10-Q · April 29, 2026
Old National Bancorp (ONB) reported Q1 2026 revenue of $694.9 million, falling short of the estimated $705.8 million. However, the bank delivered adjusted EPS of $0.61, slightly above the consensus estimate of $0.60.…
Earnings analysis · 10-Q
ONB earnings analysis
Filed July 29, 2026 · Our reading of the company's report
The latest report
Old National delivered a strong Q2: total revenue reached $732.6 million and diluted EPS was $0.65, up from $0.59 sequentially and $0.34 a year earlier. Results reflected commercial-led loan growth, higher fee income,…
Read full summary
Old National delivered a strong Q2: total revenue reached $732.6 million and diluted EPS was $0.65, up from $0.59 sequentially and $0.34 a year earlier. Results reflected commercial-led loan growth, higher fee income, better efficiency, and substantially improved year-over-year provision comparisons following the prior-year Bremer acquisition allowance build. The principal watch items are a 1-basis-point sequential NIM decline to 3.54%, increased wholesale borrowing, and somewhat higher charge-offs, although reported nonaccrual and under-performing asset ratios improved.
Gross and operating margin
How much of each revenue dollar the business keeps.
One point per quarterly or annual filing. Both margins are shares of that report's revenue.
How we read each report
Our analysis across the last few reports.
Our model's reading of each filing, not the share price or the market's reaction. Annual and quarterly reports each occupy one position.
Reported figures
- Earnings per share
- $0.65
What stood out
-
Revenue and EPS accelerated
Q2 total revenue was $732.6 million (net interest income of $579.0 million plus noninterest income of $153.6 million), up 5.4% sequentially from $694.9 million and 13.2% from $647.3 million a year earlier. Diluted EPS rose to $0.65 from $0.59 in Q1 and $0.34 in Q2 2025.
-
Core net interest income grew
Net interest income increased $6.4 million sequentially to $579.0 million and rose 12.5% year over year from $514.8 million. Management attributed the increase to high-quality loan growth and stable core-deposit pricing; tax-equivalent NIM was 3.54%, versus 3.53% a year ago.
-
Commercial lending drove balance growth
Period-end loans grew $1.0 billion sequentially to $50.8 billion, driven by commercial production, while deposits increased $474.3 million sequentially to $56.1 billion. Since year-end, commercial loans rose $1.129 billion, commercial real estate loans increased $485.2 million, and total loans grew $2.008 billion.
-
Fee income broadened
Noninterest income increased 25.5% sequentially to $153.6 million, including a $13.2 million Bremer pension-settlement gain. Excluding that gain, fee and other income was $140.4 million; capital-markets income rose 73.3% year over year to $12.3 million.
-
Asset-quality ratios improved
Credit quality improved: nonaccrual loans declined to $461.7 million from $521.2 million at year-end, and under-performing assets fell to $471.9 million from $530.2 million. Nonperforming loans-to-total loans improved to 0.91% from 1.07%.
-
Capital supports buybacks
Capital remained sound, with CET1 at 11.09% versus 11.08% at year-end and total capital at 13.65% versus 12.85%. The company repurchased 8.3 million shares for $201.6 million in the first half and retained $276.6 million of repurchase authorization.
-
Cash-flow metrics not disclosed
Operating cash flow, capital expenditures, and free cash flow are not presented in the supplied filing extract; free cash flow is not a standard reported performance metric for this bank. Accordingly, free cash flow is reported as null.
What to watch
-
Wholesale funding reliance increased
Funding mix shifted toward wholesale sources: total wholesale borrowings increased $972.6 million, or 13.1%, from year-end to $8.424 billion, while noninterest-bearing demand deposits declined $582.2 million, or 4.4%, to $12.665 billion. Wholesale funding rose to 13% of total funding from 12%.
-
Charge-offs and provision sensitivity
Net charge-offs increased to $32.2 million in Q2 from $26.5 million a year earlier, and the annualized net-charge-off ratio rose to 0.26% from 0.24%. Management says future loan growth, lower recoveries, higher charge-offs, or CECL macroeconomic-assumption changes could increase provision expense; Q2 provision was $36.2 million.
-
Rate sensitivity and securities losses
Interest-rate exposure remains material: the available-for-sale securities portfolio had $666.5 million of net unrealized losses at June 30, 2026, up from $570.4 million at year-end, while its effective duration increased to 4.08 from 3.80. A modeled immediate 300-basis-point rate decline would reduce two-year cumulative net interest income by $383.2 million, or 8.04%, versus the base case.
-
No risk-factor updates disclosed
Item 1A states there were no material changes to the risk factors disclosed in the 2025 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Therefore, the filing contains no newly added or materially amended risk-factor disclosure.
Management's outlook
The 10-Q provides no quantitative revenue or EPS outlook. Management states that it believes it can generate and obtain adequate liquidity for short- and long-term requirements; available liquid funds and borrowing capacity totaled $20.864 billion at June 30, 2026.
Earlier filings 4
10-K · February 19, 2026
Old National completed two strategic acquisitions (CapStar on April 1, 2024 and Bremer on May 1, 2025) that materially increased scale; consolidated assets totaled $72.2 billion at December 31, 2025. 2025 results show…
10-Q · July 30, 2025
Old National’s 10-Q (Q2 2025) shows a sharp increase in revenue driven by higher net interest income and noninterest income following the May 1 Bremer acquisition, while operating profitability was compressed by higher…
10-Q · April 30, 2025
Old National reported total revenue of $481,437,000 for the quarter (net interest income $387,643,000 + noninterest income $93,794,000), up $47,457,000 (10.9%) versus the prior-year quarter. Diluted EPS was $0.44 (basic…
This is our reading of a public filing, not the filing itself. Analysis can contain errors; check the source document for full context.