Lafayette, Louisiana August 5, 2013 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ... · presence in Arkansas and Tennessee)...
Transcript of Lafayette, Louisiana August 5, 2013 PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ... · presence in Arkansas and Tennessee)...
Iberia Bank CRA Public Evaluation
Lafayette, Louisiana August 5, 2013
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
August 5, 2013
COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
IBERIABANK
RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana 71501
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ATLANTA
1000 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309-4470
NOTE: This document is an evaluation of this institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community,
including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operation of the institution. This
evaluation is not, nor should it be construed as, an assessment of the financial condition of this institution. The rating
assigned to the institution does not represent an analysis, conclusion or opinion of the federal financial supervisory agency
concerning the safety and soundness of this financial institution.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Table of Contents
i
Institution Rating
Institution’s CRA Rating…………………………..………………….…………………. 1
Table of Performance Test Ratings………………………………………………………. 1
Summary of Major Factors Supporting Rating……………………………………….…... 1
Institution
Description of Institution………………………...……………………………………….. 2
Scope of Examination……………………………..……….……………………………… 3
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………………..…... 6
State of Louisiana
Summary
State Rating……………………………………………..….…………...……… 12
Scope of Examination…………………………………….…………….....…… 13
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 13
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 13
New Orleans Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 16
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 27
Lafayette Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 33
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 42
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...……………………….................................... 49
Nonmetropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...…………………………………………... 50
State of Arkansas
Summary
State Rating………………………………………………………...…...……… 52
Scope of Examination………………………………………………………….. 53
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 53
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 53
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Table of Contents
ii
Little Rock Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 56
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 64
Fayetteville Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 70
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 78
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...……………………….................................... 83
Nonmetropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...…………………………………………... 84
State of Florida
Summary
State Rating……………………………………………..….…………...……… 85
Scope of Examination…………………………………….…………….....…….. 86
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 86
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 86
Sarasota Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 89
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 98
Naples Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 103
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 112
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...……………………….................................... 117
Nonmetropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...…………………………………………... 118
State of Alabama
Summary
State Rating……………………………………………..….…………...……… 119
Scope of Examination…………………………………….…………….....…….. 120
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 120
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 120
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Table of Contents
iii
Birmingham Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations……………………………………………………… 123
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………… 131
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...………………………................................ 136
Nonmetropolitan Areas (Limited Review)...…………………………………………... 138
State of Texas
Summary
State Rating……………………………………………..….…………...…... 139
Scope of Examination…………………………………….…………….....… 140
Description of Operations…………………………………………………… 140
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests…………………………… 140
Houston Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations…………………………………………………… 142
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests…………………………… 151
State of Tennessee
Summary
State Rating……………………………………………..….…………...……. 157
Scope of Examination…………………………………….…………….....…. 158
Description of Operations……………………………………………………. 158
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests……………………………. 158
Memphis Metropolitan Area (Full Review)
Description of Operations…………………………………………………… 160
Conclusions With Respect to Performance Tests…………………………… 170
Appendices
Appendix A: Scope of Examination…………………………………………….…… 175
Appendix B: Summary of State Ratings…………………………………………….. 178
Appendix C: CRA Abbreviations and Definitions...………..…………….…….…… 179
Appendix D: Glossary……………………………………………………...………… 181
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Table of Contents
iv
Appendix E: General Information……………….……………………………….… 185
Appendix F: Institution Tables……………….……………………………….……. 186
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables ……….……………………….…… 188
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables ……………………………….…… 217
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables…..….…………………………………….. 246
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables…..………… …………………………….. 300
Appendix K: Qualified Investments and Contributions …………………………….. 354
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
1
INSTITUTION'S CRA RATING: SATISFACTORY
The following table indicates the performance level of IBERIABANK with respect to the lending, investment,
and service tests.
PERFORMANCE LEVELS
IBERIABANK
PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test* Investment Test Service Test
Outstanding
High Satisfactory X X X
Low Satisfactory
Needs to Improve
Substantial Noncompliance
*Note: The lending test is weighted more heavily than the investment and service tests when arriving at
an overall rating.
Major factors supporting the institution’s rating include:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment areas;
The distribution of HMDA1 lending among borrowers reflects adequate penetration among customers of
different income levels;
The distribution of small business lending reflects adequate penetration among businesses of different
revenue sizes;
The bank makes a relatively high level of community development loans;
The bank has a good level of qualified investments;
Retail delivery systems are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies and to individuals of
different income levels in its assessment areas;
The bank’s record of opening and closing branches has not adversely affected the accessibility of its
delivery systems, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies and to low- and moderate-
income individuals; and
The bank provides an excellent level of community development services.
1 Home mortgage loans are reported by institutions on the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Loan Application Register
(LAR). The register includes home purchase, refinance, home improvement, and multi-family loans originated and purchased by the
institution.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
2
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION
IBERIABANK is a multi-state commercial bank headquartered in Lafayette, Louisiana. The bank operates 182
branch offices in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Texas. As of December 31, 2012,
IBERIABANK had total assets of $13.1 billion. The bank received a “Satisfactory” rating at its previous
evaluation dated June 13, 2011. No known legal impediments exist that would restrain the bank from meeting
the credit needs of its assessment areas.
For this examination, 27 assessment areas were reviewed. Total deposits for the 27 assessment areas as of
June 30, 2012, were $9.4 billion. Descriptions of the full-scope assessment areas can be found in the applicable
state sections of this report.
Business Structure
IBERIABANK Corporation, headquartered in Lafayette, Louisiana, is a one-bank, financial holding company
with $13.1 billion in consolidated assets as of December 31, 2012. IBERIABANK Corporation is the parent
company for IBERIABANK, which is a state member bank and a full-service provider of deposit, credit, trust,
and investment services to a broad range of retail, business, and institutional clients. IBERIABANK operates
and wholly owns a mortgage affiliate, IBERIABANK Mortgage, which is headquartered in Little Rock,
Arkansas, and does the majority of the bank’s HMDA lending. Other non-bank subsidiaries include: Lenders
Title Company, a title insurance and closing services agency headquartered in Little Rock, Arkansas; IBERIA
Wealth Advisors (IWA); and IBERIA Capital Partners, a corporate finance services firm in New Orleans.
IBERIABANK Corporation is also the parent of IBERIA CDE, LLC, which was created for the purpose of
investing in tax credits.
IBERIABANK has more than doubled in size over the past five years primarily from the acquisition of problem
banks (some via the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) loss-share program). IBERIABANK’s
legacy loan portfolio did not experience the significant losses experienced by other banks that had
concentrations in commercial real estate during the recent recession. The acquired banks were quickly
integrated into IBERIABANK’s operations, and a division was created to specifically manage the assets
covered by the FDIC loss-share program.
In 2011, IBERIABANK completed the merger with the company’s IBERIABANKfsb subsidiary (with a
presence in Arkansas and Tennessee) and completed the acquisitions of OMNI BANCSHARES, Inc., and
Cameron Bancshares, Inc. In addition, the bank purchased certain assets of Florida Trust Company, a wholly-
owned subsidiary of the Bank of Florida Corporation. In 2012, IBERIABANK acquired Florida Gulf Bancorp,
Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, Florida Gulf Bank, headquartered in Fort Myers, Florida. As a result of
these acquisitions, the bank has significantly expanded its presence in Florida, and Louisiana, and added
Tennessee and Arkansas to the geographic footprint.
Credit Products and Loan Portfolio
IBERIABANK offers a variety of consumer, residential real estate, and commercial loan products to fulfill the
credit needs of the residents and businesses in its assessment areas. Consumer loan products include credit
cards, personal lines of credit, installment loans, home equity loans, mortgage loans and auto loans. The bank
also offers construction lending. Commercial loan products include loans and lines of credit, business credit
cards, and real estate loans. IBERIABANK does not offer Small Business Administration (SBA) loans directly
but has a partnership with an external vendor that allows the bank to refer customers across the bank’s entire
footprint for possible SBA loans.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
3
The following table shows the distribution of IBERIABANK’s loan portfolio as of March 31, 2013, and
December 31, 2012, and 2013. Loans secured by nonfarm, nonresidential real estate comprised the greatest
percentage by dollar volume of IBERIABANK’s loan portfolio each of the three years. The next highest
volume by dollar amount was loans secured by one- to four-family dwellings, followed by commercial and
industrial loans, loans to individuals, and construction and development loans. As the table depicts, small farm
loans accounted for less than 1 percent of the bank’s loan portfolio during the review period.
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
All assessment areas for IBERIABANK were evaluated for lending, investment, and service performance. Full-
scope reviews were conducted for 9 of the bank’s 27 assessment areas. The assessment areas were selected for
full-scope reviews based on the volume of lending, number of branches, percentage of total deposits, amount of
community development activity, length of time since the last full-scope evaluation, and other nonfinancial
considerations. The bank is an interstate bank; therefore, the scope of the evaluation includes a full-scope
review of at least one assessment area in each state where the bank has offices. Arkansas and Tennessee were
added to the bank’s geographic footprint during the review period, so this is the first time the bank’s
performance in these states has been evaluated.
Assessment areas receiving full-scope reviews were New Orleans and Lafayette in the state of Louisiana; Little
Rock and Fayetteville in the state of Arkansas; Sarasota and Naples in the state of Florida; Birmingham in the
state of Alabama; Houston, in the state of Texas; and Memphis, in the state of Tennessee. The remaining
assessment areas received limited-scope reviews. The state of Louisiana had the greatest number of branches
and largest concentration of lending and deposit activity. Therefore, performance in Louisiana had the greatest
weight in determining the overall rating for the institution, followed by the remaining states in the order in
which they are presented in the evaluation. Within each state, the full-scope assessment areas are presented in
the order of their relative weight on the performance rating for that state. A description of each full-scope
assessment area is included in the applicable assessment area sections of this report.
Examination Review Period and Products Reviewed
The lending test performance was based upon loan data for the period January 1, 2011, through December 31,
2012. HMDA-reportable loans and CRA-reportable small business loans were the major products included in
the evaluation. HMDA loans from both IBERIABANK and IBERIABANK Mortgage were considered for the
lending analysis. CRA-reportable small farm loans and HMDA-reportable multi-family loans were generally
not considered in the overall assessment due to limited activity and volume. Additionally, the analysis did not
include other types of consumer loans, credit cards, or commercial loans.
$ (000s) Percent $ (000s) Percent $ (000s) Percent
Construction and Development 565,161 6.7% 554,199 6.6% 559,620 7.7%
Secured by One- to Four- Family Dwellings 2,213,077 26.4% 2,294,628 27.3% 2,043,535 28.1%
Other Real Estate: Farmland 40,492 0.5% 41,657 0.5% 36,641 0.5%
Multifamily 216,288 2.6% 222,257 2.6% 194,899 2.7%
Nonfarm nonresidential 2,544,449 30.4% 2,598,718 30.9% 2,235,014 30.8%
Commercial and Industrial 2,176,044 26.0% 2,124,952 25.3% 1,713,676 23.6%
Loans to Individuals 610,466 7.3% 559,437 6.7% 458,245 6.3%
Agricultural Loans 15,276 0.2% 16,466 0.2% 19,348 0.3%
Total $8,381,253 100.00% $8,412,314 100.00% $7,260,978 100.00%
COMPOSITION OF LOAN PORTFOLIO
* This table does not include the entire loan portfo lio . Specifically, it excludes loans to depository institutions, bankers acceptances, lease financing receivables,
obligations of state and political subdivisions, and other loans that do not meet any other category. Contra assets are also not included in this table.
3/31/2013 12/31/2011
Loan Type
12/31/2012
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
4
Community development loans and investments funded by the bank from January 1, 2011, through March 31,
2013, were reviewed for the lending and investment tests. In addition, the bank’s community development
services for the same time period were evaluated for the service test.
Examination Analysis
The evaluation of the bank’s record of lending in the individual assessment areas includes the use of and
comparison to demographic characteristics. The primary sources for the demographic information are the 2000
and 2010 U.S. Census and Dunn & Bradstreet data. Demographic characteristics of a particular assessment area
are useful in analyzing the bank’s record of lending since they provide a means of estimating loan demand and
identifying lending opportunities. To understand small business loan demand, self-reported data of revenue size
and geographical location from business entities are collected and published by Dunn & Bradstreet. The
demographic data should not be construed as defining an expected level of lending in a particular area or to a
particular group of borrowers. In addition to demographic data, general housing and economic conditions are
also considered in order to understand the bank’s performance context and to evaluate the bank appropriately.
Loans are evaluated to determine the lending activity inside the bank’s assessment area. In addition, loans
inside the assessment area are evaluated using the geographic and borrower income distribution for each
assessment area. The bank’s geographic distribution with respect to HMDA loans is assessed by comparing the
percentage of loans made in each geography type (low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income) to the
percentage of owner-occupied units in each geography type. Small business loans are compared to the
percentage of small businesses within each geographic income category.
The bank’s borrower income distribution with respect to HMDA loans is assessed by comparing the percentage
of loans made to borrowers in each income category (low-, moderate-, middle-, and upper-income) to the
percentage of families in each income category. The bank’s borrower income distribution with respect to small
business loans is assessed by comparing the percentage of loans made to businesses in each revenue category
(less than or equal to $1 million or greater than $1 million) to the percentage of total businesses in each revenue
category.
The bank’s lending performance is also compared to the performance of aggregate lenders. Aggregate lenders
include all lenders required to report HMDA and CRA data within the respective assessment areas. The bank’s
market share of deposits and lending is discussed to provide an understanding of how IBERIABANK ranks
within the respective assessment areas.
Community development activities were reviewed to determine if they have community development as a
primary purpose and meet the geographic requirements of the regulation. Qualified community development
activities were analyzed from both the quantitative and qualitative perspectives to understand the volume of
activity impacting a particular assessment area, the innovativeness of those activities and their responsiveness to
local community development and credit needs. When appropriate, peer comparisons were conducted using
annualized performance metrics to gauge the relative performance of the institution in a particular assessment
area.
In order to understand community development and community credit needs in the respective assessment areas,
several sources are used. These sources include contacts with community representatives familiar with
affordable housing and/or small business and community development; review of publically accessible data;
and analysis of documents and plans that describe the community development environment in local markets.
The community contacts are located throughout the bank’s assessment areas and include representatives of
community-based organizations, municipalities, and quasi-government agencies.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
5
Certain comments concerning the local economies were consistent throughout the assessment areas. The recent
recession has had a major impact on many of the bank’s assessment areas leading to job losses and foreclosures.
Community contacts agreed that the recovery was underway in most markets but the lingering effects of the
housing and economic crisis were still evident, particularly in low- and moderate-income communities. Many
contacts also noted that the jobs lost during the recession were being replaced by new jobs in lower wage
sectors. Therefore, despite the recovery, many lower-income households are still struggling. Based on
discussions with the community contacts, common needs identified in all assessment areas that could provide
opportunities for bank participation included affordable housing, small business lending, and investment in
community development organizations, financial education, and household financial stability.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
6
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s overall lending test rating is High Satisfactory. The overall lending performance is good in
four states (Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas) while performance is adequate in two states (Florida and
Tennessee). The bank’s geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate distribution throughout the
assessment areas. The bank’s penetration of loans among borrowers of different income levels and businesses
of different sizes is adequate. The bank made a relatively high level of community development loans during
the review period.
References are made throughout the report to IBERIABANK’s lending distribution by geography and borrower
income, as described in the preceding section. Detailed information about the bank’s HMDA- and CRA-
reportable loans in the full scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices G and H while details of lending
in limited scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices I-J. In some assessment area and product
discussions, specific numbers are quoted from these tables to support relevant points; otherwise, general
references are made comparing performance and the reader should refer to the tables for specific data.
The following table summarizes IBERIABANK’s lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31,
2012. As shown, the bank originated more HMDA loans than small business loans by number during the
review period so HMDA loans were weighted more heavily in deriving the final lending ratings. In addition,
the bank’s overall lending activity increased by almost 40 percent between 2011 and 2012. While loans in both
2011 and 2012 were evaluated, due to the bank’s significant growth and expansion over the review period, the
bank’s performance in 2012 was weighted slightly more than the performance in 2011 in determining the final
lending rating. A breakdown of the bank’s lending activity for 2011 and 2012 can be found in Appendix F.
Detailed information about the bank’s lending activity can be found in the state sections of this report.
IBERIABANK offers several programs with the specific purpose of helping to meet housing-related needs of
low- and moderate-income individuals and communities. Notably, the bank created the IBERIABANK Subsidy
Program in 2012 to provide up to $4,000 in down payment or closing cost assistance for the purchase or
refinance of loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers. The bank has pledged to provide up to $1.0
million in assistance over the next three years. The bank also created a new home improvement loan product,
which is an unsecured loan that can be used for improving or renovating a borrower’s primary residence. The
product was designed to assist homeowners who lacked the equity in their homes to secure a traditional home
improvement loan to complete needed home improvements or repairs. In addition, IBERIABANK leverages
Loan Type # % $(000s) %
Total Consumer related 0 0 0
Home Improvement 1,554 -- $17,750 --
Home Purchase 8,118 -- $582,407 --
Multi-Family Housing 91 -- $53,186 --
Refinancing 7,187 -- $558,825 --
Total HMDA related 16,950 73 $1,212,168 68
Small Business 5,858 -- $534,103 --
Total Small Business related 5,858 25 $534,103 30
Small Farm 352 -- $19,135 --
Total Small Farm related 352 2 $19,135 1
TO TAL LO ANS 23,160 100 $1,765,406 100
Summary of Lending Activity
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
7
funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas to provide additional down payment and closing cost
assistance grants and subsidized financing for affordable housing projects. Finally, across the bank’s entire
footprint, mortgage lenders originate loans utilizing many different down payment assistance and other subsidy
programs for low- and moderate borrowers. All of these actions contributed to the increase in the bank’s
lending to low- and moderate-income borrowers during the review period.
The table below shows the distribution of IBERIABANK’s lending inside and outside its assessment area.
Affiliate loan data, in accordance with the CRA, is not included in the assessment area concentration
performance review. IBERIABANK originated a substantial majority of its loans within its assessment areas,
reflecting excellent assessment area penetration.
Geographic Distribution and Distribution by Borrower Income and Business Revenue Size
The overall geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending reflects adequate penetration in low-
and moderate-income geographies. Two of the nine full-scope assessment areas are considered good, five are
considered adequate, and two are considered poor for overall geographic distribution. The overall distribution
among borrowers of different income levels and businesses of different sizes is adequate. Eight of the nine full-
scope assessment areas are considered adequate and one is considered poor for borrower distribution.
Loan Types
% $(000s) % # % $(000s) %
Home Improvement 82.2% $29,527 83.7% 276 17.8% $5,758 16.3%
Home Purchase - Conventional 87.7% $166,929 77.4% 111 12.3% $48,642 22.6%
Home Purchase - FHA 100.0% $22,694 100.0% 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Home Purchase - VA 100.0% $2,024 100.0% 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Multi-Family Housing 87.9% $104,795 80.7% 11 12.1% $25,073 19.3%
Refinancing 88.7% $291,893 85.0% 185 11.3% $51,478 15.0%
Total HMDA related 86.7% $617,862 82.5% 583 13.3% $130,951 17.5%
Small Business 88.2% $1,043,956 85.2% 689 11.8% $181,677 14.8%
Total Small Bus. related 88.2% $1,043,956 85.2% 689 11.8% $181,677 14.8%
Small Farm 92.3% $32,876 85.1% 27 7.7% $5,737 14.9%
Total Small Farm related 92.3% $32,876 85.1% 27 7.7% $5,737 14.9%
TOTAL LOANS 87.7% $1,694,694 84.2% 1,299 12.3% $318,365 15.8%
Note: Affiliate loans not included
Lending Inside and Outside the Assessment Area
5,169
5,169
325
325
9,305
792
190
14
80
1,457
3,811
Inside Outside
#
1,278
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
8
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made a high level of community
development loans during the review period. The bank
originated or renewed 81 community development loans
totaling more than $258.3 million during the review
period. The largest concentration of community
development loans by state was in Louisiana with $118.5
million, accounting for nearly 46 percent of bank-wide
community development lending. The performance in
Louisiana was driven by the amount of community
development lending in the New Orleans assessment area.
Texas accounted for approximately 16 percent of the
community development lending, followed by Arkansas, and Florida with about 15 percent each of the activity.
The community development loans originated or renewed during the evaluation period were for a variety of
purposes, including the financing of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals; promoting
economic development by financing small businesses that resulted in job creation and/or retention; revitalizing
and/or stabilizing targeted low- and moderate-income census tracts or other qualified geographies; and
community services targeted to low- and moderate-income individuals. During the review period, the bank
provided over $22 million in financing to support the development of 3 Low Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) projects providing over 230 units of new affordable housing for low- and moderate-income
individuals.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s investment performance is rated High Satisfactory based on the overall level of qualified
community development investments and contributions provided in the various assessment areas and across the
bank’s footprint. Specifically, the bank’s performance is excellent in one state (Louisiana), while performance
is good in three states (Alabama, Arkansas, and Texas), and adequate in two states (Florida and Tennessee). By
assessment area, the bank had excellent performance in one full-scope assessment area while performance was
good in five full-scope assessment areas, and adequate in three full-scope assessment areas.
IBERIABANK had qualified investments totaling
approximately $97.2 million within its assessment areas,
including $57.1 million in investments made during the review
period. Most of the bank’s investments (by dollar) support
affordable housing through the purchase of securities backed
by government-guaranteed mortgages to qualified low- and
moderate-income borrowers. The bank also invested in
several Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) projects
that provide affordable rental housing primarily for individuals
earning less than 60 percent of the area median income.
Finally, the bank provided support for community
revitalization and stabilization by purchasing New Market Tax
Credits which provided equity capital for projects in low- and moderate-income communities or designated
disaster areas. The bank was very involved with recovery efforts in New Orleans and across the Gulf Coast
Loan Purpose # $('000s)
Affordable Housing 32 101,793
Community Services 19 65,358
Economic Development 8 7,403
Revitalize & Stabilize 23 83,784
Total 81 258,338
Investment Purpose # $('000s)
Affordable Housing 271 $57,637
Community Services 0 $0
Economic
Development
1 $1,000
Revitalize & Stabilize 10 $38,554
Total 282 $97,191
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
9
after Hurricane Katrina, and through the NMTC program, invested over $38.6 million in equity capital for
projects that helped stabilize and revitalize low-income communities and those that were impacted by the
hurricane.
IBERIABANK made 591 qualified grants totaling $2.5 million
to organizations with a purpose of community development
within the assessment areas. The majority of the donations
provided support for organizations engaged in community
services for low- and moderate-income individuals or
communities, including but not limited to financial counseling;
youth and family programs; education and charter schools;
emergency assistance including food and housing; job training;
and mental health services. The bank also provided significant
financial support for affordable housing, including almost
$650,000 in mortgage grants through the IBERIABANK
Subsidy Program to help low- and moderate-income borrowers
with downpayment and closing cost assistance. The grants were provided in partnership with nonprofit
organizations in the local communities.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions can be found in Appendix K; additional detail
regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the state and full-scope assessment area
sections.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test is rated High Satisfactory. IBERIABANK’s performance
is considered good in four states (Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Tennessee) and adequate in two states
(Alabama and Texas). Under the service test, both retail and community development services are considered.
During the review period, the bank expanded its geographic coverage significantly and added a number of new
branches. Therefore, retail services were weighted slightly more than community development services in
developing the final service test rating. Specific details of the service performance are discussed in the
respective full scope assessment area sections of this report.
Retail Services
Retail delivery systems are reasonably accessible to geographies and individuals of different income levels.
During the exam period of January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK opened 20 de novo
branches, including 5 new branches within low- and moderate-income census tracts. The bank closed 17
branches and relocated 5 branches; 4 of the branches closed were in moderate-income census tracts. Three of
the closures in moderate-income tracts were the result of the bank’s exit from the Jacksonville, Florida market.
A specific listing of the branches opened or closed during the period may be obtained by accessing
IBERIABANK’s CRA public file, which is available at any IBERIABANK branch.
IBERIABANK’s record of opening and closing of branches has not adversely affected the accessibility of
banking services to low- and moderate-income geographies. In addition, banking services and business hours
do not vary in a way that inconveniences any portion of IBERIABANK’s assessment areas, particularly low-
and moderate-income geographies and individuals. The bank does not offer weekend or extended hours in
many markets but in those where extended hours are offered, they are also offered at some branches in low- and
moderate-income geographies. Branches located in low-income census tracts are in New Orleans market only;
however, in the Little Rock and Sarasota assessment areas, the bank has a relatively high number of branches in
moderate-income geographies.
Contribution Purpose # $('000s)
Affordable Housing 221 $910
Community Services 341 $1,457
Economic Development 19 $122
Revitalize & Stabilize 10 $23
Total 591 $2,512
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
10
In an effort to expand access to retail banking services, IBERIABANK offers several retail products to meet the
financial needs of lower-income customers and small businesses. For instance, the bank offers free business
banking and a free checking account for consumers with a low opening deposit requirement assuming the client
receives $500 in direct deposits each month. In addition, the bank introduced the IBERIABANK credit builder
product during the examination period, which is a CD-secured loan to assist borrowers with little or no credit
establish or improve their credit profile. The bank also participates in organized programs and other outreach
efforts across its footprint to expand banking access to low- and moderate-income consumers.
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s branches as of December 31, 2012, is found in the table below.
This distribution is based on 2010 census tracts. The bank’s branch distribution as of December 31, 2011,
which is based on the 2000 census can be found in Appendix F. The bank’s branch distribution changed during
the review period due to branching activity and the realignment of census tracts as a result of the 2010 census.
Specifically, the percentage of branches in moderate income census tracts increased from 7.6 percent to 17.6
percent of all branches, while the share of branches in middle-income census tracts declined from 49.1 percent
to 39.6 percent. While branch distribution for both time frames was taken into account in the service test
analysis, emphasis was placed on branch distribution as of December 31, 2012.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK provides an excellent level of community development services throughout its assessment areas
with 10,030 hours of community development services through 345 service activities during the review period.
Community development services were excellent in Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Tennessee, and good in
Alabama and Texas. IBERIABANK’s directors, officers, and staff members are involved in numerous
organizations and activities that promote or facilitate affordable housing for low- and moderate-income
individuals, services for low- and moderate-income individuals, economic development, and revitalization of
low- and moderate-income areas. Bank representatives are also involved with financial education outreach
efforts in every assessment area. Notably, board service hours represent the majority of service hours reported
in most of the full scope assessment areas, indicating that the bank has an ongoing commitment to individual
communities. Also, an IBERIABANK team provided extensive loss mitigation services to low- and moderate-
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # %
Low 3 1.6% 1 0 1 0 0 Total 5 2.4% 4 2.1% 1 0 1 6.3% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 3 2 0 0 1 0 0
Moderate 32 17.6% 6 0 28 20 10 Total 35 16.6% 34 17.4% 6 0 1 6.3% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 2 1 0 0 1 0 0
Middle 72 39.6% 6 5 68 33 27 Total 80 37.9% 75 38.5% 6 3 5 31.3% 0 2
DTO 1 0 0 SA 6 1 0 0 5 0 0
Upper 75 41.2% 10 4 68 27 20 Total 91 43.1% 82 42.1% 9 4 9 56.3% 0 0
DTO 3 0 0 1 SA 10 2 0 0 8 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 182 100.0% 23 9 165 80 57 Total 211 100.0% 195 100.0% 22 7 16 100.0% 0 2
DTO 4 0 0 1 SA 21 6 0 0 15 0 0
DTO - Drive thru only is a subset of total branches.
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
1073 30.0%
34 1.0%
3,577 100.0%
10.1%
898 25.1%
1211 33.9%
# % # %
361
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs
Census Tracts
# %
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Institution
11
income homebuyers facing foreclosure, primarily in Alabama, and Florida. Finally, several bank
representatives provided hundreds of hours in technical assistance to nonprofit organizations, including a
community development financial institution, and many hours of one-on-one credit and financial counseling for
low- and moderate-income individuals.
FAIR LENDING OR OTHER ILLEGAL CREDIT PRACTICES REVIEW
Pursuant to 12 CFR 228.28(c) in determining a bank’s CRA rating, the Federal Reserve System considers
evidence of discriminatory or other illegal credit practices in any geography by the bank, or in any assessment
area by an affiliate whose loans have been considered as a part of the bank’s lending performance. The Federal
Reserve Bank of Atlanta did not identify evidence of discriminatory or other illegal credit practices with respect
to this institution.
Further, section 1025 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub. L. 111-203)
assigns to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) exclusive examination authority, and primary
enforcement authority, to ensure compliance by banks with Federal consumer financial laws, if the bank has
more than $10 billion in assets. The CFPB has not provided the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta with any
information about, or other evidence of, discriminatory or other illegal credit practices relative to this institution
with respect to the Federal consumer financial laws.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Louisiana
12
CRA RATING FOR LOUISANA: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: Outstanding
The Service Test is rated: High Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment areas. In
addition, the distribution of borrowers reflects adequate penetration among customers of different
income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes.
The bank is a leader in making community development loans within the assessment areas.
The bank provides an excellent level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment areas.
Retail services are accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income levels in the
assessment areas.
The bank is a leader in providing community development services throughout the assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Louisiana
13
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for two assessment area in the State of Louisiana:
Lafayette New Orleans
Limited scope reviews were conducted for the remaining nine assessment areas:
Acadiana
Allen
Baton Rouge
Houma
Lake Charles
Lincoln
Monroe
Morehouse
Shreveport
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for these assessment areas are consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN LOUISIANA
Lending activity in Louisiana accounted for 51.5 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Louisiana represented 47.7 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small
business and small farm lending represented 63.6 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm
lending. As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $5.2 billion in deposits in Louisiana accounting for 54.8 percent of
IBERIABANK’s total deposits. IBERIABANK ranks 5th
out of 158 insured institutions in the state with 5.8
percent of total deposits. As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 81 branch offices in Louisiana
representing 44.3 percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the state of Louisiana is High Satisfactory. IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and
small business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in determining the lending test rating for
Louisiana because the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than small business loans. Additionally,
the New Orleans assessment area received slightly greater consideration when determining the state rating
because it holds a greater percentage of the bank’s deposits, loans, and branches in the state of Louisiana than
the Lafayette assessment area. The full-scope areas selected together represent 53.9 percent of the deposits in
the assessment areas in Louisiana as well as 43.2 percent of the branches. The full-scope assessment areas
represent 49.8 percent of the HMDA loans and 51.4 percent of the small business loans in the state. Lastly,
74.9 percent of community development loans occurred in the two full scope assessment areas. Thus, the two
full-scope assessment areas represent a majority of the branches, deposits and lending in the state of Louisiana.
IBERIABANK originated a relatively low number of small farm loans in Louisiana during the review period
(50); therefore, no detailed discussion of these loans is included in this section of the report.
IBERIABANK offers several programs with the specific purpose of helping to meet housing-related needs of
low- and moderate-income individuals and communities in Louisiana. Most notably, IBERIABANK partners
with Southern Mutual Financial Services, Inc., a community development financial institution (CDFI) to
originate flexible mortgage products for low- and moderate-income borrowers throughout the state of
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Louisiana
14
Louisiana. Over the exam period, IBERIABANK purchased 49 loans totaling over $3.8 million to qualified
homeowners. The bank is also very involved with this organization from a community development service
perspective, with a bank representative serving on the loan committee and providing hundreds of hours in
technical assistance.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices F-H while details on lending in the limited scope
assessment areas can be found in Appendices I-J.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans was adequate in both full scope assessment areas. Additionally, the distribution of loans by
borrower income and business revenue size is adequate. The borrower distribution is considered adequate in
both full scope assessment areas. A detailed discussion of the geographic and borrower distribution of lending
for the full scope assessment areas is included in the next section of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in Louisiana. The bank made 33
community development loans totaling $118.5 million across the state during the review period. Loans
primarily supported the revitalization and stabilization of low-income and designated disaster areas and
affordable housing. More information on community development lending can be found in each full-scope
assessment area section.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Louisiana is Outstanding. The bank made excellent use of qualified investments
and contributions with total investments of $58.1 million and contributions of $1.4 million in the state. The
bank exhibited excellent responsiveness to the credit and community development needs through its investment
activities in the New Orleans assessment area while performance in Lafayette was good. Altogether, almost 83
percent of the total investments and contributions were made in the two full scope assessment areas.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 3,406 30.6% $607,111 29.9%
HMDA Refinance 3,617 32.5% $720,628 35.4%
HMDA Home Improvement 740 6.6% $18,867 0.9%
HMDA Multi-Family 40 0.4% $44,728 2.2%
Total HMDA 7,803 70.0% $1,391,334 68.4%
Total Small Business 3,289 29.5% $639,533 31.4%
Total Farm 50 0.4% $2,882 0.1%
TOTAL LOANS 11,142 100.0% $2,033,749 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Louisiana
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Louisiana
15
Additionally, the bank had several statewide contributions to support affordable housing and economic
development initiatives that benefitted all of the bank’s assessment areas in Louisiana.
As discussed earlier, the IBERIABANK has a longstanding partnership with the Southern Mutual Help
Association and its financing affiliate, Southern Mutual Financial Services in the Acadiana assessment area.
The bank has committed to multi-year support totaling $250,000 to help the organization provide
homeownership and financial counseling, as well as assistance with new affordable housing development. The
bank has also partnered with the organization to provide down-payment and closing cost assistance grants to
low- and moderate-income homebuyers and by purchasing first mortgages from the organization in order to
create new loan capital for the CDFI.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Service Test
The service test rating for Louisiana is High Satisfactory.
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and hours of operation
do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-income
geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank’s record of opening and closing of offices has
not affected the accessibility of its delivery systems, including to low- and moderate-income geographies and/or
low- and moderate-income individuals.
Community Development Services
The bank is a leader in providing community development services that benefit residents and small businesses
in Louisiana. The bank’s community development services were excellent in both full scope assessment areas
in the state. Notably, IBERIABANK reported a significant number of community development board service
hours indicating local bank employees are engaged in markets across the state. For example, a bank employee
has given hundreds of hours providing technical assistance and serving on the loan review committee for a
statewide CDFI. Additional details regarding specific community development services can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
16
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA
ASSESSMENT AREA
The New Orleans assessment area includes Jefferson, Orleans, St. John the Baptist, and St. Tammany.
Parishes and is part of the seven-parish New Orleans-Metairie MSA. IBERIABANK operates 23 branches in
the assessment area, including one in a low-income census tract and 3 in moderate-income census tracts; 11
branches are in Jefferson Parish, 7 branches in Orleans Parish, 4 branches in St. Tammany Parish, and one
branch in St. John the Baptist Parish.
Population and Income Characteristics
New Orleans, located in Orleans Parish, is the principal city within the assessment area. Hurricane Katrina led
to dramatic population loss across the entire MSA, but over the past eight years, the region has slowly
recovered. According to the Greater New Orleans Data Community Data Center, as of July 2012, the U.S.
Census Bureau estimated New Orleans’ population at 369,250, or 76 percent of its 2000 population of 484,674.
The metro area, with 1.2 million residents, has 92 percent of its 2000 population of 1.3 million.2
The demographics of the New Orleans metro area have changed since Katrina. While the city of New Orleans
is still majority African-American, the percentage of African-American residents has declined from 67 percent
in 2000 to 59 percent in 2012. The region has become much more diverse due to a significant increase in the
Hispanic population.
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following table sets forth the
estimated median family income for 2011 and 2012 for the New Orleans-Metairie, LA MSA and also provides a
breakdown of the estimated annual family income for each income category (low, moderate, middle, and
upper). The table indicates that the HUD estimated median family income for New Orleans increased slightly
from $61,100 in 2011 to $61,900 in 2012.
Demographic Characteristics by Census Tract
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
2 Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. Facts for Features: Hurricane Katrina Recovery. August 28, 2013. (accessed on
November 4, 2013); available at: http://www.gnocdc.org/Factsforfeatures/HurricaneKatrinaRecovery/
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $61,100 0 - $30,549 $30,550 - $48,879 $48,880 - $73,319 $73,320 - & above
2012 $61,900 0 - $30,949 $30,950 - $49,519 $49,520 - $74,279 $74,280 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
17
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
The data shows the substantial changes that have occurred in the region as a result of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Overall, the assessment area lost five census tracts between 2000 and 2010. The number of low-income tracts
remained constant but the percentage of low-income tracts declined slightly from 16.6 to 16.3 percent. The
percentage of moderate income tracts increased slightly from 24.6 percent to 25.9 percent.
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 453,985 housing units in the assessment area in 2010, of which 53.0
percent were owner-occupied, 29.8 percent were rental units, and 17.2 percent were vacant. In low-income
tracts, 24.8 percent of housing units are owner-occupied and in moderate-income tracts, 38.5 percent of units
were owner-occupied. The median age of the housing units in low-and moderate-income tracts is significantly
higher than the median age for the assessment area overall.
The total number of housing units in the assessment area declined by 7.1 percent between 2000 and 2010, but
the loss of units was even more pronounced low-income tracts, where the number of units fell by 20 percent
while the number of vacant housing units increased by 72 percent. While low- and moderate-income
neighborhoods have always struggled with housing vacancy, as a result of Hurricane Katrina, 28.6 percent of all
housing units in low-income census tracts and 22.9 percent of units in moderate-income census tracts are
vacant.
The loss of housing units in low-income tracts, the high concentration of vacant housing units and age of the
housing stock indicate that lending opportunities in the low- and moderate-income tracts may be limited.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
18
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
58
16.6
30,859
10.3
14,294
46.3
72,951
24.4
Moderate-income
86
24.6
62,530
20.9
15,435
24.7
48,186
16.1
Middle-income
110
31.4
111,520
37.3
11,812
10.6
55,800
18.7
Upper-income
94
26.9
94,197
31.5
4,119
4.4
122,169
40.8
Unknown-income
2
0.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
350
100.0
299,106
100.0
45,660
15.3
299,106
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
56,436
13,530
5.1
24.0
32,979
58.4
9,927
17.6
Moderate-income
111,699
45,249
16.9
40.5
54,168
48.5
12,282
11.0
Middle-income
177,181
107,910
40.4
60.9
55,424
31.3
13,847
7.8
Upper-income
148,612
100,681
37.7
67.7
38,080
25.6
9,851
6.6
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
493,928
267,370
100.0
54.1
180,651
36.6
45,907
9.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4,886
6.0
4,267
5.8
384
9.6
235
7.5
Moderate-income
14,871
18.3
13,312
18.0
867
21.7
692
22.1
Middle-income
28,988
35.7
26,596
35.9
1,301
32.5
1,091
34.8
Upper-income
32,406
39.9
29,846
40.3
1,450
36.2
1,110
35.5
Unknown-income
38
0.0
33
0.0
2
0.0
3
0.1
Total Assessment Area
81,189
100.0
74,054
100.0
4,004
100.0
3,131
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.2
4.9
3.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7
1.9
7
1.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
37
10.0
35
9.7
2
22.2
0
0.0
Middle-income
195
52.6
189
52.2
6
66.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
132
35.6
131
36.2
1
11.1
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
371
100.0
362
100.0
9
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.6
2.4
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
19
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
58
16.3
18,212
7.4
6,894
37.9
57,312
23.4
Moderate-income
92
25.9
51,590
21.1
9,577
18.6
41,063
16.8
Middle-income
104
29.3
97,681
39.9
9,530
9.8
45,138
18.5
Upper-income
94
26.5
77,067
31.5
2,860
3.7
101,037
41.3
Unknown-income
7
2.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
355
100.0
244,550
100.0
28,861
11.8
244,550
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
45,408
11,258
4.6
24.8
21,153
46.6
12,997
28.6
Moderate-income
110,302
42,474
17.5
38.5
42,541
38.6
25,287
22.9
Middle-income
167,308
102,162
42.0
61.1
42,512
25.4
22,634
13.5
Upper-income
135,786
87,354
35.9
64.3
30,353
22.4
18,079
13.3
Unknown-income
181
11
0.0
6.1
9
5.0
161
89.0
Total Assessment Area
458,985
243,259
100.0
53.0
136,568
29.8
79,158
17.2
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,744
6.2
3,285
6.0
282
8.2
177
7.6
Moderate-income
11,297
18.7
10,060
18.4
721
21.0
516
22.0
Middle-income
19,305
32.0
17,790
32.6
850
24.8
665
28.4
Upper-income
25,958
43.0
23,422
42.9
1,563
45.6
973
41.5
Unknown-income
76
0.1
49
0.1
15
0.4
12
0.5
Total Assessment Area
60,380
100.0
54,606
100.0
3,431
100.0
2,343
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.4
5.7
3.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7
2.4
7
2.5
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
21
7.2
19
6.7
2
28.6
0
0.0
Middle-income
132
45.4
130
45.8
2
28.6
0
0.0
Upper-income
131
45.0
128
45.1
3
42.9
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
291
100.0
284
100.0
7
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.6
2.4
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
20
Housing Characteristics
Several major economic shocks, including Hurricane Katrina, the BP Oil Spill in 2010 and the national
economic downturn have taken a heavy toll on the housing market in New Orleans but overall, the market is
starting to recover. According to the National Association of Realtors, the median housing price for the New
Orleans MSA declined between 2010 and 2011, but started rising again in 2012 to $156,200.3 Home prices are
highest in Orleans parish.
Single-family home sales in the metro area have fallen substantially since 2007 due to the credit crunch and
weak economy. However, the market hit bottom in 2011, and for the first time in four years, the number of
home sales rose in 2012. Not all markets have rebounded equally, with stronger sales and price increases in
eastern Orleans Parish and Jefferson Parish, while eastern New Orleans and the West Bank in Orleans Parish, as
well as St John’s Parish continue to struggle.4 Another indication that the market is improving is the decline in
distressed sales. In the 12 months ending August 2013, distressed sales comprised 18 percent of total sales
compared to 23 percent a year earlier.5
New home construction, as evidenced by the number of building permits issued, declined by 51 percent during
the recession (2007 to 2010) before slowly picking up again in 2011. Most of the new construction is occurring
in St. Tammany Parish.6
The New Orleans housing market has been adversely impacted by foreclosures and mortgage delinquencies
though conditions are improving. The percent of seriously delinquent mortgages in the assessment area
(defined as more than 90 days past due or in foreclosure) fell from 8.7 percent in January 2011 to 7.6 percent in
December 2012, but remains well above the rate statewide of 6.2 percent.7
Housing costs, particularly for lower income renters, are a significant challenge in New Orleans. In Orleans
Parish, 56 percent of renters are considered housing cost burdened, meaning that housing costs account for more
than 30 percent of household income. Housing is a bit more affordable in the remainder of the assessment area,
yet almost 50 percent of renters in Jefferson and St Tammany parishes are cost-burdened.8 The 2013 Out of
Reach study by the National Low Income Housing Coalition confirms housing affordability is a problem,
finding that a minimum wage worker would have to work 2.5 jobs (assuming 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a
year) in order to afford the fair market rent for a two bedroom apartment in the New Orleans MSA.9
The significant number of vacant or blighted properties in the New Orleans has negatively impacted the housing
market and neighborhood stabilization more generally. As of March 2012, there were an estimated 35,700
blighted homes and empty lots in New Orleans, down from 43,755 in September 2010, as indicated by United
3 National Association of Realtors. “Metropolitan Median Area Prices and Affordability” (accessed on November 3, 2013); available
from: http://www.realtor.org/sites/default/files/reports/2012/embargoes/2012-q1-metro-home-prices-
49bc10b1efdc1b8cc3eb66dbcdad55f7/metro-home-prices-q1-single-family-2012-05-09.pdf 4 The Times-Picayune. “Local real estate market on rebound as housing recession nears end.” February 15, 2013. (accessed on
November 5, 2013); available at: http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2013/02/local_real_estate_market_on_re.html 5 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. Market at a Glance: New
Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA CBSA. (accessed on November 6, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/MCCharts/php/pdf/223538.pdf 6 U.S. Census Bureau, Building Permits Survey. Accessed through PolicyMap (accessed on November 6, 2013); available from
www.policymap.com 7 Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta calculations of data provided by LPS.
8 U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on June 5, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com
9 National Low Income Housing Coalition. “Out of Reach 2013.” (accessed on June 27, 2013); available at: http://nlihc.org/oor/2013
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
21
States Postal Service (USPS) data.10
However, as described earlier, vacant and blighted properties are more
concentrated in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, creating additional hardship for the residents of
these neighborhoods and challenging neighborhood revitalization efforts.
Employment and Economic Conditions
The New Orleans economy has gone through upheaval in the last ten years, though conditions have improved
significantly in the last few years. Since the onset of the recession, job losses in the New Orleans metro area
have been less severe than across the nation. From 2008 to 2010, the New Orleans metro lost only 1 percent of
jobs compared to 5 percent of jobs lost nationwide. The economic performance was fueled by the $100 billion
in government investment to aid in the region’s rebuilding, which also buffered the region from the impact of
the national recession. The region did experience some job loss but by 2012, New Orleans had recouped all its
recession-era losses and reached 1 percent above its 2008 job level, while the nation remained more than 2
percent below 2008 job levels.11
Despite the relatively strong performance during the recession, the total
number of jobs in the New Orleans metro remains at about 87 percent of pre-Katrina job levels.12
Jobs have
been shifting within the metro area, with more jobs moving out to suburban parishes. Jefferson Parish was the
top job center in 2011 with 38 percent of metro area jobs.13
New Orleans is still heavily dependent on the energy sector, but the economy has become much more diverse,
and is receiving national recognition as a center for innovation. The region has employment concentrations in
multiple industry sectors, including wholesale and retail trade, leisure and hospitality, government, professional
and business services, education and health services, and mining and construction. Major employers in the
region include the Oschner Health System, the Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Northrop
Grumman Ship Systems, and Tulane University.14
Small businesses have traditionally been an anchor to the New Orleans economy. However, D&B information
indicates that the number of small businesses in the assessment area declined by 26 percent over the review
period. In 2012, there were 60,380 businesses within the New Orleans assessment area of which 90.4 percent
had total annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small
businesses.15
Access to credit for small businesses declined significantly during the recession. Between 2007
and 2010, small business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 72 percent before beginning
10
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. Benchmarks for Blight: How much blight does New Orleans have? August 21,
2012. (accessed on November 5, 2013); available at: http://www.gnocdc.org/BenchmarksForBlight/index.html 11
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. Facts for Features: Hurricane Katrina Recovery. August 28, 2013. (accessed on
November 4, 2013); available at: http://www.gnocdc.org/Factsforfeatures/HurricaneKatrinaRecovery/ 12
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. Market at a Glance: New
Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA CBSA. (accessed on November 6, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/MCCharts/php/pdf/223538.pdf 13
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. The New Orleans Index at Eight. August, 2013. (accessed on November 4, 2013);
available at: https://gnocdc.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/GNOCDC_NewOrleansIndexAtEight.pdf 14
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. New Orleans, Louisiana.
April 1, 2011. (accessed November 5, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pdf/NewOrleans_Comp.pdf 15
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
22
to stabilize in 2011. However, small business lending remains at about 50 percent of peak lending levels.16
The
region has experienced strong growth in the number of start-ups. The New Orleans metro area’s rate of
business startups continues to grow, reaching 501 startups per 100,000 adults during the most recent three-year
period ending in 2012 — a level which is 56 percent higher than the national average.17
New Orleans was spared from the worst of the national recession but still experienced rising unemployment
starting in 2009. Unemployment peaked in 2010 and as shown in the table below, the unemployment rate in
New Orleans MSA declined from 7.2 percent to 6.5 percent between 2011 and 2012. Unemployment is highest
in Orleans Parish and lowest in St. Tammany Parish.
The New Orleans economy was starting to stabilize from Katrina when the 2008 recession hit and stalled the
recovery. In 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and subsequent moratorium on oil drilling created another
setback. Since 2010, however, most sectors have been adding jobs, with the exception of manufacturing, oil
and gas, government, administrative, and waste services. The strongest growth has occurred in leisure and
hospitality and business and professional services. Tourism hit record levels in the last few years, creating
many new jobs, though the jobs typically pay less than $32,000 per year.18
There is a sense of optimism regarding New Orleans economic future. Several major projects are underway,
including the new Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the new University Medical Center. These projects will
cost an estimated $2.2 billion, and are expected to create thousands of new jobs. In addition, these projects will
anchor a new economic development district near downtown New Orleans focused on biosciences that is
16
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 17
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. The New Orleans Index at Eight. August, 2013. (accessed on November 4, 2013);
available at: https://gnocdc.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/GNOCDC_NewOrleansIndexAtEight.pdf 18
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. The New Orleans Index at Eight. August, 2013. (accessed on November 4, 2013);
available at: https://gnocdc.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/GNOCDC_NewOrleansIndexAtEight.pdf
2011 2012
Jefferson Parish 6.8 6.2
Orleans Parish 8.6 7.8
St. John the Baptist Parish 9.4 7.9
St. Tammany Parish 5.8 5.2
New Orleans MSA 7.2 6.5
Louisiana 7.3 6.4
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
23
expected to bring additional jobs and investment.19
Overall, since Katrina, $4.2 billion has been invested or is
slated to be invested in the revitalization of downtown New Orleans in the form of housing, hospitals, schools,
infrastructure improvements, parks, grocery stores, and other neighborhood amenities.20
Competition
The New Orleans banking market is competitive, yet three institutions hold more than 60 percent of all deposits.
According to the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of Deposits Report, Capital One has 30.7 percent of deposits,
followed by Whitney with 17.1 percent and JP Morgan Chase with 15.1 percent. IBERIABANK is ranked 6th
in the market with 5.0 percent of deposits ($1.4 billion). Overall, there are 36 banks active in the market
operating 333 branches and a total of $27.8 billion in deposits.
Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase are the largest HMDA lenders in the New Orleans market, with 18.4 percent
and 10.3 percent of total HMDA loans, respectively in 2012. IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 9th
and
IBERIABANK ranked 21st in 2011 and combined, reported 3.4 percent of HMDA loans in 2011. In 2012,
IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 5th
and IBERIABANK ranked 22nd
and combined, reported 3.9 percent of
total HMDA loans.
IBERIABANK ranked 12th
in CRA lending in both 2011 and 2012, though the volume of the bank’s CRA
lending increased over the review period. In 2011, IBERIABANK had 1.7 percent of total CRA loans and in
2012 the bank reported 2.2 percent of loans.
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
The New Orleans area faced affordable housing issues prior to Katrina striking. The significant damage caused
by the hurricane and the related spikes in the cost of living only compounded the problem. 2010 housing needs
assessment found that insurance increased by as much as 400 percent, construction costs increased 33 percent
and the fair market rent increased by 40 percent. Households that previously could afford a market rate unit
could no longer afford to rent even a subsidized unit and it was extremely difficult for low- and moderate-
income households to afford housing in the New Orleans MSA.21
According to the City of New Orleans 2011 Draft Action Plan, these affordable housing issues persist. Some of
the primary barriers to affordable housing in New Orleans are the limited supply of housing and the resulting
high costs for rental and ownership; credit related issues; predatory lending practices; and a lack of funds for
down payments.22
The 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan mentions that 28 percent of working households are faced with severe
housing costs burdens, with renters, particularly elderly ones, carrying the highest burden. Although rent
increases have subsided in the past two years, they remain about 35 percent above the pre-Katrina levels.
19
BioDistrict New Orleans. (accessed on November 6, 2013); available at: http://biodistrictneworleans.org/ 20
NEWCITY Neighborhood partnership. (accessed on November 20, 2013); available at: http://newcitynola.org/ 21
Louisiana Housing Finance Agency. 2010 Louisiana Housing Needs Assessment. (accessed on November 6, 2013);available from:
http://www.lhc.la.gov/downloads/gcr/LHFA_2010_ExecSummaryf2_14Dec10.pdf 22
City of New Orleans, Office of Community Development. 2011 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report.
(accessed on November 7, 2013); available from: http://www.nola.gov/RESIDENTS/Office-of-Community-
Development/Consolidated-Annual-Performance-and-Evaluation-Report/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
24
According to the consolidated plan, an affordable rent for a lower-income family is well below the fair market
rent in the region. Moreover, the lack of quality rental property and overcrowding (more than one person per
room) is a housing concern.23
The reduction in federal funds is impacting the development of affordable housing. Per the city’s 2012-2016
Consolidated Plan, entitlement funding to New Orleans has been significantly reduced due to population loss
coupled with general cuts in federal funds. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has
been reduced over the past two years by about 40 percent, and the HOME program was reduced by over 70
percent. As a result, the city has had to implement significant changes to the types of projects funded, and
many projects that historically relied on these sources have to look to for different funding options.24
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) are an important financing tool for increasing affordable rental
housing, and present a good opportunity for local bank investment. The LIHTC program was the primary
financing tool for rebuilding the rental market in Louisiana after Katrina. Between 2006 and 2008, the state
received $56.8 million annually in GO Zone credits. Approximately 60 percent of the funds were targeted to
the New Orleans MSA.25
According to the Greater New Orleans Community Data Center, 3,513 new
affordable units were expected to be completed in Orleans Parish alone between 2009 and 2011. Due to the
significant amount of new construction post Katrina, LIHTC allocations to the New Orleans area have slowed
significantly in the past few years as the rental market adjusts to current levels of supply demand.26
Much of the New Orleans public housing was damaged by Hurricane Katrina and city of New Orleans received
approval from HUD for a massive revitalization effort focused around the city’s four largest housing projects.
The new model for public housing focuses on reduced density and creating more mixed income communities at
the original project site and in the surrounding neighborhoods. Several developments are underway, including
Faubourg Lafitte, which is a mixed income project built on the site for the former Lafitte public housing project.
These projects are creating new, higher quality and affordable rental while also bringing new investment and
population growth to traditionally depressed communities.
Given the significant foreclosure rate in the area, the city of New Orleans and the New Orleans Redevelopment
Authority received Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) Funds in the amount of $2.3 million and $29.8
million respectively. Funds for the city of New Orleans are primarily being used for acquisition of foreclosed
homes and rehabilitation of residential property. Funds for the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority focus
more on new construction of residential properties, as well as the rehabilitation of older units.27
A community contact specializing in affordable housing noted the tremendous new investment in the city’s
public housing and mixed income developments in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The contact
indicated that there is great demand for the new subsidized rental housing and the affordable single-family
23
City of New Orleans, Office of Community Development. 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan. (accessed on November 6, 2013);
available from: http://new.nola.gov/community-development/documents/general-reports/2012-2016-consolidated-plan-city-of-new-
orleans-w/ 24
City of New Orleans, Office of Community Development. 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan. (accessed on November 6, 2013);
available from: http://new.nola.gov/community-development/documents/general-reports/2012-2016-consolidated-plan-city-of-new-
orleans-w/ 25
Louisiana Housing Finance Agency. 2010 Louisiana Housing Needs Assessment. (accessed on November 6, 2013);available from:
http://www.lhc.la.gov/downloads/gcr/LHFA_2010_ExecSummaryf2_14Dec10.pdf 26
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. Housing Production Needs: Three Scenarios for New Orleans. November 2009.
(accessed on November 7, 2013) available at: http://www.gnocdc.org/HousingProductionScenarios/index.html 27
Neighborhood Stabilization Program. New Orleans, LA Redevelopment Authority NSP2 Report. (accessed on November 6, 2013);
available from: http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
25
housing, but many buyers are struggling to obtain first mortgage financing. The contact noted that there are a
number of credit needs related to affordable housing. First, more flexible first mortgage products are needed.
Second, there is an opportunity to create a lease purchase program for individuals who would like to buy a
home, but do not currently have the equity needed or are not deemed credit worthy. Third, the contact noted
that there is a need for additional subsidies (in the form of soft-seconds) to help cover the difference between
the cost of construction and appraised values for new construction. Homeowners rebuilding homes damaged by
Katrina also need an additional source of funds to help cover the gap between the funds they received through
the Road Home program and the cost of restoring the home. Finally, the contact indicated that nonprofits were
still the primary developers of affordable housing in low- and moderate-income communities. These
organizations need access to more affordable construction financing, as well as credit lines to help with the
acquisition of blighted properties.
Small Business and Economic Development
Small business assistance and access to credit were identified by both bank management and community
contacts as important needs in New Orleans. Bank management states that there is a need for continued
education to help businesses take advantage of lower cost bank financing. In addition, there are opportunities
for more support of nonprofits, small business incubators, and community development financial institutions
(CDFIs) that provide important support and financing for small businesses.
A community contact that specializes in microenterprises stated that CDFIs and credit unions are typically the
best option for the small dollar loans that these businesses require. However, there are still opportunities for
banks to assist these businesses by providing additional capital for CDFI loan funds, and by funding technical
assistance programs or providing the advisory services directly to small business owners. One key area that the
community contact felt was needed is credit counseling. Many of the small businesses that survived the
recession have damaged credit scores and there is a great opportunity to help these business owners repair their
credit, in addition to other types of training, so they are on a firm foundation to access traditional bank financing
at the appropriate time.
Financial Stability
New Orleans has been plagued by poverty for years and historically, the poverty rates in New Orleans have
been much higher than in the surrounding suburban parishes and the nation. In 2011, the poverty rate in New
Orleans was 29 percent compared to a poverty rate of 15 percent in the suburban parishes and 16 percent
nationwide. However, following a national pattern, poverty has been increasing in suburban areas in New
Orleans; Hurricane Katrina and the recession accelerated this trend. Today, the majority of the metro’s poor
population (56 percent) resides in the suburban parishes. Many of the suburban communities lack the social
services and the network of organizations to aid very low-income people. Insufficient public transit makes it
very challenging for these individuals to get to the services they need.28
In light of the many economic challenges, there is a great need for more financial education and other
household financial stability efforts targeting low- and moderate-income households. According to the FDIC’s
2011 National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 12.5 percent of households in the city of
New Orleans are unbanked, meaning they have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial
28
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. The New Orleans Index at Eight. August, 2013. (accessed on November 4, 2013);
available at: https://gnocdc.s3.amazonaws.com/reports/GNOCDC_NewOrleansIndexAtEight.pdf
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
26
institution. In addition, 25.5 percent of households are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit
account but they also rely on alternative financial services providers on a regular basis. The unbanked are
disproportionately lower income and minority households.29
There are a number of opportunities for banks to participate in local initiatives focused on the financial stability
including programs to increase banking access and encourage savings, free tax assistance programs and
financial counseling through local nonprofits. Bank management has also stated that there is a need to
capitalize an Individual Development Account (IDA) program to help lower-income individuals save for a
house, to start a small business, or education.
New Orleans has been recognized nationwide for its economic resurgence, yet lower income individuals have
been largely left behind. More resources are needed for workforce development, mass transit, childcare, public
safety, and other support services to help ensure the most disadvantaged can participate in the region’s recovery.
29
Calculations by CFED of data from the 2009 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed
February); available at: http://joinbankon.org/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
27
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the New Orleans assessment area is good. The geographic
distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of
borrowers reflects adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different
revenue sizes. In addition, the bank is a leader in making community development loans.
During the review period, the bank reported 2,544 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 841small
business loans in the New Orleans assessment area. HMDA lending represented 75.2 percent of total lending
and small business lending accounted for 24.8 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is
weighted more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The New
Orleans assessment area contains 15.5 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 16.3 percent of its total
small business lending by number of loans. In comparison, 15.0 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this
assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK
Bank’s geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending in low-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of home purchase
loans was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts throughout the review period.
The bank increased home purchase lending between 2011 and 2012 and performance was similar to the
aggregate in 2012. In 2012, 3.6 percent of bank loans were originated in low-income tracts compared to 3.7
percent of aggregate loans.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of home purchase loans in
moderate-income tracts was below the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts in both 2011 and
2012; however, the bank’s lending was similar to aggregate in both years. Most recently, in 2012, 12.6 percent
of the bank’s loans were originated in moderate-income tracts compared with 13.4 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts exceeded the percentage of units.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank’s refinance
lending in low-income tracts was significantly less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income
tracts throughout the review period. The bank’s performance significantly exceeded the aggregated in 2011 but
declined slightly in 2012; in 2012, the bank made 1.9 percent of home refinance loans in low-income tracts
compared to 2.6 percent of aggregate loans.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
28
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. In both 2011 and 2012, the
percentage of loans originated in moderate-income tracts was well below the percentage of owner-occupied
housing units in these tracts. The percentage of bank loans in moderate income tracts exceeded the percentage
of aggregate loans in 2011 but fell slightly in 2012; in 2012, 9.3 percent of the bank’s refinance loans were
made in moderate-income tracts compared to 10.8 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts throughout the review period, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage
of owner-occupied units.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The number of home
improvement loans increased over the review period. In 2012, 7.4 percent of the bank’s loans were made in
low-income tracts, which was substantially greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units in the low-
income tracts. Moreover, while less than aggregate in 2011, the percentage of the bank’s loans in low-income
tracts was greater than aggregate lending in 2012.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is excellent. The bank increased the
number of home improvement loans in moderate-income census tracts over the review period. In both years,
the percentage of the bank’s home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts, and significantly exceeded the aggregate.
The bank’s home improvement lending in middle- and upper-income census tracts was less than the percentage
of owner-occupied units in middle- and upper-income census tracts throughout the review period.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank’s small business
lending in low-income tracts increased during the review period but was less than the percentage of small
businesses in those tracts and below aggregate lending in both 2011 and 2012.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending in
moderate-income tracts was greater than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts and exceeded
aggregate performance throughout the review period. In 2012, 21.1 percent of the bank’s small business loans
were originated in moderate-income tracts compared to 17.9 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area over the review period.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
29
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of the bank’s
loans to low-income borrowers increased over the review period but was less than the percentage of low-income
families in the assessment area and less than aggregate for both years. In 2012, 5.5 percent of the bank’s loans
were made to low-income borrowers compared to 6.8 percent of the aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of home
purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers was below the percentage of moderate-income families living in
the assessment area; in 2012, the bank originated 14.9 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-income
borrowers while 16.8 percent of families were classified as moderate-income in the assessment area. The
bank’s lending to moderate-income borrowers increased over the review period but was less than the aggregate
in both 2011 and 2012.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-
income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the
percentage of upper-income families over the review period.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The percentage of refinance loans
to low-income borrowers was substantially less than the percentage of low-income families in the assessment
area for both years. In 2012, the bank originated 4.0 percent of its home refinance loans to low-income
borrowers, compared to 23.4 percent of families classified as low-income in the assessment area. In addition,
the percentage of the bank’s loans to low-income borrowers was below aggregate lending throughout the review
period.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area over the review period. However, the bank’s performance improved relative to aggregate over
the review period. In 2012, 11.4 percent of the bank’s loans were made to moderate-income borrowers
compared to 11.6 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
upper-income families throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank increased the
number of home improvement loan to low-income borrowers between 2011 and 2012, though the percentage of
the bank’s home improvement loans to low-income borrowers was less than the percentage of low-income
families in the assessment area for both years. The bank performed below aggregate in 2011, but in 2012 the
bank significantly exceeded the aggregate, originating 16.1 percent of home improvement loans to low-income
borrowers compared to 11.8 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of the bank’s
home improvement loans to moderate-income borrowers was similar to the percentage of moderate-income
families in the assessment area in 2011 and 2012. The bank’s performance was slightly below aggregate in
2011 but in 2012, the bank originated 17.7 percent of home improvement loans to moderate income borrowers,
outperforming the aggregate at 15.4 percent.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
30
The bank’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area in 2011, but greater than the percentage of middle income families in 2012. The
bank’s lending to upper income borrowers exceeded the percentage of families in 2011 but fell well below in
2012.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is adequate. The
percentage of small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly less than
the percentage of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. Most recently, in 2012,
the bank originated 43.5 percent of its loans to small businesses, although 90.4 percent of total businesses in the
assessment area are classified as small businesses; however, the bank performed similarly to or above the
aggregate during the review period.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in the New Orleans assessment area. The
bank originated 14 community development loans totaling $61.0 million during the review period. Several
community development loans supported revitalization and stabilization of low- and moderate-income
communities as well as designated disaster areas. Other loans supported community services and affordable
multi-family housing. Notably, several of the loans provided bridge financing to New Market Tax Credit and
other projects financed with state and federal tax credits. The bank also provided support to one of the major
public housing revitalization projects underway in New Orleans. The bank’s community development lending
portfolio is responsive to a number of identified community development needs and indicates that the bank is an
active participant in the revitalization of distressed communities and the continued rebuilding of New Orleans
after Hurricane Katrina.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the New Orleans assessment area is
excellent. The bank had 49 investments totaling $29.6 million; $6.0 million were current period investments.
The prior period investments were primarily New Market Tax Credits that were used to finance housing,
community services and commercial real estate to support the revitalization of distressed communities in New
Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The current period investments are all government-guaranteed mortgage
backed securities.
The bank made 73 contributions totaling $665,000. The majority of the contributions supported community
services to low- and moderate-income individuals and economic development. Of particular note, the bank
provided 16 grants totaling almost $60,000 to help qualified low- and moderate-income homebuyers with down
payment and closing costs to purchase a home. The mortgage grant was administered in partnership with a
local nonprofit organization. The bank also provided significant contributions to support entrepreneurship,
youth workforce development, charter schools and financial education.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
development of affordable housing, revitalization and stabilization of distressed and designated disaster areas,
small business assistance and the financial stability of low- and moderate-income individuals.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the New Orleans assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
31
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies
and individuals of different income levels. The distribution of 23 branch offices and 35 ATMs as of
December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories
within the assessment area. The bank has one branch in a low-income tract representing 4.3 percent of total
branches and three in moderate-income tracts representing 13 percent of branches. For comparison purposes, in
2010 8.5 percent of households and 6.2 percent of businesses were located in low-income census tracts and 22.4
percent of households and 18.7 percent of businesses were located in in moderate-income communities. During
the review period, the bank opened 18 branches and closed 3 branches. One of the new branches was opened in
a low-income tract and three were opened in moderate-income tracts; once of the closures occurred in a
moderate-income tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK offers weekend hours at one branch in a moderate-income tract
(33 percent) compared to 10 of the branches in middle- and upper-income tracts (53 percent); the bank does not
offer extended hours at any of its branch offices in the New Orleans assessment area. Bank products, services,
and standard business hours are consistent throughout the assessment area.
In addition to the one branch located in a moderate-income geography, a branch analysis conducted by the bank
found that 15 branches located in middle- or upper- income geographies provide loan and deposit services to
individuals from low- or moderate-income areas within the assessment area.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 1 4.3% 1 0 0 0 0 Total 2 5.7% 2 6.3% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 3 13.0% 1 0 2 0 1 Total 4 11.4% 4 12.5% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 6 26.1% 0 0 6 0 3 Total 9 25.7% 9 28.1% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
DTO 1 1 SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 13 56.5% 2 0 10 0 7 Total 20 57.1% 17 53.1% 2 0 3 100.0% 0 0
DTO 2 2 SA 3 0 0 0 3 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 23 100.0% 4 0 18 0 11 Total 35 100.0% 32 100.0% 4 0 3 100.0% 0 0
DTO 3 3 SA 4 1 0 0 3 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.DTO - Drive thru only
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
7 2.0% 0.0% 0.1%
355 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
104 29.3% 38.1% 32.0%
94 26.5% 31.0% 43.0%
58 16.3% 8.5% 6.2%
92 25.9% 22.4% 18.7%
Census
Tracts
# % # % #
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
%
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
New Orleans, Louisiana
32
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK is a leader in providing community development services in the assessment area. During the
review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 945 service hours in various capacities for community
development organizations, by participating in 33 different community development services. Multiple bank
employees served on boards for qualified nonprofit organizations or provided technical assistance in other
capacities; almost 50 percent of the qualified hours were board service. Bank employees primarily engaged
with organizations that provided community services including affordable housing, financial education,
education, youth-services, and various other community services that aided low- and moderate-income
geographies and low- and moderate-income individuals. One bank employee provided over 350 hours over the
review period in credit and homeownership counseling with a local nonprofit.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
33
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE LAFAYETTE, LOUISIANA,
ASSESSMENT AREA
Overview
The Lafayette assessment consists of Lafayette and St. Martin parishes, which make up the Lafayette MSA.
The parish seat of Lafayette Parish is Lafayette, while the parish seat of St. Martin Parish is St. Martinsville.
IBERIABANK operates 12 branches in the assessment area, with three in moderate-income tracts; all 12
branches are located in Lafayette Parish.
Population and Income Characteristics
According to the U.S. Census, the population in the assessment area was 273,738 in 2010, representing a 14.5
percent increase since 2000. Much of this population increase can be attributed to Hurricane Katrina and Rita
evacuees who permanently relocated to Lafayette. U.S. Census data indicate that between July 2005 and July
2007, the Lafayette MSA population increased by 9,033 or 3.7 percent.30
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the years 2011 through 2012 for the Lafayette MSA. As shown, the
median family income increased slightly between 2011 and 2012 from $60,400 to $61,200.
Demographic Characteristics by Census Tract
The following tables, based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data, presents key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown in the tables below, the number of low-income census tracts remained the same but the overall
percentage declined, from 8 percent in 2000 to 7.4 percent in 2010. The percentage of moderate-income census
tracts increased from 16 percent to 27.8 percent. The number of total housing units in low-income tracts
increased from 3,425 in 2000 to 4,757 in 2010, an increase of 38.9 percent, while the number of housing units
in moderate- tracts doubled from 14,431 in 2000 to 29,660 in 2010 or a 106 percent increase. Over the same
30
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $60,400 0 - $30,199 $30,200 - $48,319 $48,320 - $72,479 $72,480 - & above
2012 $61,200 0 - $30,599 $30,600 - $48,959 $48,960 - $73,439 $73,440 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
Lafayette, LA MSA
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
34
time period, the number of housing units in middle- and upper-income census tracts declined by approximately
2.3 percent. The share of vacant housing units increased across all income categories with the exception of
middle income tracts; the total number of vacant units accounted for 9.0 percent of all housing units in 2000 and
increased slightly to 9.1 percent in 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
35
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
8.0
2,148
3.5
798
37.2
14,433
23.2
Moderate-income
8
16.0
9,278
14.9
2,152
23.2
9,911
16.0
Middle-income
23
46.0
31,581
50.9
4,036
12.8
12,205
19.7
Upper-income
15
30.0
19,079
30.7
1,210
6.3
25,537
41.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
50
100.0
62,086
100.0
8,196
13.2
62,086
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,425
1,544
2.5
45.1
1,554
45.4
327
9.5
Moderate-income
14,431
8,768
14.2
60.8
4,497
31.2
1,166
8.1
Middle-income
50,764
31,703
51.3
62.5
13,495
26.6
5,566
11.0
Upper-income
29,747
19,810
32.0
66.6
8,165
27.4
1,772
6.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
98,367
61,825
100.0
62.9
27,711
28.2
8,831
9.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
573
2.8
489
2.6
58
4.6
26
3.9
Moderate-income
2,291
11.2
2,091
11.3
109
8.6
91
13.6
Middle-income
9,607
46.9
8,700
46.9
579
45.7
328
48.9
Upper-income
8,029
39.2
7,281
39.2
522
41.2
226
33.7
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
20,500
100.0
18,561
100.0
1,268
100.0
671
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.5
6.2
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.4
1
0.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
32
11.8
31
11.6
1
25.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
150
55.4
148
55.4
2
50.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
88
32.5
87
32.6
1
25.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
271
100.0
267
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.5
1.5
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
36
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
7.4
2,297
3.4
581
25.3
16,198
24.2
Moderate-income
15
27.8
17,162
25.6
3,748
21.8
11,115
16.6
Middle-income
23
42.6
29,271
43.7
2,835
9.7
11,920
17.8
Upper-income
11
20.4
18,246
27.2
883
4.8
27,743
41.4
Unknown-income
1
1.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
54
100.0
66,976
100.0
8,047
12.0
66,976
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4,757
1,916
2.8
40.3
2,127
44.7
714
15.0
Moderate-income
29,660
16,139
23.3
54.4
10,861
36.6
2,660
9.0
Middle-income
50,639
32,055
46.2
63.3
13,702
27.1
4,882
9.6
Upper-income
27,975
19,305
27.8
69.0
6,636
23.7
2,034
7.3
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
113,031
69,415
100.0
61.4
33,326
29.5
10,290
9.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
524
2.9
444
2.8
60
5.3
20
3.2
Moderate-income
4,297
24.0
3,865
24.0
257
22.6
175
27.9
Middle-income
8,155
45.6
7,246
45.0
634
55.7
275
43.9
Upper-income
4,882
27.3
4,545
28.2
181
15.9
156
24.9
Unknown-income
19
0.1
11
0.1
7
0.6
1
0.2
Total Assessment Area
17,877
100.0
16,111
100.0
1,139
100.0
627
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.1
6.4
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.4
1
0.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
54
20.3
52
19.8
2
50.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
141
53.0
140
53.4
1
25.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
70
26.3
69
26.3
1
25.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
266
100.0
262
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.5
1.5
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
37
Housing Characteristics
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 113,031 housing units located in the assessment area in 2010, of
which 61.4 percent were owner-occupied, 29.5 percent were rental units, and 9.1 percent were vacant. Rental
units are more highly concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. The median age of the housing stock
across the assessment area was 30 years, though housing was much older in the low- and moderate-income
census tracts compared to the assessment area overall.
The housing market in the assessment area softened during the recent economic downturn but since hitting
bottom in 2010 with a 60.4 percent decline in home sales from its 2007 peak, the market has been steadily
improving. Home sales in Lafayette metro for the 12-month period ending June 2013 were up 20 percent over
the previous 12-month period and up 67 percent from the average of 2,600 homes sold annually from 2007
through 2008. Prices and homebuilding activity remain lower than pre-recessionary levels, however these
numbers are increasing. The average home sales price for the 12-month period ending June 2013 was $197,000
or up 11 percent compared with the average price recorded during the same period the previous year.31,32
After
slowing significantly between 2008 and 2011, the number of homes permitted was up significantly in 2012.33
Mortgage delinquencies rose during the economic downturn, but have gradually declined during the past two
years. The percent of mortgages considered seriously delinquent (defined as more than 90 days past due or in
foreclosure) declined from 4.6 percent in January 2011 to 3.5 percent in December 2012. This current rate is
significantly less than the state and national rates of 5.6 and 5.4 percent, respectively.34
Employment and Economic Conditions
The state’s fourth largest MSA had approximately 158,500 people employed as of the second quarter of 2013.35
Given Lafayette’s location in south-central Louisiana and its proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, it has been
historically positioned for the oil and gas exploration industry and to those companies that provide services to
the industry. The MSA derives 11 percent of its jobs directly from the exploration industry, the highest
concentration among the state’s eight MSAs.36
The other significant sectors in the MSA as a percent of total
employment include the following: healthcare (12.3 percent); retail trade (10.5 percent); and government (9.3
percent). Top employers include Lafayette General Medical Center, Schlumberger (oil and gas), Wood Group
Production Services (oil and gas), Wal-Mart Inc., local government and the parish school system.37
Additionally, Lafayette is home to one of the state's larger public universities and one of the leading employers
in the area with approximately 16,400 students and 2,100 employees.
In addition to the recession, the Lafayette MSA experienced the impact of BP’s Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in
the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 and the six-month off-shore drilling moratorium that followed. Prior to the
31
HUD, Office of Policy Development and Research. July, 2013. (accessed November 18, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/periodicals/ushmc/reg/LafayetteLA_HMP_1Jul13.pdf 32
Local home sales and average home price data in the Lafayette, LA MSA was not available for year end 2012 or the end of the
review period; June 2013 represents the most current data available and is comparable to data provided throughout the remainder of
the evaluation. 33
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 34
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta calculations of data provided by LPS. 35
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Housing Market Profiles,
Lafayette, Louisiana, July 2013” (accessed October 29, 2013);
http://www.huduser.org/portal/periodicals/ushmc/reg/LafayetteLA_HMP_1Jul13.pdf 36
The Louisiana Economic Outlook: 2014 and 2015; Loren C. Scott and James A. Richardson, Louisiana State University. (accessed
on November 21, 2013); available from http://www.acadianabusiness.com/extras/DR_LOREN_SCOTT_LEO_2014-15.pdf. 37
HUD, Office of Policy Development and Research. July, 2013. (accessed November 18, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/periodicals/ushmc/reg/LafayetteLA_HMP_1Jul13.pdf
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
38
spill, there were 33 rigs operating in the Gulf of Mexico. With the moratorium in place and drill ships leaving
the Gulf for other geographies with allowable drilling, the number of rigs dipped to 11. However, analysts with
the International Strategy and Investment Group recently issued a report entitled, “U.S. Gulf of Mexico
Deepwater Outlook: Rising Up From the Ashes,” which projects that the number of floating rigs will grow to
60 in 2015.38
This activity will further fuel the local economy and bolster exploration and energy service firms
in the region.
As mentioned previously, economic conditions across the Lafayette MSA declined during the recession, but the
region quickly recovered with increasing jobs and falling unemployment over the review period. The MSA
began recording job losses in the latter half of 2008; the Lafayette MSA lost a total of 4,400 jobs, or a 3 percent
decline between 2009 and 2010. The Lafayette MSA then added 10,200 jobs, or a 6.9 percent growth rate for
2010-2013 period; this was also the best recovery of all eight Louisiana MSAs during this period. However, a
significant number of the new jobs have been in lower wage sectors, including leisure and hospitality.39
As
shown in the table below, the unemployment rate fell from 5.7 to 4.7 percent between 2011 and 2012, and is
well below the unemployment rate for the state at 6.4 percent.40
Small businesses play an important role in the Lafayette economy though it should be noted that the number of
small businesses in the assessment area declined by about 15 percent over the review period. According to
2012 D&B information, there were 17,877 businesses within the Lafayette assessment area of which 90 percent
had total annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small
businesses.41
Small business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 77 percent between
2007 and 2010. However, starting in 2010, lending started to increase, and between 2010 and 2011, the number
of loans to small businesses increased by about 86 percent. While small business lending has increased, a
disproportionate amount of all small business loans are made to firms with revenues greater than $1.0 million,
indicating that most likely there is unmet loan demand from smaller firms.42
Competition
The Lafayette assessment area is a highly competitive banking market with several regional and national banks
represented. According to the June 30, 2012, FDIC Summary of Deposit Report, 26 financial institutions
38
FuelFix. “Gulf of Mexico will be strongest offshore market, analysts say.” January 2, 2013. (accessed on December 10, 2013);
available from: http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/01/02/gulf-of-mexico-will-be-strongest-offshore-market-analysts-say/ 39
The Louisiana Economic Outlook: 2014 and 2015; Loren C. Scott and James A. Richardson, Louisiana State University. (accessed
on November 21, 2013); available from http://www.acadianabusiness.com/extras/DR_LOREN_SCOTT_LEO_2014-15.pdf. 40
Bureau of Labor Statistics 41
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 42
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com
2011 2012
Lafayette MSA 5.7 4.7
Louisiana 7.3 6.4
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
39
operated 122 offices in the assessment area. IBERIABANK ranked first with a deposit market share of 23.5
percent ($1.4 billion) and 12 of the 122 offices. JP Morgan, Mid-South Bank, and Capital One were the next
three financial institutions with deposit market share at 17.6 percent, 9.3 percent, and 8.0 percent, respectively.
HMDA and CRA lending is also dominated by regional and national banks. In 2011, IBERIABANK Mortgage
ranked 4th
out of 228 lenders with 3.4 percent of total HMDA loans and IBERIABANK ranked 11th
. HMDA
lending increased in 2012 and IBERIABANK Mortgage increased its ranking to 3rd
out of 238 lenders with 4.1
percent of total HMDA lending, while IBERIABANK jumped to 4th
. Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase held
the top two slots for largest HMDA lenders. For CRA lending, IBERIABANK ranked 4th
in 2011 and 5th
in
2012 with an average of 6.6 percent of CRA loans in each year. CRA lending is dominated by the national
credit card issuers (American Express and Capital One) followed by Chase Bank.
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
Access to quality, affordable housing is an ongoing need in Lafayette. According to a report by the National
Low Income Housing Coalition, the fair market rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in the Lafayette MSA is $772,
which would be affordable for a worker earning a wage of $14.85 per hour. Mean wages for renters is $14.19
and $9.42 in Lafayette and St. Martin Parishes, respectively.43
In addition, a 2010 Louisiana Housing Needs
Assessment reports that low-income households, and particularly low-income renters, have the greatest housing
needs, with 52 percent (22,835) of all households earning 80 percent AMI or less, experiencing housing
problems.44
Households with housing problems as defined by HUD are households that are paying more than
30 percent of their income towards housing costs and/or households living within inadequate conditions.45
This
does not factor in homes in blighted conditions. It is important to note that the need for affordable senior
housing in Lafayette is high as well. A recent 41-unit subsidized complex serving individuals at least 62 years
old and living at 50 percent of the AMI already reports a three-year waiting list.46
There are several groups operating in the affordable housing arena in Lafayette that are either providing
advocacy, technical assistance or financing mechanisms. They include, but are not limited to: Louisiana
Housing Corp., the state agency which administers several housing programs including low-income tax credits;
Lafayette Public Trust Financing Authority, which offers a first-time home-buyer program and develops various
community development projects; Louisiana Housing Alliance, a statewide coalition working to preserve and
produce quality affordable housing for low to moderate income Louisianans; and Habitat for Humanity.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
There are numerous federal and state financing mechanisms that can be useful to financial institutions in
partnering or financing small business enterprises and community economic development projects. In
particular, the Louisiana State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) provides opportunities for banks to
partner on small business financing by providing loan guarantees. The SSBCI is made possible by $13.2
43
National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2013, accessed on November 19, 2013; available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 44
Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, 2010 Louisiana Housing Needs Assessment; (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from
http://www.lhfa.state.la.us/downloads/gcr/LHFA_2010_FULLREPORT_f3_14Dec10.pdf 45
HUD defines inadequate conditions are defined as households living without adequate kitchen or plumbing facilities or households
living in overcrowded conditions (more than one person per room). 46
“Senior Living Apartment Complex Receives AHP Grant for Major Renovation,” dated November 6, 2013. The Katy News;
accessed on November 19, 2013; available from http://thekatynews.com/2013/11/06/senior-living-apartment-complex-receives-ahp-
grant-for-major-renovation/#sthash.roSlP8w9.dpuf
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
40
million in federal funding under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and administered by Louisiana Economic
Development Corporation (LEDC). Similarly, eight organizations have been awarded $430 million in tax credit
authority under the New Markets Tax Credits Program (NMTC Program) since 2010; however no projects were
completed with NMTCs in the assessment area during this review period.47
Additionally, as a result of
Hurricane Isaac both parishes in the assessment area are eligible for FEMA’s Public Assistance as declared
disaster areas. Lafayette is also eligible for USDA low interest emergency loans as a contiguous parish to areas
impacted by drought in 2013.
As it relates to local financial and technical assistance support for existing and start-up businesses in the
Lafayette MSA, there is an extensive list of resources and possible partners for financial institutions. Resource
and service delivery providers include: Lafayette Economic Development Authority, Acadiana Small Business
Development Center (SBDC), Opportunity Machine, and the Enterprise Center of Louisiana (a business
incubator). For women-owned and disadvantaged businesses, they can also seek assistance from the Acadiana
Regional Development District and its subsidiary, the Enterprise Consortium of the Gulf Coast (ECGC), which
operates one of two SBA-supported women’s business centers in the state. There were two Community
Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) loan funds identified that serve Lafayette MSA, as well as one
SBA certified micro-lender. It should be noted though that two community contacts familiar with the area and
serving this sector stated that there are opportunities for banks to increase support for small business
development, such as providing investments into organizations serving small businesses, establishing an “angel
fund” or loan consortium, and creating a robust referral program for business owners that do not qualify for
traditional business financing.
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
Poverty and financial instability are also concerns throughout the assessment area. The percentage of people
living in poverty is high in both parishes in the assessment area; 18.1 percent and 16.1 percent of individuals
lived under the poverty level between 2007 and 2011 in St. Martin and Lafayette parishes, respectively.
Moreover, there were 34.5 percent of children living in poverty between 2007 and 2011 in the assessment area.
Given the level of childhood poverty in Louisiana, Save the Children has been working in Louisiana since 2006.
They currently partner with six schools in three parishes in Louisiana, including St. Martin, to help break the
cycle of poverty. Food stamp usage, another indicator of financial distress, has also been rising in the
assessment area. In 2010, 20.2 percent of the population in St. Martin Parish was receiving food stamps, which
is higher than the state average.48
In light of increasing poverty and economic challenges for low- and moderate-income individuals, there is an
opportunity for banks to support activities that improve financial capability and household financial stability.
One opportunity is expanding access to mainstream financial services. According to the FDIC’s National
Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 8.4 percent of households are unbanked, meaning they
have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In addition, 22 percent of households
are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on alternative financial
services providers on a regular basis.49
According to the Louisiana Budget Project, Louisiana has one of the
highest concentrations of payday lenders in the country with 945 lenders operating statewide, and more
specifically, Lafayette’s 70501 zip code ranks among the top ten zip codes in Louisiana for payday lending.
The Louisiana Budget Project is currently conducting a statewide initiative to educate Louisiana residents about
47
U.S. Treasury, CDFI Fund. (Accessed on November 22, 2013); available from
http://www.cdfifund.gov/awardees/db/advancedSearchResults.asp 48
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 1, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 49
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed November 1, 2013); available at:
http://webtools.joinbankon.org/community/profile?state=LA&county=Lafayette percent20Parish
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
41
the pitfalls of payday lending. Banks have an opportunity to create more flexible, non-predatory products to
reach this potential customer base, and to partner with the Louisiana Budget Project.50
There are a number of opportunities for bank participation in financial stability programs including BankOn
Lafayette in collaboration with United Way Acadiana. In addition, there is a nascent movement in the region,
Louisianans Building Economic Stability Together (LABEST), which has begun working to increase access to
financial education and address policy issues related to predatory lending. They are partnering with the
Southern Regional Asset Building Coalition (SRABC) and other state coalitions to help advance policies that
build economic security for low-wealth communities. SRABC is funded by the Ford Foundation’s Building
Economic Security Over a Lifetime (BESOL) Initiative.
50
Louisiana Budget Project. (accessed on November 21, 2013); available from http://www.labudget.org/lbp/wp-
content/uploads/2011/07/Payday-Lenders.pdf
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
42
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Lafayette assessment area is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of
borrowers reflects adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different
revenue sizes. In addition, the bank made a relatively high level of community development loans in the
Lafayette assessment area.
During the review period, the bank reported 1,319 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 851 small
business loans in the Lafayette assessment area. HMDA lending represented 60.8 percent of total lending and
small business lending accounted for 39.2 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted
more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Lafayette assessment
area contains 8.1 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 16.5 percent of its total small business lending
by number of loans. In comparison, 14.7 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK
Bank’s geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending in low-income tracts is good. IBERIABANK had a very low volume
of home purchase loans in low-income tracts in 2011 and there was limited aggregate lending activity.
Therefore minimal weighting was given to home purchase lending in low-income tracts in 2011. The bank’s
performance improved in 2012. While the percentage of loans in low-income tracts was less than the
percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts, that bank’s performance significantly exceeded aggregate.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s home purchase lending increased
significantly between 2011 and 2012. The percentage of loans in 2011 was less than the percentage of owner-
occupied units in moderate-income tracts and also less than aggregate. However, in 2012, 27.6 percent of
IERIABANK’s mortgages were originated in moderate-income tracts, compared to 23.3 percent of owner-
occupied housing units in moderate-income tracts and 20.1 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts while lending in upper-income tracts exceeded the percentage of units throughout the
review period.
Home Refinance Loans
During the review period, the bank did not originate any home refinance loans in low-income census tracts in
the assessment area where 2.8 percent of owner-occupied units are located. It should be noted that the
aggregate also had very low lending levels in both 2011 and 2012, which may suggest a lack of lending
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
43
opportunity in the low-income tracts in this assessment area. Due to the low level of owner-occupied units, as
well as limited aggregate activity, the bank’s performance is adequate, with minimal weighting given to home
refinance lending in low-income tracts.
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank’s home refinance
lending in moderate-income tracts increased between 2011 and 2012. The percentage of loans in both years
was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in moderate-income tracts. However, the bank’s
performance improved relative to aggregate over the review period. In 2012, 15.6 percent of the bank’s home
refinance loans were originated in moderate-income tracts, compared to 16.9 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units
throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank’s home
improvement lending in low-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income
tracts in 2011, but significantly exceeded the percentage of owner-occupied units in 2012. The bank’s
performance relative to aggregate improved over the review period. In 2012, 4.1 percent of the bank’s home
improvement loans were originated in low-income tracts, compared to 2.0 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is good. The bank increased the
number of home improvement loans in moderate-income census tracts over the review period. The percentage
of loans in moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in 2011, but
significantly exceeded the percentage of owner-occupied units in 2012. The bank’s performance relative to
aggregate also improved over the review period. In 2012, 35.0 percent of the bank’s home improvement loans
were originated in a moderate-income tract, compared to 23.1 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending in middle- and upper-income census tracts was greater than the
percentage of owner-occupied units in middle- and upper-income census tracts in 2011, but declined in both
categories in 2012.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is poor. The bank’s small business
lending activity in low-income tracts declined during the review period and was less than the percentage of
small businesses in those tracts and below aggregate lending. In 2012, 0.9 percent of the bank’s small business
loans were originated in low-income tracts where 2.8 percent of small businesses are located. Additionally, 2.3
percent of aggregate loans were originated in low-income tracts.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending in
moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts and less than aggregate
in 2011. However, in 2012, the bank’s small business lending performance improved. The bank originated
23.2 percent of total small business loans in moderate-income tracts where 24.0 percent of small businesses are
located; 22.3 percent of aggregate lending occurred in moderate-income tracts in 2012.
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area over the review period.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
44
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The number of loans to low-
income borrowers increased significantly over the review period. In 2011, 3.1 percent of the banks loans were
made to low-income borrowers compared to 15.2 percent of home purchase loans in 2012. In both years, the
percentage of loans to low-income borrowers was below the percentage of low-income families in the
assessment area. In 2011, the bank’s lending was substantially less than aggregate lending to low-income
borrowers; in 2012, the bank significantly exceeded aggregate.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of home purchase
loans to moderate-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of moderate-income families living in the
assessment area for both years; in 2012, the bank originated 21.8 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-
income borrowers while 16.6 percent of families were classified as moderate-income in the assessment area.
The bank’s lending to moderate-income borrowers was similar to aggregate throughout the review period.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-
income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the
percentage of upper-income families over the review period.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The percentage of refinance loans
to low-income borrowers was substantially less than the percentage of low-income families in the assessment
area for both years. In 2012, the bank originated 3.6 percent of its home refinance loans to low-income
borrowers, compared to 24.2 percent of families classified as low-income in the assessment area. Additionally,
the bank’s lending to low-income borrowers was less than aggregate lending throughout the review period. In
2012, 4.9 percent of aggregate loans were made to low-income borrowers.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is poor. The share of home refinance loans
to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the assessment area
and similar to or slightly below aggregate over the review period. In 2012, 9.6 percent of the bank’s loans were
made to moderate-income borrowers compared to 11.0 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
upper-income families throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of home
improvement loans originated to low-income borrowers was less than the percentage of families classified as
low-income throughout the review period. The bank originated 20.3 percent of home improvement loans to
low-income borrowers in 2011 compared to 18.9 percent of aggregate loans. The bank's performance declined
in 2012, with 12.2 percent of home improvement loans to low-income borrowers compared to 14.9 percent of
aggregate loans.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
45
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The bank increased home
improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers over the review period. The percentage of loans to
moderate-income borrower was slightly below the percentage of moderate-income families in the assessment
area in 2011 but similar to the percentage of families in 2012. The bank’s performance was slightly below
aggregate in 2011 and 2012; in 2012, the bank originated 16.3 percent of home improvement loans to moderate-
income borrowers compared to 17.7 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to middle-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of middle-
income families throughout the review period. The bank’s lending to upper-income borrowers exceeded the
percentage of upper-income families in 2011, but fell below in 2012.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is good. The percentage of
small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly less than the percentage
of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. However, the bank outperformed the
aggregate for both years. Most recently, in 2012, the bank originated 44.2 percent of its loans to small
businesses, although 90.1 percent of total businesses in the assessment area are classified as small businesses;
30.3 percent of aggregate loans were made to small businesses.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made a relatively high level of community development loans in the Lafayette assessment
area. The bank originated 9 community development loans totaling $27.8 million during the review
period. Most of the community development loans supported revitalization and stabilization of low- and
moderate-income communities and designated disaster areas. The remaining loans provided support to
community services. The bank’s community development loan portfolio is responsive to several identified
community development needs including the revitalization of designated disaster areas. IBERIABANK has
worked closely with local municipalities and parishes in the assessment area that were impacted by Hurricane
Katrina and several subsequent hurricanes. Several of the community development loans have provided
financing assistance to these jurisdictions for infrastructure and other improvements needed to help these areas
recover from the disasters and remove blighted conditions in their communities.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Lafayette assessment area is good.
The bank had 39 investments totaling $18.6 million; $5.4 million were current period investments. The largest
prior period investment was a New Market Tax Credit investment in a medical center located in a low-income
census tract. The bank also had a prior period investment in a low-income housing tax credit fund. All of the
current period investments were government-guaranteed mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 37 contributions totaling $263,200. The majority of the contributions supported community
services to low- and moderate-income individuals. Of particular note, the bank provided 10 grants totaling
almost $35,000 to help qualified low- and moderate-income homebuyers with down payment and closing costs
to purchase a home. The mortgage grant was administered in partnership with a local nonprofit organization.
The bank also provided significant contributions to support emergency assistance to families in distress, and
individuals and families facing homelessness; provide safe and secure senior living communities; provide
financial education, and a range of other community services targeting low- and moderate-income individuals
and communities. In addition to the contributions in the assessment area, the bank had several statewide and
regional contributions for affordable housing and small business initiatives that benefitted the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
46
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
development of affordable housing, revitalization and stabilization of distressed and designated disaster areas,
and the financial stability of low- and moderate-income individuals.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Lafayette assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels. The distribution of 12 branch offices and 15 ATMs as of December 31,
2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories within the
assessment area. The bank has three branches located in moderate-income tracts, representing 25 percent of
total branches, compared to 26.3 percent of households and 24 percent of businesses located in moderate-
income communities. During the review period, no branches were opened or closed in the assessment area.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK offers extended hours at all of its branch locations in the
Lafayette assessment area, and provides weekend hours at many of its branch offices, including those located in
moderate-income tracts. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent throughout the
assessment area.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 3 25.0% 0 0 3 3 1 Total 5 33.3% 4 30.8% 0 0 1 50.0% 0 0
SA 2 1 0 0 1 0 0
Middle 7 58.3% 0 0 7 7 3 Total 7 46.7% 7 53.8% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 2 16.7% 0 0 2 2 1 Total 3 20.0% 2 15.4% 0 0 1 50.0% 0 0
SA 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 12 100.0% 0 0 12 12 5 Total 15 100.0% 13 100.0% 0 0 2 100.0% 0 0
SA 3 1 0 0 2 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
%
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
# % # % #
4 7.4% 3.9% 2.9%
15 27.8% 26.3% 24.0%
23 42.6% 44.5% 45.6%
11 20.4% 25.2% 27.3%
0.1%
54 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
1 1.9% 0.0%
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Lafayette, Louisiana
47
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK is a leader in providing community development services in the assessment area. During the
review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 985 service hours in various capacities for community
development organizations, by participating in 31 different community development services. Board service
represented approximately 63 percent of the total community development service hours. Bank employees
engaged in providing financial education, homeownership counseling and fundraising assistance; employees
also worked with a variety of organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-income
geographies and for low- and moderate-income individuals.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
48
The following metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE LOUISIANA METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Baton Rouge Assessment Area (East Baton Rouge and Livingston Parishes)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated eight branches in the assessment area, representing
10 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $527.4 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 3.6 percent and 10 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Louisiana.
Houma Assessment Area (Terrebonne Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated one branch in the assessment area, representing 1
percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $17.5 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 0.91 percent and 0.3 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Louisiana.
Lake Charles Assessment Area (Calcasieu and Cameron Parishes)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 15 branches in the assessment area, representing
19 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $505.2 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 15.6 percent and 10 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Louisiana.
Monroe Assessment Area (Ouachita Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated six branches in the assessment area, representing 7
percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $314.6 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 12.6 percent and 6 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Louisiana.
Shreveport Assessment Area (Caddo Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated two branches in the assessment area, representing
2 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $170.2 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 3.3 percent and 3.0 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Louisiana.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
49
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Metropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment Areas Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Baton Rouge Below Below Below
Houma Below Below Below
Lake Charles Below Below Consistent
Monroe Below Below Above
Shreveport Below Below Above
For the lending test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state of Louisiana. Performance
in all limited-scope metropolitan assessment areas was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state. In all
of the limited-scope assessment areas, weaker performance was attributable to poorer geographic distribution of
loans and community development lending. With the exception of Lake Charles, the remaining limited-scope
assessment areas also had weaker levels of borrower distribution of loans relative to the bank’s performance in
the state. While the bank had lower levels of community development lending in Baton Rouge compared to the
rest of the state, the bank’s community development lending was good in the assessment area, including a $3.1
million loan to support a New Markets Tax Credit project.
For the investment test, IBERIABANK received an Outstanding rating for the state of Louisiana. Performance
in all limited-scope metropolitan assessment areas (Baton Rouge, Houma, Lake Charles, Monroe, and
Shreveport) was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state due to lower levels of qualified investments
relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment areas; however, all assessment areas were still considered
satisfactory.
For the service test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state. Performance in the Baton
Rouge and Houma assessment areas was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state due to the lack of
accessible retail delivery systems. Performance in the Lake Charles assessment area was consistent with the
bank’s performance in the state. Performance in the Monroe and Shreveport assessment areas was stronger than
IBERIABANK’s statewide performance due to greater accessibility of delivery systems. The level of
community development services in the Baton Rouge and Monroe assessment areas was excellent.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Non-Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
50
The following non-metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE LOUISIANA NON-METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Acadiana Assessment Area (Acadia, Iberia, and Vermilion Parishes)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated eight branches in the assessment area, representing
10 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $719.6 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 21.2 percent and 14 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Louisiana.
Allen Assessment Area (Allen Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated three branches in the assessment area, representing
4 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $28.7 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 17.3 percent and 1.0 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Louisiana.
Lincoln Assessment Area (Lincoln Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated two branches in the assessment area, representing
2.0 percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $83.2 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 8.9 percent and 2.0 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Louisiana.
Morehouse Assessment Area (Morehouse Parish)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated one branch in the assessment area, representing 1
percent of its branches in Louisiana.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $16.8 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 6.2 percent and 0.3 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Louisiana.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Nonmetropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment Areas Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Acadiana Below Below Below
Allen Below Below Below
Lincoln Below Below Below
Morehouse Below Below Below
For the lending test, the bank’s performance in the nonmetropolitan limited scope assessment was not as strong
as the bank’s performance in the state due to weaker geographic and borrower distribution of loans.
Community development lending was insignificant in the Allen and Lincoln assessment areas, while
community development lending in the Acadiana and Morehouse assessment areas was consistent with the
bank’s statewide performance.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Non-Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
51
For the investment test, the performance in each of the limited-scope assessment areas (Acadiana, Allen,
Lincoln, and Morehouse) was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state due to lower levels of qualified
investments relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment areas; performance was considered satisfactory
in only the Acadiana and Morehouse assessment areas.
For the service test, the performance in each of the limited-scope assessment areas was weaker than the bank’s
performance in the state due to lower levels of community development services and insufficient retail delivery
systems. In the Acadiana assessment area, while the level of community development services relative to the
bank’s presence in the assessment area was not as strong as the state, the bank’s performance was still
considered good.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Arkansas
52
CRA RATING FOR ARKANSAS: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Service Test is rated: High Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans and the distribution of loans by borrower income and revenue size
of business reflect adequate penetration among customers of different income levels and businesses of
different revenue sizes.
The bank made a good level community development loans within the assessment areas.
The bank provides a significant level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment areas.
Retail services are accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income levels in the
assessment areas.
The bank is a leader in providing community development services throughout the assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Arkansas
53
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for the following two assessment areas in the State of Arkansas:
Fayetteville
Little Rock
Limited scope reviews were conducted for the remaining two assessment areas:
Jonesboro
Northeast Arkansas
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for these assessment areas is consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN ARKANSAS
Lending activity in Arkansas accounted for 24.3 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Arkansas represented 27.6 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small
business and small farm lending represented 13.8 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm
lending. As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $983.9 million in deposits in Arkansas accounting for 10.4 percent
of IBERIABANK’s total deposits. There are 144 financial institutions active in Arkansas and IBERIABANK
holds 1.8 percent of total deposits in the state. As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 34 branch
offices in Arkansas representing 18.6 percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the state of Arkansas is High Satisfactory. IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and small
business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in determining the lending test rating for the
state given that the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than small business loans. Additionally, the
Little Rock assessment area received slightly greater consideration when determining the state rating because it
holds a greater percentage of the bank’s deposits, loans, and branches in the state of Arkansas than the
Fayetteville assessment area. The full-scope areas selected together represent 54.1 percent of the deposits in the
assessment areas in Arkansas, as well as 53.0 percent of the branches. The full-scope assessment areas
represent 84.1 percent of the HMDA loans and 56.8 percent of the small business loans in the state. Lastly,
58.0 percent of community development loans occurred in the two full scope assessment areas. Thus, the two
full-scope assessment areas represent a majority of the branches, deposits and lending in the state of Arkansas.
IBERIABANK originated 272 small farm loans in Arkansas over the review period, representing 83 percent of
the bank’s total small farm lending. Of the total small farm loans in the state, just two were originated in the
full scope assessment areas and the remaining loans were originated in the two limited scope assessment areas.
In Northeast Arkansas, the bank originated 226 small farm loans during the review period. However, given that
small farm loans are a small percentage of the bank’s overall lending and most of the loans were originated in
limited scope assessment areas, there is no detailed discussion of these loans is included in this section of the
report.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Arkansas
54
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices F-H while details on lending in the lending scope
assessment areas can be found in Appendices I-J.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans was adequate in the Little Rock assessment area and poor in Fayetteville. Additionally, the
distribution of loans by borrower income and business revenue size is adequate. The borrower distribution is
considered adequate in both full scope assessment areas. A detailed discussion of the geographic and borrower
distribution of lending for the full scope assessment areas is included in the next section of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made a good level of community development loans in Arkansas, primarily driven by
community development lending in the Little Rock assessment area. The bank originated 12 community
development loans totaling $39.3 million in the state; 58.0 percent of community development loans were in the
Fayetteville and Little Rock assessment areas. More information on community development lending can be
found in the full-scope assessment area section.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Arkansas is High Satisfactory. The bank made significant use of qualified
investments and contributions with total investments of $8.5 million and contributions of $309,700 in the state.
The bank exhibited good responsiveness to credit and community development needs through its investment
activities in the Fayetteville and Little Rock assessment areas.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Service Test
The service test rating for Arkansas is High Satisfactory.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 2,206 40.1% $340,718 42.2%
HMDA Refinance 1,914 34.8% $302,441 37.4%
HMDA Home Improvement 397 7.2% $7,890 1.0%
HMDA Multi-Family 4 0.1% $1,087 0.1%
Total HMDA 4,521 82.1% $652,136 80.7%
Total Small Business 711 12.9% $126,192 15.6%
Total Farm 272 4.9% $29,594 3.7%
TOTAL LOANS 5,504 100.0% $807,922 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Arkansas
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Arkansas
55
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and hours of operation
do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-income
geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank opened 2 branches and closed 5 branches in
the assessment areas during the review period but there has been no change to the accessibility of its delivery
systems for low- and moderate-income geographies and/or low- and moderate-income individuals. Additional
detail on the bank’s retail services can be found in the full-scope assessment area section.
Community Development Services
The bank is a leader in providing community development services that benefit residents and small businesses
of the assessment area.
Additional detail on the bank’s retail and community development services can be found in the full-scope
assessment area section.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
56
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS,
ASSESSMENT AREA
Overview
The Little Rock assessment area includes portions of Pulaski County (76 of 95 census tracts) and Saline County
(4 of 21 census tracts). The assessment area is part of the six-county Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway,
Arkansas MSA (Little Rock MSA), which is the largest population center in Arkansas. Within the assessment
area there are 9 low-income and 25 moderate-income tracts. All of the low- or moderate-income (LMI) tracts
are located in Pulaski County. As of December 2012, Iberiabank operated 11 branches in the Little Rock
Assessment Area with 10 in Pulaski County and one in Saline County. Four branches are located in moderate-
income census tracts. FEMA declared Pulaski and Saline counties a federal disaster area in June 2011 due to
severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding.
Population and Income Characteristics
According to the U.S. Census, the population in the assessment area was 331,241 in 2010, representing a 7.8
percent increase since 2000. The majority of the population resides in Pulaski County; however, Saline County
was one of the fastest growing counties in the state between 2000 and 2010, growing by more than 28 percent.
Statewide, the population increased by approximately 9.1 percent between 2000 and 2010.51
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the years 2011 through 2012 for the Little Rock MSA. As shown, the
median family income increased slightly from $61,500 to $62,300 between 2011 and 2012.
Demographic Characteristics
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown in the tables below, the percentage of low-income census tracts increased between 2000 and 2010,
from 10.1 percent to 11.3 percent, while the percentage of moderate-income census tracts declined from 34.8
percent to 31.3 percent. The number of total housing units in low-income tracts increased from 8,058 in 2000 to
13,435 in 2010, an increase of 67 percent, while the number of housing units in moderate- tracts increased by 23
51
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on February 4, 2013); available from www.policymap.com
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $61,500 0 - $30,749 $30,750 - $49,199 $49,200 - $73,799 $73,800 - & above
2012 $62,300 0 - $31,149 $31,150 - $49,839 $49,840 - $74,759 $74,760 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
57
percent. The number of housing units in middle-income census tracts fell by 11 percent and the number of
housing units in upper-income tracts increased by 8 percent. The share of vacant housing units increased across
all income categories; the total number of vacant units accounted for 8.1 percent of all housing units in 2000
and increased to 10.9 percent by 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
58
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7
10.1
3,789
4.6
1,319
34.8
17,123
21.0
Moderate-income
24
34.8
20,179
24.7
4,002
19.8
13,679
16.8
Middle-income
21
30.4
26,882
32.9
2,283
8.5
16,605
20.4
Upper-income
17
24.6
30,736
37.7
810
2.6
34,179
41.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
69
100.0
81,586
100.0
8,414
10.3
81,586
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8,058
2,339
3.0
29.0
4,665
57.9
1,054
13.1
Moderate-income
35,054
16,972
21.5
48.4
13,654
39.0
4,428
12.6
Middle-income
47,093
26,541
33.7
56.4
17,174
36.5
3,378
7.2
Upper-income
48,628
32,905
41.8
67.7
13,277
27.3
2,446
5.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
138,833
78,757
100.0
56.7
48,770
35.1
11,306
8.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,225
8.5
1,806
7.8
279
15.0
140
12.2
Moderate-income
5,881
22.4
5,013
21.5
588
31.7
280
24.3
Middle-income
8,460
32.2
7,603
32.6
527
28.4
330
28.6
Upper-income
9,738
37.0
8,876
38.1
460
24.8
402
34.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
26,304
100.0
23,298
100.0
1,854
100.0
1,152
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
88.6
7.0
4.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
13
5.1
13
5.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
21
8.3
18
7.3
2
33.3
1
100.0
Middle-income
76
30.0
74
30.1
2
33.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
143
56.5
141
57.3
2
33.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
253
100.0
246
100.0
6
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.2
2.4
.4
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
59
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
9
11.3
6,192
7.4
2,316
37.4
19,244
23.0
Moderate-income
25
31.3
22,927
27.4
4,615
20.1
14,906
17.8
Middle-income
23
28.8
22,335
26.7
1,962
8.8
15,400
18.4
Upper-income
22
27.5
32,149
38.5
1,452
4.5
34,053
40.7
Unknown-income
1
1.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
80
100.0
83,603
100.0
10,345
12.4
83,603
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
13,435
4,359
5.3
32.4
6,769
50.4
2,307
17.2
Moderate-income
43,199
19,975
24.4
46.2
17,060
39.5
6,164
14.3
Middle-income
42,127
23,011
28.1
54.6
14,629
34.7
4,487
10.7
Upper-income
52,509
34,441
42.1
65.6
14,608
27.8
3,460
6.6
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
151,270
81,786
100.0
54.1
53,066
35.1
16,418
10.9
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,661
6.4
1,376
6.0
212
11.7
73
6.4
Moderate-income
8,146
31.5
6,972
30.5
739
40.9
435
38.0
Middle-income
6,568
25.4
5,956
26.0
369
20.4
243
21.2
Upper-income
9,444
36.6
8,566
37.5
485
26.9
393
34.4
Unknown-income
3
0.0
3
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
25,822
100.0
22,873
100.0
1,805
100.0
1,144
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
88.6
7.0
4.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
10
3.7
10
3.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
29
10.7
27
10.2
2
33.3
0
0.0
Middle-income
98
36.0
95
35.7
3
50.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
135
49.6
134
50.4
1
16.7
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
272
100.0
266
100.0
6
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.8
2.2
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
60
Housing Characteristics
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 151,270 housing units located in the assessment area in 2010, of
which 54.1 percent were owner-occupied, 35.1 percent were rental units, and 10.9 percent were vacant. Rental
units are more highly concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. The median age of the housing stock
across the assessment area was 36 years, though housing was much older in the low- and moderate-income
census tracts compared to the assessment area overall. These factors indicate that lending opportunities in the
low- and moderate-income tracts are likely to be more limited.52
The assessment area housing market was impacted by the recent housing crisis but there are signs of recovery.
The Arkansas Realtors Association reports that Pulaski County has seen average housing prices recover and
increase beyond 2008 prices and while home sales are down compared to the peak in 2008, they are once again
on the rise. In Pulaski County, 4,151 new and existing housing units were sold in 2012 for an average price of
$188,131, representing an increase of 5.4 percent in units sold and 6.8 percent higher than in the average price
in 2011. In Saline County home sales were up by 1.3 percent between 2011 and 2012, while average sales price
was up by 7.3 percent. The average sales price in Saline County was lower than Pulaski at $169,376.53
New
home construction fell significantly between 2005 and 2009 and remains at about 50 percent of the 2005 level,
though the number of permits issued has been increasing over the past couple years.54
Housing costs are a challenge across the assessment area, particularly for lower income renters. In Pulaski
County, 47.1 percent of all renters and almost 60 percent of renters earning less than $50,000 a year are
considered cost-burdened, meaning that rental costs account for more than 30 percent of household income.
Renters fare a bit better in Saline County, though more than 50 percent of lower income renters are still cost
burdened.55
The 2013 Out of Reach study by the National Low Income Housing Coalition confirms housing
affordability is a problem, finding a minimum wage worker would have to work two jobs (assuming 40 hours a
week for 52 weeks a year) in order to afford the fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the Pulaski or
Saline counties.56
Mortgage delinquencies have had an adverse impact on the local housing market. In the assessment area, the
percentage of seriously delinquent mortgages, which includes loans more than 90 days past due, rose from 4.9
percent in January 2011 to 6.4 percent in December 2012.57
Employment and Economic Conditions
The assessment area is home to the city of Little Rock, which is the capital of Arkansas and the state’s most
populous city; Little Rock is the economic engine of the assessment area and the greater metropolitan area fuels
much of the state’s economic activity. Total employment in 2011 in Pulaski and Saline counties was 340,974.
Leading private nonfarm employment sectors included health care and social assistance, retail trade, and
administrative and waste management services. These sectors typically have lower wage jobs. As home to the
52
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap (accessed on February 4, 2013); available from www.policymap.com. 53
Arkansas Realtors Association. “Housing Market Reports.” (accessed on October 21, 2013); available from
http://www.arkansasrealtors.com/news-events/housing-market-reports. 54
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap (accessed on February 4, 2013); available from www.policymap.com. 55
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on June 5, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com 56
National Low Income Housing Coalition. Out of Reach, 2013. (accessed on October 16, 2013); available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 57
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta calculations of data provided by LPS.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
61
state capital and Little Rock Air Force Base, the area also has a large government employer base. Almost 50
percent of the government jobs were in state government and about 10 percent were U.S. military.58
The heavy
concentration of government jobs in the area has created strains on the local economy as all levels of
government cut spending.
Small businesses play an important role in the overall Little Rock economy though the number of small
businesses in the assessment area declined by about 2 percent over the review period. According to 2012 D&B
information, there were 25,822 businesses within the Little Rock assessment area of which 88.6 percent had
total annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small businesses.59
In Pulaski County, small business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 72 percent between
2007 and 2009. However, small business lending started to recover in 2010 and between 2009 and 2011, the
number of loans to small businesses increased by about 60 percent. Small business lending remains less than 50
percent of peak lending levels, and less than 50 percent of all small business loans are made to firms with
revenues under $1.0 million, indicating that most likely there is unmet loan demand from smaller firms.60
Little Rock’s city manager reports that the city has seen a steady increase in economic development activities
while manufacturing, transportation, and service sector employment are growing at a steady rate. Little Rock is
one of the more aggressive development markets in the nation and has doubled in the past 30 years, with
projections indicating it will double again over the next 20 years.61
Several major companies have expanded
their operations in the Little Rock market in recent years. In 2010 Caterpillar, manufacturer of construction and
mining equipment located its new North American motor grader production facility in North Little Rock. The
company is investing $140 million and employs approximately 600 people at this location.62
Also in 2010,
computer company Hewlett-Packard opened a state-of-the-art customer service center in Conway, citing the
area's quality workforce as a factor. The company plans to fill more than 1,200 positions at the $28 million
facility.63
The area is also capturing a slice of the growing wind energy industry. In 2008, windmill blade
manufacturers, LM Glasfiber and Polymarin Composites, announced the expansion of their manufacturing
facilities to Little Rock, where together they plan to hire more than 1,500 people and invest millions of
dollars.64
As a result of these economic developments, the Little Rock economy has performed relatively well throughout
the national economic malaise of the last few years. Little Rock’s recession-related decline in employment,
which was centered near January 2009, was milder than the nation’s decline, and recovery started earlier, where
the first increase in employment occurred in December 2009. The recovery has not been steady, but seems to
have taken hold in 2012 with strong 4th
quarter growth in several sectors, including trade, transportation, and
utilities.65
58
REIS data 59
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 60
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 61
City of Little Rock. (accessed on October 23, 2013); available from
http://www.littlerock.org/citymanager/divisions/economicdevelopment/. 62
Arkansas Economic Development Commission. (accessed on October 23, 2013); available from http://arkansasedc.com/news-and-
media-resources/news/2009/jan/caterpillar-to-locate-north-american-motor-grader-production-facility-in-north-little-rock.aspx. 63
Metro Little Rock Alliance. (accessed on October 23, 2013); available from http://customer-service.metrolittlerockalliance.com/. 64
USA Today. “Arkansas and Elsewhere, Economy Stable.” (accessed on February 5, 2013); available from
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-02-25-ark-economy_N.htm 65
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “Current Economic Conditions in the Eighth Federal Reserve District.” (accessed February 5,
2013); available from http://research.stlouisfed.org/regecon/burgundybooks/13/03/BB0313LR.pdf
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
62
While unemployment remains an issue inside the assessment area, it does so to a lesser degree than the state of
Arkansas and nationwide. The table below shows that the unemployment rate declined in both Pulaski and
Saline counties between 2011 and 2012. The unemployment rate in the Little Rock MSA in 2012 was 6.5
percent, compared to statewide unemployment rate of 7.3 percent.66
Competition
Little Rock is an active banking market where Bank of America and Regions Bank hold the largest share of
deposits with 20.3 percent and 15.5 percent, respectively. According to the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of
Deposits Report, there were 31 financial institutions operating 244 branch locations with a total of $11.3 billion
in deposits. IBERIABANK Bank ranked 9th
with a deposit market share of 3.7 percent ($420 million).
HMDA and CRA lending are competitive in Little Rock market. In 2011, IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 6th
and IBERIABANK ranked 33rd
, and combined, reported approximately 5.2 percent of total HMDA lending. In
2012, IBERIABANK Mortgage again ranked 6th
and IBERIABNK ranked 31st in total HMDA lending and
altogether accounted for 5.2 percent of all HMDA lending. For CRA lending, the bank ranked 15th
in 2011 with
2.2 percent of total CRA loans, and moved up to 14th
in 2012 with 2.4 percent of all CRA loans.
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
A community contact specializing in affordable housing confirmed that housing affordability remains an issue
for LMI individuals and that there is an acute need for affordable rental housing. Low Income Housing Tax
Credits are an important financing tool for increasing affordable rental housing, and present a good opportunity
for local bank investment. Arkansas receives an allocation of approximately $6.5 million in federal low-income
housing tax credits annually.67
The state also provides resources such as a housing trust fund and below market
financing to incentivize the development of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals and
families.
The housing market in Arkansas was less volatile than other markets, so the foreclosure crisis was less severe.
Nonetheless, the state of Arkansas received a significant allocation of funds under the federal government’s
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). The funds are available to help stabilize communities hard hit by
the foreclosure crisis. Arkansas received $19.6 million under the NSP1 allocation process and $5 million under
66
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (accessed on January 15, 2013); available from http://www.bls.gov/. 67
State of Arkansas. “Multi-Family Housing. Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.” (accessed January 3, 2013); available from
http://www.state.ar.us/adfa/programs/lihtcp.html.
2011 2012
Pulaski Co. 7.1 6.6
Saline Co. 6.5 6.0
Little Rock MSA 7.0 6.5
Arkansas 7.9 7.3
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
63
NSP3. The city of Little Rock received NSP2 funding in the amount of $8.6 million and the city of North Little
Rock received $6.4 million in NSP2 funding. The purpose of these funds is to save neighborhoods where
foreclosed and abandoned buildings are considerably impacting community viability and to increase home
ownership.68
Bank management states that poor credit history is one of the primary barriers to homeownership for low- and
moderate-income individuals. There are a number of organizations in the area that provide credit counseling
and homebuyer education, but there is a need for more education, particularly before credit issues arise.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
Several community contacts that specialize in economic development and small business assistance noted that
the Little Rock region had remained relatively stable during the economic downturn and confirmed that a slow
but steady recovery was underway. All of the contacts indicated that there is a need for more commercial credit
from financial institutions to help businesses start-up or expand. Greater access to working capital loans for
local small businesses would also have a trickle-down effect that would positively impact the community. To
help meet the financing needs of local small businesses there are several sources of alternative financing,
including a statewide CDFI that provides small business financing and a micro-lender. The contacts also noted
that some area banks partnered with small business organizations to do workshops and related training, but
there was a need for more bank participation in providing technical assistance, as well as more bank referrals of
unbankable customers that might benefit from one of the alternative financing providers.
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
Poverty is a growing concern in the assessment area. The percentage of people living below the federal poverty
level in Pulaski County increased by 32.6 percent between 2000 and 2011 and by almost 60 percent in Saline
County. In Pulaski County, 16.7 percent of the population was estimated to live below the federal poverty level
between 2007 and 2011. In addition, 15.9 percent of the population in Pulaski County and 10.0 percent of the
population in Saline County was receiving food stamps.69
In light of increased poverty and lower household income as a result of the recent recession, there is an
opportunity for banks to support activities that improve financial capability and household financial stability.
One opportunity is expanding access to mainstream financial services. According to the FDIC’s 2011 National
Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 10.7 percent of households are unbanked, meaning they
have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In addition, 25 percent of households
are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also regularly use alternative
financial services like check-cashing services, payday lenders, or pawn shops.70
Financial counseling is also
needed to help improve financial stability and one community contact noted that there are numerous
opportunities for banks to partner with organizations that offer financial education classes. In addition, there are
several other asset building programs, including homeownership counseling, Volunteer Income Tax Assistance
sites, and an IDA program operated by the Central Arkansas Development Council, which provides matching
funds for savings used to acquire an asset.
68
U.S. Department of Housing and Development. “Neighborhood Stabilization Program, NSP Grantees” (accessed on August 29,
2012); available from http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults. 69
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 18, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 70
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed October 18, 2013); available at:
http://economicinclusion.gov/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
64
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Little Rock assessment area is good. The geographic distribution
of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of borrowers reflects
adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes. In
addition, the bank is a leader in making community development loans.
During the review period, the bank reported 1,506 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 296 small
business loans in the Little Rock assessment area. HMDA lending represented 84.0 percent of total lending and
small business lending accounted for 16.0 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted
more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Little Rock
assessment area contains 9.2 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 5.7 percent of its total small
business lending by number of loans. In comparison, 4.5 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this
assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G-H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK’s
geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending in low-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of home purchase
lending was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts throughout the review
period. The bank increased home purchase lending between 2011 and 2012 and performance was greater than
the aggregate in 2012. In 2012, 2.9 percent of bank loans were originated in low-income tracts compared to 1.7
percent of aggregate loans.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of home purchase loans in
moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts in both 2011 and
2012. The bank’s lending was less than aggregate in 2011 but similar to aggregate in 2012. Most recently, in
2012, 10.2 percent of the bank’s loans were originated in moderate-income tracts compared with 11.6 percent of
aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts throughout the review period, while lending in upper-income tracts exceeded the percentage
of owner-occupied units in both years.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
65
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is poor. The bank’s refinance lending in
low-income tracts was significantly less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts and
less than aggregate throughout the review period. There was no increase in loan volume during the review
period. In 2012, the bank made 0.3 percent of home refinance loans in low-income tracts compared to 1.0
percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is poor. In both 2011 and 2012, the percentage
of loans originated in moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied housing units in
these tracts. The percentage of bank loans in moderate income tracts trailed the percentage of aggregate loans
in 2011 and 2012; in 2012, 4.6 percent of the bank’s refinance loans were made in moderate-income tracts
compared to 7.7 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts throughout the review period, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage
of owner-occupied units.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. In both years, the bank’s
lending activity in low-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts. The
percentage of the bank’s loans in low-income tracts was similar to aggregate during the review period; however,
the bank’s loan volume in this product category was very low in low-income tracts in this assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is good. The bank significantly
increased the number of home improvement loans in moderate-income census tracts over the review period.
The percentage of the bank’s loans in moderate-income tracts was significantly less than the percent of units in
these tracts and less than aggregate in 2011. However, in 2012, 32.4 percent of the bank’s loans were made in
moderate-income tracts, exceeding the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts (24.4 percent), and
aggregate lending (21.6 percent).
The bank’s home improvement lending in middle-income census tracts exceeded the percentage of owner-
occupied units in middle-income census tracts throughout the review period, while lending activity in upper
income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts in 2011 but declined in
2012.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is good. The bank’s small business
lending in low-income tracts declined slightly during the review period but was greater than the percentage of
both small businesses and aggregate lending in low-income tracts in 2011 and 2012.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending
increased during the review period. In moderate-income tracts, the bank’s lending activity was slightly less
than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts throughout the review period. The bank’s performance
was similar to aggregate in 2011 and exceeded aggregate in 2012. In 2012, 28.7 percent of the bank’s small
business loans were originated in moderate-income tracts compared to 26.9 percent of aggregate loans.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
66
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was slightly below the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts in 2011 and slightly greater than the demographic in 2012. In upper-
income tracts, the bank’s lending to small businesses was greater than the percentage of small businesses in
2011 but less than the percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in in 2012.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of the bank’s
loans to low-income borrowers increased over the review period but was less than the percentage of low-income
families in the assessment area for both years. The bank’s lending to low-income borrowers was similar to or
greater than aggregate over the review period. In 2012, 11.5 percent of the bank’s loans were made to low-
income borrowers compared to 8.0 percent of the aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is excellent. The percentage of home
purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of moderate-income families
living in the assessment area and exceeded the aggregate throughout the review period. In 2012, the bank
originated 23.6 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers while 17.8 percent of families
were classified as moderate-income in the assessment area.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers exceeded the percentage of
middle- and upper-income income families in the assessment area throughout the review period.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of refinance
loans to low-income borrowers was substantially less than the percentage of low-income families in the
assessment area for both years. In 2012, the bank originated 4.6 percent of its home refinance loans to low-
income borrowers, compared to 23.0 percent of families classified as low-income in the assessment area.
However, the bank’s performance was comparable to aggregate throughout the review period; in 2012, 4.1
percent of aggregate home refinance loans were made to low-income borrowers.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area over the review period. However, the bank’s performance improved relative to aggregate over
the review period. In 2012, 11.2 percent of the bank’s loans were made to moderate-income borrowers
compared to 9.6 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was equal to and greater than the percentage of
middle-income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the
percentage of upper-income families throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank increased the
number of home improvement loan to low-income borrowers between 2011 and 2012, though the percentage of
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
67
the bank’s home improvement loans to low-income borrowers was significantly less than the percentage of low-
income families in the assessment area for both years. The bank performed well below aggregate in 2011;
however, the bank’s performance improved in 2012, originating 6.7 percent of home improvement loans to low-
income borrowers compared to 7.4 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of the bank’s
home improvement loans to moderate-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of moderate-income
families in the assessment area in 2011 and 2012. The bank’s performance was similar to or exceeded the
aggregate throughout the review period. In 2012, the bank originated 21.9 percent of home improvement loans
to moderate-income borrowers, outperforming the aggregate at 18.6 percent.
The bank’s home purchase lending to middle- and upper-income families was greater than the percentage of
middle- and upper-income families in the assessment area in both years.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is adequate. The
percentage of small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly less than
the percentage of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. Most recently, in 2012,
the bank originated 42.0 percent of its loans to small businesses, although 88.6 percent of total businesses in the
assessment area are classified as small businesses. The bank’s lending to small businesses was less than
aggregate in 2011 but similar to aggregate in 2012.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in the Little Rock assessment area. The
bank originated five community development loans totaling $22.3 million during the review period. Three of
the community development loans funded the renovation of a historic building in a moderate income census
tract in downtown Little Rock. The project was funded through traditional bank financing from IBERIABANK
as well as New Market, Historic, and State Tax Credits. The other community development loans supported a
senior nursing home and economic development. Notably, the bank provided a $5 million line of credit to a
statewide SBA preferred lender and CDFI; a portion of the total line of credit represents a pro-rata allocation to
the Little Rock assessment area. The mission of the supported organization is to provide financing to small
businesses and economic development projects in the Arkansas region through long-term financing options,
including financing guaranteed through the SBA and USDA loan programs. The bank’s community
development lending portfolio is responsive to a number of identified community development needs and
indicates that the bank is an active participant in the revitalization and stabilization of low- and moderate-
income communities and small businesses.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Little Rock assessment area is good.
The bank had 7 investments totaling $6.4 million; $6.1 million were current period investments. The prior
period investments included investments in the CRA Qualified Investment Fund supporting affordable housing.
The current period investments are all government-guaranteed mortgage backed securities with the exception of
a significant equity investment in a New Market Tax Credit project previously discussed.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
68
The bank made 77 contributions totaling $250,400. The majority of the contributions supported community
services to low- and moderate-income individuals and affordable housing. Of particular note, the bank
provided 47 grants totaling almost $165,700 to assist qualified low- and moderate-income homebuyers with
down payment and closing costs to purchase a home. The mortgage grant was administered in partnership with
a local nonprofit organization.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
development of affordable housing, revitalization and stabilization of distressed areas, small business assistance
and the financial stability of low- and moderate-income individuals. A summary of the bank’s investments and
contributions can be found in Appendix K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Little Rock assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels. The distribution of 11 branch offices and 15 ATMs as of December 31,
2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories within the
assessment area. The bank has four branches located in moderate-income tracts, representing 36.4 percent of
total branches compared to 27.5 percent of households and 31.5 percent of businesses located in moderate-
income communities. During the review period, the bank opened and closed one branch, both located in a
moderate-income census tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK offers extended hours at most of its branch locations in the Little
Rock assessment area, and provides weekend hours at many of its branch offices, including those located in
moderate-income tracts. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent throughout the
assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Little Rock, Arkansas
69
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK is a leader in providing community development services in the assessment area. During the
review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 744 service hours in various capacities for community
development organizations, by participating in 21 different community development services. Board service
represented approximately 65 percent of the total community development service hours. Bank employees
engaged in providing financial education, homeownership counseling as well as working with a variety of
organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-income geographies and for low- and
moderate-income individuals.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 4 36.4% 1 0 3 3 2 Total 4 28.6% 4 33.3% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 3 27.3% 0 0 3 3 2 Total 5 35.7% 3 25.0% 0 0 2 100.0% 0 0
SA 2 0 0 0 2 0 0
Upper 4 36.4% 0 0 4 4 3 Total 6 35.7% 6 41.7% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 11 100.0% 1 0 10 10 7 Total 15 100.0% 13 100.0% 1 0 2 100.0% 0 0
SA 3 1 0 0 2 0 0
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
LPOS are not included in this table
1 1.3% 0.0% 0.0%
80 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
23 28.8% 27.9% 25.4%
22 27.5% 36.4% 36.6%
9 11.3% 8.3% 6.4%
25 31.3% 27.5% 31.5%
# % # % # %
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
70
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS,
ASSESSMENT AREA
Overview
The Fayetteville assessment area is comprised of Benton and Washington counties and is part of the
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers MSA (Fayetteville MSA). Two other counties, Madison County, Arkansas, and
McDonald County, Missouri are also part of the Fayetteville MSA but are not included in the assessment area.
The county seats are Bentonville and Fayetteville for Benton and Washington County, respectively.
IBERIABANK operates seven branches in the assessment area, including two in moderate-income tracts; three
branches are in Benton County and four are in Washington County.
Population and Income Characteristics
According to the U.S. Census, the population in the assessment area was 424,404 in 2010, representing a 36.4
percent increase since 2000. This market was the 12th
fastest growing MSA nationally, increasing by an
average of 11,600 people, or 2.9 percent, annually. The population growth can be attributed to in-migration due
to an expanding economy from 2000-2007, retiree attraction and relocation to the area, and enrollment increases
at the University of Arkansas.71
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the years 2011 through 2012 for the Fayetteville MSA. As shown, the
median family income increased slightly from $57,500 to $58,200 between 2011 and 2012.
Demographic Characteristics by Census Tract
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
71
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $57,500 0 - $28,749 $28,750 - $45,999 $46,000 - $68,999 $69,000 - & above
2012 $58,200 0 - $29,099 $29,100 - $46,559 $46,560 - $69,839 $69,840 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
71
As shown in the tables below, the Fayetteville assessment area added 21 tracts between 2000 and 2010,
including 1 low-income tract and 6 moderate-income tracts. The percentage of low-income census tracts
increased from 3.3 percent in 2000 to 3.7 percent of total tracts in 2010, while the percentage of moderate-
income census tracts increased from 8.3 percent to 13.6 percent of total tracts. The number of total housing
units in low-income tracts increased from 3,739 in 2000 to 8,662 in 2010, an increase of 132 percent, while the
number of housing units in moderate-income tracts nearly tripled from 7,684 in 2000 to 22,440 in 2010, or a
192 percent increase. The number of housing units in middle-income tracts declined slightly while the number
of housing units in upper-income census tracts increased by approximately 124 percent. The share of vacant
housing units increased across all income categories; the total number of vacant units accounted for 8.0 percent
of all housing units in 2000 and increased to 11.5 percent by 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
72
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
3.3
944
1.1
250
26.5
14,366
17.2
Moderate-income
5
8.3
3,812
4.6
746
19.6
15,057
18.0
Middle-income
44
73.3
64,130
76.9
5,244
8.2
20,101
24.1
Upper-income
9
15.0
14,553
17.4
721
5.0
33,915
40.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
60
100.0
83,439
100.0
6,961
8.3
83,439
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,739
200
0.3
5.3
3,327
89.0
212
5.7
Moderate-income
7,684
2,707
3.5
35.2
4,417
57.5
560
7.3
Middle-income
95,710
60,627
78.0
63.3
26,714
27.9
8,369
8.7
Upper-income
21,478
14,242
18.3
66.3
6,129
28.5
1,107
5.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
128,611
77,776
100.0
60.5
40,587
31.6
10,248
8.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
187
0.8
164
0.8
17
1.5
6
0.6
Moderate-income
2,161
9.3
1,902
8.9
151
13.7
108
11.2
Middle-income
16,360
70.1
15,013
70.6
704
63.9
643
66.8
Upper-income
4,620
19.8
4,186
19.7
229
20.8
205
21.3
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
23,328
100.0
21,265
100.0
1,101
100.0
962
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.2
4.7
4.1
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
20
2.3
20
2.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
733
85.5
721
85.3
8
100.0
4
100.0
Upper-income
104
12.1
104
12.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
857
100.0
845
100.0
8
100.0
4
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.6
.9
.5
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
73
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3
3.7
3,082
2.9
1,045
33.9
20,777
19.6
Moderate-income
11
13.6
12,710
12.0
2,282
18.0
19,113
18.0
Middle-income
44
54.3
59,840
56.3
5,977
10.0
21,786
20.5
Upper-income
23
28.4
30,594
28.8
1,626
5.3
44,550
41.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
81
100.0
106,226
100.0
10,930
10.3
106,226
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8,662
1,671
1.7
19.3
5,535
63.9
1,456
16.8
Moderate-income
22,440
8,499
8.7
37.9
10,976
48.9
2,965
13.2
Middle-income
95,537
55,978
57.2
58.6
29,444
30.8
10,115
10.6
Upper-income
48,045
31,707
32.4
66.0
10,701
22.3
5,637
11.7
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
174,684
97,855
100.0
56.0
56,656
32.4
20,173
11.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
735
3.3
642
3.2
61
5.7
32
3.4
Moderate-income
3,782
17.2
3,345
16.8
277
26.0
160
16.9
Middle-income
11,058
50.4
10,094
50.6
486
45.5
478
50.5
Upper-income
6,379
29.1
5,860
29.4
243
22.8
276
29.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
21,954
100.0
19,941
100.0
1,067
100.0
946
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.8
4.9
4.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
0.8
6
0.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
24
3.1
24
3.1
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
553
71.5
542
71.1
9
100.0
2
100.0
Upper-income
190
24.6
190
24.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
773
100.0
762
100.0
9
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.6
1.2
.3
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
74
Housing Characteristics
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 174,684 housing units located in the assessment area in 2010, of
which 56 percent were owner-occupied, 32.4 percent were rental units, and 11.5 percent were vacant. Rental
units are more highly concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. The median age of the housing stock
across the assessment area was 20 years, though housing was much older in the low- and moderate-income
census tracts compared to the assessment area overall.
The housing market in the assessment area softened during the economic downturn but has recently shown
signs of improvement. The average number of homes sold in 2006-2007, pre-recession years, was
approximately 10,100 with an average median sales price of $144,000. Home sales in the assessment area
declined from 2008 to 2011, reaching the lowest point in 2011 of approximately 8,000 homes sold. During this
time, the median sales price decreased by 21 percent. In 2012, the real estate market began to rebound both in
sales and home prices.72
Although homebuilding activity remains lower than pre-recessionary levels, the
number of single-family homes permitted is on the rise. Between 2007 and 2011, the average number of
permits issued was 1,350; however this figure was up more than 30 percent in 2012 from the prior 5-year
average.73
Mortgage delinquencies rose during the economic downturn and have fluctuated over the past two years. The
percent of mortgages considered seriously delinquent (defined as more than 90 days past due or in foreclosure)
increased from 6.4 percent in January 2011 to a high of 7.0 percent in June 2012. Since mid-2012, the rate has
been steadily declining, falling to 6.7 percent at the end of 2012, which was slightly higher than the state rate of
6.4 percent.74
Employment and Economic Conditions
The Fayetteville assessment area had approximately 204,500 people employed as in 2012.75
The significant
employment sectors in the MSA as a percent of total employment include: professional and business services
(17.4 percent), wholesale and retail trade (14.6 percent), government (14.1 percent) and manufacturing (13.9
percent). Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., is the largest employer in Benton County, employing approximately 28,000.
Following as the next largest employers are Tyson Foods, Inc., employing about 12,000 and the University of
Arkansas (UA), with 4,000 employees. Other major employers in the assessment area include Simmons Foods
(manufacturing), J.B. Hunt Transport, and Washington Regional (education & health services).
Economic conditions across the Fayetteville MSA declined during the recession, but the region began
recovering in 2011 with increasing jobs and falling unemployment over the review period. After tremendous
job growth in the early 2000s, approximately 30 percent growth from 2000-2007, the assessment area began
recording job losses in 2008. During 2008 and 2009, the number of nonfarm jobs declined by 5,800, or 2.9
percent. The Fayetteville assessment area added 10,700 jobs (5.6 percent growth) for 2010 through 2012.
Although the recession affected nearly every job sector, the manufacturing and mining, logging, and
construction sectors lost the most jobs.
72
HUD, Office of Policy Development and Research. July, 2013. (accessed November 18, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/periodicals/ushmc/reg/FayettevilleLA_HMP_1Jul13.pdf 73
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 74
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta calculations of data provided by LPS. 75
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
75
The 2007 pre-recession unemployment rate was 3.8 percent and increased to 6.7 percent in the second quarter
of 2011. Then, the unemployment rate fell to 5.6 percent between 2011 and 2012, and is well below the
unemployment rate for the state at 7.3 percent.76
Small businesses play an important role in the Fayetteville economy as well, though it should be noted that the
number of small businesses in the assessment area declined over the review period. According to 2012 D&B
information, there were 21,954 businesses within the Fayetteville assessment area of which 90 percent had total
annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small businesses.77
Small
business lending to this segment peaked in 2007 with 7,420 small business loans made and a four-year average
of 6,780 loans made. The number of loans fell drastically in 2009 and reached a low of 995 loans made.
Fortunately, small business lending to firms with revenues less than $1.0 million began to recover and ended
2011 with 3,868 loans or a 288 percent increase from the trough.78
Competition
The Fayetteville assessment area banking market is dominated by community banks. According to the June 30,
2012, FDIC Summary of Deposit Report, 31 financial institutions operated 191 offices in the assessment area.
IBERIABANK ranked 17th
with a deposit market share of 1.3 percent ($112.2 million) and eight offices. The
top three financial institutions are Arvest Bank, First Security Bank, and the Bank of Fayetteville with deposit
market shares of 52.3 percent, 7.3 percent, and 3.6 percent, respectively.
HMDA and CRA lending is also competitive in the assessment area. In 2011, IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked
5th
out of 275 lenders with 5.5 percent of total HMDA loans, and IBERIABANK ranked 44th
. HMDA lending
increased in 2012 and IBERIABANK Mortgage maintained its ranking of 5th
out of 321 lenders again with 5.5
percent of total HMDA lending, while IBERIABANK improved to 36th
. Arvest Mortgage, Wells Fargo and
Arvest Bank held the top three slots for largest HMDA lenders. For CRA lending, IBERIABANK ranked 4th
in
2011 and 16th
in 2012 with an average of less than one percent of CRA loans in each year. CRA lending is
dominated by Arvest Bank followed by the national credit card issuers, American Express and Capital One.
76
Bureau of Labor Statistics 77
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 78
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com
2011 2012
Benton Co. 6.2 5.7
Washington Co. 6.0 5.4
Fayetteville MSA 6.2 5.6
Arkansas 7.9 7.3
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
76
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
According to a report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the fair market rent for a 2-bedroom
apartment in the MSA is $655, which would be affordable for a worker earning a wage of $12.60 per hour.
Mean wages for renters is $15.40 and $12.32 in Benton and Washington Counties, respectively.79
This data
indicates that the Fayetteville market is relatively affordable. However, census data reveals that an estimated 41
percent of all renters and 22 percent of all homeowners were cost burdened from 2007-2011 in the entire
assessment area.80
Cost burdened households are defined by HUD as households that are paying more than 30
percent of their income towards housing costs. It should be noted that of the 23,200 students currently enrolled
at the University of Arkansas, an estimated 16,000 students, or nearly 70 percent, rent in the MSA, thereby
impacting affordability, the type of multifamily construction activity, rental rates, and vacancy levels. Access
to quality, affordable housing is an ongoing need in the Fayetteville MSA. Annual action plans from
Bentonville, Springdale, and Fayetteville cited affordable housing and housing rehabilitation as a continued
need and the primary use for limited federal dollars.
The state of Arkansas received a significant allocation of funds under the federal government’s Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP). The funds are available to help stabilize communities hard hit by the foreclosure
crisis. Arkansas received $19.6 million under the NSP1 allocation process and $5 million under NSP3; funds
were administered by the Arkansas Development Finance Authority.81
Two projects were allocated funds
within the assessment area; a senior housing rehab project in Rogers, Arkansas ($5.8 million) and an acquisition
and rehab of an apartment complex near the University of Arkansas ($7.7 million). Other community
development opportunities include participation in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program.
Arkansas receives an allocation of approximately $6.5 million in federal low-income housing tax credits
annually.82
The state also provides resources such as a housing trust fund and below market financing to
incentivize the development of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals and families.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
There are numerous federal and state financing mechanisms that can be useful to financial institutions in
partnering or financing small business enterprises and community economic development projects. In
particular, the Arkansas State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) provides opportunities for banks to
partner on small business financing. Arkansas received $13.2 million under the SSBCI which is expected to
generate $130 million in new private lending. Funds will be used by The Arkansas Development Finance
Authority (ADFA) to support and provide additional funding for its existing Arkansas Capital Access Program,
Bond Guaranty/Loan Participation Program, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Fund, as well as other
programs.
There are seven Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) in the state of Arkansas, including one
based inside the assessment area that assists low-income individuals with home improvement loans and new
construction as well as community infrastructure projects. In addition, Arkansas Capital Corporation, a
statewide CDFI, provides small business financing assistance statewide primarily through SBA and USDA loan
programs. Arkansas Capital Corporation has also been awarded $130 million in tax credit authority under the
79
National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2013, accessed on November 19, 2013; available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 80
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 19, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 81
U.S. Department of Housing and Development. “Neighborhood Stabilization Program, NSP Grantees” (accessed on November 29,
2013); available from http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults. 82
State of Arkansas. “Multi-Family Housing. Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.” (accessed on December 2, 2013); available
from http://www.state.ar.us/adfa/programs/lihtcp.html.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
77
New Markets Tax Credits Program (NMTC Program) since 2009. Finally, there is also one certified micro-
lender located in Huntsville, Arkansas, that provides services to Benton County.
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
Poverty and financial instability are also concerns throughout the assessment area. The percentage of people
living in poverty is high in both counties in the assessment area, but particularly so in Washington County; 11.7
percent and 19 percent of individuals lived below the poverty level as of 2007-2011 in Benton and Washington
counties, respectively. Food stamp usage, another indicator of financial distress, has also been rising in the
assessment area for the past decade. In 2000, 4.1 percent of the population in the assessment area received food
stamps. In 2010, food stamp usage spiked to 11.2 percent in the assessment area, while the state rate was 16.5
percent.83
In light of increasing poverty and economic challenges for low- and moderate-income individuals, there is an
opportunity for banks to support activities that improve financial capability and household financial stability.
One opportunity is expanding access to mainstream financial services. According to the FDIC’s National
Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 8.2 percent of households are unbanked, meaning they
have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In addition, 22 percent of households
are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on alternative financial
services providers on a regular basis.84
83
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on November 1, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 84
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed November 1, 2013); available at:
http://webtools.joinbankon.org/community/profile?state=LA&county=Fayetteville percent20Parish85
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data
provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
78
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Fayetteville assessment area is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans reflects poor penetration throughout the assessment area, although the distribution of
borrowers reflects adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different
revenue sizes. In addition, the bank made a low level of community development loans in the assessment area.
During the review period, the bank reported 2,298 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 108 small
business loans in the Fayetteville assessment area. HMDA lending represented 95.5 percent of total lending and
small business lending accounted for 4.5 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted
more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Fayetteville
assessment area contains 14 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 2.1 percent of its total small
business lending by number of loans. In comparison, 1.2 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this
assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK’s
geographic distribution of loans reflects poor penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK did not originate any home purchase loans in low-income tracts in the assessment area in 2011.
The bank did originate home purchase loans in 2012 with the percentage of loans in low-income tracts being
slightly less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts. The bank’s performance was
comparable to aggregate. However, it should be noted there were low levels of owner-occupied units, as well
as limited aggregate activity in the assessment area during both years of the review period. There were 0.3
percent and 1.7 percent of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts in 2011 and 2012, respectively, while
aggregate lending activity was 0.1 percent in 2011 and 1.2 percent in 2012. Therefore, IBERIABANK’s home
purchase lending in low-income tracts is adequate.
While the bank’s home purchase lending increased between 2011 and 2012, home purchase lending in
moderate-income tracts is poor. In both years, the percentage of loans was less than the percentage of owner-
occupied units in moderate-income tracts and less than aggregate. Most recently, in 2012, 4.8 percent of
IERIABANK’s mortgages were originated in moderate-income tracts, compared to 8.7 percent of owner-
occupied housing units and 8.4 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts while lending in upper-income tracts exceeded the percentage of units throughout the
review period.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
79
Home Refinance Loans
Home refinance lending in low-income tracts is poor. The bank did not originate any home refinance loans in
in 2011 where just 0.3 percent of the owner-occupied housing units are located. Aggregate lending was also
very limited in 2011. In 2012, 0.7 percent of the bank’s home refinance loans were originated in low-income
tracts, which was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in the these tracts, and also less than
aggregate lending at 1.1 percent.
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. While the percentage of loans
in both years was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units and aggregate lending, the bank’s
performance improved between 2011 and 2012. In 2012, 5.8 percent of the bank’s home refinance loans were
originated in moderate-income tracts, compared to 7.3 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units
throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. While the bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in low-income tracts in 2011, lending in low-income tracts improved
over the review period. In 2012, 6.7 percent of the bank’s home improvement loans were originated in low-
income tracts, compared to 1.4 percent of aggregate loans and 1.7 percent of owner-occupied units.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is poor. IBERIABANK did not
originate any home improvement loans in moderate income tracts in 2011; 4.0 percent of aggregate home
improvement loans were originated in moderate-income tracts. The bank’s performance improved over the
review period. In 2012, 11.1 percent of the bank’s home improvement loans were originated in a moderate-
income tract, compared to 8.2 percent of aggregate loans and 8.7 percent of owner-occupied units.
The percent of the bank’s home improvement lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the
percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts throughout the review period. The bank’s lending in upper-
income tracts exceeded the owner-occupied units in these tracts in 2011 but declined as a percent of total loans
in 2012.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank originated no small
business loans in low-income tracts in 2011 where 0.8 percent of the small businesses are located; however,
aggregate lending in 2011 was also very limited. The bank’s small business lending activity in low-income
tracts increased during the review period. In 2012, 5.9 percent of the bank’s small business loans were
originated in low-income tracts where 3.2 percent of small businesses are located. Additionally, 3.3 percent of
aggregate loans were originated in low-income tracts.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending in
moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts and less than aggregate
in 2011. However, in 2012, the bank’s small business lending performance improved significantly. The bank
originated 38.2 percent of total small business loans in moderate-income tracts in 2012; this compares very
favorably with 16.8 percent of small businesses and 16.0 percent of aggregate lending in these tracts.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
80
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts declined from 85 percent of total small
business loans in 2011 to 41.2 percent of loans in 2012. The bank’s lending in middle-income tracts was less
than the percentage of small businesses in these tracts. Additionally, lending in upper-income tracts was less
than the percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area over the review period.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank’s home purchase
lending to low-income borrowers in 2011 and 2012 was 8.9 percent and 8.2 percent, respectively. In both
years, the percentage of loans to low-income borrowers was below the percentage of low-income families in the
assessment area and slightly below the aggregate lending to low-income borrowers.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of home
purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers was greater than the aggregate throughout the review period. In
addition, the bank’s lending to moderate-income borrowers exceeded the percentage of moderate-income
families living in the assessment area in 2011 although was slightly below the demographic in the following
year. In 2012, the bank originated 16.6 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers while
18.0 percent of families were classified as moderate-income in the assessment area.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was similar to or greater than
the percentage of middle- and upper-income families in the assessment area during the review period.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of home
refinance loans to low-income borrowers was substantially less than the percentage of low-income families in
the assessment area for both years. The bank’s performance was below aggregate in 2011 but improved relative
to aggregate in 2012. In 2012, the bank originated 5.6 percent of its home refinance loans to low-income
borrowers, compared to 19.6 percent of families classified as low-income in the assessment area; 6.3 percent of
aggregate loans were made to low-income borrowers in 2012.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area but similar to aggregate over the review period. In 2012, 11.7 percent of the bank’s loans were
made to moderate-income borrowers compared to 12.3 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
upper-income families throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The percentage of loans
was slightly greater than the percentage of families classified as low-income in 2011 and exceeded aggregate.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
81
The bank's performance declined in 2012 relative to the percentage of low-income borrowers in the assessment
but remained similar to aggregate; 8.9 percent of home improvement loans were originated to low-income
borrowers compared to 9.9 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The bank increased home
improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers over the review period. The percentage of loans to
moderate- income borrower was greater than the percentage of moderate-income families and also exceeded
aggregate lending in both years. In 2012, the bank originated 22.0 percent of home improvement loans to
moderate-income borrowers compared to 15.0 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was slightly less than the
percentage of middle- and upper-income families in 2011. However, in 2012, the bank’s lending to middle-
income borrowers dropped to 6.7 percent, substantially below the demographic, while loans to upper-income
borrowers grew significantly, and exceeded the percentage of upper-income families.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is adequate. The
percentage of small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly less than
the percentage of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. The bank’s lending
was less than aggregate lending to small businesses in 2011; however, the bank outperformed the aggregate in
2012. Although 90.8 percent of total businesses in the assessment area are classified as small businesses, the
bank originated 63.2 percent of its loans to small businesses, compared to 49.8 percent of aggregate loans in
2012.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made a low level of community development loans in the Fayetteville assessment area. The
bank originated one community development loan totaling $494,000 during the review period. The loan
amount was a pro-rata allocation to the Fayetteville assessment area of a $5 million line of credit provided to a
statewide SBA preferred lender and CDFI. The mission of the supported organization is to provide financing to
small businesses located in the Arkansas region through long-term financing options and risk mitigation tools,
including financing guaranteed through the SBA and USDA loan programs.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Fayetteville assessment area is good.
The bank had five investments totaling $994,600; $791,900 was current period investments. The prior period
investments were investments in the CRA Qualified Investment Fund. All of the current period investments are
mortgage backed securities. The securities are pools of 30-year and 15-year residential mortgages originated in
2012 to low- and moderate-income borrowers in the Fayetteville assessment area and issued by Fannie Mae,
Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae.
The bank made five contributions totaling $21,700. The largest contribution was in-kind, providing subsidized
rent for office space in a bank facility to a local nonprofit that provides community services to low- and
moderate-income families. A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions can be found in Appendix
K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Fayetteville assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Fayetteville, Arkansas
82
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are readily accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels. The distribution of seven branch offices and seven ATMs as of
December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories
within the assessment area. The bank has two branches located in moderate-income tracts, representing 28.6
percent of total branches compared to 12.6 percent of households and 17.2 percent of businesses located in
moderate-income communities. During the review period, the bank closed one branch, located in an upper
income census tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK offers extended hours at all of its branch locations in the
Fayetteville assessment area, and provides weekend hours at most of its branch offices, including those located
in moderate-income tracts. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent throughout the
assessment area.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK provides a relatively high level of community development services in the assessment area.
IBERIABANK employees provided 455.5 service hours by participating in 4 different services during the
review period. Board service represented approximately 87 percent of the total community development
service hours. Bank employees engaged in providing financial education as well as working with several
organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-income geographies and for low- and
moderate-income individuals. However, bank staff did not engage in other types of community development
activities such as affordable housing, poverty alleviation, and small business assistance.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 2 28.6% 0 0 2 2 1 Total 2 28.6% 2 28.6% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 4 57.1% 0 0 4 4 4 Total 4 57.1% 4 57.1% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 1 14.3% 0 1 1 1 0 Total 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 0 1 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 7 100.0% 0 1 7 7 5 Total 7 100.0% 7 100.0% 0 1 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
%
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
# % # % #
3 3.7% 4.7% 3.3%
11 13.6% 12.6% 17.2%
44 54.3% 55.3% 50.4%
23 28.4% 27.4% 29.1%
0.0%
81 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
0 0.0% 0.0%
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
83
The following metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Jonesboro Assessment Area (Craighead and Poinsett Counties)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated six branches in the assessment area, representing
18 percent of its branches in Arkansas.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $238.6 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 8.7 percent and 24 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Arkansas.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Metropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment
Areas
Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Jonesboro Below Below Above
For the lending test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state of Arkansas. The
geographic and borrower distribution of loans in the Jonesboro assessment area were stronger than the state but
lower levels of community development lending led to weaker performance in the limited-scope metropolitan
assessment area.
For the investment test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state of Arkansas.
Performance in the Jonesboro assessment area was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state due to lower
levels of qualified investments relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment area; however, it was still
considered satisfactory.
For the service test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state. Performance in the
Jonesboro assessment area was stronger than the bank’s performance in the state due to accessibility of delivery
systems and greater level of community development services completed by the bank.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Non-Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
84
The following non-metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE ARKANSAS NON-METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Northeast Arkansas Assessment Area (Clay, Greene, Jackson, Lawrence, Randolph, and Sharp Counties) o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 10 branches in the assessment area, representing
29 percent of its branches in Arkansas.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $213.3 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 10.1 percent and 22 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Arkansas.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Nonmetropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment Areas Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Northeast Arkansas Below Below Below
For the lending test, performance was weaker in the Northeast Arkansas assessment area than in the state.
Although borrower distribution of loans was stronger than the bank’s performance in the state in the assessment
area, its performance in community development lending was weak.
For the investment test, the performance in Northeast Arkansas was weaker than the bank’s performance in the
state due to lower levels of qualified investments relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment area.
For the service test, the performance in Northeast Arkansas was weaker to the bank’s performance in the state
due to fewer community development services and limited accessibility of delivery systems.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Florida
85
CRA RATING FOR FLORIDA: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
The Service Test is rated: High Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment areas. In
addition, the distribution of borrowers reflects adequate penetration among customers of different
income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes.
The bank makes an adequate level of community development loans within the assessment areas.
The bank provides an adequate level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment areas.
Retail services are accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income levels in the
assessment areas.
The bank is a leader in providing community development services throughout the assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Florida
86
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for two assessment area in the State of Florida:
Naples
Sarasota
Limited scope reviews were conducted for the remaining nine assessment areas:
Ft Meyers
Keys
Palm Beach/Broward County
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for these assessment areas are consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN FLORIDA
Lending activity in Florida accounted for 9.0 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Florida represented 9.8 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small business
and small farm lending represented 6.5 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm lending. As of
June 30, 2012, the bank had $2.2 billion in deposits in Florida accounting for 23.3 percent of IBERIABANK’s
total deposits. IBERIABANK ranks 26th
out of 292 insured institutions in the state with 0.53 percent of total
deposits. As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 43 branch offices in Florida representing 23.5
percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the state of Florida is Low Satisfactory. IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and small
business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in determining the lending test rating for
Florida because the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than small business loans. Additionally, the
Sarasota assessment area received slightly greater consideration when determining the state rating because it
holds a greater percentage of the bank’s deposits, loans, and branches in the state of Florida than the Naples
assessment area. The full-scope areas selected together represent 61.4 percent of the deposits in the assessment
areas in Florida as well as 41.9 percent of the branches. The full-scope assessment areas represent 37.4 percent
of the HMDA loans and 50.7 percent of the small business loans in the state. Lastly, only 9.0 percent of
community development loans occurred in the two full scope assessment areas. Thus, the two full-scope
assessment areas represent a majority of the branches, deposits and lending in the state of Florida yet only a
small amount of the community development lending in the state. IBERIABANK did not originate any small
farm loans in Florida during the review period; therefore, there is no discussion of these loans in this section of
the report.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Florida
87
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices F-H while details on lending in the lending scope
assessment areas can be found in Appendices I-J.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans is adequate in Naples and poor in Sarasota. Additionally, the distribution of loans by
borrower income and business revenue size is adequate. The borrower distribution is considered adequate in
both full scope assessment areas. A detailed discussion of the geographic and borrower distribution of lending
for the full scope assessment areas is included in the next section of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made an adequate level of community development loans in Florida. The bank made 18
community development loans totaling $39.2 million across the state during the review period. The majority of
loans funded affordable housing and community services. Notably, the bank provided over $16 million in
community development loans for workforce housing in the Keys (a limited scope assessment area), where
affordable housing is critical for the significant number of workers that support tourism and related service
industries. The bank’s community development lending in Florida also included a loan to a statewide
Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) that serves all of the assessment areas in the state.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Florida is Low Satisfactory. The bank made adequate use of qualified
investments and contributions with total investments of $18.0 million and contributions of $318,420 in the state.
The bank exhibited adequate responsiveness to the credit and community development needs through its
investment activities in both the Naples and Sarasota assessment areas; investments in the two full scope
assessment areas accounted for 29 percent of the bank’s total investments in the state. The bank’s largest
investment was in the Keys, which was a limited scope assessment area. During the review period, the bank
made an $8.8 million Low Income Housing Tax Credit investment to support 36 units of workforce housing in a
hard to develop area. The majority of the bank’s other investments are mortgage backed securities, and all of
the investments were made during the review period.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 1,120 57.6% $169,371 48.2%
HMDA Refinance 417 21.4% $106,831 30.4%
HMDA Home Improvement 65 3.3% $1,594 0.5%
HMDA Multi-Family 9 0.5% $16,573 4.7%
Total HMDA 1,611 82.8% $294,369 83.9%
Total Small Business 335 17.2% $56,695 16.1%
Total Farm 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
TOTAL LOANS 1,946 100.0% $351,064 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Florida
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Florida
88
The bank primarily provided support to community services and affordable housing through its contributions.
In addition to the contributions that were unique to the assessment areas, the bank had two statewide donations
totaling $10,000 that provided support to small business and financial stability conferences that benefitted the
entire state.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Service Test
The service test rating for Florida is High Satisfactory.
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and hours of operation
do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-income
geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank’s record of opening and closing branch offices
has not affected the accessibility of its delivery systems, including to low- and moderate-income geographies
and/or low- and moderate-income individuals.
Community Development Services
The bank is a leader in providing community development services that benefit residents and small businesses
in Florida. The bank’s community development services were excellent in the Sarasota assessment area while
services in Naples were good. Additional details regarding specific community development services can be
found in the full-scope assessment area sections.
In addition to the community development services, IBERIABANK staff dedicated a significant number of
hours to helping low- and moderate-income homebuyers through the bank’s loss mitigation program. After
acquiring four failed banks in Alabama and Florida utilizing FDIC loss sharing agreements, IBERIABANK
created a dedicated team of six associates to assist homeowners who were having difficulty making mortgage
payments. This team works with borrowers at all income levels to determine if they qualify for the bank’s
standard modification program and if not, the team takes a “second look” in an effort to find a loan payment
that the homeowner can afford. The bank estimates that the loss mitigation team provided over 950 hours of
assistance over the review period specifically to low- and moderate-income homebuyers in Florida, and
Alabama, though the majority of the these borrowers were in the Florida assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
89
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE SARASOTA, FLORIDA, ASSESSMENT
AREA
Overview
The assessment area is comprised of the North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, Florida MSA (Sarasota MSA), which
consist of Manatee and Sarasota counties. Within the assessment area there are 4 low-income and 42 moderate-
income census tracts. Iberia had 10 branches in the assessment area as of December 31, 2012. Of the 10
branches, 4 are located in moderate income census tracts and 6 are located in middle income census tracts; six
branches are in Sarasota County while four are in Manatee County.
Population and Income Characteristics
According to 2010 census data, the population in the assessment area was 702,281, with 379,448 residing in
Sarasota County and 322,833 in Manatee County. Between 2000 and 2010, Manatee and Sarasota counties
grew by 22 and 16 percent, respectively, which was on par with the population growth rate for Florida of 17.6
percent.85
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the years 2011 through 2012 for the Sarasota MSA. The chart provides a
range of the estimated annual family income for each income category (low, moderate, middle and upper). As
shown, the median family income increased slightly over the review period from $59,100 in 2011 to $59,900 in
2012.
Demographic Characteristics
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown in the tables below, the assessment area changed significantly between 2000 and 2010, with the total
number of census tracts increasing by 20 percent. The number of low-income census tracts increased from one
(0.7 percent of the total) to four (2.3 percent of the total) between 2000 and 2010. The percentage of moderate-
85
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $59,100 0 - $29,549 $29,550 - $47,279 $47,280 - $70,919 $70,920 - & above
2012 $59,900 0 - $29,949 $29,950 - $47,919 $47,920 - $71,879 $71,880 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
90
income census tracts increased from 21.7 percent to 24.4 percent over the time period. The number of total
housing units in low-income tracts increased from 1,621 in 2000 to 7,714 in 2010, an increase of 367 percent,
while the number of housing units in moderate- tracts increased by 16 percent. The number of housing units in
middle-income census tracts increased by 10 percent while the number of housing units in upper-income tracts
increased by 52 percent. Housing vacancy increased significantly in census tracts across all income categories;
the total number of vacant units accounted for 18.2 percent of all housing units in 2000 and increased to 24.3
percent by 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
91
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.7
897
0.5
291
32.4
29,853
17.6
Moderate-income
31
21.7
37,541
22.2
4,826
12.9
33,150
19.6
Middle-income
77
53.8
89,610
52.9
3,830
4.3
39,877
23.6
Upper-income
34
23.8
41,200
24.3
1,130
2.7
66,368
39.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
143
100.0
169,248
100.0
10,077
6.0
169,248
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,621
601
0.3
37.1
853
52.6
167
10.3
Moderate-income
77,332
41,213
20.5
53.3
22,650
29.3
13,469
17.4
Middle-income
164,234
110,169
54.7
67.1
28,128
17.1
25,937
15.8
Upper-income
77,408
49,491
24.6
63.9
9,292
12.0
18,625
24.1
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
320,595
201,474
100.0
62.8
60,923
19.0
58,198
18.2
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
248
0.4
226
0.4
16
0.6
6
0.3
Moderate-income
10,719
17.4
9,834
17.2
487
19.2
398
20.3
Middle-income
32,462
52.7
30,105
52.8
1,334
52.6
1,023
52.3
Upper-income
18,126
29.4
16,899
29.6
697
27.5
530
27.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
61,555
100.0
57,064
100.0
2,534
100.0
1,957
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.7
4.1
3.2
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
49
8.9
47
9.1
2
5.9
0
0.0
Middle-income
306
55.3
281
54.4
24
70.6
1
50.0
Upper-income
198
35.8
189
36.6
8
23.5
1
50.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
553
100.0
517
100.0
34
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
93.5
6.1
.4
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
92
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
2.3
4,053
2.2
1,275
31.5
36,809
19.6
Moderate-income
42
24.4
38,939
20.7
5,818
14.9
35,850
19.0
Middle-income
78
45.3
90,137
47.9
5,461
6.1
39,390
20.9
Upper-income
48
27.9
55,100
29.3
1,927
3.5
76,180
40.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
172
100.0
188,229
100.0
14,481
7.7
188,229
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7,714
2,871
1.3
37.2
3,716
48.2
1,127
14.6
Moderate-income
90,078
45,769
20.1
50.8
22,421
24.9
21,888
24.3
Middle-income
181,215
111,729
49.0
61.7
31,818
17.6
37,668
20.8
Upper-income
117,625
67,681
29.7
57.5
14,204
12.1
35,740
30.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
396,632
228,050
100.0
57.5
72,159
18.2
96,423
24.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,040
1.7
936
1.6
64
2.7
40
2.2
Moderate-income
12,568
20.3
11,457
19.9
680
28.5
431
24.1
Middle-income
27,237
44.0
25,669
44.5
823
34.5
745
41.6
Upper-income
21,027
34.0
19,635
34.0
816
34.2
576
32.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
61,872
100.0
57,697
100.0
2,383
100.0
1,792
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
93.3
3.9
2.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.2
1
0.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
69
12.1
64
11.9
5
14.7
0
0.0
Middle-income
246
43.1
229
42.6
17
50.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
255
44.7
243
45.3
12
35.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
571
100.0
537
100.0
34
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
94.0
6.0
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
93
Housing Characteristics
The housing market in the Sarasota MSA has declined due to the national recession and housing market
collapse. The 2010 census data shows that there are 396,632 housing units in the assessment area, of which
228,050 (57.5 percent) are owner-occupied, 72,159 (18.2 percent) are rental units, and 96,423 (24.3 percent) are
vacant. Housing vacancy is a major concern in the assessment area and the number of vacant units increased by
65 percent over the ten-year period. While a majority of units are owner-occupied throughout the assessment
area, rental units are more heavily concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. In low-income tracts,
rental units represented more than 48 percent of total housing units, indicating there may be reduced
opportunities for mortgage origination in these communities. However, there exists tremendous first-time home
ownership opportunities in moderate income tracts given the 21,888 vacant units.
Home refinancing and home-improvement loans may be limited in the market due to the number of underwater
homeowners. According to CoreLogic, 31.5 percent of mortgage homeowners in Florida owe more on their
mortgage than the home is worth, ranking Florida 2nd
in the nation.86
As would be expected, the housing bust
eliminated all of the equity gained during the housing boom.
According to the Florida Realtors Association, the median housing value in the Sarasota assessment area is
$203,000, which is a 12 percent higher than June 2012.87
Prices in Sarasota rose 178.2 percent from January
2000 to its market peak in 2006, then plummeted 55 percent between 2006 and 2011.88
Low inventories, pent-
up demand and cash-rich investors are factors contributing to an upward trajectory in home prices.
In addition to lower home values and negative equity, Sarasota, like many other Florida cities is characterized
by high foreclosure rates. The area continues to have one of the worst foreclosure rates in the nation. North
Port-Bradenton-Sarasota posted the 14th
highest foreclosure rate out of 384 metropolitan areas nationwide in
June 2013, according to CoreLogic. From its peak of 12.2 percent in June 2011, the rate of foreclosures among
outstanding mortgages in the Sarasota-Manatee region dropped to 7.3 percent in July 2013. The mortgage
delinquency rate, which measures mortgage loans that are 90 days or more past due, is moving downward as
well. In Sarasota-Manatee, 11.0 percent of mortgage loans were 90 days late, down from 15.4 percent for the
year and lower than statewide figures of 12.7.89
Employment and Economic Conditions
Data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis indicates that employment in the Sarasota assessment area is
primarily dependent on healthcare, retail, real estate, and administration and waste management services.
Government and accommodations and food services are significant industries contributing to employment in the
area as well. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce 2011 employment data, the combined total
employment for the two counties comprising the bank’s assessment area was 370,527, a 1.2 percent increase
from 2010. In 2011, employment was split almost evenly between Sarasota and Manatee counties with 58.0
percent and 42.0 percent of employment, respectively.
86
Florida Realtors “CoreLogic: 2.5M more U.S. homeowners not underwater.” September 2013. (accessed on October 1, 2013):
available from http://www.floridarealtors.org/NewsAndEvents/article.cfm?id=296781 87
Florida Realtors, Florida Residential Market Sales Activity – 2012, (accessed on October 1, 2013): available from
http://media.floridarealtors.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2012-Florida-MSA-summary.pdf 88
American Action Forum. “Boom, Bust, and Beyond: A Look at Housing Market Data in Florida.” November 2012. (accessed on
October 1, 2013); available from http://americanactionforum.org/research/boom-bust-and-beyond-a-look-at-housing-market-data-in-
florida, 89
Herald-Tribune, August 29, 2013, “Foreclosure rates still among highest.” (accessed on September 30, 2013); available from:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20130829/ARTICLE/308299992
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
94
In the Sarasota metropolitan area, payroll jobs plunged 16 percent from peak-to-trough compared with a
national peak-to-trough decline of 6.5 percent and state decline of 11 percent. Much of the job loss came from
the sectors impacted most by the collapsing housing market, including the construction industry, where
employment fell by more than 50 percent. This region is heavily populated with retirees, as such health care,
personal services and tourism-related activities have become major forces in the economy.90
Also noteworthy,
Manatee County is headquarters to several global companies and is home to the expanding Port Manatee.
Located in the eastern Gulf of Mexico at the entrance to Tampa Bay, Port Manatee is one of Florida’s largest
ports and it is the closest U.S. deepwater seaport to the Panama Canal.
From 2007 until 2010, the unemployment rate increased dramatically from 4.2 percent to 12.0 percent.91
It is
important to note that higher unemployment percentages were reported by low-and-moderate income
individuals and in 2010, 16.3 percent of low-income individuals and 11.1 percent of moderate-income
individuals were unemployed.92
As noted in the table below, the unemployment rate for the Sarasota assessment area declined from 10.6 percent
in 2011 to 8.6 percent in 2012. The state, however, still has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation
at 8.6 percent in 2012.93
The Sarasota assessment lost approximately 33,170 jobs during the recession with the
construction sector comprising the greatest loss.94
According to the 2010 American Community Survey 3-year estimates, the poverty rate for all individuals in
Manatee County in 2010 was 13.6 percent as compared to 15.0 percent for Florida. The most alarming statistic
is the high rate of poverty among families headed by women with children living in the home (32.2 percent).95
According to 2012 D&B information, there were 61,872 businesses within the Sarasota assessment area of
which 93.3 percent had total annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and are therefore considered to be
small businesses.96
Small business lending peaked in 2007 prior to the beginning of the recession with 17,144
90
IHS Global Insight; U.S. Markets Metro Economies, Sarasota, FL. 91
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey. 92
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey. 93
Metrostudy, July 23, 2013. “The Sarasota housing market gains strength in the second quarter of 2013.” (accessed on October 1 ,
2013); available from http://www.metrostudyreport.com/sarasota-bradenton-market/the-sarasota-housing-market-gains-strength-in-
the-second-quarter-of-2013 94
PolicyMap (accessed on October 1, 2013); available from http://policymap.com. 95
PolicyMap (accessed on October 1, 2013); available from http://policymap.com. 96
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data.
2011 2012
Sarasota MSA 10.6 8.6
Florida 10.3 8.6
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
95
or 39.6 percent of businesses receiving small business loans. In 2011, the assessment area began to see an
uptick in small business lending opportunities with 5,574 or 46.1 percent of businesses receiving loans.97
Loan
origination data suggests that there is strong small business loan demand and that local financial institutions are
lending in this market.
Competition
The banking market in the assessment area consists of community banks and large national institutions.
According to the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of Deposits Report, Bank of America holds the highest deposit
market share with 17.2 percent of the deposits. IBERIABANK had the 6th
highest deposit market share with 3.8
percent of total deposits and 13 branches in the market area.
In 2011, IBERIABANK ranked 78th
out of 503 HMDA reporters with an insignificant portion of HMDA loans.
IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 19th
with 0.9 percent of total loans. IBERIABANK ranked 78th
out of 592
HMDA reporters in 2012 with an insignificant portion of HMDA loans, while IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked
20th
with 0.8 percent of total loans. Bank of America, Quicken Loans, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan Chase were
the top HMDA lenders in the market.
IBERIABANK ranked 31st out of 99 CRA reporters in 2011 with 0.1 percent of the CRA loans and 29
th out of
96 CRA reporters with 0.2 percent of the CRA loans in 2012. American Express Bank was the top CRA lender
in the market for both years.
Community Development Opportunities
The recent economic crisis has exacerbated issues experienced by low- and moderate-income individuals. It has
also underscored the need to build capacity of local organizations serving LMI communities and the importance
of creating public-private partnerships such that a wide range of community development activities occur in
severely impacted communities, including neighborhood revitalization projects, affordable housing
development, small business lending and financial education initiatives.
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
A report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition indicates housing affordability is a problem in the
North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota MSA. According to the study, a worker earning a mean wage of $12.82 would
have to work 1.5 full-time jobs (assuming 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year) in order to afford the $1,027
per month in fair market rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in the market.98
Although the median rent is lower in
the low-and-moderate income tracts in the assessment area ($804 in low-income tracts and $902 in moderate-
income tracts),99
it would still require hours in excess of 40 hours per week for a resident earning the mean
wage.
In Sarasota County, over a quarter of the households have a problem affording their housing. More specifically,
15.7 percent of homeowners and renters are considered cost-burdened, meaning that homeownership or rental
costs account for more than 30 percent of household income. Approximately 10.6 percent of owners and
renters are considered severely cost burdened in the county, meaning housing costs account for more than 50
percent of household income. By 2015, there will be a projected 33,399 cost-burdened homeowners in Sarasota
County making less than 120 percent of the Area Median Income and 14,853 rent-burdened families out of a
rental population of 38,777. According to the Manatee County consolidated plan, the county does not anticipate
97
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 98
National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2013. (accessed on October 1, 2013); available at: http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 99
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
96
a shortage of affordable housing in its immediate future given market forces and the inventory of vacant units.
However, they are projected to have 21,736 cost-burdened homeowners making less than 120 percent of the
Area Median Income and a projected 13,530 rent-burdened families. This data suggests that the creation of
affordable units will remain a priority for the MSA.100
The North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, MSA received a sizable allocation in Neighborhood Stabilization Program
(NSP) funds. The funds were made available to help stabilize communities hard hit by the foreclosure crisis.
The City of Sarasota, and Manatee and Sarasota counties were awarded $43.7 million through three NSP
funding rounds. The funds have been used primarily for the acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed
properties and the development of affordable rental units in formerly blighted locations.101
One example of
NSP funds at work is in the Newtown community in Sarasota, where there is a high concentration of poverty.
Sarasota committed $23 million dollars of the funds to redevelop public housing units, renovate exteriors of
local businesses, construct a new community center and K-12 schools, and other improvements to help stabilize
and redevelop the Newtown area.
Throughout the MSA, public, private, and nonprofit groups are working to meet the current and future needs for
affordable housing, especially at a time when NSP dollars are winding down and there are continual decreases
in federal and state grant funding. Municipalities and housing developers will, therefore, turn to financial
institutions, thus creating various community development financing opportunities. One contact suggested that
financial institutions create flexible financing vehicles for the purchase and/or rehabilitation of affordable rental
housing; donate bank-owned properties to qualifying non-profit developers; and invest in the local community
housing trust. Another contact indicated the need for a flexible mortgage product that allows for mortgage
qualification through the use of HUD rental vouchers; this is currently not offered by any financial institutions
in the Sarasota assessment area but has been done in other markets.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
With respect to small business needs, there are still gaps in access to capital. Microloans, loan requests greater
than $100,000 and working capital lines of any size are in the greatest demand and traditional banks are not
lending in this space according to a local contact. According to the SBA’s list of intermediaries, as of July
2013, there is one Florida based micro-lender serving the market, the Center for Enterprise Opportunity; Accion
also provides funding to the market but they do not have a local presence. SunCoast Community Capital is a
microenterprise development organization serving the assessment area with business development coaching
services, along with financial education, free tax preparation and credit-building services. They do not provide
loans, but instead provide referrals to a local community development financial institution (CDFI) serving the
area.
Another local contact indicated there is an initiative across the five-county area from Manatee County south to
Collier County to develop a regional loan fund. The City of North Port, in Sarasota County, has created a
revolving loan guarantee fund and business training program to assist existing small businesses expand and aid
business operators that are interested in relocating to its city. They also have a business incubator planned.
In addition, the Florida State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) provides opportunities for banks to
partner on community economic development lending. By reducing risks, this Initiative allows lenders to
approve business loans they otherwise could not. The initiative is made possible by $97 million in federal
100
Schimberg Center for Affordable Housing, University of Florida. (accessed October 4, 2013); available at:
http://flhousingdata.shimberg.ufl.edu. 101
U.S. Department of Housing and Development, Neighborhood Stabilization Program, NSP Grantees. (accessed on October 1,
2013); available: http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults, accessed October 1, 2013.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
97
funding under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and administered by Enterprise Florida, Inc. Other ways
local financial institutions can partner with organizations serving small businesses include, but are not limited
to: providing long-term investments into these organizations, providing ongoing sponsorships of small business
workshops, and creating a robust referral program for business owners that do not qualify for traditional loan
products.
Sarasota and Manatee counties are served by two CDFIs which provide opportunities for financial institutions
to invest in initiatives such as affordable housing, small businesses and community facilities lending.102
They
are also served by local redevelopment agencies.
In the City of Bradenton, the Central Community Redevelopment Agency is spearheading two noteworthy
projects. The first project is a 16,000 square foot grocery store and 9,600 square foot retail plaza in an
underserved community. The other project named the Enterprise Center is a centralized facility that will
address personal development and job training needs for the redevelopment area and the greater surrounding
areas.
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
With respect to financial stability, FDIC’s National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households reports
that an average of 3.0 percent of households in North Port-Bradenton – Sarasota Metro are unbanked, meaning
they have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution.103
This percentage is significantly
lower than the state and national percentages, with both being approximately 7 percent; the city of Sarasota is
closer to the state average at 6.8 percent. Meanwhile, 15.9 percent of households are considered underbanked,
meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on alternative financial services providers on a regular
basis; this percentage is on par with state and national percentages. In light of these figures, there is an
opportunity for banks to support activities that improve financial capability and household financial stability.
One opportunity is to expand access to low-cost banking services and access to financial education for low-
income un- and underbanked populations.
Since employment is essential to financial stability, the CareerEdge Funders Collaborative in Bradenton started
the Bridges to Careers Program initiative in April 2011. The program’s objective is to enhance skills and
earning capabilities of jobseekers by providing them with the necessary training and credentials to enter the
workforce. Locally, CareerEdge is a collaborative effort among funders, employers and workers that support
industry-led partnerships that prepare low-wage workers for high-demand, mid-skilled positions in the
healthcare, manufacturing, transportation and technology sectors. Community-based programming such as
CareerEdge creates opportunities for financial institutions to engage in and create financial stability initiatives
with local organizations.
102
CDFI Fund. Certified CDFIs and Native CDFIs – Sortable List. (accessed on October 1, 2013); available at:
http://www.cdfifund.gov/what_we_do/programs_id.asp?programID=9. 103
2009 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households data through Research Your Community: Sarasota.
(accessed on October 1, 2013); available: http://webtools.joinbankon.org/community/search.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
98
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Sarasota assessment area is adequate. The geographic distribution
of loans reflects poor penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of borrowers reflects
adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes. In
addition, the bank made an adequate level of community development loans in the Sarasota assessment area.
During the review period, the bank reported 430 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 60 small
business loans in the Sarasota assessment area. HMDA lending represented 87.6 percent of total lending and
small business lending accounted for 12.4 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted
more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Sarasota assessment
area contains 2.6 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 1.2 percent of its total small business lending
by number of loans. In comparison, 6.7 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. It should be noted that in 2011, based on the 2000
U.S. Census, there was just one low-income tract in the assessment area, though the number increased to four in
2012 based on the 2010 U.S. Census. Considering these factors, IBERIABANK’s geographic distribution of
loans reflects poor penetration throughout the Sarasota assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
The bank originated no home purchase loans in low-income tracts in 2011 and just one loan in a low-income
tract in 2012 where 1.3 percent of owner-occupied units are located. Aggregate lending was also very limited in
2011 and 2012, which may suggest limited lending opportunities in the low-income tracts in this assessment
area. Due to the bank’s low volume of home purchase lending, limited aggregate activity, and other
performance context factors, the bank’s performance is adequate, with minimal weighting given to home
purchase lending in low-income tracts.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank increased its home purchase lending
in moderate-income tracts between 2011 and 2012, but the percentage of home purchase loans originated in
moderate-income tracts in both years was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units located in these
tracts. The bank’s performance was slightly below aggregate in 2011 but improved relative to aggregate in
2012. In 2012, the bank originated 15.8 percent of its home purchase loans in moderate-income tracts
compared to 10.6 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle- and upper-income tracts exceeded the percentage of owner-
occupied units in these tracts.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank did not make any
refinance loans in low-income tracts in 2011 but in 2012, the bank originated 3.7 percent of home refinance
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
99
loans in low-income tracts where 1.3 percent of the units are owner-occupied. The bank outperformed the
aggregate in 2012. However, the bank’s performance is due to limited loan volume in this product category in
low-income tracts.
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank increased the number of
refinance loans in moderate-income tracts throughout the review period, and in 2012, 11.1 percent of the bank’s
loans were originated in moderate-income census tracts, where 20.1 percent of the units are owner-occupied.
The bank’s performance relative to aggregate improved over the review period, and the bank exceeded
aggregate lending in moderate-income tracts in 2012.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was similar to or exceeded the percentage of owner-
occupied units in these tracts throughout the review period, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater
than the percentage of owner-occupied units.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts was very poor. The bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in the low-income tracts over the review period. Aggregate lending was
limited in 2011. However, in 2012, aggregate lending increased and 1.5 percent of home improvement loans
were originated in low-income tracts where 1.3 percent of the owner-occupied units are located.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is poor. The bank did not originate
any home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts in 2011 and just one loan in 2012, representing 11.1
percent of the bank’s lending. Aggregate lending was much stronger with 17.5 percent of loans in moderate-
income tracts in 2011, increasing to 19.4 percent in 2012.
The bank’s home improvement loan volume was very low across all census tracts during the review period.
The percentage of loans in middle-income census tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied
housing units, while the percentage loans in upper-income census tracts was less than the percentage of owner-
occupied units in these tracts.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is very poor. The bank originated just one
small business loan in a low-income census tract during the review period. Aggregate lending was very limited
in 2011 but increased in 2012 and 1.7 percent of aggregate small business lending occurred in low-income
tracts, where 1.6 percent of small businesses are located.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s lending in moderate-income
tracts was less than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts and less than aggregate in 2011.
However, in 2012, the bank’s small business lending performance improved. The bank originated 38.5 percent
of total small business loans in moderate-income tracts where 19.9 percent of small businesses are located; 18.8
percent of aggregate lending occurred in moderate-income tracts in 2012.
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area over the review period.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
100
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. Over the review period, the
share of the bank’s loans to low-income borrowers was less than the percentage of families in the assessment
area classified as low-income. The bank’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers declined between
2011 and 2012. However, in both years the bank’s lending was similar to or exceeded aggregate lending to
low-income borrowers. Most recently in 2012, 5.9 percent of the banks loans were made to low-income
borrowers compared to 5.7 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is excellent. The percentage of home
purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of moderate-income families
living in the assessment area for both years; in 2012, the bank originated 25.0 percent of home purchase loans to
moderate-income borrowers, while 19.0 percent of families were classified as moderate-income in the
assessment area. The bank’s lending to moderate-income borrowers was substantially greater than aggregate
lending throughout the review period.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
middle-income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was less than the
percentage of upper-income families in 2011, though it increased in 2012.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
home refinance loans to low-income borrowers in 2011; in 2012, 4.9 percent of bank loans were made to low-
income borrowers compared to 19.6 percent of families in the assessment areas classified as low-income.
Aggregate lending to low-income borrowers increased over the review period, representing 6.1 percent of total
home refinance loans in 2012. The significant number of homeowners still underwater on their mortgages may
be a factor limiting home refinance lending for low-income borrowers throughout the assessment area.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The share of home refinance loans
to moderate-income borrowers slipped over the review period; in 2012, 13.6 percent of the bank’s loans were
made to moderate-income borrowers while 19.0 percent of families were considered moderate-income.
Throughout the review period, the bank’s home refinance lending exceeded aggregate lending to moderate-
income borrowers.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
upper-income families in the assessment area.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The share of loans to low-
income borrowers was greater than the percentage of low-income families in 2011, but less than the percentage
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
101
of low-income families in 2012. Throughout the review period, the bank’s performance exceeded aggregate
lending; however, the bank’s performance was based on a limited level of lending of this product category in
the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. Throughout the review
period, the percentage of loans to moderate-income borrowers exceeded the percentage of moderate-income
families in the assessment area. The bank’s lending exceeded aggregate lending to moderate-income borrowers
in 2011, but fell slightly below in 2012; however, the bank’s performance was based on a limited level of
lending of this product category in the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was less than the percentage of
middle-and upper-income families in the assessment area throughout the review period.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is good. The percentage of
small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was slightly less than the percentage of
small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. However, the bank significantly
outperformed the aggregate for both years. Most recently, in 2012, the bank originated 76.9 percent of its loans
to small businesses compared to 42.0 percent of aggregate loans.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made an adequate level of community development loans in the Sarasota assessment area. The
bank originated five community development loans totaling $3.4 million during the review period. All of the
loans provided support for affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals. Of particular note are
two loans to a nonprofit organization for the acquisition of bank-owned rental properties that will be renovated
and used for low-income and Section 8 housing.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Sarasota assessment area is adequate.
The bank had 21 investments totaling $2.9 million; all investments were current period investments. All of the
bank’s investments were government-guaranteed mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 19 contributions totaling $42,000. Contributions provided support for nonprofits engaged in
affordable housing, including housing development and financial education. The bank also provided support to
a range of community services that included youth programs, emergency assistance, homeless services, health
care and education. One contribution to note is the bank’s financial support for a childcare program at the local
housing authority. This contribution allows the housing authority to help residents who previously were unable
to participate in job training and other needed programs due to the lack of childcare.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
affordable housing and the financial stability of low- and moderate-income individuals. A summary of the
bank’s investments can be found in Appendix K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Sarasota assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Sarasota, Florida
102
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are readily accessible to the bank’s geographies and
individuals of different income levels. The distribution of 10 branch offices and 10 ATMs as of December 31,
2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories within the
assessment area. The bank has four branches located in moderate-income tracts, representing 40 percent of total
branches compared to 22.7 percent of households and 20.3 percent of businesses located in moderate-income
communities. During the review period, the bank closed three branches, all located in middle-income tracts.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK does not offer weekend hours at any of its branch offices in the
assessment area, however all of its branches operate extended hours. Bank products, services, and standard
business hours are consistent throughout the assessment area.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK is a leader in providing community development services in the assessment area. During the
review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 933 service hours in various capacities for community
development organizations, by participating in 23 different community development services. Board service
represented approximately 54 percent of the total community development service hours. Bank employees
engaged in providing financial education, homeownership counseling and small business assistance as well as
working with a variety of organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-income
geographies and for low- and moderate-income individuals.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 4 40.0% 0 0 4 4 0 Total 4 40.0% 4 40.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 6 60.0% 0 3 6 6 0 Total 6 60.0% 6 60.0% 0 1 0 0.0% 0 2
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 10 100.0% 0 3 10 10 0 Total 10 100.0% 10 100.0% 0 1 0 0.0% 0 2
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
%
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
# % # % #
4 2.3% 2.2% 1.7%
42 24.4% 22.7% 20.3%
78 45.3% 47.8% 44.0%
48 27.9% 27.3% 34.0%
0.0%
172 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
0 0.0% 0.0%
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
103
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE NAPLES, FLORIDA, ASSESSMENT
AREA
Overview
The Naples assessment area includes Collier County, which is the only county in the Naples-Marco Island
Metropolitan Statistical Area (Naples MSA). Naples and Marco Island are the principal cities in the MSA. The
assessment area consists of 73 census tracts; 6 census tracts, or 8.2 percent are low income, and 15 tracts or 20.5
percent are moderate-income. IBERIABANK had eight branches in the assessment area as of December 31,
2012. Of the eight branches, one is located in a moderate income census tract, two in middle income and five in
upper income tracts.
Population and Income Characteristics
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the population in the assessment area was 321,520, which represents an
increase of 28 percent since 2000. This growth rate was considerably greater than the growth rate for Florida of
17.6 percent. It is also important to note that during the winter months the county’s population spikes, given the
significant percentage of snowbirds or people from colder climates who travel south to their winter homes.104
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the years 2011 through 2012 for the Naples MSA. The chart provides a
range of the estimated annual family income for each income category (low, moderate, middle and upper). As
shown, the median family income increased slightly over the review period from $71,800 in 2011 to $72,800 in
2012.
Demographic Characteristics
The following tables based on the 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown in the tables below, the assessment area changed significantly between 2000 and 2010, with the total
number of census tracts increasing by 40 percent. Many of the new census tracts are low- or moderate-income.
The number of low-income census tracts increased from 4 to 6 (7.7 percent to 8.2 percent of the total) and the
number of moderate-income census tracts increased from 9 to 15 (17.3 percent to 20.5 percent of the total) 104
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $71,800 0 - $35,899 $35,900 - $57,439 $57,440 - $86,159 $86,160 - & above
2012 $72,800 0 - $36,399 $36,400 - $58,239 $58,240 - $87,359 $87,360 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Naples-Marco Island, FL MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
104
between 2000 and 2010. The number of total housing units in low-income tracts increased from 5,201 in 2000
to 8,154 in 2010, an increase of 57 percent, while the number of housing units in moderate-income tracts
increased by 55 percent. The number of housing units in middle-income census tracts increased by 37 percent
while the number of housing units in upper-income tracts increased by 22 percent. Housing vacancy increased
significantly across all income categories between 2000 and 2010; the total number of vacant units accounted
for 28.8 percent of all housing units in 2000 and increased to 38.6 percent by 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
105
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
7.7
3,774
5.3
1,317
34.9
13,582
18.9
Moderate-income
9
17.3
11,451
15.9
1,207
10.5
13,791
19.2
Middle-income
23
44.2
32,998
45.9
1,556
4.7
14,850
20.7
Upper-income
16
30.8
23,600
32.9
692
2.9
29,600
41.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
52
100.0
71,823
100.0
4,772
6.6
71,823
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5,201
1,788
2.3
34.4
2,940
56.5
473
9.1
Moderate-income
21,361
10,177
13.1
47.6
6,230
29.2
4,954
23.2
Middle-income
61,381
37,340
48.0
60.8
10,260
16.7
13,781
22.5
Upper-income
56,593
28,524
36.6
50.4
5,714
10.1
22,355
39.5
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
144,536
77,829
100.0
53.8
25,144
17.4
41,563
28.8
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
551
1.7
490
1.7
29
2.2
32
3.0
Moderate-income
3,467
11.0
3,223
11.0
100
7.7
144
13.6
Middle-income
14,379
45.5
13,364
45.7
567
43.5
448
42.3
Upper-income
13,207
41.8
12,165
41.6
607
46.6
435
41.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
31,604
100.0
29,242
100.0
1,303
100.0
1,059
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.5
4.1
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
28
11.6
20
9.0
8
44.4
0
0.0
Moderate-income
52
21.5
45
20.3
6
33.3
1
50.0
Middle-income
103
42.6
101
45.5
2
11.1
0
0.0
Upper-income
59
24.4
56
25.2
2
11.1
1
50.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
242
100.0
222
100.0
18
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
91.7
7.4
.8
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
106
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
8.2
4,181
5.2
1,603
38.3
17,150
21.1
Moderate-income
15
20.5
15,305
18.9
1,780
11.6
14,862
18.3
Middle-income
28
38.4
35,999
44.4
1,934
5.4
15,449
19.0
Upper-income
24
32.9
25,650
31.6
1,070
4.2
33,674
41.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
73
100.0
81,135
100.0
6,387
7.9
81,135
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8,154
2,191
2.4
26.9
3,532
43.3
2,431
29.8
Moderate-income
33,145
15,007
16.4
45.3
7,875
23.8
10,263
31.0
Middle-income
84,139
42,071
46.0
50.0
10,889
12.9
31,179
37.1
Upper-income
69,091
32,128
35.2
46.5
5,824
8.4
31,139
45.1
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
194,529
91,397
100.0
47.0
28,120
14.5
75,012
38.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
853
2.7
771
2.6
32
2.5
50
4.8
Moderate-income
4,231
13.4
3,966
13.6
114
9.0
151
14.4
Middle-income
13,664
43.4
12,689
43.5
508
40.1
467
44.5
Upper-income
12,730
40.4
11,736
40.2
612
48.3
382
36.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
31,478
100.0
29,162
100.0
1,266
100.0
1,050
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.6
4.0
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
29
11.5
22
9.4
7
38.9
0
0.0
Moderate-income
44
17.5
37
15.9
6
33.3
1
100.0
Middle-income
117
46.4
114
48.9
3
16.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
62
24.6
60
25.8
2
11.1
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
252
100.0
233
100.0
18
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
92.5
7.1
.4
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
107
Housing Characteristics
The housing market in the Naples MSA has declined due to the national recession and housing market collapse.
The 2010 census data shows that there were 194,529 housing units in the assessment area, of which 91,397
(46.9 percent) were owner-occupied, 28,120 (14.5 percent) were rental units, and 75,012 (38.6 percent) were
vacant.105
Housing vacancy is a concern in the assessment area and the number of vacant housing units
increased by 80 percent over the ten-year period. The median age of the housing stock was 19 years, while
homes in low and moderate communities were 24 and 28 years old, respectively. While a majority of units
were owner-occupied throughout the assessment area, 67 percent of rental units were concentrated in low- and
moderate-income tracts, indicating there may be reduced opportunities for mortgage origination in these
communities.
The median home value in Naples MSA rose to $357,357, or 140 percent from 2000 to 2010, according to
census data. During the recent recession, property values in Naples and Collier County declined for consecutive
years from 2008-2011. Naples’ property values declined on average 4.4 percent, while Collier County property
values declined an average of 8.3 percent. However, the real estate market in the Naples MSA appears to be
recovering. As of September 2013, the MSA median single-family home price was $312,450, which is a 27.5
percent increase year-over-year for the area.106
Low inventories and cash-rich investors are factors contributing
to an upward trajectory in home prices and a declining negative equity position in the Naples MSA.
While Florida ranks 2nd
in the nation with 31 percent of mortgage homeowners owing more on their mortgage
than the home is worth, the number of underwater mortgages in the Naples market has been steadily dropping;
the number is down to 27 percent of mortgage homeowners in the first quarter of 2013 from 37 percent at the
peak in the third quarter of 2009.107
Another encouraging sign for the Naples MSA is a downward trending
foreclosure rate. While the state of Florida continues to have one of the worst foreclosure rates in the nation,
Naples-Marco Island has a foreclosure rate of 5.4 percent as of July 2013, which is a decline of 3.4 percent from
a year earlier according to CoreLogic. Statewide, the foreclosure rate was 8.2 percent.108
The mortgage
delinquency rate, which measures mortgage loans that are 90 days or more past due, is moving downward as
well. In Naples-Marco Island, 8.7 percent of mortgage loans were at least 90 days late, down from 12.9 percent
for the year. Meanwhile, the U.S. rate is 5.4 percent, which is at its lowest level since December 2008.109
Employment and Economic Conditions
Data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis indicates that employment in the Naples assessment area was
primarily concentrated in retail trade, leisure and hospitality, healthcare and social services, and government.
Professional and business services were significant industries contributing to employment in the area as well.
According to 2011 REIS data, the employment for Collier County was 177,410, a 3.0 percent increase from
2010. Naples Community Hospital is the largest employer in Collier County, employing approximately 4,000.
105
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey. 106
Naples Daily News, “Southwest Florida home prices near top of state list,” accessed on October 23, 2013; available from
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/oct/22/southwest-florida-home-prices-near-top-of-state/ 107
Naples News, “Florida tops the U.S. in May Foreclosures,” available from http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/jun/14/florida-
tops-the-us-in-may-foreclosures/; accessed October 9, 2013. 108
Naples News, September 25, 2013, “Foreclosures continue drop in Southwest Florida,” accessed on October 18, 2013, available
from: http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/sep/25/foreclosures-continue-drop-in-southwest-florida/. 109
Naples News, September 25, 2013, “Foreclosures continue drop in Southwest Florida,” accessed on October 18, 2013, available
from: http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2013/sep/25/foreclosures-continue-drop-in-southwest-florida/.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
108
Some of the other major employers include the Collier County School District; the Collier County Government
and Sheriff’s Department; Home Depot; and the Ritz-Carlton.110
This region is heavily populated with retirees, and as such, health care and personal services have become major
factors in the economy. Tourism-related activities are also crucial to the local economy, creating about 30,600
jobs in 2011. The sector showing the strongest growth over the next few years will be construction, which is
projected to grow at an average rate of 9.1 percent each year. The professional and business services sector and
education and health services sector follow with average projected growth rates of 3.8 percent and 2.3 percent,
respectively.
In the Naples metropolitan area, payroll jobs plunged 17.2 percent from peak-to-trough compared with a
national peak-to-trough decline of 6.5 percent and state decline of 11 percent.111
Much of the job loss came
from sectors impacted most by the housing market collapse, including construction which has lost about 50
percent of total jobs. From 2007 until 2010, the unemployment rate increased dramatically from 4.2 percent to
11.6 percent.112
It is important to note that at the height of the recession in 2010, higher unemployment rates
were reported by low-to-moderate individuals of 10.4 percent and 9.5 percent, respectively.113
The
unemployment rate has been falling during the review period, from 10.2 percent in 2011 to 8.5 percent in 2012.
The unemployment rate in Naples is comparable to the unemployment rate statewide of 8.6 percent.
According to 2012 D&B information, there were 31,478 businesses within the Naples assessment area of which
92.6 percent had total annual revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be
small businesses.114
Small business lending peaked in 2007 prior to the beginning of the recession with 7,916
loans made, or 34.3 percent of small business loans originated to businesses with revenue under $1 million. In
2011, the assessment area began to see an uptick in small business lending opportunities with 2,937 loans made
and 8.4 percent increase in the number of loans to small businesses under $1 million.115
Loan origination data
suggests that there is strong small business loan demand and that local financial institutions are lending in this
market.
110
Collier County Government. Retrieved October 21, 2013 from
http://www.colliergov.net/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=43859 111
UCF, Institute for Economic Competitiveness; Florida & Metro Forecast, July 2013. Accessed on October 22, 2013, available
from: http://iec.ucf.edu/post/2013/07/22/Florida-Metro-Forecast-July-2013.aspx 112
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey. 113
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey. 114
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2012 American Community Survey data. 115
Policy Map, CRA Reported Small Business Loans for Borrowers under $1 million; accessed October 23, 2013.
2011 2012
Naples MSA 10.2 8.5
Florida 10.3 8.6
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: FL Naples
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
109
Competition
The assessment area is a somewhat active banking market led by regional and national financial institutions.
According to the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of Deposits report, there are 39 institutions active in the
assessment area operating 153 branches and $10.8 billion in deposits. Fifth Third Bank holds the highest
deposit market share with 17.9 percent of the deposits and 20 branches in the market area. IBERIABANK has
the 5th
highest deposit market share with 6.7 percent of total deposits and seven branches in the market area.
IBERIABANK is not a significant HMDA lender in the Naples market. In 2011, IBERIABANK Mortgage
ranked 39th
with 0.3 percent of total HMDA loans, while IBERIABANK ranked 58th
out of 446 HMDA
reporters with an insignificant portion of HMDA loans. In 2012, IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 26th
with 0.6
percent of total HMDA loans, and IBERIABANK ranked 39th
out of 549 HMDA with 0.2 percent of total loans.
Wells Fargo, Bank of America, and JP Morgan Chase were the top HMDA lenders in the market.
IBERIABANK ranked 16th
out of 90 CRA reporters with 0.5 percent of the CRA loans in 2011 and 15th
out of
94 CRA reporters in 2012 with 0.7 percent of the CRA loans. American Express Bank was the top CRA lender
in the market for both years.
Community Development Opportunities
The economic crisis beginning in 2008 generated significant changes in Collier County and in its housing
market according to the data and contacts with local stakeholders. Some of these changes included: the
reduction in mortgages being offered to potential homeowners; loss of employment throughout the area;
foreclosures of housing units; and the collapse of the construction industry. The recent economic crisis has
exacerbated issues experienced by low- and moderate-income individuals. It also has underscored the need to
build capacity of local organizations serving LMI communities and the importance of creating public-private
partnerships to pursue community development activities in impacted communities including neighborhood
revitalization, affordable housing, and small business lending and financial education.
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
A report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition indicates that housing affordability is a problem in the
Naples-Marco Island MSA. According to the study, a worker earning a mean wage of $12.66 would have to
work 1.6 full-time jobs (assuming 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year) in order to afford the $1,038 per month
in fair market rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in the market.116
Although the median rent is lower in the low-to-
moderate income tracts in the assessment area ($813 in low-income tracts and $988 in moderate-income
tracts)117
, it would still require hours in excess of 40 hours per week for a resident earning the mean wage.
Moreover, nearly one quarter of the households in Collier County have a problem affording their housing.
Specifically, 14.8 percent of homeowners and renters are considered cost-burdened, meaning that
homeownership or rental costs account for more than 30 percent of household income. Approximately 12
percent of owners and renters are considered severely cost burdened in the county, meaning housing costs
account for more than 50 percent of household income. These figures are slightly below statewide figures with
16.3 percent of Florida residents cost burdened and 12.5 percent severely cost burdened.
Collier County received an $11.2 million allocation in Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds
through two funding rounds. The funds were made available to help stabilize communities hard hit by the
foreclosure crisis. The funds have been used primarily for the acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed
116
National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2013, accessed on October 1, 2013; available at: http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 117
FRB Atlanta Calculations of data provided by 2010 American Community Survey.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
110
properties and the development of affordable rental units in formerly blighted locations.118
However, an audit
released in September 2011 found that Collier County’s Housing, Human and Veteran Services Department
mismanaged the funds. Consequently, the County negotiated with Habitat for Humanity to transfer ownership
of the NSP purchased properties and $3.8 million in NSP money; Habitat will rehabilitate the properties and
buy other homes in foreclosure. Habitat appears to have been an ideal choice for the County, given its
production track record; it recently celebrated its 1500th
home in Collier County and has completed over 100
homes a year for the past 10 years, more than any other affiliate in the country. From a local contact, the county
does not appear to have the requisite skill set, capacity, or appetite for further affordable housing development
or facilitation.
In its 2011-2016 consolidated plan, Collier County cited a number of challenges in the affordable housing
delivery system including: lack of housing affordability due to low wages and high unemployment; lack of
mortgage loan opportunities; declining levels of federal and state financial support for housing programs; and
no public housing for very low to low-income households, only farmworker housing projects. Another contact
indicated that there is a lack of housing near jobs for low- and -moderate income residents. The county did not
outline any significant housing and community development initiatives in its 5-year plan or its latest 2012-2013
annual report, which confirms the county’s reluctance to engage in housing development. Of its annual
allocation of $2.6 million for 2012-2013, the more noteworthy projects included support to an emergency youth
shelter and a local housing counselor.
Although research of local housing conditions and discussions with community contacts do not reveal concerted
efforts by public, private and nonprofit groups to engage in affordable housing and community economic
development, there may still be limited opportunities for financial institution participation. In particular, local
financial institutions can seek out opportunities with the county’s Affordable Housing Advisory Board and local
redevelopment agencies; accept Section 8 vouchers for mortgage qualification; support Habitat through
foreclosed home donations, or buy and/or originate mortgages to provide immediate funds for building
materials and land; and participate with the Collier County Loan Consortium. The Collier County Loan
Consortium is comprised of a group of local banking partners offering a 30-year fixed rate loan product with a 3
percent down payment and no private mortgage insurance. The program is designed to assist low-income
households obtain financing for a primary residence if their household income is less than $57,850.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
There are numerous ways that local financial institutions can partner with organizations serving small
businesses. They include, but are not limited to: providing long-term investments in these organizations,
providing ongoing sponsorships of small business workshops, and creating a robust referral program for
business owners that do not qualify for traditional loan products.
According to SBA’s list of intermediaries, as of July 2013 the area is served by one local and one national
micro lender. A local contact indicated there is an initiative across the five-county area from Manatee County
south to Collier County to develop a regional loan fund. Additionally, in the City of Immokalee, there is the
Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) which is a designated redevelopment area and rural
enterprise zone. Businesses located within the Immokalee Enterprise Zone may qualify for a variety of
financial incentives. Immokalee CRA launched the Immokalee Business Development Center (IBDC) to assist
entrepreneurs to build their own businesses; the center is situated in a low- income tract with an estimated
median tract income of $23,000 (est. 2013 MSA median of $65,700) and it presumably serves individuals from
the surrounding low- and moderate-income tracts. To assist new businesses, the IBDC created the IBDC
118
U.S. Department of Housing and Development, Neighborhood Stabilization Program, NSP Grantees. Available:
http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults, accessed October 1, 2013.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
111
MicroEnterprise Loan Fund in partnership with Florida Community Bank and One by One Leadership. It is
presently a small loan fund, but this is an opportunity for other local financial institutions to lend their expertise
and invest in a loan fund.
Collier County is served by four community development financial institutions (CDFIs), which provide
opportunities for financial institutions to invest in initiatives such as affordable housing, small businesses and
community facilities lending; however, these CDFIs are located outside of Collier County and provide
statewide programs.119
Similarly, the Florida State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) provides
opportunities for banks to partner on community economic development lending. By reducing risks, the
initiative allows lenders to approve business loans they otherwise could not. The initiative is made possible by
$97 million in federal funding under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and administered by Enterprise
Florida, Inc. Lastly, in May 2013, two Florida organizations were awarded $100 million tax credit authority
under the New Markets Tax Credits Program (NMTC Program).
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
With respect to financial stability, FDIC’s National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households reports
that an average of 3.1 percent of households in the Naples Metro are unbanked, meaning they have no type of
deposit account with a mainstream financial institution.120
This percentage is significantly lower than the state
and national percentages, with both being approximately 7 percent. Meanwhile, 14.3 percent of households are
considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on alternative financial
services providers on a regular basis; this percentage is slightly on par with state and national percentages.
Figures might be quite higher in the Immokalee community of Collier County. Opportunities for banks include
assessing the needs of low-income un- and underbanked populations, which includes the farm worker
community; developing creative low-cost financial products and services; and expanding access to education on
the interconnection of banking and financial stability.
Another opportunity for engagement by local financial institutions is providing community development
services and investments to the local or regional workforce development board. The Southwest Florida
Workforce Development Board services Collier, Charlotte, Lee, Henry and Glades counties. The agency works
to match employers with job seekers. More importantly, through its Career Centers, assessments, workshops
and occupational training are provided to a variety of individuals that may qualify as LMI, such as unemployed
and underemployed individuals, veterans, youth, welfare recipients, and displaced workers. One particular
initiative offered by the Board is Destination Graduation. Destination Graduation provides mentoring and
intervention services to students with a minimum of two risk factors such as financial, foster care, teen parent,
gang participation, or criminal problems.
119
Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Directory of Southeastern Community Development Financial Institutions, October 2013.
Available at: http://www.richmondfed.org/community_development/resource_centers/cdfi/. Accessed: November 15, 2013. 120
Bank On. 2009 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households data through Research Your Community:
Collier County. Available: http://webtools.joinbankon.org/community/search. Accessed: November 1, 2013.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
112
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Naples assessment area is adequate. The geographic distribution
of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of borrowers reflects
adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes.
The bank made a poor level of community development loans in the Naples assessment area.
During the review period, the bank reported 176 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 110 small
business loans in the Naples assessment area. HMDA lending represented 61.5 percent of total lending and
small business lending accounted for 38.5 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted
more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Naples assessment
area contains 1.1 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 2.1 percent of its total small business lending
by number of loans. In comparison, 7.6 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK
Bank’s geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the Naples assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The percentage of loans
originated in low-income census tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units located in these
census tracts throughout the review period. In addition, the bank’s performance significantly exceeded the
aggregate in both 2011 and 2012. However, the bank’s performance was based on a very limited level of
lending in this product category in the assessment area.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of home purchase loans
originated in a moderate-income census tracts exceeded the percentage of owner-occupied units located in these
tracts and was greater than aggregate lending in 2011. The percentage of the bank’s loans in moderate-income
tracts declined during the review period. In 2012, 10.8 percent of the bank’s lending occurred in moderate-
income tracts where 16.4 percent of owner-occupied units are located. The bank’s lending lagged aggregate
lending at 13.8 percent.
The percentage of the bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income census tracts was similar to the
percentage of owner-occupied units in middle-income tracts, while the percentage of loans in upper-income
tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
113
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank did not make any
refinance loans in low-income tracts in 2011 and aggregate lending was very limited. In 2012, the bank
originated 1.9 percent of home refinance loans in low-income tracts; however aggregate lending was again
limited. Due to limited loan volume and aggregate lending, the bank’s performance is adequate, but minimal
weighting is given to home refinance lending in low-income tracts.
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The percentage of the bank’s loans
that were made in moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts
and less than aggregate in 2011. The bank’s lending increased slightly in 2012 and 15.1 percent of the bank’s
loans were originated in moderate-income census tracts where 16.4 percent of owner-occupied units are located.
Additionally, the bank’s performance exceeded the aggregate in 2012.
The percentage of the bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income census tracts was similar to the
percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts while the percentage of loans in upper-income tracts was
greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in low-income tracts in 2011 and aggregate lending was limited. In
2012, 14.3 percent of the bank’s home improvement loans were made in low-income census tracts, which was
significantly greater than both the share of owner-occupied housing units in low-income census tracts and
aggregate lending. However, the bank’s performance was based on a very limited level of lending in this
product category in the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is poor. The bank did not originate
any home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts in 2011 while 13.5 percent of aggregate loans were
made in moderate-income tracts. The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income tracts increased
in 2012 and the bank’s performance exceeded both the percentage of owner-occupied housing units in
moderate-income tracts and aggregate lending. However, the bank’s performance was based on a very limited
level of lending in this product category in the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement loan volume was very low across the assessment area during the review period.
The percentage of loans in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts during the review period; the percentage of loans in upper-income census tracts was less than the
percentage of owner-occupied units in 2011 but increased relative to owner-occupied housing units in 2012.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank’s small business
lending in low-income tracts was greater than the percentage of small businesses in these tracts throughout the
review period. Additionally, aggregate lending was limited but the bank outperformed the aggregate in both
2011 and 2012. The bank’s performance was impacted by the limited volume of small business lending in the
assessment area.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank originated just one small
business loan in a moderate-income census tract in 2011 while 11 percent of small businesses were located in
moderate-income census tracts, and 8.0 percent of aggregate lending was in moderate-income tracts. The
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
114
bank’s small business lending increased in 2012. The bank originated 9.1 percent of small business loans in
moderate-income tracts, which was less than the percentage of small businesses but similar to aggregate lending
in moderate-income tracts.
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area over the review period.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of HMDA lending across borrower income levels and small business lending across business
revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is good. In 2011, the percentage of loans to
low-income borrowers was considerably greater than the percentage of low-income families in the assessment
area; in 2012 the bank originated 16.9 percent of loans to low-income borrower’s compared to 21.1 percent of
families classified as low-income in the assessment area. The bank substantially outperformed the aggregate
throughout the review period.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of home purchase
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families and less than
aggregate lending in 2011. The bank’s lending to moderate-income borrowers increased in 2012 and the bank
originated 24.6 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers while 18.3 percent of families
were considered moderate-income in the assessment area. The bank’s performance compared favorably to
aggregate in 2012; 13.3 percent of aggregate loans were made to moderate-income borrowers.
IBERIABANK has very little home purchase lending to middle- or upper-income borrowers in 2011. In 2012,
lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was similar to the percentage of families classified as middle-
or upper-income in the assessment area.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank had very few
refinance loans to low-income borrowers in in 2011; refinance loans to low-income borrowers represented 5.6
percent of total loans, which exceeded the aggregate of 4.6 percent. However, this performance was driven by
very limited loan volume. In 2012, the bank originated 9.4 percent of home refinance loans to low-income
borrowers, which was less than the percentage of families classified as low-income in the assessment area, but
considerably more than the 6.4 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The bank’s performance in 2011
compared favorably to aggregate. In 2012, the bank originated 24.5 percent of home refinance loans to
moderate-income borrowers compared to 18.3 percent of families classified as moderate-income in the
assessment area. The bank’s lending was also greater than aggregate at 12.0 percent of total loans to moderate-
income borrowers.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was comparable to the percentage
of middle- and upper-income families in the assessment area throughout the review period.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
115
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
home improvement loans to low-income borrowers in 2011. In 2012, 21.4 percent of the bank’s loans were
made to low-income borrowers; the bank’s lending was comparable to the percentage of low-income families in
the assessment area and exceeded aggregate lending. However, the bank’s performance was based on a limited
level of lending of this product category in the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
home improvement loans to moderate-income borrowers in 2011, while 17.7 percent of aggregate loans were
made to moderate-income borrowers. In 2012, the bank originated 14.3 percent of home improvement loans to
moderate-income borrowers, which was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the assessment
area and less than aggregate lending of 18.9 percent.
The bank made no home improvement loans to middle-income borrowers in 2011; in 2012, the percentage of
loans to middle-income borrowers was less than percentage of middle-income families. Lending to upper-
income families was greater than the percentage upper-income families in the assessment area throughout the
review period.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is good. The percentage of
small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was less than the percentage of small
businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. However, the bank’s lending was comparable
to aggregate in 2011 and significantly greater than aggregate in 2012.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made a poor level of community development loans in the Naples assessment area. The bank
did not have any community development loans originated in the Naples assessment area. However, the bank
had a loan to a statewide CDFI that benefits a regional area that includes the assessment area but has a diffused
benefit to the assessment area.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Naples assessment area is adequate.
The bank had 14 investments totaling $2.2 million; all investments were current period investments. All of the
bank’s investments were government-guaranteed mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 38 contributions totaling $125,490. Notably, the bank provided $32,000 in mortgage grants to
assist qualified LMI homebuyers with down payment assistance and closing costs. Other significant
contributions provided support for financial education, youth and family services, behavioral health, emergency
assistance and other community services that assist low- and moderate-income individuals and communities.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
affordable housing and the financial stability of low- and moderate-income individuals. A summary of the
bank’s investments can be found in Appendix K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Naples assessment area is adequate. Its retail and
community development services reflect adequate responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Naples, Florida
116
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are marginally accessible to portions of the bank’s
geographies and individuals of different income levels. The distribution of eight branch offices and eight
ATMs as of December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract
categories within the assessment area. The bank has one branch located in a moderate-income tract,
representing 12.5 percent of total branches compared to 19.1 percent of households and 13.4 percent of
businesses located in moderate-income communities. While the percentage of households and businesses in
low-income tracts are 4.8 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively, the bank has no branches in low-income tracts.
During the review period, the bank opened one branch, located in a moderate-income census tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK does not offer weekend and extended hours at any of its branch
offices in the Naples assessment area. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent
throughout the assessment area.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK provides a relatively high level of community development services in the assessment area.
During the review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 675 service hours in various capacities for
community development organizations, by participating in 19 different community development services.
Board service represented approximately 53 percent of the total community development service hours. Bank
employees engaged in providing financial education, homeownership counseling and small business assistance,
as well as working with a variety of organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-
income geographies and for low- and moderate-income individuals.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 1 12.5% 1 0 1 0 0 Total 1 12.5% 1 12.5% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 2 25.0% 0 0 2 0 0 Total 2 25.0% 2 25.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 5 62.5% 0 0 5 0 0 Total 5 62.5% 5 62.5% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 8 100.0% 1 0 8 0 0 Total 8 100.0% 8 100.0% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
73 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
28 38.4% 44.3% 43.4%
24 32.9% 31.8% 40.4%
6 8.2% 4.8% 2.7%
15 20.5% 19.1% 13.4%
# % # % # %
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
117
The following metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE FLORIDA METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Ft. Myers Assessment Area (Lee County)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 11 branches in the assessment area, representing
26 percent of its branches in Florida.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $161.4 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 1.4 percent and 7 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Florida.
Palm Beach-Broward Assessment Area (Palm Beach and Broward Counties)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 10 branches in the assessment area, representing
23 percent of its branches in Florida.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $509.5 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 0.67 percent and 23 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Florida.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Metropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment
Areas
Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Ft. Myers Consistent Above Consistent
Palm Beach-
Broward Consistent Consistent Above
For the lending test, IBERIABANK received a Low Satisfactory rating for the state of Florida. Performance in
all limited-scope metropolitan assessment areas was consistent with the bank’s performance in the state;
however, community development lending in the Ft. Myers assessment areas was stronger than the bank’s
performance in the state as a result of the bank’s lending for a number of affordable housing and community
services projects.
For the investment test, IBERIABANK received a Low Satisfactory rating for the state of Florida. Performance
in the Ft. Myers assessment area was stronger than the bank’s performance in the state, while the performance
in Palm Beach-Broward metropolitan assessment area was consistent with the bank’s performance in the state.
For the service test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state. The performance in Ft.
Myers was consistent with the bank’s performance in the state, while the performance in the Palm Beach-
Broward assessment area was stronger than the bank’s performance in the state due to greater accessibility of
delivery systems.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Non-Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
118
The following non-metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE FLORIDA NON-METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Keys Assessment Area (Monroe County)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated four branches in the assessment area, representing
9 percent of its branches in Florida.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $177.0 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 7.7 percent and 8 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Florida.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Nonmetropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment Areas Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Keys Consistent Above Consistent
For the lending test, performance in Keys assessment area was consistent with the bank’s performance in the
state. Community development lending was stronger than the bank’s performance in the state, while the
geographic and borrower distribution of loans was weaker. The bank provided equity and financing for the
development of a 36-unit Low Income Housing Tax Credit project in Monroe County, which will provide
workforce housing options for employees serving the tourism industry.
For the investment test, performance in the Keys assessment area was stronger than the bank’s performance in
the state due to significantly higher levels of qualified investments relative to the bank’s operations in the
assessment area. Specifically, as noted above, the bank invested in a LIHTC project located in the assessment
area.
For the service test, the performance in the Keys assessment area was consistent with the bank’s performance in
the state as a result of the bank’s high level of community development services.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Alabama
119
CRA RATING FOR ALABAMA: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Service Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment areas. In
addition, the distribution of borrowers reflects adequate penetration among customers of different
income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes.
Lending activity reflects adequate responsiveness to assessment area credit needs.
The bank is a leader in making community development loans within the assessment areas.
The bank provides a significant level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment areas.
Retail services are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income
levels in the assessment areas.
The bank provides a relatively high level of community development services throughout the assessment
areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Alabama
120
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for one assessment area in the State of Alabama:
Birmingham
Limited scope reviews were conducted for the remaining four assessment areas:
Baldwin
Huntsville
Mobile
Montgomery
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for these assessment areas are consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN ALABAMA
Lending activity in Alabama accounted for 11 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Alabama represented 10 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small business
and small farm lending represented 12 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm lending. As of
June 30, 2012, the bank had $608.5 million in deposits in Alabama accounting for 6 percent of IBERIABANK’s
total deposits. IBERIABANK ranks 17th
out of 172 insured institutions in the state with less than 1 percent of
total deposits. As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK operated 16 branch offices in Alabama representing 9
percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the State of Alabama is High Satisfactory.
IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and small business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in
determining the lending test rating for Alabama because the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than
small business loans. Birmingham is only full scope assessment area in the state, so the rating for Alabama is
based solely on the ratings for the Birmingham assessment area. Birmingham accounts for 50 percent of the
branches in the state; 46 percent of deposits; 30 percent of HMDA lending; and 40 percent of small business
lending in the state. In addition, 53 percent of community development lending occurred in the Birmingham
assessment area. IBERIABANK originated just one small farm loan in Alabama during the review period;
therefore, no detailed discussion of these loans is included in this section of the report.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Alabama
121
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment areas can be found in Appendices F-H while details on lending in the lending scope
assessment areas can be found in Appendices I-J.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is good and the distribution
of loans by borrower’s income and revenue size of business is adequate in Alabama. As noted above, the state
of Alabama’s rating is derived solely from the Birmingham assessment area. A detailed discussion of the
geographic and borrower distribution of lending for the Birmingham assessment area is included in the next
section of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in Alabama. The bank originated 7
community development loans totaling $17.7 million across the state, including 3 loans in the Birmingham
assessment area for $9.5 million. Total community development lending includes a $3.5 million community
development loan originated outside a designated assessment area that benefited a broader statewide or regional
area. More information on community development lending can be found in the full-scope assessment area
section.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Alabama is High Satisfactory. The bank made significant use of qualified
investments and contributions with total investments of $9.2 million and contributions of $316,251 in the
Alabama assessment areas. The bank exhibited good responsiveness to credit and community development
needs through its investment activities in the Birmingham assessment area.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 880 38.1% $158,805 31.6%
HMDA Refinance 732 31.7% $179,361 35.7%
HMDA Home Improvement 54 2.3% $790 0.2%
HMDA Multi-Family 5 0.2% $3,286 0.7%
Total HMDA 1,671 72.3% $342,242 68.2%
Total Small Business 636 27.5% $159,453 31.8%
Total Farm 3 0.1% $400 0.1%
TOTAL LOANS 2,310 100.0% $502,095 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Alabama
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Alabama
122
Service Test
The service test rating for Alabama is Low Satisfactory.
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are reasonably accessible to the bank’s
geographies and individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and
hours of operation do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-
income geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank’s record of opening and closing of
offices has not affected the accessibility of its delivery systems, including to low- and moderate-income
geographies and/or low- and moderate-income individuals.
Community Development Services
The bank provides a relatively high level of community development services that benefit residents and small
businesses in the bank’s assessment areas. Notably IBERIABANK reported a significant number of community
development board service hours in all assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
123
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
ASSESSMENT AREA
Overview
The Birmingham assessment includes six of the seven counties in the Birmingham MSA: Bibb, Blount,
Jefferson, St. Claire, Walker, and Shelby counties. Birmingham, located in Jefferson County, is the principal
city in the region. IBERIABANK operates eight branches in the assessment area, with one in a moderate
income tract. Seven branches are located in Jefferson County and one in Shelby County.
Population and Income Characteristics
The population in the assessment area was 1.1 million in 2010, representing a 7 percent increase since 2000.
The region grew faster than elsewhere in the state, but the growth was uneven. New suburban jurisdictions that
did not even exist several decades ago grew the fastest, while the city of Birmingham experienced a population
loss of approximately 12.7 percent between 2000 and 2010.121
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following chart sets forth the
estimated median family income for the Birmingham-Hoover MSA and shows that the median family income
increased slightly from $62,000 to $62,800 between 2011 and 2012.
Demographic Characteristics by Census Tract
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown, the percentage of low-income census tracts increased from 7.4 percent in 2000 to 9.8 percent in
2010, while the percentage of moderate-income census tracts declined from 29 percent to 25.1 percent. The
number of total housing units in low-income tracts increased from 25,276 in 2000 to 39,955 in 2010, an
increase of 58.1 percent, while the number of housing units in moderate- tracts fell by 3.9 percent. During the
same time period, the number of housing units in middle- and upper-income census tracts increased by
approximately 20 percent. The share of vacant housing units increased across all income categories; the total
number of vacant units accounted for 9.1 percent of all housing units in 2000, and increased to 12.1 percent by
2010.
121
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 23, 2012); available from http://www.policymap.com
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $62,000 0 - $30,999 $31,000 - $49,599 $49,600 - $74,399 $74,400 - & above
2012 $62,800 0 - $31,399 $31,400 - $50,239 $50,240 - $75,359 $75,360 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Birmingham-Hoover, AL MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
124
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
16
7.4
12,468
4.5
5,203
41.7
59,700
21.5
Moderate-income
63
29.0
67,276
24.2
12,791
19.0
47,928
17.3
Middle-income
78
35.9
109,121
39.3
8,854
8.1
56,126
20.2
Upper-income
60
27.6
88,631
31.9
2,281
2.6
113,742
41.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
217
100.0
277,496
100.0
29,129
10.5
277,496
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
25,276
6,654
2.3
26.3
14,136
55.9
4,486
17.7
Moderate-income
113,035
64,738
22.8
57.3
35,379
31.3
12,918
11.4
Middle-income
169,311
116,336
40.9
68.7
37,710
22.3
15,265
9.0
Upper-income
129,065
96,408
33.9
74.7
25,728
19.9
6,929
5.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
436,687
284,136
100.0
65.1
112,953
25.9
39,598
9.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5,583
8.2
4,709
7.7
666
16.3
208
8.6
Moderate-income
10,501
15.5
9,487
15.4
600
14.7
414
17.0
Middle-income
24,550
36.1
22,421
36.5
1,211
29.6
918
37.8
Upper-income
27,324
40.2
24,824
40.4
1,611
39.4
889
36.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
67,958
100.0
61,441
100.0
4,088
100.0
2,429
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.4
6.0
3.6
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
0.6
4
0.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
136
19.5
127
18.9
6
28.6
3
75.0
Middle-income
400
57.5
391
58.3
8
38.1
1
25.0
Upper-income
156
22.4
149
22.2
7
33.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
696
100.0
671
100.0
21
100.0
4
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.4
3.0
.6
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
125
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
25
9.8
17,911
6.4
5,928
33.1
61,534
21.9
Moderate-income
64
25.1
56,980
20.2
9,816
17.2
47,976
17.0
Middle-income
94
36.9
113,829
40.4
10,156
8.9
55,164
19.6
Upper-income
71
27.8
92,690
32.9
2,648
2.9
116,736
41.5
Unknown-income
1
0.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
255
100.0
281,410
100.0
28,548
10.1
281,410
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
39,955
13,121
4.4
32.8
17,881
44.8
8,953
22.4
Moderate-income
108,573
54,821
18.3
50.5
34,363
31.6
19,389
17.9
Middle-income
188,277
125,776
42.0
66.8
39,784
21.1
22,717
12.1
Upper-income
140,230
105,486
35.3
75.2
24,388
17.4
10,356
7.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
477,035
299,204
100.0
62.7
116,416
24.4
61,415
12.9
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4,955
7.8
4,231
7.4
510
12.8
214
9.1
Moderate-income
11,710
18.5
10,375
18.3
877
22.0
458
19.5
Middle-income
22,627
35.8
20,604
36.3
1,142
28.7
881
37.5
Upper-income
23,853
37.8
21,610
38.0
1,450
36.4
793
33.8
Unknown-income
10
0.0
9
0.0
0
0.0
1
0.0
Total Assessment Area
63,155
100.0
56,829
100.0
3,979
100.0
2,347
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.0
6.3
3.7
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
0.8
6
0.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
207
29.2
203
29.4
3
17.6
1
100.0
Middle-income
327
46.2
316
45.8
11
64.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
168
23.7
165
23.9
3
17.6
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
708
100.0
690
100.0
17
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.5
2.4
.1
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
126
Housing Characteristics
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 477,305 housing units in the assessment area in 2010, of which 67.6
percent were owner-occupied, 24.4 percent were rental units, and 12.9 percent were vacant. Rental units are
more concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. The median age of the housing stock was 34 years,
though housing was much older in the low- and moderate-income census tracts compared to the assessment area
overall. These factors indicate that lending opportunities in the low- and moderate-income tracts may be more
limited.
The Birmingham housing market weakened during the economic downturn but has been steadily improving
since 2010. Home sales have increased by 33 percent since September 2010 according to the Alabama Center
for Real Estate at the University of Alabama; median home prices are up by 8.6 percent. The median home
price in the Birmingham MSA was $165,000 in September 2013. New home construction is also on the rise
again and much of the new growth is occurring outside Birmingham, particularly in Hoover and other suburban
jurisdictions.122
Housing costs are a challenge for homeowners and renters across the assessment area, particularly in
Birmingham where more than 50 percent of renters and 35 percent of homeowners are cost-burdened. A
household is considered cost-burdened if homeownership or rental costs account for more than 30 percent of
household income.123
The 2013 Out of Reach study by the National Low Income Housing Coalition confirms
housing affordability is a problem, finding a minimum wage worker would have to work 2.1 jobs (assuming 40
hours a week for 52 weeks a year) in order to afford the fair market rent for a 2 bedroom apartment in the
Birmingham MSA.124
Mortgage delinquencies rose during the economic downturn, and remain a concern in the assessment area. The
percent of mortgages considered seriously delinquent (defined as more than 90 days past due or in foreclosure)
declined from 6.3 percent in January 2011 to 5.4 percent in June 2013. Jefferson County consistently has one of
the highest foreclosure rates in the state.125
Vacant and abandoned housing units due to decades of population loss and the foreclosure crisis are also
impacting the market in the city of Birmingham and neighborhood stabilization generally. Birmingham city
officials have tagged almost 2,000 units for demolition and have identified another 7,000 vacant properties.126
These properties are more concentrated in the city’s low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and have a
destabilizing effect on the surrounding communities.
Employment and Economic Conditions
The Birmingham economy was historically based on manufacturing, and specifically the steel industry. The
economy has diversified in recent years and the manufacturing sector now accounts for just 7.4 percent of total
employment. The service sector has become the dominant source of jobs. Government agencies also account
for a significant share of employment in the region, and despite changes in the financial services landscape,
122
Alabama Center for Real Estate, University of Alabama. September 2013. (accessed October 14, 2013); available at:
http://acre.cba.ua.edu/store/store_files/Birmingham_Report-2838.pdf 123
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on June 5, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com 124
National Low Income Housing Coalition. Out of Reach, 2013. (accessed on October 16, 2013); available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 125
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta calculations of data provided by LPS. 126
AL.com and The Birmingham News editorial board. “OUR VIEW: Birmingham Mayor William Bell and City Council right to
move quickly on abandoned buildings.” June 2, 2012. (accessed on November); available at: http://blog.al.com/birmingham-news-
commentary/2012/06/our_view_birmingham_mayor_will_24.html
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
127
Birmingham is still one of the financial centers in the Southeast.127
The University of Alabama at Birmingham
is the largest employer in the region with almost 19,000 employees. Other employers include Regions Bank,
AT&T, St. Vincent’s Health System, Honda Manufacturing of Alabama, Baptist Health System, Inc., the city of
Birmingham, and the Birmingham and Jefferson County Boards of Education.128
Small businesses are important to the Birmingham economy though the number of small businesses in the
assessment area declined by about 8 percent over the review period. According to 2012 D&B information,
there were 67,958 businesses within the Birmingham assessment area, of which 90 percent had total annual
revenues less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small businesses.129
Small
business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 72 percent between 2005 and 2009. Lending
started to increase in 2010 and the number of small business loans increased by 50 percent between 2010 and
2011. While small business lending has increased, well under 50 percent of all small business loans are made to
firms with revenues under $1.0 million, indicating that smaller firms may still be struggling to access credit.130
Economic conditions across the Birmingham-Hoover MSA declined during the recession, but the region has
started to recover, with increasing jobs and falling unemployment over the review period. The services sector
contributed the largest number of new jobs, with much of the growth in food services and retail, which are
typically lower wage jobs. The region also saw growth in manufacturing jobs while job losses occurred in the
government and construction sectors. As shown in the table below, the unemployment rate fell from 7.9 percent
to 6.4 percent between 2011 and 2012, and is well below the unemployment rate for the state at 7.3 percent.131
127
Center for Business and Economic Research, Culverhouse College of Commerce, the University of Alabama. Alabama Economic
Outlook, Birmingham-Hoover 2013; (accessed October 18, 2013); available at:
http://cber.cba.ua.edu/pdf/EconomicOutlook_Metro2013/Birmingham-Hoover.pdf 128
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Comprehensive Housing
Market Analysis, Birmingham-Hoover, Alabama, April 2011” (accessed October 29, 2012); available at
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/PDF/BirminghamAL_Comp.pdf. 129
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 130
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 131
Bureau of Labor Statistics
2011 2012
Bibb Co. 9.5 7.6
Blount Co. 8.0 6.2
Jefferson Co. 8.4 6.8
St. Clair Co. 7.9 6.4
Shelby Co. 6.1 5.0
Walker Co. 9.1 7.5
Birmingham MSA 7.9 6.4
Alabama 8.7 7.3
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
128
The Birmingham MSA has had a challenging few years. Jefferson County filed for bankruptcy protection in
November 2011 with the goal of restructuring more than $4.3 billion in county debt. At the time, this was the
largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history.132
As a result of the bankruptcy, the county has had to make
budget cuts in excess of $30 million and has had to lay off about 800 employees.133
The region has also been
impacted by natural disasters. In April 2011, deadly tornados hit the Birmingham area, claiming the lives of at
least 46 people and destroying or damaging thousands of homes, primarily in Jefferson, St. Clair, and Walker
counties.134
While the past few years have been difficult, there are a number of new projects underway across the MSA. In
late 2012, Norfolk Southern completed the $97.5 million Birmingham Regional Intermodal Facility, which will
ultimately create more than 200 new jobs, and has given a boost to the region as a center for logistics. The
entrepreneurial community is also growing. Innovation Depot, which was recognized as the nation’s top
technology incubator in 2011 is expanding to serve about 90 companies. There are also a number of projects
underway to help revitalize downtown Birmingham, including Railroad Park, a new minor league stadium and a
number of other civic, residential, office and retail-oriented projects.135
Competition
The Birmingham assessment area is a competitive banking market dominated by several national and super
regional banks. According to the June 30, 2012, FDIC Summary of Deposit Report, 46 financial institutions
operated 345 offices in the assessment area. IBERIABANK ranked 11th
with a deposit market share of 1.0
percent ($278.6 million) and 7 of the 345 offices.136
Regions Bank, Compass Bank, and Wells Fargo Bank
were the top three financial institutions with deposit market share at 34.6 percent, 17.9 percent and 11.9 percent,
respectively.
HMDA and CRA lending are also dominated by national and larger regional banks. In 2011, IBERIABANK
Mortgage ranked 60th
out of 385 lenders with less than 1 percent of total HMDA loans, and IBERIABANK
ranked 85th
. HMDA lending increased in 2012 and IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 32nd
out of 418 lenders yet
still had less than 1 percent of total HMDA lending. Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Regions were the
largest HMDA lenders in the assessment area. For CRA lending, IBERIABANK ranked 18th
in 2011 and 20th
in 2012 with less than 1 percent of CRA loans in each year. CRA lending is dominated by the national credit
card issuers (American Express and Capital One), followed by Regions Bank.
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
Access to quality, affordable housing is an ongoing concern in Birmingham. One community contact noted that
there is a particular need for affordable rental housing. Low-income individuals, including those who lost their
132
The official website of Jefferson County, Alabama. JeffCOnline Article. Jefferson County Commission Press Release, November
9, 2011 Jefferson County Files for Chapter 9 Bankruptcy. (accessed on October 18, 2013); available at:
http://jeffconline.jccal.org/home/DocumentManager/general/bankruptcydocuments/1262937844 133
Center for Business and Economic Research, Culverhouse College of Commerce, the University of Alabama. Alabama Economic
Outlook, Birmingham-Hoover 2012; (accessed October 15, 2013); available at:
http://cber.cba.ua.edu/pdf/EconomicOutlook_Metro2013/Birmingham-Hoover.pdf 134
Center for Business and Economic Research, Culverhouse College of Commerce, the University of Alabama. Alabama Economic
Outlook, Birmingham-Hoover 2012; (accessed October 15, 2013); available at:
http://cber.cba.ua.edu/pdf/EconomicOutlook_Metro2012/Birmingham-Hoover.pdf 135
Center for Business and Economic Research, Culverhouse College of Commerce, the University of Alabama. Alabama Economic
Outlook, Birmingham-Hoover 2012; (accessed October 15, 2013); available at:
http://cber.cba.ua.edu/pdf/EconomicOutlook_Metro2013/Birmingham-Hoover.pdf 136
IBERIABANK opened an additional branch in late 2012 and had 8 total branches in the assessment area as of 12/31/12.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
129
homes through foreclosure, are not able to afford current market rents. Two contacts who specialize in
affordable housing said that the banks are not meeting the needs of LMI communities and there are numerous
opportunities for them to be more engaged by providing mortgage financing, home improvement loans and
quality housing for the elderly and veterans. The city of Birmingham does offer some down payment
assistance, but a community contact familiar with the program indicated that it was hard for many homeowners
to use the funds since they are unable to qualify for first mortgages. The city is currently exploring
opportunities to create alternative sources of mortgage financing for LMI homeowners.
Neighborhood stabilization in the aftermath of the foreclosure crisis is another concern. In 2009, the city of
Birmingham received about $2.9 million from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as part
of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). These funds are available to support several neighborhood
stabilization activities, and Birmingham has chosen to focus on the acquisition and rehabilitation of foreclosed
properties in communities particularly hard hit by foreclosure. In addition to the NSP program, the city of
Birmingham has targeted other federal funds to address the high concentration of bighted and vacant housing in
LMI communities and to increase the supply of quality affordable housing units in these areas.137
Disaster Recovery
The tornados that hit Birmingham in April 2011 were particularly devastating for low- and moderate-income
areas and created opportunities for financial institutions to engage in disaster recovery efforts. Government,
business, and nonprofit leaders came together immediately to provide assistance to the impacted communities
and individuals. In September 2012, HUD approved $14 million in tornado recovery plans for Jefferson County
and Birmingham. These funds will support long-term disaster recovery efforts and can be used to confront
unmet housing, business and infrastructure needs.138
One community contact indicated that there was a great
opportunity for local banks to help develop a program that would assist people displaced by the tornados and
other natural disasters in the future.
Small Businesses and Economic Development
Small business credit declined during the recession, and while the region is now recovering, community
contacts specializing in small business felt credit access was still limited. Specifically, small dollar loans are
very challenging to obtain, and there is a perception in the community that the large banks have very little
appetite for this type of lending.
One community contact indicated that there were opportunities for banks to increase support for small
businesses through investments in organizations that provide financing assistance, or have the ability to develop
financing programs. Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) are an important partner for small
business financing, but the capacity of the CDFIs serving Birmingham is limited. Community contacts also
indicated that small business owners need more technical assistance to help position them for traditional bank
financing and that banks should be investing more time in building relationships with traditionally
disadvantaged businesses.
137
City of Birmingham, Consolidated Plan 2010-2015.(accessed on October 18, 2013); available at:
http://www.informationbirmingham.com/pdf/community/B'hamConPlan(Final)5%2013%2010.pdf 138
Birmingham Business Journal “HUD approves $55M in Alabama tornado recovery plans” September 11, 2012. (accessed October
25, 2012); available at: http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2012/09/11/hud-approves-55m-in-alabama-tornado.html.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
130
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
Poverty has been on the rise across the assessment area and particularly in Birmingham where the 27.3 percent
of the population lived in poverty in 2010. Food stamp usage, another indicator of financial distress, has also
been rising. With the exception of Shelby County, between 15 and 18 percent of the population in all counties
in the assessment area were receiving food stamps in 2010.139
In light of increasing poverty and economic challenges, there are a number of efforts focused on improving
financial capability and household financial stability. One opportunity for banks is to expand access to
mainstream financial services through programs like BankOn Birmingham and BankOn Alabama. According
to the FDIC’s 2011 National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 12.1 percent of households
are unbanked, meaning they have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In
addition, 33 percent of households are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they
regularly use alternative financial services providers.140
According to one community contact, Birmingham has
a large presence of payday lenders, which are creating a cycle of poverty in the city. Banks have a big
opportunity to create more flexible, non-predatory products to reach this potential customer base, and keep
people from payday lenders. In addition to the banking initiatives, the Alabama Asset Building coalition has
been working to increase access to Individual Development Account (IDAs), financial education and free tax
assistance programs and to address policy issues related to predatory lending.
139
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 18, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 140
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed October 18, 2013); available at:
http://economicinclusion.gov/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
131
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Birmingham assessment area is good. The geographic distribution
of loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of borrowers reflects
adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes. In
addition, the bank is a leader in making community development loans.
During the review period, the bank reported 471 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 289 small
business loans in the Birmingham assessment area. HMDA lending represented 62.0 percent of total lending
and small business lending accounted for 38.0 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is
weighted more heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The
Birmingham assessment area contains 2.9 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 5.6 percent of its total
small business lending by number of loans. In comparison, 3.0 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this
assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK
Bank’s geographic distribution of loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
The bank originated only one home purchase loan in a low-income tract in 2012 where 4.4 percent of owner-
occupied units are located. It should be noted that the aggregate also had very low lending levels in both 2011
and 2012, which may suggest a limited lending opportunities in the low-income tracts in this assessment area.
Due to the bank’s low volume of home purchase lending, limited aggregate activity and other performance
context factors, the bank’s performance is adequate, with minimal weighting given to home purchase lending in
low-income tracts.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank increased its home purchase lending
in moderate-income tracts between 2011 and 2012, but the percentage of home purchase loans originated in
moderate-income tracts in both years was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units located in these
tracts. The bank’s performance was comparable to aggregate in 2011 and slightly below aggregate performance
in 2012. In 2012, the bank originated 7.3 percent of its home purchase loans in moderate-income tracts
compared to 8.2 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle- and upper-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-
occupied units in these tracts.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is poor. The bank’s refinance lending in
low-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts throughout the
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
132
review period. The aggregate also had limited refinance activity in low-income tracts, yet the aggregate
performance exceeded the bank’s performance in 2012.
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is poor. All of the bank’s refinance loans in
moderate-income tracts were originated in 2012; the bank originated 8.6 percent of its home refinance loans in
moderate-income tracts, where 18.3 percent of owner-occupied units are located. With no refinance lending in
moderate-income tracts in 2011, the bank performed poorly compared to aggregate, but in 2012, the bank
outperformed the aggregate.
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts throughout the review period, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage
of owner-occupied units.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is adequate. The bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in 2011, but in 2012 but the bank originated 10.3 percent of its home
improvement loans in low-income tracts, where 4.4 percent of owner-occupied units are located. Moreover, the
bank significantly exceeded aggregate performance in 2012; however, the bank’s performance was based on a
limited volume of lending of this product category in the assessment area.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is good. Throughout the review
period, the bank’s percentage of loans in moderate-income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-
occupied units located in these tracts. The bank also performed favorably to the aggregate, originating 51.7
percent of its home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts in 2012 compared to 18.0 percent of
aggregate loans.
The bank’s total home improvement lending in the assessment area increased significantly during the review
period. However, in 2012, the percent of home improvement loans in both middle- and upper-income tracts
was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is excellent. The bank’s small business
lending in low-income tracts was greater than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts and exceeded
aggregate lending throughout the review period.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending in
moderate-income tracts was less than the percentage of small businesses in those tracts throughout the review
period. The bank’s performance was slightly less than aggregate in 2011 but in 2012, the bank made 16.1
percent of its small business loans in moderate-income tracts, compared to 14.6 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s small business lending in middle-income census tracts was less than the percentage of small
businesses located in middle-income tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the
percentage of small businesses in upper-income tracts in the assessment area.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of small business lending across business revenue sizes and HMDA lending across borrower
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
133
income levels was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank significantly
increased home purchase lending to low-income borrowers between 2011 and 2012 yet lending was less than
the percentage of low-income families living in the assessment area for both years. The bank performed well
compared to aggregate in 2012, with 15.2 percent of its home purchase loans to low-income borrowers versus
the aggregate at 10.3 percent.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of home purchase
loans to moderate-income borrowers was similar to or greater than the percentage of moderate-income families
located in the assessment area throughout the review period. The bank underperformed relative to the aggregate
in 2011 but exceeded aggregate in 2012, originating 29.3 percent of home purchase loans to moderate-income
borrowers compared to 23.3 percent for the aggregate.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-
income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the
percentage of upper-income families.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The number of home refinance
loans to low-income borrowers increased between 2011 and 2012 but the percentage of home refinance loans
made to low-income borrowers was well below the percentage of low-income families in the assessment area
for both years. In 2012, the bank originated 7.4 percent of its home refinance loans to low-income borrowers,
compared to 21.9 percent of families classified as low-income in the assessment area. The bank’s performance
was less than aggregate performance in 2011 but greater than aggregate in 2012.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers was well below the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area and below aggregate in 2011. The bank’s performance improved in 2012 with 15.3 percent of
loans to moderate-income borrowers compared to 17.0 percent of families classified as moderate-income.
Additionally, the bank outperformed the aggregate.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area while lending to upper-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of
upper-income families throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank originated just one
home improvement loan to a low-income borrower in 2011. In 2012, the bank’s percentage of home
improvement loans to low-income borrowers was significantly less than the percentage of low-income families
in the assessment area. In addition, the bank performed well below the aggregate, originating 6.9 percent of
total home improvement loans to low-income borrowers compared to 13.2 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The bank originated no
home improvement loans to moderate-income borrowers in 2011 while loans to moderate-income borrowers
accounted for 23.6 percent of aggregate lending. In 2012, the bank’s percentage of home improvement loans to
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
134
moderate-income borrowers was significantly more than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area. Additionally, the bank’s performance in home improvement lending to moderate-income
borrowers (27.6 percent of total loans) was significantly higher than the aggregate (21.6 percent).
The bank’s volume of home improvement loans to middle and upper-income borrowers was limited in 2011. In
2012, home improvement lending to middle income borrowers exceeded the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was less than the percentage of upper-
income families.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is adequate. The
percentage of small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly below the
percentage of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. Most recently, in 2012, the
bank originated 36.8 percent of its loans to small businesses, although 90.0 percent of total businesses in the
assessment area are classified as small businesses. The bank performed similarly to aggregate throughout the
review period.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in the Birmingham assessment area. The
bank originated 3 community development loans totaling $9.5 million during the review period. Loans
supported affordable housing and community services. Affordable rental housing is needed in Birmingham and
the bank exhibited responsiveness to this need through a $5.6 million loan to finance the acquisition,
development, and construction of a 56-unit affordable, elderly multi-family rental property with Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). The bank also intends to provide the permanent financing upon completion of
construction and the project achieving stabilization.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Birmingham assessment area is good.
The bank had 8 investments totaling $7.0 million; all investments were made during the current review period.
The investments provided support for affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals, including a
$6.2 million investment in an LIHTC project. The remaining investments were government-guaranteed
mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 57 contributions totaling $219,087. The majority of the contributions supported community
services to low- and moderate-income individuals and affordable housing. Most notably, the bank provided
nearly $138,000 in mortgage grants to help qualified low- and moderate-income homebuyers with the down
payment needed to purchase a home. The mortgage grant was administered in partnership with a local
nonprofit organization.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs, including the
development of affordable housing and financial assistance to low- and moderate-income homebuyers. A
summary of the bank’s investments can be found in Appendix K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Birmingham assessment area is adequate. Its retail
and community development services reflect adequate responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Birmingham, Alabama
135
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies
and individuals of different income levels. The distribution of eight branch offices and nine ATMs as of
December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories
within the assessment area. The bank has one branch is located in a moderate-income tract, representing 12.5
percent of total branches compared to 21.5 percent of households and 18.5 percent of businesses located in
moderate-income communities. During the review period, the bank opened five branches, including the one
branch in a moderate-income census tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK does not offer weekend and extended hours at any of its branch
offices in the Birmingham assessment area. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent
throughout the assessment area.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK provides a relatively high level of community development services in the assessment area.
During the review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 471 service hours in various capacities for
community development organizations, by participating in 15 different community development services.
Notably, multiple bank employees served on boards for qualified nonprofit organizations and 69 percent of the
qualified hours were board service. Bank employees primarily engaged with organizations that provided
community services including access to basic needs and emergency assistance, transitional housing, financial
education, education, youth-services, and various other community services that aided low- and moderate-
income geographies and low- and moderate-income individuals.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 1 12.5% 1 0 0 0 0 Total 1 11.1% 1 11.1% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 2 25.0% 0 0 2 0 0 Total 2 22.2% 2 22.2% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 5 62.5% 1 0 5 0 0 Total 6 66.7% 6 66.7% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 8 100.0% 2 0 7 0 0 Total 9 100.0% 9 100.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
1 0.4% 0.0% 0.0%
255 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
94 36.9% 39.8% 35.8%
71 27.8% 31.2% 37.8%
25 9.8% 7.5% 7.8%
64 25.1% 21.5% 18.5%
# % # % # %
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
136
The following metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE ALABAMA METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Huntsville Assessment Area (Madison County)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated three branches in the assessment area, representing
19 percent of its branches in Alabama.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $46.3 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 0.78 percent and 8 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Alabama.
Mobile Assessment Area (Mobile County)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated two branches in the assessment area, representing
13 percent of its branches in Alabama.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $141.0 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 2.4 percent and 23 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Alabama.
Montgomery Assessment Area (Autauga, Elmore, Lowndes, and Montgomery Counties)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated two branches in the assessment area, representing
13 percent of its branches in Alabama.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $126.6 million in deposits in this assessment area,
representing a market share of 1.6 percent and 21 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in
Alabama.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Metropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment
Areas
Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Huntsville Below Above Consistent
Mobile Below Below Consistent
Montgomery Below Below Consistent
For the lending test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state of Alabama. Weaker
performance in the limited-scope assessment areas as compared to the bank’s performance in the state was
attributable to a lower level of community development lending and poorer geographic distribution of loans.
Distribution of loans by borrower income also led to weaker performance in the metropolitan assessment areas.
However, community development lending in the Montgomery assessment area was stronger than
IBERIABANK’s performance in the state.
For the investment test, IBERIABANK received a High Satisfactory rating for the state. Performance in the
Mobile and Montgomery assessment areas was weaker than the bank’s performance in the state due to lower
levels of qualified investments relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment areas; however, both
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
137
assessment areas were still considered satisfactory. The performance in the Huntsville assessment area was
stronger than the bank’s performance in the state.
IBERIABANK received a Low Satisfactory rating for the service test in the state of Alabama, and performance
in the limited-scope metropolitan assessment areas was consistent with the bank’s statewide performance.
More specifically, the performance of community development services in the limited scope assessment areas
was consistent with the bank’s community development services performance in the state; however, the
accessibility of delivery systems was weaker in the limited scope assessment areas.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Non-Metropolitan Areas (Limited Review)
138
The following non-metropolitan assessment areas were reviewed using limited-scope examination procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE ALABAMA NON-METROPOLITAN
ASSESSMENT AREAS
Baldwin Assessment Area (Baldwin County)
o As of June 30, 2012, IBERIABANK operated one branch in the assessment area, representing 6
percent of its branches in Alabama.
o As of June 30, 2012, the bank had $15.9 million in deposits in this assessment area, representing
a market share of 0.50 percent and 3 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits in Alabama.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Through the use of available facts and data, including performance and demographic information, each
assessment area’s performance was evaluated and compared with the bank’s performance in the state. The
conclusions regarding performance are provided in the tables below. Please refer to the tables in Appendices I
and J for information regarding these areas.
Nonmetropolitan Assessment Areas
Assessment Areas Lending Test Investment Test Service Test
Baldwin Below Consistent Above
For the lending test, performance in the limited-scope nonmetropolitan assessment area was weaker than the
bank’s performance in the state. This performance was attributable to lower levels of community development
lending and poorer geographic and borrower income distribution of loans.
For the investment test, the performance in the Baldwin assessment area was consistent with the bank’s
performance in the state due its level of qualified investments relative to the bank’s operations in the assessment
area.
For the service test, performance was stronger in the Baldwin assessment area due to a higher level of
community development services, and the accessibility of delivery systems was consistent with the bank’s
performance in the state.
The performance in the limited-scope assessment areas did not affect the overall state rating.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Texas
139
CRA RATING FOR TEXAS: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: High Satisfactory
The Service Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment area. In
addition, the distribution of borrowers reflects adequate penetration among customers of different
income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes.
The bank is a leader in making community development loans within the assessment area.
The bank provides a significant level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment area.
Retail services are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income
levels in the assessment area.
The bank provides a relatively high level of community development services throughout the assessment
area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Texas
140
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for the only assessment area in the State of Texas:
Houston
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for these assessment areas are consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN TEXAS
Lending activity in Texas accounted for 1.8 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Texas represented 1.5 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small business
lending represented 2.9 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm lending. As of June 30, 2012,
the bank had $321.2 million in deposits in Texas accounting for 3.4 percent of IBERIABANK’s total deposits.
Texas is a competitive banking market with 648 active financial institutions; IBERIABANK holds .05 percent
of total statewide deposits. As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK operated six branch offices in Texas
representing 3.3 percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the state of Texas is High Satisfactory. IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and small
business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in determining the lending test rating for
Texas because the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than small business loans. Since the Houston
assessment area is the only assessment area in the state, the rating for Texas is based solely on the bank’s
performance in Houston. In 2012, 91.5 percent of the bank’s HMDA lending and 100 percent of small business
lending in Texas occurred in the Houston market; 91 percent of community development lending was also in
Houston. The bank did not originate any small farm loans in Texas.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 123 31.1% $28,528 20.4%
HMDA Refinance 88 22.3% $23,671 16.9%
HMDA Home Improvement 12 3.0% $187 0.1%
HMDA Multi-Family 22 5.6% $39,121 28.0%
Total HMDA 245 62.0% $91,507 65.5%
Total Small Business 150 38.0% $48,181 34.5%
Total Farm 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
TOTAL LOANS 395 100.0% $139,688 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Texas
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Texas
141
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment area can be found in Appendices F-H.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is good and the distribution
of loans by borrower’s income and revenue size of business is adequate. As noted above, the rating for the state
of Texas is derived solely from the Houston assessment area. A detailed discussion of the borrower and
geographic distribution of lending for the Houston assessment area is included in the next section of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in Texas. The bank originated 9
community development loans totaling $41.9 million in the state. The bank had 6 loans totaling $29.8 million
in the Houston assessment area and an additional $12.5 million in community development loans that benefitted
the entire state. The statewide loans included two loans for $11.5 million to a small business financing
intermediary serving Texas. More information on community development lending can be found in the full-
scope assessment area section.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Texas is High Satisfactory. The bank made significant use of qualified
investments and contributions with total investments of $2.2 million and contributions of $121,579 in the state.
The bank exhibited good responsiveness to credit and community development needs through its investment
activities in the Houston assessment area.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Service Test
The service test rating for Texas is Low Satisfactory.
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are reasonably accessible to the bank’s
geographies and individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and
hours of operation do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-
income geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank opened three branches in the Houston
assessment area during the review period, including one branch in a moderate-income tract. The bank’s record
of opening and closing of offices has not affected the accessibility of its delivery systems, including to low- and
moderate-income geographies and/or low- and moderate-income individuals.
Community Development Services
The bank provides a relatively high level of community development services that benefit residents and small
businesses of the assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
142
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUION’S OPERATIONS IN THE HOUSTON, TEXAS ASSESSMENT
AREA
Overview
The Houston assessment area includes Harris and Fort Bend counties and is part of the Houston-Sugar Land-
Baytown MSA. The 10-county MSA is the 5th
most populous MSA in the United States and the city of Houston
is the 4th
largest city in the country. IBERIABANK operates six branches in the assessment area, with one in a
moderate-income tract; five branches are located in Harris County and one in Fort Bend County.
Population and Income Characteristics
Houston was the fastest growing U.S. city in the 20th
century and has become a major center for business and
commerce.141
According to the 2010 census, the Houston assessment area had a total population of 4.7 million,
which represents an increase of 24.6 percent since 2000. The majority of the population resides in Harris
County (4.1 million residents), yet Fort Bend County was one of the fastest growing counties in the country
with population growth exceeding 65 percent between 2000 and 2010.142
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following table sets forth the
estimated median family income for 2011 and 2012 for the Houston MSA and also provides a breakdown of the
estimated annual family income for each income category (low, moderate, middle, and upper). The table
indicates that the HUD estimated median family income for the Houston area increased from $66,000 in 2011 to
$66,900 in 2012.
Demographic Characteristics
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
141
Greater Houston Partnership. “Houston Area Profile.” Available at: http://www.houston.org/pdf/research/02CW001.pdf.
Accessed November 8, 2012. 142
U.S. Census. Accessed through PolicyMap. Available at: www.policymap.com. Accessed on November 8, 2012.
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $66,000 0 - $32,999 $33,000 - $52,799 $52,800 - $79,199 $79,200 - & above
2012 $66,900 0 - $33,449 $33,450 - $53,519 $53,520 - $80,279 $80,280 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
143
As shown, the percentage of low-income census tracts in the assessment area increased from 9.1 percent in
2000 to 14.5 percent in 2010, while the percentage of moderate-income census tracts declined from 32.1 percent
to 29.9 percent. The number of total housing units in low-income tracts increased from 101,950 in 2000 to
222,457 in 2010, an increase of 118 percent, while the number of housing units in moderate-income tracts
increased by 14 percent, and the number of units in middle- and upper-income tracts increased by 16 percent.
The share of vacant housing units increased across all income categories; the total number of vacant housing
units accounted for 11 percent of all housing units in 2010.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
144
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
64
9.1
64,589
6.9
22,141
34.3
214,963
23.0
Moderate-income
227
32.1
276,181
29.6
52,590
19.0
162,271
17.4
Middle-income
199
28.1
274,639
29.4
22,685
8.3
174,019
18.6
Upper-income
210
29.7
319,029
34.1
9,416
3.0
383,185
41.0
Unknown-income
7
1.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
707
100.0
934,438
100.0
106,832
11.4
934,438
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
101,950
26,732
3.5
26.2
65,183
63.9
10,035
9.8
Moderate-income
420,715
177,543
23.5
42.2
209,326
49.8
33,846
8.0
Middle-income
430,078
229,692
30.4
53.4
172,843
40.2
27,543
6.4
Upper-income
461,359
322,780
42.7
70.0
112,314
24.3
26,265
5.7
Unknown-income
19
10
0.0
52.6
8
42.1
1
5.3
Total Assessment Area
1,414,121
756,757
100.0
53.5
559,674
39.6
97,690
6.9
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
14,448
4.6
12,849
4.5
997
5.7
602
5.5
Moderate-income
69,828
22.4
61,918
21.9
5,266
30.2
2,644
24.0
Middle-income
86,627
27.8
79,181
28.0
4,273
24.5
3,173
28.8
Upper-income
139,998
45.0
128,653
45.5
6,765
38.9
4,580
41.5
Unknown-income
551
0.2
403
0.1
112
0.6
36
0.3
Total Assessment Area
311,452
100.0
283,004
100.0
17,413
100.0
11,035
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.9
5.6
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
32
1.6
30
1.5
1
3.1
1
7.1
Moderate-income
225
11.1
214
10.8
9
28.1
2
14.3
Middle-income
646
31.9
634
32.1
9
28.1
3
21.4
Upper-income
1,117
55.2
1,096
55.4
13
40.6
8
57.1
Unknown-income
3
0.1
3
0.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
2,023
100.0
1,977
100.0
32
100.0
14
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.7
1.6
.7
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
145
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
125
14.5
114,948
10.6
39,481
34.3
272,158
25.1
Moderate-income
258
29.9
292,612
27.0
56,791
19.4
182,978
16.9
Middle-income
210
24.4
293,157
27.1
27,679
9.4
187,728
17.3
Upper-income
265
30.7
382,180
35.3
13,319
3.5
440,033
40.6
Unknown-income
4
0.5
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
862
100.0
1,082,897
100.0
137,270
12.7
1,082,897
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
222,457
47,189
5.1
21.2
132,113
59.4
43,155
19.4
Moderate-income
480,669
211,720
22.8
44.0
204,938
42.6
64,011
13.3
Middle-income
454,791
268,104
28.9
59.0
142,907
31.4
43,780
9.6
Upper-income
577,004
401,796
43.3
69.6
130,966
22.7
44,242
7.7
Unknown-income
79
0
0.0
0.0
50
63.3
29
36.7
Total Assessment Area
1,735,000
928,809
100.0
53.5
610,974
35.2
195,217
11.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
29,108
9.7
25,312
9.3
2,388
13.8
1,408
12.0
Moderate-income
66,637
22.1
59,647
21.9
4,230
24.5
2,760
23.6
Middle-income
74,882
24.9
67,845
25.0
4,021
23.3
3,016
25.7
Upper-income
130,120
43.2
118,965
43.8
6,629
38.4
4,526
38.6
Unknown-income
113
0.0
92
0.0
14
0.1
7
0.1
Total Assessment Area
300,860
100.0
271,861
100.0
17,282
100.0
11,717
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.4
5.7
3.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
73
3.6
71
3.5
2
7.7
0
0.0
Moderate-income
233
11.4
228
11.3
4
15.4
1
12.5
Middle-income
653
31.8
640
31.7
12
46.2
1
12.5
Upper-income
1,092
53.2
1,078
53.4
8
30.8
6
75.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
2,051
100.0
2,017
100.0
26
100.0
8
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.3
1.3
.4
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
146
Housing Characteristics
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 1.7 million housing units in the assessment area in 2010, of which
53.5 percent were owner-occupied, 35.2 percent were rental units, and 11.3 percent were vacant. Rental and
vacant units are more highly concentrated in low- and moderate-income tracts. The median age of the housing
stock across the assessment area was 30 years, though housing was much older in the low- and moderate-
income census tracts compared to the assessment area overall. These factors indicate that lending opportunities
in the low- and moderate-income tracts may be limited.143
Across the state of Texas, housing prices remained relatively stable throughout the recession. The housing
market did not experience major price escalation prior to the housing crisis and therefore did not fall drastically
during the downturn.144
According to data from the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University, the median
housing price increased during and after the recession, with a large jump in prices occurring between 2011 and
2012 when the median sales price increased from $153,700 to $163,400. Preliminary data for 2013 indicates
that prices are continuing to rise. Home sales, however, declined during the recession, though started to
stabilize in 2010, and then increased by 16.6 percent between 2011 and 2012. New residential construction in
the region slowed considerably between 2006 and 2010, but in 2011, the number of new single family permits
started increasing again. This combination of factors, combined with the region’s population and job growth,
indicates that a strong recovery is underway in Houston housing market.145
Housing costs are a significant challenge in the assessment area, particularly for lower income renters. In
Harris County, almost 50 percent of renters and 66 percent of renters earning less than $50,000 a year are
considered cost-burdened, meaning that rental costs account for more than 30 percent of household income.146
The 2013 Out of Reach by the National Low Income Housing Coalition confirms housing affordability is a
problem, finding a minimum wage worker would have to work 2.5 jobs (assuming 40 hours a week for 52
weeks a year) in order to afford the fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in either Harris or Fort Bend
Counties.147
Houston fared better than many other metro areas during the housing crisis, but mortgage delinquencies did
increase during the recession. However, the delinquency rate has been steadily falling for the past two years.
Between January 2011 and December 2012, the percentage of seriously delinquent mortgages, which includes
loans more than 90 days past due, fell from 5.0 percent to 3.9 percent. Delinquencies are continuing to decline
in 2013, though the overall delinquency rate in the Houston assessment area is slightly higher than the rate
statewide. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for the assessment area show that demand for home
purchase loans of owner-occupied, one-to-four family dwellings is weak. Home purchase loans have been in
general state of decline since 2006, with the number of loans originated annually inside the assessment area
declining by 61 percent from 2006 to 2011. Refinance activity exhibited more strength during this time period,
increasing by more than 100 percent between 2008 and 2011.148
143
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap (accessed on February 4, 2013); available from www.policymap.com. 144
Peterson, D’Ann and Laila Assanie. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. “Texas Dodges Worst of Foreclosure Woes.” 4th
Quarter
2009. (accessed on October 24, 2013); available at: http://www.dallasfed.org/research/economy/constr.cfm. 145
Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University. “Housing Activity and Affordability for Texas Areas.” (accessed on October 24,
2013); available at: http://recenter.tamu.edu/data/hs/ 146
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 29, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com 147
National Low Income Housing Coalition. Out of Reach, 2013. (accessed on October 16, 2013); available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013 148
HMDA data calculations provided by PolicyMap. (accessed on October 22, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
147
Employment and Economic Conditions
Houston is the U.S. energy headquarters and a world center for virtually every segment of the oil and gas
industry including exploration, production, transmission, marketing, supply, and technology. There are more
than 3,700 energy-related establishments located within the Houston MSA, and in 2012, 27.3 percent of the
nation’s jobs in oil and gas extraction and 10.8 percent of jobs in support activities for mining were based in the
region.149
The Houston MSA ranks third in the country for Fortune 500 companies, with 25 Fortune 500
companies based in the region, including ConocoPhillips, Marathon Oil, Sysco, Enterprise Products Partners,
Plains All American Pipeline, Halliburton, Baker Hughes, Waste Management, National Oilwell Varco,
Apache, Anadarko Petroleum, and KBR.150
While energy is central to Houston’s economy, the economic base in the region has become much more diverse.
There are significant worker concentrations in numerous industries including mining; manufacturing; retail;
health care; accommodation and food services; federal, state and local government; construction; finance;
transportation and warehousing; and a range of other services.151
Major employers include the Exxon Mobile
Corporation; Memorial Hermann Healthcare System; and the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center;
United Airlines; Schlumberger Limited; Shell Oil Company; The Methodist Hospital System; and Kroger
Company.152
In addition, there are many employers in the region employing over 1,000 employees.
Small businesses play an important role in the Houston economy. According to 2012 D&B information, there
were 300,860 businesses within the Houston assessment area of which 90.4 percent had total annual revenues
less than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small businesses.153
Access to credit for
small businesses declined during the recession though conditions appear to be improving modestly. In the
assessment area, small business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 72 percent between
2007 and 2010 before beginning to stabilize in 2011. Small business lending is less than 50 percent of peak
lending levels, and only about 40 percent of all small business loans in 2011 were made to firms with revenues
under $1.0 million, indicating that may still be struggling to access credit.154
The impact of the national economic downturn in the Houston MSA was less severe than many other parts of
the country.155
The unemployment rate for the Houston MSA increased from pre-recession levels of 4.3 percent
in 2007 to 8.5 percent in 2010 but began improving in 2011, dropping from 8.1 percent in 2011 to 6.8 percent in
2012. The unemployment rate in Harris County is comparable to the MSA overall, but in Fort Bend County,
the unemployment rate dropped to 6.1 percent in 2012.
149
Greater Houston Partnership. (accessed on October 25, 2013); available at: http://www.houstonedguide.com/ 150
Greater Houston Partnership. (accessed on October 25, 2013); available at: http://www.houstonedguide.com/ 151
2011 Regional Economic Information Systems. 152
Greater Houston Partnership. (accessed on October 25, 2013); available at: http://www.houstonedguide.com/ 153
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 154
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 155
Levy, Francesca. Forbes, “Cities Where the Recession is Easing.” March 8, 2010. Available at:
http://www.governorperry.com/blog/forbes-if-one-state-poster-child-economic-recovery-its-texas/. Accessed November 8, 2012.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
148
From the start of the recession in September 2008 to the bottom in January 2010, Houston lost 135,400 jobs or
one in every 19 in the region. However, the region recouped all lost jobs faster than any other metro in the
country and employment growth continues at a strong pace. Four sectors account for the bulk of recent job
creation, including leisure and hospitality, education and health care, construction and trade, and transportation
and utilities.156
While job growth is strong, many of the new jobs are in traditionally low wage occupations.
Competition
The Houston assessment area is a highly competitive market dominated by national and super regional banks.
According to the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of Deposits Report, IBERIABANK ranks 36th
out of 91
financial institutions operating in the assessment area with 0.2 percent of the deposit market share. As of June
2012, IBERIABANK operated 5 branch offices in the assessment area; in total, 1,182 branch offices were
located in the area. The top financial institution by deposit market share is JP Morgan Chase Bank with 33.9
percent, followed by Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Compass Bank.
HMDA lending was similarly competitive with 704 total HMDA reporters operating in the Houston assessment
area in 2011. IBERIABANK Mortgage ranked 167th
and IBERIABANK ranked 178th
with a combined total of
less than 0.05 percent of all HMDA loans in 2011. In 2012, IBERIABANK ranked 114th
and IBERIABANK
Mortgage ranked 176th
out of 775 reporters with 0.1 percent combined of total HMDA loans. HMDA lending
was dominated by large national lenders including Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase.
CRA lending is also highly competitive and led by American Express, Wells Fargo, Chase Bank and Capitol
One. IBERIABANK ranked 38th
out of 161 CRA lenders in 2011 and 34th
of 164 reporters in 2012 with less
than 0.1 percent of the total CRA loans in both years.
Community Development Opportunities
The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas conducts a quarterly Community Outlook Survey that helps assess
community and economic development in the 11th
District (covering Texas, Northern Louisiana and Southern
New Mexico). Community organizations that provide housing, workforce development, health and financial
stability programs are invited to participate in the survey. The survey covers a much larger geographic area
156
Greater Houston Partnership. Greater Houston Partnership 2013 Employment Forecast. (accessed October 28, 2013); Available at:
http://www.houston.org/pdf/research/quickview/Partnership_2013_Jobs_Forecast.pdf
2011 2012
Harris Co. 8.2 6.8
Fort Bend Co. 7.4 6.1
Houston MSA 8.1 6.8
Texas 7.9 6.8
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: TX Houston
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
149
than the subject assessment area but the findings are illustrative of some of the challenges facing low- and
moderate income (LMI) areas across the region. Organizations that participated in the first quarter 2013 survey
identified several positive economic trends, including increased job availability, though optimism about job
openings was tempered by concerns about benefits and living wages and providers noted that underemployment
was still an issue. The other primary areas of concern were affordable housing for LMI populations and
declining public and private funding to support the work of the nonprofit organizations serving LMI individuals
or communities.157
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas survey identified several factors limiting the supply of affordable housing
in the 11th
District, including the lack of capital for development, high development costs and competition for
grants or subsidies. Survey participants also noted that tighter underwriting requirements and lower credit
quality were impacting LMI individuals considering homeownership.158
Bank management and several community contacts confirmed that affordable rental and single family
homeownership are critical needs in the market. A community contact specializing in affordable housing
indicated that housing prices in Houston are lower than other major markets in the U.S., but are rising rapidly,
making it increasingly difficult for lower-income individuals to purchase homes. The contact stated that
housing prices are typically lower in suburban areas, but the additional transportation costs associated with
living further from job centers would impact affordability. The contact noted that there is an opportunity for
financial institutions to support a loan pool that provides down payment and closing cost assistance, as well as a
single family housing rehabilitation programs.
A second affordable housing contact stated that more affordable rental housing was needed, and particularly
units that are close to transportation and jobs. The contact felt that Houston was shifting away from
homeownership and demand for rental was rising so maintaining an adequate supply of affordable rental
housing for low- and moderate-income renters is critical.
Low-income Housing Tax Credits are an important financing tool for increasing affordable rental housing, and
present a good opportunity for local bank investment. The Texas Department of Housing and Community
Affairs estimated that approximately $9.4 million in low-income housing tax credits would be available to
support affordable rental housing projects in Houston in 2013.159
While the foreclosure problem in Houston was not as bad as elsewhere in the country, the region did receive a
significant allocation through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). Harris County has received
$16.8 million in NSP funds, the city of Houston received $16.9 million, and Fort Bend County received $2.8
million. The NSP funds were used primarily for the acquisition, rehabilitation and resale of foreclosed
properties, as well as new construction.160
157
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Community Outlook Survey, First Quarter 2013. (accessed on October 28, 2013); available at:
http://www.dallasfed.org/cd/cos/index.cfm. 158
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Community Outlook Survey, First Quarter 2013. (accessed on October 28, 2013); available at:
http://www.dallasfed.org/cd/cos/index.cfm. 159
Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. (accessed October 25, 2013); available at:
http://www.tdhca.state.tx.us/multifamily/htc/docs/13-AwardLimits-EstRegAlloc.pdf 160
U.S. Department of Housing and Development, Neighborhood Stabilization Program, NSP Grantees. (accessed October 28, 2013);
available at: http://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm?do=viewGranteeAreaResults
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
150
In addition to the revitalization supported by NSP, there are other neighborhoods in need of revitalization. The
Third Ward was mentioned by a community contact in Houston as an example of a neighborhood where more
capital is needed to form businesses, create jobs for low- and moderate-income residents, and develop non-
profit programs for community residents. Banks have an opportunity to support this revitalization by lending or
investing directly in the neighborhoods, or working in partnership with nonprofits and alternative financing
sources like Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs).
Small Businesses and Economic Development
A community contact that specializing in small business financing confirmed the statement by bank
management that the Houston economy is strong, and there are opportunities for small businesses to participate
in the economic growth. The critical need for small businesses is access to capital, and particularly working
capital. The community contact indicated that there was need for more flexible financing for microenterprise
and other small businesses that can help revitalize distressed communities and create new jobs. CDFIs are one
resource for small business financing and they provide good investment and partnership opportunities for
financial institutions. There are several CDFIs serving the Houston market, providing access to different loans
types, including microloans and SBA loans, as well as technical assistance.
Increasing Financial Capability and Stability
Economic growth has been strong in Houston yet not all communities have benefitted. The percentage of
people living in poverty has been rising and in Harris County, 17.4 percent of the population lived under the
poverty level between 2007 and 2011, while in the city of Houston, 21.5 percent of the population lived in
poverty. Food stamp usage, another indicator of financial distress, has also been rising and in 2010, 14.3
percent of the population in Harris County was receiving food stamps.161
In light of increasing poverty and other economic challenges facing LMI individuals, there is an opportunity for
banks to support activities that improve financial capability and household financial stability. One approach is
expanding access to mainstream financial services. According to the FDIC’s 2011 National Survey of
Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 15.4 percent of households are unbanked, meaning they have no type
of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In addition, 25.6 percent of households are
considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on alternative financial
services providers on a regular basis.162
There are a number of efforts to increase financial stability in the
assessment area including Bank On Houston. Bank On Houston is a collaborative effort of financial
institutions, nonprofits and government agencies to increase access to affordable bank accounts and promote
financial education. In addition to local efforts, RAISE Texas is a nationally recognized nonprofit organization
working to promote a range of asset building programs and public policy to enhance the economic security of
LMI individuals statewide.
161
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 18, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com 162
2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed October 18, 2013); available at:
http://economicinclusion.gov/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
151
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Houston assessment area is good. The geographic distribution of
loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of borrowers reflects
adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different revenue sizes. In
addition, the bank is a leader in making community development loans.
During the review period, the bank reported 223 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 150 small
business loans in the Houston assessment area. HMDA lending represented 59.8 percent of total lending and
small business accounted for 40.2 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted more
heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Houston assessment area
contains 1.4 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 2.9 percent of its total small business lending by
number of loans. In comparison, 3.0 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendices G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK’s
geographic distribution of loans reflects good penetration throughout the assessment area.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending in low-income census tracts is poor and the volume of loans over the
review period was low. In 2011, the bank did not originate any home purchase loans in low-income tracts while
1.6 percent of aggregate loans were in low-income tracts. IBERIABANK’s lending improved in 2012, while
the percentage of loans was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low income tracts, the bank’s
performance exceeded aggregate.
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The percentage of home purchase loans originated
in moderate-income tracts was slightly less than the percentage of owner-occupied units located in these tracts
but the bank significantly outperformed aggregate performance throughout the review period. In 2012, the bank
originated 20 percent of its home purchase loans in moderate-income tracts compared to 9.5 percent of
aggregate loans.
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts exceeded the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts in 2011, yet was less than the percentage of units in 2012. Home purchase lending in upper-income
tracts was greater than the percentage of units in upper-income tracts in both years.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in low-income census tracts is poor. The bank’s refinance lending in
low-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in low-income tracts throughout the
review period. The aggregate also had limited refinance activity in low-income tracts. In 2012, IBERIABANK
originated two home refinance loans in low-income tracts which represented 3.3 percent of bank loans, while
refinance loans in moderate-income tracts accounted for 1.3 percent of aggregate loans.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
152
The bank’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank significantly increased home
refinance lending in moderate income-tracts between 2011 and 2012; in 2012, 27.9 percent of home refinance
loans were made in moderate-income tracts, where 22.8 percent of owner-occupied units are located. The
bank’s refinance lending in moderate-income tracts was identical to aggregate in 2011 but significantly
exceeded aggregate in 2012 (27.9 percent of total loans compared to 7.6 percent of aggregate loans).
The bank’s refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in
these tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-occupied units
throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in low-income census tracts is poor. In 2011, the bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in low-income tracts where 3.5 percent of owner-occupied units are
located; 2.0 percent of aggregate lending occurred in low-income tracts in 2011. In 2012, the bank originated
just one home improvement loan (9.1 percent of total loans) in a low-income tract where 5.1 percent of owner-
occupied units are located. Moreover, the bank significantly exceeded aggregate performance in 2012;
however, the bank’s rating is based on a limited volume of lending in this product category in the assessment
area.
The bank’s home improvement lending in moderate-income census tracts is adequate. In 2011, the bank did not
originate any home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts where 23.5 percent of owner-occupied units
are located; 13.9 percent of aggregate lending occurred in moderate-income tracts in 2011. IBERIABANK’s
home improvement lending in moderate-income tracts improved in 2012. The bank originated 45.5 percent of
total home-improvement loans in moderate-income tracts where 22.8 percent of owner-occupied units are
located. Additionally, the bank’s performance exceeded aggregate.
Overall, IBERIABANK’s volume of home improvement lending was low across all income levels throughout
the review period; in 2011, the bank originated just one home improvement loan in the assessment area. In
2012, the percent of home improvement loans in both middle- and upper-income tracts was well below the
percentage of owner-occupied units.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in low-income census tracts is excellent. The bank increased small
business lending between 2011 and 2012 and the percent of loans was greater than the percentage of small
businesses in low-income tracts. The bank also exceeded aggregate lending throughout the review period.
The bank’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank’s small business lending in
moderate-income tracts exceeded the percentage of small businesses in those tracts in 2011 and was well above
aggregate. In 2012, the bank’s small business lending was less than the percentage of small businesses located
in moderate-income tracts and less than the aggregate, at 17.2 percent compared to 19.5 percent.
The bank’s small business lending in middle- and upper-income census tracts was greater than the percentage of
small businesses located in these tracts in 2011; in 2012, the percentage of loans in middle-income tracts
exceeded the percentage of businesses in these tracts, but the percentage of loans in upper-income tracts was
lower than the percentage of businesses.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
153
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues is adequate. For this analysis, the
distribution of small business lending across business revenue sizes and HMDA lending across borrower
income levels was compared to available demographic information. Performance context issues were also
considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank significantly
increased home purchase lending to low-income borrowers between 2011 and 2012, yet lending was less than
the percentage of low-income families living in the assessment area for both years. The bank outperformed
aggregate in 2012, with 21.0 percent of its home purchase loans to low-income borrowers versus the aggregate
at 5.4 percent.
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of home purchase
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families located in the
assessment area in 2011, but much greater than the percentage of moderate-income families in 2012. The bank
did not perform well compared to the aggregate in 2011, but in 2012, the bank originated 33.0 percent of home
purchase loans to moderate-income borrowers, significantly exceeding the aggregate at 16.2 percent.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle- and upper-income borrowers was greater the percentage of
families in each income category in the assessment area, while lending in 2012 was less than the percentage of
middle- and upper-income families in the assessment area.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
refinance loans to low-income borrowers in 2011, while 2.3 percent of aggregate loans were made to low-
income borrowers. The number of home refinance loans to low-income borrowers increased between 2011 and
2012 but the percentage of loans to low-income borrowers was less than the percentage of low-income families
in the assessment area. The bank performed well compared to aggregate in 2012, originating 13.1 percent of
refinance loans to low-income borrowers compared to the aggregate at 3.1 percent.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers was less than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area for both years. The bank’s lending volume increased in 2012, with 14.8 percent of loans to
moderate-income borrowers compared to 8.0 percent for the aggregate.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area throughout the review period, while lending to upper-income borrowers was
greater than the percentage of upper-income families.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
home improvement loans to low-income borrowers in 2011 while 5.3 percent of aggregate loans were made to
low-income borrowers. The bank originated one loan to a low-income borrower in 2012; the percentage of
loans to low-income borrowers was much less than the percentage of low-income families in the assessment
areas. The bank out performed aggregate in 2012 but this was driven by the low loan volume in this product
category.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
154
The bank’s home improvement lending to moderate-income borrowers is poor. The bank originated no home
improvement loans to moderate-income borrowers in 2011, while loans to moderate-income borrowers
accounted for 11.0 percent of aggregate lending. In 2012, the bank’s percentage of home improvement loans to
moderate-income borrowers was greater the percentage of moderate-income families in the assessment area.
Additionally, the bank performed better than aggregate in home improvement lending to moderate-income
borrowers (18.2 percent compared to 10.0 percent of aggregate) though this performance was based on low
home improvement lending volume.
The bank’s volume of home improvement loans to middle- and upper-income borrowers was very limited in
2011. In 2012, home improvement lending to middle- income borrowers exceeded the percentage of middle-
income families in the assessment area, while lending to upper-income borrowers was less than the percentage
of upper-income families.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is adequate. The
percentage of small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was less than the
percentage of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. Most recently, in 2012, the
bank originated 37.4 percent of its loans to small businesses, although 90.4 percent of total businesses in the
assessment area are classified as small businesses. The bank did not perform as well as aggregate in 2011 but
performed on par with aggregate in 2012.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK is a leader in making community development loans in the Houston assessment area. The bank
originated six community development loans totaling $29.8 million during the review period. The loans
financed more than 300 units of affordable rental housing, which is an identified need in the Houston
assessment area. In addition, the bank had three community development loans totaling $12.1 million that
benefitted a broader regional area that included the assessment area. Two of the three regional loans ($11
million) provided capital to a financial intermediary that invests in companies across the state that are operating
in or are willing to expand or move to under-served markets, creating new jobs and revitalizing lower-income
communities.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Houston assessment area is good.
The bank had 8 investments totaling $2.2 million; all investments were made during the current review period.
The bank’s investments provided support for economic development and affordable housing, including a $1.0
million investment in a loan fund that provides access to capital for small businesses. The remaining
investments were government-guaranteed mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 16 contributions totaling $121,579. The majority of the contributions supported community
services to low- and moderate-income individuals with an emphasis on education, youth services and health
care.
The bank’s investments and contributions exhibited responsiveness to several identified needs including
affordable housing, small business credit access, and support for basic needs for low- and moderate-income
individuals. A summary of the bank’s investments can be found in Appendix K.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
155
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Houston assessment area is adequate. Its retail and
community development services reflect adequate responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies
and individuals of different income levels. The distribution of six branch offices and six ATMs as of
December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories
within the assessment area. The bank has one branch located in a moderate-income tract, representing 16.7
percent of total branches compared to 27.1 percent of households and 22.1 percent of businesses located in
moderate-income communities. During the review period, the bank opened three branches, including the one
branch in a moderate-income census tract.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly in low- and moderate-income geographies or to low- and
moderate-income individuals. IBERIABANK does not offer weekend and extended hours at any of its branch
offices in the Houston assessment area. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are consistent
throughout the assessment area.
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK provides a relatively high level of community development services in the assessment area.
During the review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 497 service hours in various capacities for
community development organizations, by participating in 32 different community development services.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 1 16.7% 1 0 0 0 0 Total 1 16.7% 1 16.7% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 1 16.7% 0 0 1 0 0 Total 1 16.7% 1 16.7% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 4 66.7% 1 0 4 0 0 Total 4 66.7% 4 66.7% 1 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 6 100.0% 2 0 5 0 0 Total 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 2 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
%
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
# % # % #
125 14.5% 11.6% 9.7%
258 29.9% 27.1% 22.1%
210 24.4% 26.7% 24.9%
265 30.7% 34.6% 43.2%
0.0%
862 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
4 0.5% 0.0%
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Houston, Texas
156
Board service represented approximately 25 percent of the total community development service hours. Bank
employees engaged in providing financial education, homeownership counseling and small business assistance
as well as working with a variety of organizations that provided community services in low- and moderate-
income geographies and for low- and moderate-income individuals.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Tennessee
157
CRA RATING FOR TENNESSEE: Satisfactory
The Lending Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
The Investment Test is rated: Low Satisfactory
The Service Test is rated: High Satisfactory
Major factors supporting the rating include the following:
The geographic distribution of loans reflects marginally adequate penetration while the distribution of
borrowers reflects poor penetration among customers of different income levels and businesses of
different revenue sizes in the Memphis assessment area.
The bank made an adequate level community development loans within the assessment areas.
The bank provides an adequate level of qualified community development investments and grants that
are responsive to several identified community development needs of the assessment areas.
Retail services are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies and individuals of different income
levels in the assessment areas.
The bank is a leader in providing community development services throughout the assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Tennessee
158
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
A full scope review was conducted for the only assessment area in the State of Tennessee:
Memphis
The time period, products, and affiliates evaluated for this assessment area is consistent with the scope
discussed in the institution section of this report.
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN TENNESSEE
Lending activity in Tennessee accounted for 2.6 percent of the bank’s total lending activity. HMDA-reportable
lending in Tennessee represented 3.2 percent of the bank’s total HMDA-reportable lending, while small
business lending represented 0.9 percent of the bank’s total small business and small farm lending. As of
June 30, 2012, the bank had $154.5 million in deposits in Tennessee accounting for 1.6 percent of
IBERIABANK’s total deposits. There are 227 financial institutions active in Tennessee and IBERIABANK
holds a very small share of total deposits in the state (0.1 percent). As of December 31, 2012, IBERIABANK
operated 3 branch offices in Tennessee representing 1.6 percent of the bank’s total branches.
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
The lending test rating in the State of Tennessee is Low Satisfactory. IBERIABANK is both a HMDA and
small business lender; HMDA lending was given greater consideration in determining the lending test rating for
Memphis because the bank originated more HMDA loans by number than small business loans. Since the
Memphis assessment area is the only assessment area in the state, the rating for Tennessee is based solely on the
bank’s performance in Memphis; 100 percent of the bank’s HMDA, small business and community
development lending in Tennessee occurred within the Memphis assessment area. The bank did not originate
any small farm loans in Tennessee.
The following table shows lending activity from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012.
Loan Type # % $ (000s) %
HMDA Home Purchase 272 48.2% $47,888 43.4%
HMDA Refinance 234 41.5% $48,416 43.9%
HMDA Home Improvement 10 1.8% $199 0.2%
HMDA Multi-Family 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Total HMDA 516 91.5% $96,503 87.4%
Total Small Business 48 8.5% $13,902 12.6%
Total Farm 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
TOTAL LOANS 564 100.0% $110,405 100.0%
Statewide Summary of Lending ActivityAssessment Areas Located in
Tennessee
Originations and Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Tennessee
159
Details of the bank’s HMDA and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers in the full
scope assessment area can be found in Appendices F-H.
Geographic and Borrower Distribution
The geographic distribution of IBERIABANK’s HMDA and small business loans is adequate and the
distribution of loans by borrower’s income and revenue size of business is poor. As noted above, the rating for
the state of Tennessee is derived solely from the Memphis assessment area. A detailed discussion of the
borrower and geographic distribution of lending for the Memphis assessment area is included in the next section
of this report.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made an adequate level of community development loans in Tennessee, originating two
community development loans totaling $1.7 million during the review period. More information on community
development lending can be found in the full-scope assessment area section.
Investment Test
The investment test rating for Tennessee is Low Satisfactory. The bank made adequate use of qualified
investments and contributions with $1.1 million in qualified investments and $31,500 in contributions. The
bank exhibited adequate responsiveness to credit and community development needs through its investment
activities in the Memphis assessment area.
A summary of the bank’s investments and contributions for full scope and limited scope assessment areas can
be found in Appendix K; additional details regarding specific investments and contributions can be found in the
full-scope assessment area sections.
Service Test
The service test rating for Tennessee is High Satisfactory.
Retail Services
Delivery systems, including ATMs and branch office locations, are reasonably accessible to the bank’s
geographies and individuals of different income levels in the assessment areas. Overall, banking services and
hours of operation do not vary in a way that inconveniences the assessment areas, including low- and moderate-
income geographies or low- and moderate-income individuals. The bank did not open or close any branches in
the assessment area during the review period so there has been no change in the accessibility of its delivery
systems for low- and moderate-income geographies and/or low- and moderate-income individuals. Additional
detail on the bank’s retail services can be found in the full-scope assessment area section.
Community Development Services
The bank is a leader in providing community development services that benefit residents and small businesses
of the assessment area. Additional detail on the bank’s retail and community development services can be
found in the full-scope assessment area section.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
160
METROPOLITAN AREA
(Full Scope Review)
DESCRIPTION OF INSTITUTION’S OPERATIONS IN THE MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE
ASSESSMENT AREA
The Memphis assessment area includes a portion of Shelby County, Tennessee (37 out of 221 census tracts in
2010). Shelby County is one of the nine counties in the Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metropolitan Statistical Area.
IBERIABANK operates three branches in the assessment area, which are all located in upper-income census
tracts.
Population and Income Characteristics
Memphis is principal city in Shelby County and the largest city in Tennessee. According to the 2010 U.S.
Census, the Memphis assessment area had a total population of 181,811, representing approximately 20 percent
of the total population in Shelby County. The population in the assessment area is growing faster than Shelby
County as a whole, increasing by almost 19 percent between 2000 and 2010, while Shelby County grew by
about 3.4 percent.163
For purposes of classifying borrower income, this evaluation uses the Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) estimated median family income for the relevant area. The following table sets forth the
estimated median family income for 2011 and 2012 for the Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA and also provides a
breakdown of the estimated annual family income for each income category (low, moderate, middle, and
upper). The table indicates that the HUD estimated median family income for the Memphis area increased from
$58,300 in 2011 to $59,100 in 2012.
Demographic Characteristics by Census Tract
The following tables based on 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census and 2012 Dun & Bradstreet data present key
demographic and business information used to help develop a performance context for the assessment area.
The first table presents 2000 census data that is used for the 2011 lending analysis and the second table presents
the 2010 census data that is used for the 2012 lending analysis.
As shown, the assessment area lost its only low-income tract between 2000 and 2010, though the percentage of
moderate income tracts increased from 3.2 percent to 5.4 percent. The total number of housing units in
moderate income tracts increased from 1,045 in 2000 to 3,395 in 2010, an increase of 225 percent, while the
number of housing units in middle-income tracts increased by 87 percent. The number of units in upper-income
tracts was almost unchanged and the share of vacant housing units increased across all income categories.
163
U.S. Census Bureau, Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on January 30, 2013); available from http://www.policymap.com
0 - 49.99% 50% - 79.99% 80% - 119.99% 120% - & above
2011 $58,300 0 - $29,149 $29,150 - $46,639 $46,640 - $69,959 $69,960 - & above
2012 $59,100 0 - $29,549 $29,550 - $47,279 $47,280 - $70,919 $70,920 - & above
Borrower Income Levels
Memphis, TN-MS-AR MSA
HUD Estimated Median
Family Income
Low Moderate Middle Upper
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
161
U.S. Census data indicates that there were 77,266 housing units in the assessment area in 2010, of which 65.1
percent were owner-occupied, 26.5 percent were rental units, and 8.5 percent were vacant. In the moderate-
income tracts, only 50 percent of housing units were owner-occupied and the median age was twice the median
age for the assessment area overall. These factors indicate that lending opportunities may be limited in the
moderate-income tracts.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
162
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
3.2
113
0.3
82
72.6
3,123
7.0
Moderate-income
1
3.2
705
1.6
47
6.7
4,486
10.0
Middle-income
4
12.9
4,727
10.5
226
4.8
6,764
15.1
Upper-income
24
77.4
39,263
87.6
817
2.1
30,435
67.9
Unknown-income
1
3.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
31
100.0
44,808
100.0
1,172
2.6
44,808
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
166
6
0.0
3.6
135
81.3
25
15.1
Moderate-income
1,045
779
1.6
74.5
222
21.2
44
4.2
Middle-income
8,362
5,512
11.5
65.9
2,456
29.4
394
4.7
Upper-income
58,526
41,504
86.8
70.9
14,551
24.9
2,471
4.2
Unknown-income
2
2
0.0
100.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
68,101
47,803
100.0
70.2
17,364
25.5
2,934
4.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
0.0
4
0.0
0
0.0
2
0.4
Moderate-income
86
0.6
79
0.6
5
0.5
2
0.4
Middle-income
814
6.0
744
6.1
41
4.1
29
5.7
Upper-income
12,675
92.7
11,262
92.6
941
93.8
472
92.7
Unknown-income
97
0.7
77
0.6
16
1.6
4
0.8
Total Assessment Area
13,678
100.0
12,166
100.0
1,003
100.0
509
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
88.9
7.3
3.7
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
5
5.4
4
4.5
0
0.0
1
50.0
Upper-income
84
90.3
81
92.0
2
66.7
1
50.0
Unknown-income
4
4.3
3
3.4
1
33.3
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
93
100.0
88
100.0
3
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
94.6
3.2
2.2
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
163
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
4,485
9.6
Moderate-income
2
5.4
1,995
4.3
489
24.5
5,331
11.4
Middle-income
7
18.9
7,901
16.9
442
5.6
7,211
15.4
Upper-income
26
70.3
36,978
78.9
1,164
3.1
29,847
63.7
Unknown-income
2
5.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
37
100.0
46,874
100.0
2,095
4.5
46,874
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
3,395
1,701
3.4
50.1
1,442
42.5
252
7.4
Middle-income
15,621
7,778
15.5
49.8
6,100
39.0
1,743
11.2
Upper-income
58,250
40,811
81.2
70.1
12,907
22.2
4,532
7.8
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
77,266
50,290
100.0
65.1
20,449
26.5
6,527
8.4
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
271
2.1
247
2.1
11
1.1
13
2.9
Middle-income
1,327
10.1
1,206
10.3
75
7.5
46
10.2
Upper-income
11,442
87.2
10,155
87.0
897
90.0
390
86.3
Unknown-income
80
0.6
63
0.5
14
1.4
3
0.7
Total Assessment Area
13,120
100.0
11,671
100.0
997
100.0
452
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
89.0
7.6
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
7
7.1
7
7.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
89
90.8
86
91.5
2
66.7
1
100.0
Unknown-income
2
2.0
1
1.1
1
33.3
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
98
100.0
94
100.0
3
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
95.9
3.1
1.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
164
Housing Characteristics
The economic downturn took a heavy toll on the housing market in Memphis. According to the National
Association of Realtors, the median home price for the Memphis MSA only recently started to recover. In
2012, the median home price was $117,200.164
Home prices are much lower in Shelby County than the greater
Memphis MSA. According to the Memphis Area Association of Realtors, the median home price in Shelby
County in 2012 was $82,900, which was almost 2% below the median sales price in 2011.165
The Memphis Area Association of Realtors reported that the home sales market in the region is soft, though
showed signs of improvement in 2012 and certain subareas within the county are recovering at a much faster
rate. However, foreclosures are still a big drag on the market, and in 2012, bank sales represented 28 percent of
all home sales.166
New home construction in Memphis slowed significantly during the housing crisis,
bottoming out in 2011. Construction activity picked up in 2012 and most of the new development in Shelby
County is occurring in new subdivisions outside the city of Memphis.167
The foreclosure crisis had a severe impact on the Memphis housing market though foreclosures appear to be
slowing. The percent of seriously delinquent mortgages in the assessment area (defined as more than 90 days
past due or in foreclosure) fell from 9.7 percent in January 2011 to 8.9 percent in December 2012 but remains
well above the rate statewide of 5.5 percent. While delinquencies are improving, Zillow.com reports that at
least 40 percent of homeowners in Memphis are still underwater with their mortgage. Therefore, foreclosure is
still a risk in the assessment area. In addition, many homeowners are lacking the equity needed for any type of
borrowing.168
Memphis is considered a relatively affordable region, yet housing costs are a challenge for many homeowners
and renters. For instance, 31 percent of homeowners and 53 percent of renters in Shelby County are considered
cost-burdened, meaning that homeownership or rental costs account for more than 30 percent of household
income. The lowest income renters in the county are the most likely to be cost burdened.169
The 2013 Out of
Reach study by the National Low Income Housing Coalition confirms housing affordability is a problem,
finding that a minimum wage worker would have to work 2 jobs (assuming 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a
year) in order to afford the fair market rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in the Memphis MSA.170
Employment and Economic Conditions
Memphis is a center for distribution and logistics, and is known as “America’s Aerotropolis.” According to the
Greater Memphis Chamber, an aerotropolis is a city or an economic hub that extends out from a large airport
into a surrounding area that consists mostly of distribution centers, office buildings, light manufacturing firms,
164
National Association of Realtors. “Metropolitan Median Area Prices and Affordability” (accessed on November 5, 2012);
available from: http://www.realtor.org/sites/default/files/reports/2012/embargoes/2012-q1-metro-home-prices-
49bc10b1efdc1b8cc3eb66dbcdad55f7/metro-home-prices-q1-single-family-2012-05-09.pdf 165
Memphis Area Association of Realtors. “December 2012 Report.” (accessed on July 17, 2013); available at:
http://www.maar.org/assets/1151/sales_stats_december_2012.pdf 166
Memphis Area Association of Realtors, Market Reports. (accessed on February 7, 2013); available at:
http://www.maar.org/assets/1151/sales_stats_december_2012.pdf 167
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Memphis, Tennessee-
Mississippi-Arkansas, April 1,2012” (accessed February 8, 2013); available at: 168
Zillow.com. Negative Equity Report. (accessed on July 17, 2013); available at: http://www.zillow.com/visuals/negative-
equity/#11/35.1390/-90.0175 169
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on June 5, 2013); available at: http://www.policymap.com 170
National Low Income Housing Coalition. “Out of Reach 2013.” (accessed on June 27, 2013); available at:
http://nlihc.org/oor/2013
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
165
convention centers, and hotels, all linked to the airport via roads, expressways, and rail lines.171
The Memphis
Airport is the world’s busiest airport in terms of cargo tonnage and 98 percent of the cargo is handled by Fed
Ex, the region’s largest employer with 31,000 employees.172
The Memphis economy is fairly diverse and three Fortune 500 companies (Fed Ex, International Paper and
AutoZone) are headquartered in the city.173
The area is also home to First Tennessee Bank, giving it a
significant banking presence. There are employment concentrations in multiple industry sectors, including
wholesale and retail trade; government; education and health services; professional and business services; and
transportation and utilities. In addition to the three Fortune 500 companies, other major employers include
Methodist Healthcare, Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, Wal-Mart, University of Tennessee Health
Science Center, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and First Horizon National Corporation.174
Small businesses play an important role in the Memphis economy. According to 2012 D&B information, there
were 13,120 businesses within the Memphis assessment area, of which 89 percent had total annual revenues less
than or equal to $1 million, and were therefore considered to be small businesses.175
Access to credit for small
businesses declined during the recession though conditions appear to be improving modestly. In the assessment
area, small business lending to firms with revenues $1.0 million or less fell by 73 percent between 2007 and
2010 before beginning to stabilize in 2011. Small business lending remains well below 50 percent of peak
lending levels.176
Memphis was hit hard by the recession. Between 2007 and 2010, there was job loss in many sectors, with the
largest declines in manufacturing, construction, financial and information services. The only sectors that have
not lost employment are education and health services, which steadily grew even during the recession.177
Unemployment in the region peaked in 2010. Over the review period, the unemployment rate in Shelby County
fell from 10.1 percent to 9.1 percent, though remains well above the state and national unemployment rate. A
community contact stated that in some of the poorest neighborhoods in Memphis the unemployment rate may
be as high as 50 percent, indicating there is great disparity in the economic conditions within the region.
171
Greater Memphis Chamber. (accessed on February 8, 2013); available at: http://www.memphischamber.com/Economic-
Development/Aerotropolis.aspx 172
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Memphis, Tennessee-
Mississippi-Arkansas, April 1,2012” (accessed February 8, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/PDF/MemphisTN_comp.pdf 173
CNNMoney.com. “Fortune 500 2011: States: Tennessee Companies “ (accessed on February 8, 2013); available at:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/states/TN.html 174
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Memphis, Tennessee-
Mississippi-Arkansas, April 1,2012” (accessed February 8, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/PDF/MemphisTN_comp.pdf 175
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 176
FRB Atlanta Calculations of Dun & Bradstreet, 2010 American Community Survey data. 177
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Economy at a Glance, Memphis TN-AR-MS. (accessed on February 10, 2013); available at:
http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.tn_memphis_msa.htm
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
166
The Memphis region is recovering, but it is happening slowly. The number of jobs in the MSA remains well
below the peak of 640,800 recorded in 2007.178
In December 2012, Memphis ranked 54th in the Brookings
Institute Metro Monitor index of economic recovery, which considers the pace of recovery in the 100 largest
metro economies based on job creation, unemployment rate, metro economic output and housing prices.179
The
combination of the foreclosure crisis and elevated unemployment rates continue to limit economic growth in the
region, particularly in lower income communities.
According to a small business community contact, Memphis has always been considered a low wage
environment. Therefore, while new job creation is needed, there is concern about the quality of jobs, and the
likelihood that many of the new jobs will be low-skilled and low wage jobs, which won’t significantly help low-
and moderate-income individuals build their financial stability.
Competition
First Tennessee Bank, based in Memphis, is the dominant financial institution in the Memphis market, holding
almost 36 percent of all deposits as of the June 30, 2012 FDIC Summary of Deposits Report. IBERIABANK
has a very small presence in the market, holding less than 1 percent of total deposits. Overall, there are 36
banks active in the market operating 251 branches.
HMDA lending is competitive in Memphis with 283 HMDA lenders in the market in 2012. Wells Fargo is the
dominant lender, reporting 17 percent of HMDA loans in 2011 and 22 percent of loans in 2012. IBERIABANK
Mortgage ranked 8th
and IBERIABANK ranked 47th
in 2011 with IBERIABANK Mortgage reporting
approximately 2.9 percent of total HMDA loans. IBERIABANK Mortgage again ranked 8th
in 2012 and
IBERIABANK ranked 52nd
with IBERIABANK Mortgage reporting 3.0 percent of total HMDA loans.
American Express is the leader in CRA lending in Memphis, followed by Regions Bank. IBERIABANK
ranked 17th
in 2011 and 2012 with less than 1 percent of total CRA loans in both years.
178
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. “Memphis, Tennessee-
Mississippi-Arkansas, April 1,2012” (accessed February 8, 2013); available at:
http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/PDF/MemphisTN_comp.pdf 179
Brookings Institute, Metro Monitor 2012. (accessed on February 10, 2013); available at;
http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/metromonitor#M32820-recovery-overall-mv
2011 2012
Shelby Co. 10.1 9.1
Memphis MSA 10.0 9.0
Tennessee 9.3 8.0
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment Rates
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
AreaYears - Annualized
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
167
Community Development Opportunities
Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Stabilization
The recession, coupled with the housing and foreclosure crisis, has had a significant impact on low- and
moderate-income communities in the Memphis region. Memphis has long struggled with concentrated poverty,
particularly in majority minority neighborhoods. In these communities, the impact of the recession has been
hardest and the recovery has been the slowest. It’s estimated that African American households have lost two
decades of economic gains as a result of subprime lending, the foreclosure crisis, and job loss. Black middle-
class neighborhoods that were beginning to stabilize have seen home prices plummet and housing vacancies
increase, leading to increases in crime and other challenges. Memphis is a city of neighborhoods with many
active community development organizations that have been working for years to revitalize distressed
communities. However, the recession has created a crisis of an entirely different magnitude and it will take
years for these neighborhoods to recover, if they ever do.180
Affordable housing is one of the biggest problems in Memphis. According to a housing needs assessment
conducted by the Tennessee Housing Development Agency in 2012, over one third of the households in
Memphis had a serious housing problem (substandard housing or paying more than 35 percent of their income).
In addition, Shelby County had the second highest percentage of households (homeowners and renters) in the
state that were considered cost burdened. Finally, foreclosures have increased significantly and almost 30
percent of the foreclosure filings in Tennessee in the past 3 years have occurred in Shelby County.181
To aid communities impacted by foreclosures, the federal government created the Neighborhood Stabilization
Program (NSP) in late 2008. To date, through two rounds of NSP funding, $20.8 million has been awarded to
the city of Memphis and Shelby County. The funds have been used to purchase and renovate foreclosed homes
for rental or resale, to rehabilitate multi-family housing and for the removal of blighted properties.182
Financial
and homeownership counseling are critical to the success of the neighborhood stabilization efforts since many
low- and moderate-income individuals are not considered creditworthy by traditional banking institutions.
Community Development Capacity
Memphis has a very well established network of community based organizations that are engaged in affordable
housing, neighborhood stabilization and small business initiatives. There are nine Community Housing
Development Organizations in the city working on affordable housing development and rehabilitation. Many of
these organizations also provide financing and homeownership counseling and are potential partners for bank
CRA activities.183
While there is an active nonprofit network in Memphis, many of the organizations are struggling to recover
from the recession and the sequestration cuts have further impacted their ability to provide needed services. A
community contact noted that operating support for nonprofits was one of the biggest needs in the community.
The contact also noted that alternative sources of financing, like CDFIs, might be better able to bridge the
180
New York Times. May 30, 2010. “Blacks in Memphis Lose Decades of Economic Gains” (accessed on February 11, 2013);
available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/business/economy/31memphis.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 181
Tennessee Housing Development Agency. Tennessee Housing Needs Assessment, September 2012. (accessed on February 11,
2013); available at: http://www.thda.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/2819 182
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Neighborhood Stabilization Program Resource Exchange. (accessed on
February 11, 2013); available at: https://hudnsphelp.info/index.cfm 183
Memphis Nonprofit Housing Development Center. (accessed on February 11, 2013); available at:
http://www.memphistn.gov/chdo/index.html
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
168
funding gap for nonprofits that are not always considered a good credit risk for a bank. The contact did indicate
that overall, banks are good partners for community development activities, though rarely take a leadership role,
and are not very creative in developing solutions to meet community needs.
Small Business and Economic Development
Small businesses in Memphis were negatively impacted by the recession, and as result, access to bank credit has
diminished. One small business community contact noted that declining cash flow coupled with tighter
underwriting standards has made it very difficult for small businesses to access the capital they need to survive.
A second community contact specializing in small businesses noted that more bank funding is needed to support
businesses that serve as anchor institutions and provide essential services, which help stabilize and revitalize
communities.
There are a number of community development financial institutions (CDFIs) and loan funds serving Memphis
that present opportunities for banks to invest in small businesses and economic development.
CommunnityLIFT is a relatively new community development corporation that recently created an affiliate
CDFI, the River City Capital Investment Corporation. River City Capital Investment Corporation is focused on
providing an alternative source of financing to smaller, service oriented businesses that will create jobs and
provide needed neighborhood services. The River City Capital Investment Corporation has received funding
from the U.S. Treasury and several financial institutions to start capitalizing the loan fund. In addition, Pathway
Lending, a CDFI based in Nashville, Tennessee provides small business loans in the Memphis area. Finally,
there are several other organizations that provide microenterprise loans and other types of technical assistance.
Financial Stability
Memphis ranked as the poorest large metro area (defined as a region with more than one million residents) in
the country according to the 2010 U.S. Census. The poverty rate in the MSA was 19.1 percent and in the
Memphis city limits, the poverty rate exceeded 26 percent.184
In addition, 27 percent of the population in
Shelby County received food stamps.185
In light of the many economic challenges, there is a great need for more financial education and other
household financial stability efforts targeting low- and moderate-income households. One opportunity is
increasing access to mainstream banking products. According to the FDIC’s 2011 National Survey of
Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 15.7 percent of households in the city of Memphis are unbanked,
meaning they have no type of deposit account with a mainstream financial institution. In addition, 28.1 percent
of households are considered underbanked, meaning they have a deposit account but they also rely on
alternative financial services providers on a regular basis. The unbanked are disproportionately lower income
and minority households.186
BankOn Memphis was launched in 2011 to focus on increasing access to
mainstream financial services. Twelve financial institutions are participating in this initiative by providing low-
cost basic transaction accounts.
184
The Commercial Appeal. “Census calls Memphis poorest in nation.” September 23, 2011. (accessed on February 6, 2013);
available at: http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/sep/23/census-calls-city-poorest-in-nation/ 185
U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed through PolicyMap. (accessed on October 23, 2012); available from http://www.policymap.com 186
Calculations by CFED of data from the 2009 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households. (accessed
February); available at: http://joinbankon.org/
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
169
There are a number of other opportunities for banks to participate in local initiatives focused on the financial
stability. First, there is an active network of volunteer income tax assistance (VITA) sites coordinated by the
United Way of the MidSouth in Shelby County. Second, there are opportunities to support financial education
and homeownership counseling through the large network of nonprofit and community-based organizations.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
170
CONCLUSIONS WITH RESPECT TO PERFORMANCE TESTS
Lending Test
IBERIABANK’s lending performance in the Memphis assessment area is adequate. The geographic
distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area and the distribution of
borrowers reflects adequate penetration among individuals of different income levels and businesses of different
revenue sizes. In addition, the bank makes an adequate level of community development loans.
There are several specific performance context factors that may help explain the bank’s lending in low- and
moderate-income communities and to low- and moderate-income borrowers. First, there are a no low-income
census tracts and a limited number moderate-income census tracts in the assessment area, and the bank has a
very small presence overall in the Memphis market. Second, as noted earlier, the housing market in Memphis
only started to recover in 2012 and mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures are still high in the assessment
area. In addition, housing values have been slow to rebound, and there are many homeowners who are still
underwater with their mortgages and do not have the equity to borrow. These factors will impact borrowers in
all communities and at all income levels, but particularly low- and moderate-income borrowers or those living
in low- and moderate-income census tracts, where the housing recovery has been weakest. As a result,
borrowers in low- and moderate-income communities and those classified as low- and moderate-income may
not have the ability to refinance their homes and are less likely to be able to borrow for home improvement
projects. These factors are taken in to consideration when determining the relative weight given to each product
type in the overall analysis of the bank’s HMDA lending.
During the review period, the bank reported 516 HMDA loans, excluding multifamily loans and 48 small
business loans in the Memphis assessment area. HMDA lending represented 91.5 percent of total lending and
small business accounted for 8.5 percent. Therefore, the performance of HMDA lending is weighted more
heavily than small business lending in determining the final lending test rating. The Memphis assessment area
contains 3.2 percent of the bank’s total HMDA lending and 0.9 percent of its total small business lending by
number of loans. In comparison, 2.0 percent of the bank’s total deposits are in this assessment area.
Details of the bank’s mortgage and small business lending and information regarding lending by peers can be
found in Appendix G and H.
Geographic Distribution of Loans
For this analysis the geographic distribution of HMDA and small business lending, including both originations
and purchases, was compared with available demographic information. Performance context information and
aggregate lending data were also taken into consideration. Considering all of these factors, IBERIABANK’s
geographic distribution of loans reflects adequate penetration throughout the assessment area. There were no
low-income tracts and just two moderate-income tracts within the Memphis assessment area, which helps
explain the bank’s geographic performance. Since there are no low-income tracts in the assessment area, loans
to low-income tracts were not included in the bank’s geographic rating.
Home Purchase Loans
Home purchase lending in moderate-income tracts is adequate. The bank did not originate any home purchase
loans in a moderate-income tract in 2011. The bank originated 1.4 percent of home purchase loans in moderate-
income tracts in 2012, which was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these tracts; the bank’s
lending was slightly less than aggregate in 2012.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
171
The bank’s home purchase lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts in 2011 and 2012, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage of
units in upper-income tracts in both years.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending in moderate-income tracts is poor. The bank did not originate any
home refinance loans in a moderate-income tract in 2011. The bank originated 0.7 percent of home refinance
loans in moderate-income tracts in 2012, which was less than the percentage of owner-occupied units in these
tracts and less than aggregate.
The bank’s home refinance lending in middle-income tracts was less than the percentage of owner-occupied
units in these tracts, while lending in upper-income tracts was greater than the percentage of units in upper-
income tracts throughout the review period.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending in moderate-income tracts is very poor. The bank’s performance
is driven by very limited home improvement loan volume over the review period (less than 2 percent of total
HMDA lending). The bank did not originate any home improvement loans in moderate-income tracts over the
review period. In 2011, there was no aggregate lending, but in 2012, 6.4 percent of aggregate lending was done
in moderate-income tracts.
The bank’s home improvement lending in middle-income tracts was greater than the percentage of owner-
occupied units in these tracts in 2011; however, the bank made no home improvement loans in middle income
tracts in 2012. The bank’s home improvement lending in upper-income tracts was similar to or greater than the
percentage of units in upper-income tracts over the review period.
Small Business Loans
IBERIABANK’s small business lending in moderate-income tracts is good. The bank originated no small
business loans in moderate-income tracts in 2011. In 2012, loans in moderate-income tracts accounted for 11.1
percent of the bank’s small business loans, which significantly exceeded the percentage of small businesses in
moderate-income tracts and the 1.5 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank made no small business loans in middle-income tracts during the review period. Small business
lending in upper-income tracts was slightly greater than the percentage of small businesses located in these
tracts in both 2011 and 2012.
Lending to Borrowers of Different Income Levels and Businesses of Different Sizes
The distribution of loans based on borrower income or business revenues in the Memphis assessment area is
poor. For this analysis, HMDA lending across borrower income levels and the distribution of small business
lending across business revenue sizes was compared to available demographic information. Performance
context issues (noted above) were also considered, as well as the performance of other banks.
Home Purchase Loans
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to low-income borrowers is adequate. The bank’s percentage of loans
to low-income borrowers was less than the percentage of low-income families in the assessment area
throughout the review period. However, the bank’s performance exceeded the aggregate for both years. In
2012, the bank originated 4.8 percent of loans to low-income borrowers compared to aggregate at 4.2 percent.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
172
The bank’s home purchase lending to moderate-income borrowers is good. The percentage of home purchase
loans to moderate-income borrowers is greater than the percentage of moderate-income families in the
assessment area over the review period. In 2011, the bank’s percentage of loans to moderate-income borrowers
was below aggregate; in 2012, the bank outperformed aggregate with 22.6 percent of home-purchase loans to
moderate-income borrowers, compared to 17.2 percent of aggregate loans.
IBERIABANK’s home purchase lending to middle-income borrowers was greater the percentage of middle-
income families, while lending to upper-income borrowers was below the percentage of upper-income families
in the assessment area throughout the review period.
Home Refinance Loans
IBERIABANK’s home refinance lending to low-income borrowers is poor. The bank did not originate any
refinance loans to low-income borrowers in 2011 compared to 2.0 percent of aggregate lending. In 2012, the
bank originated 1.4 percent of home refinance loans to low-income borrowers compared to 9.6 percent of
families classified as low-income in the assessment area; refinance loans to low-income borrowers represented
2.2 percent of aggregate loans.
The bank’s home refinance lending to moderate-income borrowers is adequate. The share of home refinance
loans to moderate-income borrowers exceeded the percentage of moderate-income families in the assessment
area and the bank outperformed the aggregate in 2011. In 2012, the bank originated 8.8 percent of home
refinance loans to moderate-income borrowers, which was less than the percentage of families classified as
moderate-income in the assessment area, but above 6.8 percent of aggregate loans to moderate-income families.
The bank’s home refinance lending to middle-income borrowers was less than the percentage of middle-income
families in the assessment area throughout the review period, while lending to upper-income borrowers was
greater than the percentage of upper-income families.
Home Improvement Loans
IBERIABANK’s home improvement lending to low and moderate-income borrowers is very poor. The bank
did not originate any home improvement loans to low or moderate-income borrowers throughout the review
period. In 2012, 4.0 percent of aggregate loans were made to low-income borrowers and 10.4 to moderate-
income borrowers.
The bank’s volume of home improvement loans in the assessment area was low in both 2011 and 2012. Home
improvement lending to middle-income borrowers was greater than the percentage of middle-income families
for both years; in 2011, the bank’s lending to upper-income families was greater than the percentage of upper-
income families but fell below in 2012.
Small Business Lending
IBERIABANK’s distribution of small business loans to businesses of different sizes is poor. The percentage of
small business loans to businesses with revenues of $1 million or less was significantly less than the percentage
of small businesses in the assessment area throughout the review period. The bank performed below the
aggregate throughout the review period as well. In 2012, 22.2 percent of the banks loans were made to small
businesses compared to 37.4 percent of aggregate loans.
Community Development Lending
IBERIABANK made an adequate level of community development loans in the Memphis assessment area. The
bank originated one community development loan totaling $1.0 million during the review period to support
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
173
community revitalization in a moderate-income tract. In addition, the bank originated a $5.0 million revolving
line of credit to a nonprofit financing intermediary that promotes economic development by lending to small
businesses in Arkansas and Tennessee that may not qualify for traditional bank financing. The loan benefits a
larger regional area that includes the Memphis assessment area.
Investment Test
IBERIABANK’s community development investment performance in the Memphis assessment area is
adequate. The bank had 9 investments totaling $1.1 million. All investments provided support for affordable
housing through the purchase of mortgage backed securities and an investment in a fund that purchased
mortgage backed securities.
The bank made 10 contributions totaling $31,500. Total contributions include $8,000 in down payment
assistance grants for low- and moderate-income homebuyers. The remaining contributions supported
community services to low- and moderate-income individuals with an emphasis on education and youth
services.
The bank’s investments and contributions are responsive to the need in the community for affordable housing.
A summary of the bank’s investments can be found in Appendix K.
Service Test
IBERIABANK’s performance under the service test in the Memphis assessment area is good. Its retail and
community development services reflect good responsiveness to the needs of the assessment area.
Retail Services
IBERIABANK’s delivery systems in the assessment area are reasonably accessible to the bank’s geographies
and individuals of different income levels. The distribution of three branch offices and four ATMs as of
December 31, 2012, was compared to the distribution of households and businesses among the tract categories
within the assessment area. The bank has no branches in low or moderate-income tracts; 4.4 percent of
households and 2.1 percent of businesses are located in moderate-income communities within the assessment
area. All of the bank’s branches are located in upper-income tracts. During the review period, the bank opened
two branches and closed one branch.
Alternative delivery systems, such as ATMs, toll-free telephone and text banking, and online banking, were also
considered in determining accessibility. Banking services and hours of operations do not vary in a way that
inconveniences the assessment area, particularly moderate-income geographies or to low- and moderate-income
individuals. IBERIABANK does offer drive through services and extended hours at two branches and weekend
hours at one branch in the Memphis assessment area. Bank products, services, and standard business hours are
consistent throughout the assessment area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Memphis, Tennessee
174
Community Development Services
IBERIABANK is a leader in providing community development services in the Memphis assessment area.
During the review period, IBERIABANK employees provided 325 service hours in various capacities for
community development organizations by participating in 12 different community development services.
Notably, board service represented approximately 77 percent of the total community development service
hours. Bank employees utilized their financial expertise with a variety of community development
organizations including a land bank, a CDFI, and several affordable housing organizations. Bank employees
also offered financial education through various community partners.
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # % % %
Low 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Middle 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper 3 100.0% 1 1 3 3 1 Total 4 100.0% 4 100.0% 1 1 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 3 100.0% 1 1 3 3 1 Total 4 100.0% 4 100.0% 1 1 0 0.0% 0 0
SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LPOS are not included in this table.
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
2 5.4% 0.0% 0.6%
37 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
7 18.9% 19.6% 10.1%
26 70.3% 75.9% 87.2%
0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
2 5.4% 4.4% 2.1%
# % # % # %
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs Cash only ATMs Census
Tracts
House
holds
Total
Businesses
2012 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix A: Scope of Examination
175
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
TIME PERIOD REVIEWED
Lending: January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012
Investments, CD Loans, and Services: January 1, 2011 to March 31, 2013
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
IBERIABANK– Lafayette, Louisiana
PRODUCTS REVIEWED
HMDA Lending & Small Business
AFFILIATE(S)
IBERIABANK Mortgage Co.
AFFILIATE RELATIONSHIP
Subsidiary
PRODUCTS REVIEWED
HMDA Lending
LIST OF ASSESSMENT AREAS AND TYPE OF EXAMINATION
ASSESSMENT
AREA
TYPE
OF EXAMINATION
BRANCHES
VISITED
OTHER
INFORMATION
ALABAMA
Baldwin County Limited-Scope Review
Birmingham, MSA 13820 Full-Scope Review
Huntsville, MSA 26620 Limited-Scope Review
Mobile, MSA 33660 Limited-Scope Review
Montgomery, MSA 33860 Limited-Scope Review
ARKANSAS
Fayetteville, MSA 22220
Full-Scope Review
Jonesboro, MSA 27860
Limited-Scope Review
Little Rock, MSA 30780
Full-Scope Review
Northeast Arkansas
Limited-Scope Review
FLORIDA
Naples, MSA 34940 Full-Scope Review
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix A: Scope of Examination
176
LIST OF ASSESSMENT AREAS AND TYPE OF EXAMINATION
ASSESSMENT
AREA
TYPE
OF EXAMINATION
BRANCHES
VISITED
OTHER
INFORMATION
Sarasota, MSA 35840 Full-Scope Review
Palm Beach/Broward, MSA
48424/22744
Limited-Scope Review
Ft Myers, MSA 15980 Limited-Scope Review
Florida Keys Limited-Scope Review
LOUISIANA
Acadiana
Limited-Scope Review
Allen Limited-Scope Review
Baton Rouge, MSA 12940 Limited-Scope Review
Houma, MSA 26380 Limited-Scope Review
Lafayette, MSA 29180 Full-Scope Review
Lake Charles, MSA 29340 Limited-Scope Review
Lincoln Limited-Scope Review
Monroe, MSA 33740 Limited-Scope Review
Morehouse Limited-Scope Review
New Orleans, MSA 35380 Full-Scope Review
Shreveport, MSA 43340 Limited-Scope Review
TENNESSEE
Memphis, MSA 32820 Full-Scope Review
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix A: Scope of Examination
177
LIST OF ASSESSMENT AREAS AND TYPE OF EXAMINATION
ASSESSMENT
AREA
TYPE
OF EXAMINATION
BRANCHES
VISITED
OTHER
INFORMATION
TEXAS
Houston, MSA 26420 Full-Scope Review
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix B: Summary of State Ratings
178
State Name Lending Test
Rating
Investment
Test Rating
Service Test
Rating
Overall State
Rating
Alabama High
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory
Low
Satisfactory Satisfactory
Arkansas High
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory Satisfactory
Florida Low
Satisfactory
Low
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory Satisfactory
Louisiana High
Satisfactory Outstanding
High
Satisfactory Satisfactory
Tennessee Low
Satisfactory
Low
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory Satisfactory
Texas High
Satisfactory
High
Satisfactory
Low
Satisfactory Satisfactory
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix C: Abbreviations and Definitions
179
Abbreviations
AHP - Affordable Housing Program
ATM - Automated Teller Machine
CDC - Community Development Corporation
CDFI - Community Development Financial Institution
CRA - Community Reinvestment Act (Regulation BB)
FDIC - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
FFIEC - Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
HMDA - Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (Regulation C)
HUD - Department of Housing and Urban Development
LMI - Low- and Moderate-Income
LIHTC - Low Income Housing Tax Credit
LTD - Loan-to-Deposit
LTV - Loan-to-Value Ratio
MD - Metropolitan Division
MSA - Metropolitan Statistical Area
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
REIS - Regional Economic Information System
SBA - Small Business Administration
USDA - United States Department of Agriculture
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix C: Abbreviations and Definitions
180
Performance Definitions Regarding Lending
Excellent - This rating is assigned to an institution with lending performance that substantially
exceeds the characteristics of demographic data and aggregate performance.
Good - This rating is assigned to an institution with lending performance that exceeds the
characteristics of demographic data and aggregate performance.
Adequate - This rating is assigned to an institution with lending performance that is comparable to
the characteristics of demographic data and aggregate performance.
Poor - This rating is assigned to an institution with lending performance that is significantly
below the characteristics of demographic data and aggregate performance.
Consistent - This term is used to describe the performance of an institution in an assessment area
reviewed not using full-scope procedures when the performance is comparable to the
performance in the state overall.
*Not Consistent - This term is used to describe the performance of an institution in an assessment area
reviewed not using full-scope procedures when the performance is not comparable to the
performance in the state overall.
*A “not consistent” rating only illustrates the performance of an assessment area in comparison to the
performance in the state as a whole. It does not necessarily indicate that the performance is less than
satisfactory.
Rounding Convention
Because the percentages presented in tables were rounded to the nearest tenth in most cases, some columns may
not total exactly 100 percent.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix D: Glossary
181
Aggregate lending: The number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders in specified income
categories as a percentage of the aggregate number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders in
the metropolitan area/assessment area.
Census tract: A small subdivision of metropolitan and other densely populated counties. Census tract
boundaries do not cross county lines; however, they may cross the boundaries of metropolitan statistical areas.
Census tracts usually have between 2,500 and 8,000 persons, and their physical size varies widely depending
upon population density. Census tracts are designed to be homogeneous with respect to population
characteristics, economic status, and living conditions to allow for statistical comparisons.
Community development: All Agencies have adopted the following language. Affordable housing (including
multi-family rental housing) for low- or moderate-income individuals; community services targeted to low- or
moderate-income individuals; activities that promote economic development by financing businesses or farms
that meet the size eligibility standards of the Small Business Administration’s Development Company or Small
Business Investment Company programs (13 CFR 121.301) or have gross annual revenues of $1 million or less;
or, activities that revitalize or stabilize low- or moderate-income geographies.
Effective September 1, 2005, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have adopted the following additional language
as part of the revitalize or stabilize definition of community development. Activities that revitalize or stabilize-
I. Low-or moderate-income geographies;
II. Designated disaster areas; or
III. Distressed or underserved nonmetropolitan middle-income geographies designated by the Board,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, based on-
a. Rates of poverty, unemployment, and population loss; or
b. Population size, density, and dispersion. Activities that revitalize and stabilize
geographies designated based on population size, density, and dispersion if they help to
meet essential community needs, including needs of low- and moderate-income
individuals.
Effective January 19, 2010, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation revised the definition of
community development to include loans, investments, and services by financial institutions that-
I. Support, enable or facilitate projects or activities that meet the “eligible uses” criteria described
in Section 2301(c) of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), Public Law
110-289, 122 Stat. 2654, as amended, and are conducted in designated target areas identified in
plans approved by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development in
accordance with the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP);
II. Are provided no later than two years after the last date funds appropriated for the NSP are
required to be spent by grantees; and
III. Benefit low-, moderate-, and middle-income individuals and geographies in the bank's
assessment area(s) or areas outside the bank's assessment area(s) provided the bank has
adequately addressed the community development needs of its assessment area(s).
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix D: Glossary
182
Consumer loan(s): A loan(s) to one or more individuals for household, family, or other personal expenditures.
A consumer loan does not include a home mortgage, small business, or small farm loan. This definition
includes the following categories: motor vehicle loans, credit card loans, home equity loans, other secured
consumer loans, and other unsecured consumer loans.
Family: Includes a householder and one or more other persons living in the same household who are related to
the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. The number of family households always equals the number of
families; however, a family household may also include nonrelatives living with the family. Families are
classified by type as either a married-couple family or other family, which is further classified into ‘male
householder’ (a family with a male householder and no wife present) or ‘female householder’ (a family with a
female householder and no husband present).
Full-scope review: Performance under the Lending, Investment, and Service Tests is analyzed considering
performance context, quantitative factors (for example, geographic distribution, borrower distribution, and total
number and dollar amount of investments), and qualitative factors (for example, innovativeness, complexity,
and responsiveness).
Geography: A census tract delineated by the United States Bureau of the Census in the most recent decennial
census.
Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA): The statute that requires certain mortgage lenders that do business
or have banking offices in a metropolitan statistical area to file annual summary reports of their mortgage
lending activity. The reports include such data as the race, gender, and the income of applications, the amount
of loan requested, and the disposition of the application (for example, approved, denied, and withdrawn).
Home mortgage loans: Includes home purchase and home improvement loans as defined in the HMDA
regulation. This definition also includes multi-family (five or more families) dwelling loans, loans for the
purchase of manufactured homes and refinancing of home improvement and home purchase loans.
Household: Includes all persons occupying a housing unit. Persons not living in households are classified as
living in group quarters. In 100 percent tabulations, the count of households always equals the count of
occupied housing units.
Limited-scope review: Performance under the Lending, Investment, and Service Tests is analyzed using only
quantitative factors (for example, geographic distribution, borrower distribution, total number and dollar
amount of investments and branch distribution).
Low-income: Individual income that is less than 50 percent of the area median income, or a median family
income that is less than 50 percent, in the case of geography.
Market share: The number of loans originated and purchased by the institution as a percentage of the
aggregate number of loans originated and purchased by all reporting lenders in the metropolitan area/assessment
area.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix D: Glossary
183
Metropolitan area (MA): A metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or a metropolitan division (MD) as defined
by the Office of Management and Budget. An MSA is a core area containing at least one urbanized area of
50,000 or more inhabitants, together with adjacent communities having a high degree of economic and social
integration with that core. An MD is a division of an MSA based on specific criteria including commuting
patterns. Only an MSA that has a population of at least 2.5 million may be divided into MDs.
Middle-income: Individual income that is at least 80 percent and less than 120 percent of the area median
income, or a median family income that is at least 80 percent and less than 120 percent, in the case of a
geography.
Moderate-income: Individual income that is at least 50 percent and less than 80 percent of the area median
income, or a median family income that is at least 50 percent and less than 80 percent, in the case of a
geography.
Multi-family: Refers to a residential structure that contains five or more units.
Other products: Includes any unreported optional category of loans for which the institution collects and
maintains data for consideration during a CRA examination. Examples of such activity include consumer loans
and other loan data an institution may provide concerning its lending performance.
Owner-occupied units: Includes units occupied by the owner or co-owner, even if the unit has not been fully
paid for or is mortgaged.
Qualified investment: A qualified investment is defined as any lawful investment, deposit, membership share,
or grant that has as its primary purpose community development.
Rated area: A rated area is a state or multistate metropolitan area. For an institution with domestic branches
in only one state, the institution’s CRA rating would be the state rating. If an institution maintains domestic
branches in more than one state, the institution will receive a rating for each state in which those branches are
located. If an institution maintains domestic branches in two or more states within a multistate metropolitan
area, the institution will receive a rating for the multistate metropolitan area.
Small loan(s) to business(es): A loan included in 'loans to small businesses' as defined in the Consolidated
Report of Condition and Income (Call Report) and the Thrift Financial Reporting (TFR) instructions. These
loans have original amounts of $1 million or less and typically are either secured by nonfarm or nonresidential
real estate or are classified as commercial and industrial loans. However, thrift institutions may also exercise
the option to report loans secured by nonfarm residential real estate as "small business loans" if the loans are
reported on the TFR as nonmortgage, commercial loans.
Small loan(s) to farm(s): A loan included in ‘loans to small farms’ as defined in the instructions for
preparation of the Consolidated Report of Condition and Income (Call Report). These loans have original
amounts of $500,000 or less and are either secured by farmland, or are classified as loans to finance agricultural
production and other loans to farmers.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix D: Glossary
184
Upper-income: Individual income that is more than 120 percent of the area median income, or a median
family income that is more than 120 percent, in the case of a geography.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix E: General Information
185
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requires each federal financial supervisory agency to use its authority
when examining financial institutions subject to its supervision to assess the institution’s record of meeting the
credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe
and sound operation of the institution. Upon conclusion of such examination, the agency must prepare a written
evaluation of the institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community.
This document is an evaluation of the CRA performance of IBERIABANK prepared by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Atlanta, the institution’s supervisory agency, as of August 5, 2013. The agency rates the CRA
performance of an institution consistent with the provisions set forth in Appendix A to 12 CFR Part 228.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix F: Institution Tables
186
Loan Type # % $(000s) %
Total Consumer related 0 0 0
Home Improvement 620 -- $17,750 --
Home Purchase 3,523 -- $582,407 --
Multi-Family Housing 40 -- $53,186 --
Refinancing 2,831 -- $558,825 --
Total HMDA related 7,014 73 $1,212,168 68
Small Business 2,490 -- $534,103 --
Total Small Business related 2,490 26 $534,103 30
Small Farm 186 -- $19,135 --
Total Small Farm related 186 2 $19,135 1
TOTAL LOANS 9,690 100 $1,765,406 100
2011 Summary of Lending Activity
Note: Affiliate loans include only loans originated or purchased within the bank's assessment areas.
Loan Type # % $(000s) %
Total Consumer related 0 0 $0 0
Home Improvement 934 -- $17,535 --
Home Purchase 4,595 -- $818,656 --
Multi-Family Housing 51 -- $76,682 --
Refinancing 4,356 -- $874,001 --
Total HMDA related 9,936 74 $1,786,874 72
Small Business 3,368 -- $691,530 --
Total Small Business related 3,368 25 $691,530 28
Small Farm 166 -- $19,478 --
Total Small Farm related 166 1 $19,478 1
TOTAL LOANS 13,470 100 $2,497,882 100
2012 Summary of Lending Activity
Note: Affiliate loans include only loans originated or purchased within the bank's assessment areas.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix F: Institution Tables
187
O pen Closed O pen Closed O pen Closed
# # # # # # # # % # # # %
Low 3 1.8% 0 0 3 1 1 Total 4 2.0% 4 2.2% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Moderate 13 7.6% 5 4 12 7 7 Total 18 9.0% 15 8.4% 6 4 3 13.6% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 4 1 0 0 3 0 0
Middle 84 49.1% 17 3 74 44 27 Total 92 46.0% 83 46.6% 18 2 9 40.9% 0 1
DTO 1 0 0 1 SA 5 0 0 0 5 0 0
Upper 71 41.5% 21 3 61 25 20 Total 86 43.0% 76 42.7% 23 2 10 45.5% 0 1
DTO 5 4 0 5 SA 11 4 0 0 7 0 0
Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0
DTO 0 0 0 SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 171 100.0% 43 10 150 77 55 Total 200 100.0% 178 100.0% 47 8 22 100.0% 0 2
DTO 6 4 0 6 SA 21 6 0 0 15 0 0
DTO - Drive thru only is a subset of total branches.
2011 Geographic Distribution of Branches & ATMS
Closed branches/ATMs are not included in the totals. SA = Stand Alone ATM; a subset of total ATMs
864 28.4%
14 0.5%
3,039 100.0%
252 8.3%
757 24.9%
1152 37.9%
Cash only ATMs
Census Tracts
# % # % # %
Tract
Category
Branches ATMs Demographics
Total BranchesDrive
thrus
Extend-
ed
Hours
Week-
end
Hours
Total ATMs Full Service ATMs
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
188
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 3 7.7% $378 4.3% 22.8% 3 7.7% 7.7% $378 4.3% 4.2%
Middle 7 17.9% $893 10.2% 40.9% 7 17.9% 43.2% $893 10.2% 35.0%
Upper 29 74.4% $7,500 85.5% 33.9% 29 74.4% 48.5% $7,500 85.5% 60.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 39 100.0% $8,771 100.0% 100.0% 39 100.0% 100.0% $8,771 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.8% 0 0.0% 6.7% $0 0.0% 3.8%
Middle 8 17.8% $1,593 11.3% 40.9% 8 17.8% 37.5% $1,593 11.3% 30.4%
Upper 37 82.2% $12,495 88.7% 33.9% 37 82.2% 55.2% $12,495 88.7% 65.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 45 100.0% $14,088 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $14,088 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.8% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 1 25.0% $20 36.4% 22.8% 1 25.0% 11.0% $20 36.4% 6.3%
Middle 1 25.0% $3 5.5% 40.9% 1 25.0% 31.6% $3 5.5% 30.0%
Upper 2 50.0% $32 58.2% 33.9% 2 50.0% 26.6% $32 58.2% 58.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 30.0% $0 0.0% 5.4%
Total 4 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 14.6% 0 0.0% 11.9% $0 0.0% 3.8%
Moderate 1 25.0% $583 24.1% 23.3% 1 25.0% 28.4% $583 24.1% 10.0%
Middle 1 25.0% $388 16.0% 31.0% 1 25.0% 37.3% $388 16.0% 50.5%
Upper 2 50.0% $1,452 59.9% 31.1% 2 50.0% 17.9% $1,452 59.9% 35.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.5% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 4 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 5 5.4% $981 3.9% 22.8% 5 5.4% 7.4% $981 3.9% 4.2%
Middle 17 18.5% $2,877 11.4% 40.9% 17 18.5% 39.5% $2,877 11.4% 32.7%
Upper 70 76.1% $21,479 84.8% 33.9% 70 76.1% 50.9% $21,479 84.8% 62.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 92 100.0% $25,337 100.0% 100.0% 92 100.0% 100.0% $25,337 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
189
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 2.6% $138 1.6% 21.5% 1 2.6% 10.3% $138 1.6% 5.2%
Moderate 6 15.4% $655 7.5% 17.3% 6 15.4% 22.8% $655 7.5% 16.5%
Middle 4 10.3% $414 4.7% 20.2% 4 10.3% 20.8% $414 4.7% 19.6%
Upper 26 66.7% $6,958 79.3% 41.0% 26 66.7% 29.4% $6,958 79.3% 43.2%
Unknown 2 5.1% $606 6.9% 0.0% 2 5.1% 16.7% $606 6.9% 15.4%
Total 39 100.0% $8,771 100.0% 100.0% 39 100.0% 100.0% $8,771 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.2% $95 0.7% 21.5% 1 2.2% 4.9% $95 0.7% 2.4%
Moderate 2 4.4% $272 1.9% 17.3% 2 4.4% 13.1% $272 1.9% 8.5%
Middle 4 8.9% $703 5.0% 20.2% 4 8.9% 18.6% $703 5.0% 15.0%
Upper 27 60.0% $10,463 74.3% 41.0% 27 60.0% 41.5% $10,463 74.3% 53.8%
Unknown 11 24.4% $2,555 18.1% 0.0% 11 24.4% 21.8% $2,555 18.1% 20.3%
Total 45 100.0% $14,088 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $14,088 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 25.0% $20 36.4% 21.5% 1 25.0% 18.2% $20 36.4% 4.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 24.0% $0 0.0% 14.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.2% 0 0.0% 23.6% $0 0.0% 22.6%
Upper 3 75.0% $35 63.6% 41.0% 3 75.0% 29.7% $35 63.6% 50.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.6% $0 0.0% 7.7%
Total 4 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 4 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 0.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 100.0%
Total 4 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $2,423 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 3.3% $253 1.0% 21.5% 3 3.3% 7.8% $253 1.0% 3.5%
Moderate 8 8.7% $927 3.7% 17.3% 8 8.7% 17.6% $927 3.7% 11.5%
Middle 8 8.7% $1,117 4.4% 20.2% 8 8.7% 19.7% $1,117 4.4% 16.5%
Upper 56 60.9% $17,456 68.9% 41.0% 56 60.9% 35.9% $17,456 68.9% 48.1%
Unknown 17 18.5% $5,584 22.0% 0.0% 17 18.5% 18.9% $5,584 22.0% 20.4%
Total 92 100.0% $25,337 100.0% 100.0% 92 100.0% 100.0% $25,337 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
2011
Bank Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
190
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 20 14.9% $7,056 23.3% 7.7% 20 14.9% 9.3% $7,056 23.3% 13.8%
Moderate 12 9.0% $1,123 3.7% 15.4% 12 9.0% 11.0% $1,123 3.7% 12.1%
Middle 31 23.1% $9,140 30.2% 36.5% 31 23.1% 28.7% $9,140 30.2% 25.8%
Upper 71 53.0% $12,974 42.8% 40.4% 71 53.0% 48.9% $12,974 42.8% 47.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 134 100.0% $30,293 100.0% 100.0% 134 100.0% 100.0% $30,293 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 51 38.1% $10,955 36.2% 51 38.1% 38.5% $10,955 36.2% 35.5%
Over $1 Million 51 38.1% $12,941 42.7% 51 38.1%
Total Rev. available 102 76.2% $23,896 78.9% 102 76.2%
Rev. Not Known 32 23.9% $6,397 21.1% 32 23.9%
Total 134 100.0% $30,293 100.0% 134 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 60 44.8% $3,021 10.0% 60 44.8% 90.2% $3,021 10.0% 30.5%
$100,001 - $250,000 35 26.1% $6,547 21.6% 35 26.1% 4.6% $6,547 21.6% 15.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 39 29.1% $20,725 68.4% 39 29.1% 5.2% $20,725 68.4% 53.5%
Total 134 100.0% $30,293 100.0% 134 100.0% 100.0% $30,293 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 22 43.1% $1,079 9.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 14 27.5% $2,635 24.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 15 29.4% $7,241 66.1%
Total 51 100.0% $10,955 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
90.4%
6.0%
96.4%
3.6%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
191
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 6 1.0% $1,065 1.2% 3.5% 6 1.0% 1.8% $1,065 1.2% 1.4%
Middle 473 77.7% $65,447 73.7% 78.0% 473 77.7% 77.9% $65,447 73.7% 72.9%
Upper 130 21.3% $22,236 25.1% 18.3% 130 21.3% 20.1% $22,236 25.1% 25.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 609 100.0% $88,748 100.0% 100.0% 609 100.0% 100.0% $88,748 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 4 1.2% $322 0.6% 3.5% 4 1.2% 2.1% $322 0.6% 1.5%
Middle 220 68.5% $34,006 65.3% 78.0% 220 68.5% 72.5% $34,006 65.3% 68.5%
Upper 97 30.2% $17,787 34.1% 18.3% 97 30.2% 25.3% $17,787 34.1% 29.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 321 100.0% $52,115 100.0% 100.0% 321 100.0% 100.0% $52,115 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 4.7%
Middle 15 65.2% $93 19.1% 78.0% 15 65.2% 75.5% $93 19.1% 66.7%
Upper 8 34.8% $394 80.9% 18.3% 8 34.8% 20.1% $394 80.9% 28.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 23 100.0% $487 100.0% 100.0% 23 100.0% 100.0% $487 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.7% 0 0.0% 17.9% $0 0.0% 12.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.8% 0 0.0% 22.4% $0 0.0% 24.3%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 52.6% 0 0.0% 50.7% $0 0.0% 59.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.0% 0 0.0% 9.0% $0 0.0% 3.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Moderate 10 1.0% $1,387 1.0% 3.5% 10 1.0% 2.1% $1,387 1.0% 2.6%
Middle 708 74.3% $99,546 70.4% 78.0% 708 74.3% 74.9% $99,546 70.4% 70.0%
Upper 235 24.7% $40,417 28.6% 18.3% 235 24.7% 22.8% $40,417 28.6% 26.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 953 100.0% $141,350 100.0% 100.0% 953 100.0% 100.0% $141,350 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
192
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 54 8.9% $4,177 4.7% 17.2% 54 8.9% 10.5% $4,177 4.7% 5.2%
Moderate 136 22.3% $13,467 15.2% 18.0% 136 22.3% 18.8% $13,467 15.2% 12.6%
Middle 136 22.3% $18,306 20.6% 24.1% 136 22.3% 17.9% $18,306 20.6% 15.1%
Upper 281 46.1% $52,474 59.1% 40.6% 281 46.1% 36.2% $52,474 59.1% 48.7%
Unknown 2 0.3% $324 0.4% 0.0% 2 0.3% 16.6% $324 0.4% 18.4%
Total 609 100.0% $88,748 100.0% 100.0% 609 100.0% 100.0% $88,748 100.0% 100.0%
Low 9 2.8% $596 1.1% 17.2% 9 2.8% 5.3% $596 1.1% 2.4%
Moderate 40 12.5% $4,381 8.4% 18.0% 40 12.5% 11.8% $4,381 8.4% 7.2%
Middle 64 19.9% $8,201 15.7% 24.1% 64 19.9% 17.4% $8,201 15.7% 13.1%
Upper 191 59.5% $36,445 69.9% 40.6% 191 59.5% 49.8% $36,445 69.9% 60.8%
Unknown 17 5.3% $2,492 4.8% 0.0% 17 5.3% 15.7% $2,492 4.8% 16.5%
Total 321 100.0% $52,115 100.0% 100.0% 321 100.0% 100.0% $52,115 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 17.4% $20 4.1% 17.2% 4 17.4% 10.4% $20 4.1% 4.1%
Moderate 5 21.7% $26 5.3% 18.0% 5 21.7% 17.9% $26 5.3% 12.9%
Middle 5 21.7% $41 8.4% 24.1% 5 21.7% 21.9% $41 8.4% 15.9%
Upper 9 39.1% $400 82.1% 40.6% 9 39.1% 41.2% $400 82.1% 57.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.6% $0 0.0% 9.1%
Total 23 100.0% $487 100.0% 100.0% 23 100.0% 100.0% $487 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 67 7.0% $4,793 3.4% 17.2% 67 7.0% 7.8% $4,793 3.4% 3.5%
Moderate 181 19.0% $17,874 12.6% 18.0% 181 19.0% 15.1% $17,874 12.6% 9.3%
Middle 205 21.5% $26,548 18.8% 24.1% 205 21.5% 17.7% $26,548 18.8% 13.4%
Upper 481 50.5% $89,319 63.2% 40.6% 481 50.5% 43.2% $89,319 63.2% 52.5%
Unknown 19 2.0% $2,816 2.0% 0.0% 19 2.0% 16.2% $2,816 2.0% 21.4%
Total 953 100.0% $141,350 100.0% 100.0% 953 100.0% 100.0% $141,350 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
193
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 2 5.0% $220 3.6% 8.9% 2 5.0% 9.2% $220 3.6% 8.0%
Middle 34 85.0% $5,805 94.2% 70.6% 34 85.0% 64.4% $5,805 94.2% 66.5%
Upper 4 10.0% $135 2.2% 19.7% 4 10.0% 23.9% $135 2.2% 24.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.9% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 40 100.0% $6,160 100.0% 100.0% 40 100.0% 100.0% $6,160 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.4% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Middle 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 85.3% 1 100.0% 90.2% $196 100.0% 87.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 7.6% $0 0.0% 10.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $196 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
M
Count Dollar Bank Bank
2011 2011
Bank Small
Businesses
Count Dollar
Geographic Distribution of Small Business & Small Farm Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
194
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
$1 Million or Less 22 55.0% $2,017 32.7% 22 55.0% 60.5% $2,017 32.7% 73.6%
Over $1 Million 14 35.0% $3,865 62.7% 14 35.0%
Total Rev. available 36 90.0% $5,882 95.4% 36 90.0%
Rev. Not Known 4 10.0% $278 4.5% 4 10.0%
Total 40 100.0% $6,160 100.0% 40 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 24 60.0% $923 15.0% 24 60.0% 85.3% $923 15.0% 22.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 20.0% $1,462 23.7% 8 20.0% 7.6% $1,462 23.7% 20.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 8 20.0% $3,775 61.3% 8 20.0% 7.1% $3,775 61.3% 56.8%
Total 40 100.0% $6,160 100.0% 40 100.0% 100.0% $6,160 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 16 72.7% $607 30.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 4 18.2% $710 35.2%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 9.1% $700 34.7%
Total 22 100.0% $2,017 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 1 100.0% 95.3% $196 100.0% 95.0%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 1 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 86.2% $0 0.0% 42.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 1 100.0% 10.1% $196 100.0% 31.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.7% $0 0.0% 25.8%
Total 1 100.0% $196 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $196 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 100.0% $196 100.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $196 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Originations & Purchases
100.0%
Lo
an
Siz
e
0.9%
99.5%
0.5%
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Sm
all F
arm
Total Farms
Re
ve
nu
e
98.6%
Sm
all B
usin
ess
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Count
95.9%
4.1%
100.0%
%
91.2%
4.7%
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Pro
du
ct
Ty
pe Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Dollar Bank Bank
Bank Total
Businesses
Count Dollar
Small Business & Small Farm Lending By Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
195
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 0.6% $220 0.4% 3.0% 2 0.6% 1.3% $220 0.4% 1.1%
Moderate 19 5.7% $1,860 3.6% 21.5% 19 5.7% 9.1% $1,860 3.6% 4.6%
Middle 92 27.5% $11,370 21.8% 33.7% 92 27.5% 35.3% $11,370 21.8% 28.9%
Upper 222 66.3% $38,710 74.2% 41.8% 222 66.3% 54.2% $38,710 74.2% 65.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 335 100.0% $52,160 100.0% 100.0% 335 100.0% 100.0% $52,160 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.4% $24 0.1% 3.0% 1 0.4% 0.8% $24 0.1% 0.6%
Moderate 10 3.7% $594 1.3% 21.5% 10 3.7% 6.1% $594 1.3% 2.8%
Middle 74 27.1% $10,261 21.6% 33.7% 74 27.1% 27.1% $10,261 21.6% 21.4%
Upper 188 68.9% $36,560 77.1% 41.8% 188 68.9% 66.0% $36,560 77.1% 75.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 273 100.0% $47,439 100.0% 100.0% 273 100.0% 100.0% $47,439 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.2% $9 0.3% 3.0% 1 2.2% 2.3% $9 0.3% 0.3%
Moderate 4 8.9% $32 1.0% 21.5% 4 8.9% 13.5% $32 1.0% 4.9%
Middle 19 42.2% $229 7.1% 33.7% 19 42.2% 35.3% $229 7.1% 25.8%
Upper 21 46.7% $2,936 91.6% 41.8% 21 46.7% 49.0% $2,936 91.6% 69.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 45 100.0% $3,206 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $3,206 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.3% 0 0.0% 17.1% $0 0.0% 5.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 19.5% $0 0.0% 9.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 36.0% 0 0.0% 48.8% $0 0.0% 61.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 37.6% 0 0.0% 14.6% $0 0.0% 23.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 4 0.6% $253 0.2% 3.0% 4 0.6% 1.1% $253 0.2% 1.1%
Moderate 33 5.1% $2,486 2.4% 21.5% 33 5.1% 7.8% $2,486 2.4% 3.9%
Middle 185 28.3% $21,860 21.3% 33.7% 185 28.3% 31.2% $21,860 21.3% 26.6%
Upper 431 66.0% $78,206 76.1% 41.8% 431 66.0% 59.9% $78,206 76.1% 68.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 653 100.0% $102,805 100.0% 100.0% 653 100.0% 100.0% $102,805 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
196
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 29 8.7% $2,545 4.9% 21.0% 29 8.7% 8.8% $2,545 4.9% 4.4%
Moderate 67 20.0% $7,748 14.9% 16.8% 67 20.0% 18.7% $7,748 14.9% 13.6%
Middle 80 23.9% $11,453 22.0% 20.4% 80 23.9% 19.0% $11,453 22.0% 17.8%
Upper 154 46.0% $29,840 57.2% 41.9% 154 46.0% 33.1% $29,840 57.2% 45.2%
Unknown 5 1.5% $574 1.1% 0.0% 5 1.5% 20.4% $574 1.1% 18.9%
Total 335 100.0% $52,160 100.0% 100.0% 335 100.0% 100.0% $52,160 100.0% 100.0%
Low 9 3.3% $669 1.4% 21.0% 9 3.3% 3.8% $669 1.4% 1.8%
Moderate 27 9.9% $3,298 7.0% 16.8% 27 9.9% 10.6% $3,298 7.0% 6.4%
Middle 67 24.5% $7,705 16.2% 20.4% 67 24.5% 16.2% $7,705 16.2% 11.8%
Upper 158 57.9% $33,529 70.7% 41.9% 158 57.9% 46.2% $33,529 70.7% 56.9%
Unknown 12 4.4% $2,238 4.7% 0.0% 12 4.4% 23.2% $2,238 4.7% 23.1%
Total 273 100.0% $47,439 100.0% 100.0% 273 100.0% 100.0% $47,439 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.2% $26 0.8% 21.0% 1 2.2% 8.1% $26 0.8% 2.4%
Moderate 8 17.8% $103 3.2% 16.8% 8 17.8% 16.2% $103 3.2% 8.2%
Middle 13 28.9% $106 3.3% 20.4% 13 28.9% 24.4% $106 3.3% 16.8%
Upper 23 51.1% $2,971 92.7% 41.9% 23 51.1% 44.4% $2,971 92.7% 63.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.9% $0 0.0% 8.8%
Total 45 100.0% $3,206 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $3,206 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 39 6.0% $3,240 3.2% 21.0% 39 6.0% 6.2% $3,240 3.2% 2.8%
Moderate 102 15.6% $11,149 10.8% 16.8% 102 15.6% 14.5% $11,149 10.8% 9.3%
Middle 160 24.5% $19,264 18.7% 20.4% 160 24.5% 17.7% $19,264 18.7% 13.9%
Upper 335 51.3% $66,340 64.5% 41.9% 335 51.3% 40.0% $66,340 64.5% 49.2%
Unknown 17 2.6% $2,812 2.7% 0.0% 17 2.6% 21.7% $2,812 2.7% 24.7%
Total 653 100.0% $102,805 100.0% 100.0% 653 100.0% 100.0% $102,805 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
197
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 15 10.8% $2,115 7.3% 7.8% 15 10.8% 8.3% $2,115 7.3% 12.2%
Moderate 26 18.7% $6,618 22.9% 21.5% 26 18.7% 20.8% $6,618 22.9% 21.3%
Middle 39 28.1% $8,296 28.7% 32.6% 39 28.1% 29.7% $8,296 28.7% 27.8%
Upper 59 42.4% $11,841 41.0% 38.1% 59 42.4% 41.3% $11,841 41.0% 38.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 139 100.0% $28,870 100.0% 100.0% 139 100.0% 100.0% $28,870 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 43 30.9% $5,658 19.6% 43 30.9% 43.3% $5,658 19.6% 42.5%
Over $1 Million 70 50.4% $19,232 66.6% 70 50.4%
Total Rev. available 113 81.3% $24,890 86.2% 113 81.3%
Rev. Not Known 26 18.7% $3,980 13.8% 26 18.7%
Total 139 100.0% $28,870 100.0% 139 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 67 48.2% $3,417 11.8% 67 48.2% 88.7% $3,417 11.8% 25.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 38 27.3% $7,004 24.3% 38 27.3% 5.8% $7,004 24.3% 19.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 34 24.5% $18,449 63.9% 34 24.5% 5.5% $18,449 63.9% 55.2%
Total 139 100.0% $28,870 100.0% 139 100.0% 100.0% $28,870 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 30 69.8% $1,168 20.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 18.6% $1,386 24.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 11.6% $3,104 54.9%
Total 43 100.0% $5,658 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
88.6%
7.0%
95.6%
4.4%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
198
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 9.1% $112 3.3% 2.3% 2 9.1% 0.4% $112 3.3% 0.2%
Moderate 7 31.8% $603 17.5% 13.1% 7 31.8% 13.7% $603 17.5% 8.5%
Middle 10 45.5% $1,855 53.9% 48.0% 10 45.5% 51.7% $1,855 53.9% 40.2%
Upper 3 13.6% $870 25.3% 36.6% 3 13.6% 34.2% $870 25.3% 51.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 22 100.0% $3,440 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $3,440 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 1 5.6% $368 4.9% 13.1% 1 5.6% 7.3% $368 4.9% 4.6%
Middle 9 50.0% $1,677 22.5% 48.0% 9 50.0% 43.1% $1,677 22.5% 32.4%
Upper 8 44.4% $5,416 72.6% 36.6% 8 44.4% 49.2% $5,416 72.6% 62.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 18 100.0% $7,461 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $7,461 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.1% 0 0.0% 13.5% $0 0.0% 4.8%
Middle 1 25.0% $18 16.1% 48.0% 1 25.0% 51.0% $18 16.1% 55.0%
Upper 3 75.0% $94 83.9% 36.6% 3 75.0% 34.4% $94 83.9% 40.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 4 100.0% $112 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $112 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.1% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 18.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 35.1% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 77.7%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 55.8% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 2 4.5% $112 1.0% 2.3% 2 4.5% 0.4% $112 1.0% 0.3%
Moderate 8 18.2% $971 8.8% 13.1% 8 18.2% 10.9% $971 8.8% 6.7%
Middle 20 45.5% $3,550 32.2% 48.0% 20 45.5% 48.0% $3,550 32.2% 37.1%
Upper 14 31.8% $6,380 57.9% 36.6% 14 31.8% 40.7% $6,380 57.9% 55.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 44 100.0% $11,013 100.0% 100.0% 44 100.0% 100.0% $11,013 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
199
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 12 54.5% $900 26.2% 18.9% 12 54.5% 11.5% $900 26.2% 4.8%
Moderate 3 13.6% $317 9.2% 19.2% 3 13.6% 15.3% $317 9.2% 8.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.7% 0 0.0% 12.9% $0 0.0% 8.9%
Upper 6 27.3% $2,059 59.9% 41.2% 6 27.3% 48.8% $2,059 59.9% 67.5%
Unknown 1 4.5% $164 4.8% 0.0% 1 4.5% 11.5% $164 4.8% 10.4%
Total 22 100.0% $3,440 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $3,440 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 5.6% $154 2.1% 18.9% 1 5.6% 4.6% $154 2.1% 1.9%
Moderate 3 16.7% $457 6.1% 19.2% 3 16.7% 10.3% $457 6.1% 4.7%
Middle 4 22.2% $851 11.4% 20.7% 4 22.2% 15.9% $851 11.4% 9.6%
Upper 7 38.9% $2,441 32.7% 41.2% 7 38.9% 54.0% $2,441 32.7% 70.0%
Unknown 3 16.7% $3,558 47.7% 0.0% 3 16.7% 15.2% $3,558 47.7% 13.7%
Total 18 100.0% $7,461 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $7,461 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.9% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.2% 0 0.0% 17.7% $0 0.0% 6.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.7% 0 0.0% 24.0% $0 0.0% 12.1%
Upper 4 100.0% $112 100.0% 41.2% 4 100.0% 41.7% $112 100.0% 61.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 19.3%
Total 4 100.0% $112 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $112 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 13 29.5% $1,054 9.6% 18.9% 13 29.5% 8.5% $1,054 9.6% 3.3%
Moderate 6 13.6% $774 7.0% 19.2% 6 13.6% 13.2% $774 7.0% 6.4%
Middle 4 9.1% $851 7.7% 20.7% 4 9.1% 14.3% $851 7.7% 9.1%
Upper 17 38.6% $4,612 41.9% 41.2% 17 38.6% 50.9% $4,612 41.9% 67.5%
Unknown 4 9.1% $3,722 33.8% 0.0% 4 9.1% 13.1% $3,722 33.8% 13.6%
Total 44 100.0% $11,013 100.0% 100.0% 44 100.0% 100.0% $11,013 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
200
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 1 2.3% $1,000 11.7% 1.7% 1 2.3% 0.8% $1,000 11.7% 1.9%
Moderate 1 2.3% $9 0.1% 11.0% 1 2.3% 8.0% $9 0.1% 6.6%
Middle 15 34.1% $3,485 40.7% 45.7% 15 34.1% 43.3% $3,485 40.7% 40.7%
Upper 27 61.4% $4,067 47.5% 41.6% 27 61.4% 47.2% $4,067 47.5% 50.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 44 100.0% $8,561 100.0% 100.0% 44 100.0% 100.0% $8,561 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 18 40.9% $2,905 33.9% 18 40.9% 39.5% $2,905 33.9% 39.2%
Over $1 Million 15 34.1% $4,102 47.9% 15 34.1%
Total Rev. available 33 75.0% $7,007 81.8% 33 75.0%
Rev. Not Known 11 25.0% $1,554 18.2% 11 25.0%
Total 44 100.0% $8,561 100.0% 44 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 26 59.1% $1,281 15.0% 26 59.1% 95.0% $1,281 15.0% 40.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 7 15.9% $1,438 16.8% 7 15.9% 2.4% $1,438 16.8% 14.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 11 25.0% $5,842 68.2% 11 25.0% 2.5% $5,842 68.2% 45.3%
Total 44 100.0% $8,561 100.0% 44 100.0% 100.0% $8,561 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 12 66.7% $541 18.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 5.6% $138 4.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 27.8% $2,226 76.6%
Total 18 100.0% $2,905 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
92.5%
4.1%
96.6%
3.4%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
201
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 11 8.1% $845 4.4% 20.5% 11 8.1% 9.5% $845 4.4% 6.2%
Middle 86 63.7% $10,862 56.2% 54.7% 86 63.7% 56.5% $10,862 56.2% 46.3%
Upper 38 28.1% $7,622 39.4% 24.6% 38 28.1% 33.9% $7,622 39.4% 47.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 135 100.0% $19,329 100.0% 100.0% 135 100.0% 100.0% $19,329 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 2 4.3% $179 1.9% 20.5% 2 4.3% 6.4% $179 1.9% 4.2%
Middle 31 67.4% $6,491 69.3% 54.7% 31 67.4% 50.6% $6,491 69.3% 42.0%
Upper 13 28.3% $2,692 28.8% 24.6% 13 28.3% 42.9% $2,692 28.8% 53.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 46 100.0% $9,362 100.0% 100.0% 46 100.0% 100.0% $9,362 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 17.5% $0 0.0% 8.8%
Middle 3 100.0% $32 100.0% 54.7% 3 100.0% 56.0% $32 100.0% 43.9%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.6% 0 0.0% 26.5% $0 0.0% 47.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $32 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $32 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 2 66.7% $1,900 60.3% 20.9% 2 66.7% 30.0% $1,900 60.3% 5.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 43.0% 0 0.0% 45.0% $0 0.0% 50.4%
Upper 1 33.3% $1,251 39.7% 35.5% 1 33.3% 25.0% $1,251 39.7% 44.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 15 8.0% $2,924 9.2% 20.5% 15 8.0% 8.3% $2,924 9.2% 5.2%
Middle 120 64.2% $17,385 54.5% 54.7% 120 64.2% 53.9% $17,385 54.5% 44.3%
Upper 52 27.8% $11,565 36.3% 24.6% 52 27.8% 37.8% $11,565 36.3% 50.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 187 100.0% $31,874 100.0% 100.0% 187 100.0% 100.0% $31,874 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
202
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 15 11.1% $1,083 5.6% 17.6% 15 11.1% 6.6% $1,083 5.6% 2.8%
Moderate 38 28.1% $3,758 19.4% 19.6% 38 28.1% 15.9% $3,758 19.4% 9.6%
Middle 34 25.2% $5,419 28.0% 23.6% 34 25.2% 18.1% $5,419 28.0% 14.0%
Upper 46 34.1% $8,762 45.3% 39.2% 46 34.1% 46.5% $8,762 45.3% 61.7%
Unknown 2 1.5% $307 1.6% 0.0% 2 1.5% 12.9% $307 1.6% 11.9%
Total 135 100.0% $19,329 100.0% 100.0% 135 100.0% 100.0% $19,329 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 3.8% $0 0.0% 1.8%
Moderate 11 23.9% $1,156 12.3% 19.6% 11 23.9% 10.7% $1,156 12.3% 6.2%
Middle 8 17.4% $1,164 12.4% 23.6% 8 17.4% 15.9% $1,164 12.4% 11.0%
Upper 21 45.7% $4,423 47.2% 39.2% 21 45.7% 48.9% $4,423 47.2% 62.7%
Unknown 6 13.0% $2,619 28.0% 0.0% 6 13.0% 20.7% $2,619 28.0% 18.4%
Total 46 100.0% $9,362 100.0% 100.0% 46 100.0% 100.0% $9,362 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 66.7% $20 62.5% 17.6% 2 66.7% 15.2% $20 62.5% 3.5%
Moderate 1 33.3% $12 37.5% 19.6% 1 33.3% 27.5% $12 37.5% 12.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.6% 0 0.0% 17.2% $0 0.0% 12.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.2% 0 0.0% 36.1% $0 0.0% 64.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 6.8%
Total 3 100.0% $32 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $32 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 3 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 0.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 100.0%
Total 3 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,151 100.0% 100.0%
Low 17 9.1% $1,103 3.5% 17.6% 17 9.1% 5.5% $1,103 3.5% 2.3%
Moderate 50 26.7% $4,926 15.5% 19.6% 50 26.7% 13.8% $4,926 15.5% 7.8%
Middle 42 22.5% $6,583 20.7% 23.6% 42 22.5% 17.1% $6,583 20.7% 12.4%
Upper 67 35.8% $13,185 41.4% 39.2% 67 35.8% 47.4% $13,185 41.4% 61.4%
Unknown 11 5.9% $6,077 19.1% 0.0% 11 5.9% 16.3% $6,077 19.1% 16.1%
Total 187 100.0% $31,874 100.0% 100.0% 187 100.0% 100.0% $31,874 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
203
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 1 4.8% $240 4.6% 0.4% 1 4.8% 0.2% $240 4.6% 0.3%
Moderate 2 9.5% $301 5.8% 17.2% 2 9.5% 14.3% $301 5.8% 15.6%
Middle 9 42.9% $2,403 46.0% 52.8% 9 42.9% 49.8% $2,403 46.0% 50.5%
Upper 9 42.9% $2,285 43.7% 29.6% 9 42.9% 34.4% $2,285 43.7% 33.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 21 100.0% $5,229 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $5,229 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 16 76.2% $3,970 75.9% 16 76.2% 44.0% $3,970 75.9% 36.3%
Over $1 Million 4 19.0% $1,253 24.0% 4 19.0%
Total Rev. available 20 95.2% $5,223 99.9% 20 95.2%
Rev. Not Known 1 4.8% $6 0.1% 1 4.8%
Total 21 100.0% $5,229 100.0% 21 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 7 33.3% $330 6.3% 7 33.3% 94.4% $330 6.3% 36.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 38.1% $1,497 28.6% 8 38.1% 2.9% $1,497 28.6% 16.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 6 28.6% $3,402 65.1% 6 28.6% 2.7% $3,402 65.1% 47.0%
Total 21 100.0% $5,229 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $5,229 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 5 31.3% $244 6.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 6 37.5% $1,136 28.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 31.3% $2,590 65.2%
Total 16 100.0% $3,970 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
92.7%
4.1%
96.8%
3.2%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
204
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 0.5% $50 0.1% 2.5% 1 0.5% 0.3% $50 0.1% 0.1%
Moderate 12 6.2% $1,647 4.3% 14.2% 12 6.2% 12.1% $1,647 4.3% 9.3%
Middle 56 29.0% $8,381 22.1% 51.3% 56 29.0% 40.5% $8,381 22.1% 35.2%
Upper 124 64.2% $27,882 73.5% 32.0% 124 64.2% 47.1% $27,882 73.5% 55.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 193 100.0% $37,960 100.0% 100.0% 193 100.0% 100.0% $37,960 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Moderate 14 5.4% $1,707 3.7% 14.2% 14 5.4% 7.7% $1,707 3.7% 6.5%
Middle 104 40.0% $12,556 26.9% 51.3% 104 40.0% 41.4% $12,556 26.9% 34.5%
Upper 142 54.6% $32,384 69.4% 32.0% 142 54.6% 50.4% $32,384 69.4% 58.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 260 100.0% $46,647 100.0% 100.0% 260 100.0% 100.0% $46,647 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 1.3% $3 0.1% 2.5% 1 1.3% 1.6% $3 0.1% 0.4%
Moderate 9 11.4% $211 9.7% 14.2% 9 11.4% 13.3% $211 9.7% 8.1%
Middle 41 51.9% $1,021 46.9% 51.3% 41 51.9% 59.7% $1,021 46.9% 55.7%
Upper 28 35.4% $942 43.3% 32.0% 28 35.4% 25.4% $942 43.3% 35.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 79 100.0% $2,177 100.0% 100.0% 79 100.0% 100.0% $2,177 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.8% 0 0.0% 10.5% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.0% 0 0.0% 10.5% $0 0.0% 4.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 50.8% 0 0.0% 42.1% $0 0.0% 24.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 36.5% 0 0.0% 36.8% $0 0.0% 70.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.4% $53 0.1% 2.5% 2 0.4% 0.5% $53 0.1% 0.3%
Moderate 35 6.6% $3,565 4.1% 14.2% 35 6.6% 10.1% $3,565 4.1% 7.8%
Middle 201 37.8% $21,958 25.3% 51.3% 201 37.8% 42.1% $21,958 25.3% 34.8%
Upper 294 55.3% $61,208 70.5% 32.0% 294 55.3% 47.3% $61,208 70.5% 57.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 532 100.0% $86,784 100.0% 100.0% 532 100.0% 100.0% $86,784 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
205
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 6 3.1% $790 2.1% 23.2% 6 3.1% 6.3% $790 2.1% 3.4%
Moderate 40 20.7% $5,566 14.7% 16.0% 40 20.7% 23.2% $5,566 14.7% 18.3%
Middle 35 18.1% $5,346 14.1% 19.7% 35 18.1% 25.1% $5,346 14.1% 24.0%
Upper 102 52.8% $24,730 65.1% 41.1% 102 52.8% 36.3% $24,730 65.1% 46.6%
Unknown 10 5.2% $1,528 4.0% 0.0% 10 5.2% 9.1% $1,528 4.0% 7.8%
Total 193 100.0% $37,960 100.0% 100.0% 193 100.0% 100.0% $37,960 100.0% 100.0%
Low 9 3.5% $518 1.1% 23.2% 9 3.5% 4.1% $518 1.1% 1.9%
Moderate 28 10.8% $2,860 6.1% 16.0% 28 10.8% 11.6% $2,860 6.1% 7.6%
Middle 45 17.3% $5,138 11.0% 19.7% 45 17.3% 18.8% $5,138 11.0% 15.5%
Upper 163 62.7% $35,956 77.1% 41.1% 163 62.7% 49.0% $35,956 77.1% 59.6%
Unknown 15 5.8% $2,175 4.7% 0.0% 15 5.8% 16.5% $2,175 4.7% 15.4%
Total 260 100.0% $46,647 100.0% 100.0% 260 100.0% 100.0% $46,647 100.0% 100.0%
Low 16 20.3% $176 8.1% 23.2% 16 20.3% 18.9% $176 8.1% 5.5%
Moderate 10 12.7% $165 7.6% 16.0% 10 12.7% 15.9% $165 7.6% 11.1%
Middle 17 21.5% $306 14.1% 19.7% 17 21.5% 22.3% $306 14.1% 19.8%
Upper 34 43.0% $1,392 63.9% 41.1% 34 43.0% 36.3% $1,392 63.9% 57.8%
Unknown 2 2.5% $138 6.3% 0.0% 2 2.5% 6.6% $138 6.3% 5.8%
Total 79 100.0% $2,177 100.0% 100.0% 79 100.0% 100.0% $2,177 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 31 5.8% $1,484 1.7% 23.2% 31 5.8% 6.0% $1,484 1.7% 2.6%
Moderate 78 14.7% $8,591 9.9% 16.0% 78 14.7% 17.1% $8,591 9.9% 12.4%
Middle 97 18.2% $10,790 12.4% 19.7% 97 18.2% 21.9% $10,790 12.4% 19.0%
Upper 299 56.2% $62,078 71.5% 41.1% 299 56.2% 42.3% $62,078 71.5% 51.6%
Unknown 27 5.1% $3,841 4.4% 0.0% 27 5.1% 12.7% $3,841 4.4% 14.6%
Total 532 100.0% $86,784 100.0% 100.0% 532 100.0% 100.0% $86,784 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
206
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 6 1.5% $1,224 1.7% 2.6% 6 1.5% 1.6% $1,224 1.7% 1.5%
Moderate 26 6.5% $6,317 8.7% 11.3% 26 6.5% 8.4% $6,317 8.7% 8.6%
Middle 144 36.2% $30,414 41.9% 46.9% 144 36.2% 41.7% $30,414 41.9% 43.5%
Upper 222 55.8% $34,614 47.7% 39.2% 222 55.8% 44.5% $34,614 47.7% 43.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.9% $0 0.0% 2.9%
Total 398 100.0% $72,569 100.0% 100.0% 398 100.0% 100.0% $72,569 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.6% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 2.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 55.4% 0 0.0% 71.4% $0 0.0% 65.3%
Upper 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 32.6% 1 100.0% 14.3% $50 100.0% 28.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 4.1%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
M
Count Dollar Bank Bank
2011 2011
Bank Small
Businesses
Count Dollar
Geographic Distribution of Small Business & Small Farm Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
207
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
$1 Million or Less 139 34.9% $20,503 28.3% 139 34.9% 30.5% $20,503 28.3% 25.5%
Over $1 Million 156 39.2% $40,719 56.1% 156 39.2%
Total Rev. available 295 74.1% $61,222 84.4% 295 74.1%
Rev. Not Known 103 25.9% $11,347 15.6% 103 25.9%
Total 398 100.0% $72,569 100.0% 398 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 229 57.5% $10,293 14.2% 229 57.5% 90.7% $10,293 14.2% 25.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 82 20.6% $15,323 21.1% 82 20.6% 4.1% $15,323 21.1% 15.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 87 21.9% $46,953 64.7% 87 21.9% 5.2% $46,953 64.7% 59.1%
Total 398 100.0% $72,569 100.0% 398 100.0% 100.0% $72,569 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 90 64.7% $4,350 21.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 26 18.7% $4,542 22.2%
$250,001 - $1 Million 23 16.5% $11,611 56.6%
Total 139 100.0% $20,503 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0% 28.6% $50 100.0% 40.4%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $50 100.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Originations & Purchases
100.0%
Lo
an
Siz
e
1.5%
100.0%
0.0%
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Sm
all F
arm
Total Farms
Re
ve
nu
e
98.5%
Sm
all B
usin
ess
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Count
96.7%
3.3%
100.0%
%
90.5%
6.2%
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Pro
du
ct
Ty
pe Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Dollar Bank Bank
Bank Total
Businesses
Count Dollar
Small Business & Small Farm Lending By Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
208
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 12 2.5% $1,355 1.3% 5.1% 12 2.5% 2.9% $1,355 1.3% 2.2%
Moderate 60 12.3% $10,094 10.0% 16.9% 60 12.3% 12.4% $10,094 10.0% 10.2%
Middle 154 31.5% $28,431 28.1% 40.4% 154 31.5% 37.6% $28,431 28.1% 31.6%
Upper 263 53.8% $61,310 60.6% 37.7% 263 53.8% 47.0% $61,310 60.6% 56.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 489 100.0% $101,190 100.0% 100.0% 489 100.0% 100.0% $101,190 100.0% 100.0%
Low 16 2.8% $2,161 1.6% 5.1% 16 2.8% 2.0% $2,161 1.6% 1.5%
Moderate 62 10.8% $11,570 8.6% 16.9% 62 10.8% 9.9% $11,570 8.6% 7.8%
Middle 154 26.9% $26,444 19.7% 40.4% 154 26.9% 35.4% $26,444 19.7% 29.6%
Upper 341 59.5% $93,840 70.0% 37.7% 341 59.5% 52.6% $93,840 70.0% 61.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 573 100.0% $134,015 100.0% 100.0% 573 100.0% 100.0% $134,015 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.2% $157 3.7% 5.1% 1 2.2% 4.5% $157 3.7% 3.6%
Moderate 11 23.9% $1,312 30.7% 16.9% 11 23.9% 17.5% $1,312 30.7% 15.7%
Middle 17 37.0% $1,080 25.3% 40.4% 17 37.0% 40.3% $1,080 25.3% 28.0%
Upper 17 37.0% $1,720 40.3% 37.7% 17 37.0% 37.7% $1,720 40.3% 52.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 46 100.0% $4,269 100.0% 100.0% 46 100.0% 100.0% $4,269 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 6.7% $1,272 6.2% 16.8% 1 6.7% 14.4% $1,272 6.2% 6.4%
Moderate 5 33.3% $3,553 17.4% 27.3% 5 33.3% 26.4% $3,553 17.4% 10.1%
Middle 6 40.0% $9,734 47.7% 31.8% 6 40.0% 25.6% $9,734 47.7% 47.9%
Upper 3 20.0% $5,856 28.7% 24.1% 3 20.0% 33.6% $5,856 28.7% 35.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 15 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 100.0% 15 100.0% 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 100.0%
Low 30 2.7% $4,945 1.9% 5.1% 30 2.7% 2.5% $4,945 1.9% 2.0%
Moderate 138 12.3% $26,529 10.2% 16.9% 138 12.3% 11.3% $26,529 10.2% 8.9%
Middle 331 29.5% $65,689 25.3% 40.4% 331 29.5% 36.4% $65,689 25.3% 31.0%
Upper 624 55.6% $162,726 62.6% 37.7% 624 55.6% 49.8% $162,726 62.6% 58.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,123 100.0% $259,889 100.0% 100.0% 1,123 100.0% 100.0% $259,889 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
209
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 23 4.7% $2,289 2.3% 24.4% 23 4.7% 7.1% $2,289 2.3% 3.4%
Moderate 57 11.7% $7,382 7.3% 16.1% 57 11.7% 20.2% $7,382 7.3% 14.2%
Middle 82 16.8% $13,139 13.0% 18.7% 82 16.8% 21.4% $13,139 13.0% 19.0%
Upper 307 62.8% $74,698 73.8% 40.8% 307 62.8% 40.8% $74,698 73.8% 54.2%
Unknown 20 4.1% $3,682 3.6% 0.0% 20 4.1% 10.5% $3,682 3.6% 9.1%
Total 489 100.0% $101,190 100.0% 100.0% 489 100.0% 100.0% $101,190 100.0% 100.0%
Low 22 3.8% $2,043 1.5% 24.4% 22 3.8% 4.3% $2,043 1.5% 2.3%
Moderate 50 8.7% $5,805 4.3% 16.1% 50 8.7% 11.4% $5,805 4.3% 7.2%
Middle 91 15.9% $13,385 10.0% 18.7% 91 15.9% 18.7% $13,385 10.0% 14.6%
Upper 339 59.2% $97,154 72.5% 40.8% 339 59.2% 47.5% $97,154 72.5% 59.1%
Unknown 71 12.4% $15,628 11.7% 0.0% 71 12.4% 18.1% $15,628 11.7% 16.8%
Total 573 100.0% $134,015 100.0% 100.0% 573 100.0% 100.0% $134,015 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 6.5% $78 1.8% 24.4% 3 6.5% 11.4% $78 1.8% 3.7%
Moderate 7 15.2% $462 10.8% 16.1% 7 15.2% 17.9% $462 10.8% 12.1%
Middle 6 13.0% $354 8.3% 18.7% 6 13.0% 19.9% $354 8.3% 15.6%
Upper 20 43.5% $1,887 44.2% 40.8% 20 43.5% 35.0% $1,887 44.2% 49.3%
Unknown 10 21.7% $1,488 34.9% 0.0% 10 21.7% 15.8% $1,488 34.9% 19.2%
Total 46 100.0% $4,269 100.0% 100.0% 46 100.0% 100.0% $4,269 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 15 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 0.0% 15 100.0% 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 100.0%
Total 15 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 100.0% 15 100.0% 100.0% $20,415 100.0% 100.0%
Low 48 4.3% $4,410 1.7% 24.4% 48 4.3% 5.7% $4,410 1.7% 2.7%
Moderate 114 10.2% $13,649 5.3% 16.1% 114 10.2% 15.0% $13,649 5.3% 9.7%
Middle 179 15.9% $26,878 10.3% 18.7% 179 15.9% 19.7% $26,878 10.3% 15.8%
Upper 666 59.3% $173,739 66.9% 40.8% 666 59.3% 44.2% $173,739 66.9% 55.0%
Unknown 116 10.3% $41,213 15.9% 0.0% 116 10.3% 15.4% $41,213 15.9% 16.8%
Total 1,123 100.0% $259,889 100.0% 100.0% 1,123 100.0% 100.0% $259,889 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
210
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 12 3.6% $5,721 7.8% 5.8% 12 3.6% 5.6% $5,721 7.8% 7.3%
Moderate 77 22.8% $12,928 17.5% 18.0% 77 22.8% 17.4% $12,928 17.5% 18.7%
Middle 92 27.2% $20,202 27.4% 35.9% 92 27.2% 30.8% $20,202 27.4% 30.9%
Upper 157 46.4% $34,934 47.3% 40.3% 157 46.4% 44.4% $34,934 47.3% 41.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.8% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Total 338 100.0% $73,785 100.0% 100.0% 338 100.0% 100.0% $73,785 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 125 37.0% $23,294 31.6% 125 37.0% 37.6% $23,294 31.6% 34.6%
Over $1 Million 125 37.0% $37,319 50.6% 125 37.0%
Total Rev. available 250 74.0% $60,613 82.2% 250 74.0%
Rev. Not Known 88 26.0% $13,172 17.9% 88 26.0%
Total 338 100.0% $73,785 100.0% 338 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 153 45.3% $8,441 11.4% 153 45.3% 90.6% $8,441 11.4% 25.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 90 26.6% $16,870 22.9% 90 26.6% 4.4% $16,870 22.9% 17.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 95 28.1% $48,474 65.7% 95 28.1% 4.9% $48,474 65.7% 57.2%
Total 338 100.0% $73,785 100.0% 338 100.0% 100.0% $73,785 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 58 46.4% $3,542 15.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 40 32.0% $7,178 30.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 27 21.6% $12,574 54.0%
Total 125 100.0% $23,294 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
91.2%
4.9%
96.1%
3.9%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
211
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 6 4.8% $634 3.0% 11.5% 6 4.8% 7.4% $634 3.0% 3.9%
Upper 120 95.2% $20,313 97.0% 86.8% 120 95.2% 92.0% $20,313 97.0% 95.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 126 100.0% $20,947 100.0% 100.0% 126 100.0% 100.0% $20,947 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Middle 3 3.4% $368 2.2% 11.5% 3 3.4% 5.6% $368 2.2% 3.1%
Upper 84 96.6% $16,549 97.8% 86.8% 84 96.6% 94.1% $16,549 97.8% 96.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 87 100.0% $16,917 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $16,917 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 1 16.7% $15 12.2% 11.5% 1 16.7% 11.9% $15 12.2% 8.4%
Upper 5 83.3% $108 87.8% 86.8% 5 83.3% 88.1% $108 87.8% 91.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $123 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $123 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 87.3% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Middle 10 4.6% $1,017 2.7% 11.5% 10 4.6% 6.5% $1,017 2.7% 3.4%
Upper 209 95.4% $36,970 97.3% 86.8% 209 95.4% 93.1% $36,970 97.3% 96.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 219 100.0% $37,987 100.0% 100.0% 219 100.0% 100.0% $37,987 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
212
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 7 5.6% $562 2.7% 7.0% 7 5.6% 5.1% $562 2.7% 2.5%
Moderate 16 12.7% $1,666 8.0% 10.0% 16 12.7% 16.5% $1,666 8.0% 10.6%
Middle 32 25.4% $4,684 22.4% 15.1% 32 25.4% 20.1% $4,684 22.4% 16.5%
Upper 71 56.3% $14,035 67.0% 67.9% 71 56.3% 42.4% $14,035 67.0% 55.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.0% $0 0.0% 15.2%
Total 126 100.0% $20,947 100.0% 100.0% 126 100.0% 100.0% $20,947 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 9 10.3% $1,175 6.9% 10.0% 9 10.3% 6.9% $1,175 6.9% 4.0%
Middle 12 13.8% $1,427 8.4% 15.1% 12 13.8% 12.6% $1,427 8.4% 8.5%
Upper 66 75.9% $14,315 84.6% 67.9% 66 75.9% 56.2% $14,315 84.6% 65.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 22.3% $0 0.0% 21.0%
Total 87 100.0% $16,917 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $16,917 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 5.9% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.0% 0 0.0% 13.9% $0 0.0% 9.0%
Middle 1 16.7% $8 6.5% 15.1% 1 16.7% 18.8% $8 6.5% 12.1%
Upper 5 83.3% $115 93.5% 67.9% 5 83.3% 57.4% $115 93.5% 67.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 10.4%
Total 6 100.0% $123 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $123 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 67.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 7 3.2% $562 1.5% 7.0% 7 3.2% 3.4% $562 1.5% 1.5%
Moderate 25 11.4% $2,841 7.5% 10.0% 25 11.4% 11.3% $2,841 7.5% 6.7%
Middle 45 20.5% $6,119 16.1% 15.1% 45 20.5% 16.1% $6,119 16.1% 11.6%
Upper 142 64.8% $28,465 74.9% 67.9% 142 64.8% 50.0% $28,465 74.9% 59.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 19.3% $0 0.0% 20.7%
Total 219 100.0% $37,987 100.0% 100.0% 219 100.0% 100.0% $37,987 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
213
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.6% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.1% 0 0.0% 4.2% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Upper 21 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 92.6% 21 100.0% 94.6% $5,496 100.0% 94.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.6% 0 0.0% 0.9% $0 0.0% 1.6%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 21 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 2 9.5% $292 5.3% 2 9.5% 38.3% $292 5.3% 32.7%
Over $1 Million 8 38.1% $2,445 44.5% 8 38.1%
Total Rev. available 10 47.6% $2,737 49.8% 10 47.6%
Rev. Not Known 11 52.4% $2,759 50.2% 11 52.4%
Total 21 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 21 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 5 23.8% $230 4.2% 5 23.8% 89.3% $230 4.2% 24.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 7 33.3% $1,118 20.3% 7 33.3% 4.8% $1,118 20.3% 16.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 9 42.9% $4,148 75.5% 9 42.9% 5.9% $4,148 75.5% 58.4%
Total 21 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $5,496 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 50.0% $3 1.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 1 50.0% $289 99.0%
Total 2 100.0% $292 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
88.9%
7.3%
96.2%
3.7%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
214
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Moderate 5 21.7% $927 17.6% 23.5% 5 21.7% 9.1% $927 17.6% 7.2%
Middle 8 34.8% $1,858 35.3% 30.4% 8 34.8% 30.9% $1,858 35.3% 24.2%
Upper 10 43.5% $2,485 47.2% 42.7% 10 43.5% 58.1% $2,485 47.2% 66.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Total 23 100.0% $5,270 100.0% 100.0% 23 100.0% 100.0% $5,270 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Moderate 2 7.4% $482 6.5% 23.5% 2 7.4% 7.4% $482 6.5% 5.5%
Middle 3 11.1% $570 7.7% 30.4% 3 11.1% 22.5% $570 7.7% 17.6%
Upper 22 81.5% $6,341 85.8% 42.7% 22 81.5% 68.6% $6,341 85.8% 75.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 27 100.0% $7,393 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $7,393 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.5% 0 0.0% 13.9% $0 0.0% 9.3%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 30.4% 0 0.0% 25.3% $0 0.0% 21.0%
Upper 1 100.0% $30 100.0% 42.7% 1 100.0% 58.7% $30 100.0% 68.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $30 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $30 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.4% 0 0.0% 11.6% $0 0.0% 5.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 35.7% 0 0.0% 31.2% $0 0.0% 30.1%
Middle 2 33.3% $936 7.3% 30.9% 2 33.3% 38.7% $936 7.3% 36.1%
Upper 4 66.7% $11,870 92.7% 23.1% 4 66.7% 18.5% $11,870 92.7% 28.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Moderate 7 12.3% $1,409 5.5% 23.5% 7 12.3% 8.5% $1,409 5.5% 7.3%
Middle 13 22.8% $3,364 13.2% 30.4% 13 22.8% 27.0% $3,364 13.2% 21.7%
Upper 37 64.9% $20,726 81.3% 42.7% 37 64.9% 62.8% $20,726 81.3% 69.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 57 100.0% $25,499 100.0% 100.0% 57 100.0% 100.0% $25,499 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2011
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2011
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
215
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 5.4% $0 0.0% 2.5%
Moderate 2 8.7% $314 6.0% 17.4% 2 8.7% 18.0% $314 6.0% 10.9%
Middle 5 21.7% $884 16.8% 18.6% 5 21.7% 19.4% $884 16.8% 15.3%
Upper 15 65.2% $3,820 72.5% 41.0% 15 65.2% 46.1% $3,820 72.5% 61.7%
Unknown 1 4.3% $252 4.8% 0.0% 1 4.3% 11.0% $252 4.8% 9.7%
Total 23 100.0% $5,270 100.0% 100.0% 23 100.0% 100.0% $5,270 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 1 3.7% $188 2.5% 17.4% 1 3.7% 7.4% $188 2.5% 4.0%
Middle 3 11.1% $417 5.6% 18.6% 3 11.1% 13.5% $417 5.6% 9.0%
Upper 22 81.5% $6,618 89.5% 41.0% 22 81.5% 56.8% $6,618 89.5% 69.6%
Unknown 1 3.7% $170 2.3% 0.0% 1 3.7% 20.1% $170 2.3% 16.4%
Total 27 100.0% $7,393 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $7,393 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 5.3% $0 0.0% 2.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.4% 0 0.0% 11.0% $0 0.0% 5.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.6% 0 0.0% 17.5% $0 0.0% 11.1%
Upper 1 100.0% $30 100.0% 41.0% 1 100.0% 60.2% $30 100.0% 74.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.9% $0 0.0% 7.8%
Total 1 100.0% $30 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $30 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 6 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 0.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 100.0%
Total 6 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $12,806 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Moderate 3 5.3% $502 2.0% 17.4% 3 5.3% 13.0% $502 2.0% 7.3%
Middle 8 14.0% $1,301 5.1% 18.6% 8 14.0% 16.7% $1,301 5.1% 11.8%
Upper 38 66.7% $10,468 41.1% 41.0% 38 66.7% 51.1% $10,468 41.1% 63.0%
Unknown 8 14.0% $13,228 51.9% 0.0% 8 14.0% 15.1% $13,228 51.9% 16.2%
Total 57 100.0% $25,499 100.0% 100.0% 57 100.0% 100.0% $25,499 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2000 Census Data.
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix G: 2011 Full Scope Lending Tables
216
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 4 7.8% $1,229 8.8% 4.5% 4 7.8% 3.8% $1,229 8.8% 4.4%
Moderate 14 27.5% $2,444 17.5% 21.9% 14 27.5% 20.5% $2,444 17.5% 25.2%
Middle 11 21.6% $3,581 25.7% 28.0% 11 21.6% 25.0% $3,581 25.7% 24.7%
Upper 22 43.1% $6,690 48.0% 45.5% 22 43.1% 49.3% $6,690 48.0% 44.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 51 100.0% $13,944 100.0% 100.0% 51 100.0% 100.0% $13,944 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
2011 2011
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 14 27.5% $3,196 22.9% 14 27.5% 38.8% $3,196 22.9% 31.6%
Over $1 Million 32 62.7% $10,118 72.6% 32 62.7%
Total Rev. available 46 90.2% $13,314 95.5% 46 90.2%
Rev. Not Known 5 9.8% $630 4.5% 5 9.8%
Total 51 100.0% $13,944 100.0% 51 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 19 37.3% $1,197 8.6% 19 37.3% 93.9% $1,197 8.6% 34.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 13 25.5% $2,640 18.9% 13 25.5% 2.9% $2,640 18.9% 14.2%
$250,001 - $1 Million 19 37.3% $10,107 72.5% 19 37.3% 3.3% $10,107 72.5% 51.2%
Total 51 100.0% $13,944 100.0% 51 100.0% 100.0% $13,944 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 6 42.9% $389 12.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 3 21.4% $595 18.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 35.7% $2,212 69.2%
Total 14 100.0% $3,196 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information 2000 Census Boundaries.
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
90.9%
5.6%
96.5%
3.5%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Bank Bank
%
2011
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
217
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 0.5% $191 0.5% 4.4% 1 0.5% 0.7% $191 0.5% 0.3%
Moderate 14 7.3% $1,385 3.8% 18.3% 14 7.3% 8.2% $1,385 3.8% 4.7%
Middle 61 31.9% $7,517 20.7% 42.0% 61 31.9% 38.8% $7,517 20.7% 29.1%
Upper 113 59.2% $26,837 73.9% 35.3% 113 59.2% 52.3% $26,837 73.9% 65.8%
Unknown 2 1.0% $362 1.0% 0.0% 2 1.0% 0.0% $362 1.0% 0.0%
Total 191 100.0% $36,292 100.0% 100.0% 191 100.0% 100.0% $36,292 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.6% $82 0.2% 4.4% 1 0.6% 1.2% $82 0.2% 0.5%
Moderate 14 8.6% $1,915 4.7% 18.3% 14 8.6% 7.4% $1,915 4.7% 4.7%
Middle 32 19.6% $4,619 11.4% 42.0% 32 19.6% 33.9% $4,619 11.4% 26.2%
Upper 116 71.2% $33,925 83.7% 35.3% 116 71.2% 57.5% $33,925 83.7% 68.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 163 100.0% $40,541 100.0% 100.0% 163 100.0% 100.0% $40,541 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 10.3% $27 9.4% 4.4% 3 10.3% 4.1% $27 9.4% 1.0%
Moderate 15 51.7% $143 50.0% 18.3% 15 51.7% 18.0% $143 50.0% 7.9%
Middle 3 10.3% $35 12.2% 42.0% 3 10.3% 41.6% $35 12.2% 30.6%
Upper 8 27.6% $81 28.3% 35.3% 8 27.6% 36.3% $81 28.3% 60.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 29 100.0% $286 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $286 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 15.4% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 28.2% 0 0.0% 16.9% $0 0.0% 21.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 31.6% 0 0.0% 55.4% $0 0.0% 51.3%
Upper 1 100.0% $863 100.0% 26.7% 1 100.0% 12.3% $863 100.0% 26.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $863 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $863 100.0% 100.0%
Low 5 1.3% $300 0.4% 4.4% 5 1.3% 1.1% $300 0.4% 0.4%
Moderate 43 11.2% $3,443 4.4% 18.3% 43 11.2% 8.0% $3,443 4.4% 5.2%
Middle 96 25.0% $12,171 15.6% 42.0% 96 25.0% 35.9% $12,171 15.6% 28.0%
Upper 238 62.0% $61,706 79.1% 35.3% 238 62.0% 54.9% $61,706 79.1% 66.3%
Unknown 2 0.5% $362 0.5% 0.0% 2 0.5% 0.0% $362 0.5% 0.0%
Total 384 100.0% $77,982 100.0% 100.0% 384 100.0% 100.0% $77,982 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
218
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 29 15.2% $2,567 7.1% 21.9% 29 15.2% 10.3% $2,567 7.1% 5.1%
Moderate 56 29.3% $7,157 19.7% 17.0% 56 29.3% 23.3% $7,157 19.7% 16.9%
Middle 27 14.1% $4,020 11.1% 19.6% 27 14.1% 19.7% $4,020 11.1% 18.4%
Upper 75 39.3% $21,445 59.1% 41.5% 75 39.3% 29.8% $21,445 59.1% 43.8%
Unknown 4 2.1% $1,103 3.0% 0.0% 4 2.1% 16.9% $1,103 3.0% 15.8%
Total 191 100.0% $36,292 100.0% 100.0% 191 100.0% 100.0% $36,292 100.0% 100.0%
Low 12 7.4% $1,199 3.0% 21.9% 12 7.4% 5.5% $1,199 3.0% 2.8%
Moderate 25 15.3% $3,255 8.0% 17.0% 25 15.3% 12.8% $3,255 8.0% 8.4%
Middle 17 10.4% $2,816 6.9% 19.6% 17 10.4% 18.1% $2,816 6.9% 14.7%
Upper 97 59.5% $30,783 75.9% 41.5% 97 59.5% 43.2% $30,783 75.9% 54.7%
Unknown 12 7.4% $2,488 6.1% 0.0% 12 7.4% 20.4% $2,488 6.1% 19.5%
Total 163 100.0% $40,541 100.0% 100.0% 163 100.0% 100.0% $40,541 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 6.9% $9 3.1% 21.9% 2 6.9% 13.2% $9 3.1% 4.7%
Moderate 8 27.6% $68 23.8% 17.0% 8 27.6% 21.6% $68 23.8% 14.2%
Middle 10 34.5% $87 30.4% 19.6% 10 34.5% 24.9% $87 30.4% 22.5%
Upper 7 24.1% $92 32.2% 41.5% 7 24.1% 35.7% $92 32.2% 53.4%
Unknown 2 6.9% $30 10.5% 0.0% 2 6.9% 4.6% $30 10.5% 5.3%
Total 29 100.0% $286 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $286 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $863 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $863 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $863 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $863 100.0% 100.0%
Low 43 11.2% $3,775 4.8% 21.9% 43 11.2% 7.4% $3,775 4.8% 3.5%
Moderate 89 23.2% $10,480 13.4% 17.0% 89 23.2% 16.7% $10,480 13.4% 11.1%
Middle 54 14.1% $6,923 8.9% 19.6% 54 14.1% 18.9% $6,923 8.9% 15.6%
Upper 179 46.6% $52,320 67.1% 41.5% 179 46.6% 38.2% $52,320 67.1% 49.5%
Unknown 19 4.9% $4,484 5.8% 0.0% 19 4.9% 18.8% $4,484 5.8% 20.4%
Total 384 100.0% $77,982 100.0% 100.0% 384 100.0% 100.0% $77,982 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
219
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 22 14.2% $3,638 10.9% 7.4% 22 14.2% 7.3% $3,638 10.9% 10.5%
Moderate 25 16.1% $5,653 16.9% 18.3% 25 16.1% 14.6% $5,653 16.9% 17.8%
Middle 30 19.4% $7,986 23.9% 36.3% 30 19.4% 30.1% $7,986 23.9% 26.8%
Upper 78 50.3% $16,095 48.2% 38.0% 78 50.3% 43.5% $16,095 48.2% 44.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.5% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Total 155 100.0% $33,372 100.0% 100.0% 155 100.0% 100.0% $33,372 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.9% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 29.4% 0 0.0% 31.4% $0 0.0% 19.3%
Middle 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 45.8% 1 100.0% 50.3% $100 100.0% 34.7%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.9% 0 0.0% 17.0% $0 0.0% 45.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business & Small Farm Loans
Assessment Area: AL Birmingham
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
M
Count Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
Bank Small
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
220
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 7 1.0% $1,026 0.9% 1.7% 7 1.0% 1.2% $1,026 0.9% 0.8%
Moderate 33 4.8% $4,692 4.1% 8.7% 33 4.8% 8.4% $4,692 4.1% 5.7%
Middle 340 49.0% $49,702 43.7% 57.2% 340 49.0% 49.2% $49,702 43.7% 43.0%
Upper 314 45.2% $58,398 51.3% 32.4% 314 45.2% 41.2% $58,398 51.3% 50.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 694 100.0% $113,818 100.0% 100.0% 694 100.0% 100.0% $113,818 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 0.7% $430 0.4% 1.7% 4 0.7% 1.1% $430 0.4% 0.8%
Moderate 35 5.8% $4,270 4.3% 8.7% 35 5.8% 7.3% $4,270 4.3% 5.8%
Middle 298 49.2% $44,886 44.9% 57.2% 298 49.2% 50.7% $44,886 44.9% 45.4%
Upper 269 44.4% $50,274 50.3% 32.4% 269 44.4% 40.8% $50,274 50.3% 48.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 606 100.0% $99,860 100.0% 100.0% 606 100.0% 100.0% $99,860 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 6.7% $16 2.7% 1.7% 3 6.7% 1.4% $16 2.7% 2.2%
Moderate 5 11.1% $28 4.7% 8.7% 5 11.1% 8.2% $28 4.7% 4.9%
Middle 25 55.6% $308 51.3% 57.2% 25 55.6% 57.1% $308 51.3% 42.9%
Upper 12 26.7% $248 41.3% 32.4% 12 26.7% 33.3% $248 41.3% 50.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 45 100.0% $600 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $600 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.8% 0 0.0% 27.4% $0 0.0% 14.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.5% 0 0.0% 24.7% $0 0.0% 20.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 45.6% 0 0.0% 32.9% $0 0.0% 31.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.1% 0 0.0% 15.1% $0 0.0% 34.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 14 1.0% $1,472 0.7% 1.7% 14 1.0% 1.2% $1,472 0.7% 1.3%
Moderate 73 5.4% $8,990 4.2% 8.7% 73 5.4% 7.8% $8,990 4.2% 6.3%
Middle 663 49.3% $94,896 44.3% 57.2% 663 49.3% 50.3% $94,896 44.3% 44.0%
Upper 595 44.2% $108,920 50.8% 32.4% 595 44.2% 40.7% $108,920 50.8% 48.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,345 100.0% $214,278 100.0% 100.0% 1,345 100.0% 100.0% $214,278 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
221
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 57 8.2% $4,624 4.1% 19.6% 57 8.2% 10.2% $4,624 4.1% 4.9%
Moderate 115 16.6% $12,931 11.4% 18.0% 115 16.6% 16.4% $12,931 11.4% 11.1%
Middle 162 23.3% $22,385 19.7% 20.5% 162 23.3% 16.9% $22,385 19.7% 14.7%
Upper 359 51.7% $73,548 64.6% 41.9% 359 51.7% 38.7% $73,548 64.6% 51.9%
Unknown 1 0.1% $330 0.3% 0.0% 1 0.1% 17.8% $330 0.3% 17.4%
Total 694 100.0% $113,818 100.0% 100.0% 694 100.0% 100.0% $113,818 100.0% 100.0%
Low 34 5.6% $3,114 3.1% 19.6% 34 5.6% 6.3% $3,114 3.1% 3.3%
Moderate 71 11.7% $8,279 8.3% 18.0% 71 11.7% 12.3% $8,279 8.3% 7.9%
Middle 108 17.8% $14,784 14.8% 20.5% 108 17.8% 16.8% $14,784 14.8% 13.2%
Upper 341 56.3% $65,477 65.6% 41.9% 341 56.3% 49.6% $65,477 65.6% 59.0%
Unknown 52 8.6% $8,206 8.2% 0.0% 52 8.6% 15.0% $8,206 8.2% 16.6%
Total 606 100.0% $99,860 100.0% 100.0% 606 100.0% 100.0% $99,860 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 8.9% $19 3.2% 19.6% 4 8.9% 9.9% $19 3.2% 4.6%
Moderate 10 22.2% $94 15.7% 18.0% 10 22.2% 15.1% $94 15.7% 8.2%
Middle 3 6.7% $10 1.7% 20.5% 3 6.7% 20.5% $10 1.7% 16.5%
Upper 27 60.0% $474 79.0% 41.9% 27 60.0% 45.7% $474 79.0% 54.3%
Unknown 1 2.2% $3 0.5% 0.0% 1 2.2% 8.8% $3 0.5% 16.4%
Total 45 100.0% $600 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $600 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 95 7.1% $7,757 3.6% 19.6% 95 7.1% 7.8% $7,757 3.6% 3.8%
Moderate 196 14.6% $21,304 9.9% 18.0% 196 14.6% 13.8% $21,304 9.9% 8.8%
Middle 273 20.3% $37,179 17.4% 20.5% 273 20.3% 16.9% $37,179 17.4% 13.3%
Upper 727 54.1% $139,499 65.1% 41.9% 727 54.1% 45.3% $139,499 65.1% 54.3%
Unknown 54 4.0% $8,539 4.0% 0.0% 54 4.0% 16.1% $8,539 4.0% 19.8%
Total 1,345 100.0% $214,278 100.0% 100.0% 1,345 100.0% 100.0% $214,278 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
222
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 4 5.9% $828 8.6% 3.2% 4 5.9% 3.3% $828 8.6% 3.3%
Moderate 26 38.2% $4,089 42.2% 16.8% 26 38.2% 16.0% $4,089 42.2% 18.3%
Middle 28 41.2% $3,656 37.8% 50.6% 28 41.2% 46.4% $3,656 37.8% 44.7%
Upper 10 14.7% $1,107 11.4% 29.4% 10 14.7% 30.9% $1,107 11.4% 33.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 68 100.0% $9,680 100.0% 100.0% 68 100.0% 100.0% $9,680 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 43 63.2% $4,786 49.4% 43 63.2% 49.8% $4,786 49.4% 60.7%
Over $1 Million 19 27.9% $4,261 44.0% 19 27.9%
Total Rev. available 62 91.1% $9,047 93.4% 62 91.1%
Rev. Not Known 6 8.8% $633 6.5% 6 8.8%
Total 68 100.0% $9,680 100.0% 68 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 40 58.8% $1,333 13.8% 40 58.8% 87.0% $1,333 13.8% 22.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 13 19.1% $2,375 24.5% 13 19.1% 6.7% $2,375 24.5% 20.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 15 22.1% $5,972 61.7% 15 22.1% 6.4% $5,972 61.7% 56.7%
Total 68 100.0% $9,680 100.0% 68 100.0% 100.0% $9,680 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 30 69.8% $1,021 21.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 6 14.0% $1,068 22.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 7 16.3% $2,697 56.4%
Total 43 100.0% $4,786 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: AR Fayetteville
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
90.8%
4.9%
95.7%
4.3%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
223
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 11 2.9% $865 1.4% 5.3% 11 2.9% 1.7% $865 1.4% 0.8%
Moderate 39 10.2% $3,256 5.2% 24.4% 39 10.2% 11.6% $3,256 5.2% 6.0%
Middle 89 23.4% $11,507 18.5% 28.1% 89 23.4% 31.5% $11,507 18.5% 24.8%
Upper 242 63.5% $46,456 74.8% 42.1% 242 63.5% 55.2% $46,456 74.8% 68.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 381 100.0% $62,084 100.0% 100.0% 381 100.0% 100.0% $62,084 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.3% $69 0.1% 5.3% 1 0.3% 1.0% $69 0.1% 0.6%
Moderate 17 4.6% $1,364 2.1% 24.4% 17 4.6% 7.7% $1,364 2.1% 3.8%
Middle 77 21.0% $9,419 14.2% 28.1% 77 21.0% 23.5% $9,419 14.2% 17.4%
Upper 272 74.1% $55,536 83.7% 42.1% 272 74.1% 67.8% $55,536 83.7% 78.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 367 100.0% $66,388 100.0% 100.0% 367 100.0% 100.0% $66,388 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 1.9% $44 3.3% 5.3% 2 1.9% 2.0% $44 3.3% 0.6%
Moderate 34 32.4% $373 28.0% 24.4% 34 32.4% 21.6% $373 28.0% 6.1%
Middle 30 28.6% $330 24.8% 28.1% 30 28.6% 29.9% $330 24.8% 24.1%
Upper 39 37.1% $585 43.9% 42.1% 39 37.1% 46.5% $585 43.9% 69.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 105 100.0% $1,332 100.0% 100.0% 105 100.0% 100.0% $1,332 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.2% 0 0.0% 11.8% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.9% 0 0.0% 23.5% $0 0.0% 13.7%
Middle 1 100.0% $241 100.0% 29.8% 1 100.0% 29.4% $241 100.0% 10.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 33.1% 0 0.0% 35.3% $0 0.0% 73.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0%
Low 14 1.6% $978 0.8% 5.3% 14 1.6% 1.4% $978 0.8% 0.8%
Moderate 90 10.5% $4,993 3.8% 24.4% 90 10.5% 9.8% $4,993 3.8% 5.0%
Middle 197 23.1% $21,497 16.5% 28.1% 197 23.1% 26.8% $21,497 16.5% 20.0%
Upper 553 64.8% $102,577 78.9% 42.1% 553 64.8% 62.0% $102,577 78.9% 74.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 854 100.0% $130,045 100.0% 100.0% 854 100.0% 100.0% $130,045 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
224
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 44 11.5% $3,904 6.3% 23.0% 44 11.5% 8.0% $3,904 6.3% 4.1%
Moderate 90 23.6% $10,953 17.6% 17.8% 90 23.6% 17.4% $10,953 17.6% 12.8%
Middle 73 19.2% $11,391 18.3% 18.4% 73 19.2% 17.9% $11,391 18.3% 16.8%
Upper 173 45.4% $35,616 57.4% 40.7% 173 45.4% 32.6% $35,616 57.4% 44.6%
Unknown 1 0.3% $220 0.4% 0.0% 1 0.3% 24.1% $220 0.4% 21.7%
Total 381 100.0% $62,084 100.0% 100.0% 381 100.0% 100.0% $62,084 100.0% 100.0%
Low 17 4.6% $1,358 2.0% 23.0% 17 4.6% 4.1% $1,358 2.0% 2.0%
Moderate 41 11.2% $4,638 7.0% 17.8% 41 11.2% 9.6% $4,638 7.0% 5.8%
Middle 67 18.3% $9,256 13.9% 18.4% 67 18.3% 16.7% $9,256 13.9% 12.5%
Upper 225 61.3% $47,345 71.3% 40.7% 225 61.3% 45.6% $47,345 71.3% 55.2%
Unknown 17 4.6% $3,791 5.7% 0.0% 17 4.6% 24.0% $3,791 5.7% 24.5%
Total 367 100.0% $66,388 100.0% 100.0% 367 100.0% 100.0% $66,388 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 6.7% $44 3.3% 23.0% 7 6.7% 7.4% $44 3.3% 2.9%
Moderate 23 21.9% $261 19.6% 17.8% 23 21.9% 18.6% $261 19.6% 11.4%
Middle 27 25.7% $235 17.6% 18.4% 27 25.7% 23.9% $235 17.6% 17.2%
Upper 46 43.8% $776 58.3% 40.7% 46 43.8% 45.0% $776 58.3% 62.9%
Unknown 2 1.9% $16 1.2% 0.0% 2 1.9% 5.0% $16 1.2% 5.6%
Total 105 100.0% $1,332 100.0% 100.0% 105 100.0% 100.0% $1,332 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $241 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0%
Low 68 8.0% $5,306 4.1% 23.0% 68 8.0% 5.7% $5,306 4.1% 2.7%
Moderate 154 18.0% $15,852 12.2% 17.8% 154 18.0% 13.0% $15,852 12.2% 8.3%
Middle 167 19.6% $20,882 16.1% 18.4% 167 19.6% 17.4% $20,882 16.1% 13.6%
Upper 444 52.0% $83,737 64.4% 40.7% 444 52.0% 40.3% $83,737 64.4% 49.1%
Unknown 21 2.5% $4,268 3.3% 0.0% 21 2.5% 23.6% $4,268 3.3% 26.3%
Total 854 100.0% $130,045 100.0% 100.0% 854 100.0% 100.0% $130,045 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
225
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 12 7.6% $3,243 11.3% 6.0% 12 7.6% 6.0% $3,243 11.3% 8.8%
Moderate 45 28.7% $8,363 29.1% 30.5% 45 28.7% 26.9% $8,363 29.1% 30.5%
Middle 48 30.6% $8,990 31.3% 26.0% 48 30.6% 23.7% $8,990 31.3% 21.2%
Upper 52 33.1% $8,172 28.4% 37.5% 52 33.1% 43.4% $8,172 28.4% 39.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 157 100.0% $28,768 100.0% 100.0% 157 100.0% 100.0% $28,768 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.8% 0 0.0% 4.8% $0 0.0% 3.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.2% 0 0.0% 23.8% $0 0.0% 37.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 35.7% 0 0.0% 23.8% $0 0.0% 7.2%
Upper 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 50.4% 1 100.0% 47.6% $109 100.0% 51.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $109 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business & Small Farm Loans
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
M
Count Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
Bank Small
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
226
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
$1 Million or Less 66 42.0% $9,873 34.3% 66 42.0% 41.0% $9,873 34.3% 38.5%
Over $1 Million 82 52.2% $17,153 59.6% 82 52.2%
Total Rev. available 148 94.2% $27,026 93.9% 148 94.2%
Rev. Not Known 9 5.7% $1,742 6.1% 9 5.7%
Total 157 100.0% $28,768 100.0% 157 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 87 55.4% $4,373 15.2% 87 55.4% 89.0% $4,373 15.2% 22.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 42 26.8% $7,725 26.9% 42 26.8% 5.2% $7,725 26.9% 16.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 28 17.8% $16,670 57.9% 28 17.8% 5.8% $16,670 57.9% 60.4%
Total 157 100.0% $28,768 100.0% 157 100.0% 100.0% $28,768 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 43 65.2% $1,759 17.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 13 19.7% $2,252 22.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 10 15.2% $5,862 59.4%
Total 66 100.0% $9,873 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 59.5% $0 0.0% 50.3%
Over $1 Million 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 1 100.0%
Total Rev. available 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 1 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 81.0% $0 0.0% 30.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 1 100.0% 11.9% $109 100.0% 31.2%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 38.6%
Total 1 100.0% $109 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $109 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business & Small Farm Lending By Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: AR Little Rock
Pro
du
ct
Ty
pe Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
Dollar Bank Bank
Bank Total
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
95.6%
4.4%
100.0%
%
88.6%
7.0%
2.2%
100.0%
0.0%
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Sm
all F
arm
Total Farms
Re
ve
nu
e
97.8%
Sm
all B
usin
ess
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Originations & Purchases
100.0%
Lo
an
Siz
e
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
227
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 3.1% $125 0.9% 2.4% 2 3.1% 2.7% $125 0.9% 1.0%
Moderate 7 10.8% $704 5.2% 16.4% 7 10.8% 13.8% $704 5.2% 8.7%
Middle 37 56.9% $6,805 50.4% 46.0% 37 56.9% 50.0% $6,805 50.4% 39.7%
Upper 19 29.2% $5,873 43.5% 35.2% 19 29.2% 33.6% $5,873 43.5% 50.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 65 100.0% $13,507 100.0% 100.0% 65 100.0% 100.0% $13,507 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 1.9% $100 0.9% 2.4% 1 1.9% 0.7% $100 0.9% 0.4%
Moderate 8 15.1% $1,028 8.9% 16.4% 8 15.1% 11.2% $1,028 8.9% 8.0%
Middle 20 37.7% $3,421 29.6% 46.0% 20 37.7% 47.9% $3,421 29.6% 38.3%
Upper 24 45.3% $7,027 60.7% 35.2% 24 45.3% 40.1% $7,027 60.7% 53.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 53 100.0% $11,576 100.0% 100.0% 53 100.0% 100.0% $11,576 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 14.3% $13 4.5% 2.4% 2 14.3% 3.1% $13 4.5% 0.2%
Moderate 5 35.7% $53 18.2% 16.4% 5 35.7% 11.9% $53 18.2% 7.0%
Middle 4 28.6% $135 46.4% 46.0% 4 28.6% 51.6% $135 46.4% 36.9%
Upper 3 21.4% $90 30.9% 35.2% 3 21.4% 33.3% $90 30.9% 55.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 14 100.0% $291 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $291 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.8% 0 0.0% 21.1% $0 0.0% 25.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.5% 0 0.0% 36.8% $0 0.0% 23.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 43.7% 0 0.0% 42.1% $0 0.0% 51.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 5 3.8% $238 0.9% 2.4% 5 3.8% 1.6% $238 0.9% 0.6%
Moderate 20 15.2% $1,785 7.0% 16.4% 20 15.2% 12.4% $1,785 7.0% 8.5%
Middle 61 46.2% $10,361 40.8% 46.0% 61 46.2% 48.9% $10,361 40.8% 38.7%
Upper 46 34.8% $12,990 51.2% 35.2% 46 34.8% 37.1% $12,990 51.2% 52.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 132 100.0% $25,374 100.0% 100.0% 132 100.0% 100.0% $25,374 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
228
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 11 16.9% $1,087 8.0% 21.1% 11 16.9% 8.4% $1,087 8.0% 3.4%
Moderate 16 24.6% $2,103 15.6% 18.3% 16 24.6% 13.3% $2,103 15.6% 7.1%
Middle 12 18.5% $2,561 19.0% 19.0% 12 18.5% 13.8% $2,561 19.0% 9.4%
Upper 26 40.0% $7,756 57.4% 41.5% 26 40.0% 52.8% $7,756 57.4% 72.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 11.7% $0 0.0% 8.0%
Total 65 100.0% $13,507 100.0% 100.0% 65 100.0% 100.0% $13,507 100.0% 100.0%
Low 5 9.4% $435 3.8% 21.1% 5 9.4% 6.4% $435 3.8% 3.3%
Moderate 13 24.5% $1,914 16.5% 18.3% 13 24.5% 12.0% $1,914 16.5% 6.8%
Middle 9 17.0% $1,890 16.3% 19.0% 9 17.0% 17.0% $1,890 16.3% 11.7%
Upper 24 45.3% $6,804 58.8% 41.5% 24 45.3% 55.7% $6,804 58.8% 67.7%
Unknown 2 3.8% $533 4.6% 0.0% 2 3.8% 8.9% $533 4.6% 10.4%
Total 53 100.0% $11,576 100.0% 100.0% 53 100.0% 100.0% $11,576 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 21.4% $18 6.2% 21.1% 3 21.4% 13.2% $18 6.2% 1.8%
Moderate 2 14.3% $18 6.2% 18.3% 2 14.3% 18.9% $18 6.2% 9.6%
Middle 2 14.3% $30 10.3% 19.0% 2 14.3% 22.6% $30 10.3% 17.4%
Upper 7 50.0% $225 77.3% 41.5% 7 50.0% 43.4% $225 77.3% 70.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.9% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Total 14 100.0% $291 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $291 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 19 14.4% $1,540 6.1% 21.1% 19 14.4% 7.4% $1,540 6.1% 3.3%
Moderate 31 23.5% $4,035 15.9% 18.3% 31 23.5% 12.6% $4,035 15.9% 6.8%
Middle 23 17.4% $4,481 17.7% 19.0% 23 17.4% 15.6% $4,481 17.7% 10.6%
Upper 57 43.2% $14,785 58.3% 41.5% 57 43.2% 54.2% $14,785 58.3% 68.7%
Unknown 2 1.5% $533 2.1% 0.0% 2 1.5% 10.2% $533 2.1% 10.5%
Total 132 100.0% $25,374 100.0% 100.0% 132 100.0% 100.0% $25,374 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
229
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 3 4.5% $182 1.8% 2.6% 3 4.5% 1.8% $182 1.8% 2.6%
Moderate 6 9.1% $518 5.2% 13.6% 6 9.1% 10.1% $518 5.2% 7.7%
Middle 17 25.8% $2,755 27.5% 43.5% 17 25.8% 40.2% $2,755 27.5% 36.4%
Upper 40 60.6% $6,561 65.5% 40.2% 40 60.6% 45.4% $6,561 65.5% 52.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.5% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Total 66 100.0% $10,016 100.0% 100.0% 66 100.0% 100.0% $10,016 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 33 50.0% $3,216 32.1% 33 50.0% 36.7% $3,216 32.1% 37.4%
Over $1 Million 30 45.5% $6,626 66.2% 30 45.5%
Total Rev. available 63 95.5% $9,842 98.3% 63 95.5%
Rev. Not Known 3 4.5% $174 1.7% 3 4.5%
Total 66 100.0% $10,016 100.0% 66 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 47 71.2% $1,695 16.9% 47 71.2% 95.3% $1,695 16.9% 37.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 12.1% $1,625 16.2% 8 12.1% 2.2% $1,625 16.2% 13.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 11 16.7% $6,696 66.9% 11 16.7% 2.6% $6,696 66.9% 49.2%
Total 66 100.0% $10,016 100.0% 66 100.0% 100.0% $10,016 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 27 81.8% $709 22.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 2 6.1% $361 11.2%
$250,001 - $1 Million 4 12.1% $2,146 66.7%
Total 33 100.0% $3,216 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
92.6%
4.0%
96.6%
3.3%
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: FL Naples
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
230
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 0.7% $33 0.1% 1.3% 1 0.7% 0.2% $33 0.1% 0.1%
Moderate 24 15.8% $2,904 11.8% 20.1% 24 15.8% 10.6% $2,904 11.8% 6.9%
Middle 81 53.3% $11,538 46.8% 49.0% 81 53.3% 49.0% $11,538 46.8% 36.7%
Upper 46 30.3% $10,174 41.3% 29.7% 46 30.3% 40.1% $10,174 41.3% 56.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 152 100.0% $24,649 100.0% 100.0% 152 100.0% 100.0% $24,649 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 3.7% $316 2.0% 1.3% 3 3.7% 0.3% $316 2.0% 0.1%
Moderate 9 11.1% $1,400 9.0% 20.1% 9 11.1% 9.8% $1,400 9.0% 7.3%
Middle 39 48.1% $6,210 39.9% 49.0% 39 48.1% 49.2% $6,210 39.9% 40.4%
Upper 30 37.0% $7,633 49.1% 29.7% 30 37.0% 40.7% $7,633 49.1% 52.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 81 100.0% $15,559 100.0% 100.0% 81 100.0% 100.0% $15,559 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 1 11.1% $20 16.1% 20.1% 1 11.1% 19.4% $20 16.1% 6.3%
Middle 6 66.7% $56 45.2% 49.0% 6 66.7% 49.0% $56 45.2% 32.8%
Upper 2 22.2% $48 38.7% 29.7% 2 22.2% 30.0% $48 38.7% 60.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 100.0% $124 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $124 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.6% 0 0.0% 30.8% $0 0.0% 23.3%
Middle 1 100.0% $119 100.0% 38.7% 1 100.0% 50.0% $119 100.0% 48.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.5% 0 0.0% 19.2% $0 0.0% 28.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $119 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $119 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 1.6% $349 0.9% 1.3% 4 1.6% 0.3% $349 0.9% 0.1%
Moderate 34 14.0% $4,324 10.7% 20.1% 34 14.0% 10.3% $4,324 10.7% 7.5%
Middle 127 52.3% $17,923 44.3% 49.0% 127 52.3% 49.2% $17,923 44.3% 39.1%
Upper 78 32.1% $17,855 44.1% 29.7% 78 32.1% 40.2% $17,855 44.1% 53.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 243 100.0% $40,451 100.0% 100.0% 243 100.0% 100.0% $40,451 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
231
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 9 5.9% $531 2.2% 19.6% 9 5.9% 5.7% $531 2.2% 2.4%
Moderate 38 25.0% $4,744 19.2% 19.0% 38 25.0% 15.3% $4,744 19.2% 9.2%
Middle 33 21.7% $5,038 20.4% 20.9% 33 21.7% 18.2% $5,038 20.4% 14.2%
Upper 71 46.7% $14,135 57.3% 40.5% 71 46.7% 50.5% $14,135 57.3% 65.3%
Unknown 1 0.7% $201 0.8% 0.0% 1 0.7% 10.3% $201 0.8% 8.9%
Total 152 100.0% $24,649 100.0% 100.0% 152 100.0% 100.0% $24,649 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 4.9% $317 2.0% 19.6% 4 4.9% 6.1% $317 2.0% 3.6%
Moderate 11 13.6% $1,266 8.1% 19.0% 11 13.6% 12.2% $1,266 8.1% 7.8%
Middle 15 18.5% $2,169 13.9% 20.9% 15 18.5% 19.2% $2,169 13.9% 14.7%
Upper 46 56.8% $10,687 68.7% 40.5% 46 56.8% 50.8% $10,687 68.7% 62.4%
Unknown 5 6.2% $1,120 7.2% 0.0% 5 6.2% 11.7% $1,120 7.2% 11.6%
Total 81 100.0% $15,559 100.0% 100.0% 81 100.0% 100.0% $15,559 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 11.1% $3 2.4% 19.6% 1 11.1% 10.8% $3 2.4% 2.3%
Moderate 2 22.2% $25 20.2% 19.0% 2 22.2% 24.8% $25 20.2% 8.5%
Middle 1 11.1% $13 10.5% 20.9% 1 11.1% 22.2% $13 10.5% 15.5%
Upper 2 22.2% $48 38.7% 40.5% 2 22.2% 38.2% $48 38.7% 66.8%
Unknown 3 33.3% $35 28.2% 0.0% 3 33.3% 3.9% $35 28.2% 6.9%
Total 9 100.0% $124 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $124 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $119 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $119 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $119 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $119 100.0% 100.0%
Low 14 5.8% $851 2.1% 19.6% 14 5.8% 6.0% $851 2.1% 3.0%
Moderate 51 21.0% $6,035 14.9% 19.0% 51 21.0% 13.6% $6,035 14.9% 8.2%
Middle 49 20.2% $7,220 17.8% 20.9% 49 20.2% 18.8% $7,220 17.8% 14.1%
Upper 119 49.0% $24,870 61.5% 40.5% 119 49.0% 50.4% $24,870 61.5% 62.0%
Unknown 10 4.1% $1,475 3.6% 0.0% 10 4.1% 11.1% $1,475 3.6% 12.8%
Total 243 100.0% $40,451 100.0% 100.0% 243 100.0% 100.0% $40,451 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
232
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 15 38.5% $996 25.4% 19.9% 15 38.5% 18.8% $996 25.4% 21.4%
Middle 10 25.6% $417 10.6% 44.5% 10 25.6% 38.0% $417 10.6% 34.1%
Upper 14 35.9% $2,515 64.0% 34.0% 14 35.9% 39.5% $2,515 64.0% 41.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Total 39 100.0% $3,928 100.0% 100.0% 39 100.0% 100.0% $3,928 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 30 76.9% $2,892 73.6% 30 76.9% 42.0% $2,892 73.6% 38.4%
Over $1 Million 8 20.5% $986 25.1% 8 20.5%
Total Rev. available 38 97.4% $3,878 98.7% 38 97.4%
Rev. Not Known 1 2.6% $50 1.3% 1 2.6%
Total 39 100.0% $3,928 100.0% 39 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 26 66.7% $1,063 27.1% 26 66.7% 94.7% $1,063 27.1% 37.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 10 25.6% $1,511 38.5% 10 25.6% 2.7% $1,511 38.5% 16.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 3 7.7% $1,354 34.5% 3 7.7% 2.6% $1,354 34.5% 46.8%
Total 39 100.0% $3,928 100.0% 39 100.0% 100.0% $3,928 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 21 70.0% $659 22.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 7 23.3% $1,152 39.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 6.7% $1,081 37.4%
Total 30 100.0% $2,892 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: FL Sarasota
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
93.3%
3.9%
97.2%
2.9%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
233
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 8 2.4% $33 0.1% 2.8% 8 2.4% 0.8% $33 0.1% 0.2%
Moderate 91 27.6% $9,748 18.3% 23.3% 91 27.6% 20.1% $9,748 18.3% 17.2%
Middle 112 33.9% $14,226 26.7% 46.2% 112 33.9% 37.6% $14,226 26.7% 32.1%
Upper 119 36.1% $29,298 55.0% 27.8% 119 36.1% 41.5% $29,298 55.0% 50.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 330 100.0% $53,305 100.0% 100.0% 330 100.0% 100.0% $53,305 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.8% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 52 15.6% $9,387 13.6% 23.3% 52 15.6% 16.9% $9,387 13.6% 15.2%
Middle 117 35.0% $17,280 25.1% 46.2% 117 35.0% 38.9% $17,280 25.1% 32.4%
Upper 165 49.4% $42,201 61.3% 27.8% 165 49.4% 43.8% $42,201 61.3% 52.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 334 100.0% $68,868 100.0% 100.0% 334 100.0% 100.0% $68,868 100.0% 100.0%
Low 5 4.1% $85 4.1% 2.8% 5 4.1% 2.0% $85 4.1% 0.5%
Moderate 43 35.0% $618 29.7% 23.3% 43 35.0% 23.1% $618 29.7% 15.7%
Middle 45 36.6% $891 42.8% 46.2% 45 36.6% 50.9% $891 42.8% 39.6%
Upper 30 24.4% $489 23.5% 27.8% 30 24.4% 23.9% $489 23.5% 44.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 123 100.0% $2,083 100.0% 100.0% 123 100.0% 100.0% $2,083 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 29.8% 0 0.0% 48.0% $0 0.0% 26.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 44.0% $0 0.0% 21.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 27.0% 0 0.0% 8.0% $0 0.0% 51.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 13 1.7% $118 0.1% 2.8% 13 1.7% 0.7% $118 0.1% 0.3%
Moderate 186 23.6% $19,753 15.9% 23.3% 186 23.6% 18.8% $19,753 15.9% 16.4%
Middle 274 34.8% $32,397 26.1% 46.2% 274 34.8% 39.0% $32,397 26.1% 32.1%
Upper 314 39.9% $71,988 57.9% 27.8% 314 39.9% 41.6% $71,988 57.9% 51.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 787 100.0% $124,256 100.0% 100.0% 787 100.0% 100.0% $124,256 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
234
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 50 15.2% $1,052 2.0% 24.2% 50 15.2% 6.5% $1,052 2.0% 3.0%
Moderate 72 21.8% $6,992 13.1% 16.6% 72 21.8% 23.5% $6,992 13.1% 18.4%
Middle 44 13.3% $6,661 12.5% 17.8% 44 13.3% 25.8% $6,661 12.5% 25.1%
Upper 150 45.5% $36,171 67.9% 41.4% 150 45.5% 35.6% $36,171 67.9% 45.6%
Unknown 14 4.2% $2,429 4.6% 0.0% 14 4.2% 8.5% $2,429 4.6% 7.9%
Total 330 100.0% $53,305 100.0% 100.0% 330 100.0% 100.0% $53,305 100.0% 100.0%
Low 12 3.6% $805 1.2% 24.2% 12 3.6% 4.9% $805 1.2% 2.2%
Moderate 32 9.6% $2,887 4.2% 16.6% 32 9.6% 11.0% $2,887 4.2% 6.9%
Middle 52 15.6% $6,611 9.6% 17.8% 52 15.6% 19.8% $6,611 9.6% 16.0%
Upper 216 64.7% $55,407 80.5% 41.4% 216 64.7% 50.3% $55,407 80.5% 59.9%
Unknown 22 6.6% $3,158 4.6% 0.0% 22 6.6% 14.0% $3,158 4.6% 15.1%
Total 334 100.0% $68,868 100.0% 100.0% 334 100.0% 100.0% $68,868 100.0% 100.0%
Low 15 12.2% $102 4.9% 24.2% 15 12.2% 14.9% $102 4.9% 4.8%
Moderate 20 16.3% $233 11.2% 16.6% 20 16.3% 17.7% $233 11.2% 9.9%
Middle 33 26.8% $605 29.0% 17.8% 33 26.8% 20.5% $605 29.0% 14.6%
Upper 42 34.1% $995 47.8% 41.4% 42 34.1% 40.7% $995 47.8% 65.6%
Unknown 13 10.6% $148 7.1% 0.0% 13 10.6% 6.2% $148 7.1% 5.1%
Total 123 100.0% $2,083 100.0% 100.0% 123 100.0% 100.0% $2,083 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 77 9.8% $1,959 1.6% 24.2% 77 9.8% 6.2% $1,959 1.6% 2.6%
Moderate 124 15.8% $10,112 8.1% 16.6% 124 15.8% 16.9% $10,112 8.1% 12.0%
Middle 129 16.4% $13,877 11.2% 17.8% 129 16.4% 22.5% $13,877 11.2% 19.8%
Upper 408 51.8% $92,573 74.5% 41.4% 408 51.8% 43.1% $92,573 74.5% 52.0%
Unknown 49 6.2% $5,735 4.6% 0.0% 49 6.2% 11.3% $5,735 4.6% 13.6%
Total 787 100.0% $124,256 100.0% 100.0% 787 100.0% 100.0% $124,256 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
235
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 4 0.9% $1,675 2.0% 2.8% 4 0.9% 2.3% $1,675 2.0% 2.2%
Moderate 105 23.2% $20,489 24.8% 24.0% 105 23.2% 22.3% $20,489 24.8% 28.4%
Middle 199 43.9% $36,165 43.7% 45.0% 199 43.9% 43.0% $36,165 43.7% 44.6%
Upper 145 32.0% $24,447 29.5% 28.2% 145 32.0% 28.2% $24,447 29.5% 23.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.1% $0 0.0% 1.8%
Total 453 100.0% $82,776 100.0% 100.0% 453 100.0% 100.0% $82,776 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.8% 0 0.0% 34.9% $0 0.0% 29.9%
Middle 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 53.4% 1 100.0% 44.2% $48 100.0% 38.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 26.3% 0 0.0% 18.6% $0 0.0% 8.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 23.3%
Total 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $48 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business & Small Farm Loans
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
M
Count Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
Bank Small
Businesses
Count Dollar
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
236
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
$1 Million or Less 200 44.2% $26,630 32.2% 200 44.2% 30.3% $26,630 32.2% 30.0%
Over $1 Million 190 41.9% $47,067 56.9% 190 41.9%
Total Rev. available 390 86.1% $73,697 89.1% 390 86.1%
Rev. Not Known 63 13.9% $9,079 11.0% 63 13.9%
Total 453 100.0% $82,776 100.0% 453 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 269 59.4% $11,981 14.5% 269 59.4% 90.3% $11,981 14.5% 24.5%
$100,001 - $250,000 79 17.4% $14,907 18.0% 79 17.4% 4.7% $14,907 18.0% 17.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 105 23.2% $55,888 67.5% 105 23.2% 5.0% $55,888 67.5% 58.1%
Total 453 100.0% $82,776 100.0% 453 100.0% 100.0% $82,776 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 141 70.5% $5,927 22.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 26 13.0% $4,400 16.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 33 16.5% $16,303 61.2%
Total 200 100.0% $26,630 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 1 100.0% 32.6% $48 100.0% 40.7%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 1 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 1 100.0% 90.7% $48 100.0% 34.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 7.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.0% $0 0.0% 58.7%
Total 1 100.0% $48 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $48 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $48 100.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $48 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business & Small Farm Lending By Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: LA Lafayette
Pro
du
ct
Ty
pe Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
Dollar Bank Bank
Bank Total
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
96.5%
3.5%
100.0%
%
90.1%
6.4%
1.5%
100.0%
0.0%
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Sm
all F
arm
Total Farms
Re
ve
nu
e
98.5%
Sm
all B
usin
ess
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
Loan S
ize &
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Originations & Purchases
100.0%
Lo
an
Siz
e
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
237
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 22 3.6% $2,967 2.2% 4.6% 22 3.6% 3.7% $2,967 2.2% 2.5%
Moderate 78 12.6% $12,558 9.5% 17.5% 78 12.6% 13.4% $12,558 9.5% 10.0%
Middle 145 23.4% $26,123 19.7% 42.0% 145 23.4% 37.6% $26,123 19.7% 31.2%
Upper 374 60.4% $90,857 68.6% 35.9% 374 60.4% 45.3% $90,857 68.6% 56.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 619 100.0% $132,505 100.0% 100.0% 619 100.0% 100.0% $132,505 100.0% 100.0%
Low 14 1.9% $1,975 1.1% 4.6% 14 1.9% 2.6% $1,975 1.1% 1.9%
Moderate 70 9.3% $10,061 5.8% 17.5% 70 9.3% 10.8% $10,061 5.8% 7.5%
Middle 186 24.6% $33,081 19.2% 42.0% 186 24.6% 34.7% $33,081 19.2% 28.2%
Upper 485 64.2% $127,015 73.8% 35.9% 485 64.2% 51.9% $127,015 73.8% 62.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 755 100.0% $172,132 100.0% 100.0% 755 100.0% 100.0% $172,132 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 11.3% $85 2.4% 4.6% 7 11.3% 7.1% $85 2.4% 4.9%
Moderate 24 38.7% $251 7.2% 17.5% 24 38.7% 20.0% $251 7.2% 12.2%
Middle 15 24.2% $2,089 59.7% 42.0% 15 24.2% 35.6% $2,089 59.7% 27.6%
Upper 16 25.8% $1,076 30.7% 35.9% 16 25.8% 37.3% $1,076 30.7% 55.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 62 100.0% $3,501 100.0% 100.0% 62 100.0% 100.0% $3,501 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 11.1% $450 6.8% 15.2% 1 11.1% 13.5% $450 6.8% 6.9%
Moderate 4 44.4% $2,456 37.0% 31.1% 4 44.4% 27.9% $2,456 37.0% 9.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 28.8% 0 0.0% 26.9% $0 0.0% 45.7%
Upper 4 44.4% $3,723 56.2% 24.8% 4 44.4% 31.7% $3,723 56.2% 37.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 100.0%
Low 44 3.0% $5,477 1.7% 4.6% 44 3.0% 3.2% $5,477 1.7% 2.3%
Moderate 176 12.2% $25,326 8.0% 17.5% 176 12.2% 12.2% $25,326 8.0% 8.6%
Middle 346 23.9% $61,293 19.5% 42.0% 346 23.9% 35.8% $61,293 19.5% 29.7%
Upper 879 60.8% $222,671 70.7% 35.9% 879 60.8% 48.8% $222,671 70.7% 59.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,445 100.0% $314,767 100.0% 100.0% 1,445 100.0% 100.0% $314,767 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
238
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 34 5.5% $2,719 2.1% 23.4% 34 5.5% 6.8% $2,719 2.1% 3.2%
Moderate 92 14.9% $11,894 9.0% 16.8% 92 14.9% 19.7% $11,894 9.0% 13.4%
Middle 105 17.0% $19,434 14.7% 18.5% 105 17.0% 20.7% $19,434 14.7% 18.2%
Upper 371 59.9% $90,852 68.6% 41.3% 371 59.9% 41.6% $90,852 68.6% 55.2%
Unknown 17 2.7% $7,606 5.7% 0.0% 17 2.7% 11.2% $7,606 5.7% 10.0%
Total 619 100.0% $132,505 100.0% 100.0% 619 100.0% 100.0% $132,505 100.0% 100.0%
Low 30 4.0% $2,620 1.5% 23.4% 30 4.0% 4.4% $2,620 1.5% 2.3%
Moderate 86 11.4% $9,525 5.5% 16.8% 86 11.4% 11.6% $9,525 5.5% 7.0%
Middle 120 15.9% $19,116 11.1% 18.5% 120 15.9% 19.0% $19,116 11.1% 14.7%
Upper 483 64.0% $130,853 76.0% 41.3% 483 64.0% 50.7% $130,853 76.0% 61.8%
Unknown 36 4.8% $10,018 5.8% 0.0% 36 4.8% 14.4% $10,018 5.8% 14.1%
Total 755 100.0% $172,132 100.0% 100.0% 755 100.0% 100.0% $172,132 100.0% 100.0%
Low 10 16.1% $123 3.5% 23.4% 10 16.1% 11.8% $123 3.5% 4.2%
Moderate 11 17.7% $151 4.3% 16.8% 11 17.7% 15.4% $151 4.3% 9.4%
Middle 20 32.3% $329 9.4% 18.5% 20 32.3% 21.9% $329 9.4% 15.4%
Upper 15 24.2% $2,761 78.9% 41.3% 15 24.2% 43.2% $2,761 78.9% 62.7%
Unknown 6 9.7% $137 3.9% 0.0% 6 9.7% 7.7% $137 3.9% 8.4%
Total 62 100.0% $3,501 100.0% 100.0% 62 100.0% 100.0% $3,501 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 9 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 0.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 100.0%
Total 9 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $6,629 100.0% 100.0%
Low 74 5.1% $5,462 1.7% 23.4% 74 5.1% 5.5% $5,462 1.7% 2.6%
Moderate 189 13.1% $21,570 6.9% 16.8% 189 13.1% 14.8% $21,570 6.9% 9.3%
Middle 245 17.0% $38,879 12.4% 18.5% 245 17.0% 19.7% $38,879 12.4% 15.7%
Upper 869 60.1% $224,466 71.3% 41.3% 869 60.1% 46.8% $224,466 71.3% 58.1%
Unknown 68 4.7% $24,390 7.7% 0.0% 68 4.7% 13.2% $24,390 7.7% 14.3%
Total 1,445 100.0% $314,767 100.0% 100.0% 1,445 100.0% 100.0% $314,767 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
239
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 22 4.4% $8,255 7.2% 6.0% 22 4.4% 6.0% $8,255 7.2% 7.7%
Moderate 106 21.1% $21,464 18.7% 18.4% 106 21.1% 17.9% $21,464 18.7% 16.9%
Middle 120 23.9% $28,147 24.5% 32.6% 120 23.9% 27.9% $28,147 24.5% 23.1%
Upper 255 50.7% $57,086 49.7% 42.9% 255 50.7% 45.1% $57,086 49.7% 50.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.1% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Total 503 100.0% $114,952 100.0% 100.0% 503 100.0% 100.0% $114,952 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 219 43.5% $42,369 36.9% 219 43.5% 36.5% $42,369 36.9% 37.4%
Over $1 Million 211 41.9% $58,184 50.6% 211 41.9%
Total Rev. available 430 85.4% $100,553 87.5% 430 85.4%
Rev. Not Known 73 14.5% $14,399 12.5% 73 14.5%
Total 503 100.0% $114,952 100.0% 503 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 239 47.5% $12,390 10.8% 239 47.5% 90.3% $12,390 10.8% 22.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 111 22.1% $20,003 17.4% 111 22.1% 4.2% $20,003 17.4% 16.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 153 30.4% $82,559 71.8% 153 30.4% 5.5% $82,559 71.8% 62.0%
Total 503 100.0% $114,952 100.0% 503 100.0% 100.0% $114,952 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 110 50.2% $5,647 13.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 53 24.2% $9,613 22.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 56 25.6% $27,109 64.0%
Total 219 100.0% $42,369 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: LA New Orleans
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
90.4%
5.7%
96.1%
3.9%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
240
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 2 1.4% $148 0.5% 3.4% 2 1.4% 1.6% $148 0.5% 0.9%
Middle 16 11.0% $2,095 7.8% 15.5% 16 11.0% 14.9% $2,095 7.8% 9.3%
Upper 128 87.7% $24,698 91.7% 81.2% 128 87.7% 83.6% $24,698 91.7% 89.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 146 100.0% $26,941 100.0% 100.0% 146 100.0% 100.0% $26,941 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 0.7% $76 0.2% 3.4% 1 0.7% 1.5% $76 0.2% 0.8%
Middle 11 7.5% $1,330 4.2% 15.5% 11 7.5% 12.2% $1,330 4.2% 7.6%
Upper 135 91.8% $30,093 95.5% 81.2% 135 91.8% 86.3% $30,093 95.5% 91.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 147 100.0% $31,499 100.0% 100.0% 147 100.0% 100.0% $31,499 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.4% 0 0.0% 6.4% $0 0.0% 4.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.5% 0 0.0% 10.4% $0 0.0% 4.8%
Upper 4 100.0% $76 100.0% 81.2% 4 100.0% 83.2% $76 100.0% 91.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 4 100.0% $76 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $76 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 72.6% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 3 1.0% $224 0.4% 3.4% 3 1.0% 1.6% $224 0.4% 0.9%
Middle 27 9.1% $3,425 5.9% 15.5% 27 9.1% 13.1% $3,425 5.9% 8.0%
Upper 267 89.9% $54,867 93.8% 81.2% 267 89.9% 85.3% $54,867 93.8% 91.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 297 100.0% $58,516 100.0% 100.0% 297 100.0% 100.0% $58,516 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
241
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 7 4.8% $711 2.6% 9.6% 7 4.8% 4.2% $711 2.6% 2.1%
Moderate 33 22.6% $3,642 13.5% 11.4% 33 22.6% 17.2% $3,642 13.5% 11.1%
Middle 27 18.5% $4,459 16.6% 15.4% 27 18.5% 17.6% $4,459 16.6% 14.0%
Upper 79 54.1% $18,129 67.3% 63.7% 79 54.1% 45.4% $18,129 67.3% 58.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.6% $0 0.0% 13.9%
Total 146 100.0% $26,941 100.0% 100.0% 146 100.0% 100.0% $26,941 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 1.4% $162 0.5% 9.6% 2 1.4% 2.2% $162 0.5% 1.1%
Moderate 13 8.8% $1,520 4.8% 11.4% 13 8.8% 6.8% $1,520 4.8% 4.0%
Middle 18 12.2% $2,465 7.8% 15.4% 18 12.2% 12.7% $2,465 7.8% 8.7%
Upper 111 75.5% $26,787 85.0% 63.7% 111 75.5% 57.1% $26,787 85.0% 66.7%
Unknown 3 2.0% $565 1.8% 0.0% 3 2.0% 21.3% $565 1.8% 19.5%
Total 147 100.0% $31,499 100.0% 100.0% 147 100.0% 100.0% $31,499 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.6% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.4% 0 0.0% 10.4% $0 0.0% 8.5%
Middle 2 50.0% $26 34.2% 15.4% 2 50.0% 19.2% $26 34.2% 10.6%
Upper 2 50.0% $50 65.8% 63.7% 2 50.0% 63.2% $50 65.8% 77.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.2% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Total 4 100.0% $76 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $76 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 63.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 9 3.0% $873 1.5% 9.6% 9 3.0% 3.0% $873 1.5% 1.4%
Moderate 46 15.5% $5,162 8.8% 11.4% 46 15.5% 10.6% $5,162 8.8% 6.3%
Middle 47 15.8% $6,950 11.9% 15.4% 47 15.8% 14.5% $6,950 11.9% 10.3%
Upper 192 64.6% $44,966 76.8% 63.7% 192 64.6% 52.9% $44,966 76.8% 62.2%
Unknown 3 1.0% $565 1.0% 0.0% 3 1.0% 19.0% $565 1.0% 19.9%
Total 297 100.0% $58,516 100.0% 100.0% 297 100.0% 100.0% $58,516 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
242
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 3 11.1% $824 9.8% 2.1% 3 11.1% 1.5% $824 9.8% 1.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.3% 0 0.0% 7.7% $0 0.0% 6.6%
Upper 24 88.9% $7,582 90.2% 87.0% 24 88.9% 89.8% $7,582 90.2% 90.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.5% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 27 100.0% $8,406 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $8,406 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 6 22.2% $1,134 13.5% 6 22.2% 37.4% $1,134 13.5% 34.1%
Over $1 Million 14 51.9% $4,777 56.8% 14 51.9%
Total Rev. available 20 74.1% $5,911 70.3% 20 74.1%
Rev. Not Known 7 25.9% $2,495 29.7% 7 25.9%
Total 27 100.0% $8,406 100.0% 27 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 7 25.9% $343 4.1% 7 25.9% 91.2% $343 4.1% 26.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 9 33.3% $1,651 19.6% 9 33.3% 4.0% $1,651 19.6% 16.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 11 40.7% $6,412 76.3% 11 40.7% 4.8% $6,412 76.3% 57.1%
Total 27 100.0% $8,406 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $8,406 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 3 50.0% $123 10.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 16.7% $245 21.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 33.3% $766 67.5%
Total 6 100.0% $1,134 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: TN Memphis
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
89.0%
7.6%
96.6%
3.4%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
243
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 4 4.0% $501 2.2% 5.1% 4 4.0% 1.4% $501 2.2% 1.0%
Moderate 20 20.0% $2,399 10.3% 22.8% 20 20.0% 9.5% $2,399 10.3% 5.6%
Middle 21 21.0% $2,916 12.5% 28.9% 21 21.0% 27.8% $2,916 12.5% 20.2%
Upper 55 55.0% $17,442 75.0% 43.3% 55 55.0% 61.3% $17,442 75.0% 73.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 100 100.0% $23,258 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $23,258 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 3.3% $119 0.7% 5.1% 2 3.3% 1.3% $119 0.7% 0.9%
Moderate 17 27.9% $1,676 10.3% 22.8% 17 27.9% 7.6% $1,676 10.3% 4.3%
Middle 8 13.1% $1,091 6.7% 28.9% 8 13.1% 21.4% $1,091 6.7% 14.8%
Upper 34 55.7% $13,392 82.3% 43.3% 34 55.7% 69.6% $13,392 82.3% 80.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 61 100.0% $16,278 100.0% 100.0% 61 100.0% 100.0% $16,278 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 9.1% $17 10.8% 5.1% 1 9.1% 2.9% $17 10.8% 1.1%
Moderate 5 45.5% $39 24.8% 22.8% 5 45.5% 11.9% $39 24.8% 6.1%
Middle 2 18.2% $66 42.0% 28.9% 2 18.2% 22.6% $66 42.0% 16.3%
Upper 3 27.3% $35 22.3% 43.3% 3 27.3% 62.6% $35 22.3% 76.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 11 100.0% $157 100.0% 100.0% 11 100.0% 100.0% $157 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 6.3% $1,160 4.4% 24.6% 1 6.3% 21.5% $1,160 4.4% 15.8%
Moderate 4 25.0% $14,099 53.6% 31.9% 4 25.0% 30.5% $14,099 53.6% 29.0%
Middle 1 6.3% $585 2.2% 20.6% 1 6.3% 18.4% $585 2.2% 14.0%
Upper 10 62.5% $10,471 39.8% 22.9% 10 62.5% 29.7% $10,471 39.8% 41.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 16 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 100.0%
Low 8 4.3% $1,797 2.7% 5.1% 8 4.3% 1.4% $1,797 2.7% 1.6%
Moderate 46 24.5% $18,213 27.6% 22.8% 46 24.5% 8.7% $18,213 27.6% 6.0%
Middle 32 17.0% $4,658 7.1% 28.9% 32 17.0% 24.6% $4,658 7.1% 17.4%
Upper 102 54.3% $41,340 62.6% 43.3% 102 54.3% 65.3% $41,340 62.6% 75.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 188 100.0% $66,008 100.0% 100.0% 188 100.0% 100.0% $66,008 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Geographic Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
Count
Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Bank
2012
Dollar
BankCount Dollar
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
Comparison
2012
Bank O wner
O ccupied
Units
Multi-Family Units
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
244
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 21 21.0% $1,695 7.3% 25.1% 21 21.0% 5.4% $1,695 7.3% 2.5%
Moderate 33 33.0% $3,998 17.2% 16.9% 33 33.0% 16.2% $3,998 17.2% 9.8%
Middle 10 10.0% $1,467 6.3% 17.3% 10 10.0% 18.9% $1,467 6.3% 14.8%
Upper 35 35.0% $15,853 68.2% 40.6% 35 35.0% 48.1% $15,853 68.2% 63.6%
Unknown 1 1.0% $245 1.1% 0.0% 1 1.0% 11.4% $245 1.1% 9.3%
Total 100 100.0% $23,258 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $23,258 100.0% 100.0%
Low 8 13.1% $865 5.3% 25.1% 8 13.1% 3.1% $865 5.3% 1.5%
Moderate 9 14.8% $916 5.6% 16.9% 9 14.8% 8.0% $916 5.6% 4.3%
Middle 9 14.8% $1,099 6.8% 17.3% 9 14.8% 14.6% $1,099 6.8% 9.7%
Upper 31 50.8% $12,322 75.7% 40.6% 31 50.8% 59.0% $12,322 75.7% 71.2%
Unknown 4 6.6% $1,076 6.6% 0.0% 4 6.6% 15.3% $1,076 6.6% 13.4%
Total 61 100.0% $16,278 100.0% 100.0% 61 100.0% 100.0% $16,278 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 9.1% $5 3.2% 25.1% 1 9.1% 5.2% $5 3.2% 1.7%
Moderate 2 18.2% $42 26.8% 16.9% 2 18.2% 10.0% $42 26.8% 4.7%
Middle 3 27.3% $23 14.6% 17.3% 3 27.3% 14.3% $23 14.6% 8.2%
Upper 4 36.4% $77 49.0% 40.6% 4 36.4% 67.6% $77 49.0% 80.6%
Unknown 1 9.1% $10 6.4% 0.0% 1 9.1% 2.8% $10 6.4% 4.8%
Total 11 100.0% $157 100.0% 100.0% 11 100.0% 100.0% $157 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 16 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 0.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 100.0%
Total 16 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $26,315 100.0% 100.0%
Low 30 16.0% $2,565 3.9% 25.1% 30 16.0% 4.3% $2,565 3.9% 1.9%
Moderate 44 23.4% $4,956 7.5% 16.9% 44 23.4% 12.1% $4,956 7.5% 6.8%
Middle 22 11.7% $2,589 3.9% 17.3% 22 11.7% 16.7% $2,589 3.9% 11.8%
Upper 70 37.2% $28,252 42.8% 40.6% 70 37.2% 53.7% $28,252 42.8% 64.6%
Unknown 22 11.7% $27,646 41.9% 0.0% 22 11.7% 13.2% $27,646 41.9% 15.0%
Total 188 100.0% $66,008 100.0% 100.0% 188 100.0% 100.0% $66,008 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
2012
Bank
Based on 2010 ACS Data.
Dollar
Bank
Count
Count Dollar Bank
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Families
by Family
Income
RE
FIN
AN
CE
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix H: 2012 Full Scope Lending Tables
245
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ 000s $ % $ %
Low 13 13.1% $2,899 8.5% 9.3% 13 13.1% 9.0% $2,899 8.5% 10.9%
Moderate 17 17.2% $6,452 18.8% 21.9% 17 17.2% 19.5% $6,452 18.8% 21.0%
Middle 30 30.3% $12,154 35.5% 25.0% 30 30.3% 22.9% $12,154 35.5% 23.9%
Upper 39 39.4% $12,732 37.2% 43.8% 39 39.4% 45.5% $12,732 37.2% 42.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.0% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Total 99 100.0% $34,237 100.0% 100.0% 99 100.0% 100.0% $34,237 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
Geographic Distribution of Small Business Loans
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
Dollar Bank Bank
2012 2012
BankSmall
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count
Agg Agg
# % $ % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
$1million or Less 37 37.4% $8,524 24.9% 37 37.4% 37.3% $8,524 24.9% 31.1%
Over $1 Million 53 53.5% $23,144 67.6% 53 53.5%
Total Rev. available 90 90.9% $31,668 92.5% 90 90.9%
Rev. Not Known 9 9.1% $2,569 7.5% 9 9.1%
Total 99 100.0% $34,237 100.0% 99 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 31 31.3% $1,452 4.2% 31 31.3% 93.7% $1,452 4.2% 32.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 23 23.2% $4,459 13.0% 23 23.2% 2.8% $4,459 13.0% 13.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 45 45.5% $28,326 82.7% 45 45.5% 3.5% $28,326 82.7% 54.2%
Total 99 100.0% $34,237 100.0% 99 100.0% 100.0% $34,237 100.0% 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 17 45.9% $869 10.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 9 24.3% $1,625 19.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 11 29.7% $6,030 70.7%
Total 37 100.0% $8,524 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information .
Small Business Loans by Business Revenue & Loan Size
Assessment Area: TX Houston
Business Revenue & Loan
Size
Bank Lending & Demographic Data Comparison Bank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Bank Bank
%
2012
BankTotal
Businesses
Count Dollar
Count $ (000s)
100.0%
LO
AN
SIZ
EB
US
INE
SS
RE
VE
NU
E
90.4%
5.7%
96.1%
3.9%
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
LO
AN
SIZ
E
Rev $
1 M
ill o
r
Less
Originations & Purchases
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
246
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
5,070
12.5
Moderate-income
1
4.3
988
2.4
292
29.6
5,219
12.9
Middle-income
10
43.5
18,472
45.6
1,538
8.3
8,280
20.4
Upper-income
12
52.2
21,071
52.0
1,252
5.9
21,962
54.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
23
100.0
40,531
100.0
3,082
7.6
40,531
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,380
854
1.9
61.9
440
31.9
86
6.2
Middle-income
28,967
20,254
46.0
69.9
4,353
15.0
4,360
15.1
Upper-income
43,938
22,928
52.1
52.2
6,507
14.8
14,503
33.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
74,285
44,036
100.0
59.3
11,300
15.2
18,949
25.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
143
1.1
121
1.0
12
2.2
10
1.9
Middle-income
5,104
38.3
4,710
38.5
214
39.2
180
33.7
Upper-income
8,067
60.6
7,403
60.5
320
58.6
344
64.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
13,314
100.0
12,234
100.0
546
100.0
534
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.9
4.1
4.0
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
5
2.0
5
2.1
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
142
58.2
136
58.1
5
55.6
1
100.0
Upper-income
97
39.8
93
39.7
4
44.4
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
244
100.0
234
100.0
9
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
95.9
3.7
.4
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
247
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 1.9% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.9% 0 0.0% 12.8% $0 0.0% 7.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 18.5% $0 0.0% 13.3%
Upper 16 100.0% $3,993 100.0% 54.2% 16 100.0% 55.2% $3,993 100.0% 66.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 11.6% $0 0.0% 12.2%
Total 16 100.0% $3,993 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $3,993 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 1.8% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.9% 0 0.0% 5.8% $0 0.0% 3.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 13.9% $0 0.0% 9.0%
Upper 15 88.2% $9,541 96.4% 54.2% 15 88.2% 56.4% $9,541 96.4% 66.3%
Unknown 2 11.8% $359 3.6% 0.0% 2 11.8% 22.0% $359 3.6% 20.7%
Total 17 100.0% $9,900 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $9,900 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 7.6% $0 0.0% 2.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.9% 0 0.0% 18.5% $0 0.0% 10.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 21.7% $0 0.0% 12.3%
Upper 1 100.0% $8 100.0% 54.2% 1 100.0% 45.7% $8 100.0% 61.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 13.7%
Total 1 100.0% $8 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 54.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.9% 0 0.0% 9.5% $0 0.0% 5.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.4% 0 0.0% 16.4% $0 0.0% 11.0%
Upper 32 94.1% $13,542 97.4% 54.2% 32 94.1% 55.5% $13,542 97.4% 65.9%
Unknown 2 5.9% $359 2.6% 0.0% 2 5.9% 16.6% $359 2.6% 17.0%
Total 34 100.0% $13,901 100.0% 100.0% 34 100.0% 100.0% $13,901 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 9 25.0% $2,015 21.6% 91.9% 9 25.0% 43.5% $2,015 21.6% 49.3%
Over $1 Million 14 38.9% $5,360 57.3% 4.1% 14 38.9%
Total Rev. available 23 63.9% $7,375 78.9% 96.0% 23 63.9%
Rev. Not Known 13 36.1% $1,973 21.1% 4.0% 13 36.1%
Total 36 100.0% $9,348 100.0% 100.0% 36 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 11 30.6% $750 8.0% 11 30.6% 90.1% $750 8.0% 29.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 15 41.7% $2,623 28.1% 15 41.7% 5.3% $2,623 28.1% 19.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 10 27.8% $5,975 63.9% 10 27.8% 4.6% $5,975 63.9% 50.9%
Total 36 100.0% $9,348 100.0% 36 100.0% 100.0% $9,348 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 95.9% 0 0.0% 57.1% $0 0.0% 59.6%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.7% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 76.2% $0 0.0% 16.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.5% $0 0.0% 19.7%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.3% $0 0.0% 63.9%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all F
arm R
eve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
AL
SS
ma
ll B
usin
ess
Total Businesses
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
248
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.9% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 4 25.0% $815 20.4% 46.0% 4 25.0% 31.5% $815 20.4% 24.4%
Upper 12 75.0% $3,178 79.6% 52.1% 12 75.0% 68.3% $3,178 79.6% 75.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 16 100.0% $3,993 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $3,993 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.9% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 1 5.9% $380 3.8% 46.0% 1 5.9% 32.2% $380 3.8% 24.8%
Upper 16 94.1% $9,520 96.2% 52.1% 16 94.1% 67.4% $9,520 96.2% 75.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 17 100.0% $9,900 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $9,900 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.9% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 46.0% 0 0.0% 47.3% $0 0.0% 32.8%
Upper 1 100.0% $8 100.0% 52.1% 1 100.0% 51.1% $8 100.0% 65.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $8 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 60.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 39.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.9% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 5 14.7% $1,195 8.6% 46.0% 5 14.7% 32.3% $1,195 8.6% 24.8%
Upper 29 85.3% $12,706 91.4% 52.1% 29 85.3% 67.4% $12,706 91.4% 75.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 34 100.0% $13,901 100.0% 100.0% 34 100.0% 100.0% $13,901 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Middle 5 13.9% $2,055 22.0% 38.5% 5 13.9% 29.8% $2,055 22.0% 26.8%
Upper 31 86.1% $7,293 78.0% 60.5% 31 86.1% 64.7% $7,293 78.0% 71.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.4% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 36 100.0% $9,348 100.0% 100.0% 36 100.0% 100.0% $9,348 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.1% 0 0.0% 4.8% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 58.1% 0 0.0% 57.1% $0 0.0% 36.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.7% 0 0.0% 38.1% $0 0.0% 63.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
AL
L F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
AL
L B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank Owner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
249
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
8.2
2,903
3.8
1,309
45.1
14,866
19.6
Moderate-income
19
26.0
16,797
22.1
2,351
14.0
13,045
17.2
Middle-income
26
35.6
29,453
38.8
1,601
5.4
15,786
20.8
Upper-income
22
30.1
26,722
35.2
860
3.2
32,178
42.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
73
100.0
75,875
100.0
6,121
8.1
75,875
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6,314
1,147
1.5
18.2
4,037
63.9
1,130
17.9
Moderate-income
32,355
14,832
19.3
45.8
13,426
41.5
4,097
12.7
Middle-income
44,767
31,839
41.4
71.1
9,798
21.9
3,130
7.0
Upper-income
36,852
28,998
37.7
78.7
5,878
16.0
1,976
5.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
120,288
76,816
100.0
63.9
33,139
27.5
10,333
8.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,915
8.7
1,634
8.1
219
18.2
62
8.2
Moderate-income
4,388
19.9
3,991
19.9
221
18.3
176
23.3
Middle-income
8,322
37.7
7,559
37.6
464
38.5
299
39.6
Upper-income
7,440
33.7
6,919
34.4
302
25.0
219
29.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
22,065
100.0
20,103
100.0
1,206
100.0
756
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.1
5.5
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
1.7
5
1.7
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
51
17.1
50
17.3
1
14.3
0
0.0
Middle-income
149
49.8
145
50.2
4
57.1
0
0.0
Upper-income
94
31.4
89
30.8
2
28.6
3
100.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
299
100.0
289
100.0
7
100.0
3
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.7
2.3
1.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
250
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.5% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.3% 0 0.0% 10.1% $0 0.0% 6.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.4% 0 0.0% 40.8% $0 0.0% 37.0%
Upper 2 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 37.7% 2 100.0% 48.7% $1,795 100.0% 56.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.5% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.3% 0 0.0% 8.6% $0 0.0% 5.9%
Middle 2 15.4% $425 5.6% 41.4% 2 15.4% 37.8% $425 5.6% 32.6%
Upper 11 84.6% $7,121 94.4% 37.7% 11 84.6% 53.1% $7,121 94.4% 61.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 13 100.0% $7,546 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $7,546 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.5% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.3% 0 0.0% 14.6% $0 0.0% 7.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.4% 0 0.0% 46.9% $0 0.0% 38.4%
Upper 1 100.0% $25 100.0% 37.7% 1 100.0% 37.4% $25 100.0% 53.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $25 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $25 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 20.0% $0 0.0% 16.5%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 46.7% $0 0.0% 14.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.3% $0 0.0% 69.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.5% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.3% 0 0.0% 9.7% $0 0.0% 6.2%
Middle 2 12.5% $425 4.5% 41.4% 2 12.5% 39.7% $425 4.5% 34.8%
Upper 14 87.5% $8,941 95.5% 37.7% 14 87.5% 50.1% $8,941 95.5% 58.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 16 100.0% $9,366 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $9,366 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 22.2% $1,249 21.5% 8.1% 6 22.2% 11.5% $1,249 21.5% 14.6%
Moderate 5 18.5% $950 16.4% 19.9% 5 18.5% 14.6% $950 16.4% 17.3%
Middle 6 22.2% $1,264 21.8% 37.6% 6 22.2% 33.7% $1,264 21.8% 30.8%
Upper 10 37.0% $2,341 40.3% 34.4% 10 37.0% 39.0% $2,341 40.3% 37.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 27 100.0% $5,804 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $5,804 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.7% 0 0.0% 8.0% $0 0.0% 4.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 8.0% $0 0.0% 7.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 50.2% 0 0.0% 44.0% $0 0.0% 33.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 30.8% 0 0.0% 40.0% $0 0.0% 54.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
AL
L F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
AL
L B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
ETract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank Owner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
251
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 14.2% $0 0.0% 7.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 20.2% $0 0.0% 15.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.8% 0 0.0% 20.9% $0 0.0% 20.4%
Upper 2 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 42.4% 2 100.0% 32.6% $1,795 100.0% 44.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.1% $0 0.0% 11.1%
Total 2 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $1,795 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 3.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 12.0% $0 0.0% 7.7%
Middle 1 7.7% $176 2.3% 20.8% 1 7.7% 16.1% $176 2.3% 13.3%
Upper 12 92.3% $7,370 97.7% 42.4% 12 92.3% 45.3% $7,370 97.7% 56.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 19.4% $0 0.0% 19.0%
Total 13 100.0% $7,546 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $7,546 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 21.8% $0 0.0% 8.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 23.8% $0 0.0% 13.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.8% 0 0.0% 22.8% $0 0.0% 19.3%
Upper 1 100.0% $25 100.0% 42.4% 1 100.0% 30.1% $25 100.0% 55.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 4.6%
Total 1 100.0% $25 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $25 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 11.0% $0 0.0% 5.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 16.1% $0 0.0% 11.0%
Middle 1 6.3% $176 1.9% 20.8% 1 6.3% 18.5% $176 1.9% 16.2%
Upper 15 93.8% $9,190 98.1% 42.4% 15 93.8% 39.1% $9,190 98.1% 51.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.2% $0 0.0% 16.2%
Total 16 100.0% $9,366 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $9,366 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 4 14.8% $1,064 18.3% 91.1% 4 14.8% 42.9% $1,064 18.3% 39.2%
Over $1 Million 13 48.1% $4,046 69.7% 5.5% 13 48.1%
Total Rev. available 17 62.9% $5,110 88.0% 96.6% 17 62.9%
Rev. Not Known 10 37.0% $694 12.0% 3.4% 10 37.0%
Total 27 100.0% $5,804 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 13 48.1% $550 9.5% 13 48.1% 86.8% $550 9.5% 23.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 4 14.8% $605 10.4% 4 14.8% 6.1% $605 10.4% 17.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 10 37.0% $4,649 80.1% 10 37.0% 7.1% $4,649 80.1% 59.3%
Total 27 100.0% $5,804 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $5,804 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.7% 0 0.0% 60.0% $0 0.0% 59.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 52.0% $0 0.0% 12.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 36.0% $0 0.0% 51.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.0% $0 0.0% 35.8%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all F
arm R
eve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
AL
SS
ma
ll B
usin
ess
Total Businesses
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
252
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
17
14.9
9,101
8.5
4,581
50.3
25,477
23.7
Moderate-income
20
17.5
14,378
13.4
3,942
27.4
16,878
15.7
Middle-income
51
44.7
52,919
49.3
6,690
12.6
21,393
19.9
Upper-income
26
22.8
30,940
28.8
1,507
4.9
43,590
40.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
114
100.0
107,338
100.0
16,720
15.6
107,338
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
15,189
5,075
4.9
33.4
7,753
51.0
2,361
15.5
Moderate-income
23,442
12,299
11.9
52.5
8,355
35.6
2,788
11.9
Middle-income
81,043
53,306
51.6
65.8
20,460
25.2
7,277
9.0
Upper-income
45,427
32,722
31.6
72.0
10,209
22.5
2,496
5.5
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
165,101
103,402
100.0
62.6
46,777
28.3
14,922
9.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,697
7.2
1,467
6.9
169
11.5
61
7.4
Moderate-income
2,277
9.7
2,008
9.5
180
12.3
89
10.8
Middle-income
11,590
49.4
10,487
49.5
703
48.0
400
48.7
Upper-income
7,901
33.7
7,217
34.1
412
28.1
272
33.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
23,465
100.0
21,179
100.0
1,464
100.0
822
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.3
6.2
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8
3.1
6
2.5
2
13.3
0
0.0
Moderate-income
15
5.9
12
5.0
3
20.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
166
65.4
157
65.7
9
60.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
65
25.6
64
26.8
1
6.7
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
254
100.0
239
100.0
15
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
94.1
5.9
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
253
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.9% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 3.7% $0 0.0% 2.8%
Middle 4 36.4% $352 13.8% 51.6% 4 36.4% 48.9% $352 13.8% 43.9%
Upper 7 63.6% $2,190 86.2% 31.6% 7 63.6% 46.8% $2,190 86.2% 53.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 11 100.0% $2,542 100.0% 100.0% 11 100.0% 100.0% $2,542 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 5.9% $25 0.5% 4.9% 1 5.9% 0.5% $25 0.5% 0.2%
Moderate 3 17.6% $185 3.4% 11.9% 3 17.6% 3.3% $185 3.4% 2.4%
Middle 2 11.8% $277 5.1% 51.6% 2 11.8% 44.9% $277 5.1% 39.8%
Upper 11 64.7% $4,902 91.0% 31.6% 11 64.7% 51.3% $4,902 91.0% 57.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 17 100.0% $5,389 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $5,389 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.9% 0 0.0% 1.3% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 5.8% $0 0.0% 6.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 51.6% 0 0.0% 67.7% $0 0.0% 49.8%
Upper 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 31.6% 1 100.0% 25.1% $65 100.0% 43.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.3% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 35.7% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 98.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 1 3.4% $25 0.3% 4.9% 1 3.4% 0.5% $25 0.3% 0.2%
Moderate 3 10.3% $185 2.3% 11.9% 3 10.3% 3.6% $185 2.3% 2.5%
Middle 6 20.7% $629 7.9% 51.6% 6 20.7% 47.8% $629 7.9% 39.3%
Upper 19 65.5% $7,157 89.5% 31.6% 19 65.5% 48.0% $7,157 89.5% 57.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 29 100.0% $7,996 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $7,996 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 6.3% $1,472 7.3% 6.9% 4 6.3% 6.9% $1,472 7.3% 8.5%
Moderate 1 1.6% $1,000 5.0% 9.5% 1 1.6% 8.7% $1,000 5.0% 8.7%
Middle 38 60.3% $12,317 61.4% 49.5% 38 60.3% 46.2% $12,317 61.4% 49.1%
Upper 20 31.7% $5,260 26.2% 34.1% 20 31.7% 36.2% $5,260 26.2% 33.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Total 63 100.0% $20,049 100.0% 100.0% 63 100.0% 100.0% $20,049 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 3.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.0% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 65.7% 0 0.0% 44.4% $0 0.0% 56.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 26.8% 0 0.0% 47.2% $0 0.0% 40.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
AL
L F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
AL
L B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
ETract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank Owner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
254
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.7% 0 0.0% 6.2% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 21.0% $0 0.0% 15.7%
Middle 2 18.2% $209 8.2% 19.9% 2 18.2% 25.9% $209 8.2% 24.7%
Upper 9 81.8% $2,333 91.8% 40.6% 9 81.8% 31.3% $2,333 91.8% 41.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.6% $0 0.0% 14.4%
Total 11 100.0% $2,542 100.0% 100.0% 11 100.0% 100.0% $2,542 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.7% 0 0.0% 3.4% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 10.8% $0 0.0% 7.2%
Middle 1 5.9% $103 1.9% 19.9% 1 5.9% 18.9% $103 1.9% 15.8%
Upper 15 88.2% $5,261 97.6% 40.6% 15 88.2% 43.8% $5,261 97.6% 53.9%
Unknown 1 5.9% $25 0.5% 0.0% 1 5.9% 23.1% $25 0.5% 21.3%
Total 17 100.0% $5,389 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $5,389 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.7% 0 0.0% 10.2% $0 0.0% 5.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 17.5% $0 0.0% 7.3%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.9% 0 0.0% 28.1% $0 0.0% 22.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 35.7% $0 0.0% 50.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 8.4% $65 100.0% 14.8%
Total 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.7% 0 0.0% 5.0% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 15.8% $0 0.0% 10.4%
Middle 3 10.3% $312 3.9% 19.9% 3 10.3% 22.5% $312 3.9% 18.7%
Upper 24 82.8% $7,594 95.0% 40.6% 24 82.8% 37.7% $7,594 95.0% 45.6%
Unknown 2 6.9% $90 1.1% 0.0% 2 6.9% 19.1% $90 1.1% 23.1%
Total 29 100.0% $7,996 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $7,996 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 20 31.7% $6,673 33.3% 90.3% 20 31.7% 37.4% $6,673 33.3% 40.1%
Over $1 Million 28 44.4% $10,957 54.7% 6.2% 28 44.4%
Total Rev. available 48 76.1% $17,630 88.0% 96.5% 48 76.1%
Rev. Not Known 15 23.8% $2,419 12.1% 3.5% 15 23.8%
Total 63 100.0% $20,049 100.0% 100.0% 63 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 19 30.2% $1,099 5.5% 19 30.2% 87.1% $1,099 5.5% 25.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 19 30.2% $3,435 17.1% 19 30.2% 7.3% $3,435 17.1% 22.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 25 39.7% $15,515 77.4% 25 39.7% 5.6% $15,515 77.4% 51.2%
Total 63 100.0% $20,049 100.0% 63 100.0% 100.0% $20,049 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 94.1% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 58.1%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 52.8% $0 0.0% 11.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.8% $0 0.0% 36.4%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 19.4% $0 0.0% 52.3%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Fa
rm Re
ven
ue
Lo
an
Siz
e
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
AL
SS
ma
ll B
usi
ne
ss
Total Businesses
Re
ven
ue
Lo
an
Siz
e
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
255
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
9
11.0
5,811
6.4
2,521
43.4
19,838
21.9
Moderate-income
18
22.0
16,308
18.0
3,881
23.8
15,423
17.0
Middle-income
39
47.6
43,962
48.5
3,955
9.0
19,026
21.0
Upper-income
16
19.5
24,507
27.1
597
2.4
36,301
40.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
82
100.0
90,588
100.0
10,954
12.1
90,588
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
11,867
3,690
4.1
31.1
5,705
48.1
2,472
20.8
Moderate-income
26,951
15,909
17.5
59.0
7,554
28.0
3,488
12.9
Middle-income
66,702
44,898
49.5
67.3
15,955
23.9
5,849
8.8
Upper-income
39,113
26,167
28.9
66.9
9,839
25.2
3,107
7.9
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
144,633
90,664
100.0
62.7
39,053
27.0
14,916
10.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,024
9.1
1,656
8.3
215
17.5
153
17.8
Moderate-income
3,031
13.7
2,743
13.7
163
13.2
125
14.6
Middle-income
9,252
41.8
8,528
42.5
439
35.7
285
33.2
Upper-income
7,849
35.4
7,140
35.6
414
33.6
295
34.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
22,156
100.0
20,067
100.0
1,231
100.0
858
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.6
5.6
3.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
13
3.2
11
2.8
1
7.7
1
33.3
Moderate-income
64
15.6
59
14.9
4
30.8
1
33.3
Middle-income
239
58.2
231
58.5
7
53.8
1
33.3
Upper-income
95
23.1
94
23.8
1
7.7
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
411
100.0
395
100.0
13
100.0
3
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.1
3.2
.7
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
256
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.1% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 13 4.7% $1,264 2.9% 17.5% 13 4.7% 5.3% $1,264 2.9% 2.9%
Middle 138 49.6% $19,775 45.7% 49.5% 138 49.6% 49.9% $19,775 45.7% 43.9%
Upper 127 45.7% $22,217 51.4% 28.9% 127 45.7% 44.4% $22,217 51.4% 53.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 278 100.0% $43,256 100.0% 100.0% 278 100.0% 100.0% $43,256 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.1% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 3 3.1% $398 2.3% 17.5% 3 3.1% 4.9% $398 2.3% 3.4%
Middle 39 39.8% $6,342 37.4% 49.5% 39 39.8% 46.1% $6,342 37.4% 41.7%
Upper 56 57.1% $10,221 60.3% 28.9% 56 57.1% 48.6% $10,221 60.3% 54.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 98 100.0% $16,961 100.0% 100.0% 98 100.0% 100.0% $16,961 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.1% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.5% 0 0.0% 5.9% $0 0.0% 4.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 49.5% 0 0.0% 76.7% $0 0.0% 54.2%
Upper 1 100.0% $3 100.0% 28.9% 1 100.0% 15.9% $3 100.0% 39.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $3 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $3 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 18.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.3% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 37.5% $0 0.0% 37.9%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 43.8% $0 0.0% 42.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.1% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Moderate 16 4.2% $1,662 2.8% 17.5% 16 4.2% 5.2% $1,662 2.8% 3.1%
Middle 177 46.9% $26,117 43.4% 49.5% 177 46.9% 49.6% $26,117 43.4% 42.5%
Upper 184 48.8% $32,441 53.9% 28.9% 184 48.8% 44.7% $32,441 53.9% 53.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 377 100.0% $60,220 100.0% 100.0% 377 100.0% 100.0% $60,220 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 4.8% $50 1.4% 8.3% 1 4.8% 12.1% $50 1.4% 17.0%
Moderate 2 9.5% $85 2.4% 13.7% 2 9.5% 10.6% $85 2.4% 12.0%
Middle 4 19.0% $667 19.0% 42.5% 4 19.0% 33.8% $667 19.0% 26.7%
Upper 14 66.7% $2,714 77.2% 35.6% 14 66.7% 41.2% $2,714 77.2% 44.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.2% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 21 100.0% $3,516 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $3,516 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.8% 0 0.0% 2.5% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 14.9% 1 100.0% 33.3% $175 100.0% 32.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 58.5% 0 0.0% 35.8% $0 0.0% 44.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.8% 0 0.0% 24.7% $0 0.0% 21.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.7% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Total 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $175 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
AL
L F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
AL
L B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
Bank Owner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
257
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 39 14.0% $3,296 7.6% 21.9% 39 14.0% 10.2% $3,296 7.6% 5.2%
Moderate 82 29.5% $10,295 23.8% 17.0% 82 29.5% 21.8% $10,295 23.8% 16.5%
Middle 73 26.3% $10,832 25.0% 21.0% 73 26.3% 22.1% $10,832 25.0% 21.0%
Upper 84 30.2% $18,833 43.5% 40.1% 84 30.2% 28.4% $18,833 43.5% 41.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 17.5% $0 0.0% 16.3%
Total 278 100.0% $43,256 100.0% 100.0% 278 100.0% 100.0% $43,256 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 3.1% $325 1.9% 21.9% 3 3.1% 4.2% $325 1.9% 2.2%
Moderate 13 13.3% $1,641 9.7% 17.0% 13 13.3% 12.2% $1,641 9.7% 8.2%
Middle 27 27.6% $3,747 22.1% 21.0% 27 27.6% 18.9% $3,747 22.1% 15.7%
Upper 39 39.8% $8,081 47.6% 40.1% 39 39.8% 37.9% $8,081 47.6% 46.4%
Unknown 16 16.3% $3,167 18.7% 0.0% 16 16.3% 26.8% $3,167 18.7% 27.6%
Total 98 100.0% $16,961 100.0% 100.0% 98 100.0% 100.0% $16,961 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.9% 0 0.0% 19.9% $0 0.0% 6.9%
Moderate 1 100.0% $3 100.0% 17.0% 1 100.0% 26.3% $3 100.0% 16.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.0% 0 0.0% 23.3% $0 0.0% 21.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.1% 0 0.0% 25.6% $0 0.0% 42.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.0% $0 0.0% 12.2%
Total 1 100.0% $3 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $3 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 42 11.1% $3,621 6.0% 21.9% 42 11.1% 7.6% $3,621 6.0% 3.2%
Moderate 96 25.5% $11,939 19.8% 17.0% 96 25.5% 16.9% $11,939 19.8% 11.0%
Middle 100 26.5% $14,579 24.2% 21.0% 100 26.5% 20.4% $14,579 24.2% 17.0%
Upper 123 32.6% $26,914 44.7% 40.1% 123 32.6% 33.3% $26,914 44.7% 41.9%
Unknown 16 4.2% $3,167 5.3% 0.0% 16 4.2% 21.8% $3,167 5.3% 26.9%
Total 377 100.0% $60,220 100.0% 100.0% 377 100.0% 100.0% $60,220 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 9 42.9% $763 21.7% 90.6% 9 42.9% 39.4% $763 21.7% 41.9%
Over $1 Million 8 38.1% $2,101 59.8% 5.6% 8 38.1%
Total Rev. available 17 81.0% $2,864 81.5% 96.2% 17 81.0%
Rev. Not Known 4 19.0% $652 18.5% 3.9% 4 19.0%
Total 21 100.0% $3,516 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 11 52.4% $541 15.4% 11 52.4% 87.5% $541 15.4% 26.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 5 23.8% $815 23.2% 5 23.8% 6.4% $815 23.2% 19.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 23.8% $2,160 61.4% 5 23.8% 6.1% $2,160 61.4% 54.4%
Total 21 100.0% $3,516 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $3,516 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.1% 0 0.0% 76.5% $0 0.0% 90.1%
Over $1 Million 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 3.2% 1 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.7% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 74.1% $0 0.0% 24.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 1 100.0% 19.8% $175 100.0% 45.5%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.2% $0 0.0% 30.1%
Total 1 100.0% $175 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $175 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all F
arm R
eve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses w ith revenue over $1 million or revenue unknow n, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
AL
SS
ma
ll B
usin
ess
Total Businesses
Re
ve
nu
eL
oa
n S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
258
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
5.0
876
3.0
415
47.4
6,292
21.3
Moderate-income
2
10.0
1,641
5.6
395
24.1
5,137
17.4
Middle-income
15
75.0
22,004
74.7
2,715
12.3
6,408
21.7
Upper-income
2
10.0
4,955
16.8
316
6.4
11,639
39.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
20
100.0
29,476
100.0
3,841
13.0
29,476
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,193
216
0.8
9.8
1,663
75.8
314
14.3
Moderate-income
2,867
1,336
4.9
46.6
1,254
43.7
277
9.7
Middle-income
34,421
20,949
76.6
60.9
10,552
30.7
2,920
8.5
Upper-income
6,703
4,850
17.7
72.4
1,507
22.5
346
5.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
46,184
27,351
100.0
59.2
14,976
32.4
3,857
8.4
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
130
2.1
115
2.0
11
2.8
4
1.7
Moderate-income
309
4.9
265
4.7
22
5.7
22
9.1
Middle-income
4,487
71.0
4,029
70.8
278
72.0
180
74.4
Upper-income
1,392
22.0
1,281
22.5
75
19.4
36
14.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
6,318
100.0
5,690
100.0
386
100.0
242
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.1
6.1
3.8
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.2
1
0.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
25
4.0
20
3.3
3
23.1
2
40.0
Middle-income
476
76.4
466
77.0
8
61.5
2
40.0
Upper-income
121
19.4
118
19.5
2
15.4
1
20.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
623
100.0
605
100.0
13
100.0
5
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.1
2.1
.8
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
259
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.9% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Middle 18 41.9% $2,273 31.7% 76.6% 18 41.9% 61.1% $2,273 31.7% 51.4%
Upper 25 58.1% $4,904 68.3% 17.7% 25 58.1% 35.9% $4,904 68.3% 47.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 43 100.0% $7,177 100.0% 100.0% 43 100.0% 100.0% $7,177 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 6 8.1% $149 1.2% 4.9% 6 8.1% 2.0% $149 1.2% 0.9%
Middle 37 50.0% $4,538 37.1% 76.6% 37 50.0% 58.7% $4,538 37.1% 47.1%
Upper 31 41.9% $7,535 61.7% 17.7% 31 41.9% 38.9% $7,535 61.7% 51.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 74 100.0% $12,222 100.0% 100.0% 74 100.0% 100.0% $12,222 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 5 17.9% $75 15.2% 4.9% 5 17.9% 6.2% $75 15.2% 3.0%
Middle 13 46.4% $171 34.7% 76.6% 13 46.4% 71.0% $171 34.7% 61.1%
Upper 10 35.7% $247 50.1% 17.7% 10 35.7% 22.5% $247 50.1% 35.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 28 100.0% $493 100.0% 100.0% 28 100.0% 100.0% $493 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.4% $0 0.0% 3.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 73.1% $0 0.0% 91.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 11.5% $0 0.0% 5.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 11 7.6% $224 1.1% 4.9% 11 7.6% 2.4% $224 1.1% 1.0%
Middle 68 46.9% $6,982 35.1% 76.6% 68 46.9% 60.5% $6,982 35.1% 51.8%
Upper 66 45.5% $12,686 63.8% 17.7% 66 45.5% 36.5% $12,686 63.8% 46.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 145 100.0% $19,892 100.0% 100.0% 145 100.0% 100.0% $19,892 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 1.1% $100 0.5% 2.0% 1 1.1% 1.6% $100 0.5% 1.7%
Moderate 2 2.1% $176 0.8% 4.7% 2 2.1% 1.5% $176 0.8% 0.8%
Middle 78 82.1% $15,741 75.7% 70.8% 78 82.1% 69.9% $15,741 75.7% 71.9%
Upper 14 14.7% $4,775 23.0% 22.5% 14 14.7% 22.7% $4,775 23.0% 24.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.4% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 95 100.0% $20,792 100.0% 100.0% 95 100.0% 100.0% $20,792 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.3% 0 0.0% 4.9% $0 0.0% 7.8%
Middle 20 80.0% $2,517 78.2% 77.0% 20 80.0% 73.6% $2,517 78.2% 73.9%
Upper 5 20.0% $700 21.8% 19.5% 5 20.0% 19.1% $700 21.8% 18.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.4% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 25 100.0% $3,217 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $3,217 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
260
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 4.7% $176 2.5% 21.3% 2 4.7% 8.2% $176 2.5% 4.1%
Moderate 8 18.6% $932 13.0% 17.4% 8 18.6% 19.7% $932 13.0% 13.1%
Middle 11 25.6% $1,516 21.1% 21.7% 11 25.6% 18.5% $1,516 21.1% 16.8%
Upper 21 48.8% $4,465 62.2% 39.5% 21 48.8% 34.3% $4,465 62.2% 46.3%
Unknown 1 2.3% $88 1.2% 0.0% 1 2.3% 19.3% $88 1.2% 19.8%
Total 43 100.0% $7,177 100.0% 100.0% 43 100.0% 100.0% $7,177 100.0% 100.0%
Low 8 10.8% $252 2.1% 21.3% 8 10.8% 3.9% $252 2.1% 1.4%
Moderate 12 16.2% $930 7.6% 17.4% 12 16.2% 10.5% $930 7.6% 5.6%
Middle 11 14.9% $1,109 9.1% 21.7% 11 14.9% 17.0% $1,109 9.1% 12.1%
Upper 41 55.4% $9,672 79.1% 39.5% 41 55.4% 45.9% $9,672 79.1% 55.0%
Unknown 2 2.7% $259 2.1% 0.0% 2 2.7% 22.8% $259 2.1% 26.0%
Total 74 100.0% $12,222 100.0% 100.0% 74 100.0% 100.0% $12,222 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 21.4% $38 7.7% 21.3% 6 21.4% 13.0% $38 7.7% 4.8%
Moderate 2 7.1% $40 8.1% 17.4% 2 7.1% 15.9% $40 8.1% 11.2%
Middle 6 21.4% $70 14.2% 21.7% 6 21.4% 18.5% $70 14.2% 15.8%
Upper 12 42.9% $299 60.6% 39.5% 12 42.9% 45.3% $299 60.6% 58.5%
Unknown 2 7.1% $46 9.3% 0.0% 2 7.1% 7.2% $46 9.3% 9.7%
Total 28 100.0% $493 100.0% 100.0% 28 100.0% 100.0% $493 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 16 11.0% $466 2.3% 21.3% 16 11.0% 6.3% $466 2.3% 2.4%
Moderate 22 15.2% $1,902 9.6% 17.4% 22 15.2% 14.8% $1,902 9.6% 8.4%
Middle 28 19.3% $2,695 13.5% 21.7% 28 19.3% 17.6% $2,695 13.5% 13.3%
Upper 74 51.0% $14,436 72.6% 39.5% 74 51.0% 40.6% $14,436 72.6% 48.1%
Unknown 5 3.4% $393 2.0% 0.0% 5 3.4% 20.8% $393 2.0% 27.8%
Total 145 100.0% $19,892 100.0% 100.0% 145 100.0% 100.0% $19,892 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 55 57.9% $9,285 44.7% 90.1% 55 57.9% 40.0% $9,285 44.7% 40.1%
Over $1 Million 26 27.4% $9,114 43.8% 6.1% 26 27.4%
Total Rev. available 81 85.3% $18,399 88.5% 96.2% 81 85.3%
Rev. Not Known 14 14.7% $2,393 11.5% 3.8% 14 14.7%
Total 95 100.0% $20,792 100.0% 100.0% 95 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 49 51.6% $2,292 11.0% 49 51.6% 88.6% $2,292 11.0% 24.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 17 17.9% $2,583 12.4% 17 17.9% 5.4% $2,583 12.4% 16.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 29 30.5% $15,917 76.6% 29 30.5% 6.0% $15,917 76.6% 58.7%
Total 95 100.0% $20,792 100.0% 95 100.0% 100.0% $20,792 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 19 76.0% $2,579 80.2% 97.1% 19 76.0% 67.1% $2,579 80.2% 62.7%
Over $1 Million 4 16.0% $525 16.3% 2.1% 4 16.0%
Not Known 2 8.0% $113 3.5% 0.8% 2 8.0%
Total 25 100.0% $3,217 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 14 56.0% $737 22.9% 14 56.0% 49.6% $737 22.9% 12.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 7 28.0% $1,187 36.9% 7 28.0% 24.8% $1,187 36.9% 27.6%
$250,001 - $500,000 4 16.0% $1,293 40.2% 4 16.0% 25.6% $1,293 40.2% 60.2%
Total 25 100.0% $3,217 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $3,217 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
261
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
6,986
19.4
Moderate-income
1
3.2
567
1.6
97
17.1
7,127
19.8
Middle-income
28
90.3
31,548
87.7
4,025
12.8
8,390
23.3
Upper-income
2
6.5
3,865
10.7
255
6.6
13,477
37.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
31
100.0
35,980
100.0
4,377
12.2
35,980
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,139
677
1.8
59.4
108
9.5
354
31.1
Middle-income
51,104
32,600
87.7
63.8
11,779
23.0
6,725
13.2
Upper-income
6,067
3,898
10.5
64.2
1,660
27.4
509
8.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
58,310
37,175
100.0
63.8
13,547
23.2
7,588
13.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
69
1.1
63
1.1
1
0.4
5
1.7
Middle-income
5,309
85.3
4,827
85.1
225
87.2
257
86.0
Upper-income
849
13.6
780
13.8
32
12.4
37
12.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
6,227
100.0
5,670
100.0
258
100.0
299
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.1
4.1
4.8
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
6
0.8
6
0.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
758
96.1
750
96.0
6
100.0
2
100.0
Upper-income
25
3.2
25
3.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
789
100.0
781
100.0
6
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
99.0
.8
.3
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
262
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.8% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Middle 46 92.0% $3,788 89.7% 87.7% 46 92.0% 75.1% $3,788 89.7% 71.2%
Upper 4 8.0% $433 10.3% 10.5% 4 8.0% 23.6% $433 10.3% 27.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 50 100.0% $4,221 100.0% 100.0% 50 100.0% 100.0% $4,221 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 0.9% $19 0.3% 1.8% 1 0.9% 1.3% $19 0.3% 1.1%
Middle 102 94.4% $5,515 91.0% 87.7% 102 94.4% 79.5% $5,515 91.0% 74.0%
Upper 5 4.6% $524 8.6% 10.5% 5 4.6% 19.1% $524 8.6% 24.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 108 100.0% $6,058 100.0% 100.0% 108 100.0% 100.0% $6,058 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.8% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 2.9%
Middle 60 96.8% $823 97.1% 87.7% 60 96.8% 88.3% $823 97.1% 88.3%
Upper 2 3.2% $25 2.9% 10.5% 2 3.2% 9.8% $25 2.9% 8.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 62 100.0% $848 100.0% 100.0% 62 100.0% 100.0% $848 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 1 100.0% $150 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 71.4% $150 100.0% 73.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 28.6% $0 0.0% 27.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $150 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $150 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 0.5% $19 0.2% 1.8% 1 0.5% 1.2% $19 0.2% 1.0%
Middle 209 94.6% $10,276 91.1% 87.7% 209 94.6% 78.3% $10,276 91.1% 73.2%
Upper 11 5.0% $982 8.7% 10.5% 11 5.0% 20.3% $982 8.7% 25.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 221 100.0% $11,277 100.0% 100.0% 221 100.0% 100.0% $11,277 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.1% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Middle 51 96.2% $5,688 88.4% 85.1% 51 96.2% 77.9% $5,688 88.4% 77.9%
Upper 2 3.8% $750 11.6% 13.8% 2 3.8% 14.2% $750 11.6% 20.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.9% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Total 53 100.0% $6,438 100.0% 100.0% 53 100.0% 100.0% $6,438 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Middle 128 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 96.0% 128 100.0% 93.3% $12,697 100.0% 94.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.2% 0 0.0% 4.2% $0 0.0% 5.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 128 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 100.0% 128 100.0% 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
263
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 11 22.0% $569 13.5% 19.4% 11 22.0% 7.8% $569 13.5% 4.6%
Moderate 11 22.0% $906 21.5% 19.8% 11 22.0% 22.0% $906 21.5% 17.8%
Middle 10 20.0% $693 16.4% 23.3% 10 20.0% 19.0% $693 16.4% 19.0%
Upper 18 36.0% $2,053 48.6% 37.5% 18 36.0% 37.1% $2,053 48.6% 45.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.1% $0 0.0% 13.1%
Total 50 100.0% $4,221 100.0% 100.0% 50 100.0% 100.0% $4,221 100.0% 100.0%
Low 13 12.0% $319 5.3% 19.4% 13 12.0% 6.9% $319 5.3% 3.5%
Moderate 29 26.9% $1,133 18.7% 19.8% 29 26.9% 14.4% $1,133 18.7% 9.4%
Middle 16 14.8% $577 9.5% 23.3% 16 14.8% 18.0% $577 9.5% 13.7%
Upper 48 44.4% $3,864 63.8% 37.5% 48 44.4% 48.9% $3,864 63.8% 59.5%
Unknown 2 1.9% $165 2.7% 0.0% 2 1.9% 11.9% $165 2.7% 14.0%
Total 108 100.0% $6,058 100.0% 100.0% 108 100.0% 100.0% $6,058 100.0% 100.0%
Low 13 21.0% $131 15.4% 19.4% 13 21.0% 15.4% $131 15.4% 6.2%
Moderate 15 24.2% $115 13.6% 19.8% 15 24.2% 24.3% $115 13.6% 16.4%
Middle 7 11.3% $64 7.5% 23.3% 7 11.3% 19.6% $64 7.5% 20.7%
Upper 27 43.5% $538 63.4% 37.5% 27 43.5% 37.9% $538 63.4% 53.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 3.5%
Total 62 100.0% $848 100.0% 100.0% 62 100.0% 100.0% $848 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 37.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $150 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $150 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $150 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $150 100.0% 100.0%
Low 37 16.7% $1,019 9.0% 19.4% 37 16.7% 7.9% $1,019 9.0% 4.0%
Moderate 55 24.9% $2,154 19.1% 19.8% 55 24.9% 18.3% $2,154 19.1% 13.1%
Middle 33 14.9% $1,334 11.8% 23.3% 33 14.9% 18.5% $1,334 11.8% 16.1%
Upper 93 42.1% $6,455 57.2% 37.5% 93 42.1% 43.1% $6,455 57.2% 53.1%
Unknown 3 1.4% $315 2.8% 0.0% 3 1.4% 12.3% $315 2.8% 13.7%
Total 221 100.0% $11,277 100.0% 100.0% 221 100.0% 100.0% $11,277 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 23 43.4% $1,755 27.3% 91.1% 23 43.4% 35.6% $1,755 27.3% 35.5%
Over $1 Million 14 26.4% $3,751 58.3% 4.1% 14 26.4%
Total Rev. available 37 69.8% $5,506 85.6% 95.2% 37 69.8%
Rev. Not Known 16 30.2% $932 14.5% 4.8% 16 30.2%
Total 53 100.0% $6,438 100.0% 100.0% 53 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 39 73.6% $1,588 24.7% 39 73.6% 93.5% $1,588 24.7% 39.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 7 13.2% $1,132 17.6% 7 13.2% 3.2% $1,132 17.6% 13.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 7 13.2% $3,718 57.8% 7 13.2% 3.4% $3,718 57.8% 46.7%
Total 53 100.0% $6,438 100.0% 53 100.0% 100.0% $6,438 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 109 85.2% $11,004 86.7% 99.0% 109 85.2% 72.1% $11,004 86.7% 63.1%
Over $1 Million 4 3.1% $791 6.2% 0.8% 4 3.1%
Not Known 15 11.7% $902 7.1% 0.3% 15 11.7%
Total 128 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 100.0% 128 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 79 61.7% $3,646 28.7% 79 61.7% 61.0% $3,646 28.7% 18.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 41 32.0% $6,301 49.6% 41 32.0% 23.7% $6,301 49.6% 34.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 8 6.3% $2,750 21.7% 8 6.3% 15.3% $2,750 21.7% 47.6%
Total 128 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 128 100.0% 100.0% $12,697 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
264
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
1.7
2,090
1.6
906
43.3
22,017
17.1
Moderate-income
20
17.1
18,440
14.4
2,789
15.1
25,614
19.9
Middle-income
68
58.1
80,176
62.4
4,285
5.3
29,947
23.3
Upper-income
27
23.1
27,717
21.6
616
2.2
50,845
39.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
117
100.0
128,423
100.0
8,596
6.7
128,423
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,069
1,248
0.9
40.7
1,591
51.8
230
7.5
Moderate-income
37,265
17,856
12.4
47.9
12,959
34.8
6,450
17.3
Middle-income
144,203
92,210
63.9
63.9
24,057
16.7
27,936
19.4
Upper-income
60,868
32,942
22.8
54.1
5,736
9.4
22,190
36.5
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
245,405
144,256
100.0
58.8
44,343
18.1
56,806
23.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
429
0.8
378
0.7
33
1.6
18
1.0
Moderate-income
6,077
11.1
5,440
10.7
363
17.2
274
15.0
Middle-income
34,294
62.4
32,118
62.9
1,123
53.3
1,053
57.6
Upper-income
14,195
25.8
13,126
25.7
586
27.8
483
26.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
54,995
100.0
51,062
100.0
2,105
100.0
1,828
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.8
3.8
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.3
1
0.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
39
10.3
36
9.8
3
30.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
247
65.2
240
65.2
6
60.0
1
100.0
Upper-income
92
24.3
91
24.7
1
10.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
379
100.0
368
100.0
10
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.1
2.6
.3
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
265
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 0.9% $75 0.4% 0.9% 2 0.9% 0.1% $75 0.4% 0.0%
Moderate 14 6.2% $840 4.1% 12.4% 14 6.2% 4.3% $840 4.1% 3.1%
Middle 191 84.5% $16,027 79.1% 63.9% 191 84.5% 67.0% $16,027 79.1% 53.8%
Upper 19 8.4% $3,315 16.4% 22.8% 19 8.4% 28.6% $3,315 16.4% 43.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 226 100.0% $20,257 100.0% 100.0% 226 100.0% 100.0% $20,257 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.4% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Middle 7 70.0% $1,557 70.6% 63.9% 7 70.0% 52.6% $1,557 70.6% 40.2%
Upper 3 30.0% $649 29.4% 22.8% 3 30.0% 44.1% $649 29.4% 57.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 10 100.0% $2,206 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $2,206 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.9% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.4% 0 0.0% 14.6% $0 0.0% 7.2%
Middle 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 63.9% 3 100.0% 61.8% $70 100.0% 48.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.8% 0 0.0% 21.9% $0 0.0% 43.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.0% $0 0.0% 13.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 45.0% $0 0.0% 56.5%
Upper 1 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 40.0% $3,439 100.0% 29.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.8% $75 0.3% 0.9% 2 0.8% 0.1% $75 0.3% 0.0%
Moderate 14 5.8% $840 3.2% 12.4% 14 5.8% 4.1% $840 3.2% 2.8%
Middle 201 83.8% $17,654 68.0% 63.9% 201 83.8% 61.7% $17,654 68.0% 47.8%
Upper 23 9.6% $7,403 28.5% 22.8% 23 9.6% 34.1% $7,403 28.5% 49.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 240 100.0% $25,972 100.0% 100.0% 240 100.0% 100.0% $25,972 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.7% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Moderate 2 11.8% $1,116 25.2% 10.7% 2 11.8% 9.5% $1,116 25.2% 12.6%
Middle 7 41.2% $1,318 29.8% 62.9% 7 41.2% 58.2% $1,318 29.8% 53.0%
Upper 8 47.1% $1,986 44.9% 25.7% 8 47.1% 29.9% $1,986 44.9% 32.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.8% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Total 17 100.0% $4,420 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $4,420 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.8% 0 0.0% 4.2% $0 0.0% 28.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 65.2% 0 0.0% 70.8% $0 0.0% 37.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.7% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 34.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
266
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 83 36.7% $5,405 26.7% 17.1% 83 36.7% 8.6% $5,405 26.7% 4.1%
Moderate 71 31.4% $6,285 31.0% 19.9% 71 31.4% 15.0% $6,285 31.0% 9.3%
Middle 33 14.6% $3,326 16.4% 23.3% 33 14.6% 15.8% $3,326 16.4% 12.5%
Upper 37 16.4% $4,980 24.6% 39.6% 37 16.4% 45.8% $4,980 24.6% 60.8%
Unknown 2 0.9% $261 1.3% 0.0% 2 0.9% 14.7% $261 1.3% 13.3%
Total 226 100.0% $20,257 100.0% 100.0% 226 100.0% 100.0% $20,257 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 3.9% $0 0.0% 1.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.9% 0 0.0% 8.2% $0 0.0% 4.2%
Middle 1 10.0% $125 5.7% 23.3% 1 10.0% 14.6% $125 5.7% 9.2%
Upper 7 70.0% $1,653 74.9% 39.6% 7 70.0% 53.6% $1,653 74.9% 67.0%
Unknown 2 20.0% $428 19.4% 0.0% 2 20.0% 19.7% $428 19.4% 17.7%
Total 10 100.0% $2,206 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $2,206 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 10.3% $0 0.0% 1.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.9% 0 0.0% 23.6% $0 0.0% 11.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.3% 0 0.0% 24.5% $0 0.0% 17.0%
Upper 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 39.6% 3 100.0% 36.9% $70 100.0% 62.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.7% $0 0.0% 7.1%
Total 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $3,439 100.0% 100.0%
Low 83 34.6% $5,405 20.8% 17.1% 83 34.6% 6.9% $5,405 20.8% 3.1%
Moderate 71 29.6% $6,285 24.2% 19.9% 71 29.6% 12.7% $6,285 24.2% 7.0%
Middle 34 14.2% $3,451 13.3% 23.3% 34 14.2% 15.5% $3,451 13.3% 11.0%
Upper 47 19.6% $6,703 25.8% 39.6% 47 19.6% 48.5% $6,703 25.8% 63.2%
Unknown 5 2.1% $4,128 15.9% 0.0% 5 2.1% 16.5% $4,128 15.9% 15.7%
Total 240 100.0% $25,972 100.0% 100.0% 240 100.0% 100.0% $25,972 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 6 35.3% $2,941 66.5% 92.8% 6 35.3% 43.8% $2,941 66.5% 38.4%
Over $1 Million 4 23.5% $866 19.6% 3.8% 4 23.5%
Total Rev. available 10 58.8% $3,807 86.1% 96.6% 10 58.8%
Rev. Not Known 7 41.2% $613 13.9% 3.3% 7 41.2%
Total 17 100.0% $4,420 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 7 41.2% $301 6.8% 7 41.2% 95.1% $301 6.8% 37.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 5 29.4% $934 21.1% 5 29.4% 2.3% $934 21.1% 13.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 29.4% $3,185 72.1% 5 29.4% 2.6% $3,185 72.1% 48.7%
Total 17 100.0% $4,420 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $4,420 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 97.1% 0 0.0% 54.2% $0 0.0% 56.6%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.6% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 83.3% $0 0.0% 19.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 24.9%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 55.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
267
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,548
12.3
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,533
12.3
Middle-income
7
26.9
5,205
25.2
628
12.1
3,536
17.1
Upper-income
18
69.2
15,456
74.8
775
5.0
12,044
58.3
Unknown-income
1
3.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
26
100.0
20,661
100.0
1,403
6.8
20,661
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
11,977
4,435
20.3
37.0
5,207
43.5
2,335
19.5
Upper-income
39,612
17,465
79.7
44.1
7,951
20.1
14,196
35.8
Unknown-income
28
0
0.0
0.0
28
100.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
51,617
21,900
100.0
42.4
13,186
25.5
16,531
32.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
2,137
22.8
1,947
22.6
97
25.3
93
26.5
Upper-income
7,227
77.2
6,682
77.4
287
74.7
258
73.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
9,364
100.0
8,629
100.0
384
100.0
351
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.2
4.1
3.7
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
12
19.4
12
19.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
50
80.6
50
80.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
62
100.0
62
100.0
0
.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
100.0
.0
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
268
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 8 19.0% $2,161 19.4% 20.3% 8 19.0% 15.4% $2,161 19.4% 16.6%
Upper 34 81.0% $8,974 80.6% 79.7% 34 81.0% 84.6% $8,974 80.6% 83.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 42 100.0% $11,135 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $11,135 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 11 37.9% $2,958 32.8% 20.3% 11 37.9% 17.0% $2,958 32.8% 19.2%
Upper 18 62.1% $6,063 67.2% 79.7% 18 62.1% 83.0% $6,063 67.2% 80.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 29 100.0% $9,021 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $9,021 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 1 50.0% $5 5.3% 20.3% 1 50.0% 15.4% $5 5.3% 10.7%
Upper 1 50.0% $89 94.7% 79.7% 1 50.0% 84.6% $89 94.7% 89.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $94 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $94 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 20 27.4% $5,124 25.3% 20.3% 20 27.4% 16.2% $5,124 25.3% 17.8%
Upper 53 72.6% $15,126 74.7% 79.7% 53 72.6% 83.8% $15,126 74.7% 82.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 73 100.0% $20,250 100.0% 100.0% 73 100.0% 100.0% $20,250 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 8 57.1% $1,806 48.5% 22.6% 8 57.1% 28.9% $1,806 48.5% 31.9%
Upper 6 42.9% $1,917 51.5% 77.4% 6 42.9% 67.5% $1,917 51.5% 67.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.6% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 14 100.0% $3,723 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $3,723 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.4% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 76.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 80.6% 0 0.0% 87.5% $0 0.0% 23.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
269
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 1 2.4% $161 1.4% 12.3% 1 2.4% 1.0% $161 1.4% 0.4%
Middle 7 16.7% $1,246 11.2% 17.1% 7 16.7% 6.6% $1,246 11.2% 3.6%
Upper 34 81.0% $9,728 87.4% 58.3% 34 81.0% 76.4% $9,728 87.4% 81.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.7% $0 0.0% 14.5%
Total 42 100.0% $11,135 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $11,135 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Moderate 1 3.4% $148 1.6% 12.3% 1 3.4% 2.9% $148 1.6% 1.4%
Middle 3 10.3% $593 6.6% 17.1% 3 10.3% 5.3% $593 6.6% 3.0%
Upper 19 65.5% $5,639 62.5% 58.3% 19 65.5% 69.0% $5,639 62.5% 77.7%
Unknown 6 20.7% $2,641 29.3% 0.0% 6 20.7% 21.8% $2,641 29.3% 17.5%
Total 29 100.0% $9,021 100.0% 100.0% 29 100.0% 100.0% $9,021 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 3.8% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 1 50.0% $5 5.3% 12.3% 1 50.0% 7.7% $5 5.3% 1.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 15.4% $0 0.0% 10.5%
Upper 1 50.0% $89 94.7% 58.3% 1 50.0% 73.1% $89 94.7% 88.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $94 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $94 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 58.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.3% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 3 4.1% $314 1.6% 12.3% 3 4.1% 2.0% $314 1.6% 0.9%
Middle 10 13.7% $1,839 9.1% 17.1% 10 13.7% 6.1% $1,839 9.1% 3.3%
Upper 54 74.0% $15,456 76.3% 58.3% 54 74.0% 72.7% $15,456 76.3% 79.1%
Unknown 6 8.2% $2,641 13.0% 0.0% 6 8.2% 18.6% $2,641 13.0% 16.5%
Total 73 100.0% $20,250 100.0% 100.0% 73 100.0% 100.0% $20,250 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 9 64.3% $2,428 65.2% 92.2% 9 64.3% 45.7% $2,428 65.2% 55.5%
Over $1 Million 3 21.4% $850 22.8% 4.1% 3 21.4%
Total Rev. available 12 85.7% $3,278 88.0% 96.3% 12 85.7%
Rev. Not Known 2 14.3% $445 12.0% 3.7% 2 14.3%
Total 14 100.0% $3,723 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 3 21.4% $184 4.9% 3 21.4% 95.2% $184 4.9% 34.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 6 42.9% $1,039 27.9% 6 42.9% 2.1% $1,039 27.9% 14.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 35.7% $2,500 67.2% 5 35.7% 2.7% $2,500 67.2% 51.0%
Total 14 100.0% $3,723 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $3,723 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 86.0%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 87.5% $0 0.0% 23.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 76.4%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
270
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
27
5.0
22,372
3.1
7,765
34.7
147,294
20.5
Moderate-income
142
26.1
184,487
25.6
25,977
14.1
132,139
18.4
Middle-income
206
37.9
285,413
39.6
16,704
5.9
147,822
20.5
Upper-income
167
30.7
227,688
31.6
6,563
2.9
292,705
40.7
Unknown-income
2
0.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
544
100.0
719,960
100.0
57,009
7.9
719,960
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
38,378
10,049
1.2
26.2
23,713
61.8
4,616
12.0
Moderate-income
360,048
195,461
24.2
54.3
116,972
32.5
47,615
13.2
Middle-income
524,799
337,460
41.7
64.3
126,060
24.0
61,279
11.7
Upper-income
374,246
265,679
32.9
71.0
53,226
14.2
55,341
14.8
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,297,471
808,649
100.0
62.3
319,971
24.7
168,851
13.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
10,006
3.4
8,781
3.2
808
6.0
417
4.4
Moderate-income
61,653
21.0
55,825
20.7
3,653
27.3
2,175
23.2
Middle-income
112,036
38.2
103,523
38.3
4,867
36.4
3,646
38.8
Upper-income
109,109
37.2
101,951
37.7
4,020
30.1
3,138
33.4
Unknown-income
150
0.1
110
0.0
27
0.2
13
0.1
Total Assessment Area
292,954
100.0
270,190
100.0
13,375
100.0
9,389
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.2
4.6
3.2
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
50
3.9
44
3.7
6
10.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
175
13.8
160
13.3
14
23.3
1
25.0
Middle-income
411
32.4
396
32.9
13
21.7
2
50.0
Upper-income
631
49.8
603
50.1
27
45.0
1
25.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,267
100.0
1,203
100.0
60
100.0
4
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
94.9
4.7
.3
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
271
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 1 7.1% $205 7.2% 24.2% 1 7.1% 14.8% $205 7.2% 9.4%
Middle 8 57.1% $1,002 35.0% 41.7% 8 57.1% 40.5% $1,002 35.0% 32.5%
Upper 5 35.7% $1,656 57.8% 32.9% 5 35.7% 43.5% $1,656 57.8% 57.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 14 100.0% $2,863 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $2,863 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 3 17.6% $286 2.8% 24.2% 3 17.6% 7.9% $286 2.8% 5.1%
Middle 6 35.3% $1,367 13.4% 41.7% 6 35.3% 31.8% $1,367 13.4% 25.1%
Upper 8 47.1% $8,529 83.8% 32.9% 8 47.1% 59.7% $8,529 83.8% 69.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 17 100.0% $10,182 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $10,182 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 1 33.3% $20 28.6% 24.2% 1 33.3% 14.5% $20 28.6% 5.8%
Middle 1 33.3% $15 21.4% 41.7% 1 33.3% 32.0% $15 21.4% 23.3%
Upper 1 33.3% $35 50.0% 32.9% 1 33.3% 51.8% $35 50.0% 70.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.8% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 30.4% $0 0.0% 21.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.0% $0 0.0% 40.3%
Upper 2 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 28.7% $1,454 100.0% 37.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 5 13.9% $511 3.5% 24.2% 5 13.9% 11.9% $511 3.5% 8.2%
Middle 15 41.7% $2,384 16.4% 41.7% 15 41.7% 36.7% $2,384 16.4% 29.6%
Upper 16 44.4% $11,674 80.1% 32.9% 16 44.4% 50.4% $11,674 80.1% 61.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 36 100.0% $14,569 100.0% 100.0% 36 100.0% 100.0% $14,569 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.2% 0 0.0% 3.4% $0 0.0% 5.0%
Moderate 6 23.1% $1,420 23.0% 20.7% 6 23.1% 17.2% $1,420 23.0% 20.4%
Middle 10 38.5% $2,688 43.6% 38.3% 10 38.5% 36.6% $2,688 43.6% 37.5%
Upper 10 38.5% $2,060 33.4% 37.7% 10 38.5% 42.1% $2,060 33.4% 36.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 26 100.0% $6,168 100.0% 100.0% 26 100.0% 100.0% $6,168 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.7% 0 0.0% 5.3% $0 0.0% 9.5%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.3% 0 0.0% 6.3% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 32.9% 0 0.0% 28.4% $0 0.0% 15.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 50.1% 0 0.0% 58.9% $0 0.0% 74.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
272
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 6.2% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 4 28.6% $374 13.1% 18.4% 4 28.6% 18.4% $374 13.1% 10.5%
Middle 3 21.4% $452 15.8% 20.5% 3 21.4% 19.5% $452 15.8% 15.6%
Upper 7 50.0% $2,037 71.1% 40.7% 7 50.0% 43.3% $2,037 71.1% 59.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 12.5%
Total 14 100.0% $2,863 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $2,863 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 5.9% $50 0.5% 20.5% 1 5.9% 3.7% $50 0.5% 1.8%
Moderate 1 5.9% $138 1.4% 18.4% 1 5.9% 8.3% $138 1.4% 4.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 13.6% $0 0.0% 9.3%
Upper 11 64.7% $3,581 35.2% 40.7% 11 64.7% 49.0% $3,581 35.2% 62.1%
Unknown 4 23.5% $6,413 63.0% 0.0% 4 23.5% 25.5% $6,413 63.0% 22.3%
Total 17 100.0% $10,182 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $10,182 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 8.6% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.4% 0 0.0% 18.1% $0 0.0% 5.4%
Middle 2 66.7% $35 50.0% 20.5% 2 66.7% 22.5% $35 50.0% 13.0%
Upper 1 33.3% $35 50.0% 40.7% 1 33.3% 45.5% $35 50.0% 64.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.3% $0 0.0% 15.3%
Total 3 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $70 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 2 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 100.0%
Total 2 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $1,454 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.8% $50 0.3% 20.5% 1 2.8% 5.2% $50 0.3% 2.1%
Moderate 5 13.9% $512 3.5% 18.4% 5 13.9% 14.1% $512 3.5% 7.3%
Middle 5 13.9% $487 3.3% 20.5% 5 13.9% 17.0% $487 3.3% 12.1%
Upper 19 52.8% $5,653 38.8% 40.7% 19 52.8% 45.7% $5,653 38.8% 57.4%
Unknown 6 16.7% $7,867 54.0% 0.0% 6 16.7% 18.1% $7,867 54.0% 21.1%
Total 36 100.0% $14,569 100.0% 100.0% 36 100.0% 100.0% $14,569 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 11 42.3% $3,427 55.6% 92.2% 11 42.3% 43.2% $3,427 55.6% 29.9%
Over $1 Million 7 26.9% $1,280 20.8% 4.6% 7 26.9%
Total Rev. available 18 69.2% $4,707 76.4% 96.8% 18 69.2%
Rev. Not Known 8 30.8% $1,461 23.7% 3.2% 8 30.8%
Total 26 100.0% $6,168 100.0% 100.0% 26 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 9 34.6% $368 6.0% 9 34.6% 96.1% $368 6.0% 44.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 9 34.6% $1,659 26.9% 9 34.6% 2.0% $1,659 26.9% 14.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 8 30.8% $4,141 67.1% 8 30.8% 1.9% $4,141 67.1% 41.1%
Total 26 100.0% $6,168 100.0% 26 100.0% 100.0% $6,168 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 94.9% 0 0.0% 65.3% $0 0.0% 50.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.7% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 92.6% $0 0.0% 45.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 8.8%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.3% $0 0.0% 46.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
273
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
5.4
2,187
4.4
1,031
47.1
11,603
23.5
Moderate-income
5
13.5
5,262
10.7
1,744
33.1
7,241
14.7
Middle-income
18
48.6
23,442
47.5
4,697
20.0
8,708
17.6
Upper-income
11
29.7
18,505
37.5
2,222
12.0
21,844
44.2
Unknown-income
1
2.7
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
37
100.0
49,396
100.0
9,694
19.6
49,396
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,699
1,722
3.5
46.6
1,402
37.9
575
15.5
Moderate-income
8,048
4,311
8.8
53.6
3,001
37.3
736
9.1
Middle-income
35,692
23,187
47.2
65.0
8,868
24.8
3,637
10.2
Upper-income
26,075
19,934
40.6
76.4
3,930
15.1
2,211
8.5
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
73,514
49,154
100.0
66.9
17,201
23.4
7,159
9.7
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
267
2.4
256
2.5
3
0.6
8
2.1
Moderate-income
1,001
9.0
944
9.2
28
5.3
29
7.5
Middle-income
5,732
51.4
5,206
50.8
318
60.0
208
53.9
Upper-income
4,162
37.3
3,840
37.5
181
34.2
141
36.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
11,162
100.0
10,246
100.0
530
100.0
386
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.8
4.7
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
0.4
2
0.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
26
5.3
25
5.3
1
10.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
208
42.7
205
43.2
2
20.0
1
50.0
Upper-income
251
51.5
243
51.2
7
70.0
1
50.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
487
100.0
475
100.0
10
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.5
2.1
.4
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
274
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 2.7% $60 0.7% 3.5% 2 2.7% 1.3% $60 0.7% 0.5%
Moderate 5 6.8% $582 6.8% 8.8% 5 6.8% 5.2% $582 6.8% 4.3%
Middle 29 39.2% $2,593 30.1% 47.2% 29 39.2% 42.2% $2,593 30.1% 38.3%
Upper 38 51.4% $5,366 62.4% 40.6% 38 51.4% 51.3% $5,366 62.4% 56.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 74 100.0% $8,601 100.0% 100.0% 74 100.0% 100.0% $8,601 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 9 8.2% $705 5.5% 8.8% 9 8.2% 5.4% $705 5.5% 4.4%
Middle 32 29.1% $3,585 27.7% 47.2% 32 29.1% 41.8% $3,585 27.7% 38.2%
Upper 69 62.7% $8,630 66.8% 40.6% 69 62.7% 51.6% $8,630 66.8% 56.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 110 100.0% $12,920 100.0% 100.0% 110 100.0% 100.0% $12,920 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 8 10.5% $65 6.9% 8.8% 8 10.5% 8.2% $65 6.9% 5.1%
Middle 37 48.7% $452 48.2% 47.2% 37 48.7% 50.0% $452 48.2% 52.9%
Upper 31 40.8% $421 44.9% 40.6% 31 40.8% 41.8% $421 44.9% 42.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 76 100.0% $938 100.0% 100.0% 76 100.0% 100.0% $938 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 3.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 75.0% $0 0.0% 96.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.8% $60 0.3% 3.5% 2 0.8% 1.1% $60 0.3% 0.5%
Moderate 22 8.5% $1,352 6.0% 8.8% 22 8.5% 5.6% $1,352 6.0% 4.4%
Middle 98 37.7% $6,630 29.5% 47.2% 98 37.7% 42.8% $6,630 29.5% 38.0%
Upper 138 53.1% $14,417 64.2% 40.6% 138 53.1% 50.4% $14,417 64.2% 57.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 260 100.0% $22,459 100.0% 100.0% 260 100.0% 100.0% $22,459 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 7 8.6% $1,195 13.4% 9.2% 7 8.6% 6.8% $1,195 13.4% 7.0%
Middle 36 44.4% $4,144 46.6% 50.8% 36 44.4% 48.0% $4,144 46.6% 47.6%
Upper 38 46.9% $3,551 39.9% 37.5% 38 46.9% 39.7% $3,551 39.9% 42.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.3% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Total 81 100.0% $8,890 100.0% 100.0% 81 100.0% 100.0% $8,890 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 43.2% 0 0.0% 15.2% $0 0.0% 14.0%
Upper 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 51.2% 1 100.0% 73.9% $55 100.0% 80.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.9% $0 0.0% 5.3%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
275
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 2.7% $102 1.2% 23.5% 2 2.7% 3.5% $102 1.2% 1.5%
Moderate 7 9.5% $721 8.4% 14.7% 7 9.5% 15.5% $721 8.4% 10.7%
Middle 17 23.0% $1,863 21.7% 17.6% 17 23.0% 27.9% $1,863 21.7% 26.4%
Upper 35 47.3% $5,090 59.2% 44.2% 35 47.3% 40.9% $5,090 59.2% 51.7%
Unknown 13 17.6% $825 9.6% 0.0% 13 17.6% 12.1% $825 9.6% 9.6%
Total 74 100.0% $8,601 100.0% 100.0% 74 100.0% 100.0% $8,601 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 2.7% $175 1.4% 23.5% 3 2.7% 3.2% $175 1.4% 1.2%
Moderate 10 9.1% $545 4.2% 14.7% 10 9.1% 9.2% $545 4.2% 5.5%
Middle 19 17.3% $1,523 11.8% 17.6% 19 17.3% 16.9% $1,523 11.8% 13.4%
Upper 70 63.6% $9,606 74.3% 44.2% 70 63.6% 55.3% $9,606 74.3% 64.0%
Unknown 8 7.3% $1,071 8.3% 0.0% 8 7.3% 15.4% $1,071 8.3% 15.9%
Total 110 100.0% $12,920 100.0% 100.0% 110 100.0% 100.0% $12,920 100.0% 100.0%
Low 8 10.5% $65 6.9% 23.5% 8 10.5% 9.6% $65 6.9% 3.6%
Moderate 13 17.1% $156 16.6% 14.7% 13 17.1% 14.5% $156 16.6% 7.1%
Middle 21 27.6% $277 29.5% 17.6% 21 27.6% 20.8% $277 29.5% 14.4%
Upper 32 42.1% $420 44.8% 44.2% 32 42.1% 51.4% $420 44.8% 69.0%
Unknown 2 2.6% $20 2.1% 0.0% 2 2.6% 3.8% $20 2.1% 6.0%
Total 76 100.0% $938 100.0% 100.0% 76 100.0% 100.0% $938 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 14.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 44.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 13 5.0% $342 1.5% 23.5% 13 5.0% 4.0% $342 1.5% 1.4%
Moderate 30 11.5% $1,422 6.3% 14.7% 30 11.5% 12.4% $1,422 6.3% 7.6%
Middle 57 21.9% $3,663 16.3% 17.6% 57 21.9% 21.9% $3,663 16.3% 18.7%
Upper 137 52.7% $15,116 67.3% 44.2% 137 52.7% 48.9% $15,116 67.3% 57.9%
Unknown 23 8.8% $1,916 8.5% 0.0% 23 8.8% 12.9% $1,916 8.5% 14.4%
Total 260 100.0% $22,459 100.0% 100.0% 260 100.0% 100.0% $22,459 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 41 50.6% $2,278 25.6% 91.8% 41 50.6% 30.3% $2,278 25.6% 27.2%
Over $1 Million 22 27.2% $4,869 54.8% 4.7% 22 27.2%
Total Rev. available 63 77.8% $7,147 80.4% 96.5% 63 77.8%
Rev. Not Known 18 22.2% $1,743 19.6% 3.5% 18 22.2%
Total 81 100.0% $8,890 100.0% 100.0% 81 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 61 75.3% $2,672 30.1% 61 75.3% 93.4% $2,672 30.1% 34.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 11 13.6% $2,176 24.5% 11 13.6% 3.3% $2,176 24.5% 16.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 9 11.1% $4,042 45.5% 9 11.1% 3.3% $4,042 45.5% 49.7%
Total 81 100.0% $8,890 100.0% 81 100.0% 100.0% $8,890 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 97.5% 1 100.0% 63.0% $55 100.0% 73.4%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 67.4% $55 100.0% 24.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 21.7% $0 0.0% 36.2%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.9% $0 0.0% 39.8%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
276
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1,380
22.9
Moderate-income
1
20.0
915
15.2
252
27.5
939
15.6
Middle-income
3
60.0
3,486
57.9
598
17.2
1,172
19.5
Upper-income
1
20.0
1,624
27.0
229
14.1
2,534
42.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
5
100.0
6,025
100.0
1,079
17.9
6,025
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,551
833
13.5
53.7
536
34.6
182
11.7
Middle-income
5,131
3,700
60.1
72.1
884
17.2
547
10.7
Upper-income
2,475
1,627
26.4
65.7
522
21.1
326
13.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
9,157
6,160
100.0
67.3
1,942
21.2
1,055
11.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
167
18.0
155
18.1
6
23.1
6
14.0
Middle-income
472
51.0
441
51.5
8
30.8
23
53.5
Upper-income
287
31.0
261
30.5
12
46.2
14
32.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
926
100.0
857
100.0
26
100.0
43
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.5
2.8
4.6
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
3
6.3
3
6.7
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
30
62.5
28
62.2
2
66.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
15
31.3
14
31.1
1
33.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
48
100.0
45
100.0
3
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
93.8
6.3
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
277
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 4.3% $0 0.0% 3.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 60.1% 0 0.0% 55.4% $0 0.0% 60.1%
Upper 1 100.0% $52 100.0% 26.4% 1 100.0% 39.6% $52 100.0% 36.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 1 100.0% $52 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $52 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 4.1% $0 0.0% 3.2%
Middle 2 40.0% $174 72.2% 60.1% 2 40.0% 47.9% $174 72.2% 45.8%
Upper 3 60.0% $67 27.8% 26.4% 3 60.0% 47.9% $67 27.8% 50.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 5 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 5.3%
Middle 3 75.0% $15 83.3% 60.1% 3 75.0% 50.0% $15 83.3% 49.2%
Upper 1 25.0% $3 16.7% 26.4% 1 25.0% 33.3% $3 16.7% 45.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 4 100.0% $18 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $18 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 5.8% $0 0.0% 3.3%
Middle 5 50.0% $189 60.8% 60.1% 5 50.0% 51.2% $189 60.8% 50.0%
Upper 5 50.0% $122 39.2% 26.4% 5 50.0% 42.7% $122 39.2% 46.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 10 100.0% $311 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $311 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 11.6% $0 0.0% 13.3%
Middle 1 50.0% $23 67.6% 51.5% 1 50.0% 59.8% $23 67.6% 67.0%
Upper 1 50.0% $11 32.4% 30.5% 1 50.0% 25.9% $11 32.4% 19.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $34 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 2 100.0% $53 100.0% 62.2% 2 100.0% 100.0% $53 100.0% 100.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 31.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $53 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $53 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
278
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.9% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 12.9% $0 0.0% 8.7%
Middle 1 100.0% $52 100.0% 19.5% 1 100.0% 25.9% $52 100.0% 18.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.1% 0 0.0% 51.8% $0 0.0% 67.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 4.8%
Total 1 100.0% $52 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $52 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.9% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 11.6% $0 0.0% 8.7%
Middle 1 20.0% $11 4.6% 19.5% 1 20.0% 17.1% $11 4.6% 16.2%
Upper 4 80.0% $230 95.4% 42.1% 4 80.0% 56.2% $230 95.4% 61.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.7% $0 0.0% 12.8%
Total 5 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $241 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 25.0% $3 16.7% 22.9% 1 25.0% 7.1% $3 16.7% 2.0%
Moderate 2 50.0% $4 22.2% 15.6% 2 50.0% 23.8% $4 22.2% 5.1%
Middle 1 25.0% $11 61.1% 19.5% 1 25.0% 11.9% $11 61.1% 8.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.1% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 80.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 4.6%
Total 4 100.0% $18 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $18 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 1 10.0% $3 1.0% 22.9% 1 10.0% 2.7% $3 1.0% 0.8%
Moderate 2 20.0% $4 1.3% 15.6% 2 20.0% 13.7% $4 1.3% 8.1%
Middle 3 30.0% $74 23.8% 19.5% 3 30.0% 20.1% $74 23.8% 16.0%
Upper 4 40.0% $230 74.0% 42.1% 4 40.0% 53.4% $230 74.0% 62.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.1% $0 0.0% 13.0%
Total 10 100.0% $311 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $311 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 92.5% 2 100.0% 40.2% $34 100.0% 27.5%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.8% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 95.3% 2 100.0%
Rev. Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.6% 0 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 2 100.0% 94.6% $34 100.0% 36.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 16.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 46.8%
Total 2 100.0% $34 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $34 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 50.0% $50 94.3% 93.8% 1 50.0% 83.3% $50 94.3% 99.4%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0%
Not Known 1 50.0% $3 5.7% 0.0% 1 50.0%
Total 2 100.0% $53 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 2 100.0% $53 100.0% 2 100.0% 66.7% $53 100.0% 15.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 21.5%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 63.2%
Total 2 100.0% $53 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $53 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
279
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
14
13.7
10,423
8.1
4,134
39.7
28,933
22.4
Moderate-income
25
24.5
24,057
18.6
5,984
24.9
20,791
16.1
Middle-income
31
30.4
48,862
37.9
4,230
8.7
24,503
19.0
Upper-income
32
31.4
45,674
35.4
1,646
3.6
54,789
42.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
102
100.0
129,016
100.0
15,994
12.4
129,016
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
20,279
6,506
5.3
32.1
10,623
52.4
3,150
15.5
Moderate-income
39,233
19,698
15.9
50.2
16,079
41.0
3,456
8.8
Middle-income
73,482
48,974
39.6
66.6
18,683
25.4
5,825
7.9
Upper-income
72,291
48,464
39.2
67.0
19,968
27.6
3,859
5.3
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
205,285
123,642
100.0
60.2
65,353
31.8
16,290
7.9
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,254
5.5
2,051
5.5
117
5.6
86
5.4
Moderate-income
6,716
16.3
6,041
16.1
382
18.4
293
18.5
Middle-income
15,203
37.0
14,035
37.5
636
30.6
532
33.6
Upper-income
16,942
41.2
15,325
40.9
943
45.4
674
42.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
41,115
100.0
37,452
100.0
2,078
100.0
1,585
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.1
5.1
3.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
1.8
5
1.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
19
6.9
18
6.6
1
33.3
0
0.0
Middle-income
130
47.1
129
47.4
1
33.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
122
44.2
120
44.1
1
33.3
1
100.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
276
100.0
272
100.0
3
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.6
1.1
.4
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
280
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 0.5% $58 0.2% 5.3% 1 0.5% 1.1% $58 0.2% 0.8%
Moderate 6 3.0% $554 1.4% 15.9% 6 3.0% 6.9% $554 1.4% 4.4%
Middle 86 42.8% $14,984 38.8% 39.6% 86 42.8% 48.1% $14,984 38.8% 44.8%
Upper 108 53.7% $23,058 59.7% 39.2% 108 53.7% 43.9% $23,058 59.7% 50.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 201 100.0% $38,654 100.0% 100.0% 201 100.0% 100.0% $38,654 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.8% $236 0.4% 5.3% 2 0.8% 1.2% $236 0.4% 1.0%
Moderate 9 3.4% $1,870 3.0% 15.9% 9 3.4% 5.9% $1,870 3.0% 4.5%
Middle 90 34.2% $17,727 28.7% 39.6% 90 34.2% 41.9% $17,727 28.7% 38.5%
Upper 162 61.6% $41,922 67.9% 39.2% 162 61.6% 51.0% $41,922 67.9% 55.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 263 100.0% $61,755 100.0% 100.0% 263 100.0% 100.0% $61,755 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.3% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 1.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.9% 0 0.0% 13.0% $0 0.0% 9.0%
Middle 3 42.9% $176 35.1% 39.6% 3 42.9% 43.1% $176 35.1% 38.8%
Upper 4 57.1% $325 64.9% 39.2% 4 57.1% 41.0% $325 64.9% 51.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 7 100.0% $501 100.0% 100.0% 7 100.0% 100.0% $501 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.5% $0 0.0% 4.1%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 22.0% $0 0.0% 4.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 35.6% $0 0.0% 34.9%
Upper 1 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 33.9% $4,292 100.0% 56.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 0.6% $294 0.3% 5.3% 3 0.6% 1.2% $294 0.3% 1.1%
Moderate 15 3.2% $2,424 2.3% 15.9% 15 3.2% 6.7% $2,424 2.3% 4.6%
Middle 179 37.9% $32,887 31.3% 39.6% 179 37.9% 44.6% $32,887 31.3% 40.8%
Upper 275 58.3% $69,597 66.2% 39.2% 275 58.3% 47.5% $69,597 66.2% 53.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 472 100.0% $105,202 100.0% 100.0% 472 100.0% 100.0% $105,202 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 1.2% $151 0.2% 5.5% 3 1.2% 3.7% $151 0.2% 3.5%
Moderate 29 11.9% $4,977 7.8% 16.1% 29 11.9% 12.8% $4,977 7.8% 14.6%
Middle 71 29.1% $24,262 37.9% 37.5% 71 29.1% 34.6% $24,262 37.9% 32.2%
Upper 141 57.8% $34,605 54.1% 40.9% 141 57.8% 46.9% $34,605 54.1% 48.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Total 244 100.0% $63,995 100.0% 100.0% 244 100.0% 100.0% $63,995 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.6% 0 0.0% 12.9% $0 0.0% 32.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 47.4% 0 0.0% 38.7% $0 0.0% 17.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 44.1% 0 0.0% 41.9% $0 0.0% 49.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
281
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 15 7.5% $1,664 4.3% 22.4% 15 7.5% 9.8% $1,664 4.3% 5.5%
Moderate 36 17.9% $5,260 13.6% 16.1% 36 17.9% 23.8% $5,260 13.6% 18.6%
Middle 47 23.4% $7,442 19.3% 19.0% 47 23.4% 22.7% $7,442 19.3% 21.9%
Upper 100 49.8% $23,710 61.3% 42.5% 100 49.8% 33.2% $23,710 61.3% 43.9%
Unknown 3 1.5% $578 1.5% 0.0% 3 1.5% 10.5% $578 1.5% 10.0%
Total 201 100.0% $38,654 100.0% 100.0% 201 100.0% 100.0% $38,654 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 2.3% $559 0.9% 22.4% 6 2.3% 4.4% $559 0.9% 2.3%
Moderate 25 9.5% $3,237 5.2% 16.1% 25 9.5% 11.4% $3,237 5.2% 7.5%
Middle 36 13.7% $5,316 8.6% 19.0% 36 13.7% 19.6% $5,316 8.6% 15.4%
Upper 189 71.9% $50,246 81.4% 42.5% 189 71.9% 47.2% $50,246 81.4% 58.2%
Unknown 7 2.7% $2,397 3.9% 0.0% 7 2.7% 17.4% $2,397 3.9% 16.5%
Total 263 100.0% $61,755 100.0% 100.0% 263 100.0% 100.0% $61,755 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.4% 0 0.0% 9.5% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 18.2% $0 0.0% 12.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 21.1% $0 0.0% 18.7%
Upper 7 100.0% $501 100.0% 42.5% 7 100.0% 43.6% $501 100.0% 59.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.6% $0 0.0% 6.7%
Total 7 100.0% $501 100.0% 100.0% 7 100.0% 100.0% $501 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $4,292 100.0% 100.0%
Low 21 4.4% $2,223 2.1% 22.4% 21 4.4% 6.9% $2,223 2.1% 3.5%
Moderate 61 12.9% $8,497 8.1% 16.1% 61 12.9% 17.0% $8,497 8.1% 11.5%
Middle 83 17.6% $12,758 12.1% 19.0% 83 17.6% 20.9% $12,758 12.1% 17.1%
Upper 296 62.7% $74,457 70.8% 42.5% 296 62.7% 40.9% $74,457 70.8% 49.0%
Unknown 11 2.3% $7,267 6.9% 0.0% 11 2.3% 14.3% $7,267 6.9% 18.9%
Total 472 100.0% $105,202 100.0% 100.0% 472 100.0% 100.0% $105,202 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 86 35.2% $19,686 30.8% 91.1% 86 35.2% 35.4% $19,686 30.8% 34.1%
Over $1 Million 86 35.2% $32,377 50.6% 5.1% 86 35.2%
Total Rev. available 172 70.4% $52,063 81.4% 96.2% 172 70.4%
Rev. Not Known 72 29.5% $11,932 18.6% 3.9% 72 29.5%
Total 244 100.0% $63,995 100.0% 100.0% 244 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 90 36.9% $4,621 7.2% 90 36.9% 89.0% $4,621 7.2% 22.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 70 28.7% $12,568 19.6% 70 28.7% 4.9% $12,568 19.6% 16.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 84 34.4% $46,806 73.1% 84 34.4% 6.0% $46,806 73.1% 60.4%
Total 244 100.0% $63,995 100.0% 244 100.0% 100.0% $63,995 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 98.6% 0 0.0% 38.7% $0 0.0% 81.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.4% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 90.3% $0 0.0% 36.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 27.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.2% $0 0.0% 37.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
282
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
6,635
24.2
Moderate-income
5
25.0
7,084
25.8
1,666
23.5
4,293
15.6
Middle-income
12
60.0
14,818
53.9
2,287
15.4
5,384
19.6
Upper-income
3
15.0
5,571
20.3
376
6.7
11,161
40.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
20
100.0
27,473
100.0
4,329
15.8
27,473
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
10,845
6,977
25.7
64.3
2,102
19.4
1,766
16.3
Middle-income
21,776
14,651
53.9
67.3
5,253
24.1
1,872
8.6
Upper-income
7,307
5,565
20.5
76.2
1,449
19.8
293
4.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
39,928
27,193
100.0
68.1
8,804
22.0
3,931
9.8
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,536
20.3
1,359
19.8
132
28.9
45
18.2
Middle-income
3,915
51.6
3,591
52.2
192
42.0
132
53.4
Upper-income
2,132
28.1
1,929
28.0
133
29.1
70
28.3
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
7,583
100.0
6,879
100.0
457
100.0
247
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.7
6.0
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
23
27.4
20
25.6
3
50.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
42
50.0
40
51.3
2
33.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
19
22.6
18
23.1
1
16.7
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
84
100.0
78
100.0
6
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
92.9
7.1
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
283
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 7 12.1% $801 8.9% 25.7% 7 12.1% 14.3% $801 8.9% 10.4%
Middle 27 46.6% $4,130 45.8% 53.9% 27 46.6% 49.4% $4,130 45.8% 43.6%
Upper 24 41.4% $4,081 45.3% 20.5% 24 41.4% 36.3% $4,081 45.3% 46.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 58 100.0% $9,012 100.0% 100.0% 58 100.0% 100.0% $9,012 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 3 16.7% $1,715 47.1% 25.7% 3 16.7% 11.9% $1,715 47.1% 9.2%
Middle 4 22.2% $413 11.3% 53.9% 4 22.2% 46.0% $413 11.3% 39.0%
Upper 11 61.1% $1,512 41.5% 20.5% 11 61.1% 42.1% $1,512 41.5% 51.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 18 100.0% $3,640 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $3,640 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.7% 0 0.0% 24.2% $0 0.0% 17.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 53.9% 0 0.0% 50.8% $0 0.0% 44.2%
Upper 1 100.0% $75 100.0% 20.5% 1 100.0% 25.0% $75 100.0% 38.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $75 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $75 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.0% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 40.0% $0 0.0% 95.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 10 13.0% $2,516 19.8% 25.7% 10 13.0% 13.8% $2,516 19.8% 9.4%
Middle 31 40.3% $4,543 35.7% 53.9% 31 40.3% 47.7% $4,543 35.7% 39.0%
Upper 36 46.8% $5,668 44.5% 20.5% 36 46.8% 38.5% $5,668 44.5% 51.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 77 100.0% $12,727 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $12,727 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.8% 0 0.0% 19.3% $0 0.0% 25.7%
Middle 3 60.0% $1,300 46.4% 52.2% 3 60.0% 46.0% $1,300 46.4% 40.6%
Upper 2 40.0% $1,500 53.6% 28.0% 2 40.0% 31.4% $1,500 53.6% 31.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 1.8%
Total 5 100.0% $2,800 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $2,800 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.6% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 7.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 51.3% 0 0.0% 37.5% $0 0.0% 28.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.1% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 63.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
284
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 3 5.2% $263 2.9% 24.2% 3 5.2% 5.0% $263 2.9% 2.5%
Moderate 16 27.6% $1,968 21.8% 15.6% 16 27.6% 21.9% $1,968 21.8% 16.5%
Middle 13 22.4% $1,892 21.0% 19.6% 13 22.4% 23.8% $1,892 21.0% 22.6%
Upper 26 44.8% $4,889 54.2% 40.6% 26 44.8% 37.3% $4,889 54.2% 48.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.0% $0 0.0% 9.9%
Total 58 100.0% $9,012 100.0% 100.0% 58 100.0% 100.0% $9,012 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.2% 0 0.0% 4.9% $0 0.0% 2.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 11.1% $0 0.0% 7.2%
Middle 7 38.9% $744 20.4% 19.6% 7 38.9% 17.4% $744 20.4% 13.7%
Upper 10 55.6% $1,531 42.1% 40.6% 10 55.6% 49.8% $1,531 42.1% 57.3%
Unknown 1 5.6% $1,365 37.5% 0.0% 1 5.6% 16.9% $1,365 37.5% 19.6%
Total 18 100.0% $3,640 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $3,640 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.2% 0 0.0% 6.0% $0 0.0% 1.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 14.1% $0 0.0% 12.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 17.3% $0 0.0% 18.0%
Upper 1 100.0% $75 100.0% 40.6% 1 100.0% 46.0% $75 100.0% 57.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.5% $0 0.0% 11.1%
Total 1 100.0% $75 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $75 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 3 3.9% $263 2.1% 24.2% 3 3.9% 5.0% $263 2.1% 2.2%
Moderate 16 20.8% $1,968 15.5% 15.6% 16 20.8% 15.5% $1,968 15.5% 10.5%
Middle 20 26.0% $2,636 20.7% 19.6% 20 26.0% 19.8% $2,636 20.7% 16.4%
Upper 37 48.1% $6,495 51.0% 40.6% 37 48.1% 44.5% $6,495 51.0% 50.8%
Unknown 1 1.3% $1,365 10.7% 0.0% 1 1.3% 15.2% $1,365 10.7% 20.1%
Total 77 100.0% $12,727 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $12,727 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 2 40.0% $550 19.6% 90.7% 2 40.0% 31.1% $550 19.6% 25.4%
Over $1 Million 2 40.0% $1,250 44.6% 6.0% 2 40.0%
Total Rev. available 4 80.0% $1,800 64.2% 96.7% 4 80.0%
Rev. Not Known 1 20.0% $1,000 35.7% 3.3% 1 20.0%
Total 5 100.0% $2,800 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 20.0% $50 1.8% 1 20.0% 91.3% $50 1.8% 28.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 11.5%
$250,001 - $1 Million 4 80.0% $2,750 98.2% 4 80.0% 5.4% $2,750 98.2% 60.5%
Total 5 100.0% $2,800 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $2,800 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 92.9% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
285
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
4.7
1,064
2.0
429
40.3
11,596
22.3
Moderate-income
11
25.6
10,889
21.0
2,565
23.6
8,686
16.7
Middle-income
19
44.2
23,608
45.4
2,607
11.0
10,185
19.6
Upper-income
11
25.6
16,391
31.6
950
5.8
21,485
41.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
43
100.0
51,952
100.0
6,551
12.6
51,952
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,771
679
1.3
38.3
843
47.6
249
14.1
Moderate-income
19,650
9,197
17.6
46.8
7,988
40.7
2,465
12.5
Middle-income
36,590
25,011
48.0
68.4
7,058
19.3
4,521
12.4
Upper-income
23,320
17,259
33.1
74.0
4,170
17.9
1,891
8.1
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
81,331
52,146
100.0
64.1
20,059
24.7
9,126
11.2
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
165
1.3
149
1.2
8
1.4
8
2.0
Moderate-income
3,252
24.7
2,937
24.1
201
34.3
114
28.5
Middle-income
5,503
41.8
5,085
41.8
251
42.8
167
41.8
Upper-income
4,232
32.2
3,995
32.8
126
21.5
111
27.8
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
13,152
100.0
12,166
100.0
586
100.0
400
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.5
4.5
3.0
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
14
7.3
13
6.8
1
50.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
125
64.8
124
64.9
1
50.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
54
28.0
54
28.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
193
100.0
191
100.0
2
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
99.0
1.0
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
286
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 5 11.1% $279 4.2% 17.6% 5 11.1% 7.6% $279 4.2% 5.0%
Middle 17 37.8% $2,347 35.5% 48.0% 17 37.8% 42.3% $2,347 35.5% 35.1%
Upper 23 51.1% $3,988 60.3% 33.1% 23 51.1% 49.9% $3,988 60.3% 59.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 45 100.0% $6,614 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $6,614 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.7% $9 0.1% 1.3% 1 0.7% 0.4% $9 0.1% 0.2%
Moderate 22 15.6% $1,045 6.7% 17.6% 22 15.6% 8.7% $1,045 6.7% 5.7%
Middle 57 40.4% $5,831 37.2% 48.0% 57 40.4% 39.0% $5,831 37.2% 34.4%
Upper 61 43.3% $8,808 56.1% 33.1% 61 43.3% 51.9% $8,808 56.1% 59.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 141 100.0% $15,693 100.0% 100.0% 141 100.0% 100.0% $15,693 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 1.8% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 5 6.7% $25 2.3% 17.6% 5 6.7% 12.8% $25 2.3% 6.0%
Middle 58 77.3% $945 85.1% 48.0% 58 77.3% 51.5% $945 85.1% 37.0%
Upper 12 16.0% $141 12.7% 33.1% 12 16.0% 33.8% $141 12.7% 56.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 75 100.0% $1,111 100.0% 100.0% 75 100.0% 100.0% $1,111 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 45.5% $0 0.0% 27.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.3% $0 0.0% 6.0%
Upper 1 100.0% $417 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 27.3% $417 100.0% 66.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $417 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $417 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.4% $9 0.0% 1.3% 1 0.4% 0.4% $9 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 32 12.2% $1,349 5.7% 17.6% 32 12.2% 8.6% $1,349 5.7% 6.1%
Middle 132 50.4% $9,123 38.3% 48.0% 132 50.4% 41.2% $9,123 38.3% 33.9%
Upper 97 37.0% $13,354 56.0% 33.1% 97 37.0% 49.8% $13,354 56.0% 59.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 262 100.0% $23,835 100.0% 100.0% 262 100.0% 100.0% $23,835 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 26 22.2% $4,460 32.5% 24.1% 26 22.2% 26.7% $4,460 32.5% 29.5%
Middle 46 39.3% $4,002 29.1% 41.8% 46 39.3% 36.4% $4,002 29.1% 37.1%
Upper 45 38.5% $5,270 38.4% 32.8% 45 38.5% 33.0% $5,270 38.4% 29.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.5% $0 0.0% 3.5%
Total 117 100.0% $13,732 100.0% 100.0% 117 100.0% 100.0% $13,732 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.8% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 10 100.0% $350 100.0% 64.9% 10 100.0% 80.3% $350 100.0% 77.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 28.3% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 22.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Total 10 100.0% $350 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $350 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
287
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 4.4% $121 1.8% 22.3% 2 4.4% 10.0% $121 1.8% 5.7%
Moderate 3 6.7% $230 3.5% 16.7% 3 6.7% 23.1% $230 3.5% 17.9%
Middle 10 22.2% $1,464 22.1% 19.6% 10 22.2% 25.2% $1,464 22.1% 25.6%
Upper 27 60.0% $4,370 66.1% 41.4% 27 60.0% 33.7% $4,370 66.1% 43.9%
Unknown 3 6.7% $429 6.5% 0.0% 3 6.7% 8.0% $429 6.5% 7.0%
Total 45 100.0% $6,614 100.0% 100.0% 45 100.0% 100.0% $6,614 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 5.0% $226 1.4% 22.3% 7 5.0% 5.5% $226 1.4% 2.7%
Moderate 22 15.6% $1,160 7.4% 16.7% 22 15.6% 13.8% $1,160 7.4% 9.3%
Middle 28 19.9% $2,177 13.9% 19.6% 28 19.9% 19.4% $2,177 13.9% 16.7%
Upper 67 47.5% $9,225 58.8% 41.4% 67 47.5% 44.3% $9,225 58.8% 55.3%
Unknown 17 12.1% $2,905 18.5% 0.0% 17 12.1% 16.9% $2,905 18.5% 16.0%
Total 141 100.0% $15,693 100.0% 100.0% 141 100.0% 100.0% $15,693 100.0% 100.0%
Low 18 24.0% $102 9.2% 22.3% 18 24.0% 14.4% $102 9.2% 4.3%
Moderate 21 28.0% $199 17.9% 16.7% 21 28.0% 21.5% $199 17.9% 8.6%
Middle 16 21.3% $208 18.7% 19.6% 16 21.3% 25.4% $208 18.7% 25.6%
Upper 19 25.3% $596 53.6% 41.4% 19 25.3% 33.1% $596 53.6% 52.4%
Unknown 1 1.3% $6 0.5% 0.0% 1 1.3% 5.6% $6 0.5% 9.0%
Total 75 100.0% $1,111 100.0% 100.0% 75 100.0% 100.0% $1,111 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $417 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $417 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $417 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $417 100.0% 100.0%
Low 27 10.3% $449 1.9% 22.3% 27 10.3% 8.0% $449 1.9% 3.9%
Moderate 46 17.6% $1,589 6.7% 16.7% 46 17.6% 18.1% $1,589 6.7% 12.6%
Middle 54 20.6% $3,849 16.1% 19.6% 54 20.6% 22.2% $3,849 16.1% 20.1%
Upper 113 43.1% $14,191 59.5% 41.4% 113 43.1% 39.1% $14,191 59.5% 48.9%
Unknown 22 8.4% $3,757 15.8% 0.0% 22 8.4% 12.6% $3,757 15.8% 14.5%
Total 262 100.0% $23,835 100.0% 100.0% 262 100.0% 100.0% $23,835 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 48 41.0% $4,038 29.4% 92.5% 48 41.0% 34.6% $4,038 29.4% 37.0%
Over $1 Million 34 29.1% $7,146 52.0% 4.5% 34 29.1%
Total Rev. available 82 70.1% $11,184 81.4% 97.0% 82 70.1%
Rev. Not Known 35 29.9% $2,548 18.6% 3.0% 35 29.9%
Total 117 100.0% $13,732 100.0% 100.0% 117 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 89 76.1% $3,108 22.6% 89 76.1% 91.5% $3,108 22.6% 31.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 14 12.0% $2,250 16.4% 14 12.0% 4.7% $2,250 16.4% 20.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 14 12.0% $8,374 61.0% 14 12.0% 3.7% $8,374 61.0% 47.7%
Total 117 100.0% $13,732 100.0% 117 100.0% 100.0% $13,732 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 5 50.0% $207 59.1% 99.0% 5 50.0% 78.8% $207 59.1% 89.4%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 5 50.0% $143 40.9% 0.0% 5 50.0%
Total 10 100.0% $350 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 9 90.0% $210 60.0% 9 90.0% 69.7% $210 60.0% 20.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 10.0% $140 40.0% 1 10.0% 16.7% $140 40.0% 27.9%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.6% $0 0.0% 51.8%
Total 10 100.0% $350 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $350 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
288
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,176
22.3
Moderate-income
2
20.0
1,540
15.8
649
42.1
1,182
12.1
Middle-income
4
40.0
3,879
39.8
718
18.5
1,532
15.7
Upper-income
4
40.0
4,319
44.4
404
9.4
4,848
49.8
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
10
100.0
9,738
100.0
1,771
18.2
9,738
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
2,877
1,058
11.6
36.8
1,470
51.1
349
12.1
Middle-income
7,085
3,594
39.4
50.7
2,649
37.4
842
11.9
Upper-income
7,038
4,479
49.1
63.6
1,985
28.2
574
8.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
17,000
9,131
100.0
53.7
6,104
35.9
1,765
10.4
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
448
15.6
399
15.1
28
21.7
21
20.4
Middle-income
869
30.3
801
30.4
34
26.4
34
33.0
Upper-income
1,550
54.1
1,435
54.5
67
51.9
48
46.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
2,867
100.0
2,635
100.0
129
100.0
103
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.9
4.5
3.6
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
3
3.8
2
2.6
1
25.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
27
33.8
26
34.2
1
25.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
50
62.5
48
63.2
2
50.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
80
100.0
76
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
95.0
5.0
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
289
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.6% 0 0.0% 3.9% $0 0.0% 3.1%
Middle 7 58.3% $858 55.5% 39.4% 7 58.3% 36.7% $858 55.5% 31.6%
Upper 5 41.7% $687 44.5% 49.1% 5 41.7% 59.4% $687 44.5% 65.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 12 100.0% $1,545 100.0% 100.0% 12 100.0% 100.0% $1,545 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.6% 0 0.0% 5.1% $0 0.0% 3.8%
Middle 3 60.0% $139 22.9% 39.4% 3 60.0% 29.4% $139 22.9% 24.2%
Upper 2 40.0% $468 77.1% 49.1% 2 40.0% 65.5% $468 77.1% 72.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 5 100.0% $607 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $607 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.6% 0 0.0% 7.2% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Middle 1 33.3% $7 10.9% 39.4% 1 33.3% 32.5% $7 10.9% 33.8%
Upper 2 66.7% $57 89.1% 49.1% 2 66.7% 60.2% $57 89.1% 65.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.3% $0 0.0% 10.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 45.5% $0 0.0% 43.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.3% $0 0.0% 46.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.6% 0 0.0% 5.0% $0 0.0% 3.7%
Middle 11 55.0% $1,004 45.3% 39.4% 11 55.0% 32.4% $1,004 45.3% 27.9%
Upper 9 45.0% $1,212 54.7% 49.1% 9 45.0% 62.6% $1,212 54.7% 68.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 20 100.0% $2,216 100.0% 100.0% 20 100.0% 100.0% $2,216 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 7.1% $150 9.7% 15.1% 1 7.1% 5.6% $150 9.7% 6.0%
Middle 5 35.7% $1,064 68.7% 30.4% 5 35.7% 28.1% $1,064 68.7% 32.2%
Upper 8 57.1% $334 21.6% 54.5% 8 57.1% 63.9% $334 21.6% 61.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.5% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Total 14 100.0% $1,548 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $1,548 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 34.2% 0 0.0% 20.0% $0 0.0% 6.1%
Upper 3 100.0% $408 100.0% 63.2% 3 100.0% 80.0% $408 100.0% 93.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $408 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $408 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
290
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 3 25.0% $339 21.9% 12.1% 3 25.0% 11.3% $339 21.9% 7.4%
Middle 4 33.3% $618 40.0% 15.7% 4 33.3% 20.5% $618 40.0% 18.6%
Upper 5 41.7% $588 38.1% 49.8% 5 41.7% 47.5% $588 38.1% 55.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.0% $0 0.0% 18.0%
Total 12 100.0% $1,545 100.0% 100.0% 12 100.0% 100.0% $1,545 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 2.6% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 1 20.0% $40 6.6% 12.1% 1 20.0% 6.0% $40 6.6% 3.7%
Middle 1 20.0% $35 5.8% 15.7% 1 20.0% 12.7% $35 5.8% 10.0%
Upper 3 60.0% $532 87.6% 49.8% 3 60.0% 56.4% $532 87.6% 59.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 22.3% $0 0.0% 25.4%
Total 5 100.0% $607 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $607 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 8.4% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.1% 0 0.0% 9.6% $0 0.0% 2.5%
Middle 2 66.7% $57 89.1% 15.7% 2 66.7% 21.7% $57 89.1% 11.0%
Upper 1 33.3% $7 10.9% 49.8% 1 33.3% 49.4% $7 10.9% 55.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.8% $0 0.0% 27.4%
Total 3 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 49.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.3% 0 0.0% 3.0% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 4 20.0% $379 17.1% 12.1% 4 20.0% 8.1% $379 17.1% 4.9%
Middle 7 35.0% $710 32.0% 15.7% 7 35.0% 16.0% $710 32.0% 12.9%
Upper 9 45.0% $1,127 50.9% 49.8% 9 45.0% 52.3% $1,127 50.9% 55.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 20.7% $0 0.0% 25.4%
Total 20 100.0% $2,216 100.0% 100.0% 20 100.0% 100.0% $2,216 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 11 78.6% $948 61.2% 91.9% 11 78.6% 53.2% $948 61.2% 64.5%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.5% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 11 78.6% $948 61.2% 96.4% 11 78.6%
Rev. Not Known 3 21.4% $600 38.8% 3.6% 3 21.4%
Total 14 100.0% $1,548 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 11 78.6% $508 32.8% 11 78.6% 87.2% $508 32.8% 31.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 7.1% $150 9.7% 1 7.1% 7.4% $150 9.7% 22.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 14.3% $890 57.5% 2 14.3% 5.4% $890 57.5% 46.0%
Total 14 100.0% $1,548 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $1,548 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 33.3% $225 55.1% 95.0% 1 33.3% 55.0% $225 55.1% 61.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 2 66.7% $183 44.9% 0.0% 2 66.7%
Total 3 100.0% $408 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 2 66.7% $183 44.9% 2 66.7% 85.0% $183 44.9% 45.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 33.3% $225 55.1% 1 33.3% 15.0% $225 55.1% 54.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $408 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $408 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
291
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7
17.1
4,089
10.6
1,941
47.5
8,939
23.2
Moderate-income
9
22.0
6,713
17.4
1,935
28.8
6,207
16.1
Middle-income
14
34.1
15,431
40.0
1,572
10.2
7,126
18.5
Upper-income
11
26.8
12,303
31.9
644
5.2
16,264
42.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
41
100.0
38,536
100.0
6,092
15.8
38,536
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6,755
2,467
7.0
36.5
3,549
52.5
739
10.9
Moderate-income
10,588
5,311
15.0
50.2
4,059
38.3
1,218
11.5
Middle-income
23,883
15,391
43.5
64.4
6,460
27.0
2,032
8.5
Upper-income
18,928
12,243
34.6
64.7
5,736
30.3
949
5.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
60,154
35,412
100.0
58.9
19,804
32.9
4,938
8.2
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,153
9.9
1,021
9.6
89
14.8
43
10.4
Moderate-income
2,007
17.1
1,754
16.4
174
29.0
79
19.1
Middle-income
4,407
37.7
4,108
38.4
152
25.3
147
35.6
Upper-income
4,136
35.3
3,807
35.6
185
30.8
144
34.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
11,703
100.0
10,690
100.0
600
100.0
413
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.3
5.1
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
1.2
2
1.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
12
7.1
11
6.6
0
0.0
1
100.0
Middle-income
94
56.0
94
56.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
60
35.7
60
35.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
168
100.0
167
100.0
0
.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
99.4
.0
.6
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
292
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 7 2.8% $564 1.5% 15.0% 7 2.8% 4.3% $564 1.5% 2.5%
Middle 131 52.2% $18,743 50.3% 43.5% 131 52.2% 47.9% $18,743 50.3% 43.4%
Upper 113 45.0% $17,948 48.2% 34.6% 113 45.0% 46.5% $17,948 48.2% 53.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 251 100.0% $37,255 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $37,255 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 2.0% $41 0.3% 7.0% 2 2.0% 0.8% $41 0.3% 0.7%
Moderate 5 5.0% $340 2.4% 15.0% 5 5.0% 5.0% $340 2.4% 3.1%
Middle 46 46.0% $6,589 46.7% 43.5% 46 46.0% 42.6% $6,589 46.7% 39.3%
Upper 47 47.0% $7,144 50.6% 34.6% 47 47.0% 51.6% $7,144 50.6% 57.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 100 100.0% $14,114 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $14,114 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.0% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 3 14.3% $83 21.6% 15.0% 3 14.3% 13.7% $83 21.6% 6.8%
Middle 10 47.6% $139 36.1% 43.5% 10 47.6% 48.7% $139 36.1% 52.6%
Upper 8 38.1% $163 42.3% 34.6% 8 38.1% 36.5% $163 42.3% 40.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 21 100.0% $385 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $385 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.3% $0 0.0% 21.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.8% $0 0.0% 34.8%
Upper 2 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 38.9% $2,387 100.0% 44.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.5% $41 0.1% 7.0% 2 0.5% 1.0% $41 0.1% 0.7%
Moderate 15 4.0% $987 1.8% 15.0% 15 4.0% 5.2% $987 1.8% 3.3%
Middle 187 50.0% $25,471 47.0% 43.5% 187 50.0% 45.3% $25,471 47.0% 41.3%
Upper 170 45.5% $27,642 51.1% 34.6% 170 45.5% 48.5% $27,642 51.1% 54.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 374 100.0% $54,141 100.0% 100.0% 374 100.0% 100.0% $54,141 100.0% 100.0%
Low 52 51.5% $9,143 56.9% 9.6% 52 51.5% 10.3% $9,143 56.9% 17.8%
Moderate 15 14.9% $3,376 21.0% 16.4% 15 14.9% 16.4% $3,376 21.0% 17.1%
Middle 13 12.9% $672 4.2% 38.4% 13 12.9% 30.8% $672 4.2% 26.1%
Upper 21 20.8% $2,864 17.8% 35.6% 21 20.8% 40.4% $2,864 17.8% 37.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Total 101 100.0% $16,055 100.0% 100.0% 101 100.0% 100.0% $16,055 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.6% 0 0.0% 6.9% $0 0.0% 11.5%
Middle 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 56.3% 1 100.0% 69.0% $65 100.0% 73.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 35.9% 0 0.0% 20.7% $0 0.0% 10.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.4% $0 0.0% 4.3%
Total 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
293
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 21 8.4% $1,824 4.9% 23.2% 21 8.4% 6.0% $1,824 4.9% 3.1%
Moderate 33 13.1% $3,370 9.0% 16.1% 33 13.1% 14.7% $3,370 9.0% 10.6%
Middle 69 27.5% $9,281 24.9% 18.5% 69 27.5% 23.5% $9,281 24.9% 21.3%
Upper 126 50.2% $22,539 60.5% 42.2% 126 50.2% 42.5% $22,539 60.5% 53.3%
Unknown 2 0.8% $241 0.6% 0.0% 2 0.8% 13.2% $241 0.6% 11.6%
Total 251 100.0% $37,255 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $37,255 100.0% 100.0%
Low 5 5.0% $350 2.5% 23.2% 5 5.0% 2.6% $350 2.5% 1.0%
Moderate 10 10.0% $696 4.9% 16.1% 10 10.0% 8.2% $696 4.9% 4.9%
Middle 27 27.0% $3,091 21.9% 18.5% 27 27.0% 17.6% $3,091 21.9% 13.9%
Upper 51 51.0% $8,895 63.0% 42.2% 51 51.0% 50.5% $8,895 63.0% 59.4%
Unknown 7 7.0% $1,082 7.7% 0.0% 7 7.0% 21.1% $1,082 7.7% 20.8%
Total 100 100.0% $14,114 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $14,114 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 14.3% $24 6.2% 23.2% 3 14.3% 4.6% $24 6.2% 1.2%
Moderate 7 33.3% $43 11.2% 16.1% 7 33.3% 16.8% $43 11.2% 7.4%
Middle 5 23.8% $161 41.8% 18.5% 5 23.8% 19.3% $161 41.8% 17.6%
Upper 6 28.6% $157 40.8% 42.2% 6 28.6% 49.2% $157 40.8% 56.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.2% $0 0.0% 17.8%
Total 21 100.0% $385 100.0% 100.0% 21 100.0% 100.0% $385 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 2 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 100.0%
Total 2 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $2,387 100.0% 100.0%
Low 29 7.8% $2,198 4.1% 23.2% 29 7.8% 4.3% $2,198 4.1% 2.0%
Moderate 50 13.4% $4,109 7.6% 16.1% 50 13.4% 11.6% $4,109 7.6% 7.5%
Middle 101 27.0% $12,533 23.1% 18.5% 101 27.0% 20.4% $12,533 23.1% 17.1%
Upper 183 48.9% $31,591 58.3% 42.2% 183 48.9% 46.5% $31,591 58.3% 55.0%
Unknown 11 2.9% $3,710 6.9% 0.0% 11 2.9% 17.2% $3,710 6.9% 18.5%
Total 374 100.0% $54,141 100.0% 100.0% 374 100.0% 100.0% $54,141 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 11 10.9% $1,485 9.2% 91.3% 11 10.9% 38.7% $1,485 9.2% 44.0%
Over $1 Million 68 67.3% $11,940 74.4% 5.1% 68 67.3%
Total Rev. available 79 78.2% $13,425 83.6% 96.4% 79 78.2%
Rev. Not Known 22 21.8% $2,630 16.4% 3.5% 22 21.8%
Total 101 100.0% $16,055 100.0% 100.0% 101 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 72 71.3% $3,662 22.8% 72 71.3% 87.9% $3,662 22.8% 27.5%
$100,001 - $250,000 11 10.9% $2,177 13.6% 11 10.9% 6.4% $2,177 13.6% 19.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 18 17.8% $10,216 63.6% 18 17.8% 5.7% $10,216 63.6% 52.7%
Total 101 100.0% $16,055 100.0% 101 100.0% 100.0% $16,055 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 99.4% 1 100.0% 72.4% $65 100.0% 66.6%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.6% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 1 100.0% 58.6% $65 100.0% 17.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 27.6% $0 0.0% 41.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.8% $0 0.0% 40.9%
Total 1 100.0% $65 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $65 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
294
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,239
26.7
Moderate-income
1
12.5
1,037
12.4
396
38.2
1,326
15.8
Middle-income
6
75.0
5,629
67.1
1,230
21.9
1,537
18.3
Upper-income
1
12.5
1,723
20.5
165
9.6
3,287
39.2
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
8
100.0
8,389
100.0
1,791
21.3
8,389
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,631
817
10.0
50.1
633
38.8
181
11.1
Middle-income
8,784
5,548
68.1
63.2
2,195
25.0
1,041
11.9
Upper-income
2,296
1,785
21.9
77.7
404
17.6
107
4.7
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
12,711
8,150
100.0
64.1
3,232
25.4
1,329
10.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
166
8.8
153
8.7
2
3.4
11
20.0
Middle-income
1,300
69.3
1,219
69.2
45
76.3
36
65.5
Upper-income
410
21.9
390
22.1
12
20.3
8
14.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,876
100.0
1,762
100.0
59
100.0
55
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
93.9
3.1
2.9
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
153
85.5
149
85.1
4
100.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
26
14.5
26
14.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
179
100.0
175
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.8
2.2
.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
295
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.0% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 2.5%
Middle 21 77.8% $2,592 79.6% 68.1% 21 77.8% 69.8% $2,592 79.6% 69.5%
Upper 6 22.2% $666 20.4% 21.9% 6 22.2% 27.4% $666 20.4% 28.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 27 100.0% $3,258 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $3,258 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 11.1% $24 2.0% 10.0% 1 11.1% 6.8% $24 2.0% 4.3%
Middle 7 77.8% $946 79.0% 68.1% 7 77.8% 57.0% $946 79.0% 58.3%
Upper 1 11.1% $228 19.0% 21.9% 1 11.1% 36.2% $228 19.0% 37.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 100.0% $1,198 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $1,198 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.0% 0 0.0% 14.0% $0 0.0% 6.1%
Middle 5 83.3% $353 99.2% 68.1% 5 83.3% 62.8% $353 99.2% 63.0%
Upper 1 16.7% $3 0.8% 21.9% 1 16.7% 23.3% $3 0.8% 30.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $356 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $356 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 2.4% $24 0.5% 10.0% 1 2.4% 5.6% $24 0.5% 5.2%
Middle 33 78.6% $3,891 80.9% 68.1% 33 78.6% 63.7% $3,891 80.9% 62.9%
Upper 8 19.0% $897 18.6% 21.9% 8 19.0% 30.7% $897 18.6% 31.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 42 100.0% $4,812 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $4,812 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 8.7% 0 0.0% 6.1% $0 0.0% 7.3%
Middle 4 80.0% $506 79.2% 69.2% 4 80.0% 66.4% $506 79.2% 74.3%
Upper 1 20.0% $133 20.8% 22.1% 1 20.0% 22.7% $133 20.8% 17.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.9% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Total 5 100.0% $639 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $639 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.4% $0 0.0% 6.4%
Middle 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 85.1% 1 100.0% 64.3% $50 100.0% 69.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 14.9% 0 0.0% 19.6% $0 0.0% 15.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.7% $0 0.0% 8.1%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
296
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 5 18.5% $434 13.3% 26.7% 5 18.5% 10.9% $434 13.3% 7.3%
Moderate 4 14.8% $281 8.6% 15.8% 4 14.8% 19.8% $281 8.6% 15.3%
Middle 5 18.5% $588 18.0% 18.3% 5 18.5% 19.0% $588 18.0% 19.9%
Upper 13 48.1% $1,955 60.0% 39.2% 13 48.1% 38.3% $1,955 60.0% 49.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.1% $0 0.0% 7.6%
Total 27 100.0% $3,258 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $3,258 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 22.2% $47 3.9% 26.7% 2 22.2% 3.4% $47 3.9% 1.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.8% 0 0.0% 8.7% $0 0.0% 5.1%
Middle 2 22.2% $165 13.8% 18.3% 2 22.2% 17.4% $165 13.8% 13.9%
Upper 2 22.2% $510 42.6% 39.2% 2 22.2% 52.2% $510 42.6% 59.8%
Unknown 3 33.3% $476 39.7% 0.0% 3 33.3% 18.4% $476 39.7% 20.0%
Total 9 100.0% $1,198 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $1,198 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 33.3% $7 2.0% 26.7% 2 33.3% 18.6% $7 2.0% 3.5%
Moderate 1 16.7% $55 15.4% 15.8% 1 16.7% 9.3% $55 15.4% 4.5%
Middle 2 33.3% $20 5.6% 18.3% 2 33.3% 20.9% $20 5.6% 13.4%
Upper 1 16.7% $274 77.0% 39.2% 1 16.7% 41.9% $274 77.0% 73.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.3% $0 0.0% 5.2%
Total 6 100.0% $356 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $356 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 26.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 9 21.4% $488 10.1% 26.7% 9 21.4% 8.4% $488 10.1% 4.2%
Moderate 5 11.9% $336 7.0% 15.8% 5 11.9% 14.2% $336 7.0% 10.0%
Middle 9 21.4% $773 16.1% 18.3% 9 21.4% 18.4% $773 16.1% 16.5%
Upper 16 38.1% $2,739 56.9% 39.2% 16 38.1% 44.3% $2,739 56.9% 54.3%
Unknown 3 7.1% $476 9.9% 0.0% 3 7.1% 14.6% $476 9.9% 14.9%
Total 42 100.0% $4,812 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $4,812 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 2 40.0% $225 35.2% 93.9% 2 40.0% 43.7% $225 35.2% 68.3%
Over $1 Million 1 20.0% $300 46.9% 3.1% 1 20.0%
Total Rev. available 3 60.0% $525 82.1% 97.0% 3 60.0%
Rev. Not Known 2 40.0% $114 17.8% 2.9% 2 40.0%
Total 5 100.0% $639 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 3 60.0% $206 32.2% 3 60.0% 94.3% $206 32.2% 39.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 20.0% $133 20.8% 1 20.0% 2.4% $133 20.8% 11.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 1 20.0% $300 46.9% 1 20.0% 3.2% $300 46.9% 49.0%
Total 5 100.0% $639 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $639 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 97.8% 1 100.0% 62.5% $50 100.0% 63.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.2% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0% 51.8% $50 100.0% 14.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 21.4% $0 0.0% 22.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 26.8% $0 0.0% 63.3%
Total 1 100.0% $50 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $50 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
297
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8
12.5
5,380
8.2
2,438
45.3
16,875
25.8
Moderate-income
21
32.8
17,122
26.1
4,679
27.3
10,578
16.1
Middle-income
16
25.0
18,346
28.0
2,515
13.7
12,304
18.8
Upper-income
19
29.7
24,656
37.6
1,585
6.4
25,747
39.3
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
64
100.0
65,504
100.0
11,217
17.1
65,504
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
9,911
3,659
5.9
36.9
4,918
49.6
1,334
13.5
Moderate-income
29,426
14,533
23.2
49.4
11,121
37.8
3,772
12.8
Middle-income
29,877
17,313
27.7
57.9
10,001
33.5
2,563
8.6
Upper-income
39,082
27,041
43.2
69.2
9,388
24.0
2,653
6.8
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
108,296
62,546
100.0
57.8
35,428
32.7
10,322
9.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,096
5.9
995
5.9
71
7.5
30
5.2
Moderate-income
4,627
25.1
4,187
24.7
271
28.6
169
29.4
Middle-income
5,616
30.5
5,046
29.8
373
39.4
197
34.3
Upper-income
7,102
38.5
6,693
39.6
231
24.4
178
31.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
18,441
100.0
16,921
100.0
946
100.0
574
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.8
5.1
3.1
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3
1.5
3
1.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
23
11.9
21
11.4
2
28.6
0
0.0
Middle-income
64
33.0
63
34.1
1
14.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
104
53.6
98
53.0
4
57.1
2
100.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
194
100.0
185
100.0
7
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
95.4
3.6
1.0
Based on 2011 D&B information according to 2000 Census Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
298
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 1.1%
Moderate 12 8.1% $1,316 5.0% 23.2% 12 8.1% 8.1% $1,316 5.0% 4.4%
Middle 35 23.5% $4,559 17.5% 27.7% 35 23.5% 25.3% $4,559 17.5% 20.6%
Upper 102 68.5% $20,206 77.5% 43.2% 102 68.5% 65.2% $20,206 77.5% 74.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 149 100.0% $26,081 100.0% 100.0% 149 100.0% 100.0% $26,081 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 5.8% $0 0.0% 2.6%
Middle 11 22.4% $2,014 20.7% 27.7% 11 22.4% 22.9% $2,014 20.7% 18.7%
Upper 38 77.6% $7,712 79.3% 43.2% 38 77.6% 69.6% $7,712 79.3% 77.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 49 100.0% $9,726 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $9,726 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0% 2.4% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 22.8% $0 0.0% 10.4%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 27.7% 0 0.0% 31.7% $0 0.0% 22.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 43.2% 0 0.0% 43.1% $0 0.0% 66.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 10.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 8.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 79.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Moderate 12 6.1% $1,316 3.7% 23.2% 12 6.1% 7.9% $1,316 3.7% 3.7%
Middle 46 23.2% $6,573 18.4% 27.7% 46 23.2% 24.5% $6,573 18.4% 20.6%
Upper 140 70.7% $27,918 78.0% 43.2% 140 70.7% 65.9% $27,918 78.0% 74.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 198 100.0% $35,807 100.0% 100.0% 198 100.0% 100.0% $35,807 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 5.9% 0 0.0% 4.5% $0 0.0% 4.6%
Moderate 6 7.8% $1,581 7.2% 24.7% 6 7.8% 19.4% $1,581 7.2% 18.3%
Middle 32 41.6% $11,071 50.5% 29.8% 32 41.6% 28.3% $11,071 50.5% 37.6%
Upper 39 50.6% $9,287 42.3% 39.6% 39 50.6% 46.2% $9,287 42.3% 38.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 77 100.0% $21,939 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $21,939 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.4% 0 0.0% 18.8% $0 0.0% 5.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 34.1% 0 0.0% 43.8% $0 0.0% 70.7%
Upper 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 53.0% 1 100.0% 37.5% $100 100.0% 24.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011 2011
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix I: 2011 Limited Scope Tables
299
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 10 6.7% $765 2.9% 25.8% 10 6.7% 5.9% $765 2.9% 2.9%
Moderate 33 22.1% $3,872 14.8% 16.1% 33 22.1% 19.1% $3,872 14.8% 13.5%
Middle 46 30.9% $7,198 27.6% 18.8% 46 30.9% 24.0% $7,198 27.6% 22.0%
Upper 60 40.3% $14,246 54.6% 39.3% 60 40.3% 38.1% $14,246 54.6% 49.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.9% $0 0.0% 11.7%
Total 149 100.0% $26,081 100.0% 100.0% 149 100.0% 100.0% $26,081 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.0% $75 0.8% 25.8% 1 2.0% 4.2% $75 0.8% 1.8%
Moderate 5 10.2% $636 6.5% 16.1% 5 10.2% 10.1% $636 6.5% 5.9%
Middle 10 20.4% $1,333 13.7% 18.8% 10 20.4% 18.3% $1,333 13.7% 13.7%
Upper 33 67.3% $7,682 79.0% 39.3% 33 67.3% 49.1% $7,682 79.0% 61.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.4% $0 0.0% 16.7%
Total 49 100.0% $9,726 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $9,726 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.8% 0 0.0% 11.1% $0 0.0% 2.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 20.6% $0 0.0% 8.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.8% 0 0.0% 22.2% $0 0.0% 14.3%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.3% 0 0.0% 40.1% $0 0.0% 65.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.0% $0 0.0% 8.9%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 11 5.6% $840 2.3% 25.8% 11 5.6% 5.4% $840 2.3% 2.3%
Moderate 38 19.2% $4,508 12.6% 16.1% 38 19.2% 15.0% $4,508 12.6% 9.6%
Middle 56 28.3% $8,531 23.8% 18.8% 56 28.3% 21.2% $8,531 23.8% 17.5%
Upper 93 47.0% $21,928 61.2% 39.3% 93 47.0% 43.2% $21,928 61.2% 55.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.1% $0 0.0% 15.3%
Total 198 100.0% $35,807 100.0% 100.0% 198 100.0% 100.0% $35,807 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 30 39.0% $8,190 37.3% 91.8% 30 39.0% 37.1% $8,190 37.3% 36.2%
Over $1 Million 29 37.7% $10,192 46.5% 5.1% 29 37.7%
Total Rev. available 59 76.7% $18,382 83.8% 96.9% 59 76.7%
Rev. Not Known 18 23.4% $3,557 16.2% 3.1% 18 23.4%
Total 77 100.0% $21,939 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 25 32.5% $1,653 7.5% 25 32.5% 90.3% $1,653 7.5% 29.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 20 26.0% $4,081 18.6% 20 26.0% 4.9% $4,081 18.6% 17.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 32 41.6% $16,205 73.9% 32 41.6% 4.8% $16,205 73.9% 52.9%
Total 77 100.0% $21,939 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $21,939 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 95.4% 1 100.0% 62.5% $100 100.0% 72.0%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.6% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 1 100.0% 62.5% $100 100.0% 20.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.8% $0 0.0% 24.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.8% $0 0.0% 55.6%
Total 1 100.0% $100 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $100 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2011 D&B information and 2000 Census Data.
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2011
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2011
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
300
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
6,711
13.4
Moderate-income
1
3.2
838
1.7
179
21.4
6,800
13.5
Middle-income
12
38.7
20,264
40.4
2,467
12.2
9,734
19.4
Upper-income
18
58.1
29,093
58.0
1,937
6.7
26,950
53.7
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
31
100.0
50,195
100.0
4,583
9.1
50,195
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,440
688
1.3
47.8
459
31.9
293
20.3
Middle-income
38,115
20,854
39.1
54.7
6,472
17.0
10,789
28.3
Upper-income
61,538
31,767
59.6
51.6
9,236
15.0
20,535
33.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
101,093
53,309
100.0
52.7
16,167
16.0
31,617
31.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
150
1.2
128
1.1
11
2.0
11
2.0
Middle-income
4,693
36.7
4,326
37.1
177
32.7
190
33.7
Upper-income
7,937
62.1
7,222
61.9
353
65.2
362
64.3
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
12,780
100.0
11,676
100.0
541
100.0
563
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.4
4.2
4.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
3
1.2
3
1.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
148
57.4
141
56.6
7
77.8
0
0.0
Upper-income
107
41.5
105
42.2
2
22.2
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
258
100.0
249
100.0
9
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.5
3.5
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
301
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Middle 1 4.0% $120 1.3% 39.1% 1 4.0% 27.9% $120 1.3% 20.0%
Upper 24 96.0% $8,795 98.7% 59.6% 24 96.0% 71.7% $8,795 98.7% 79.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 25 100.0% $8,915 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $8,915 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Middle 9 17.3% $2,508 15.6% 39.1% 9 17.3% 29.7% $2,508 15.6% 24.5%
Upper 43 82.7% $13,525 84.4% 59.6% 43 82.7% 69.7% $13,525 84.4% 75.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 52 100.0% $16,033 100.0% 100.0% 52 100.0% 100.0% $16,033 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 2.4% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.1% 0 0.0% 40.5% $0 0.0% 31.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 59.6% 0 0.0% 57.1% $0 0.0% 68.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.3% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 66.7% $0 0.0% 97.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Middle 10 13.0% $2,628 10.5% 39.1% 10 13.0% 29.2% $2,628 10.5% 22.2%
Upper 67 87.0% $22,320 89.5% 59.6% 67 87.0% 70.2% $22,320 89.5% 77.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 77 100.0% $24,948 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $24,948 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.1% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 2.2%
Middle 10 18.5% $4,011 22.1% 37.1% 10 18.5% 27.6% $4,011 22.1% 23.0%
Upper 44 81.5% $14,127 77.9% 61.9% 44 81.5% 63.7% $14,127 77.9% 73.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.3% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Total 54 100.0% $18,138 100.0% 100.0% 54 100.0% 100.0% $18,138 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 56.6% 0 0.0% 72.7% $0 0.0% 54.3%
Upper 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 42.2% 1 100.0% 23.4% $125 100.0% 45.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.9% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $125 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
302
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 4.0% $50 0.6% 13.4% 1 4.0% 1.9% $50 0.6% 0.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 11.8% $0 0.0% 6.9%
Middle 2 8.0% $374 4.2% 19.4% 2 8.0% 18.8% $374 4.2% 13.6%
Upper 20 80.0% $8,071 90.5% 53.7% 20 80.0% 56.4% $8,071 90.5% 67.7%
Unknown 2 8.0% $420 4.7% 0.0% 2 8.0% 11.2% $420 4.7% 11.1%
Total 25 100.0% $8,915 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $8,915 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.4% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Moderate 1 1.9% $61 0.4% 13.5% 1 1.9% 6.9% $61 0.4% 4.0%
Middle 2 3.8% $458 2.9% 19.4% 2 3.8% 13.7% $458 2.9% 9.4%
Upper 46 88.5% $14,551 90.8% 53.7% 46 88.5% 58.5% $14,551 90.8% 66.3%
Unknown 3 5.8% $963 6.0% 0.0% 3 5.8% 18.5% $963 6.0% 18.9%
Total 52 100.0% $16,033 100.0% 100.0% 52 100.0% 100.0% $16,033 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.4% 0 0.0% 9.8% $0 0.0% 3.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 14.6% $0 0.0% 9.3%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.4% 0 0.0% 20.5% $0 0.0% 16.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 53.7% 0 0.0% 51.7% $0 0.0% 66.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.4% $0 0.0% 4.7%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 53.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 1 1.3% $50 0.2% 13.4% 1 1.3% 2.3% $50 0.2% 1.1%
Moderate 1 1.3% $61 0.2% 13.5% 1 1.3% 9.1% $61 0.2% 5.1%
Middle 4 5.2% $832 3.3% 19.4% 4 5.2% 16.0% $832 3.3% 11.0%
Upper 66 85.7% $22,622 90.7% 53.7% 66 85.7% 57.4% $22,622 90.7% 65.6%
Unknown 5 6.5% $1,383 5.5% 0.0% 5 6.5% 15.2% $1,383 5.5% 17.2%
Total 77 100.0% $24,948 100.0% 100.0% 77 100.0% 100.0% $24,948 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 23 42.6% $7,779 42.9% 91.4% 23 42.6% 42.4% $7,779 42.9% 50.3%
Over $1 Million 29 53.7% $10,345 57.0% 4.2% 29 53.7%
Total Rev. available 52 96.3% $18,124 99.9% 95.6% 52 96.3%
Rev. Not Known 2 3.7% $14 0.1% 4.4% 2 3.7%
Total 54 100.0% $18,138 100.0% 100.0% 54 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 18 33.3% $1,028 5.7% 18 33.3% 90.2% $1,028 5.7% 26.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 14 25.9% $2,891 15.9% 14 25.9% 4.6% $2,891 15.9% 17.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 22 40.7% $14,219 78.4% 22 40.7% 5.2% $14,219 78.4% 56.0%
Total 54 100.0% $18,138 100.0% 54 100.0% 100.0% $18,138 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 96.5% 1 100.0% 18.2% $125 100.0% 42.0%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.5% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 89.6% $0 0.0% 24.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 1 100.0% 3.9% $125 100.0% 14.6%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 61.2%
Total 1 100.0% $125 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $125 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Baldwin
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
303
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
10
13.7
6,300
7.5
2,141
34.0
18,180
21.7
Moderate-income
17
23.3
14,686
17.5
2,197
15.0
13,012
15.5
Middle-income
23
31.5
29,890
35.6
2,100
7.0
15,353
18.3
Upper-income
23
31.5
33,011
39.4
814
2.5
37,342
44.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
73
100.0
83,887
100.0
7,252
8.6
83,887
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
15,844
3,771
4.2
23.8
8,901
56.2
3,172
20.0
Moderate-income
30,113
14,429
16.2
47.9
11,573
38.4
4,111
13.7
Middle-income
48,379
33,478
37.5
69.2
10,484
21.7
4,417
9.1
Upper-income
47,147
37,484
42.0
79.5
6,444
13.7
3,219
6.8
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
141,483
89,162
100.0
63.0
37,402
26.4
14,919
10.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,465
11.7
2,117
11.1
248
21.4
100
13.5
Moderate-income
4,111
19.6
3,618
18.9
326
28.1
167
22.6
Middle-income
6,776
32.3
6,313
33.0
247
21.3
216
29.2
Upper-income
7,656
36.4
7,060
36.9
339
29.2
257
34.7
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
21,008
100.0
19,108
100.0
1,160
100.0
740
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.0
5.5
3.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7
2.2
7
2.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
50
15.4
49
15.5
1
14.3
0
0.0
Middle-income
166
51.2
160
50.6
5
71.4
1
100.0
Upper-income
101
31.2
100
31.6
1
14.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
324
100.0
316
100.0
7
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.5
2.2
.3
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
304
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.2% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.2% 0 0.0% 9.7% $0 0.0% 6.1%
Middle 1 16.7% $138 11.2% 37.5% 1 16.7% 39.1% $138 11.2% 34.2%
Upper 5 83.3% $1,090 88.8% 42.0% 5 83.3% 49.6% $1,090 88.8% 59.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $1,228 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $1,228 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.2% 0 0.0% 1.3% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 3 11.1% $487 6.2% 16.2% 3 11.1% 8.3% $487 6.2% 5.4%
Middle 7 25.9% $2,610 33.3% 37.5% 7 25.9% 34.8% $2,610 33.3% 30.5%
Upper 17 63.0% $4,733 60.4% 42.0% 17 63.0% 55.6% $4,733 60.4% 63.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 27 100.0% $7,830 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $7,830 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 25.0% $19 22.6% 4.2% 2 25.0% 3.3% $19 22.6% 1.0%
Moderate 5 62.5% $45 53.6% 16.2% 5 62.5% 17.9% $45 53.6% 10.7%
Middle 1 12.5% $20 23.8% 37.5% 1 12.5% 47.0% $20 23.8% 44.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.0% 0 0.0% 31.8% $0 0.0% 43.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 8 100.0% $84 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $84 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.2% $0 0.0% 49.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 63.6% $0 0.0% 36.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.2% $0 0.0% 13.7%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 2 4.9% $19 0.2% 4.2% 2 4.9% 1.6% $19 0.2% 0.8%
Moderate 8 19.5% $532 5.8% 16.2% 8 19.5% 9.4% $532 5.8% 5.9%
Middle 9 22.0% $2,768 30.3% 37.5% 9 22.0% 37.0% $2,768 30.3% 31.8%
Upper 22 53.7% $5,823 63.7% 42.0% 22 53.7% 52.0% $5,823 63.7% 61.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 41 100.0% $9,142 100.0% 100.0% 41 100.0% 100.0% $9,142 100.0% 100.0%
Low 5 10.2% $1,506 9.9% 11.1% 5 10.2% 14.4% $1,506 9.9% 18.4%
Moderate 7 14.3% $1,576 10.3% 18.9% 7 14.3% 15.1% $1,576 10.3% 16.9%
Middle 17 34.7% $3,736 24.5% 33.0% 17 34.7% 29.7% $3,736 24.5% 24.9%
Upper 20 40.8% $8,446 55.3% 36.9% 20 40.8% 39.2% $8,446 55.3% 39.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 49 100.0% $15,264 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $15,264 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.2% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.5% 0 0.0% 14.9% $0 0.0% 37.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 50.6% 0 0.0% 64.4% $0 0.0% 37.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 31.6% 0 0.0% 19.5% $0 0.0% 22.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
305
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.7% 0 0.0% 13.6% $0 0.0% 7.5%
Moderate 1 16.7% $103 8.4% 15.5% 1 16.7% 21.5% $103 8.4% 16.7%
Middle 2 33.3% $271 22.1% 18.3% 2 33.3% 20.0% $271 22.1% 19.6%
Upper 2 33.3% $575 46.8% 44.5% 2 33.3% 32.3% $575 46.8% 45.2%
Unknown 1 16.7% $279 22.7% 0.0% 1 16.7% 12.6% $279 22.7% 10.9%
Total 6 100.0% $1,228 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $1,228 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 7.4% $361 4.6% 21.7% 2 7.4% 6.2% $361 4.6% 3.1%
Moderate 6 22.2% $696 8.9% 15.5% 6 22.2% 11.5% $696 8.9% 7.3%
Middle 1 3.7% $201 2.6% 18.3% 1 3.7% 16.8% $201 2.6% 13.7%
Upper 18 66.7% $6,572 83.9% 44.5% 18 66.7% 42.6% $6,572 83.9% 49.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 22.9% $0 0.0% 26.0%
Total 27 100.0% $7,830 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $7,830 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 12.5% $8 9.5% 21.7% 1 12.5% 19.2% $8 9.5% 7.7%
Moderate 2 25.0% $19 22.6% 15.5% 2 25.0% 27.5% $19 22.6% 18.0%
Middle 4 50.0% $37 44.0% 18.3% 4 50.0% 22.7% $37 44.0% 23.3%
Upper 1 12.5% $20 23.8% 44.5% 1 12.5% 29.0% $20 23.8% 44.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 6.4%
Total 8 100.0% $84 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $84 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 44.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 3 7.3% $369 4.0% 21.7% 3 7.3% 9.5% $369 4.0% 4.6%
Moderate 9 22.0% $818 8.9% 15.5% 9 22.0% 15.9% $818 8.9% 10.6%
Middle 7 17.1% $509 5.6% 18.3% 7 17.1% 18.2% $509 5.6% 15.7%
Upper 21 51.2% $7,167 78.4% 44.5% 21 51.2% 38.3% $7,167 78.4% 47.9%
Unknown 1 2.4% $279 3.1% 0.0% 1 2.4% 18.1% $279 3.1% 21.1%
Total 41 100.0% $9,142 100.0% 100.0% 41 100.0% 100.0% $9,142 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 20 40.8% $5,335 35.0% 91.0% 20 40.8% 41.3% $5,335 35.0% 41.8%
Over $1 Million 17 34.7% $6,998 45.8% 5.5% 17 34.7%
Total Rev. available 37 75.5% $12,333 80.8% 96.5% 37 75.5%
Rev. Not Known 12 24.5% $2,931 19.2% 3.5% 12 24.5%
Total 49 100.0% $15,264 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 17 34.7% $836 5.5% 17 34.7% 86.6% $836 5.5% 21.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 6 12.2% $1,042 6.8% 6 12.2% 6.0% $1,042 6.8% 17.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 26 53.1% $13,386 87.7% 26 53.1% 7.4% $13,386 87.7% 61.4%
Total 49 100.0% $15,264 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $15,264 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 97.5% 0 0.0% 14.9% $0 0.0% 13.1%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.2% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.3% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 93.1% $0 0.0% 34.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 4.6%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.7% $0 0.0% 60.5%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Huntsville
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
306
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
12
10.5
6,085
5.8
3,072
50.5
24,250
23.2
Moderate-income
34
29.8
23,905
22.9
5,968
25.0
17,428
16.7
Middle-income
41
36.0
40,554
38.9
4,982
12.3
20,338
19.5
Upper-income
26
22.8
33,780
32.4
2,317
6.9
42,308
40.6
Unknown-income
1
0.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
114
100.0
104,324
100.0
16,339
15.7
104,324
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
12,220
4,212
4.0
34.5
5,310
43.5
2,698
22.1
Moderate-income
43,854
20,571
19.6
46.9
16,198
36.9
7,085
16.2
Middle-income
67,433
42,685
40.7
63.3
16,370
24.3
8,378
12.4
Upper-income
52,246
37,347
35.6
71.5
10,609
20.3
4,290
8.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
175,753
104,815
100.0
59.6
48,487
27.6
22,451
12.8
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,487
6.8
1,262
6.5
158
11.2
67
8.4
Moderate-income
4,488
20.7
3,948
20.2
370
26.2
170
21.4
Middle-income
7,592
34.9
6,940
35.6
389
27.6
263
33.1
Upper-income
8,128
37.4
7,350
37.7
485
34.4
293
36.9
Unknown-income
29
0.1
19
0.1
9
0.6
1
0.1
Total Assessment Area
21,724
100.0
19,519
100.0
1,411
100.0
794
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
89.8
6.5
3.7
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6
2.4
5
2.1
1
6.3
0
0.0
Moderate-income
20
7.9
17
7.2
3
18.8
0
0.0
Middle-income
133
52.6
127
53.6
6
37.5
0
0.0
Upper-income
94
37.2
88
37.1
6
37.5
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
253
100.0
237
100.0
16
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
93.7
6.3
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
307
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.0% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.6% 0 0.0% 10.7% $0 0.0% 7.4%
Middle 4 21.1% $829 14.6% 40.7% 4 21.1% 39.8% $829 14.6% 35.8%
Upper 15 78.9% $4,848 85.4% 35.6% 15 78.9% 49.0% $4,848 85.4% 56.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 19 100.0% $5,677 100.0% 100.0% 19 100.0% 100.0% $5,677 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.0% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 6 12.2% $1,169 8.6% 19.6% 6 12.2% 8.9% $1,169 8.6% 6.0%
Middle 9 18.4% $2,043 15.0% 40.7% 9 18.4% 37.5% $2,043 15.0% 34.5%
Upper 34 69.4% $10,383 76.4% 35.6% 34 69.4% 53.0% $10,383 76.4% 59.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 49 100.0% $13,595 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $13,595 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.0% 0 0.0% 3.1% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Moderate 1 33.3% $10 5.5% 19.6% 1 33.3% 17.8% $10 5.5% 6.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 41.4% $0 0.0% 40.2%
Upper 2 66.7% $173 94.5% 35.6% 2 66.7% 37.8% $173 94.5% 52.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $183 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $183 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 46.7% $0 0.0% 12.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 46.7% $0 0.0% 47.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.7% $0 0.0% 40.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.0% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 7 9.9% $1,179 6.1% 19.6% 7 9.9% 10.0% $1,179 6.1% 6.7%
Middle 13 18.3% $2,872 14.8% 40.7% 13 18.3% 38.6% $2,872 14.8% 35.4%
Upper 51 71.8% $15,404 79.2% 35.6% 51 71.8% 50.9% $15,404 79.2% 57.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 71 100.0% $19,455 100.0% 100.0% 71 100.0% 100.0% $19,455 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 10.4% $3,133 17.6% 6.5% 7 10.4% 5.9% $3,133 17.6% 8.4%
Moderate 10 14.9% $2,358 13.3% 20.2% 10 14.9% 18.5% $2,358 13.3% 21.8%
Middle 14 20.9% $3,198 18.0% 35.6% 14 20.9% 29.6% $3,198 18.0% 22.4%
Upper 36 53.7% $9,072 51.1% 37.7% 36 53.7% 40.7% $9,072 51.1% 46.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.2% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 67 100.0% $17,761 100.0% 100.0% 67 100.0% 100.0% $17,761 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.1% 0 0.0% 4.7% $0 0.0% 10.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.2% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 53.6% 0 0.0% 46.9% $0 0.0% 36.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 37.1% 0 0.0% 45.3% $0 0.0% 53.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
308
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 5.3% $57 1.0% 23.2% 1 5.3% 5.3% $57 1.0% 2.7%
Moderate 3 15.8% $339 6.0% 16.7% 3 15.8% 23.0% $339 6.0% 17.2%
Middle 1 5.3% $133 2.3% 19.5% 1 5.3% 25.4% $133 2.3% 24.4%
Upper 14 73.7% $5,148 90.7% 40.6% 14 73.7% 29.2% $5,148 90.7% 40.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 17.1% $0 0.0% 15.1%
Total 19 100.0% $5,677 100.0% 100.0% 19 100.0% 100.0% $5,677 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 4.1% $243 1.8% 23.2% 2 4.1% 3.8% $243 1.8% 2.2%
Moderate 3 6.1% $337 2.5% 16.7% 3 6.1% 10.1% $337 2.5% 6.3%
Middle 3 6.1% $245 1.8% 19.5% 3 6.1% 16.7% $245 1.8% 13.0%
Upper 41 83.7% $12,770 93.9% 40.6% 41 83.7% 44.6% $12,770 93.9% 53.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 24.8% $0 0.0% 25.5%
Total 49 100.0% $13,595 100.0% 100.0% 49 100.0% 100.0% $13,595 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 10.0% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 1 33.3% $140 76.5% 16.7% 1 33.3% 19.4% $140 76.5% 14.1%
Middle 1 33.3% $10 5.5% 19.5% 1 33.3% 27.2% $10 5.5% 15.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 38.9% $0 0.0% 58.6%
Unknown 1 33.3% $33 18.0% 0.0% 1 33.3% 4.4% $33 18.0% 9.4%
Total 3 100.0% $183 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $183 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 3 4.2% $300 1.5% 23.2% 3 4.2% 4.6% $300 1.5% 2.3%
Moderate 7 9.9% $816 4.2% 16.7% 7 9.9% 15.4% $816 4.2% 10.2%
Middle 5 7.0% $388 2.0% 19.5% 5 7.0% 20.4% $388 2.0% 16.8%
Upper 55 77.5% $17,918 92.1% 40.6% 55 77.5% 38.3% $17,918 92.1% 47.0%
Unknown 1 1.4% $33 0.2% 0.0% 1 1.4% 21.2% $33 0.2% 23.6%
Total 71 100.0% $19,455 100.0% 100.0% 71 100.0% 100.0% $19,455 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 32 47.8% $6,834 38.5% 89.8% 32 47.8% 38.5% $6,834 38.5% 39.3%
Over $1 Million 27 40.3% $8,901 50.1% 6.5% 27 40.3%
Total Rev. available 59 88.1% $15,735 88.6% 96.3% 59 88.1%
Rev. Not Known 8 11.9% $2,026 11.4% 3.7% 8 11.9%
Total 67 100.0% $17,761 100.0% 100.0% 67 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 26 38.8% $1,576 8.9% 26 38.8% 87.0% $1,576 8.9% 23.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 18 26.9% $2,760 15.5% 18 26.9% 6.7% $2,760 15.5% 20.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 23 34.3% $13,425 75.6% 23 34.3% 6.3% $13,425 75.6% 56.2%
Total 67 100.0% $17,761 100.0% 67 100.0% 100.0% $17,761 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 93.7% 0 0.0% 35.9% $0 0.0% 45.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 65.6% $0 0.0% 13.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 21.9% $0 0.0% 35.2%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 50.9%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AL Mobile
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
309
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
15
15.6
8,479
8.9
3,904
46.0
22,555
23.6
Moderate-income
18
18.8
18,460
19.3
3,805
20.6
15,751
16.5
Middle-income
34
35.4
37,568
39.3
3,641
9.7
17,747
18.6
Upper-income
29
30.2
31,133
32.6
1,316
4.2
39,587
41.4
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
96
100.0
95,640
100.0
12,666
13.2
95,640
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
17,504
5,908
6.1
33.8
8,090
46.2
3,506
20.0
Moderate-income
31,587
16,877
17.6
53.4
10,482
33.2
4,228
13.4
Middle-income
61,042
38,907
40.5
63.7
14,540
23.8
7,595
12.4
Upper-income
49,687
34,391
35.8
69.2
11,262
22.7
4,034
8.1
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
159,820
96,083
100.0
60.1
44,374
27.8
19,363
12.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,008
14.7
2,516
13.6
303
25.3
189
23.0
Moderate-income
3,388
16.5
3,042
16.4
214
17.8
132
16.0
Middle-income
6,753
32.9
6,222
33.6
300
25.0
231
28.1
Upper-income
7,371
35.9
6,717
36.3
383
31.9
271
32.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
20,520
100.0
18,497
100.0
1,200
100.0
823
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.1
5.8
4.0
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
15
3.5
11
2.7
3
23.1
1
50.0
Moderate-income
72
16.9
69
16.8
2
15.4
1
50.0
Middle-income
244
57.4
238
58.0
6
46.2
0
0.0
Upper-income
94
22.1
92
22.4
2
15.4
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
425
100.0
410
100.0
13
100.0
2
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.5
3.1
.5
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
310
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 3 1.0% $393 0.8% 6.1% 3 1.0% 1.4% $393 0.8% 0.6%
Moderate 19 6.5% $1,816 3.9% 17.6% 19 6.5% 8.7% $1,816 3.9% 5.0%
Middle 120 41.0% $17,328 37.4% 40.5% 120 41.0% 39.6% $17,328 37.4% 36.1%
Upper 151 51.5% $26,799 57.8% 35.8% 151 51.5% 50.3% $26,799 57.8% 58.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 293 100.0% $46,336 100.0% 100.0% 293 100.0% 100.0% $46,336 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 1.2% $517 1.1% 6.1% 3 1.2% 1.3% $517 1.1% 0.7%
Moderate 8 3.2% $1,215 2.6% 17.6% 8 3.2% 7.2% $1,215 2.6% 4.0%
Middle 89 35.5% $14,472 30.5% 40.5% 89 35.5% 36.2% $14,472 30.5% 34.2%
Upper 151 60.2% $31,274 65.9% 35.8% 151 60.2% 55.3% $31,274 65.9% 61.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 251 100.0% $47,478 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $47,478 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.1% 0 0.0% 4.9% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 18.2% $0 0.0% 7.9%
Middle 5 83.3% $56 69.1% 40.5% 5 83.3% 46.1% $56 69.1% 36.6%
Upper 1 16.7% $25 30.9% 35.8% 1 16.7% 30.8% $25 30.9% 54.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $81 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $81 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 3.5%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.3% $0 0.0% 12.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.3% $0 0.0% 18.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% $0 0.0% 66.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 6 1.1% $910 1.0% 6.1% 6 1.1% 1.5% $910 1.0% 0.7%
Moderate 27 4.9% $3,031 3.2% 17.6% 27 4.9% 8.1% $3,031 3.2% 4.5%
Middle 214 38.9% $31,856 33.9% 40.5% 214 38.9% 37.7% $31,856 33.9% 34.6%
Upper 303 55.1% $58,098 61.9% 35.8% 303 55.1% 52.7% $58,098 61.9% 60.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 550 100.0% $93,895 100.0% 100.0% 550 100.0% 100.0% $93,895 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 20.0% $827 14.0% 13.6% 6 20.0% 14.8% $827 14.0% 20.7%
Moderate 4 13.3% $632 10.7% 16.4% 4 13.3% 14.0% $632 10.7% 15.6%
Middle 3 10.0% $940 15.9% 33.6% 3 10.0% 28.8% $940 15.9% 17.1%
Upper 17 56.7% $3,509 59.4% 36.3% 17 56.7% 39.1% $3,509 59.4% 46.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Total 30 100.0% $5,908 100.0% 100.0% 30 100.0% 100.0% $5,908 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.7% 0 0.0% 1.0% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.8% 0 0.0% 26.0% $0 0.0% 21.9%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 58.0% 0 0.0% 41.0% $0 0.0% 35.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.4% 0 0.0% 30.0% $0 0.0% 42.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.0% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
311
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 36 12.3% $3,353 7.2% 23.6% 36 12.3% 11.9% $3,353 7.2% 6.1%
Moderate 83 28.3% $10,722 23.1% 16.5% 83 28.3% 23.5% $10,722 23.1% 18.2%
Middle 77 26.3% $12,161 26.2% 18.6% 77 26.3% 22.7% $12,161 26.2% 22.6%
Upper 96 32.8% $19,953 43.1% 41.4% 96 32.8% 27.6% $19,953 43.1% 39.2%
Unknown 1 0.3% $147 0.3% 0.0% 1 0.3% 14.3% $147 0.3% 13.9%
Total 293 100.0% $46,336 100.0% 100.0% 293 100.0% 100.0% $46,336 100.0% 100.0%
Low 12 4.8% $1,876 4.0% 23.6% 12 4.8% 5.2% $1,876 4.0% 2.9%
Moderate 50 19.9% $7,031 14.8% 16.5% 50 19.9% 12.1% $7,031 14.8% 8.1%
Middle 49 19.5% $7,891 16.6% 18.6% 49 19.5% 16.7% $7,891 16.6% 13.8%
Upper 109 43.4% $24,526 51.7% 41.4% 109 43.4% 37.4% $24,526 51.7% 44.6%
Unknown 31 12.4% $6,154 13.0% 0.0% 31 12.4% 28.6% $6,154 13.0% 30.6%
Total 251 100.0% $47,478 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $47,478 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.6% 0 0.0% 18.8% $0 0.0% 7.1%
Moderate 1 16.7% $9 11.1% 16.5% 1 16.7% 19.6% $9 11.1% 10.5%
Middle 1 16.7% $7 8.6% 18.6% 1 16.7% 22.0% $7 8.6% 12.5%
Upper 3 50.0% $45 55.6% 41.4% 3 50.0% 34.7% $45 55.6% 55.8%
Unknown 1 16.7% $20 24.7% 0.0% 1 16.7% 4.9% $20 24.7% 14.1%
Total 6 100.0% $81 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $81 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 48 8.7% $5,229 5.6% 23.6% 48 8.7% 7.9% $5,229 5.6% 3.9%
Moderate 134 24.4% $17,762 18.9% 16.5% 134 24.4% 16.2% $17,762 18.9% 11.3%
Middle 127 23.1% $20,059 21.4% 18.6% 127 23.1% 18.9% $20,059 21.4% 16.4%
Upper 208 37.8% $44,524 47.4% 41.4% 208 37.8% 34.0% $44,524 47.4% 42.3%
Unknown 33 6.0% $6,321 6.7% 0.0% 33 6.0% 23.0% $6,321 6.7% 26.0%
Total 550 100.0% $93,895 100.0% 100.0% 550 100.0% 100.0% $93,895 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 12 40.0% $817 13.8% 90.1% 12 40.0% 39.9% $817 13.8% 41.5%
Over $1 Million 13 43.3% $4,485 75.9% 5.8% 13 43.3%
Total Rev. available 25 83.3% $5,302 89.7% 95.9% 25 83.3%
Rev. Not Known 5 16.7% $606 10.3% 4.0% 5 16.7%
Total 30 100.0% $5,908 100.0% 100.0% 30 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 16 53.3% $726 12.3% 16 53.3% 87.6% $726 12.3% 23.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 6 20.0% $1,089 18.4% 6 20.0% 6.0% $1,089 18.4% 18.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 8 26.7% $4,093 69.3% 8 26.7% 6.4% $4,093 69.3% 57.2%
Total 30 100.0% $5,908 100.0% 30 100.0% 100.0% $5,908 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.5% 0 0.0% 57.0% $0 0.0% 70.9%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.5% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 81.0% $0 0.0% 24.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.0% $0 0.0% 35.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.0% $0 0.0% 40.1%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Assessment Area: AL Montgomery
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
312
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
8.3
1,845
6.0
909
49.3
7,496
24.2
Moderate-income
7
29.2
8,515
27.5
2,170
25.5
5,258
17.0
Middle-income
10
41.7
12,598
40.6
1,587
12.6
5,860
18.9
Upper-income
5
20.8
8,037
25.9
413
5.1
12,381
39.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
24
100.0
30,995
100.0
5,079
16.4
30,995
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,830
765
2.7
20.0
2,392
62.5
673
17.6
Moderate-income
15,541
7,207
25.5
46.4
6,434
41.4
1,900
12.2
Middle-income
19,558
12,206
43.1
62.4
5,284
27.0
2,068
10.6
Upper-income
11,755
8,126
28.7
69.1
2,995
25.5
634
5.4
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
50,684
28,304
100.0
55.8
17,105
33.7
5,275
10.4
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
236
3.9
207
3.8
16
4.2
13
5.0
Moderate-income
2,218
36.2
1,938
35.3
175
46.1
105
40.7
Middle-income
1,730
28.3
1,565
28.5
95
25.0
70
27.1
Upper-income
1,938
31.7
1,774
32.3
94
24.7
70
27.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
6,122
100.0
5,484
100.0
380
100.0
258
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
89.6
6.2
4.2
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
14
2.1
12
1.8
2
13.3
0
0.0
Moderate-income
183
27.2
180
27.4
1
6.7
2
66.7
Middle-income
309
45.8
299
45.6
10
66.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
168
24.9
165
25.2
2
13.3
1
33.3
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
674
100.0
656
100.0
15
100.0
3
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.3
2.2
.4
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
313
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 4 8.5% $410 5.1% 2.7% 4 8.5% 2.4% $410 5.1% 1.5%
Moderate 10 21.3% $1,099 13.8% 25.5% 10 21.3% 19.9% $1,099 13.8% 16.1%
Middle 9 19.1% $1,950 24.5% 43.1% 9 19.1% 35.7% $1,950 24.5% 30.6%
Upper 24 51.1% $4,511 56.6% 28.7% 24 51.1% 42.0% $4,511 56.6% 51.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 47 100.0% $7,970 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $7,970 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.7% 0 0.0% 1.9% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 19 29.2% $1,667 16.9% 25.5% 19 29.2% 18.2% $1,667 16.9% 12.5%
Middle 13 20.0% $1,027 10.4% 43.1% 13 20.0% 29.8% $1,027 10.4% 24.3%
Upper 33 50.8% $7,198 72.8% 28.7% 33 50.8% 50.1% $7,198 72.8% 62.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 65 100.0% $9,892 100.0% 100.0% 65 100.0% 100.0% $9,892 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.7% 0 0.0% 4.7% $0 0.0% 3.5%
Moderate 15 44.1% $125 36.8% 25.5% 15 44.1% 32.4% $125 36.8% 21.1%
Middle 7 20.6% $102 30.0% 43.1% 7 20.6% 29.7% $102 30.0% 26.3%
Upper 12 35.3% $113 33.2% 28.7% 12 35.3% 33.1% $113 33.2% 49.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 34 100.0% $340 100.0% 100.0% 34 100.0% 100.0% $340 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.7% $0 0.0% 4.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 19.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 32.1% $0 0.0% 19.5%
Upper 1 100.0% $298 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 32.1% $298 100.0% 57.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $298 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $298 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 2.7% $410 2.2% 2.7% 4 2.7% 2.3% $410 2.2% 1.4%
Moderate 44 29.9% $2,891 15.6% 25.5% 44 29.9% 19.7% $2,891 15.6% 14.5%
Middle 29 19.7% $3,079 16.6% 43.1% 29 19.7% 32.3% $3,079 16.6% 26.5%
Upper 70 47.6% $12,120 65.5% 28.7% 70 47.6% 45.7% $12,120 65.5% 57.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 147 100.0% $18,500 100.0% 100.0% 147 100.0% 100.0% $18,500 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.8% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Moderate 43 38.4% $7,821 39.0% 35.3% 43 38.4% 31.7% $7,821 39.0% 36.1%
Middle 31 27.7% $5,513 27.5% 28.5% 31 27.7% 27.5% $5,513 27.5% 24.6%
Upper 38 33.9% $6,722 33.5% 32.3% 38 33.9% 30.8% $6,722 33.5% 36.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.9% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Total 112 100.0% $20,056 100.0% 100.0% 112 100.0% 100.0% $20,056 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.8% 0 0.0% 2.2% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 27.4% 0 0.0% 15.2% $0 0.0% 8.8%
Middle 14 73.7% $2,083 72.9% 45.6% 14 73.7% 56.0% $2,083 72.9% 60.2%
Upper 5 26.3% $775 27.1% 25.2% 5 26.3% 26.3% $775 27.1% 29.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 19 100.0% $2,858 100.0% 100.0% 19 100.0% 100.0% $2,858 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
314
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 4.3% $184 2.3% 24.2% 2 4.3% 6.8% $184 2.3% 3.8%
Moderate 10 21.3% $970 12.2% 17.0% 10 21.3% 17.4% $970 12.2% 12.5%
Middle 13 27.7% $1,796 22.5% 18.9% 13 27.7% 19.2% $1,796 22.5% 17.2%
Upper 21 44.7% $4,885 61.3% 39.9% 21 44.7% 34.4% $4,885 61.3% 44.3%
Unknown 1 2.1% $135 1.7% 0.0% 1 2.1% 22.2% $135 1.7% 22.2%
Total 47 100.0% $7,970 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $7,970 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 3.1% $72 0.7% 24.2% 2 3.1% 4.3% $72 0.7% 2.1%
Moderate 12 18.5% $894 9.0% 17.0% 12 18.5% 12.9% $894 9.0% 7.3%
Middle 17 26.2% $1,306 13.2% 18.9% 17 26.2% 16.2% $1,306 13.2% 11.9%
Upper 29 44.6% $6,905 69.8% 39.9% 29 44.6% 45.8% $6,905 69.8% 56.8%
Unknown 5 7.7% $715 7.2% 0.0% 5 7.7% 20.7% $715 7.2% 21.9%
Total 65 100.0% $9,892 100.0% 100.0% 65 100.0% 100.0% $9,892 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 11.8% $22 6.5% 24.2% 4 11.8% 11.5% $22 6.5% 5.0%
Moderate 13 38.2% $139 40.9% 17.0% 13 38.2% 20.3% $139 40.9% 9.8%
Middle 5 14.7% $58 17.1% 18.9% 5 14.7% 16.2% $58 17.1% 11.8%
Upper 7 20.6% $80 23.5% 39.9% 7 20.6% 41.6% $80 23.5% 61.4%
Unknown 5 14.7% $41 12.1% 0.0% 5 14.7% 10.5% $41 12.1% 12.1%
Total 34 100.0% $340 100.0% 100.0% 34 100.0% 100.0% $340 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $298 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $298 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $298 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $298 100.0% 100.0%
Low 8 5.4% $278 1.5% 24.2% 8 5.4% 5.7% $278 1.5% 2.7%
Moderate 35 23.8% $2,003 10.8% 17.0% 35 23.8% 15.1% $2,003 10.8% 9.0%
Middle 35 23.8% $3,160 17.1% 18.9% 35 23.8% 17.4% $3,160 17.1% 13.3%
Upper 57 38.8% $11,870 64.2% 39.9% 57 38.8% 40.6% $11,870 64.2% 48.5%
Unknown 12 8.2% $1,189 6.4% 0.0% 12 8.2% 21.2% $1,189 6.4% 26.5%
Total 147 100.0% $18,500 100.0% 100.0% 147 100.0% 100.0% $18,500 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 59 52.7% $7,778 38.8% 89.6% 59 52.7% 33.5% $7,778 38.8% 37.7%
Over $1 Million 39 34.8% $10,206 50.9% 6.2% 39 34.8%
Total Rev. available 98 87.5% $17,984 89.7% 95.8% 98 87.5%
Rev. Not Known 14 12.5% $2,072 10.3% 4.2% 14 12.5%
Total 112 100.0% $20,056 100.0% 100.0% 112 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 68 60.7% $3,089 15.4% 68 60.7% 91.5% $3,089 15.4% 27.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 12 10.7% $2,126 10.6% 12 10.7% 4.3% $2,126 10.6% 18.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 32 28.6% $14,841 74.0% 32 28.6% 4.3% $14,841 74.0% 53.9%
Total 112 100.0% $20,056 100.0% 112 100.0% 100.0% $20,056 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 14 73.7% $2,353 82.3% 97.3% 14 73.7% 43.0% $2,353 82.3% 53.5%
Over $1 Million 2 10.5% $30 1.0% 2.2% 2 10.5%
Not Known 3 15.8% $475 16.6% 0.4% 3 15.8%
Total 19 100.0% $2,858 100.0% 100.0% 19 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 8 42.1% $388 13.6% 8 42.1% 69.0% $388 13.6% 18.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 42.1% $1,600 56.0% 8 42.1% 18.4% $1,600 56.0% 33.8%
$250,001 - $500,000 3 15.8% $870 30.4% 3 15.8% 12.7% $870 30.4% 47.9%
Total 19 100.0% $2,858 100.0% 19 100.0% 100.0% $2,858 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Assessment Area: AR Jonesboro
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
315
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
7,369
21.3
Moderate-income
4
11.8
3,515
10.2
699
19.9
6,205
18.0
Middle-income
28
82.4
28,401
82.2
4,453
15.7
7,469
21.6
Upper-income
2
5.9
2,637
7.6
104
3.9
13,510
39.1
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
34
100.0
34,553
100.0
5,256
15.2
34,553
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
6,457
3,727
10.4
57.7
1,501
23.2
1,229
19.0
Middle-income
49,518
29,384
81.6
59.3
12,389
25.0
7,745
15.6
Upper-income
3,930
2,898
8.0
73.7
645
16.4
387
9.8
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
59,905
36,009
100.0
60.1
14,535
24.3
9,361
15.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
518
9.1
460
8.9
31
12.8
27
9.2
Middle-income
4,878
85.6
4,420
85.6
200
82.6
258
88.1
Upper-income
304
5.3
285
5.5
11
4.5
8
2.7
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
5,700
100.0
5,165
100.0
242
100.0
293
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
90.6
4.2
5.1
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
117
13.2
115
13.1
2
28.6
0
0.0
Middle-income
754
85.2
749
85.3
5
71.4
0
0.0
Upper-income
14
1.6
14
1.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
885
100.0
878
100.0
7
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
99.2
.8
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
316
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 5 10.6% $323 7.1% 10.4% 5 10.6% 7.0% $323 7.1% 5.6%
Middle 41 87.2% $4,159 91.6% 81.6% 41 87.2% 80.1% $4,159 91.6% 78.8%
Upper 1 2.1% $58 1.3% 8.0% 1 2.1% 11.7% $58 1.3% 14.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.2% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Total 47 100.0% $4,540 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $4,540 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 15 15.0% $1,799 21.2% 10.4% 15 15.0% 7.1% $1,799 21.2% 6.7%
Middle 85 85.0% $6,668 78.8% 81.6% 85 85.0% 81.5% $6,668 78.8% 81.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 8.0% 0 0.0% 10.8% $0 0.0% 11.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 100 100.0% $8,467 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $8,467 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 7 12.7% $65 11.1% 10.4% 7 12.7% 9.8% $65 11.1% 7.5%
Middle 46 83.6% $511 87.5% 81.6% 46 83.6% 79.9% $511 87.5% 77.9%
Upper 2 3.6% $8 1.4% 8.0% 2 3.6% 9.8% $8 1.4% 14.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 55 100.0% $584 100.0% 100.0% 55 100.0% 100.0% $584 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 1 100.0% $398 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 75.0% $398 100.0% 79.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 20.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $398 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $398 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 27 13.3% $2,187 15.6% 10.4% 27 13.3% 7.3% $2,187 15.6% 6.2%
Middle 173 85.2% $11,736 83.9% 81.6% 173 85.2% 80.8% $11,736 83.9% 80.3%
Upper 3 1.5% $66 0.5% 8.0% 3 1.5% 11.1% $66 0.5% 12.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.8% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 203 100.0% $13,989 100.0% 100.0% 203 100.0% 100.0% $13,989 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 6 12.8% $711 13.1% 8.9% 6 12.8% 9.0% $711 13.1% 11.5%
Middle 40 85.1% $4,687 86.3% 85.6% 40 85.1% 75.2% $4,687 86.3% 83.4%
Upper 1 2.1% $30 0.6% 5.5% 1 2.1% 5.4% $30 0.6% 1.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.4% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Total 47 100.0% $5,428 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $5,428 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 5 5.1% $498 4.7% 13.1% 5 5.1% 10.2% $498 4.7% 11.4%
Middle 93 94.9% $10,019 95.3% 85.3% 93 94.9% 87.1% $10,019 95.3% 84.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.6% 0 0.0% 2.3% $0 0.0% 3.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.4% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 98 100.0% $10,517 100.0% 100.0% 98 100.0% 100.0% $10,517 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
317
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 2.1% $58 1.3% 21.3% 1 2.1% 5.4% $58 1.3% 3.4%
Moderate 13 27.7% $845 18.6% 18.0% 13 27.7% 21.9% $845 18.6% 17.3%
Middle 10 21.3% $858 18.9% 21.6% 10 21.3% 21.1% $858 18.9% 19.3%
Upper 21 44.7% $2,682 59.1% 39.1% 21 44.7% 35.6% $2,682 59.1% 44.6%
Unknown 2 4.3% $97 2.1% 0.0% 2 4.3% 15.9% $97 2.1% 15.3%
Total 47 100.0% $4,540 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $4,540 100.0% 100.0%
Low 9 9.0% $225 2.7% 21.3% 9 9.0% 5.7% $225 2.7% 3.3%
Moderate 15 15.0% $447 5.3% 18.0% 15 15.0% 14.0% $447 5.3% 9.3%
Middle 22 22.0% $960 11.3% 21.6% 22 22.0% 18.5% $960 11.3% 14.7%
Upper 49 49.0% $6,403 75.6% 39.1% 49 49.0% 48.6% $6,403 75.6% 58.3%
Unknown 5 5.0% $432 5.1% 0.0% 5 5.0% 13.2% $432 5.1% 14.3%
Total 100 100.0% $8,467 100.0% 100.0% 100 100.0% 100.0% $8,467 100.0% 100.0%
Low 9 16.4% $47 8.0% 21.3% 9 16.4% 11.1% $47 8.0% 4.9%
Moderate 12 21.8% $160 27.4% 18.0% 12 21.8% 21.8% $160 27.4% 13.0%
Middle 18 32.7% $151 25.9% 21.6% 18 32.7% 24.8% $151 25.9% 18.8%
Upper 14 25.5% $199 34.1% 39.1% 14 25.5% 37.6% $199 34.1% 56.7%
Unknown 2 3.6% $27 4.6% 0.0% 2 3.6% 4.7% $27 4.6% 6.6%
Total 55 100.0% $584 100.0% 100.0% 55 100.0% 100.0% $584 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $398 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $398 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $398 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $398 100.0% 100.0%
Low 19 9.4% $330 2.4% 21.3% 19 9.4% 6.0% $330 2.4% 3.4%
Moderate 40 19.7% $1,452 10.4% 18.0% 40 19.7% 17.8% $1,452 10.4% 12.8%
Middle 50 24.6% $1,969 14.1% 21.6% 50 24.6% 20.1% $1,969 14.1% 16.7%
Upper 84 41.4% $9,284 66.4% 39.1% 84 41.4% 42.4% $9,284 66.4% 52.3%
Unknown 10 4.9% $954 6.8% 0.0% 10 4.9% 13.8% $954 6.8% 14.8%
Total 203 100.0% $13,989 100.0% 100.0% 203 100.0% 100.0% $13,989 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 29 61.7% $1,990 36.7% 90.6% 29 61.7% 30.3% $1,990 36.7% 40.7%
Over $1 Million 11 23.4% $2,674 49.3% 4.2% 11 23.4%
Total Rev. available 40 85.1% $4,664 86.0% 94.8% 40 85.1%
Rev. Not Known 7 14.9% $764 14.1% 5.1% 7 14.9%
Total 47 100.0% $5,428 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 32 68.1% $1,245 22.9% 32 68.1% 95.3% $1,245 22.9% 45.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 8 17.0% $1,538 28.3% 8 17.0% 2.7% $1,538 28.3% 18.4%
$250,001 - $1 Million 7 14.9% $2,645 48.7% 7 14.9% 2.0% $2,645 48.7% 36.3%
Total 47 100.0% $5,428 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $5,428 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 83 84.7% $8,996 85.5% 99.2% 83 84.7% 46.4% $8,996 85.5% 60.4%
Over $1 Million 6 6.1% $555 5.3% 0.8% 6 6.1%
Not Known 9 9.2% $966 9.2% 0.0% 9 9.2%
Total 98 100.0% $10,517 100.0% 100.0% 98 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 62 63.3% $2,540 24.2% 62 63.3% 73.2% $2,540 24.2% 20.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 29 29.6% $5,177 49.2% 29 29.6% 15.0% $5,177 49.2% 31.3%
$250,001 - $500,000 7 7.1% $2,800 26.6% 7 7.1% 11.8% $2,800 26.6% 48.1%
Total 98 100.0% $10,517 100.0% 98 100.0% 100.0% $10,517 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: AR Northeast AR
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
318
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
3.0
4,411
2.7
1,344
30.5
30,892
19.0
Moderate-income
32
19.3
27,458
16.9
4,214
15.3
30,886
19.0
Middle-income
80
48.2
86,515
53.1
5,796
6.7
34,898
21.4
Upper-income
48
28.9
44,541
27.3
1,390
3.1
66,249
40.7
Unknown-income
1
0.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
166
100.0
162,925
100.0
12,744
7.8
162,925
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
10,760
2,430
1.3
22.6
5,440
50.6
2,890
26.9
Moderate-income
61,029
26,066
14.2
42.7
16,593
27.2
18,370
30.1
Middle-income
185,990
102,292
55.6
55.0
29,224
15.7
54,474
29.3
Upper-income
106,113
53,140
28.9
50.1
10,566
10.0
42,407
40.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
363,892
183,928
100.0
50.5
61,823
17.0
118,141
32.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,880
3.4
1,619
3.2
161
8.0
100
5.5
Moderate-income
8,071
14.8
7,435
14.6
328
16.2
308
16.9
Middle-income
28,505
52.1
26,719
52.6
871
43.1
915
50.1
Upper-income
16,176
29.6
15,022
29.5
655
32.4
499
27.3
Unknown-income
52
0.1
42
0.1
5
0.2
5
0.3
Total Assessment Area
54,684
100.0
50,837
100.0
2,020
100.0
1,827
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
93.0
3.7
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
1.3
4
1.1
1
8.3
0
0.0
Moderate-income
48
12.6
46
12.5
2
16.7
0
0.0
Middle-income
175
45.9
171
46.3
4
33.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
153
40.2
148
40.1
5
41.7
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
381
100.0
369
100.0
12
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.9
3.1
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
319
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 2 0.9% $77 0.3% 1.3% 2 0.9% 0.4% $77 0.3% 0.2%
Moderate 55 25.1% $4,312 16.1% 14.2% 55 25.1% 10.5% $4,312 16.1% 6.9%
Middle 128 58.4% $14,860 55.5% 55.6% 128 58.4% 53.0% $14,860 55.5% 42.7%
Upper 34 15.5% $7,539 28.1% 28.9% 34 15.5% 36.1% $7,539 28.1% 50.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Total 219 100.0% $26,788 100.0% 100.0% 219 100.0% 100.0% $26,788 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.5% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 5 8.2% $813 5.4% 14.2% 5 8.2% 8.5% $813 5.4% 6.6%
Middle 22 36.1% $3,852 25.7% 55.6% 22 36.1% 50.3% $3,852 25.7% 43.3%
Upper 34 55.7% $10,311 68.9% 28.9% 34 55.7% 40.8% $10,311 68.9% 49.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 61 100.0% $14,976 100.0% 100.0% 61 100.0% 100.0% $14,976 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.3% 0 0.0% 0.8% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Moderate 6 42.9% $79 17.6% 14.2% 6 42.9% 12.0% $79 17.6% 3.8%
Middle 4 28.6% $85 18.9% 55.6% 4 28.6% 58.2% $85 18.9% 48.7%
Upper 4 28.6% $285 63.5% 28.9% 4 28.6% 29.0% $285 63.5% 46.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 14 100.0% $449 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $449 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.2% $0 0.0% 66.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.2% $0 0.0% 7.6%
Middle 1 100.0% $210 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 36.4% $210 100.0% 17.9%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 30.3% $0 0.0% 7.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $210 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $210 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.7% $77 0.2% 1.3% 2 0.7% 0.5% $77 0.2% 1.2%
Moderate 66 22.4% $5,204 12.3% 14.2% 66 22.4% 9.4% $5,204 12.3% 6.7%
Middle 155 52.5% $19,007 44.8% 55.6% 155 52.5% 51.5% $19,007 44.8% 42.7%
Upper 72 24.4% $18,135 42.7% 28.9% 72 24.4% 38.7% $18,135 42.7% 49.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 295 100.0% $42,423 100.0% 100.0% 295 100.0% 100.0% $42,423 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 4.8% $221 3.9% 3.2% 2 4.8% 3.8% $221 3.9% 6.5%
Moderate 6 14.3% $770 13.6% 14.6% 6 14.3% 12.4% $770 13.6% 16.7%
Middle 22 52.4% $3,302 58.4% 52.6% 22 52.4% 46.9% $3,302 58.4% 44.2%
Upper 12 28.6% $1,362 24.1% 29.5% 12 28.6% 33.8% $1,362 24.1% 31.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.0% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 42 100.0% $5,655 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $5,655 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.5% 0 0.0% 11.4% $0 0.0% 6.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 46.3% 0 0.0% 40.0% $0 0.0% 33.3%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.1% 0 0.0% 45.7% $0 0.0% 54.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 5.9%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
320
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 42 19.2% $3,189 11.9% 19.0% 42 19.2% 6.7% $3,189 11.9% 3.0%
Moderate 63 28.8% $5,591 20.9% 19.0% 63 28.8% 14.6% $5,591 20.9% 8.9%
Middle 43 19.6% $5,092 19.0% 21.4% 43 19.6% 16.9% $5,092 19.0% 13.0%
Upper 59 26.9% $12,461 46.5% 40.7% 59 26.9% 50.1% $12,461 46.5% 64.8%
Unknown 12 5.5% $455 1.7% 0.0% 12 5.5% 11.6% $455 1.7% 10.3%
Total 219 100.0% $26,788 100.0% 100.0% 219 100.0% 100.0% $26,788 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 9.8% $713 4.8% 19.0% 6 9.8% 6.0% $713 4.8% 3.8%
Moderate 9 14.8% $1,225 8.2% 19.0% 9 14.8% 11.2% $1,225 8.2% 7.1%
Middle 6 9.8% $1,214 8.1% 21.4% 6 9.8% 17.5% $1,214 8.1% 13.4%
Upper 37 60.7% $11,035 73.7% 40.7% 37 60.7% 54.1% $11,035 73.7% 63.7%
Unknown 3 4.9% $789 5.3% 0.0% 3 4.9% 11.2% $789 5.3% 12.0%
Total 61 100.0% $14,976 100.0% 100.0% 61 100.0% 100.0% $14,976 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 10.4% $0 0.0% 2.8%
Moderate 3 21.4% $28 6.2% 19.0% 3 21.4% 21.6% $28 6.2% 13.5%
Middle 2 14.3% $15 3.3% 21.4% 2 14.3% 24.3% $15 3.3% 18.4%
Upper 8 57.1% $386 86.0% 40.7% 8 57.1% 39.1% $386 86.0% 54.6%
Unknown 1 7.1% $20 4.5% 0.0% 1 7.1% 4.6% $20 4.5% 10.7%
Total 14 100.0% $449 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $449 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $210 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $210 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $210 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $210 100.0% 100.0%
Low 48 16.3% $3,902 9.2% 19.0% 48 16.3% 6.4% $3,902 9.2% 3.4%
Moderate 75 25.4% $6,844 16.1% 19.0% 75 25.4% 12.7% $6,844 16.1% 7.7%
Middle 51 17.3% $6,321 14.9% 21.4% 51 17.3% 17.4% $6,321 14.9% 13.1%
Upper 104 35.3% $23,882 56.3% 40.7% 104 35.3% 52.2% $23,882 56.3% 63.2%
Unknown 17 5.8% $1,474 3.5% 0.0% 17 5.8% 11.4% $1,474 3.5% 12.6%
Total 295 100.0% $42,423 100.0% 100.0% 295 100.0% 100.0% $42,423 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 23 54.8% $2,589 45.8% 93.0% 23 54.8% 39.3% $2,589 45.8% 36.1%
Over $1 Million 13 31.0% $2,433 43.0% 3.7% 13 31.0%
Total Rev. available 36 85.8% $5,022 88.8% 96.7% 36 85.8%
Rev. Not Known 6 14.3% $633 11.2% 3.3% 6 14.3%
Total 42 100.0% $5,655 100.0% 100.0% 42 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 26 61.9% $1,161 20.5% 26 61.9% 95.6% $1,161 20.5% 38.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 10 23.8% $1,807 32.0% 10 23.8% 2.0% $1,807 32.0% 13.8%
$250,001 - $1 Million 6 14.3% $2,687 47.5% 6 14.3% 2.4% $2,687 47.5% 47.4%
Total 42 100.0% $5,655 100.0% 42 100.0% 100.0% $5,655 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.9% 0 0.0% 42.9% $0 0.0% 42.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 91.4% $0 0.0% 50.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.7% $0 0.0% 27.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 22.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Ft. Myers
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
321
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,067
11.9
Moderate-income
1
3.3
381
2.2
48
12.6
2,186
12.6
Middle-income
5
16.7
4,392
25.3
461
10.5
3,000
17.3
Upper-income
22
73.3
12,596
72.5
693
5.5
10,116
58.2
Unknown-income
2
6.7
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
30
100.0
17,369
100.0
1,202
6.9
17,369
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,371
472
2.5
34.4
347
25.3
552
40.3
Middle-income
10,561
3,411
17.8
32.3
3,956
37.5
3,194
30.2
Upper-income
40,897
15,327
79.8
37.5
6,278
15.4
19,292
47.2
Unknown-income
18
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
18
100.0
Total Assessment Area
52,847
19,210
100.0
36.4
10,581
20.0
23,056
43.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
220
2.4
200
2.4
12
3.4
8
2.3
Middle-income
1,973
21.6
1,793
21.3
94
26.5
86
25.1
Upper-income
6,917
75.9
6,420
76.3
248
69.9
249
72.6
Unknown-income
4
0.0
3
0.0
1
0.3
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
9,114
100.0
8,416
100.0
355
100.0
343
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.3
3.9
3.8
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
4
6.0
4
6.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
7
10.4
7
10.4
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
56
83.6
56
83.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
67
100.0
67
100.0
0
.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
100.0
.0
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
322
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Middle 20 28.2% $6,056 29.6% 17.8% 20 28.2% 16.3% $6,056 29.6% 14.1%
Upper 51 71.8% $14,418 70.4% 79.8% 51 71.8% 83.0% $14,418 70.4% 85.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 71 100.0% $20,474 100.0% 100.0% 71 100.0% 100.0% $20,474 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.8% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Middle 13 43.3% $4,051 45.7% 17.8% 13 43.3% 16.7% $4,051 45.7% 14.5%
Upper 17 56.7% $4,820 54.3% 79.8% 17 56.7% 82.5% $4,820 54.3% 84.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 30 100.0% $8,871 100.0% 100.0% 30 100.0% 100.0% $8,871 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 1 20.0% $20 14.6% 17.8% 1 20.0% 28.6% $20 14.6% 35.5%
Upper 4 80.0% $117 85.4% 79.8% 4 80.0% 71.4% $117 85.4% 64.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 5 100.0% $137 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $137 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 1 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.5% 0 0.0% 0.8% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Middle 34 31.8% $10,127 26.9% 17.8% 34 31.8% 16.7% $10,127 26.9% 14.1%
Upper 73 68.2% $27,555 73.1% 79.8% 73 68.2% 82.5% $27,555 73.1% 85.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 107 100.0% $37,682 100.0% 100.0% 107 100.0% 100.0% $37,682 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 4 16.0% $372 8.5% 2.4% 4 16.0% 2.0% $372 8.5% 1.7%
Middle 5 20.0% $727 16.5% 21.3% 5 20.0% 21.4% $727 16.5% 25.1%
Upper 16 64.0% $3,301 75.0% 76.3% 16 64.0% 69.7% $3,301 75.0% 70.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.9% $0 0.0% 2.6%
Total 25 100.0% $4,400 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $4,400 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 10.4% 0 0.0% 11.1% $0 0.0% 7.2%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 83.6% 0 0.0% 88.9% $0 0.0% 92.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
323
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 1.4% $144 0.7% 12.6% 1 1.4% 0.9% $144 0.7% 0.4%
Middle 11 15.5% $2,370 11.6% 17.3% 11 15.5% 7.2% $2,370 11.6% 4.2%
Upper 59 83.1% $17,960 87.7% 58.2% 59 83.1% 82.0% $17,960 87.7% 83.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.8% $0 0.0% 11.7%
Total 71 100.0% $20,474 100.0% 100.0% 71 100.0% 100.0% $20,474 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 1 3.3% $104 1.2% 12.6% 1 3.3% 1.9% $104 1.2% 0.8%
Middle 4 13.3% $839 9.5% 17.3% 4 13.3% 7.8% $839 9.5% 4.0%
Upper 25 83.3% $7,928 89.4% 58.2% 25 83.3% 77.9% $7,928 89.4% 82.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 11.0% $0 0.0% 11.6%
Total 30 100.0% $8,871 100.0% 100.0% 30 100.0% 100.0% $8,871 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.6% 0 0.0% 9.5% $0 0.0% 4.7%
Middle 1 20.0% $4 2.9% 17.3% 1 20.0% 14.3% $4 2.9% 4.6%
Upper 4 80.0% $133 97.1% 58.2% 4 80.0% 69.0% $133 97.1% 85.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 5.8%
Total 5 100.0% $137 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $137 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 12.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 58.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 1 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 0.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Total 1 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.9% 0 0.0% 0.9% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 2 1.9% $248 0.7% 12.6% 2 1.9% 1.6% $248 0.7% 0.7%
Middle 16 15.0% $3,213 8.5% 17.3% 16 15.0% 7.7% $3,213 8.5% 4.0%
Upper 88 82.2% $26,021 69.1% 58.2% 88 82.2% 79.3% $26,021 69.1% 80.2%
Unknown 1 0.9% $8,200 21.8% 0.0% 1 0.9% 10.6% $8,200 21.8% 14.7%
Total 107 100.0% $37,682 100.0% 100.0% 107 100.0% 100.0% $37,682 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 22 88.0% $3,420 77.7% 92.3% 22 88.0% 42.6% $3,420 77.7% 41.1%
Over $1 Million 2 8.0% $704 16.0% 3.9% 2 8.0%
Total Rev. available 24 96.0% $4,124 93.7% 96.2% 24 96.0%
Rev. Not Known 1 4.0% $276 6.3% 3.8% 1 4.0%
Total 25 100.0% $4,400 100.0% 100.0% 25 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 11 44.0% $559 12.7% 11 44.0% 96.1% $559 12.7% 38.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 9 36.0% $1,579 35.9% 9 36.0% 1.9% $1,579 35.9% 15.1%
$250,001 - $1 Million 5 20.0% $2,262 51.4% 5 20.0% 1.9% $2,262 51.4% 46.5%
Total 25 100.0% $4,400 100.0% 25 100.0% 100.0% $4,400 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 66.7% $0 0.0% 70.1%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Keys
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
324
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
40
5.7
29,972
4.0
9,304
31.0
162,530
21.8
Moderate-income
183
26.2
190,974
25.6
28,300
14.8
131,313
17.6
Middle-income
239
34.2
260,728
35.0
18,502
7.1
144,751
19.4
Upper-income
227
32.5
263,797
35.4
9,887
3.7
306,894
41.2
Unknown-income
9
1.3
17
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
698
100.0
745,488
100.0
65,993
8.9
745,488
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
65,334
19,412
2.3
29.7
30,611
46.9
15,311
23.4
Moderate-income
412,193
211,622
24.9
51.3
121,881
29.6
78,690
19.1
Middle-income
531,297
311,097
36.7
58.6
123,127
23.2
97,073
18.3
Upper-income
455,123
306,366
36.1
67.3
67,915
14.9
80,842
17.8
Unknown-income
17
9
0.0
52.9
8
47.1
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,463,964
848,506
100.0
58.0
343,542
23.5
271,916
18.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
10,944
3.8
9,663
3.6
852
6.6
429
4.6
Moderate-income
66,040
22.7
60,067
22.3
3,708
28.7
2,265
24.2
Middle-income
96,199
33.0
88,949
33.0
4,110
31.8
3,140
33.6
Upper-income
118,007
40.5
110,309
41.0
4,205
32.5
3,493
37.4
Unknown-income
288
0.1
219
0.1
48
0.4
21
0.2
Total Assessment Area
291,478
100.0
269,207
100.0
12,923
100.0
9,348
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.4
4.4
3.2
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
58
4.5
49
4.0
9
16.1
0
0.0
Moderate-income
178
13.7
165
13.3
12
21.4
1
100.0
Middle-income
316
24.4
307
24.8
9
16.1
0
0.0
Upper-income
742
57.3
716
57.8
26
46.4
0
0.0
Unknown-income
1
0.1
1
0.1
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,295
100.0
1,238
100.0
56
100.0
1
100.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
95.6
4.3
.1
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
325
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 5 2.9% $387 1.4% 2.3% 5 2.9% 0.9% $387 1.4% 0.6%
Moderate 47 27.0% $5,244 19.5% 24.9% 47 27.0% 16.2% $5,244 19.5% 9.8%
Middle 72 41.4% $10,633 39.5% 36.7% 72 41.4% 37.0% $10,633 39.5% 29.9%
Upper 50 28.7% $10,665 39.6% 36.1% 50 28.7% 45.9% $10,665 39.6% 59.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 174 100.0% $26,929 100.0% 100.0% 174 100.0% 100.0% $26,929 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 0.7% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 9 12.5% $1,229 7.0% 24.9% 9 12.5% 12.6% $1,229 7.0% 8.5%
Middle 19 26.4% $3,245 18.4% 36.7% 19 26.4% 33.8% $3,245 18.4% 28.0%
Upper 44 61.1% $13,143 74.6% 36.1% 44 61.1% 52.9% $13,143 74.6% 63.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 72 100.0% $17,617 100.0% 100.0% 72 100.0% 100.0% $17,617 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.3% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Moderate 3 37.5% $85 39.5% 24.9% 3 37.5% 17.1% $85 39.5% 6.9%
Middle 1 12.5% $25 11.6% 36.7% 1 12.5% 33.9% $25 11.6% 23.2%
Upper 4 50.0% $105 48.8% 36.1% 4 50.0% 47.4% $105 48.8% 69.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 8 100.0% $215 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $215 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.2% $0 0.0% 2.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 37.7% $0 0.0% 31.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.1% $0 0.0% 25.3%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 24.0% $0 0.0% 40.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 5 2.0% $387 0.9% 2.3% 5 2.0% 0.8% $387 0.9% 0.6%
Moderate 59 23.2% $6,558 14.7% 24.9% 59 23.2% 14.1% $6,558 14.7% 9.7%
Middle 92 36.2% $13,903 31.1% 36.7% 92 36.2% 35.1% $13,903 31.1% 28.6%
Upper 98 38.6% $23,913 53.4% 36.1% 98 38.6% 50.0% $23,913 53.4% 61.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 254 100.0% $44,761 100.0% 100.0% 254 100.0% 100.0% $44,761 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.6% 0 0.0% 3.6% $0 0.0% 5.1%
Moderate 5 12.2% $508 11.1% 22.3% 5 12.2% 19.9% $508 11.1% 23.3%
Middle 15 36.6% $604 13.1% 33.0% 15 36.6% 30.4% $604 13.1% 31.0%
Upper 21 51.2% $3,483 75.8% 41.0% 21 51.2% 44.4% $3,483 75.8% 39.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.1% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.6% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Total 41 100.0% $4,595 100.0% 100.0% 41 100.0% 100.0% $4,595 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.0% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.3% 0 0.0% 7.1% $0 0.0% 14.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 24.8% 0 0.0% 25.7% $0 0.0% 8.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 57.8% 0 0.0% 62.1% $0 0.0% 73.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.6% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
326
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 34 19.5% $2,883 10.7% 21.8% 34 19.5% 6.5% $2,883 10.7% 2.6%
Moderate 73 42.0% $8,373 31.1% 17.6% 73 42.0% 17.5% $8,373 31.1% 10.0%
Middle 20 11.5% $3,310 12.3% 19.4% 20 11.5% 19.5% $3,310 12.3% 15.3%
Upper 45 25.9% $12,069 44.8% 41.2% 45 25.9% 45.9% $12,069 44.8% 62.2%
Unknown 2 1.1% $294 1.1% 0.0% 2 1.1% 10.6% $294 1.1% 9.8%
Total 174 100.0% $26,929 100.0% 100.0% 174 100.0% 100.0% $26,929 100.0% 100.0%
Low 10 13.9% $1,228 7.0% 21.8% 10 13.9% 6.2% $1,228 7.0% 3.5%
Moderate 12 16.7% $1,376 7.8% 17.6% 12 16.7% 10.9% $1,376 7.8% 6.7%
Middle 7 9.7% $1,068 6.1% 19.4% 7 9.7% 16.6% $1,068 6.1% 12.5%
Upper 42 58.3% $13,697 77.7% 41.2% 42 58.3% 54.0% $13,697 77.7% 64.6%
Unknown 1 1.4% $248 1.4% 0.0% 1 1.4% 12.3% $248 1.4% 12.7%
Total 72 100.0% $17,617 100.0% 100.0% 72 100.0% 100.0% $17,617 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 12.5% $14 6.5% 21.8% 1 12.5% 8.9% $14 6.5% 1.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 16.3% $0 0.0% 5.8%
Middle 1 12.5% $10 4.7% 19.4% 1 12.5% 22.0% $10 4.7% 13.2%
Upper 6 75.0% $191 88.8% 41.2% 6 75.0% 49.5% $191 88.8% 75.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.3% $0 0.0% 4.4%
Total 8 100.0% $215 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $215 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 45 17.7% $4,125 9.2% 21.8% 45 17.7% 6.4% $4,125 9.2% 3.0%
Moderate 85 33.5% $9,749 21.8% 17.6% 85 33.5% 13.6% $9,749 21.8% 7.8%
Middle 28 11.0% $4,388 9.8% 19.4% 28 11.0% 17.8% $4,388 9.8% 13.2%
Upper 93 36.6% $25,957 58.0% 41.2% 93 36.6% 50.6% $25,957 58.0% 61.8%
Unknown 3 1.2% $542 1.2% 0.0% 3 1.2% 11.6% $542 1.2% 14.2%
Total 254 100.0% $44,761 100.0% 100.0% 254 100.0% 100.0% $44,761 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 22 53.7% $2,373 51.6% 92.4% 22 53.7% 42.7% $2,373 51.6% 31.0%
Over $1 Million 12 29.3% $2,079 45.2% 4.4% 12 29.3%
Total Rev. available 34 83.0% $4,452 96.8% 96.8% 34 83.0%
Rev. Not Known 7 17.1% $143 3.1% 3.2% 7 17.1%
Total 41 100.0% $4,595 100.0% 100.0% 41 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 34 82.9% $1,207 26.3% 34 82.9% 96.3% $1,207 26.3% 44.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 2.4% $225 4.9% 1 2.4% 1.8% $225 4.9% 13.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 6 14.6% $3,163 68.8% 6 14.6% 1.9% $3,163 68.8% 43.0%
Total 41 100.0% $4,595 100.0% 41 100.0% 100.0% $4,595 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 95.6% 0 0.0% 47.9% $0 0.0% 46.6%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.3% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 93.6% $0 0.0% 42.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 10.6%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.6% $0 0.0% 47.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: FL Palm Beach/Broward
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
327
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
2.6
497
1.0
224
45.1
11,327
22.2
Moderate-income
5
12.8
6,209
12.2
2,024
32.6
7,655
15.0
Middle-income
19
48.7
25,750
50.4
4,251
16.5
9,188
18.0
Upper-income
14
35.9
18,627
36.5
1,869
10.0
22,913
44.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
39
100.0
51,083
100.0
8,368
16.4
51,083
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,184
508
1.0
42.9
447
37.8
229
19.3
Moderate-income
10,458
4,767
9.5
45.6
4,284
41.0
1,407
13.5
Middle-income
40,302
24,379
48.6
60.5
10,805
26.8
5,118
12.7
Upper-income
27,224
20,530
40.9
75.4
4,244
15.6
2,450
9.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
79,168
50,184
100.0
63.4
19,780
25.0
9,204
11.6
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
82
0.8
76
0.8
1
0.2
5
1.4
Moderate-income
979
10.0
888
9.9
41
8.8
50
14.0
Middle-income
5,549
56.7
5,049
56.3
304
65.4
196
55.1
Upper-income
3,184
32.5
2,960
33.0
119
25.6
105
29.5
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
9,794
100.0
8,973
100.0
465
100.0
356
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.6
4.7
3.6
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
15
2.8
15
2.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
244
46.1
236
45.6
8
72.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
270
51.0
267
51.5
3
27.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
529
100.0
518
100.0
11
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.9
2.1
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
328
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 1.0% $65 0.5% 1.0% 1 1.0% 0.1% $65 0.5% 0.1%
Moderate 8 7.6% $698 5.8% 9.5% 8 7.6% 7.1% $698 5.8% 4.5%
Middle 49 46.7% $5,035 42.1% 48.6% 49 46.7% 44.9% $5,035 42.1% 43.1%
Upper 47 44.8% $6,172 51.6% 40.9% 47 44.8% 47.9% $6,172 51.6% 52.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 105 100.0% $11,970 100.0% 100.0% 105 100.0% 100.0% $11,970 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 4 3.4% $280 2.0% 9.5% 4 3.4% 6.6% $280 2.0% 5.0%
Middle 63 54.3% $6,893 49.6% 48.6% 63 54.3% 48.0% $6,893 49.6% 42.9%
Upper 49 42.2% $6,720 48.4% 40.9% 49 42.2% 45.2% $6,720 48.4% 52.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 116 100.0% $13,893 100.0% 100.0% 116 100.0% 100.0% $13,893 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 7 8.0% $53 4.6% 9.5% 7 8.0% 10.1% $53 4.6% 5.6%
Middle 46 52.9% $608 52.7% 48.6% 46 52.9% 49.0% $608 52.7% 42.8%
Upper 34 39.1% $492 42.7% 40.9% 34 39.1% 40.9% $492 42.7% 51.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 87 100.0% $1,153 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $1,153 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 66.7% $0 0.0% 28.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 33.3% $0 0.0% 71.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.3% $65 0.2% 1.0% 1 0.3% 0.1% $65 0.2% 0.0%
Moderate 19 6.2% $1,031 3.8% 9.5% 19 6.2% 7.1% $1,031 3.8% 4.8%
Middle 158 51.3% $12,536 46.4% 48.6% 158 51.3% 46.9% $12,536 46.4% 42.9%
Upper 130 42.2% $13,384 49.5% 40.9% 130 42.2% 45.8% $13,384 49.5% 52.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 308 100.0% $27,016 100.0% 100.0% 308 100.0% 100.0% $27,016 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.8% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Moderate 11 11.7% $1,501 11.2% 9.9% 11 11.7% 8.8% $1,501 11.2% 6.4%
Middle 53 56.4% $8,407 62.8% 56.3% 53 56.4% 50.0% $8,407 62.8% 56.4%
Upper 30 31.9% $3,470 25.9% 33.0% 30 31.9% 35.3% $3,470 25.9% 34.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.6% $0 0.0% 3.0%
Total 94 100.0% $13,378 100.0% 100.0% 94 100.0% 100.0% $13,378 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.9% 0 0.0% 1.3% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 45.6% 0 0.0% 52.7% $0 0.0% 49.2%
Upper 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 51.5% 1 100.0% 44.7% $55 100.0% 47.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.3% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
329
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 4 3.8% $185 1.5% 22.2% 4 3.8% 2.9% $185 1.5% 1.3%
Moderate 22 21.0% $1,660 13.9% 15.0% 22 21.0% 15.0% $1,660 13.9% 10.6%
Middle 26 24.8% $2,923 24.4% 18.0% 26 24.8% 24.4% $2,923 24.4% 21.9%
Upper 52 49.5% $6,965 58.2% 44.9% 52 49.5% 49.4% $6,965 58.2% 58.7%
Unknown 1 1.0% $237 2.0% 0.0% 1 1.0% 8.3% $237 2.0% 7.6%
Total 105 100.0% $11,970 100.0% 100.0% 105 100.0% 100.0% $11,970 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 3.4% $140 1.0% 22.2% 4 3.4% 3.2% $140 1.0% 1.5%
Moderate 12 10.3% $885 6.4% 15.0% 12 10.3% 7.8% $885 6.4% 4.8%
Middle 18 15.5% $1,525 11.0% 18.0% 18 15.5% 17.0% $1,525 11.0% 12.8%
Upper 78 67.2% $10,853 78.1% 44.9% 78 67.2% 59.9% $10,853 78.1% 68.9%
Unknown 4 3.4% $490 3.5% 0.0% 4 3.4% 12.1% $490 3.5% 12.1%
Total 116 100.0% $13,893 100.0% 100.0% 116 100.0% 100.0% $13,893 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 4.6% $52 4.5% 22.2% 4 4.6% 8.1% $52 4.5% 2.6%
Moderate 14 16.1% $130 11.3% 15.0% 14 16.1% 12.3% $130 11.3% 6.3%
Middle 24 27.6% $295 25.6% 18.0% 24 27.6% 21.3% $295 25.6% 14.5%
Upper 33 37.9% $560 48.6% 44.9% 33 37.9% 49.6% $560 48.6% 65.5%
Unknown 12 13.8% $116 10.1% 0.0% 12 13.8% 8.7% $116 10.1% 11.1%
Total 87 100.0% $1,153 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $1,153 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 15.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 44.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 12 3.9% $377 1.4% 22.2% 12 3.9% 3.6% $377 1.4% 1.4%
Moderate 48 15.6% $2,675 9.9% 15.0% 48 15.6% 11.0% $2,675 9.9% 7.2%
Middle 68 22.1% $4,743 17.6% 18.0% 68 22.1% 20.3% $4,743 17.6% 16.5%
Upper 163 52.9% $18,378 68.0% 44.9% 163 52.9% 54.8% $18,378 68.0% 64.4%
Unknown 17 5.5% $843 3.1% 0.0% 17 5.5% 10.4% $843 3.1% 10.6%
Total 308 100.0% $27,016 100.0% 100.0% 308 100.0% 100.0% $27,016 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 55 58.5% $4,419 33.0% 91.6% 55 58.5% 25.2% $4,419 33.0% 27.7%
Over $1 Million 35 37.2% $7,764 58.0% 4.7% 35 37.2%
Total Rev. available 90 95.7% $12,183 91.0% 96.3% 90 95.7%
Rev. Not Known 4 4.3% $1,195 8.9% 3.6% 4 4.3%
Total 94 100.0% $13,378 100.0% 100.0% 94 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 67 71.3% $2,666 19.9% 67 71.3% 94.6% $2,666 19.9% 31.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 13 13.8% $2,289 17.1% 13 13.8% 2.6% $2,289 17.1% 14.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 14 14.9% $8,423 63.0% 14 14.9% 2.8% $8,423 63.0% 54.2%
Total 94 100.0% $13,378 100.0% 94 100.0% 100.0% $13,378 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 97.9% 1 100.0% 22.0% $55 100.0% 42.8%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.1% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 86.7% $55 100.0% 25.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.3% $0 0.0% 40.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 34.5%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Acadiana
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
330
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1,374
22.9
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
1,089
18.1
Middle-income
5
100.0
6,012
100.0
976
16.2
1,089
18.1
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,460
40.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
5
100.0
6,012
100.0
976
16.2
6,012
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
9,659
6,043
100.0
62.6
2,345
24.3
1,271
13.2
Upper-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
9,659
6,043
100.0
62.6
2,345
24.3
1,271
13.2
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
804
100.0
746
100.0
22
100.0
36
100.0
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
804
100.0
746
100.0
22
100.0
36
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.8
2.7
4.5
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
52
100.0
52
100.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
52
100.0
52
100.0
0
.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
100.0
.0
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
331
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 3 100.0% $246 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 95.6% $246 100.0% 97.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.4% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Total 3 100.0% $246 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $246 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 14 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 14 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 10 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 10 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 27 100.0% $1,670 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 98.3% $1,670 100.0% 99.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.7% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Total 27 100.0% $1,670 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $1,670 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 22 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 93.4% $1,390 100.0% 94.3%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.6% $0 0.0% 5.7%
Total 22 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 5 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 5 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
332
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.9% 0 0.0% 3.0% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 11.1% $0 0.0% 7.8%
Middle 1 33.3% $68 27.6% 18.1% 1 33.3% 27.4% $68 27.6% 24.3%
Upper 2 66.7% $178 72.4% 40.9% 2 66.7% 51.1% $178 72.4% 60.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.4% $0 0.0% 6.5%
Total 3 100.0% $246 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $246 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 7.1% $86 6.5% 22.9% 1 7.1% 4.7% $86 6.5% 2.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 6.5% $0 0.0% 4.5%
Middle 2 14.3% $102 7.7% 18.1% 2 14.3% 17.8% $102 7.7% 14.7%
Upper 9 64.3% $903 68.0% 40.9% 9 64.3% 63.3% $903 68.0% 69.5%
Unknown 2 14.3% $237 17.8% 0.0% 2 14.3% 7.7% $237 17.8% 9.2%
Total 14 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0% 14 100.0% 100.0% $1,328 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 10.0% $5 5.2% 22.9% 1 10.0% 2.4% $5 5.2% 0.2%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 7.3% $0 0.0% 3.7%
Middle 2 20.0% $13 13.5% 18.1% 2 20.0% 17.1% $13 13.5% 17.7%
Upper 7 70.0% $78 81.3% 40.9% 7 70.0% 73.2% $78 81.3% 78.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 10 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0% 10 100.0% 100.0% $96 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Low 2 7.4% $91 5.4% 22.9% 2 7.4% 3.8% $91 5.4% 1.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.1% 0 0.0% 8.4% $0 0.0% 5.8%
Middle 5 18.5% $183 11.0% 18.1% 5 18.5% 21.4% $183 11.0% 18.8%
Upper 18 66.7% $1,159 69.4% 40.9% 18 66.7% 59.7% $1,159 69.4% 66.5%
Unknown 2 7.4% $237 14.2% 0.0% 2 7.4% 6.7% $237 14.2% 7.5%
Total 27 100.0% $1,670 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $1,670 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 16 72.7% $494 35.5% 92.8% 16 72.7% 34.4% $494 35.5% 28.6%
Over $1 Million 1 4.5% $400 28.8% 2.7% 1 4.5%
Total Rev. available 17 77.2% $894 64.3% 95.5% 17 77.2%
Rev. Not Known 5 22.7% $496 35.7% 4.5% 5 22.7%
Total 22 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 20 90.9% $607 43.7% 20 90.9% 97.2% $607 43.7% 48.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.9% $0 0.0% 9.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 9.1% $783 56.3% 2 9.1% 1.9% $783 56.3% 42.1%
Total 22 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $1,390 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 4 80.0% $565 97.2% 100.0% 4 80.0% 70.0% $565 97.2% 97.5%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Not Known 1 20.0% $16 2.8% 0.0% 1 20.0%
Total 5 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 4 80.0% $181 31.2% 4 80.0% 80.0% $181 31.2% 24.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 1 20.0% $400 68.8% 1 20.0% 20.0% $400 68.8% 75.1%
Total 5 100.0% $581 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $581 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Allen
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
333
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
19
17.4
14,341
10.5
5,369
37.4
31,040
22.8
Moderate-income
23
21.1
20,598
15.1
3,801
18.5
23,051
16.9
Middle-income
32
29.4
50,237
36.9
4,501
9.0
25,266
18.6
Upper-income
34
31.2
50,841
37.4
1,872
3.7
56,660
41.7
Unknown-income
1
0.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
109
100.0
136,017
100.0
15,543
11.4
136,017
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
29,928
9,118
6.7
30.5
16,106
53.8
4,704
15.7
Moderate-income
38,477
17,281
12.6
44.9
16,422
42.7
4,774
12.4
Middle-income
78,975
52,590
38.4
66.6
19,108
24.2
7,277
9.2
Upper-income
85,014
58,080
42.4
68.3
20,800
24.5
6,134
7.2
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
232,394
137,069
100.0
59.0
72,436
31.2
22,889
9.8
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3,225
8.6
2,935
8.6
155
8.3
135
9.4
Moderate-income
6,003
16.0
5,380
15.7
364
19.4
259
18.1
Middle-income
11,526
30.7
10,669
31.1
461
24.6
396
27.7
Upper-income
16,788
44.7
15,257
44.5
891
47.6
640
44.7
Unknown-income
20
0.1
17
0.0
2
0.1
1
0.1
Total Assessment Area
37,562
100.0
34,258
100.0
1,873
100.0
1,431
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.2
5.0
3.8
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
9
3.2
9
3.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
18
6.4
18
6.5
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
112
40.0
109
39.5
3
75.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
141
50.4
140
50.7
1
25.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
280
100.0
276
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.6
1.4
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
334
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 4 1.7% $630 1.4% 6.7% 4 1.7% 2.0% $630 1.4% 1.1%
Moderate 17 7.3% $2,915 6.5% 12.6% 17 7.3% 7.2% $2,915 6.5% 5.1%
Middle 71 30.5% $10,994 24.7% 38.4% 71 30.5% 41.8% $10,994 24.7% 36.5%
Upper 141 60.5% $30,011 67.4% 42.4% 141 60.5% 49.1% $30,011 67.4% 57.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 233 100.0% $44,550 100.0% 100.0% 233 100.0% 100.0% $44,550 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 0.5% $274 0.3% 6.7% 2 0.5% 1.8% $274 0.3% 1.1%
Moderate 17 4.0% $3,023 3.1% 12.6% 17 4.0% 5.8% $3,023 3.1% 4.0%
Middle 126 29.7% $24,293 25.2% 38.4% 126 29.7% 35.1% $24,293 25.2% 29.9%
Upper 279 65.8% $68,736 71.4% 42.4% 279 65.8% 57.4% $68,736 71.4% 65.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 424 100.0% $96,326 100.0% 100.0% 424 100.0% 100.0% $96,326 100.0% 100.0%
Low 4 18.2% $33 7.2% 6.7% 4 18.2% 4.1% $33 7.2% 2.3%
Moderate 5 22.7% $39 8.5% 12.6% 5 22.7% 8.9% $39 8.5% 4.2%
Middle 3 13.6% $58 12.6% 38.4% 3 13.6% 37.8% $58 12.6% 30.5%
Upper 10 45.5% $330 71.7% 42.4% 10 45.5% 49.2% $330 71.7% 63.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 22 100.0% $460 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $460 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 33.3% $260 28.3% 0.0% 1 33.3% 23.4% $260 28.3% 4.2%
Moderate 1 33.3% $160 17.4% 0.0% 1 33.3% 25.5% $160 17.4% 11.5%
Middle 1 33.3% $500 54.3% 0.0% 1 33.3% 19.1% $500 54.3% 13.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 31.9% $0 0.0% 70.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $920 100.0% 0.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $920 100.0% 100.0%
Low 11 1.6% $1,197 0.8% 6.7% 11 1.6% 2.0% $1,197 0.8% 1.2%
Moderate 40 5.9% $6,137 4.3% 12.6% 40 5.9% 6.5% $6,137 4.3% 4.6%
Middle 201 29.5% $35,845 25.2% 38.4% 201 29.5% 37.8% $35,845 25.2% 32.0%
Upper 430 63.0% $99,077 69.6% 42.4% 430 63.0% 53.7% $99,077 69.6% 62.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 682 100.0% $142,256 100.0% 100.0% 682 100.0% 100.0% $142,256 100.0% 100.0%
Low 12 4.4% $2,358 3.2% 8.6% 12 4.4% 6.6% $2,358 3.2% 5.9%
Moderate 32 11.7% $8,413 11.5% 15.7% 32 11.7% 12.7% $8,413 11.5% 14.6%
Middle 37 13.5% $14,095 19.3% 31.1% 37 13.5% 28.8% $14,095 19.3% 25.2%
Upper 192 70.1% $48,039 65.9% 44.5% 192 70.1% 49.0% $48,039 65.9% 53.1%
Unknown 1 0.4% $20 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.4% 0.1% $20 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Total 274 100.0% $72,925 100.0% 100.0% 274 100.0% 100.0% $72,925 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.5% 0 0.0% 4.8% $0 0.0% 1.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 39.5% 0 0.0% 57.1% $0 0.0% 52.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 50.7% 0 0.0% 38.1% $0 0.0% 46.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
335
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 20 8.6% $2,018 4.5% 22.8% 20 8.6% 8.0% $2,018 4.5% 4.5%
Moderate 49 21.0% $6,456 14.5% 16.9% 49 21.0% 23.5% $6,456 14.5% 18.5%
Middle 34 14.6% $5,639 12.7% 18.6% 34 14.6% 22.3% $5,639 12.7% 21.2%
Upper 123 52.8% $29,274 65.7% 41.7% 123 52.8% 34.4% $29,274 65.7% 45.1%
Unknown 7 3.0% $1,163 2.6% 0.0% 7 3.0% 11.8% $1,163 2.6% 10.7%
Total 233 100.0% $44,550 100.0% 100.0% 233 100.0% 100.0% $44,550 100.0% 100.0%
Low 16 3.8% $1,501 1.6% 22.8% 16 3.8% 5.2% $1,501 1.6% 2.9%
Moderate 48 11.3% $6,454 6.7% 16.9% 48 11.3% 12.8% $6,454 6.7% 8.3%
Middle 65 15.3% $9,535 9.9% 18.6% 65 15.3% 19.8% $9,535 9.9% 15.7%
Upper 275 64.9% $74,239 77.1% 41.7% 275 64.9% 49.9% $74,239 77.1% 59.4%
Unknown 20 4.7% $4,597 4.8% 0.0% 20 4.7% 12.3% $4,597 4.8% 13.8%
Total 424 100.0% $96,326 100.0% 100.0% 424 100.0% 100.0% $96,326 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 4.5% $5 1.1% 22.8% 1 4.5% 9.6% $5 1.1% 3.7%
Moderate 5 22.7% $35 7.6% 16.9% 5 22.7% 17.1% $35 7.6% 7.8%
Middle 4 18.2% $32 7.0% 18.6% 4 18.2% 21.3% $32 7.0% 17.3%
Upper 12 54.5% $388 84.3% 41.7% 12 54.5% 45.5% $388 84.3% 63.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 6.6% $0 0.0% 8.1%
Total 22 100.0% $460 100.0% 100.0% 22 100.0% 100.0% $460 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 22.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.7% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 3 100.0% $920 100.0% 0.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $920 100.0% 100.0%
Total 3 100.0% $920 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $920 100.0% 100.0%
Low 37 5.4% $3,524 2.5% 22.8% 37 5.4% 6.5% $3,524 2.5% 3.5%
Moderate 102 15.0% $12,945 9.1% 16.9% 102 15.0% 17.2% $12,945 9.1% 12.0%
Middle 103 15.1% $15,206 10.7% 18.6% 103 15.1% 20.8% $15,206 10.7% 17.4%
Upper 410 60.1% $103,901 73.0% 41.7% 410 60.1% 43.4% $103,901 73.0% 52.1%
Unknown 30 4.4% $6,680 4.7% 0.0% 30 4.4% 12.1% $6,680 4.7% 15.0%
Total 682 100.0% $142,256 100.0% 100.0% 682 100.0% 100.0% $142,256 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 105 38.3% $20,536 28.2% 91.2% 105 38.3% 35.2% $20,536 28.2% 35.1%
Over $1 Million 130 47.4% $45,125 61.9% 5.0% 130 47.4%
Total Rev. available 235 85.7% $65,661 90.1% 96.2% 235 85.7%
Rev. Not Known 39 14.2% $7,264 10.0% 3.8% 39 14.2%
Total 274 100.0% $72,925 100.0% 100.0% 274 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 107 39.1% $5,950 8.2% 107 39.1% 89.6% $5,950 8.2% 22.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 67 24.5% $12,495 17.1% 67 24.5% 4.5% $12,495 17.1% 16.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 100 36.5% $54,480 74.7% 100 36.5% 5.9% $54,480 74.7% 61.5%
Total 274 100.0% $72,925 100.0% 274 100.0% 100.0% $72,925 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 98.6% 0 0.0% 47.6% $0 0.0% 42.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.4% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 90.5% $0 0.0% 30.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.5% $0 0.0% 69.4%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Baton Rouge
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
336
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
6,912
25.0
Moderate-income
7
33.3
8,445
30.5
2,073
24.5
4,120
14.9
Middle-income
11
52.4
13,294
48.0
1,602
12.1
5,311
19.2
Upper-income
3
14.3
5,960
21.5
185
3.1
11,356
41.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
21
100.0
27,699
100.0
3,860
13.9
27,699
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
14,671
8,231
29.2
56.1
3,912
26.7
2,528
17.2
Middle-income
21,244
13,363
47.4
62.9
5,331
25.1
2,550
12.0
Upper-income
7,598
6,590
23.4
86.7
651
8.6
357
4.7
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
43,513
28,184
100.0
64.8
9,894
22.7
5,435
12.5
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
1,846
28.6
1,611
27.8
168
37.8
67
30.3
Middle-income
2,980
46.1
2,714
46.8
160
36.0
106
48.0
Upper-income
1,639
25.4
1,474
25.4
117
26.3
48
21.7
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
6,465
100.0
5,799
100.0
445
100.0
221
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
89.7
6.9
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
21
25.9
19
25.0
2
40.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
32
39.5
31
40.8
1
20.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
28
34.6
26
34.2
2
40.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
81
100.0
76
100.0
5
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
93.8
6.2
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
337
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 22 27.5% $2,942 22.2% 29.2% 22 27.5% 23.8% $2,942 22.2% 18.5%
Middle 28 35.0% $3,865 29.2% 47.4% 28 35.0% 44.2% $3,865 29.2% 38.8%
Upper 30 37.5% $6,429 48.6% 23.4% 30 37.5% 32.0% $6,429 48.6% 42.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 80 100.0% $13,236 100.0% 100.0% 80 100.0% 100.0% $13,236 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 12 25.5% $1,617 19.7% 29.2% 12 25.5% 20.8% $1,617 19.7% 15.6%
Middle 11 23.4% $1,719 21.0% 47.4% 11 23.4% 39.1% $1,719 21.0% 31.3%
Upper 24 51.1% $4,864 59.3% 23.4% 24 51.1% 40.2% $4,864 59.3% 53.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 47 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 20.0% $114 55.9% 29.2% 1 20.0% 23.3% $114 55.9% 13.5%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 47.4% 0 0.0% 43.6% $0 0.0% 35.9%
Upper 4 80.0% $90 44.1% 23.4% 4 80.0% 33.1% $90 44.1% 50.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 5 100.0% $204 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $204 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 0.8%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 62.5% $0 0.0% 10.3%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 88.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 35 26.5% $4,673 21.6% 29.2% 35 26.5% 22.1% $4,673 21.6% 15.9%
Middle 39 29.5% $5,584 25.8% 47.4% 39 29.5% 41.4% $5,584 25.8% 33.2%
Upper 58 43.9% $11,383 52.6% 23.4% 58 43.9% 36.5% $11,383 52.6% 50.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 132 100.0% $21,640 100.0% 100.0% 132 100.0% 100.0% $21,640 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 2 25.0% $616 51.2% 27.8% 2 25.0% 28.7% $616 51.2% 30.6%
Middle 3 37.5% $509 42.3% 46.8% 3 37.5% 38.8% $509 42.3% 29.8%
Upper 3 37.5% $77 6.4% 25.4% 3 37.5% 27.8% $77 6.4% 36.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.7% $0 0.0% 3.1%
Total 8 100.0% $1,202 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $1,202 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 7.7% $0 0.0% 2.7%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.8% 0 0.0% 61.5% $0 0.0% 61.6%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 34.2% 0 0.0% 23.1% $0 0.0% 19.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.7% $0 0.0% 16.2%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
338
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 6 7.5% $482 3.6% 25.0% 6 7.5% 7.2% $482 3.6% 3.8%
Moderate 25 31.3% $2,976 22.5% 14.9% 25 31.3% 19.5% $2,976 22.5% 15.3%
Middle 19 23.8% $2,957 22.3% 19.2% 19 23.8% 25.5% $2,957 22.3% 23.7%
Upper 30 37.5% $6,821 51.5% 41.0% 30 37.5% 38.5% $6,821 51.5% 49.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.4% $0 0.0% 7.7%
Total 80 100.0% $13,236 100.0% 100.0% 80 100.0% 100.0% $13,236 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 4.5% $0 0.0% 2.3%
Moderate 6 12.8% $745 9.1% 14.9% 6 12.8% 11.3% $745 9.1% 7.3%
Middle 9 19.1% $1,314 16.0% 19.2% 9 19.1% 19.1% $1,314 16.0% 15.2%
Upper 32 68.1% $6,141 74.9% 41.0% 32 68.1% 50.9% $6,141 74.9% 59.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.2% $0 0.0% 16.1%
Total 47 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0% 47 100.0% 100.0% $8,200 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 8.5% $0 0.0% 3.4%
Moderate 1 20.0% $114 55.9% 14.9% 1 20.0% 9.7% $114 55.9% 10.4%
Middle 1 20.0% $10 4.9% 19.2% 1 20.0% 19.9% $10 4.9% 17.0%
Upper 3 60.0% $80 39.2% 41.0% 3 60.0% 51.7% $80 39.2% 62.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 10.2% $0 0.0% 6.3%
Total 5 100.0% $204 100.0% 100.0% 5 100.0% 100.0% $204 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 14.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 19.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 6 4.5% $482 2.2% 25.0% 6 4.5% 5.8% $482 2.2% 2.8%
Moderate 32 24.2% $3,835 17.7% 14.9% 32 24.2% 14.4% $3,835 17.7% 10.1%
Middle 29 22.0% $4,281 19.8% 19.2% 29 22.0% 21.6% $4,281 19.8% 17.7%
Upper 65 49.2% $13,042 60.3% 41.0% 65 49.2% 46.0% $13,042 60.3% 52.1%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.2% $0 0.0% 17.3%
Total 132 100.0% $21,640 100.0% 100.0% 132 100.0% 100.0% $21,640 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 7 87.5% $1,192 99.2% 89.7% 7 87.5% 28.5% $1,192 99.2% 25.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.9% 0 0.0%
Total Rev. available 7 87.5% $1,192 99.2% 96.6% 7 87.5%
Rev. Not Known 1 12.5% $10 0.8% 3.4% 1 12.5%
Total 8 100.0% $1,202 100.0% 100.0% 8 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 5 62.5% $92 7.7% 5 62.5% 92.1% $92 7.7% 27.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 1 12.5% $196 16.3% 1 12.5% 3.5% $196 16.3% 14.3%
$250,001 - $1 Million 2 25.0% $914 76.0% 2 25.0% 4.5% $914 76.0% 58.4%
Total 8 100.0% $1,202 100.0% 8 100.0% 100.0% $1,202 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 93.8% 0 0.0% 61.5% $0 0.0% 82.6%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.2% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 92.3% $0 0.0% 68.6%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.7% $0 0.0% 31.4%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Houma
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
339
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
10.9
3,700
7.2
1,373
37.1
12,005
23.3
Moderate-income
10
21.7
10,211
19.8
1,812
17.7
9,020
17.5
Middle-income
19
41.3
23,422
45.5
2,409
10.3
9,065
17.6
Upper-income
10
21.7
14,150
27.5
672
4.7
21,393
41.6
Unknown-income
2
4.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
46
100.0
51,483
100.0
6,266
12.2
51,483
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
7,047
2,638
4.9
37.4
3,003
42.6
1,406
20.0
Moderate-income
19,437
9,378
17.5
48.2
7,087
36.5
2,972
15.3
Middle-income
36,977
26,014
48.4
70.4
7,160
19.4
3,803
10.3
Upper-income
21,264
15,674
29.2
73.7
3,310
15.6
2,280
10.7
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
84,725
53,704
100.0
63.4
20,560
24.3
10,461
12.3
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
613
5.3
556
5.3
33
6.2
24
6.3
Moderate-income
2,915
25.4
2,627
24.9
180
34.0
108
28.4
Middle-income
4,974
43.4
4,593
43.5
214
40.5
167
43.9
Upper-income
2,944
25.7
2,767
26.2
97
18.3
80
21.1
Unknown-income
16
0.1
10
0.1
5
0.9
1
0.3
Total Assessment Area
11,462
100.0
10,553
100.0
529
100.0
380
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
92.1
4.6
3.3
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2
0.9
2
0.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
17
7.9
16
7.5
1
33.3
0
0.0
Middle-income
136
63.0
135
63.4
1
33.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
61
28.2
60
28.2
1
33.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
216
100.0
213
100.0
3
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
98.6
1.4
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
340
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 2.6% $75 1.4% 4.9% 1 2.6% 1.5% $75 1.4% 0.7%
Moderate 7 18.4% $610 11.6% 17.5% 7 18.4% 15.0% $610 11.6% 11.4%
Middle 17 44.7% $1,994 38.0% 48.4% 17 44.7% 47.9% $1,994 38.0% 45.1%
Upper 13 34.2% $2,567 48.9% 29.2% 13 34.2% 35.5% $2,567 48.9% 42.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 38 100.0% $5,246 100.0% 100.0% 38 100.0% 100.0% $5,246 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 4.4% $478 3.0% 4.9% 7 4.4% 1.5% $478 3.0% 0.7%
Moderate 23 14.5% $1,301 8.2% 17.5% 23 14.5% 10.8% $1,301 8.2% 7.4%
Middle 78 49.1% $7,036 44.6% 48.4% 78 49.1% 46.1% $7,036 44.6% 45.1%
Upper 51 32.1% $6,967 44.1% 29.2% 51 32.1% 41.6% $6,967 44.1% 46.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 159 100.0% $15,782 100.0% 100.0% 159 100.0% 100.0% $15,782 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 2.9% $23 3.4% 4.9% 2 2.9% 4.4% $23 3.4% 1.9%
Moderate 17 25.0% $162 23.8% 17.5% 17 25.0% 17.6% $162 23.8% 8.4%
Middle 34 50.0% $341 50.1% 48.4% 34 50.0% 47.0% $341 50.1% 46.2%
Upper 15 22.1% $155 22.8% 29.2% 15 22.1% 31.0% $155 22.8% 43.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 68 100.0% $681 100.0% 100.0% 68 100.0% 100.0% $681 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.7% $0 0.0% 0.2%
Moderate 2 50.0% $1,192 19.3% 0.0% 2 50.0% 33.3% $1,192 19.3% 11.2%
Middle 2 50.0% $4,989 80.7% 0.0% 2 50.0% 44.4% $4,989 80.7% 51.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 18.5% $0 0.0% 37.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 4 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 0.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 100.0%
Low 10 3.7% $576 2.1% 4.9% 10 3.7% 1.7% $576 2.1% 0.7%
Moderate 49 18.2% $3,265 11.7% 17.5% 49 18.2% 13.0% $3,265 11.7% 9.2%
Middle 131 48.7% $14,360 51.5% 48.4% 131 48.7% 46.9% $14,360 51.5% 45.3%
Upper 79 29.4% $9,689 34.7% 29.2% 79 29.4% 38.4% $9,689 34.7% 44.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 269 100.0% $27,890 100.0% 100.0% 269 100.0% 100.0% $27,890 100.0% 100.0%
Low 10 3.5% $1,844 6.4% 5.3% 10 3.5% 4.8% $1,844 6.4% 5.2%
Moderate 65 22.8% $5,616 19.5% 24.9% 65 22.8% 23.0% $5,616 19.5% 25.1%
Middle 128 44.9% $13,763 47.8% 43.5% 128 44.9% 39.5% $13,763 47.8% 44.6%
Upper 82 28.8% $7,554 26.3% 26.2% 82 28.8% 28.0% $7,554 26.3% 22.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.2% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.5% $0 0.0% 2.8%
Total 285 100.0% $28,777 100.0% 100.0% 285 100.0% 100.0% $28,777 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 5.9% $45 10.3% 0.9% 1 5.9% 1.3% $45 10.3% 0.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 7.5% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Middle 6 35.3% $169 38.8% 63.4% 6 35.3% 56.0% $169 38.8% 59.8%
Upper 10 58.8% $222 50.9% 28.2% 10 58.8% 34.7% $222 50.9% 38.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.0% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 17 100.0% $436 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $436 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
341
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 5 13.2% $419 8.0% 23.3% 5 13.2% 9.2% $419 8.0% 5.1%
Moderate 7 18.4% $616 11.7% 17.5% 7 18.4% 22.6% $616 11.7% 17.3%
Middle 10 26.3% $1,363 26.0% 17.6% 10 26.3% 27.4% $1,363 26.0% 27.4%
Upper 15 39.5% $2,635 50.2% 41.6% 15 39.5% 34.1% $2,635 50.2% 44.3%
Unknown 1 2.6% $213 4.1% 0.0% 1 2.6% 6.7% $213 4.1% 5.9%
Total 38 100.0% $5,246 100.0% 100.0% 38 100.0% 100.0% $5,246 100.0% 100.0%
Low 22 13.8% $1,100 7.0% 23.3% 22 13.8% 6.3% $1,100 7.0% 3.3%
Moderate 29 18.2% $2,298 14.6% 17.5% 29 18.2% 13.7% $2,298 14.6% 9.4%
Middle 30 18.9% $2,114 13.4% 17.6% 30 18.9% 21.7% $2,114 13.4% 18.4%
Upper 65 40.9% $8,575 54.3% 41.6% 65 40.9% 47.3% $8,575 54.3% 57.1%
Unknown 13 8.2% $1,695 10.7% 0.0% 13 8.2% 11.0% $1,695 10.7% 11.8%
Total 159 100.0% $15,782 100.0% 100.0% 159 100.0% 100.0% $15,782 100.0% 100.0%
Low 13 19.1% $56 8.2% 23.3% 13 19.1% 14.4% $56 8.2% 4.7%
Moderate 16 23.5% $148 21.7% 17.5% 16 23.5% 17.9% $148 21.7% 7.8%
Middle 12 17.6% $120 17.6% 17.6% 12 17.6% 21.6% $120 17.6% 21.1%
Upper 20 29.4% $299 43.9% 41.6% 20 29.4% 41.7% $299 43.9% 64.7%
Unknown 7 10.3% $58 8.5% 0.0% 7 10.3% 4.4% $58 8.5% 1.7%
Total 68 100.0% $681 100.0% 100.0% 68 100.0% 100.0% $681 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 4 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 0.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 100.0%
Total 4 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 100.0% 4 100.0% 100.0% $6,181 100.0% 100.0%
Low 40 14.9% $1,575 5.6% 23.3% 40 14.9% 7.9% $1,575 5.6% 4.0%
Moderate 52 19.3% $3,062 11.0% 17.5% 52 19.3% 17.6% $3,062 11.0% 12.5%
Middle 52 19.3% $3,597 12.9% 17.6% 52 19.3% 24.0% $3,597 12.9% 21.8%
Upper 100 37.2% $11,509 41.3% 41.6% 100 37.2% 41.2% $11,509 41.3% 50.1%
Unknown 25 9.3% $8,147 29.2% 0.0% 25 9.3% 9.2% $8,147 29.2% 11.6%
Total 269 100.0% $27,890 100.0% 100.0% 269 100.0% 100.0% $27,890 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 176 61.8% $14,085 48.9% 92.1% 176 61.8% 34.1% $14,085 48.9% 36.2%
Over $1 Million 77 27.0% $11,804 41.0% 4.6% 77 27.0%
Total Rev. available 253 88.8% $25,889 89.9% 96.7% 253 88.8%
Rev. Not Known 32 11.2% $2,888 10.0% 3.3% 32 11.2%
Total 285 100.0% $28,777 100.0% 100.0% 285 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 211 74.0% $6,822 23.7% 211 74.0% 92.5% $6,822 23.7% 33.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 43 15.1% $7,250 25.2% 43 15.1% 4.3% $7,250 25.2% 20.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 31 10.9% $14,705 51.1% 31 10.9% 3.2% $14,705 51.1% 46.1%
Total 285 100.0% $28,777 100.0% 285 100.0% 100.0% $28,777 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 16 94.1% $426 97.7% 98.6% 16 94.1% 80.0% $426 97.7% 86.2%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.4% 0 0.0%
Not Known 1 5.9% $10 2.3% 0.0% 1 5.9%
Total 17 100.0% $436 100.0% 100.0% 17 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 17 100.0% $436 100.0% 17 100.0% 73.3% $436 100.0% 18.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12.0% $0 0.0% 19.9%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.7% $0 0.0% 61.8%
Total 17 100.0% $436 100.0% 17 100.0% 100.0% $436 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lake Charles
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
342
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
10.0
820
8.3
346
42.2
2,456
25.0
Moderate-income
3
30.0
2,580
26.2
902
35.0
1,339
13.6
Middle-income
2
20.0
2,072
21.1
203
9.8
1,824
18.5
Upper-income
4
40.0
4,371
44.4
373
8.5
4,224
42.9
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
10
100.0
9,843
100.0
1,824
18.5
9,843
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,637
449
4.7
27.4
859
52.5
329
20.1
Moderate-income
5,598
1,914
20.1
34.2
2,615
46.7
1,069
19.1
Middle-income
3,831
2,244
23.6
58.6
1,121
29.3
466
12.2
Upper-income
8,053
4,901
51.5
60.9
2,145
26.6
1,007
12.5
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
19,119
9,508
100.0
49.7
6,740
35.3
2,871
15.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
207
8.0
191
8.0
7
5.9
9
8.7
Moderate-income
503
19.3
457
19.2
16
13.4
30
29.1
Middle-income
515
19.8
467
19.6
32
26.9
16
15.5
Upper-income
1,377
52.9
1,265
53.2
64
53.8
48
46.6
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
2,602
100.0
2,380
100.0
119
100.0
103
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.5
4.6
4.0
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
4
4.8
4
4.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
5
6.0
5
6.2
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
23
27.4
21
25.9
2
66.7
0
0.0
Upper-income
52
61.9
51
63.0
1
33.3
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
84
100.0
81
100.0
3
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.4
3.6
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
343
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.7% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 2.4%
Moderate 6 46.2% $722 38.7% 20.1% 6 46.2% 20.2% $722 38.7% 17.9%
Middle 2 15.4% $220 11.8% 23.6% 2 15.4% 19.6% $220 11.8% 16.0%
Upper 5 38.5% $924 49.5% 51.5% 5 38.5% 57.5% $924 49.5% 63.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 13 100.0% $1,866 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $1,866 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 7.7% $30 1.6% 4.7% 1 7.7% 3.0% $30 1.6% 1.8%
Moderate 4 30.8% $533 28.2% 20.1% 4 30.8% 14.3% $533 28.2% 12.4%
Middle 3 23.1% $204 10.8% 23.6% 3 23.1% 15.6% $204 10.8% 10.9%
Upper 5 38.5% $1,123 59.4% 51.5% 5 38.5% 67.1% $1,123 59.4% 74.9%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 13 100.0% $1,890 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $1,890 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.7% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 1.3%
Moderate 2 22.2% $29 24.2% 20.1% 2 22.2% 19.4% $29 24.2% 9.4%
Middle 2 22.2% $8 6.7% 23.6% 2 22.2% 23.6% $8 6.7% 18.2%
Upper 5 55.6% $83 69.2% 51.5% 5 55.6% 55.6% $83 69.2% 71.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 100.0% $120 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $120 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 66.7% $0 0.0% 18.2%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 16.7% $0 0.0% 80.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 1 2.9% $30 0.8% 4.7% 1 2.9% 2.8% $30 0.8% 1.9%
Moderate 12 34.3% $1,284 33.1% 20.1% 12 34.3% 16.6% $1,284 33.1% 14.2%
Middle 7 20.0% $432 11.1% 23.6% 7 20.0% 17.2% $432 11.1% 12.5%
Upper 15 42.9% $2,130 55.0% 51.5% 15 42.9% 63.3% $2,130 55.0% 71.4%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 35 100.0% $3,876 100.0% 100.0% 35 100.0% 100.0% $3,876 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 8.0% 0 0.0% 3.0% $0 0.0% 3.8%
Moderate 3 18.8% $188 8.1% 19.2% 3 18.8% 12.4% $188 8.1% 8.6%
Middle 3 18.8% $905 39.2% 19.6% 3 18.8% 18.6% $905 39.2% 19.1%
Upper 10 62.5% $1,217 52.7% 53.2% 10 62.5% 62.2% $1,217 52.7% 67.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.8% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Total 16 100.0% $2,310 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $2,310 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.2% 0 0.0% 12.5% $0 0.0% 24.1%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.9% 0 0.0% 25.0% $0 0.0% 23.9%
Upper 3 100.0% $486 100.0% 63.0% 3 100.0% 62.5% $486 100.0% 52.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $486 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $486 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
344
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 2.9% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Moderate 3 23.1% $329 17.6% 13.6% 3 23.1% 10.3% $329 17.6% 7.3%
Middle 3 23.1% $348 18.6% 18.5% 3 23.1% 21.1% $348 18.6% 19.5%
Upper 6 46.2% $1,102 59.1% 42.9% 6 46.2% 48.0% $1,102 59.1% 55.9%
Unknown 1 7.7% $87 4.7% 0.0% 1 7.7% 17.7% $87 4.7% 15.9%
Total 13 100.0% $1,866 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $1,866 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 2.1% $0 0.0% 1.6%
Moderate 1 7.7% $38 2.0% 13.6% 1 7.7% 7.3% $38 2.0% 4.0%
Middle 2 15.4% $107 5.7% 18.5% 2 15.4% 12.9% $107 5.7% 9.0%
Upper 10 76.9% $1,745 92.3% 42.9% 10 76.9% 63.1% $1,745 92.3% 68.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 14.6% $0 0.0% 16.6%
Total 13 100.0% $1,890 100.0% 100.0% 13 100.0% 100.0% $1,890 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 6.9% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 1 11.1% $5 4.2% 13.6% 1 11.1% 20.8% $5 4.2% 13.0%
Middle 1 11.1% $10 8.3% 18.5% 1 11.1% 9.7% $10 8.3% 11.0%
Upper 5 55.6% $99 82.5% 42.9% 5 55.6% 55.6% $99 82.5% 74.8%
Unknown 2 22.2% $6 5.0% 0.0% 2 22.2% 6.9% $6 5.0% 0.8%
Total 9 100.0% $120 100.0% 100.0% 9 100.0% 100.0% $120 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 13.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 42.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 25.0% 0 0.0% 2.6% $0 0.0% 1.5%
Moderate 5 14.3% $372 9.6% 13.6% 5 14.3% 8.9% $372 9.6% 5.2%
Middle 6 17.1% $465 12.0% 18.5% 6 17.1% 15.2% $465 12.0% 12.2%
Upper 21 60.0% $2,946 76.0% 42.9% 21 60.0% 57.7% $2,946 76.0% 63.8%
Unknown 3 8.6% $93 2.4% 0.0% 3 8.6% 15.6% $93 2.4% 17.3%
Total 35 100.0% $3,876 100.0% 100.0% 35 100.0% 100.0% $3,876 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 7 43.8% $1,026 44.4% 91.5% 7 43.8% 49.2% $1,026 44.4% 59.4%
Over $1 Million 6 37.5% $749 32.4% 4.6% 6 37.5%
Total Rev. available 13 81.3% $1,775 76.8% 96.1% 13 81.3%
Rev. Not Known 3 18.8% $535 23.2% 4.0% 3 18.8%
Total 16 100.0% $2,310 100.0% 100.0% 16 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 11 68.8% $535 23.2% 11 68.8% 88.5% $535 23.2% 27.8%
$100,001 - $250,000 2 12.5% $330 14.3% 2 12.5% 5.9% $330 14.3% 19.9%
$250,001 - $1 Million 3 18.8% $1,445 62.6% 3 18.8% 5.6% $1,445 62.6% 52.3%
Total 16 100.0% $2,310 100.0% 16 100.0% 100.0% $2,310 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.4% 0 0.0% 70.8% $0 0.0% 66.7%
Over $1 Million 3 100.0% $486 100.0% 3.6% 3 100.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $486 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 33.3% $76 15.6% 1 33.3% 75.0% $76 15.6% 28.0%
$100,001 - $250,000 2 66.7% $410 84.4% 2 66.7% 20.8% $410 84.4% 52.9%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.2% $0 0.0% 19.1%
Total 3 100.0% $486 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $486 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Lincoln
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
345
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
5
12.5
3,476
9.2
1,618
46.5
9,018
23.9
Moderate-income
11
27.5
7,536
20.0
2,248
29.8
6,049
16.0
Middle-income
13
32.5
14,623
38.8
1,647
11.3
6,975
18.5
Upper-income
10
25.0
12,056
32.0
956
7.9
15,649
41.5
Unknown-income
1
2.5
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
40
100.0
37,691
100.0
6,469
17.2
37,691
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
6,347
2,247
6.3
35.4
2,928
46.1
1,172
18.5
Moderate-income
14,378
5,518
15.6
38.4
6,148
42.8
2,712
18.9
Middle-income
24,073
14,987
42.2
62.3
6,581
27.3
2,505
10.4
Upper-income
19,145
12,723
35.9
66.5
5,060
26.4
1,362
7.1
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
63,943
35,475
100.0
55.5
20,717
32.4
7,751
12.1
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,339
12.6
1,182
12.2
106
20.0
51
13.0
Moderate-income
2,139
20.2
1,939
20.0
114
21.5
86
21.9
Middle-income
3,634
34.3
3,353
34.6
172
32.4
109
27.8
Upper-income
3,480
32.8
3,199
33.0
136
25.6
145
37.0
Unknown-income
17
0.2
13
0.1
3
0.6
1
0.3
Total Assessment Area
10,609
100.0
9,686
100.0
531
100.0
392
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.3
5.0
3.7
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
3
1.7
3
1.7
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
12
6.7
12
6.8
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
89
50.0
89
50.3
0
0.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
73
41.0
72
40.7
1
100.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
1
0.6
1
0.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
178
100.0
177
100.0
1
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
99.4
.6
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
346
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0% 0.6% $0 0.0% 0.4%
Moderate 7 2.3% $798 1.7% 15.6% 7 2.3% 5.5% $798 1.7% 3.6%
Middle 143 47.8% $22,626 48.3% 42.2% 143 47.8% 46.3% $22,626 48.3% 43.5%
Upper 149 49.8% $23,425 50.0% 35.9% 149 49.8% 47.5% $23,425 50.0% 52.5%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 299 100.0% $46,849 100.0% 100.0% 299 100.0% 100.0% $46,849 100.0% 100.0%
Low 1 0.9% $53 0.3% 6.3% 1 0.9% 0.7% $53 0.3% 0.4%
Moderate 7 6.0% $1,465 7.5% 15.6% 7 6.0% 7.3% $1,465 7.5% 5.2%
Middle 44 37.6% $6,763 34.5% 42.2% 44 37.6% 41.4% $6,763 34.5% 37.8%
Upper 65 55.6% $11,308 57.7% 35.9% 65 55.6% 50.6% $11,308 57.7% 56.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 117 100.0% $19,589 100.0% 100.0% 117 100.0% 100.0% $19,589 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 7.4% $132 24.1% 6.3% 2 7.4% 3.2% $132 24.1% 1.7%
Moderate 6 22.2% $52 9.5% 15.6% 6 22.2% 12.8% $52 9.5% 5.2%
Middle 17 63.0% $343 62.6% 42.2% 17 63.0% 52.5% $343 62.6% 49.9%
Upper 2 7.4% $21 3.8% 35.9% 2 7.4% 31.5% $21 3.8% 43.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 27 100.0% $548 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $548 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 1 33.3% $338 10.9% 0.0% 1 33.3% 23.1% $338 10.9% 7.2%
Middle 1 33.3% $295 9.5% 0.0% 1 33.3% 46.2% $295 9.5% 57.5%
Upper 1 33.3% $2,475 79.6% 0.0% 1 33.3% 30.8% $2,475 79.6% 35.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 0.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 0.7% $185 0.3% 6.3% 3 0.7% 0.8% $185 0.3% 0.4%
Moderate 21 4.7% $2,653 3.8% 15.6% 21 4.7% 6.8% $2,653 3.8% 4.6%
Middle 205 46.0% $30,027 42.8% 42.2% 205 46.0% 44.0% $30,027 42.8% 40.8%
Upper 217 48.7% $37,229 53.1% 35.9% 217 48.7% 48.5% $37,229 53.1% 54.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 446 100.0% $70,094 100.0% 100.0% 446 100.0% 100.0% $70,094 100.0% 100.0%
Low 38 29.0% $7,685 36.8% 12.2% 38 29.0% 14.2% $7,685 36.8% 25.2%
Moderate 11 8.4% $1,520 7.3% 20.0% 11 8.4% 14.9% $1,520 7.3% 9.7%
Middle 47 35.9% $6,290 30.1% 34.6% 47 35.9% 33.3% $6,290 30.1% 31.4%
Upper 35 26.7% $5,369 25.7% 33.0% 35 26.7% 33.7% $5,369 25.7% 32.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.3% $0 0.0% 0.3%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.5% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Total 131 100.0% $20,864 100.0% 100.0% 131 100.0% 100.0% $20,864 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 1.7% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 10.7%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.8% 0 0.0% 2.8% $0 0.0% 0.1%
Middle 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 50.3% 2 100.0% 52.8% $90 100.0% 28.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 40.7% 0 0.0% 36.1% $0 0.0% 46.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.6% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.6% $0 0.0% 13.7%
Total 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $90 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
347
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 25 8.4% $2,314 4.9% 23.9% 25 8.4% 4.6% $2,314 4.9% 2.7%
Moderate 64 21.4% $7,493 16.0% 16.0% 64 21.4% 18.6% $7,493 16.0% 13.6%
Middle 80 26.8% $11,033 23.6% 18.5% 80 26.8% 22.1% $11,033 23.6% 20.0%
Upper 129 43.1% $25,769 55.0% 41.5% 129 43.1% 42.3% $25,769 55.0% 52.9%
Unknown 1 0.3% $240 0.5% 0.0% 1 0.3% 12.4% $240 0.5% 10.9%
Total 299 100.0% $46,849 100.0% 100.0% 299 100.0% 100.0% $46,849 100.0% 100.0%
Low 6 5.1% $390 2.0% 23.9% 6 5.1% 2.9% $390 2.0% 1.3%
Moderate 19 16.2% $1,707 8.7% 16.0% 19 16.2% 10.2% $1,707 8.7% 6.1%
Middle 18 15.4% $2,282 11.6% 18.5% 18 15.4% 17.3% $2,282 11.6% 12.3%
Upper 67 57.3% $13,958 71.3% 41.5% 67 57.3% 54.6% $13,958 71.3% 63.5%
Unknown 7 6.0% $1,252 6.4% 0.0% 7 6.0% 15.0% $1,252 6.4% 16.9%
Total 117 100.0% $19,589 100.0% 100.0% 117 100.0% 100.0% $19,589 100.0% 100.0%
Low 7 25.9% $40 7.3% 23.9% 7 25.9% 8.7% $40 7.3% 2.9%
Moderate 2 7.4% $17 3.1% 16.0% 2 7.4% 12.3% $17 3.1% 8.5%
Middle 2 7.4% $25 4.6% 18.5% 2 7.4% 21.0% $25 4.6% 17.0%
Upper 10 37.0% $307 56.0% 41.5% 10 37.0% 47.9% $307 56.0% 65.7%
Unknown 6 22.2% $159 29.0% 0.0% 6 22.2% 10.0% $159 29.0% 5.9%
Total 27 100.0% $548 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $548 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 16.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 41.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 3 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 0.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 100.0%
Total 3 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $3,108 100.0% 100.0%
Low 38 8.5% $2,744 3.9% 23.9% 38 8.5% 3.9% $2,744 3.9% 1.8%
Moderate 85 19.1% $9,217 13.1% 16.0% 85 19.1% 13.8% $9,217 13.1% 9.0%
Middle 100 22.4% $13,340 19.0% 18.5% 100 22.4% 19.4% $13,340 19.0% 15.3%
Upper 206 46.2% $40,034 57.1% 41.5% 206 46.2% 49.0% $40,034 57.1% 57.6%
Unknown 17 3.8% $4,759 6.8% 0.0% 17 3.8% 13.9% $4,759 6.8% 16.2%
Total 446 100.0% $70,094 100.0% 100.0% 446 100.0% 100.0% $70,094 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 65 49.6% $9,218 44.2% 91.3% 65 49.6% 38.0% $9,218 44.2% 44.0%
Over $1 Million 56 42.7% $11,087 53.1% 5.0% 56 42.7%
Total Rev. available 121 92.3% $20,305 97.3% 96.3% 121 92.3%
Rev. Not Known 10 7.6% $559 2.7% 3.7% 10 7.6%
Total 131 100.0% $20,864 100.0% 100.0% 131 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 90 68.7% $4,525 21.7% 90 68.7% 89.0% $4,525 21.7% 25.3%
$100,001 - $250,000 15 11.5% $3,114 14.9% 15 11.5% 5.3% $3,114 14.9% 17.7%
$250,001 - $1 Million 26 19.8% $13,225 63.4% 26 19.8% 5.8% $13,225 63.4% 57.0%
Total 131 100.0% $20,864 100.0% 131 100.0% 100.0% $20,864 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 99.4% 2 100.0% 47.2% $90 100.0% 92.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.6% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 2 100.0% 75.0% $90 100.0% 17.1%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 19.4% $0 0.0% 56.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5.6% $0 0.0% 26.8%
Total 2 100.0% $90 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $90 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Monroe
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
348
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
12.5
806
11.4
312
38.7
2,037
28.8
Moderate-income
2
25.0
1,819
25.7
602
33.1
1,222
17.3
Middle-income
5
62.5
4,451
62.9
631
14.2
1,479
20.9
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
2,338
33.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
8
100.0
7,076
100.0
1,545
21.8
7,076
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1,529
715
9.7
46.8
465
30.4
349
22.8
Moderate-income
3,600
1,747
23.8
48.5
1,192
33.1
661
18.4
Middle-income
7,408
4,880
66.5
65.9
1,283
17.3
1,245
16.8
Upper-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
12,537
7,342
100.0
58.6
2,940
23.5
2,255
18.0
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
128
8.0
121
8.2
0
0.0
7
13.0
Moderate-income
516
32.4
466
31.4
25
46.3
25
46.3
Middle-income
947
59.5
896
60.4
29
53.7
22
40.7
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
1,591
100.0
1,483
100.0
54
100.0
54
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
93.2
3.4
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
1
0.5
1
0.5
0
0.0
0
0.0
Moderate-income
9
4.8
9
4.9
0
0.0
0
0.0
Middle-income
176
94.6
172
94.5
4
100.0
0
0.0
Upper-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
186
100.0
182
100.0
4
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
97.8
2.2
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
349
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 1 3.7% $131 4.4% 9.7% 1 3.7% 6.4% $131 4.4% 6.1%
Moderate 4 14.8% $364 12.1% 23.8% 4 14.8% 20.5% $364 12.1% 13.5%
Middle 22 81.5% $2,507 83.5% 66.5% 22 81.5% 69.9% $2,507 83.5% 79.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 3.2% $0 0.0% 1.4%
Total 27 100.0% $3,002 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $3,002 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.7% 0 0.0% 3.1% $0 0.0% 1.7%
Moderate 7 38.9% $387 19.9% 23.8% 7 38.9% 12.8% $387 19.9% 7.4%
Middle 11 61.1% $1,562 80.1% 66.5% 11 61.1% 84.0% $1,562 80.1% 90.9%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 18 100.0% $1,949 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $1,949 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 9.7% 0 0.0% 18.4% $0 0.0% 7.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 23.8% 0 0.0% 15.8% $0 0.0% 13.5%
Middle 6 100.0% $63 100.0% 66.5% 6 100.0% 65.8% $63 100.0% 79.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 6 100.0% $63 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $63 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Low 1 2.0% $131 2.6% 9.7% 1 2.0% 5.6% $131 2.6% 3.7%
Moderate 11 21.6% $751 15.0% 23.8% 11 21.6% 16.3% $751 15.0% 10.2%
Middle 39 76.5% $4,132 82.4% 66.5% 39 76.5% 76.7% $4,132 82.4% 85.4%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 1.4% $0 0.0% 0.6%
Total 51 100.0% $5,014 100.0% 100.0% 51 100.0% 100.0% $5,014 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 13.3% $133 11.4% 8.2% 2 13.3% 5.7% $133 11.4% 13.3%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 31.4% 0 0.0% 27.0% $0 0.0% 31.7%
Middle 13 86.7% $1,036 88.6% 60.4% 13 86.7% 59.9% $1,036 88.6% 50.8%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 7.4% $0 0.0% 4.2%
Total 15 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 100.0% 15 100.0% 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 4.9% 0 0.0% 5.2% $0 0.0% 9.9%
Middle 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 94.5% 1 100.0% 79.2% $55 100.0% 71.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.6% $0 0.0% 18.6%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
350
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 7 25.9% $484 16.1% 28.8% 7 25.9% 10.8% $484 16.1% 6.2%
Moderate 8 29.6% $736 24.5% 17.3% 8 29.6% 20.1% $736 24.5% 16.8%
Middle 3 11.1% $320 10.7% 20.9% 3 11.1% 26.1% $320 10.7% 26.4%
Upper 9 33.3% $1,462 48.7% 33.0% 9 33.3% 29.3% $1,462 48.7% 40.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.7% $0 0.0% 10.2%
Total 27 100.0% $3,002 100.0% 100.0% 27 100.0% 100.0% $3,002 100.0% 100.0%
Low 3 16.7% $104 5.3% 28.8% 3 16.7% 6.3% $104 5.3% 3.8%
Moderate 2 11.1% $103 5.3% 17.3% 2 11.1% 7.6% $103 5.3% 5.0%
Middle 4 22.2% $546 28.0% 20.9% 4 22.2% 24.0% $546 28.0% 19.7%
Upper 9 50.0% $1,196 61.4% 33.0% 9 50.0% 50.7% $1,196 61.4% 58.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 11.5% $0 0.0% 12.9%
Total 18 100.0% $1,949 100.0% 100.0% 18 100.0% 100.0% $1,949 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 28.8% 0 0.0% 5.3% $0 0.0% 2.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 15.8% $0 0.0% 21.6%
Middle 1 16.7% $10 15.9% 20.9% 1 16.7% 13.2% $10 15.9% 4.0%
Upper 4 66.7% $43 68.3% 33.0% 4 66.7% 63.2% $43 68.3% 71.7%
Unknown 1 16.7% $10 15.9% 0.0% 1 16.7% 2.6% $10 15.9% 0.7%
Total 6 100.0% $63 100.0% 100.0% 6 100.0% 100.0% $63 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 28.8% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.3% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 20.9% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 33.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Low 10 19.6% $588 11.7% 28.8% 10 19.6% 8.2% $588 11.7% 4.8%
Moderate 10 19.6% $839 16.7% 17.3% 10 19.6% 13.6% $839 16.7% 10.6%
Middle 8 15.7% $876 17.5% 20.9% 8 15.7% 24.2% $876 17.5% 22.2%
Upper 22 43.1% $2,701 53.9% 33.0% 22 43.1% 42.3% $2,701 53.9% 51.0%
Unknown 1 2.0% $10 0.2% 0.0% 1 2.0% 11.8% $10 0.2% 11.4%
Total 51 100.0% $5,014 100.0% 100.0% 51 100.0% 100.0% $5,014 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 11 73.3% $714 61.1% 93.2% 11 73.3% 40.1% $714 61.1% 52.6%
Over $1 Million 4 26.7% $455 38.9% 3.4% 4 26.7%
Total Rev. available 15 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 96.6% 15 100.0%
Rev. Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.4% 0 0.0%
Total 15 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 100.0% 15 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 12 80.0% $529 45.3% 12 80.0% 94.0% $529 45.3% 41.2%
$100,001 - $250,000 2 13.3% $340 29.1% 2 13.3% 2.6% $340 29.1% 14.0%
$250,001 - $1 Million 1 6.7% $300 25.7% 1 6.7% 3.4% $300 25.7% 44.8%
Total 15 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 15 100.0% 100.0% $1,169 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 97.8% 1 100.0% 37.7% $55 100.0% 68.1%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 2.2% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 71.4% $55 100.0% 13.9%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 15.6% $0 0.0% 29.9%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.0% $0 0.0% 56.2%
Total 1 100.0% $55 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% $55 100.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Morehouse
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
351
Combined Demographics Report
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Income Categories
Tract Distribution
Families by Tract Income
Families < Poverty
Level as % of
Families by Tract
Families by Family Income
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
11
17.2
5,583
9.1
2,378
42.6
15,966
26.2
Moderate-income
16
25.0
14,950
24.5
3,877
25.9
10,502
17.2
Middle-income
22
34.4
24,479
40.1
2,344
9.6
11,305
18.5
Upper-income
14
21.9
16,023
26.3
769
4.8
23,262
38.1
Unknown-income
1
1.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
64
100.0
61,035
100.0
9,368
15.3
61,035
100.0
Housing
Housing Types by Tract
Units by
Owner-Occupied
Rental
Vacant
Tract
#
%
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
12,385
3,872
6.3
31.3
5,776
46.6
2,737
22.1
Moderate-income
29,487
13,018
21.1
44.1
11,589
39.3
4,880
16.5
Middle-income
42,862
26,016
42.1
60.7
11,807
27.5
5,039
11.8
Upper-income
27,032
18,838
30.5
69.7
6,377
23.6
1,817
6.7
Unknown-income
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
111,766
61,744
100.0
55.2
35,549
31.8
14,473
12.9
Total Businesses by
Businesses by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
2,586
15.8
2,218
14.8
272
31.2
96
17.4
Moderate-income
3,241
19.8
2,971
19.9
160
18.3
110
20.0
Middle-income
6,049
36.9
5,546
37.1
298
34.1
205
37.2
Upper-income
4,473
27.3
4,192
28.0
143
16.4
138
25.0
Unknown-income
24
0.1
22
0.1
0
0.0
2
0.4
Total Assessment Area
16,373
100.0
14,949
100.0
873
100.0
551
100.0
Percentage of Total Businesses:
91.3
5.3
3.4
Total Farms by
Farms by Tract & Revenue Size
Tract
Less Than or = $1 Million
Over $1 Million
Revenue Not Reported
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Low-income
8
4.2
7
3.8
1
14.3
0
0.0
Moderate-income
23
12.0
21
11.4
2
28.6
0
0.0
Middle-income
100
52.4
99
53.8
1
14.3
0
0.0
Upper-income
60
31.4
57
31.0
3
42.9
0
0.0
Unknown-income
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total Assessment Area
191
100.0
184
100.0
7
100.0
0
.0
Percentage of Total Farms:
96.3
3.7
.0
Based on 2012 D&B information according to 2010 ACS Boundaries.
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
352
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $ (000s) $ % $ %
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0% 1.9% $0 0.0% 0.9%
Moderate 11 6.9% $891 3.7% 21.1% 11 6.9% 9.6% $891 3.7% 5.4%
Middle 71 44.7% $10,720 44.5% 42.1% 71 44.7% 39.1% $10,720 44.5% 35.9%
Upper 77 48.4% $12,503 51.8% 30.5% 77 48.4% 49.4% $12,503 51.8% 57.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 159 100.0% $24,114 100.0% 100.0% 159 100.0% 100.0% $24,114 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0% 1.1% $0 0.0% 0.5%
Moderate 7 8.0% $755 3.8% 21.1% 7 8.0% 6.6% $755 3.8% 3.3%
Middle 23 26.4% $4,021 20.0% 42.1% 23 26.4% 40.2% $4,021 20.0% 35.5%
Upper 57 65.5% $15,339 76.3% 30.5% 57 65.5% 52.1% $15,339 76.3% 60.6%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 87 100.0% $20,115 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $20,115 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0% 2.4% $0 0.0% 1.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 21.1% 0 0.0% 26.1% $0 0.0% 10.1%
Middle 1 33.3% $4 6.3% 42.1% 1 33.3% 45.4% $4 6.3% 42.7%
Upper 2 66.7% $60 93.8% 30.5% 2 66.7% 26.1% $60 93.8% 46.2%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 3 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.1% $0 0.0% 11.9%
Moderate 1 50.0% $229 60.4% 0.0% 1 50.0% 36.4% $229 60.4% 21.2%
Middle 1 50.0% $150 39.6% 0.0% 1 50.0% 45.5% $150 39.6% 41.1%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 9.1% $0 0.0% 25.8%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 2 100.0% $379 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $379 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6.3% 0 0.0% 1.5% $0 0.0% 1.1%
Moderate 19 7.6% $1,875 4.2% 21.1% 19 7.6% 8.8% $1,875 4.2% 4.9%
Middle 96 38.2% $14,895 33.3% 42.1% 96 38.2% 40.0% $14,895 33.3% 36.0%
Upper 136 54.2% $27,902 62.5% 30.5% 136 54.2% 49.7% $27,902 62.5% 58.0%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 251 100.0% $44,672 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $44,672 100.0% 100.0%
Low 22 20.8% $5,912 24.8% 14.8% 22 20.8% 15.5% $5,912 24.8% 22.2%
Moderate 1 0.9% $250 1.1% 19.9% 1 0.9% 13.3% $250 1.1% 8.2%
Middle 28 26.4% $7,297 30.7% 37.1% 28 26.4% 37.0% $7,297 30.7% 39.1%
Upper 55 51.9% $10,345 43.5% 28.0% 55 51.9% 31.5% $10,345 43.5% 29.7%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2.7% $0 0.0% 0.7%
Total 106 100.0% $23,804 100.0% 100.0% 106 100.0% 100.0% $23,804 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.8% 0 0.0% 8.7% $0 0.0% 26.6%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 11.4% 0 0.0% 13.0% $0 0.0% 2.6%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 53.8% 0 0.0% 52.2% $0 0.0% 55.5%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 31.0% 0 0.0% 26.1% $0 0.0% 15.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Tr Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Originations & Purchases
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Small Farms
SM
ALL F
AR
MH
OM
E
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
I F
AM
ILY
Multi-Family Units
HM
DA
TO
TA
LS
Small Businesses
SM
ALL B
US
INE
SS
ES
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Tract
Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012 2012
BankOwner
Occupied
Units
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Geographic Distribution of HMDA, Small Business, & Small Farm Loans
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix J: 2012 Limited Scope Tables
353
Agg Agg
# % $ (000s) $ % % # % % $(000s) $ % $ %
Low 14 8.8% $1,147 4.8% 26.2% 14 8.8% 5.1% $1,147 4.8% 2.6%
Moderate 50 31.4% $5,902 24.5% 17.2% 50 31.4% 20.2% $5,902 24.5% 14.5%
Middle 32 20.1% $5,117 21.2% 18.5% 32 20.1% 23.2% $5,117 21.2% 22.0%
Upper 62 39.0% $11,820 49.0% 38.1% 62 39.0% 38.5% $11,820 49.0% 49.6%
Unknown 1 0.6% $128 0.5% 0.0% 1 0.6% 13.2% $128 0.5% 11.4%
Total 159 100.0% $24,114 100.0% 100.0% 159 100.0% 100.0% $24,114 100.0% 100.0%
Low 2 2.3% $216 1.1% 26.2% 2 2.3% 3.5% $216 1.1% 1.6%
Moderate 14 16.1% $1,379 6.9% 17.2% 14 16.1% 10.0% $1,379 6.9% 5.7%
Middle 16 18.4% $1,938 9.6% 18.5% 16 18.4% 19.2% $1,938 9.6% 14.0%
Upper 53 60.9% $16,178 80.4% 38.1% 53 60.9% 50.6% $16,178 80.4% 62.3%
Unknown 2 2.3% $404 2.0% 0.0% 2 2.3% 16.7% $404 2.0% 16.4%
Total 87 100.0% $20,115 100.0% 100.0% 87 100.0% 100.0% $20,115 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 26.2% 0 0.0% 13.6% $0 0.0% 4.4%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 17.1% $0 0.0% 10.0%
Middle 1 33.3% $4 6.3% 18.5% 1 33.3% 24.2% $4 6.3% 19.0%
Upper 2 66.7% $60 93.8% 38.1% 2 66.7% 40.2% $60 93.8% 62.3%
Unknown 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 4.9% $0 0.0% 4.2%
Total 3 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0% 3 100.0% 100.0% $64 100.0% 100.0%
Low 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 26.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Moderate 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 17.2% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Middle 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 18.5% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Upper 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 38.1% 0 0.0% 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0%
Unknown 2 100.0% $379 100.0% 0.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $379 100.0% 100.0%
Total 2 100.0% $379 100.0% 100.0% 2 100.0% 100.0% $379 100.0% 100.0%
Low 16 6.4% $1,363 3.1% 26.2% 16 6.4% 4.6% $1,363 3.1% 2.0%
Moderate 64 25.5% $7,281 16.3% 17.2% 64 25.5% 14.7% $7,281 16.3% 9.2%
Middle 49 19.5% $7,059 15.8% 18.5% 49 19.5% 21.1% $7,059 15.8% 16.9%
Upper 117 46.6% $28,058 62.8% 38.1% 117 46.6% 44.8% $28,058 62.8% 54.7%
Unknown 5 2.0% $911 2.0% 0.0% 5 2.0% 14.7% $911 2.0% 17.1%
Total 251 100.0% $44,672 100.0% 100.0% 251 100.0% 100.0% $44,672 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 43 40.6% $8,909 37.4% 91.3% 43 40.6% 35.8% $8,909 37.4% 36.4%
Over $1 Million 42 39.6% $9,419 39.6% 5.3% 42 39.6%
Total Rev. available 85 80.2% $18,328 77.0% 96.6% 85 80.2%
Rev. Not Known 21 19.8% $5,476 23.0% 3.4% 21 19.8%
Total 106 100.0% $23,804 100.0% 100.0% 106 100.0%
$100,000 or Less 41 38.7% $2,857 12.0% 41 38.7% 91.2% $2,857 12.0% 28.7%
$100,001 - $250,000 39 36.8% $7,250 30.5% 39 36.8% 4.7% $7,250 30.5% 19.6%
$250,001 - $1 Million 26 24.5% $13,697 57.5% 26 24.5% 4.1% $13,697 57.5% 51.7%
Total 106 100.0% $23,804 100.0% 106 100.0% 100.0% $23,804 100.0% 100.0%
$1 Million or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 96.3% 0 0.0% 56.5% $0 0.0% 93.3%
Over $1 Million 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 3.7% 0 0.0%
Not Known 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0%
$100,000 or Less 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 78.3% $0 0.0% 18.4%
$100,001 - $250,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 8.7% $0 0.0% 21.1%
$250,001 - $500,000 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13.0% $0 0.0% 60.5%
Total 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0% $0 0.0% 100.0%
Based on 2012 D&B information and 2010 ACS Data.
Total Farms
Sm
all
Farm R
evenue
Loan S
ize
Count Dollar Bank Bank
HO
ME
PU
RC
HA
SE
RE
FIN
AN
CE
PR
OD
UC
T T
YP
E
Borrower Income
Levels
Bank Lending & Demographic Data
ComparisonBank & Aggregate Lending Comparison
2012
Originations & Purchases
Aggregate data is unavailable for loans to businesses with revenue over $1 million or revenue unknown, and for loan size by revenue.
HO
ME
IMP
RO
VE
ME
NT
MU
LT
IFA
MIL
YH
MD
A T
OT
ALS
Sm
all
Busin
ess
Total Businesses
Revenue
Loan S
ize
2012
Bank Families
by Family
Income
Count Dollar
Assessment Area: LA Shreveport
Borrower Distribution of HMDA Loans & Small Business/Small Farm Lending
by Revenue & Loan Size
IBERIABANK August 5, 2013
Lafayette, Louisiana RSSD ID NUMBER: 808176
Appendix K: Qualified Investments and Contributions
354
# $ # $ # $ # $ $% of
Total
Baldwin 0 $0 1 $137,000 1 $137,000 3 $22,000 $159,000 0.2%
Birmingham 0 $0 8 $6,982,293 8 $6,982,293 57 $219,087 $7,201,380 7.2%
Huntsville 0 $0 4 $700,707 4 $700,707 8 $23,616 $724,323 0.7%
Mobile 0 $0 6 $670,575 6 $670,575 17 $21,651 $692,226 0.7%
Montgomery 0 $0 5 $659,368 5 $659,368 13 $29,897 $689,265 0.7%
TOTAL 0 $0 24 $9,149,943 24 $9,149,943 98 $316,251 $9,466,194 9.5%
Fayetteville 2 $202,743 3 $791,897 5 $994,640 5 $21,689 $1,016,329 1.0%
Jonesboro 2 $209,700 9 $907,504 11 $1,117,204 14 $24,249 $1,141,453 1.1%
Little Rock 3 $357,500 4 $6,086,420 7 $6,443,920 77 $250,391 $6,694,311 6.7%
NE AR NonMSA 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $13,426 $13,426 0.0%
TOTAL 7 $769,943 16 $7,785,821 23 $8,555,764 100 $309,755 $8,865,519 8.9%
Ft Myers 0 $0 13 $1,359,786 13 $1,359,786 19 $38,582 $1,398,368 1.4%
Jacksonville* 0 $0 3 $374,782 3 $374,782 2 $450 $375,232 0.4%
Keys 0 $0 1 $8,820,000 1 $8,820,000 9 $58,800 $8,878,800 8.9%
Palm Beach/Broward 0 $0 15 $2,296,131 15 $2,296,131 15 $43,225 $2,421,621 2.4%
Naples 0 $0 14 $2,217,439 14 $2,217,439 38 $125,490 $2,344,069 2.3%
Sarasota 0 $0 21 $2,943,291 21 $2,943,291 19 $41,872 $2,985,163 3.0%
Regional 4 $10,000 $10,000 0.0%
TOTAL 0 $0 67 $18,011,429 67 $18,011,429 106 $318,419 $18,413,253 18.5%
Acadiana 1 $526,826 4 $478,721 5 $1,005,547 15 $126,617 $1,132,164 1.1%
Allen 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 1 $2,500 $2,500 0.0%
Baton Rouge 0 $0 15 $2,008,297 15 $2,008,297 19 $96,116 $2,104,413 2.1%
Houma 0 $0 1 $126,526 1 $126,526 2 $800 $127,326 0.1%
Lafayette 2 $13,264,175 37 $5,366,671 39 $18,630,846 37 $263,229 $18,894,075 18.9%
Lake Charles 2 $1,463,573 18 $2,186,662 20 $3,650,235 33 $88,351 $3,738,586 3.7%
Lincoln 0 $0 2 $271,491 2 $271,491 1 $1,500 $272,991 0.3%
Monroe 0 $0 10 $1,471,865 10 $1,471,865 13 $64,996 $1,536,861 1.5%
Morehouse 0 $0 2 $181,486 2 $181,486 3 $5,908 $187,394 0.2%
New Orleans 9 $23,565,874 40 $6,038,991 49 $29,604,865 73 664,813$ $30,269,678 30.3%
Shreveport 1 $299,948 7 $877,119 8 $1,177,067 35 $97,736 $1,274,803 1.3%
Regional 2 $4,000 $4,000 0.0%
TOTAL 15 $39,120,396 136 $19,007,829 151 $58,128,225 234 $1,416,566 $59,544,791 59.7%
Memphis 0 $0 9 $1,109,675 9 $1,109,675 10 $31,500 $1,141,175 1.1%
TOTAL 0 $0 9 $1,109,675 9 $1,109,675 10 $31,500 $1,141,175 1.1%
Houston 0 $0 8 $2,235,255 8 $2,235,255 16 $121,579 $2,356,834 2.4%
TOTAL 0 $0 8 $2,235,255 8 $2,235,255 16 $121,579 $2,356,834 2.4%
TOTAL
INSTITUTION22 $39,890,339 260 $57,299,952 282 $97,190,291 564 $2,597,475 $99,787,766 100.0%
**Full scope assessment areas noted in bold
TEXAS
Qualified Investments and Contributions by State
* Exited market during the review period.
TOTAL INSTITUTION
Total Investments +
ContributionsAssessment Area
ALABAMA
ARKANSAS
FLORIDA
LOUISIANA
TENNESSEEE
Prior Period
Investments
Current Period
Investments
Total
InvestmentsContributions