be required to either repurchase the outstanding principal balance of a loan or make the purchaser whole for the anticipated economic benefits of a loan if it is determined that the loan sold was in violation of representations or warranties made by Trustmark at the time of the sale, herein referred to as mortgage loan servicing putback expenses. Such representations and warranties typically include those made regarding loans that had missing or insufficient file documentation, loans that do not meet investor guidelines, loans in which the appraisal does not support the value and/or loans obtained through fraud by the borrowers or other third parties. Generally, putback requests may be made until the loan is paid in full. However, mortgage loans delivered to the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) on or after January 1, 2013 are subject to the Representations and Warranties Framework, which provides that FNMA and FHLMC will not exercise their remedies, including a putback request, for breaches of certain selling representations and warranties if the mortgage loans satisfy certain criteria, such as payment history or quality control review.

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

Trustmark has significant investments in bank premises and equipment for its branch network. Trustmark has significant investments in bank premises and equipment for its branch network. Advances in technology such as ecommerce, telephone, internet and mobile banking, and in-branch self-service technologies including interactive teller machines (ITMs) and other equipment, as well as an increasing customer preference for these other methods of accessing Trustmark’s products and services, could decrease the value of its branch network, technology, or other retail distribution physical assets and may cause Trustmark 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. These actions could lead to losses on these assets or could adversely impact the carrying value of any long-lived assets and may lead to increased expenditures to renovate, reconfigure or close a number of Trustmark’s remaining branches or to otherwise reform its retail distribution channel.

Trustmark may experience disruptions of its operating systems or breaches in its information system security. Trustmark may experience disruptions of its operating systems or breaches in its information system security.

Trustmark is dependent upon communications and information systems to conduct business as such systems are used to manage virtually all aspects of Trustmark’s business. Trustmark is dependent upon communications and information systems to conduct business as such systems are used to manage virtually all aspects of Trustmark’s business. Trustmark’s operations rely on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information within its computer systems and networks. Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems could result

in significant disruption to Trustmark's operations. Trustmark has taken protective measures, which are continuously monitored and modified as warranted; however, Trustmark’s computer systems, software and networks may fail to operate properly or become disabled or damaged as a result of a number of factors, including events that are wholly or partially beyond Trustmark’s control. There could be sudden increases in customer transaction volume; electrical, telecommunications or other major physical infrastructure outages; natural disasters; and events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including terrorist acts.

Further, Trustmark’s operational and security systems and infrastructure may be vulnerable to breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents including, but not limited to, attempts to access information, including customer and company information, malicious code, computer viruses and denial of service attacks that could result in unauthorized access, theft, misuse, loss, release or destruction of data (including confidential customer information), account takeovers, unavailability of service or other events. These types of threats may derive from human error, fraud or malice on the part of external or internal parties, or may result from accidental technological failure. If one or more of these events were to occur, Trustmark’s or its customers’ confidential and other information would be jeopardized, or such an event could cause interruptions or malfunctions in Trustmark’s or its customers’ or counterparties’ operations. Any failures related to upgrades and maintenance of Trustmark's technology and information systems could further increase its information and system security risk. Trustmark's increased use of cloud and other technologies, such as remote work technologies, also increases its risk of being subject to a cyber-attack. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attack or cyber intrusion, has increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Trustmark may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify its protective measures or to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures in its computer systems and networks, and Trustmark may be subject to litigation and financial losses that are either not insured against or not fully covered through any insurance maintained by Trustmark. Any such losses, which may be difficult to detect, could adversely affect Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations. In addition, the occurrence of such a loss could expose Trustmark to reputational risk, the loss of customer business and additional regulatory scrutiny.

Security breaches in Trustmark’s internet and mobile banking activities (myTrustmark®) could further expose Trustmark to possible liability and reputational risk. Any compromise in security could deter customers from using Trustmark’s internet and mobile banking services that involve the transmission of confidential information. Trustmark relies on standard internet security systems to provide the security and authentication necessary to effect secure transmission of data. Trustmark relies on standard internet security systems to provide the 24 security and authentication necessary to effect secure transmission of data. However, these precautions may not protect Trustmark’s systems from compromise or breaches of security, which could result in significant legal liability and significant damage to Trustmark’s reputation and business.

Trustmark relies upon certain third-party vendors to provide products and services necessary to maintain day-to-day operations. Trustmark relies upon certain third-party vendors to provide products and services necessary to maintain day-to-day operations. Accordingly, Trustmark’s operations are exposed to the risk that these vendors might not perform in accordance with applicable contractual arrangements or service level agreements or that the security of the third-party vendors’ computer systems, software and networks may be vulnerable to compromises that could impact information system security. Trustmark maintains a system of policies and procedures designed to monitor vendor risks. While Trustmark believes these policies and procedures effectively mitigate risk, the failure of an external vendor to perform in accordance with applicable contractual arrangements or service level agreements or any compromise in the security of an external vendor’s information systems could be disruptive to Trustmark’s operations, which could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.

As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, Trustmark has seen no material adverse impact on its business or operations from cyber-attacks or events. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, Trustmark has seen no material adverse impact on its business or operations from cyber-attacks or events. Trustmark's customers, employees and third parties that it does business with have been, and will continue to be, targeted by parties using fraudulent e-mails and other communications in attempts to misappropriate passwords, bank account information or other personal information or to introduce viruses or other malware programs to its information systems, the information systems of its merchants or third-party service providers and/or its customers' personal devices, which are beyond Trustmark's security control systems. Though Trustmark endeavors to mitigate these threats through product improvements, use of encryption and authentication technology and customer and employee education, such cyber-attacks against Trustmark, its merchants, third-party service providers and customers remain a serious issue and have been successful in the past.

Although Trustmark makes significant efforts to maintain the security and integrity of its information systems and has implemented various measures to manage the risks of a security breach or disruption, there can be no assurance that its security efforts and measures will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. Although Trustmark makes significant efforts to maintain the security and integrity of its information systems and has implemented various measures to manage the risks of a security breach or disruption, there can be no assurance that its security efforts and measures will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. Even well protected information, networks, systems and facilities remain potentially vulnerable to attempted security breaches or disruptions because the techniques used in such attempts are constantly evolving and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected. Accordingly, Trustmark may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, and thus it is virtually impossible for Trustmark to entirely mitigate this risk. Furthermore, in the event of a cyber-attack, Trustmark may be delayed in identifying or responding to the attack, which could increase the negative impact of the cyber-attack on its business, financial condition and results of operations. A security breach or other significant disruption of Trustmark's information systems or those related to its customers, merchants or third-party vendors, including as a result of cyber-attacks, could (i) disrupt the proper functioning of its networks and systems and therefore

its operations and/or those of its customers; (ii) result in the unauthorized access to, and destruction, loss, theft, misappropriation or release of confidential, sensitive or otherwise valuable information of Trustmark or its customers; (iii) result in a violation of applicable privacy, data breach and other laws, subjecting Trustmark to additional regulatory scrutiny and exposing it to civil litigation, enforcement actions, governmental fines and possible financial liability; (iv) require significant management attention and resources to remedy the damages that result; or (v) harm Trustmark's reputation or cause a decrease in the number of customers that choose to do business with Trustmark. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark's business, financial condition and results of operations.

Trustmark must utilize new technologies to deliver its products and services, which could require significant resources and expose Trustmark to additional risks, including cyber-security risks. Trustmark must utilize new technologies to deliver its products and services, which could require significant resources and expose Trustmark to additional risks, including cyber-security risks.

In order to deliver new products and services and to improve the productivity of existing products and services, the banking industry relies on rapidly evolving technologies. In order to deliver new products and services and to improve the productivity of existing products and services, the banking industry relies on rapidly evolving technologies. Trustmark continues to invest in technology to facilitate the ability of its customers to engage in financial transactions, and otherwise enhance the customer experience with respect to its products and services. Trustmark’s ability to effectively utilize new technologies to address customer needs and create operating efficiencies could materially affect future prospects. Management cannot provide any assurances that Trustmark will be successful in utilizing such new technologies. Incorporation of new products and services, such as internet and mobile banking services, may require significant resources and expose Trustmark to additional risks, including cyber-security risks.

Trustmark’s controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented. Trustmark’s controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented.

Trustmark’s internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures, and corporate governance policies and procedures are based in part on assumptions, and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Trustmark’s internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures, and corporate governance policies and procedures are based in part on assumptions, and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of Trustmark’s controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Trustmark may be subject to increased claims and litigation, which could result in legal liability and reputational damage. 25 Trustmark may be subject to increased claims and litigation, which could result in legal liability and reputational damage.

Trustmark has been named from time to time as a defendant in litigation relating to its businesses and activities. Trustmark has been named from time to time as a defendant in litigation relating to its businesses and activities. Litigation may include claims for substantial compensatory or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages.

In recent years, a number of judicial decisions have upheld the right of borrowers to sue lending institutions on the basis of various evolving legal theories, collectively termed “lender liability.” Generally, lender liability is founded on the premise that a lender has either violated a duty, whether implied or contractual, of good faith and fair dealing owed to the borrower or has assumed a degree of control over the borrower resulting in the creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or shareholders. Substantial legal liability against Trustmark, including its subsidiaries, could materially adversely affect Trustmark’s business, financial condition or results of operations, or cause significant harm to its reputation. Substantial legal liability against Trustmark, including its subsidiaries, could materially adversely affect Trustmark’s business, financial condition or results of operations, or cause significant harm to its reputation.

Damage to Trustmark’s reputation could have a significant negative impact on Trustmark’s business. Damage to Trustmark’s reputation could have a significant negative impact on Trustmark’s business.

Trustmark’s ability to attract and retain customers, clients, investors, and highly-skilled management and employees is affected by its reputation. Trustmark’s ability to attract and retain customers, clients, investors, and highly-skilled management and employees is affected by its reputation. Significant harm to Trustmark’s reputation can also arise from other sources, including employee misconduct, actual or perceived unethical or illegal behavior, litigation or regulatory outcomes, failing to deliver minimum or required standards of service and quality, compliance failures, disclosure of confidential information, significant or numerous failures, interruptions or breaches of its information systems and the activities of its clients, customers and counterparties, including vendors. Actions by the financial services industry generally or by certain members or individuals in the industry may have a significant adverse effect on Trustmark’s reputation. Trustmark could also suffer significant reputational harm if it fails to properly identify and manage potential conflicts of interest. Management of potential conflicts of interests has become increasingly complex as Trustmark expands its business activities through more numerous transactions, obligations and interests with and among its clients. The actual or perceived failure to adequately address conflicts of interest could affect the willingness of clients to deal with Trustmark, which could adversely affect Trustmark’s businesses.

Risk Related to Acquisition Activity

Potential acquisitions by Trustmark may disrupt Trustmark’s business and dilute shareholder value.

Trustmark continuously monitors the market for merger or acquisition opportunities and, depending upon business and other considerations, may elect to pursue one or more such opportunities in the future. Trustmark continuously monitors the market for merger or acquisition opportunities and, depending upon business and other considerations, may elect to pursue one or more such opportunities in the future. Any such merger or acquisition candidate would need to have a similar culture to Trustmark, have experienced management and possess either significant market presence or have potential for improved profitability through financial management, economies of scale or expanded services. Acquiring other banks, businesses,

or branches involves various risks commonly associated with acquisitions, including: potential exposure to unknown or contingent liabilities of the target company, exposure to potential asset quality issues of the target company, difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of the target company, potential disruption to Trustmark’s business, potential diversion of Trustmark’s Management’s time and attention, the possible loss of key employees and customers of the target company, difficulty in estimating the value of the target company and potential changes in banking or tax laws or regulations that may affect the target company. Acquisitions may involve the payment of a premium over book and market values, and, therefore, some dilution of Trustmark’s tangible book value and net income per share of common stock may occur in connection with any future transaction. Furthermore, failure to realize the expected revenue projections, cost savings, increases in geographic or product presence, and/or other projected benefits from an acquisition could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

General Risk Factors

The stock price of financial institutions, like Trustmark, can be volatile.

The volatility in the stock prices of companies in the financial services industry, such as Trustmark, may make it more difficult for shareholders to resell Trustmark common stock at attractive prices in a timely manner. The volatility in the stock prices of companies in the financial services industry, such as Trustmark, may make it more difficult for shareholders to resell Trustmark common stock at attractive prices in a timely manner. Trustmark’s stock price can fluctuate significantly in response to a variety of factors, including factors affecting the financial industry as a whole, such as the bank failures in Spring 2023. The factors affecting financial stocks generally and Trustmark’s stock price in particular include:

General market fluctuations, the potential for breakdowns on electronic trading or other platforms for executing securities transactions, industry factors and general economic and political conditions could also cause Trustmark’s stock price to decrease regardless of operating results. General market fluctuations, the potential for breakdowns on electronic trading or other platforms for executing securities transactions, industry factors and general economic and political conditions could also cause Trustmark’s stock price to decrease regardless of operating results.

Changes in accounting standards may affect how Trustmark reports its financial condition and results of operations. Changes in accounting standards may affect how Trustmark reports its financial condition and results of operations.

Trustmark’s accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how Trustmark records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. Trustmark’s accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how Trustmark records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. From time to time, the FASB changes the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of Trustmark’s financial statements. The most recent economic recession resulted in increased scrutiny of accounting standards by regulators and legislators, particularly as they relate to fair value accounting principles. In addition, ongoing efforts to achieve convergence between generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and International Financial Reporting Standards may result in changes to GAAP. Any such changes can be difficult to predict and can materially affect how Trustmark records and reports its financial condition or results of operations. For additional details regarding recently adopted and pending accounting pronouncements, see Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies included in Part II. Item 8. – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this report.

Trustmark may not be able to attract or retain key employees. Trustmark may not be able to attract or retain key employees.

Trustmark’s success depends substantially on its ability to attract and retain skilled, experienced personnel. Trustmark’s success depends substantially on its ability to attract and retain skilled, experienced personnel. Competition for qualified candidates in the activities and markets that Trustmark serves is intense. While Trustmark invests significantly in the training and development of its employees, it is possible that Trustmark may not be able to retain key employees. If Trustmark were unable to retain its most qualified employees, its performance and competitive positioning could be materially adversely affected.

Natural disasters, such as hurricanes, could have a significant negative impact on Trustmark’s business.

Many of Trustmark’s loans are secured by property or are made to businesses in or near the Gulf Coast regions of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Texas, which are often in the path of seasonal hurricanes. Many of Trustmark’s loans are secured by property or are made to businesses in or near the Gulf Coast regions of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Texas, which are often in the path of seasonal hurricanes. Natural disasters, such as hurricanes, could have a significant negative impact on the stability of Trustmark’s deposit base, the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans and the value of collateral securing loans, and could cause Trustmark to incur material additional expenses. Although Management has established disaster recovery policies and procedures, the occurrence of a natural disaster, especially if any applicable insurance coverage is not adequate to enable Trustmark’s borrowers to recover from the effects of the event, could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition or results of operations.

Expectations around Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) practices as well as climate change and related regulatory initiatives could adversely affect Trustmark’s business and results of operations, including indirectly through impact to its customers. Expectations around Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) practices as well as climate change and related legislative and regulatory initiatives could adversely affect Trustmark’s business and results of operations, including indirectly through impact to its customers.

Stakeholders' expectations regarding ESG practices, as well as climate-related legislative and regulatory initiatives, continue to evolve. Institutional investors, and investor advocacy groups, in particular, are increasingly focused on these matters and expectations in many of these areas can vary widely. Institutional investors, and investor advocacy groups, in particular, are increasingly focused on these matters and expectations in many of these areas can vary widely. In addition, increased ESG related compliance costs could result in increases to Trustmark’s overall operational costs. Failure to adapt to or comply with regulatory requirements or investor or stakeholder expectations and standards, and fluctuations in these standards, could negatively impact Trustmark’s reputation, ability to do business with certain partners and its stock price. New government regulations (including at the state level) could also result in new or more stringent forms of ESG oversight and expanding mandatory and voluntary reporting, diligence and disclosure. New government regulations could also result in new or more stringent forms of ESG oversight and expanding mandatory and voluntary reporting, diligence and disclosure. Consumers and businesses also may change their behavior on their own as a result of these concerns. Consumers and businesses also may change their behavior on their own as a result of these concerns. It is not possible to predict how climate change may impact Trustmark’s financial condition and operations; however, Trustmark operates in areas where its business and the activities of its customers could be impacted by the effects of climate change. The effects of climate change may include increased frequency or severity of weather-related events, such as severe storms, hurricanes, flooding and droughts and rising sea levels. These effects can disrupt business operations, damage property, devalue assets and change customer and business preferences, which may adversely affect borrowers, increase credit risk and reduce demand for Trustmark’s products and services. Trustmark and its customers may need to respond to new laws and regulations as well as consumer and business preferences resulting from climate change concerns. Trustmark and its customers will need to respond to new laws and regulations as well as consumer and business preferences resulting from climate change concerns. Trustmark and its customers may face cost increases, asset value reductions, operating process changes and the like. The impact to Trustmark’s customers will likely vary depending on their specific attributes, including reliance on or role in carbon intensive activities. In addition, Trustmark could face reductions in creditworthiness on the part of some customers or in the value of assets securing loans. Trustmark’s efforts to take these risks into account may not be effective in protecting it from the negative impact of regulatory initiatives or changes in consumer or business behavior and could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations. Trustmark’s efforts to take these risks into account may not be effective in protecting it from the negative impact of new laws and regulations or changes in consumer or business behavior and could have a material adverse effect on Trustmark’s financial condition and results of operations.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.