Blog

  • MIL-OSI Russia: CPPCC National Committee Holds Symposium to Review Macroeconomic Situation in First Half of 2025

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, July 18 (Xinhua) — The National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) on Friday held a symposium to review the macroeconomic situation in the first half of 2025.

    Wang Huning, member of the Standing Committee of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee and Chairman of the National Committee of the CPPCC, attended the symposium and delivered a speech.

    According to Wang Huning, since the beginning of the year, despite the complicated international situation and growing uncertainty, the country has maintained stable economic growth.

    He stressed the need to focus on issues such as the goals and objectives of socio-economic development for the 15th Five-Year Plan period (2026-2030), the development of new-quality productive forces taking into account local conditions, expanding domestic demand and steadily promoting the achievement of common prosperity.

    Wang Huning called for active discussion and suggestions to promote the effective implementation of relevant measures.

    At the symposium, 13 members of the CPPCC National Committee delivered reports on a range of topics, including stabilizing and activating the capital market, promoting scientific and technological innovation in non-state enterprises, and developing artificial intelligence.

    CPPCC National Committee Vice Chairman Wang Yong presided over the symposium. -0-

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China Achieves FDI Actual Utilization Target for 2021-2025 Ahead of Schedule

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, July 18 (Xinhua) — China has achieved the target for the actual utilization of foreign direct investment (FDI) for the 14th Five-Year Plan period (2021-2025) ahead of schedule, Vice Minister of Commerce and Deputy China’s International Trade Representative Lin Ji said Friday.

    He said at a press conference that from 2021 to the end of June 2025, China’s actual FDI utilization reached US$708.73 billion, achieving the target of US$700 billion six months ahead of schedule.

    During this period, about 229 thousand new enterprises with foreign capital were created, which is approximately 25 thousand more than during the 13th five-year plan (2016-2020), he noted.

    Foreign-invested enterprises accounted for one-third of China’s foreign trade turnover and one-quarter of its industrial added value, and over the same period, these investments created more than 30 million jobs, Lin Ji added.

    According to him, the country has seen a noticeable improvement in the quality of foreign investment use. In 2024, high-tech industries accounted for 34.6 percent of attracted foreign investment, which is 6 percentage points more than in 2020.

    To create a favorable environment for foreign businesses, the Ministry of Commerce has held more than 30 roundtable meetings since 2023, helping to resolve more than 1,500 issues related to foreign-invested enterprises, according to Lin Ji. -0-

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI: Beamr Reports Entering PoCs in Video Data Compression Solution for Autonomous Vehicle

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Herzliya, Israel, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Beamr Imaging Ltd. (NASDAQ: BMR), a leader in video optimization technology and solutions, today announced a further update on its progress of validating Beamr content-adaptive, GPU-accelerated technology to the autonomous vehicles market following the initial successful launch of the Beamr solution for autonomous vehicles.

    Over the past few months, Beamr engaged in multiple Proof of Concepts (PoCs) with autonomous vehicles system developers. Some of these PoCs were successful in further validating Beamr’s contribution to the autonomous vehicles (AV) industry.

    The Beamr solution for autonomous vehicles demonstrates that it is not just keeping the visual quality of the video being perceptually identical to a human viewer, but also keeps the Machine Learning (ML) results stable to the extent that using video compression with Beamr Content-Adaptive Bitrate technology (CABR) yields 20%-50% saving on video used in the training process of such autonomous vehicles’ ML model without compromising the model’s results.

    “We are encouraged by the progress that we have made so far with our AV offering, which has already been proven with successful PoCs with AV systems developers. We believe that this indicates the use of Beamr technology is indeed applicable to such fast growing markets, like the AV market.” said Sharon Carmel, founder and CEO of Beamr

    In the development of autonomous driving, video is the dominant data type. A single vehicle produces terabytes of video data daily. Training a single autonomous model may require tens to hundreds of petabytes, which is a costly challenge for autonomous vehicles and machine learning teams and which requires managing video data at scale, long-term storage and significant infrastructure investment.

    For more details visit: beamr.com/autonomous

    About Beamr

    Beamr (Nasdaq: BMR) is a world leader in content-adaptive video compression, trusted by top media companies including Netflix and Paramount. Beamr’s perceptual optimization technology (CABR) is backed by 53 patents and a winner of Emmy® Award for Technology and Engineering. The innovative technology reduces video file sizes by up to 50% while preserving quality and enabling AI-powered enhancements.

    Beamr powers efficient video workflows across high-growth markets, such as media and entertainment, user-generated content, machine learning, and autonomous vehicles. Its flexible deployment options include on-premises, private or public cloud, with convenient availability for Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) customers.

    For more details, please visit www.beamr.com or the investors’ website www.investors.beamr.com

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains “forward-looking statements” that are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements in this communication may include, among other things, statements about Beamr’s strategic and business plans, technology, relationships, objectives and expectations for its business, the impact of trends on and interest in its business, intellectual property or product and its future results, operations and financial performance and condition. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, contained in this press release are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements contained in this press release may be identified by the use of words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “seek,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “target,” “aim,” “should,” “will” “would,” or the negative of these words or other similar expressions, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. Forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s current expectations and are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Further, certain forward-looking statements are based on assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting the Company, reference is made to the Company’s reports filed from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including, but not limited to, the risks detailed in the Company’s annual report filed with the SEC on March 4, 2025 and in subsequent filings with the SEC. Forward-looking statements contained in this announcement are made as of the date hereof and the Company undertakes no duty to update such information except as required under applicable law.

    Investor Contact:

    investorrelations@beamr.com 

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: HTX Hot Listings Weekly Recap (July 7 – 14): Bitcoin Tops $120,000, New Tokens Listed on HTX Post Impressive Returns

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PANAMA CITY, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — HTX, a leading global crypto exchange, is thrilled to announce the exceptional performance of its newly listed assets, coinciding with Bitcoin‘s groundbreaking surge past $120,000. In a period of renewed market optimism and significant capital rotation, HTX’s latest listings have once again showcased substantial wealth-generating potential. This solidifies the platform’s reputation as a go-to destination for investors looking to capitalize on emerging market trends. Between July 7 and 14, new listings across the Meme, NFT, and Infrastructure sectors achieved impressive gains. These remarkable results highlight HTX’s strategic ability to identify and list high-potential assets, providing significant wealth creation opportunities for its global user base.

    Meme Coin Resurgence Led by M and MOG

    The resurgence of meme coins saw two prominent assets deliver significant returns:

    • Memecore ($M) surged an astounding 482% in just days, firmly topping the gainers’ list. Positioned as the first Layer 1 blockchain designed for the Meme 2.0 era, $M is set to become an engine driving meme culture, value creation, and community collaboration.
    • MOG Coin ($MOG), another prominent meme coin, recorded a remarkable 112% increase. This Ethereum-based asset has recently garnered significant attention and discussion across social platforms.

    The surge in meme coin assets reaffirms the market logic that “emotion is value”. As one of the first platforms to list these tokens, HTX has effectively transformed community sentiment into trading activity, delivering tangible returns for users.

    Infrastructure and Cross-Chain Narratives Regain Momentum with Strong Performances from OMNI and TANSSI

    Technologically driven assets also performed well this week.

    • Omni Network ($OMNI) jumped 260%, driven by renewed interest in inter-chain interoperability. As an Ethereum-native interoperability protocol, Omni Network enables low-latency communication across all Ethereum rollups and offers a secure, high-performance, and globally compatible architecture — positioning Ethereum as a single, unified operating system for both users and developers.
    • Tanssi Network ($TANSSI) climbed the ranks with an 82% increase. As an appchain infrastructure protocol built on Polkadot’s shared security framework, Tanssi offers the ContainerChain parachain solution, providing appchains with essential services such as block production, data availability, cross-chain messaging, and external bridging. Its ecosystem also includes management tools, ready-to-use templates, and key integrations like wallets, indexers, RPC endpoints, block explorers, and oracles.

    HTX’s early identification of the infrastructure trend empowered previously overlooked assets to gain significant momentum on the platform, showcasing the precision of its listing strategy.

    $PENGU Surges on Enterprise NFT Buzz, NFT Sector Stages Strong Comeback

    Recently, the rise of the “enterprise NFT” narrative has sparked growing interest, with both established brands and new IPs leveraging NFTs to broaden community engagement. As a result, NFT assets are experiencing a resurgence, demonstrating strong wealth potential in this new context.

    • Pudgy Penguins ($PENGU) witnessed an impressive 89% surge in a short period. This collection of 8,888 NFTs drives Web3 innovation through IP licensing and community-driven empowerment. Each holder gets exclusive access to experiences, events, IP licensing opportunities, and more. $PENGU has distinguished itself as one of the few NFT projects to achieve both substantial traffic and high trading volume.

    Popular Assets Rally as XLM and KNC Maintain Resilience

    Beyond the newly listed assets, established popular assets also saw significant movement:

    • XLM (Stellar) rose 88%, benefiting from heightened payment activity and growing stablecoin clearing needs. As an open payment network, Stellar bridges diverse financial systems, empowering anyone to create low-cost financial services for their communities. This interconnectedness enhances individual access, reduces banking costs, and boosts business revenue.
    • Kyber Network ($KNC) recorded a 65% gain, emerging as a standout in the DEX sector. The surge was driven by the release of new DeFi versions and liquidity incentive programs. Kyber Network aims to build a system that supports instant trading and seamless conversion of diverse digital assets. It offers robust payment APIs and next-generation contract wallets, enabling smooth token-to-token payments for all users.

    The rise of these assets also signals a broader market shift from pure emotional speculation to projects backed by real-world applications and strong liquidity support.

    About HTX

    Founded in 2013, HTX has evolved from a virtual asset exchange into a comprehensive ecosystem of blockchain businesses that span digital asset trading, financial derivatives, research, investments, incubation, and other businesses.

    As a world-leading gateway to Web3, HTX harbors global capabilities that enable it to provide users with safe and reliable services. Adhering to the growth strategy of “Global Expansion, Thriving Ecosystem, Wealth Effect, Security & Compliance,” HTX is dedicated to providing quality services and values to virtual asset enthusiasts worldwide.

    To learn more about HTX, please visit https://www.htx.com/ or HTX Square , and follow HTX on X, Telegram, and Discord. For further inquiries, please contact glo-media@htx-inc.com.

    Disclaimer: This content is provided by HTX. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.

    Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/c6481a60-ca4c-4575-bc42-01f937e875f0

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/fd08fc54-78cc-46f3-9443-feb8da0c8548

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Indigo Acquisition Corp. Announces Separate Trading of its Ordinary Shares and Rights

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Indigo Acquisition Corp. (NASDAQ: INACU) (the “Company”) announced today that, commencing on or about July 30, 2025, holders of its units sold in the Company’s initial public offering may elect to separately trade the Company’s ordinary shares and rights included in the units. The ordinary shares and rights that are separated will trade on the Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”) under the symbols “INAC” and “INACR,” respectively. No fractional rights will be issued upon separation of the units and only whole rights will trade. Those units not separated will continue to trade on Nasdaq under the symbol “INACU.” Holders of units will need to have their brokers contact Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, the Company’s transfer agent, in order to separate the units into ordinary shares and rights.

    The Company is a Cayman exempt company, formed as a blank check company for the purpose of entering into a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, recapitalization, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses or entities. The Company intends to focus on opportunities with established, profitable companies with attractive market positions and/or growth potential that can leverage our management team’s experience and expertise. The Company is led by its Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, James S. Cassel, and its Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Scott Salpeter.

    FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS 

    This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements.” Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of the Company’s final prospectus relating to the Company’s initial public offering filed with the SEC on July 1, 2025. Copies are available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. The Company undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this release, except as required by law.

    Contact:

    James S. Cassel, CEO
    jcassel@cs-ib.com
    305-438-7700

    Scott Salpeter, CFO
    ssalpeter@cs-ib.com
    305-438-7700

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Auction result of Treasury Bonds – RIKB 27 0415 – RIKS 29 0917

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Series  RIKB 27 0415 RIKS 29 0917
    Settlement Date  07/23/2025 07/23/2025
    Total Amount Allocated (MM)  5,398 3,465
    All Bids Awarded At (Price / Yield)  100.420 / 7.690 99.840 / 3.540
    Total Number of Bids Received  34 38
    Total Amount of All Bids Received (MM)  10,781 8,391
    Total Number of Successful Bids  15 9
    Number of Bids Allocated in Full  15 9
    Lowest Price / Highest Yield Allocated  100.420 / 7.690 99.840 / 3.540
    Highest Price / Lowest Yield Allocated  100.442 / 7.680 99.900 / 3.524
    Lowest Price / Highest Yield Allocated in Full  100.420 / 7.690 99.840 / 3.540
    Weighted Average of Successful Bids (Price/Yield)  100.433 / 7.690 99.864 / 3.534
    Best Bid (Price / Yield)  100.442 / 7.680 99.900 / 3.524
    Worst Bid (Price / Yield)  100.250 / 7.800 99.605 / 3.602
    Weighted Average of All Bids Received (Price / Yield)  100.403 / 7.700 99.795 / 3.552
    Percentage Partial Allocation (Approximate)  100.00 % 100.00 %
    Bid to Cover Ratio  2.00 2.42

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Celebrating Partnership: Switzerland and The International Trade Centre (ITC) Reaffirm Commitment to Africa’s Trade Future

    Source: APO – Report:

    .

    The International Trade Centre (ITC) celebrated its first Partnership for Africa Day, bringing together more than 200 high-level participants from institutions, Member States, business support organizations, donors, and small businesses. The event also marked a new milestone in ITC’s collaboration with the Swiss-African Business Circle (SABC). This landmark occasion showcased how strategic, inclusive partnerships can drive trade, innovation, and prosperity for African small businesses.

    Held as a high-level welcome reception on the eve of Swiss Africa Business Day (SABD) 2025, the event was co-organized by ITC and SABC. It offered a unique platform for Swiss and African leaders from both the public and private sectors to deepen dialogue and shape forward-looking trade collaborations.

    “By joining forces with ITC to organise a welcome reception as the official start to SABD2025, we further strengthened dialogue on Swiss-African trade. The event brought together actors from international Geneva, business support organisations, and public and private sector representatives from Africa, Switzerland, and beyond,” said Helena Bischoff, Deputy Managing Director, SABC.

    A central highlight of the gathering was the signing of a memorandum of understanding between H.E. Helene Budliger Artieda, State Secretary of the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), and Prof. Benedict Oramah, President of Afreximbank. This formalized Switzerland’s renewed commitment to advancing regional integration and SME development in Africa.

    Beyond official engagements, the reception celebrated the richness of Africa’s creative economy. From a “Taste of Africa” culinary experience curated by Geneva-based African restaurants to a fashion showcase featuring designs from the Pan African Fashion Alliance (PAFA) and Swiss NGO Afrodysée, the event underscored the growing importance of diaspora engagement and cultural industries in trade development.

    “The State Secretariat for Economic Affairs collaborates with ITC, a long-standing partner, to strengthen the competitiveness of African SMEs by promoting intra-African trade and fostering linkages between Africa and Switzerland,” noted SECO representatives.

    As host country and development partner, Switzerland continues to play a pivotal role in ITC’s mission to empower African small businesses. Through its One Trade Africa initiative, ITC supports the implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and promotes triangular cooperation between Switzerland, African institutions, and global partners.

    This inaugural Partnership for Africa Day was not only a celebration but also a springboard toward a more connected, resilient, and opportunity-rich trade future for Africa. Together with Switzerland and partners such as SABC and Afreximbank, ITC is committed to turning dialogue into action—and partnerships into impact.

    – on behalf of International Trade Centre.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Mira Manini Tiwari, Research Associate at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

    If you choose to buy a sustainable product at the supermarket, or invest in a sustainable portfolio at your bank, how far does that sustainability reach? Does the product’s “sustainable” label account for the environmental and labour costs where the raw materials were extracted? Does the portfolio include renewable energy in countries where the investment is needed most?

    In the EU, whether you are an individual or represent a company or financial institution, these questions are governed by the bloc’s non-financial reporting (NFR) regulations. The latest ones include the European Sustainable Reporting Standards (ESRS), which are gradually coming into force through 2029. The ESRS set out reporting standards and requirements, while the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) determines which companies these standards apply to, to what extent, and when.

    These EU regulations also have strong implications for the Majority World, the countries and territories outside Europe and North America where most people live, at a time when global, systemic policy effects are more important than ever. As supply chains become longer and more interconnected, and as communities involved in them confront the fragilities of economic, political and climate shifts, the regulations that govern the sustainability of these chains and that enable or prohibit participation in them must be crafted and implemented to minimise harm to the most vulnerable.

    In an article in Environment and Development Economics, my co-authors and I developed a set of proposals to improve the global sustainability of the NFR regulations. These call for collaborative development of regulations across the value chain, better data accessibility, measuring of and accounting for cross-border environmental damage, and greater integrity and engagement from financial actors.



    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!


    Cooperation, not compliance

    As the ESRS come into force, reporting requirements are being applied to companies’ full value chains. This means that Majority World actors, such as those that extract raw materials for European products, may be indirectly subjected to the NFR regulations. This is important, as it holds companies and consumers, EU and non, accountable for the ethics of the goods and services they rely on. However, when regulations are built without directly involving those they will affect, they risk causing collateral, longer-term damage. For example, reporting requirements that feel inaccessible to smaller organisations can foster distrust and backlash, or cause companies to withdraw from contexts where data are less accessible, taking away key sources of income for communities.

    While global climate negotiations have come under public scrutiny for their Minority World dominance, there has been relatively less scrutiny of global organisations governing financial and corporate sustainability standards. On their boards, the Majority World is conspicuous by its absence, demonstrating the dearth of attention to its agency in enabling greater sustainability, both locally and globally. European investors and policymakers are already shifting capital from the Majority World back to the EU in response to the NFR regulations, citing the difficulty of accounting for activities along the length of value chains. The damage falls on livelihoods, industries and essential investments, such as in renewable energy, which can suddenly disappear.

    Developing NFR regulations in collaboration with all stakeholders, rather than only at the top, can provide a regulatory landscape that is, from the outset, more implementable, accessible and effective in the long run.

    Democratic data and digitalisation

    Efficacy in global NFR regulations relies on global data cooperation, which could lower the administrative burden on those reporting and enable greater accountability. The increasing number of EU NFR regulations do not exist in a vacuum: they have been accompanied by shifts in global regulations and a proliferation of national regulations. With regulations expanding to cover the full value chain, actors are increasingly likely to be subjected to multiple regulatory bodies, or have to provide data to reporting entities upstream. The time, financial resources and practical challenges involved in identifying, collecting, processing and sharing data are considerable, both for those submitting data and those receiving and verifying them. This makes divestment or significant losses more likely. Furthermore, the expansion of regulations can result in isolated streams of data and closed-circuit processes, which, in turn, cut out civil society organisations and individuals who use data to help hold firms to account for their social and environmental responsibilities.

    Aside from EU calls for a European Single Access Point for corporate data, Majority World contexts offer particularly fertile ground for reimagining and building data infrastructures. Digitalisation in low- and middle-income countries is growing rapidly, and demonstrates the ability to make digital financial and business instruments democratic and accessible to those with the fewest resources. Such efforts should involve statisticians and local data experts from the outset to determine and harmonise appropriate data, along with transnational entities with the mandate of establishing links across data systems.

    Support for international emissions accounting

    Corporate reporting on environmental impacts must be accompanied by their reduction. Indeed, the work and transparency required to identify impacts in the first place, let alone mitigate them, underpins decisions to simply detach from the system, moving economic activity to local contexts where impacts are more traceable.

    Firms that cannot afford to bring their activities onshore must account for emissions that occur from assets not directly under their ownership or control, which are known as Scope 3 emissions. In some cases, these emissions constitute well over half of a firm’s total value chain emissions. However, the implementation of the ESRS has designated the reporting of Scope 3 emissions, and climate impacts in general, to be largely discretionary, under the condition that firms provide evaluations of the economic and material implications of a given activity in their value chains.

    The glaring gaps between some firms’ targets, actions and declarations are in part enabled by reporting systems that allow the omission of more distant climate risks and impacts, maintaining the misalignment between climate pledges and actions aimed at achieving them. While the number of firms showing readiness to comply with Scope 3 accounting is increasing, data on global investor preferences suggests that investors do not necessarily prioritise companies’ performance on these emissions when making investment decisions. For ethics to exist on the ground, they must be prioritised in financial flows.

    Investment with integrity

    In light of the above, financial institutions have a core responsibility to engage with NFR. These institutions’ economic leverage and centrality in the value chains and activities of several sectors give them incentivising power to catalyse a shift from the submission of reports to the building of living data systems and the achievement of fuller value chain accountability. Currently, many investors are not willing to accept reductions in their returns in exchange for the pursuit of social or environmental goals. Surveys suggest this is in part due to perceptions of low quality of environmental information, limited ability to assess the data received, and the difficulty of making investment decisions accordingly. In the current landscape of Minority World-led reporting, such mistrust is likely to be greater with respect to Majority World data, reiterating the need for data systems and reporting mechanisms built on equal footing.

    Financial institutions can operate proactively, using their privileged access to data to bridge Minority and Majority World actors engaging in sustainable practices, such as microfinance bodies, local communities and relevant investors. Doing so could plug, at least in part, an information and trust gap that can hinder Minority World firms’ investment in unfamiliar contexts.

    Regulating for whom?

    The research underpinning our article initially involved a recommendation on streamlining and supporting reporting by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which account for more than 60% of the EU’s corporate emissions. For these firms, especially, regulators face a critical balance between lowering the entry barrier of the reporting ecosystem and setting robust environmental targets. The nature, data points and timelines of reporting under the CSRD are currently under review following calls for simplification and greater support, and decision-makers are wrestling with the tension between accessibility and integrity.

    Our work also included a recommendation that turns from the supply side, the focus of the preceding proposals, to the demand side: the data and sustainability literacy of the individual who walks into the supermarket to buy that sustainable product, or wants family investments to do more good than harm. Across sectors – public policy, investment and citizen engagement – resources must be dedicated to these literacies, so that actors are better placed to hold each other to account. Regulation becomes easily abstracted, reduced to figures and PDFs, databases and scores. Beneath each regulation is a world of citizens whose homes, livelihoods and health depend on them.

    The author was affiliated with the University of Siena during the period in which she and her colleagues did the original work for the scholarly article that is mentioned in this piece. The author’s affiliation came via a project that, overall, was financed by the Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). The scholarly article and the present article were not outputs for the project.

    ref. EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just – https://theconversation.com/eu-efforts-to-measure-companies-environmental-impacts-have-global-effects-heres-how-to-make-them-more-just-261226

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Mira Manini Tiwari, Research Associate at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

    If you choose to buy a sustainable product at the supermarket, or invest in a sustainable portfolio at your bank, how far does that sustainability reach? Does the product’s “sustainable” label account for the environmental and labour costs where the raw materials were extracted? Does the portfolio include renewable energy in countries where the investment is needed most?

    In the EU, whether you are an individual or represent a company or financial institution, these questions are governed by the bloc’s non-financial reporting (NFR) regulations. The latest ones include the European Sustainable Reporting Standards (ESRS), which are gradually coming into force through 2029. The ESRS set out reporting standards and requirements, while the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) determines which companies these standards apply to, to what extent, and when.

    These EU regulations also have strong implications for the Majority World, the countries and territories outside Europe and North America where most people live, at a time when global, systemic policy effects are more important than ever. As supply chains become longer and more interconnected, and as communities involved in them confront the fragilities of economic, political and climate shifts, the regulations that govern the sustainability of these chains and that enable or prohibit participation in them must be crafted and implemented to minimise harm to the most vulnerable.

    In an article in Environment and Development Economics, my co-authors and I developed a set of proposals to improve the global sustainability of the NFR regulations. These call for collaborative development of regulations across the value chain, better data accessibility, measuring of and accounting for cross-border environmental damage, and greater integrity and engagement from financial actors.



    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!


    Cooperation, not compliance

    As the ESRS come into force, reporting requirements are being applied to companies’ full value chains. This means that Majority World actors, such as those that extract raw materials for European products, may be indirectly subjected to the NFR regulations. This is important, as it holds companies and consumers, EU and non, accountable for the ethics of the goods and services they rely on. However, when regulations are built without directly involving those they will affect, they risk causing collateral, longer-term damage. For example, reporting requirements that feel inaccessible to smaller organisations can foster distrust and backlash, or cause companies to withdraw from contexts where data are less accessible, taking away key sources of income for communities.

    While global climate negotiations have come under public scrutiny for their Minority World dominance, there has been relatively less scrutiny of global organisations governing financial and corporate sustainability standards. On their boards, the Majority World is conspicuous by its absence, demonstrating the dearth of attention to its agency in enabling greater sustainability, both locally and globally. European investors and policymakers are already shifting capital from the Majority World back to the EU in response to the NFR regulations, citing the difficulty of accounting for activities along the length of value chains. The damage falls on livelihoods, industries and essential investments, such as in renewable energy, which can suddenly disappear.

    Developing NFR regulations in collaboration with all stakeholders, rather than only at the top, can provide a regulatory landscape that is, from the outset, more implementable, accessible and effective in the long run.

    Democratic data and digitalisation

    Efficacy in global NFR regulations relies on global data cooperation, which could lower the administrative burden on those reporting and enable greater accountability. The increasing number of EU NFR regulations do not exist in a vacuum: they have been accompanied by shifts in global regulations and a proliferation of national regulations. With regulations expanding to cover the full value chain, actors are increasingly likely to be subjected to multiple regulatory bodies, or have to provide data to reporting entities upstream. The time, financial resources and practical challenges involved in identifying, collecting, processing and sharing data are considerable, both for those submitting data and those receiving and verifying them. This makes divestment or significant losses more likely. Furthermore, the expansion of regulations can result in isolated streams of data and closed-circuit processes, which, in turn, cut out civil society organisations and individuals who use data to help hold firms to account for their social and environmental responsibilities.

    Aside from EU calls for a European Single Access Point for corporate data, Majority World contexts offer particularly fertile ground for reimagining and building data infrastructures. Digitalisation in low- and middle-income countries is growing rapidly, and demonstrates the ability to make digital financial and business instruments democratic and accessible to those with the fewest resources. Such efforts should involve statisticians and local data experts from the outset to determine and harmonise appropriate data, along with transnational entities with the mandate of establishing links across data systems.

    Support for international emissions accounting

    Corporate reporting on environmental impacts must be accompanied by their reduction. Indeed, the work and transparency required to identify impacts in the first place, let alone mitigate them, underpins decisions to simply detach from the system, moving economic activity to local contexts where impacts are more traceable.

    Firms that cannot afford to bring their activities onshore must account for emissions that occur from assets not directly under their ownership or control, which are known as Scope 3 emissions. In some cases, these emissions constitute well over half of a firm’s total value chain emissions. However, the implementation of the ESRS has designated the reporting of Scope 3 emissions, and climate impacts in general, to be largely discretionary, under the condition that firms provide evaluations of the economic and material implications of a given activity in their value chains.

    The glaring gaps between some firms’ targets, actions and declarations are in part enabled by reporting systems that allow the omission of more distant climate risks and impacts, maintaining the misalignment between climate pledges and actions aimed at achieving them. While the number of firms showing readiness to comply with Scope 3 accounting is increasing, data on global investor preferences suggests that investors do not necessarily prioritise companies’ performance on these emissions when making investment decisions. For ethics to exist on the ground, they must be prioritised in financial flows.

    Investment with integrity

    In light of the above, financial institutions have a core responsibility to engage with NFR. These institutions’ economic leverage and centrality in the value chains and activities of several sectors give them incentivising power to catalyse a shift from the submission of reports to the building of living data systems and the achievement of fuller value chain accountability. Currently, many investors are not willing to accept reductions in their returns in exchange for the pursuit of social or environmental goals. Surveys suggest this is in part due to perceptions of low quality of environmental information, limited ability to assess the data received, and the difficulty of making investment decisions accordingly. In the current landscape of Minority World-led reporting, such mistrust is likely to be greater with respect to Majority World data, reiterating the need for data systems and reporting mechanisms built on equal footing.

    Financial institutions can operate proactively, using their privileged access to data to bridge Minority and Majority World actors engaging in sustainable practices, such as microfinance bodies, local communities and relevant investors. Doing so could plug, at least in part, an information and trust gap that can hinder Minority World firms’ investment in unfamiliar contexts.

    Regulating for whom?

    The research underpinning our article initially involved a recommendation on streamlining and supporting reporting by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which account for more than 60% of the EU’s corporate emissions. For these firms, especially, regulators face a critical balance between lowering the entry barrier of the reporting ecosystem and setting robust environmental targets. The nature, data points and timelines of reporting under the CSRD are currently under review following calls for simplification and greater support, and decision-makers are wrestling with the tension between accessibility and integrity.

    Our work also included a recommendation that turns from the supply side, the focus of the preceding proposals, to the demand side: the data and sustainability literacy of the individual who walks into the supermarket to buy that sustainable product, or wants family investments to do more good than harm. Across sectors – public policy, investment and citizen engagement – resources must be dedicated to these literacies, so that actors are better placed to hold each other to account. Regulation becomes easily abstracted, reduced to figures and PDFs, databases and scores. Beneath each regulation is a world of citizens whose homes, livelihoods and health depend on them.

    The author was affiliated with the University of Siena during the period in which she and her colleagues did the original work for the scholarly article that is mentioned in this piece. The author’s affiliation came via a project that, overall, was financed by the Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). The scholarly article and the present article were not outputs for the project.

    ref. EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just – https://theconversation.com/eu-efforts-to-measure-companies-environmental-impacts-have-global-effects-heres-how-to-make-them-more-just-261226

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Immigrants in Europe and North America earn 18% less than natives – here’s why

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Are Skeie Hermansen, Professor of Sociology, University of Oslo

    F Armstrong Photography/Shutterstock

    As many countries grapple with ageing populations, falling birthrates, labour shortages and fiscal pressures, the ability to successfully integrate immigrants is becoming an increasingly pressing matter.

    However, our new study found that salaries of immigrants in Europe and North America are nearly 18% lower than those of natives, as foreign-born workers struggle to access higher-paying jobs. To reach this conclusion, we analysed the salaries of 13.5 million people in nine immigrant-receiving countries: Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United States. Data was taken from the period of 2016 to 2019.

    Immigrants in these countries earned less primarily because they were unable to access higher-paying jobs. Three-quarters of the migrant pay gap was the result of a lack of access to well-paid jobs, while only one-quarter of the gap was attributed to pay differences between migrant and native-born workers in the same job.

    Spain has the largest gap, while Sweden’s is the smallest.
    Author’s own elaboration

    The high-income countries we examined in Europe and North America all face similar demographic challenges, with low fertility rates resulting in an ageing population and labour shortages. Pro-natalist policies are unlikely to change this demographic destiny, but sound immigration policies can help.

    Across these countries with vastly different labour market institutions and immigrant populations, a common theme emerged: countries are not making good use of immigrants’ human capital.

    Stark regional differences

    We found that immigrants earn 17.9% less than natives on average, although the pay gap varied widely by country. In Spain, a relatively recent large-scale receiver of immigrants, the pay gap was over 29%. In Sweden – a country where many employed immigrants find work in the public sector – it was just 7%. These results don’t include immigrants who are unemployed or in the informal economy.

    Where immigrants were born also mattered. The highest average overall pay gaps were for immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa (26.1%) and the Middle East and North Africa (23.7%). For immigrants from Europe, North America and other Western countries, the difference in average pay compared to natives was a much more modest 9%.

    Migrant pay gaps according to region of origin. The minus sign (−) before figures indicates that immigrants earn less than natives. Note that data for second-generation immigrants is unavailable in France, Spain and the US.
    Author’s own elaboration

    Our results suggest that the children of immigrants faced substantially better earning prospects than their parents. For the countries where second-generation data was available – Canada, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden – the gap narrowed over time, and the children of immigrants had a substantially smaller earnings gap, earning an average of 5.7% less than workers with native-born parents.

    The struggle to access higher-paying jobs

    Beyond quantifying the gap, we wanted to understand the roots of pay disparities. To create better policies, it is important to know whether immigrants are paid less than natives when they’re doing the same job in the same company, or whether these differences arise because immigrants typically work in lower-paying jobs.

    By a wide margin, we found that immigrants end up working in lower-paying industries, occupations and companies; three-quarters of the gap was due to this type of labour-market sorting. The pay gap for the same work in the same company was just 4.6% on average across the nine countries.

    These differences represent a failure of immigration policy to incorporate immigrants, as immigrants are relegated to jobs where they cannot contribute to their full potential. Our analyses rule out that the lack of access to higher-paying jobs simply reflects a difference in skill between immigrants and native-born workers. We also found that the size of the pay gap and the key role of unequal access to well-paid jobs is similar for immigrants with and without a university education.

    This means that the immigrant-native pay gap in large part represents a market inefficiency and policy failure, with significant social consequences for both immigrants and immigrant-receiving countries.




    Leer más:
    What Britons and Europeans really think about immigration – new analysis


    Policy implications

    Although equal pay for equal work policies may seem like a viable solution, they won’t close the immigrant pay gap. This is because they only help those who have already secured work, but immigrants face barriers to employment that begin long before even applying for a job. This includes convoluted processes to validate university degrees or other qualifications, and exclusion from professional networks.

    The policy focus should therefore be on improving access to better jobs.

    To make this happen, governments should invest in programmes such as language training, education and vocational skills for immigrants. They should ensure immigrants have early access to employment information, networks, job-search assistance and employer referrals. They should implement standardised and transparent recognition of foreign degrees and credentials, helping immigrants to access jobs matching their skills and training.

    This is particularly important for Europe as it races to attract – and retain – skilled immigrants who may be having second thoughts about the US in the Trump era. In the European Union, around 40% of university-educated non-EU immigrants are employed in jobs that do not require a degree, an underutilisation of skills known as brain waste.

    Some countries are already taking steps to remedy this. Germany’s Skilled Immigration Act – which took effect in 2024 – allows foreign graduates to work while their degrees are being formally recognised. In 2025, France reformed its Passeport Talent permit to attract skilled professionals and address labour shortages, especially in healthcare.

    These kinds of policies help ensure that foreign-born workers can contribute at their full capacity, and that countries can reap the full benefits of immigration in terms of productivity gains, higher tax revenue and reduced inequality.

    If immigrants can’t get access to good jobs, their skills are underutilised and society loses out. Smart immigration policy doesn’t end at the border – it starts there.

    Are Skeie Hermansen has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s
    Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 851149), the Research Council of Norway (grant 287016), and the Center for Advanced Study at The Norwegian Academy of Science
    and Letters (Young CAS grant 2019/2020).

    Marta M. Elvira receives funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, grant PID2020-
    118807RB-I00/AEI /10.13039/501100011033

    Andrew Penner no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

    ref. Immigrants in Europe and North America earn 18% less than natives – here’s why – https://theconversation.com/immigrants-in-europe-and-north-america-earn-18-less-than-natives-heres-why-261188

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Chimamanda’s Lagos homecoming wasn’t just a book launch, it was a cultural moment

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tinashe Mushakavanhu, Assistant Professor, Harvard University

    When the announcement of Chimamanda Adichie Ngozi’s latest novel Dream Count was made, it was regarded as a major event in African literature. The internationally celebrated Nigerian writer had not published a novel in the past 12 years, and her long-awaited return stirred both anticipation and speculation. In the post-COVID context in which the book comes, so much has changed in the world.

    The first leg of her three city homecoming book tour coincided with my stay in Lagos as a curatorial fellow at Guest Artist Space Foundation, dedicated to facilitating cultural exchange and supporting creative practices. After Lagos, Chimamanda took the tour to Nigeria’s capital city Abuja and finally Enugu, where she was born and grew up.




    Read more:
    Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s new book Dream Count explores love in all its complicated messiness


    As a scholar of African literature, I arrived here in search of literary Lagos. But my attachment to the city may also just be romantic, a nostalgia born out of years of reading about it in fiction. No doubt, Lagos is a city of imagination and creativity.

    Chimamanda’s book event was a reminder that literary celebrity, when it happens in Africa, can exist on its own terms. It’s rooted in a popular imaginary that embraces both the writer and the spectacle.

    Lagos superstar

    The launch in Lagos took place at a conference centre on the evening of Friday 27 June. The MUSON is a multipurpose civic auditorium located in the centre of Lagos Island which can accommodate up to 1,000 guests. And on this night, the auditorium was packed.

    When I arrive, the scene outside is buzzing. A crowd gathers in front of a large canvas banner bearing a radiant image of the author. It’s more than just decoration; it’s a backdrop. It is an occasion for the selfie, a digital marker that you were there. There is even a hashtag for this: #dreamcountlagos. People take turns posing in front of it, curating their presence in the frame of Chimamanda’s aura.

    The atmosphere is festive, electric. And yet beneath the surface shimmer is something more urgent: a hunger for story, for presence, for return. Perhaps that explains why people come not just to witness, but to be counted.

    Inside the lobby, piles of Chimamanda’s books are neatly arranged on long tables. People are not just buying a copy. They are buying several in the hope that the author will autograph them. The sight is striking, almost surreal. In many parts of the continent, a book launch is often a quiet affair. Writers are lucky to sell a handful of copies. But this is something else entirely. This is not just a book launch, it is a cultural moment.

    It would have been easy to mistake the event for a political townhall. There was a VIP section reserved for the who’s who of Lagos, but those class distinctions easily dissolved into the collective energy of the room. The auditorium was filled with genuine enthusiasm.

    Even after a delay of more than an hour, when Chimamanda finally walked in, she was met with rapturous applause. She wore a bright yellow dress, an Instagrammable outfit, suited for the many fans who rushed forward to take selfies with her. Chimamanda, no doubt, is as much a fashion icon as she is a literary figure.

    On stage, she was joined by media personality Ebuka Obi-Uchendu, widely known as the host of the reality TV show Big Brother Africa. But here, he was also something more intimate: the author’s friend. Chimamanda even credited him with being a “great reader”. This is a rare compliment in a literary world that often separates celebrity from critical engagement.

    Their conversation was relaxed and full of laughter, offering the audience both intimacy and insight. Chimamanda addressed the question that had lingered for years: her decade-long silence. She spoke candidly of writer’s block, of the grief that came with losing both her parents in quick succession, and how that loss eventually reignited her desire to write.

    Dream Count, she explained, is shaped by that rupture. It is one of the major post-COVID novels from Africa, and centres on the lives of four women. It is a book about love, friendship and independence.

    Africans do read

    When she spoke about her characters on stage, it was as though she was talking about relatives that the audience recognised. They responded by shouting out the characters’ names, to the delight of the author.

    When I asked people about the launch afterwards, many said that it was a very Nigerian event – big, colourful, exuberant, festive. It was indeed a celebration that felt communal, even joyous. It was also a public demonstration of how literature can still command space and attention, not just in private reading rooms or crammed bookstores, but on a civic scale.




    Read more:
    Lagos fashion: how designers make global trends uniquely Nigerian


    This was a remarkable event because it defied the tired cliché that Africans do not read. People, mostly young, came out in their hundreds. They bought books, they took selfies with their “favourite” author, they screamed the names of fictional characters as though greeting friends.

    But more significant was Chimamanda’s choice to work with a local publisher, Narrative Landscape Press, which produced the Nigerian edition of Dream Count that is now available and accessible locally, at the same time as its release in Europe and North America. That alone is a radical act.

    In returning to Nigeria to launch her book, Chimamanda also disrupts the assumption that African literary prestige must only be validated abroad. Even though she belongs to a cohort of African writers shaped by the diaspora, she actively insists on presence – on homecoming – not as simply nostalgia, but as active engagement.

    Of course, Chimamanda is an exception. Her stature as a global literary figure, combined with her deep connection to home, allows her to move between worlds with remarkable ease. Few writers command the kind of multigenerational, cross-class attention she does. I found myself wishing though that more book launches could carry this same sense of occasion, of meaning, of return. That they could gather people in such numbers, not just to celebrate the writer, but to affirm the African book as something still worth gathering for.

    And perhaps that is what made this book launch unforgettable: not just the celebrity or the spectacle, but the sense that literature still matters here, and that it belongs to the people.

    Tinashe Mushakavanhu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Chimamanda’s Lagos homecoming wasn’t just a book launch, it was a cultural moment – https://theconversation.com/chimamandas-lagos-homecoming-wasnt-just-a-book-launch-it-was-a-cultural-moment-261112

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Connie Francis was the voice of a generation and the soundtrack of post-war America

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Leigh Carriage, Senior Lecturer in Music, Southern Cross University

    Hulton Archive/Getty Images

    Connie Francis dominated the music charts in the late 1950s and early 1960s with hits like Stupid Cupid, Pretty Little Baby and Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You.

    The pop star, author and actor has died at 87, and will be remembered for recording the soundtrack songs of post-World War II America.

    Francis photographed around 1963.
    Silver Screen Collection/Getty Images

    An early life of music

    Francis was born Concetta Rosa Maria Franconero in Newark, New Jersey, to Italian immigrant parents. At a very early age, Francis was encouraged to take accordion and singing lessons, compete in talent shows, and later she would perform occasionally on the children’s production Star Time Kids on NBC, remaining there until she was 17.

    Within these early recordings you can hear her style begin to develop: her tone, great pitching, her versatility in vocal range. Her vocal delivery is technically controlled and stylistically structured, often nuanced – and even at this early stage demonstrating such power coupled with an adaptability for a broad range of repertoire.

    At 17, Francis signed a contract with MGM Records.

    One of her early recordings was the song Who’s Sorry Now?, written by Ted Snyder with lyrics by Bert Kalmar and Harry Ruby in 1923. Her version was released in 1957 and struggled to get noticed.

    The following year, Francis appeared with the ballad on American Bandstand. This performance exposed Francis’ talent for interpretation and her ability to bridge the teen and adult fanbase.

    The song would become a hit.

    It’s useful to listen to the original version to gain more insight into Francis’ vocal approach and styling. The original is an instrumental song of its time, with light whimsical call and response motives in a foxtrot feel.

    But in Francis’ version, she demonstrates her ability to revitalise a late 1950s pop music aesthetic. In an emotional delivery she croons her own rendition, with the country styling elements of Patsy Cline.

    Connie Francis performing in Milan in 1961.
    Universal Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    The voice of a generation

    Following Who’s Sorry Now?, Stupid Cupid (1958), Where The Boys Are (1960, the titular song of a feature film starring Francis) and Lipstick on Your Collar (1959) became the soundtrack songs of post-war America.

    Francis was supported with songs penned by the some of the best songwriters from the Brill Building, a creative collective in Manhattan that housed professional songwriters, working with staff writers Edna Lewis and George Goehring.

    In 1960, Francis released her hit Everybody’s Somebody’s Fool written by Jack Keller and Howard Greenfield. It was a teeny-bopper classic, and she became the first women to top the Billboard Hot 100.

    Francis records in the studio with Freddy Quinn at MGM in 1963 in New York.
    PoPsie Randolph/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

    Styled after some of the other greats of the time – such as Frank Sinatra (1915–98), Dean Martin (1917–95) and Louis Prima (1910–70) – Francis’ performance on the Ed Sullivan show highlighted her connection to her Italian heritage and ability to draw from a broad repertoire.

    On the show, she performed Mama and La Paloma. Each performance is very carefully styled, a thoughtful approach to dynamics, sung in both English and Italian.

    Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You, a number one hit from 1962, features Francis’ gorgeous crooning harmonies. Then, the song breaks down into an earnest spoken part and finishes with a powerful belted vocal part of long notes.

    The song is full of confidence and hope.

    Away from the microphone

    Francis had two key roles in films, starring in Where the Boys Are (1960) and the comedy Follow the Boys (1963).

    She was an author of two books. The second, Who’s Sorry Now?, became a New York Times bestseller.

    Francis was involved with humanitarian causes. She was particularly involved with Women Against Rape, following her own violent rape in 1974, and the Valour Victims Assistance Legal Organisation, dedicated to supporting the legal rights of crime victims. A lesser known song in her repertoire, fitting to include here, is her version of Born Free from 1968.

    As a singer, Francis worked at her craft and transitioned effortlessly from one genre to another, performing for over five decades. She will be remembered as a trailblazing solo artist, leaving a strong legacy in popular music culture.

    She was the voice of one generation when she was a star. And in her final year she became the voice of a new generation as Pretty Little Baby, released in 1962, went viral on TikTok, with more than 1.4 million videos using her voice to share stories of their lives.

    Francis performs in Atlantic City, New Jersey, in 2009.
    Bobby Bank/WireImage

    Leigh Carriage does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Connie Francis was the voice of a generation and the soundtrack of post-war America – https://theconversation.com/connie-francis-was-the-voice-of-a-generation-and-the-soundtrack-of-post-war-america-261467

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Why did the government hide a data leak about Afghans working with British forces and why did the courts finally reveal it?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alexandros Antoniou, Senior Lecturer in Media Law, University of Essex

    William Barton/Shutterstock

    When thousands of Afghans were quietly flown to the UK under a secret relocation scheme, few knew it was triggered by an error. A defence official had accidentally leaked the personal data of nearly 19,000 Afghan nationals who had worked with British forces and were at risk of Taliban reprisals.

    It has now also been revealed that the leaked list contained the identities of UK special forces and spies.

    Even fewer knew that this misstep was being kept from the public by a rare and powerful legal device: a superinjunction. Now, after nearly two years of legal wrangling, the High Court has lifted that order, reopening the conversation about when secrecy in the justice system goes too far.

    What is a superinjunction?

    An injunction is a court order that stops someone from doing something (like publishing a story) or requires them to do something (like taking down an online post or handing back confidential documents).

    A superinjunction goes one step further and does two things: it bans the publication of certain information (usually to protect privacy, safety or national security) and also bans anyone from revealing that the court order even exists.

    In essence, it is a tool that provides legal invisibility: the story is hidden and so is the fact that it is being hidden. While an injunction works like a padlock on a filing cabinet, a superinjunction means you cannot even tell anyone the cabinet is even there.

    Superinjunctions are exceptionally rare and controversial, precisely because they run counter to the principle of open justice. This is the idea that courts must operate in public, and that their decisions can be seen, scrutinised and questioned. Any derogation from open justice must be continuously justified and treated with considerable caution, especially where media freedom is curtailed.


    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


    Historically, superinjunctions have been used sparingly in cases involving blackmail, risks of violence against witnesses, the protection of children or to prevent tipping-off a subject before an order can be served (such as in fraud investigations), always with the aim of preventing harm or ensuring that justice is done.

    The superinjunction committee (which was established in 2010 by Lord Neuberger to review growing concerns about such orders) made clear that the use of these legal tools must meet strict tests of necessity and proportionality. And, that they are only granted where serious harm (for example to life, safety or the administration of justice) is credibly at stake.

    Why was a superinjunction granted in the Afghan data breach case?

    In this case, the government argued that revealing the data leak could put lives in danger. The leaked spreadsheet contained names, contact details and, in some cases, family information of Afghan nationals who had applied to resettle in the UK. Many feared Taliban retaliation.

    So, in September 2023, the Ministry of Defence asked the High Court for an injunction to stop media outlets from reporting on the leak. The judge did not just grant that request, he escalated it to a superinjunction, banning any mention of the case or the fact of the order.

    It was described at the time as “unprecedented” in its scope. Journalists, even those who had already discovered the breach, were effectively gagged. The public had no idea any of it was happening.

    Why did the court later decide to lift the secrecy?

    After multiple hearings and appeals, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain ruled on July 15 2025 that the superinjunction should be discharged once and for all. A government-commissioned review found that the leak may not have spread as widely as initially feared, and that Taliban reprisals were unlikely to be triggered solely by someone appearing on the leaked list.

    The judge concluded that while the leak was deeply serious, continued secrecy was no longer necessary, and that the harm of suppressing public debate and scrutiny now outweighed the risks of disclosure. To put it plainly, the balance tipped.

    Protection v cover-up

    Superinjunctions are not inherently wrong. There are situations where short-term secrecy is essential, for instance for the purposes of shielding vulnerable parties like children or genuinely guarding national security.

    But the Afghan case exemplifies the dangers of allowing secrecy to persist too long or too broadly. For nearly two years, the public was kept in the dark about a data breach involving tens of thousands of lives – including British citizens – and a government response that may ultimately cost the taxpayer “several billion pounds”.

    In this context, secrecy risked becoming a form of institutional self-protection, shielding the Ministry of Defence and the government from political fallout, legal scrutiny and accountability, rather than safeguarding people from actual harm.

    The principle of open justice is at the heart of democratic life. Superinjunctions, by their nature, run directly against that principle. There are times when secrecy might be seen as necessary, but it must always be tightly scoped and justified with evidence while serving the public interest; not convenience or image. By lifting this superinjunction, the courts affirmed that the British public has a right to know not only what went wrong, but that something went wrong at all.

    Alexandros Antoniou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Why did the government hide a data leak about Afghans working with British forces and why did the courts finally reveal it? – https://theconversation.com/why-did-the-government-hide-a-data-leak-about-afghans-working-with-british-forces-and-why-did-the-courts-finally-reveal-it-261437

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael Kent, Senior Lecturer in Digital Economy & Society Education, Department of Digital Humanities, King’s College London

    Krakenimages.com/Shutterstock

    On a sunny afternoon, I was scrolling through social media when I came across a video of a young woman tossing her sunscreen into a bin. “I don’t trust this stuff anymore,” she said to the camera, holding the bottle up like a piece of damning evidence.

    The clip had been viewed over half a million times, with commenters applauding her for “ditching chemicals” and recommending homemade alternatives like coconut oil and zinc powder.

    In my research on the effect of digital technology on health, I’ve seen how posts like this can shape real-world behaviour. And anecdotally, dermatologists have reported seeing more patients with severe sunburns or suspicious moles who say they stopped using sunscreen after watching similar videos.

    Sunscreen misinformation created by social media influencers is spreading and this isn’t just a random trend. It’s being fuelled by the platforms designed to host influencer content.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    In my book, The Digital Health Self, I explain how social media platforms are not neutral arenas for sharing information. They are commercial ecosystems engineered to maximise engagement and time spent online – metrics that directly drive advertising revenue.

    Content that sparks emotion – outrage, fear, inspiration – is boosted to the top of your feed. That’s why posts questioning or rejecting science often spread further than measured, evidence-based advice.

    Health misinformation thrives in this environment. A personal story about throwing out sunscreen performs well because it’s dramatic and emotionally charged. Algorithms reward such content with higher visibility: likes, shares and comments all signal popularity.

    Each second a user spends watching or reacting gives the platform more data – and more opportunities to serve targeted ads. This is how health misinformation becomes profitable.

    In my work, I describe social media platforms as “unregulated public health platforms”. They influence what users see and believe about health, but unlike public health institutions, they’re not bound by standards for accuracy or harm reduction.

    If an influencer claims sunscreen is toxic, that message won’t be factchecked or flagged – it will often be amplified. Why? Because controversy fuels engagement.




    Read more:
    Misinformation lends itself to social contagion – here’s how to recognize and combat it


    I call this environment “the credibility arena”: a space where trust is built not through expertise, but through performance and aesthetic appeal. As I write in my book: “Trust is earned not by what is known, but by how well one narrates suffering, recovery, and resilience.”

    A creator crying on camera about “toxins” can feel more authentic to viewers than a calm, clinical explanation of ultraviolet radiation from a medical expert.

    This shift has real consequences. Ultraviolet rays are invisible, constant and damaging. They penetrate cloud cover and harm skin even on cool days.

    Decades of research, especially in countries like Australia with high skin cancer rates, show that regular use of broad-spectrum sunscreen dramatically reduces risk. And yet, myths spreading online are urging people to do the opposite: to abandon sunscreen as dangerous or unnecessary.

    This trend isn’t driven solely by individual creators. It’s embedded in how content is designed, framed and presented. Algorithms prioritise short, emotionally-charged videos. Interfaces highlight trending sounds and hashtags. Recommendation systems push users toward extreme or dramatic content.

    These features all shape what we see and how we interpret it. The “For You” page isn’t neutral. It’s engineered to keep you scrolling, and shock value outperforms nuance every time.

    That’s why videos about “ditching chemicals” thrive, even as posts on other aspects of women’s health are shadowbanned or suppressed. Shadowbanning refers to when a platform limits the visibility of content – making it harder to find, without informing the user – often due to vague or inconsistently applied moderation rules.

    The system rewards spectacle, not science. Once creators discover that a particular format, like tossing products into a bin, boosts engagement, it’s replicated over and over again. Visibility isn’t organic. It’s manufactured.

    Those who throw away their sunscreen often believe they’re doing the right thing. They’re drawn to creators who feel relatable, sincere and independent — especially when official health campaigns seem cold, patronising or out of touch. But the consequences can be serious. Sun damage accumulates silently, raising skin cancer risk with every hour spent unprotected.

    Sunscreen isn’t perfect. It needs to be reapplied properly and paired with shade and protective clothing. But the evidence for its effectiveness is clear and robust.

    The real danger lies in a system that not only allows misinformation to spread, but also incentivises it. A system in which false claims can boost an influencer’s reach and a platform’s revenue.




    Read more:
    Four ways you can design social media posts to combat health misinformation


    To resist harmful health trends, we need to understand the systems that promote them. In the case of sunscreen, rejecting protection isn’t just a personal decision – it’s a symptom of a digital culture that turns health into content, and often profits from the harm it causes.

    Rachael Kent does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage – https://theconversation.com/scroll-watch-burn-sunscreen-misinformation-and-its-real-world-damage-261137

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael Kent, Senior Lecturer in Digital Economy & Society Education, Department of Digital Humanities, King’s College London

    Krakenimages.com/Shutterstock

    On a sunny afternoon, I was scrolling through social media when I came across a video of a young woman tossing her sunscreen into a bin. “I don’t trust this stuff anymore,” she said to the camera, holding the bottle up like a piece of damning evidence.

    The clip had been viewed over half a million times, with commenters applauding her for “ditching chemicals” and recommending homemade alternatives like coconut oil and zinc powder.

    In my research on the effect of digital technology on health, I’ve seen how posts like this can shape real-world behaviour. And anecdotally, dermatologists have reported seeing more patients with severe sunburns or suspicious moles who say they stopped using sunscreen after watching similar videos.

    Sunscreen misinformation created by social media influencers is spreading and this isn’t just a random trend. It’s being fuelled by the platforms designed to host influencer content.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    In my book, The Digital Health Self, I explain how social media platforms are not neutral arenas for sharing information. They are commercial ecosystems engineered to maximise engagement and time spent online – metrics that directly drive advertising revenue.

    Content that sparks emotion – outrage, fear, inspiration – is boosted to the top of your feed. That’s why posts questioning or rejecting science often spread further than measured, evidence-based advice.

    Health misinformation thrives in this environment. A personal story about throwing out sunscreen performs well because it’s dramatic and emotionally charged. Algorithms reward such content with higher visibility: likes, shares and comments all signal popularity.

    Each second a user spends watching or reacting gives the platform more data – and more opportunities to serve targeted ads. This is how health misinformation becomes profitable.

    In my work, I describe social media platforms as “unregulated public health platforms”. They influence what users see and believe about health, but unlike public health institutions, they’re not bound by standards for accuracy or harm reduction.

    If an influencer claims sunscreen is toxic, that message won’t be factchecked or flagged – it will often be amplified. Why? Because controversy fuels engagement.




    Read more:
    Misinformation lends itself to social contagion – here’s how to recognize and combat it


    I call this environment “the credibility arena”: a space where trust is built not through expertise, but through performance and aesthetic appeal. As I write in my book: “Trust is earned not by what is known, but by how well one narrates suffering, recovery, and resilience.”

    A creator crying on camera about “toxins” can feel more authentic to viewers than a calm, clinical explanation of ultraviolet radiation from a medical expert.

    This shift has real consequences. Ultraviolet rays are invisible, constant and damaging. They penetrate cloud cover and harm skin even on cool days.

    Decades of research, especially in countries like Australia with high skin cancer rates, show that regular use of broad-spectrum sunscreen dramatically reduces risk. And yet, myths spreading online are urging people to do the opposite: to abandon sunscreen as dangerous or unnecessary.

    This trend isn’t driven solely by individual creators. It’s embedded in how content is designed, framed and presented. Algorithms prioritise short, emotionally-charged videos. Interfaces highlight trending sounds and hashtags. Recommendation systems push users toward extreme or dramatic content.

    These features all shape what we see and how we interpret it. The “For You” page isn’t neutral. It’s engineered to keep you scrolling, and shock value outperforms nuance every time.

    That’s why videos about “ditching chemicals” thrive, even as posts on other aspects of women’s health are shadowbanned or suppressed. Shadowbanning refers to when a platform limits the visibility of content – making it harder to find, without informing the user – often due to vague or inconsistently applied moderation rules.

    The system rewards spectacle, not science. Once creators discover that a particular format, like tossing products into a bin, boosts engagement, it’s replicated over and over again. Visibility isn’t organic. It’s manufactured.

    Those who throw away their sunscreen often believe they’re doing the right thing. They’re drawn to creators who feel relatable, sincere and independent — especially when official health campaigns seem cold, patronising or out of touch. But the consequences can be serious. Sun damage accumulates silently, raising skin cancer risk with every hour spent unprotected.

    Sunscreen isn’t perfect. It needs to be reapplied properly and paired with shade and protective clothing. But the evidence for its effectiveness is clear and robust.

    The real danger lies in a system that not only allows misinformation to spread, but also incentivises it. A system in which false claims can boost an influencer’s reach and a platform’s revenue.




    Read more:
    Four ways you can design social media posts to combat health misinformation


    To resist harmful health trends, we need to understand the systems that promote them. In the case of sunscreen, rejecting protection isn’t just a personal decision – it’s a symptom of a digital culture that turns health into content, and often profits from the harm it causes.

    Rachael Kent does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage – https://theconversation.com/scroll-watch-burn-sunscreen-misinformation-and-its-real-world-damage-261137

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: The impact of lost evidence on criminal cases

    Source: Mayor of London

    According to the BBC more than 30,000 criminal cases collapsed between October 2020 and September 2024 due to lost, damaged or missing evidence.[1] It found that around one in 20 prosecutions by the Met had been dropped due to missing evidence between 2020 and 2024, compared to one in 50 across England and Wales.
     
    Following a FOI request from the BBC and University of Leicester, the number of cases reported as missing evidence were found to be increasing: in 2020, 7,484 prosecutions collapsed due to lost, missing or damaged evidence, compared to 8,180 in 2024, a 9 per cent increase. 
     
    The BBC reported that the cases recorded included: 

    • Physical evidence, including forensic evidence, being lost, damaged or contaminated during storage
    • Lost digital evidence, including victim interview footage or body worn camera footage
    • Witness statements or pathology reports not being provided by the police
    • Key evidence not collected from the crime scene.

    Tomorrow, the London Assembly Police and Crime Committee will meet to question the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime on the Met’s ability to safely store and collect evidence.

    The Committee will also question the Deputy Mayor about online radicalisation, the Met’s recruitment pathways and the Met’s Culture, Diversity and Inclusion Directorate.
     
    The guests are:

    • Kaya Comer-Schwartz, Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime 
    • Kenny Bowie, Director of Strategy and MPS Oversight, Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)

    The meeting will take place on Wednesday 16 July 2025 from 10am in the Chamber at City Hall, Kamal Chunchie Way, E16 1ZE.

    Media and members of the public are invited to attend.

    The meeting can also be viewed LIVE or later via webcast or YouTube.
     
    Follow us @LondonAssembly.
     

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: With the support of Rosneft, a Summer Project School has opened at the Moscow State University Gymnasium

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Rosneft – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The ceremonial opening of the annual Summer Project School for students of Rosneft Classes took place at the University Gymnasium of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. The training will involve 80 tenth-graders from 15 regions of Russia – they passed a competitive selection, which included multi-stage testing and a distance learning course.

    The Summer Project School is a joint project of Rosneft and Moscow State University, created to support talented youth. The event is being held for the fourth time. The training helps schoolchildren acquire basic knowledge in the field of project and research activities, as well as practical skills in team development and implementation of projects, including in key areas of the Company’s activities.

    For two weeks, schoolchildren will work in project groups in four areas: mathematics, engineering, geology and natural science. To get acquainted with the activities of Rosneft, schoolchildren will visit the Arctic Research Center, as well as the laboratories of the Company’s Joint Research and Development Center. Specialists will tell schoolchildren about Rosneft’s key scientific projects. In addition, the program includes visits to specialized faculties and museums of Lomonosov Moscow State University and Gubkin Russian State University of Oil and Gas.

    For the participants of the Summer School, trainings on the development of professional and personal skills, creative master classes, as well as sports and entertainment events will be organized.

    Career guidance events will help high school students decide on their future profession. Based on the results of their studies at the Summer School, students will present their own projects.

    Reference:

    In order to form an external personnel reserve and a constant influx of highly educated young specialists into the Company, in 2005 Rosneft created a corporate system of continuous education “School – College/University – Enterprise”.

    Today, with the Company’s support, 2.7 thousand schoolchildren in 20 regions of Russia study in Rosneft Classes. The training is conducted according to programs with in-depth study of mathematics, physics, chemistry and computer science with the involvement of the best teachers.

    Department of Information and AdvertisingPJSC NK RosneftJuly 18, 2025

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Appeal for information on missing woman in Yuen Long (2) (with photos)

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    Police today (July 18) appealed to the public for information on a woman who went missing in Yuen Long.

    Lo Siu-ying, aged 86, went missing after she was last seen on Ma Tong Road yesterday (July 17). Her family then made a report to Police.
        
    She is about 1.5 metres tall, 41 kilograms in weight and of thin build. She has a long face with yellow complexion and short white hair. She was last seen wearing a brown long-sleeved shirt, black trousers, black shoes, a pair of black sunglasses, carrying a black shoulder bag and a light-coloured long umbrella.

    Anyone who knows the whereabouts of the missing woman or may have seen her is urged to contact the Regional Missing Persons Unit of New Territories North on 3661 3113 or email to rmpu-ntn-1@police.gov.hk, or contact any police station.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI: OTC Markets Group Welcomes Andean Silver Ltd to OTCQX

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM), operator of regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities, today announced Andean Silver Ltd (ASX: ASL; OTCQX: ADSLF), an Australian mineral exploration and development company, has qualified to trade on the OTCQX® Best Market.

    Andean Silver Ltd begins trading today on OTCQX under the symbol “ADSLF.” U.S. investors can find current financial disclosure and Real-Time Level 2 quotes for the company on www.otcmarkets.com.

    Upgrading to the OTCQX Market is an important step for companies seeking to provide transparent trading for their U.S. investors. For companies listed on a qualified international exchange, streamlined market standards enable them to utilize their home market reporting to make their information available in the U.S. To qualify for OTCQX, companies must meet high financial standards, follow best practice corporate governance and demonstrate compliance with applicable securities laws.

    About Andean Silver Ltd
    Andean Silver Limited (formerly Mitre Mining Corporation Limited) is an Australian mineral exploration and development company focused on advancing its 100% owned Cerro Bayo Silver-Gold project in the Aysen region of Southern Chile which boasts some of the largest precious and base metals in the world. The project currently hosts Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.8Mt @ 353g/t AgEq for 111Moz AgEq.

    About OTC Markets Group Inc.
    OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM) operates regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities. Our data-driven disclosure standards form the foundation of our public markets: OTCQX® Best Market, OTCQB® Venture Market, OTCID™ Basic Market and Pink Limited™ Market. Our OTC Link® Alternative Trading Systems (ATSs) provide critical market infrastructure that broker-dealers rely on to facilitate trading. Our innovative model offers companies more efficient access to the U.S. financial markets.

    OTC Link ATS, OTC Link ECN, OTC Link NQB, and MOON ATS™ are each SEC regulated ATS, operated by OTC Link LLC, a FINRA and SEC registered broker-dealer, member SIPC. To learn more about how we create better informed and more efficient markets, visit www.otcmarkets.com.

    Subscribe to the OTC Markets RSS Feed

    Media Contact:
    OTC Markets Group Inc., +1 (212) 896-4428, media@otcmarkets.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Security: Repeat Offender Sentenced to 10 Years for Possessing Drugs with Intent to Distribute While on Parole

    Source: US FBI

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska – An Anchorage man was sentenced yesterday to 10 years in prison and, upon release, will serve five years on supervised release, for possessing drugs with the intent to distribute them following a refusal of a routine search of his residence while on parole.

    According to court documents, on Oct. 20, 2022, two Alaska Department of Corrections parole officers visited Andrew Lee, 42, at his residence for a routine search pursuant to Lee’s conditions of parole release in a state criminal case where he was convicted of second-degree murder. Lee shared this residence with multiple family members.

    Lee led the parole officers to a bedroom he claimed he shared with his father. During a search of this bedroom, the parole officers found no material evidence that Lee stayed in the bedroom The parole officers searched his vehicle and located two cell phones and a “tooter” straw, both of which are consistent with drug paraphernalia.

    When parole officers attempted to determine who resided in the other three bedrooms in the residence, Lee claimed that two of the three were occupied by his aunt and mother, respectively, while the final bedroom was occupied by a different individual. Lee stated that this room was locked, and the parole officers were not allowed to enter. The parole officers spoke on the phone with the individual who allegedly lived in that bedroom. That individual said he was the owner of the residence, that he lived in Georgia and that the bedroom was Lee’s.

    The parole officers asked Lee about inconsistencies in his statements and Lee immediately began yelling at his father in a different language. The parole officers informed Lee he was being detained and handcuffed him for their own safety. When the parole officers attempted to unlock the bedroom door, Lee’s father stopped them. The parole officers asked Lee whether we would comply with the search, and he started yelling at his father in a different language again. The parole officers decided to arrest Lee for refusing to submit to the search.

    The parole officers remanded Lee to the Anchorage Correctional Complex. During in-processing, correctional officers located roughly $1,500 in cash and over 57 grams of pure methamphetamine, over 28 grams of heroin and nearly 5 grams of fentanyl packaged in multiple baggies on his person.

    On Jan. 18, 2024, a federal grand jury indicted Lee, and on April 11, 2024, Lee pleaded guilty to possessing controlled substances with the intent to distribute.

    “Mr. Lee participated in the dangerous drug trade while on parole for a violent felony—and will now spend 10 years behind bars for it,” said U.S. Attorney Michael J. Heyman for the District of Alaska. “Let this sentence serve as a clear message: our office, in partnership with law enforcement, will pursue drug traffickers and seek harsh penalties for those who threaten the safety of our communities.” 

    “While on parole, the defendant continued to threaten the safety of our communities by committing federal drug trafficking crimes,” said Special Agent in Charge Rebecca Day of the FBI Anchorage Field Office. “Following a collaborative investigation by the FBI’s Safe Streets Task Force, this sentencing reflects our continued commitment to hold drug traffickers accountable, while protecting Alaska’s communities from the dangers of illicit drug activity.”

    The FBI Anchorage Field Office and Anchorage Police Department investigated the case as part of the FBI’s Safe Streets Task Force, with assistance from the Alaska Department of Corrections.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Cody Tirpak prosecuted the case.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: OTC Markets Group Welcomes Andean Silver Ltd to OTCQX

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM), operator of regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities, today announced Andean Silver Ltd (ASX: ASL; OTCQX: ADSLF), an Australian mineral exploration and development company, has qualified to trade on the OTCQX® Best Market.

    Andean Silver Ltd begins trading today on OTCQX under the symbol “ADSLF.” U.S. investors can find current financial disclosure and Real-Time Level 2 quotes for the company on www.otcmarkets.com.

    Upgrading to the OTCQX Market is an important step for companies seeking to provide transparent trading for their U.S. investors. For companies listed on a qualified international exchange, streamlined market standards enable them to utilize their home market reporting to make their information available in the U.S. To qualify for OTCQX, companies must meet high financial standards, follow best practice corporate governance and demonstrate compliance with applicable securities laws.

    About Andean Silver Ltd
    Andean Silver Limited (formerly Mitre Mining Corporation Limited) is an Australian mineral exploration and development company focused on advancing its 100% owned Cerro Bayo Silver-Gold project in the Aysen region of Southern Chile which boasts some of the largest precious and base metals in the world. The project currently hosts Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.8Mt @ 353g/t AgEq for 111Moz AgEq.

    About OTC Markets Group Inc.
    OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM) operates regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities. Our data-driven disclosure standards form the foundation of our public markets: OTCQX® Best Market, OTCQB® Venture Market, OTCID™ Basic Market and Pink Limited™ Market. Our OTC Link® Alternative Trading Systems (ATSs) provide critical market infrastructure that broker-dealers rely on to facilitate trading. Our innovative model offers companies more efficient access to the U.S. financial markets.

    OTC Link ATS, OTC Link ECN, OTC Link NQB, and MOON ATS™ are each SEC regulated ATS, operated by OTC Link LLC, a FINRA and SEC registered broker-dealer, member SIPC. To learn more about how we create better informed and more efficient markets, visit www.otcmarkets.com.

    Subscribe to the OTC Markets RSS Feed

    Media Contact:
    OTC Markets Group Inc., +1 (212) 896-4428, media@otcmarkets.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Veritex Holdings, Inc. Reports Second Quarter 2025 Operating Results and Declares Quarterly Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DALLAS, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  Veritex Holdings, Inc. (“Veritex”, the “Company”, “we” or “our”) (Nasdaq: VBTX), the holding company for Veritex Community Bank, today announced the results for the quarter ended June 30, 2025.

    The Company also announced that the Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share of common stock. The dividend will be payable on August 21, 2025 to shareholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

        Quarter to Date
    Financial Highlights   Q2 2025   Q1 2025   Q2 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (unaudited)
    GAAP            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 27,202  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.50  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       28.49  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.87 %
    Return on average equity1     7.56       7.27       7.10  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.29  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       59.11  
    Non-GAAP2            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 28,310  
    Diluted operating EPS     0.56       0.54       0.52  
    Tangible book value per common share     22.68       22.33       20.62  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings     42,672       43,413       44,420  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82       1.89       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.91  
    Return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.49       10.54  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.70       10.94  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15       60.62       58.41  

    1 Annualized ratio.
    2 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of these non-generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

    Other Second Quarter Credit, Capital and Company Highlights

    • Credit quality remained strong with a nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) to total assets ratio of 0.60% and annualized net charge-offs of 0.05% for the quarter and 0.11% year-to-date;
    • Allowance for Credit Losses (“ACL”) to total loans held-for-investment ratio (excluding mortgage warehouse (“MW”)) remained relatively unchanged at 1.28%;
    • Capital remains strong with common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.05% as of June 30, 2025;
    • Book value per share increased $0.31 to $30.39 and tangible book value per share increased $0.35 to $22.68;
    • We repurchased 286,291 and 663,637 shares of Company stock for $7.1 million and $16.6 million during the second quarter and year-to-date, respectively; and
    • On July 14, 2025, we announced entry into a definitive agreement to merge with Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (“Huntington”), which is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2025, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.

    Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025

    Net Interest Income

    For the three months ended June 30, 2025, net interest income before provision for credit losses was $96.3 million and net interest margin (“NIM”) was 3.33% compared to $95.4 million and 3.31%, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The $894 thousand increase, or 0.9%, in net interest income before provision for credit losses was primarily due to a $2.8 million increase in interest income on loans, a $1.7 million decrease in interest expense on certificates and other time deposits and a $768 thousand decrease in subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, partially offset by a $2.9 million increase in interest expense on transaction and savings deposits and a $1.2 million decrease in interest income on deposits in financial institutions and fed funds sold for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The NIM increased two basis points (bps) compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to the decreased funding costs on certificates and other time deposits and subordinated debt due to the redemption of $75.0 million in subordinated debt during the three months ended March 31, 2025 as well as a mix shift from lower yielding to higher yielding assets for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was largely offset by higher deposits funding costs primarily driven by the expiration of favorable hedges on money market deposit accounts at the end of the first quarter 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, net interest income before provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was relatively unchanged. Net interest income benefited from decreases in interest expense of $16.3 million on certificates and other time deposits, $1.4 million on advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and $1.1 million on subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, as well as an increase of $1.5 million in interest income on debt securities. These changes were substantially offset by a decrease of $17.6 million in interest income on loans and a $2.5 million increase in interest expense on interest-bearing demand and savings deposits. The NIM increased four bps from 3.29% for the three months ended June 30, 2024 to 3.33% for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was primarily due to decreased funding costs on deposits, advances and subordinated debt resulting from interest rate cuts for the year over year period, partially offset by the related declines in rates earned on interest-earnings assets, primarily loans.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $13.5 million, a decrease of $790 thousand, or 5.5%, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The change was primarily due to a $1.6 million decrease in government guaranteed loan income, partially offset by an $850 thousand increase in customer swap income during the period.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $2.9 million, or 27.6%. The increase was primarily due to a $1.2 million increase in customer swap income, a $728 thousand increase in service charges and fees on deposit accounts, a $528 thousand increase in loan fees and a $368 thousand increase in government guaranteed loan income for the year over year period.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense was $67.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $66.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $328 thousand, or 0.5%. The increase was primarily due to a $920 thousand increase in other noninterest expense, a $627 thousand increase in professional and regulatory fees and a $580 thousand increase in marketing expenses compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The increase was largely offset by a $1.7 million decrease in salaries and employee benefits primarily due to $733 thousand in lower payroll taxes, which are historically higher in the first quarter, as well as decreases of $678 thousand in bonus expense, $370 thousand in employee insurance expense and $340 thousand in stock grant expenses, offset partially by a $1.0 million increase in salaries expense. In addition, deferred loan origination costs, which reduce salaries expense, were $399 thousand higher for the three months ended June 30, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $4.0 million, or 6.4%. The increase was primarily due to a $2.2 million increase in salaries and employee benefits driven by a $4.7 million increase in salaries expense and incentives accruals and a $521 thousand increase in payroll taxes, offset by decreases of $1.1 million in stock grant expense and $661 thousand in severance expense, as well as $1.6 million higher deferred loan origination costs, which reduces salaries and employee benefit expense. Additionally, there was a $1.1 million increase in other noninterest expense, driven primarily by higher OREO expenses, and a $636 thousand increase in marketing expenses during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the same period in the prior year.

    Income Tax

    Income tax expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 totaled $8.5 million, which is consistent with the amount recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 21.6% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to 22.7% for the three months ended March 31, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, income tax expense increased by $295 thousand, or 3.6%, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 23.2% for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

    Financial Condition

    Total loans held for investment (“LHI”), excluding MW was $8.78 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $44.7 million compared to March 31, 2025.

    Total deposits were $10.42 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $247.2 million compared to March 31, 2025. The decrease was primarily the result of decreases of $185.4 million in noninterest bearing deposits and $171.4 million in interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits, partially offset by an increase of $113.5 million in certificates and other time deposits.

    Credit Quality

    NPAs totaled $75.2 million, or 0.60% of total assets, of which $66.0 million represented LHI and $9.2 million represented OREO at June 30, 2025, compared to $96.9 million, or 0.77% of total assets, at March 31, 2025. The Company had net charge-offs of $1.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Annualized net charge-offs to average loans outstanding were five bps for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 17 bps and 28 bps for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

    ACL as a percentage of LHI was 1.19% at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 and 1.16% at June 30, 2024. ACL as a percentage of LHI (excluding MW) was 1.28% at June 30, 2025, 1.27% at March 31, 2025 and 1.23% at June 30, 2024. The Company recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.8 million, $4.0 million and $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. The provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was primarily attributable to changes in economic factors for the period. The balance for unfunded commitments increased to $8.9 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $7.4 million at March 31, 2025, and we recorded a $1.5 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to a $1.3 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and no provision recorded for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in the allowance for unfunded commitments was attributable to increases in unfunded balances and changes in economic factors for the period.

    Dividend Information

    On July 18, 2025, Veritex’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share on its outstanding shares of common stock. The dividend will be paid on or after August 21, 2025 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Veritex’s management uses certain non-GAAP (U.S. generally accepted accounting principles) financial measures to evaluate its operating performance and provide information that is important to investors. However, non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, Veritex’s reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Specifically, Veritex reviews and reports tangible book value per common share of the Company; operating earnings; tangible common equity to tangible assets; return on average tangible common equity; pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans; diluted operating earnings per share; operating return on average assets; operating return on average tangible common equity; and operating efficiency ratio. Veritex has included in this earnings release information related to these non-GAAP financial measures for the applicable periods presented. Please refer to “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights at the end of this earnings release for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

    About Veritex Holdings, Inc.

    Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Veritex is a bank holding company that conducts banking activities through its wholly owned subsidiary, Veritex Community Bank, with locations throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and in the Houston metropolitan area. Veritex Community Bank is a Texas state chartered bank regulated by the Texas Department of Banking and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. For more information, visit www.veritexbank.com.

    CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    This communication may contain certain forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, certain plans, expectations, goals, projections, and statements about the benefits of the proposed transaction, the plans, objectives, expectations and intentions of Veritex and Huntington, the expected timing of completion of the transaction, and other statements that are not historical facts and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties that are beyond the control of Veritex and Huntington. Such statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, estimates, uncertainties and other important factors that change over time and could cause actual results to differ materially from any results, performance, or events expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including as a result of the factors referenced below. Statements that do not describe historical or current facts, including statements about beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as expect, anticipate, continue, believe, intend, estimate, plan, trend, objective, target, goal, or similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as will, may, might, should, would, could, or similar variations. The forward-looking statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

    Veritex and Huntington caution that the forward-looking statements in this communication are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to assess and are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond Veritex’s and Huntington’s control. While there is no assurance that any list of risks and uncertainties or risk factors is complete, below are certain factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in the forward-looking statements or historical performance: changes in general economic, political, or industry conditions; deterioration in business and economic conditions, including persistent inflation, supply chain issues or labor shortages, instability in global economic conditions and geopolitical matters, as well as volatility in financial markets; changes in U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs; the impact of pandemics and other catastrophic events or disasters on the global economy and financial market conditions and our business, results of operations, and financial condition; the impacts related to or resulting from bank failures and other volatility, including potential increased regulatory requirements and costs, such as FDIC special assessments, long-term debt requirements and heightened capital requirements, and potential impacts to macroeconomic conditions, which could affect the ability of depository institutions, including us, to attract and retain depositors and to borrow or raise capital; unexpected outflows of uninsured deposits which may require us to sell investment securities at a loss; changing interest rates which could negatively impact the value of our portfolio of investment securities; the loss of value of our investment portfolio which could negatively impact market perceptions of us and could lead to deposit withdrawals; the effects of social media on market perceptions of us and banks generally; cybersecurity risks; uncertainty in U.S. fiscal and monetary policy, including the interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve; volatility and disruptions in global capital, foreign exchange and credit markets; movements in interest rates; competitive pressures on product pricing and services; success, impact, and timing of our business strategies, including market acceptance of any new products or services including those implementing our “Fair Play” banking philosophy; changes in policies and standards for regulatory review of bank mergers; the nature, extent, timing, and results of governmental actions, examinations, reviews, reforms, regulations, and interpretations, including those related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, as well as those involving the SEC, OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB and state-level regulators; the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the right of one or both of the parties to terminate the merger agreement between Veritex and Huntington; the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against Veritex and Huntington; delays in completing the transaction; the failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the transaction); the failure to obtain Veritex shareholder approval or to satisfy any of the other conditions to the transaction on a timely basis or at all; the possibility that the anticipated benefits of the transaction are not realized when expected or at all, including as a result of the impact of, or problems arising from, the integration of the two companies or as a result of the strength of the economy and competitive factors in the areas where Veritex and Huntington do business; the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events; diversion of management’s attention from ongoing business operations and opportunities; potential adverse reactions or changes to business, customer or employee relationships, including those resulting from the announcement or completion of the transaction; the ability to complete the transaction and integration of Veritex and Huntington successfully; the dilution caused by Huntington’s issuance of additional shares of its capital stock in connection with the transaction; and other factors that may affect the future results of Veritex and Huntington. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described above can be found in Veritex’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the SEC and available on Veritex’s investor relations website, ir.veritexbank.com, under the heading “Financials” and in other documents Veritex files with the SEC, and in Huntington’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and available in the “Investor Relations” section of Huntington’s website, http://www.huntington.com, under the heading “Investor Relations” and in other documents Huntington files with the SEC.

    All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements set forth above. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and are based on information available at that time. Neither Veritex nor Huntington assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, new information or future events, changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or other factors affecting forward-looking statements that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by federal securities laws. If Veritex or Huntington update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that Veritex or Huntington will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements. As forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, caution should be exercised against placing undue reliance on such statements.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    Per Share Data (Common Stock):                            
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57     $ 0.53     $ 0.46     $ 0.57     $ 0.50     $ 1.10     $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.45       0.56       0.50       1.09       0.94  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       29.37       29.53       28.49       30.39       28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share1     22.68       22.33       21.61       21.72       20.62       22.68       20.62  
    Dividends paid per common share outstanding2     0.22       0.22       0.20       0.20       0.20       0.44       0.40  
                                 
    Common Stock Data:                            
    Shares outstanding at period end     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350       54,265       54,350  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding for the period     54,251       54,486       54,489       54,409       54,457       54,368       54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding for the period     54,766       55,123       55,237       54,932       54,823       54,944       54,832  
                                 
    Summary of Credit Ratios:                            
    ACL to total LHI     1.19 %     1.19 %     1.18 %     1.21 %     1.16 %     1.19 %     1.16 %
    NPAs to total assets     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, to total assets3     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total loans and OREO     0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3     0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  
                                 
    Summary Performance Ratios:                            
    Return on average assets3     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Return on average equity3     7.56       7.27       6.17       7.79       7.10       7.42       6.72  
    Return on average tangible common equity1, 3     10.79       10.49       9.04       11.33       10.54       10.64       10.03  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       67.04       61.94       59.11       61.03       60.72  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.20       3.30       3.29       3.32       3.27  
                                 
    Selected Performance Metrics – Operating:                        
    Diluted operating EPS1   $ 0.56     $ 0.54     $ 0.54     $ 0.59     $ 0.52     $ 1.10     $ 1.05  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1, 3     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1, 3     1.82       1.89       1.72       1.83       1.83       1.86       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1,3     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1,3     10.79       10.70       10.69       11.74       10.94       10.75       11.14  
    Operating efficiency ratio1     61.15       60.62       62.98       60.63       58.41       60.88       58.57  
                                 
    Veritex Holdings, Inc. Capital Ratios:                        
    Average stockholders’ equity to average total assets     13.19 %     12.96 %     12.58 %     12.31 %     12.26 %     13.07 %     12.34 %
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets1     10.16       9.95       9.54       9.37       9.14       10.16       9.14  
    Tier 1 capital to average assets (leverage)4     10.73       10.55       10.32       10.06       10.06       10.73       10.06  
    Common equity tier 1 capital4     11.05       11.04       11.09       10.86       10.49       11.05       10.49  
    Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets4     11.32       11.31       11.36       11.13       10.75       11.32       10.75  
    Total capital to risk-weighted assets4     13.46       13.46       13.96       13.91       13.45       13.46       13.45  
    Risk-weighted assets4   $ 11,435,978     $ 11,318,220     $ 11,247,813     $ 11,290,800     $ 11,450,997     $ 11,435,978     $ 11,450,997  

    1 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.
    2 Dividend amount represents dividend paid per common share subsequent to each respective quarter end.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    4 June 30, 2025 ratios and risk-weighted assets are estimated.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands)


        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)       (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    ASSETS                    
    Cash and due from banks   $ 66,696     $ 81,088     $ 52,486     $ 54,165     $ 53,462  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks     703,869       768,702       802,714       1,046,625       598,375  
    Cash and cash equivalents     770,565       849,790       855,200       1,100,790       651,837  
    Debt securities, net     1,418,804       1,463,157       1,478,538       1,423,610       1,349,354  
    Other investments     73,986       69,452       69,638       71,257       75,885  
    Loans held for sale (“LHFS”)     69,480       69,236       89,309       48,496       57,046  
    LHI, MW     669,052       571,775       605,411       630,650       568,047  
    LHI, excluding MW     8,783,988       8,828,672       8,899,133       9,028,575       9,209,094  
    Total loans     9,522,520       9,469,683       9,593,853       9,707,721       9,834,187  
    ACL     (112,262 )     (111,773 )     (111,745 )     (117,162 )     (113,431 )
    Bank-owned life insurance     86,048       85,424       85,324       84,776       84,233  
    Bank premises, furniture and equipment, net     116,642       112,801       113,480       114,202       105,222  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)     9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256  
    Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization     25,006       27,974       28,664       32,825       35,817  
    Goodwill     404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452  
    Other assets     212,889       210,863       226,200       211,471       232,518  
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                    
    Deposits:                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits   $ 2,133,294     $ 2,318,645     $ 2,191,457     $ 2,643,894     $ 2,416,727  
    Interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits     5,009,137       5,180,495       5,061,157       4,204,708       3,979,454  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750       2,679,221       2,958,861       3,625,920       3,744,596  
    Correspondent money market deposits     482,739       486,762       541,117       561,489       584,067  
    Total deposits     10,417,920       10,665,123       10,752,592       11,036,011       10,724,844  
    Accounts payable and other liabilities     135,647       151,579       183,944       168,415       180,585  
    Advances from FHLB     169,000                          
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     156,082       155,909       230,736       230,536       230,285  
    Total liabilities     10,878,649       10,972,611       11,167,272       11,434,962       11,135,714  
    Stockholders’ equity:                    
    Common stock     617       615       613       613       612  
    Additional paid-in capital     1,329,803       1,329,626       1,328,748       1,324,929       1,321,995  
    Retained earnings     545,015       526,044       507,903       493,921       473,801  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (38,528 )     (42,170 )     (65,076 )     (40,330 )     (76,713 )
    Treasury stock     (187,688 )     (180,635 )     (171,119 )     (171,119 )     (171,079 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     1,649,219       1,633,480       1,601,069       1,608,014       1,548,616  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except per share data)

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months
    Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    Interest income:                            
    Loans, including fees   $ 149,354   $ 146,505   $ 154,998     $ 167,261   $ 166,979   $ 295,859   $ 328,921  
    Debt securities     16,883     17,106     16,893       15,830     15,408     33,989     29,103  
    Deposits in financial institutions and Fed Funds sold     8,039     9,244     11,888       12,571     7,722     17,283     15,772  
    Equity securities and other investments     847     870     940       1,001     1,138     1,717     2,038  
    Total interest income     175,123     173,725     184,719       196,663     191,247     348,848     375,834  
    Interest expense:                            
    Transaction and savings deposits     48,080     45,165     44,841       47,208     45,619     93,245     92,403  
    Certificates and other time deposits     28,539     30,268     40,279       46,230     44,811     58,807     85,303  
    Advances from FHLB     113     27     130       47     1,468     140     2,859  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     2,056     2,824     3,328       3,116     3,113     4,880     6,227  
    Total interest expense     78,788     78,284     88,578       96,601     95,011     157,072     186,792  
    Net interest income     96,335     95,441     96,141       100,062     96,236     191,776     189,042  
    Provision for credit losses     1,750     4,000     2,300       4,000     8,250     5,750     15,750  
    Provision (benefit) for unfunded commitments     1,500     1,300     (401 )             2,800     (1,541 )
    Net interest income after provisions     93,085     90,141     94,242       96,062     87,986     183,226     174,833  
    Noninterest income:                            
    Service charges and fees on deposit accounts     5,702     5,611     5,612       5,442     4,974     11,313     9,870  
    Loan fees     2,735     2,495     2,265       3,278     2,207     5,230     4,717  
    Loss on sales of debt securities             (4,397 )                 (6,304 )
    Government guaranteed loan income, net     1,688     3,301     5,368       780     1,320     4,989     3,934  
    Customer swap income     1,550     700     509       271     326     2,250     775  
    Other income     1,824     2,182     699       3,335     1,751     4,006     4,248  
    Total noninterest income     13,499     14,289     10,056       13,106     10,578     27,788     17,240  
    Noninterest expense:                            
    Salaries and employee benefits     34,957     36,624     37,446       37,370     32,790     71,581     66,155  
    Occupancy and equipment     4,511     4,650     4,633       4,789     4,585     9,161     9,262  
    Professional and regulatory fees     5,558     4,931     5,564       4,903     5,617     10,489     11,670  
    Data processing and software expense     5,507     5,403     5,741       5,268     5,097     10,910     9,953  
    Marketing     2,612     2,032     2,896       2,781     1,976     4,644     3,522  
    Amortization of intangibles     2,438     2,438     2,437       2,438     2,438     4,876     4,876  
    Telephone and communications     233     330     323       335     365     563     626  
    Other     11,346     10,426     12,154       12,216     10,273     21,772     19,193  
    Total noninterest expense     67,162     66,834     71,194       70,100     63,141     133,996     125,257  
    Income before income tax expense     39,422     37,596     33,104       39,068     35,423     77,018     66,816  
    Income tax expense     8,516     8,526     8,222       8,067     8,221     17,042     15,458  
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882     $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358  
                                 
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57   $ 0.53   $ 0.46     $ 0.57   $ 0.50   $ 1.10   $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45     $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding     54,251     54,486     54,489       54,409     54,457     54,368     54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237       54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

        For the Quarter Ended
        June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Assets                                    
    Interest-earning assets:                                    
    Loans1   $ 8,875,970     $ 141,688   6.40 %   $ 8,886,905     $ 140,329   6.40 %   $ 9,344,482     $ 160,323   6.90 %
    LHI, MW     523,203       7,666   5.88       426,724       6,176   5.87       420,946       6,656   6.36  
    Debt securities     1,440,369       16,883   4.70       1,467,220       17,106   4.73       1,352,293       15,408   4.58  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     707,933       8,039   4.55       827,751       9,244   4.53       560,586       7,722   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,779       847   4.80       70,696       870   4.99       78,964       1,138   5.80  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,618,254       175,123   6.05       11,679,296       173,725   6.03       11,757,271       191,247   6.54  
    ACL     (112,369 )             (111,563 )             (115,978 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     933,328               938,401               937,413          
    Total assets   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                                    
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,502,672     $ 48,080   3.50 %   $ 5,449,091     $ 45,165   3.36 %   $ 4,570,329     $ 45,619   4.01 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,742,655       28,539   4.17       2,726,309       30,268   4.50       3,591,035       44,811   5.02  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     9,813       113   4.62       2,333       27   4.69       106,648       1,468   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     155,985       2,056   5.29       191,638       2,824   5.98       230,141       3,113   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,411,125       78,788   3.76       8,369,371       78,284   3.79       8,498,153       95,011   4.50  
                                         
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,244,745               2,345,586               2,346,908          
    Other liabilities     142,925               170,389               192,036          
    Total liabilities     10,798,795               10,885,346               11,037,097          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,640,418               1,620,788               1,541,609          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Net interest rate spread2           2.29 %           2.24 %           2.04 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 96,335   3.33 %       $ 95,441   3.31 %       $ 96,236   3.29 %

    1 Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million and $58.5 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the quarter are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except percentages)
        For the Six Months Ended
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
    Assets                        
    Interest-earning assets:                        
    Loans1   $ 8,881,407     $ 282,017   6.40 %   $ 9,314,148     $ 317,908   6.86 %
    LHI, MW     475,230       13,842   5.87       350,252       11,013   6.32  
    Debt securities     1,453,721       33,989   4.71       1,323,644       29,103   4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     767,511       17,283   4.54       572,589       15,772   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,738       1,717   4.89       77,616       2,038   5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,648,607       348,848   6.04       11,638,249       375,834   6.49  
    ACL     (111,969 )             (114,104 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     935,850               933,229          
    Total assets   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,476,030     $ 93,245   3.43 %   $ 4,604,887     $ 92,403   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,734,527       58,807   4.34       3,437,385       85,303   4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     6,094       140   4.63       103,819       2,859   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     173,713       4,880   5.67       230,011       6,227   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,390,364       157,072   3.78       8,376,102       186,792   4.48  
                             
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,294,887               2,351,112          
    Other liabilities     156,580               192,422          
    Total liabilities     10,841,831               10,919,636          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,630,657               1,537,738          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Net interest rate spread2           2.26 %           2.01 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 191,776   3.32 %       $ 189,042   3.27 %

    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the six month periods are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


    Yield Trend
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average yield on interest-earning assets:                            
    Loans1   6.40 %   6.40 %   6.56 %   6.89 %   6.90 %   6.40 %   6.86 %
    LHI, MW   5.88     5.87     5.83     6.75     6.36     5.87     6.32  
    Total Loans   6.37     6.38     6.53     6.89     6.88     6.38     6.84  
    Debt securities   4.70     4.73     4.61     4.55     4.58     4.71     4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks   4.55     4.53     4.87     5.41     5.54     4.54     5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments   4.80     4.99     5.18     5.25     5.80     4.89     5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets   6.05 %   6.03 %   6.15 %   6.49 %   6.54 %   6.04 %   6.49 %
                                 
    Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities:                            
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   3.50 %   3.36 %   3.57 %   4.00 %   4.01 %   3.43 %   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits   4.17     4.50     4.83     5.00     5.02     4.34     4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and other   4.62     4.69     4.88     5.73     5.54     4.63     5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes   5.29     5.98     5.74     5.38     5.44     5.67     5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3.76 %   3.79 %   4.12 %   4.46 %   4.50 %   3.78 %   4.48 %
                                 
    Net interest rate spread2   2.29 %   2.24 %   2.03 %   2.03 %   2.04 %   2.26 %   2.01 %
    Net interest margin3   3.33 %   3.31 %   3.20 %   3.30 %   3.29 %   3.32 %   3.27 %

      
    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million, $46.4 million, $54.3 million and $58.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, respectively and $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024 respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.

    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.

    Supplemental Yield Trend

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average cost of interest-bearing deposits   3.73 %   3.74 %   4.07 %   4.44 %   4.46 %   3.73 %   3.33 %
    Average costs of total deposits, including noninterest-bearing   2.93     2.91     3.16     3.42     3.46     2.92     2.48  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


       
    LHI and Deposit Portfolio Composition    
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    LHI1                                        
    Commercial and Industrial (“C&I”)   $ 2,692,209     30.6 %   $ 2,717,037     30.7 %   $ 2,693,538     30.2 %   $ 2,728,544     30.2 %   $ 2,798,260     30.4 %
    Real Estate:                                        
    Owner occupied commercial (“OOCRE”)     800,881     9.1       795,808     9.0       780,003     8.8       807,223     8.9       806,285     8.7  
    Non-owner occupied commercial (“NOOCRE”)     2,311,466     26.3       2,266,526     25.6       2,382,499     26.7       2,338,094     25.9       2,369,848     25.7  
    Construction and land     1,142,457     13.0       1,214,260     13.7       1,303,711     14.7       1,436,540     15.8       1,536,580     16.7  
    Farmland     31,589     0.4       31,339     0.4       31,690     0.4       32,254     0.4       30,512     0.3  
    1-4 family residential     1,086,342     12.3       1,021,293     11.6       957,341     10.7       944,755     10.5       917,402     10.0  
    Multi-family residential     718,946     8.2       782,412     8.9       750,218     8.4       738,090     8.2       748,740     8.1  
    Consumer     8,796     0.1       8,597     0.1       9,115     0.1       11,292     0.1       9,245     0.1  
    Total LHI1   $ 8,792,686     100 %   $ 8,837,272     100 %   $ 8,908,115     100 %   $ 9,036,792     100 %   $ 9,216,872     100 %
                                             
    MW     669,052           571,775           605,411           630,650           568,047      
                                             
    Total LHI1   $ 9,461,738         $ 9,409,047         $ 9,513,526         $ 9,667,442         $ 9,784,919      
                                             
    Total LHFS     69,480           69,236           89,309           48,496           57,046      
                                             
    Total loans   $ 9,531,218         $ 9,478,283         $ 9,602,835         $ 9,715,938         $ 9,841,965      
                                             
    Deposits                                        
    Noninterest-bearing   $ 2,133,294     20.5 %   $ 2,318,645     21.7 %   $ 2,191,457     20.4 %   $ 2,643,894     24.0 %   $ 2,416,727     22.5 %
    Interest-bearing transaction     603,861     5.8       863,462     8.1       839,005     7.8       421,059     3.8       523,272     4.9  
    Money market     3,856,812     37.0       3,730,446     35.0       3,772,964     35.1       3,462,709     31.4       3,268,286     30.5  
    Savings     548,464     5.3       586,587     5.5       449,188     4.2       320,940     2.9       187,896     1.8  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750     26.8       2,679,221     25.1       2,958,861     27.5       3,625,920     32.8       3,744,596     34.9  
    Correspondent money market accounts     482,739     4.6       486,762     4.6       541,117     5.0       561,489     5.1       584,067     5.4  
    Total deposits   $ 10,417,920     100 %   $ 10,665,123     100 %   $ 10,752,592     100 %   $ 11,036,011     100 %   $ 10,724,844     100 %
                                             
    Total loans to deposits ratio     91.5 %         88.9 %         89.3 %         88.0 %         91.8 %    
                                             
    Total loans to deposit ratio, excluding MW loans and LHFS     84.4 %         82.9 %         82.8 %         81.9 %         85.9 %    

    1Total LHI does not include deferred fees of $8.7 million, $8.6 million, $9.0 million, $8.2 million and $7.8 million at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.


    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality
      For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
      (Dollars in thousands)        
    NPAs:                          
    Nonaccrual loans $ 61,142     $ 69,188     $ 52,521     $ 55,335     $ 58,537     $ 61,142     $ 58,537  
    Nonaccrual PCD loans1   196       196             70       73       196       73  
    Accruing loans 90 or more days past due2   4,641       3,249       1,914       2,860       143       4,641       143  
    Total nonperforming loans held for investment (“NPLs”)   65,979       72,633       54,435       58,265       58,753       65,979       58,753  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)   9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256       9,218       24,256  
    Total NPAs $ 75,197     $ 96,901     $ 79,172     $ 67,299     $ 83,009     $ 75,197     $ 83,009  
                               
    Charge-offs:                          
    1-4 family residential $     $     $     $     $ (31 )   $     $ (31 )
    Multifamily                           (198 )           (198 )
    OOCRE                                       (120 )
    NOOCRE   (215 )     (3,090 )     (5,113 )           (1,969 )     (3,305 )     (6,262 )
    C&I   (1,571 )     (918 )     (4,586 )     (2,259 )     (5,601 )     (2,489 )     (6,547 )
    Consumer   (55 )     (212 )     (420 )     (54 )     (30 )     (267 )     (101 )
    Total charge-offs $ (1,841 )   $ (4,220 )   $ (10,119 )   $ (2,313 )   $ (7,829 )   $ (6,061 )   $ (13,259 )
                               
    Recoveries:                          
    1-4 family residential $ 1     $ 21     $ 2     $ 3     $     $ 22     $ 1  
    OOCRE   186                         120       186       120  
    NOOCRE               1,323                          
    C&I   131       32       1,047       1,962       361       163       457  
    MW                     46                    
    Consumer   262       195       30       33       497       457       546  
    Total recoveries $ 580     $ 248     $ 2,402     $ 2,044     $ 978     $ 828     $ 1,124  
                               
    Net charge-offs $ (1,261 )   $ (3,972 )   $ (7,717 )   $ (269 )   $ (6,851 )   $ (5,233 )   $ (12,135 )
                               
    Provision for credit losses $ 1,750     $ 4,000     $ 2,300     $ 4,000     $ 8,250     $ 5,750     $ 15,750  
                               
    ACL $ 112,262     $ 111,773     $ 111,745     $ 117,162     $ 113,431     $ 112,262     $ 113,431  
                               
    Asset Quality Ratios:                          
    NPAs to total assets   0.60 %     0.77 %     0.62 %     0.52 %     0.65 %     0.60 %     0.65 %
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total assets   0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total LHI and OREO   0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    NPLs to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    NPLs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    ACL to total LHI   1.19       1.19       1.18       1.21       1.16       1.19       1.16  
    ACL to total LHI, excluding MW   1.28       1.27       1.25       1.30       1.23       1.28       1.23  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3   0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  

    1 Nonaccrual PCD loans consist of PCD loans that transitioned upon adoption of ASC 326 Financial Instruments – Credit Losses and were accounted for on a pooled basis that have subsequently been placed on nonaccrual status.
    2 Accruing loans greater than 90 days past due exclude purchase credit deteriorated loans greater than 90 days past due that are accounted for on a pooled basis.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    We identify certain financial measures discussed in this earnings release as being “non-GAAP financial measures.” In accordance with SEC rules, we classify a financial measure as being a non-GAAP financial measure if that financial measure excludes or includes amounts, or is subject to adjustments that have the effect of excluding or including amounts, that are included or excluded, as the case may be, in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, in our statements of income, balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Non-GAAP financial measures do not include operating and other statistical measures or ratios calculated using exclusively either one or both of (i) financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP and (ii) operating measures or other measures that are not non-GAAP financial measures.

    The non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the most directly comparable or other financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. Moreover, the manner in which we calculate the non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release may differ from that of other companies reporting measures with similar names. You should understand how such other financial institutions calculate their financial measures that appear to be similar or have similar names to the non-GAAP financial measures we have discussed in this earnings release when comparing such non-GAAP financial measures.

    Tangible Book Value Per Common Share. Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (b) tangible book value per common share as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by number of common shares outstanding. For tangible book value per common share, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is book value per common share.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in changes from period to period in book value per common share exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing total book value while not increasing our tangible book value.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and presents our tangible book value per common share compared with our book value per common share:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Common shares outstanding     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350  
                         
    Book value per common share   $ 30.39     $ 30.08     $ 29.37     $ 29.53     $ 28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share   $ 22.68     $ 22.33     $ 21.61     $ 21.72     $ 20.62  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets. Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity, less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; (b) tangible assets as total assets less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) tangible common equity to tangible assets as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by tangible assets (as described in clause (b)). For tangible common equity to tangible assets, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is total stockholders’ equity to total assets.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the relative changes from period to period in common equity and total assets, in each case, exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing both total stockholders’ equity and assets while not increasing our tangible common equity or tangible assets.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and total assets to tangible assets and presents our tangible common equity to tangible assets:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Tangible Assets                    
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible Assets   $ 12,109,548     $ 12,185,333     $ 12,345,145     $ 12,617,342     $ 12,256,259  
    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets     10.16 %     9.95 %     9.54 %     9.37 %     9.14 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity. Return on average tangible common equity is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles (which we refer to as “return”) as net income, plus amortization of core deposit intangibles, less tax benefit at the statutory rate; (b) average tangible common equity as total average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) return (as described in clause (a)) divided by average tangible common equity (as described in clause (b)). For return on average tangible common equity, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is return on average equity.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the return on common equity, exclusive of the impact of core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and core deposit intangibles have the effect of increasing total stockholders’ equity while not increasing our tangible common equity. This measure is particularly relevant to acquisitive institutions that may have higher balances in goodwill and core deposit intangibles than non-acquisitive institutions.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, average tangible common equity to average common equity and net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles, net of taxes to net income and presents our return on average tangible common equity:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 30,996     $ 26,807     $ 32,927     $ 29,128     $ 63,828     $ 55,210  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity (Annualized)     10.79 %     10.49 %     9.04 %     11.33 %     10.54 %     10.64 %     10.03 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Operating Earnings, Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings and performance metrics calculated using Operating Earnings and Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings, including Diluted Operating Earnings per Share, Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Loans, Operating Return on Average Tangible Common Equity and Operating Efficiency Ratio. Operating earnings, pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and the performance metrics calculated using these metrics, listed below, are non-GAAP measures used by management to evaluate the Company’s financial performance. We calculate (a) operating earnings as net income plus BOLI 1035 exchange charges, plus severance payments, plus loss on sales of debt securities available for sale (“AFS”), net, plus FDIC special assessment, less tax impact of adjustments, plus nonrecurring tax adjustments. We calculate (b) diluted operating earnings per share as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by weighted average diluted shares outstanding. We calculate (c) pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as operating earnings as described in clause (a) plus provision for income taxes, plus provision (benefit) for credit losses and unfunded commitments. We calculate (d) pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets as pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (e) operating return on average assets as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (f) operating return on average tangible common equity as operating earnings as described in clause (a), adjusted for the amortization of intangibles and tax benefit at the statutory rate, divided by total average tangible common equity (average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization). We calculate (g) operating efficiency ratio as noninterest expense plus adjustments to operating noninterest expense divided by noninterest income plus adjustments to operating noninterest income, plus net interest income.

    We believe that these measures and the operating metrics calculated utilizing these measures are important to management and many investors in the marketplace who are interested in understanding the ongoing operating performance of the Company and provide meaningful comparisons to its peers.

    The following tables reconcile, as of the dates set forth below, operating net income and pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and related metrics:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882   $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges1         517                 517    
    Plus: Severance payments2             1,545     1,487     613         613
    Plus: Loss on sales of AFS securities, net             4,397                 6,304
    Plus: FDIC special assessment                     134         134
    Operating pre-tax income     30,906     29,587     30,824     32,488     27,949     60,493     58,409
    Less: Tax impact of adjustments         109     1,248     307     166     109     1,489
    Plus: Nonrecurring tax adjustments         229     193         527     229     527
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906   $ 29,707   $ 29,769   $ 32,181   $ 28,310   $ 60,613   $ 57,447
                                 
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237     54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45   $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94
    Diluted operating EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.54   $ 0.54   $ 0.59   $ 0.52   $ 1.10   $ 1.05

    1Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    2Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands)   Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
    Pre-Tax, Pre-Provision Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Plus: Provision for income taxes     8,516       8,526       8,222       8,067       8,221       17,042       15,458  
    Plus: Provision for credit losses and unfunded commitments     3,250       5,300       1,899       4,000       8,250       8,550       14,209  
    Plus: Severance payments3                 1,545       1,487       613             613  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net                 4,397                         6,304  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2           517                         517        
    Plus: FDIC special assessment                             134             134  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings   $ 42,672     $ 43,413     $ 40,945     $ 44,555     $ 44,420     $ 86,085     $ 88,076  
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
                                 
    Average loans   $ 9,399,173     $ 9,313,629     $ 9,449,565     $ 9,661,774     $ 9,765,428     $ 9,356,637     $ 9,664,400  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82 %     1.89 %     1.72 %     1.83 %     1.83 %     1.86 %     1.83 %
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
                                 
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 29,769     $ 32,181     $ 28,310     $ 60,613     $ 57,447  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 31,633     $ 31,694     $ 34,107     $ 30,236     $ 64,465     $ 61,299  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Less: Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Less: Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79 %     10.70 %     10.69 %     11.74 %     10.94 %     10.75 %     11.14 %
                                 
    Efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.91 %     67.04 %     61.94 %     59.11 %     61.03 %     60.72 %
    Operating efficiency ratio                            
    Net interest income   $ 96,335     $ 95,441     $ 96,141     $ 100,062     $ 96,236     $ 191,776     $ 189,042  
    Noninterest income     13,499       14,289       10,056       13,106       10,578       27,788       17,240  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2           517                         517        
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net                 4,397                         6,304  
    Operating noninterest income     13,499       14,806       14,453       13,106       10,578       28,305       23,544  
    Noninterest expense     67,162       66,834       71,194       70,100       63,141       133,996       125,257  
    Less: FDIC special assessment                             134             134  
    Less: Severance payments3                 1,545       1,487       613             613  
    Operating noninterest expense   $ 67,162     $ 66,834     $ 69,649     $ 68,613     $ 62,394     $ 133,996     $ 124,510  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.62 %     62.98 %     60.63 %     58.41 %     60.88 %     58.57 %

    1 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    2 Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    3 Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Veritex Holdings, Inc. Reports Second Quarter 2025 Operating Results and Declares Quarterly Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DALLAS, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  Veritex Holdings, Inc. (“Veritex”, the “Company”, “we” or “our”) (Nasdaq: VBTX), the holding company for Veritex Community Bank, today announced the results for the quarter ended June 30, 2025.

    The Company also announced that the Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share of common stock. The dividend will be payable on August 21, 2025 to shareholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

        Quarter to Date
    Financial Highlights   Q2 2025   Q1 2025   Q2 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (unaudited)
    GAAP            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 27,202  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.50  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       28.49  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.87 %
    Return on average equity1     7.56       7.27       7.10  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.29  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       59.11  
    Non-GAAP2            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 28,310  
    Diluted operating EPS     0.56       0.54       0.52  
    Tangible book value per common share     22.68       22.33       20.62  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings     42,672       43,413       44,420  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82       1.89       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.91  
    Return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.49       10.54  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.70       10.94  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15       60.62       58.41  

    1 Annualized ratio.
    2 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of these non-generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

    Other Second Quarter Credit, Capital and Company Highlights

    • Credit quality remained strong with a nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) to total assets ratio of 0.60% and annualized net charge-offs of 0.05% for the quarter and 0.11% year-to-date;
    • Allowance for Credit Losses (“ACL”) to total loans held-for-investment ratio (excluding mortgage warehouse (“MW”)) remained relatively unchanged at 1.28%;
    • Capital remains strong with common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.05% as of June 30, 2025;
    • Book value per share increased $0.31 to $30.39 and tangible book value per share increased $0.35 to $22.68;
    • We repurchased 286,291 and 663,637 shares of Company stock for $7.1 million and $16.6 million during the second quarter and year-to-date, respectively; and
    • On July 14, 2025, we announced entry into a definitive agreement to merge with Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (“Huntington”), which is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2025, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.

    Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025

    Net Interest Income

    For the three months ended June 30, 2025, net interest income before provision for credit losses was $96.3 million and net interest margin (“NIM”) was 3.33% compared to $95.4 million and 3.31%, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The $894 thousand increase, or 0.9%, in net interest income before provision for credit losses was primarily due to a $2.8 million increase in interest income on loans, a $1.7 million decrease in interest expense on certificates and other time deposits and a $768 thousand decrease in subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, partially offset by a $2.9 million increase in interest expense on transaction and savings deposits and a $1.2 million decrease in interest income on deposits in financial institutions and fed funds sold for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The NIM increased two basis points (bps) compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to the decreased funding costs on certificates and other time deposits and subordinated debt due to the redemption of $75.0 million in subordinated debt during the three months ended March 31, 2025 as well as a mix shift from lower yielding to higher yielding assets for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was largely offset by higher deposits funding costs primarily driven by the expiration of favorable hedges on money market deposit accounts at the end of the first quarter 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, net interest income before provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was relatively unchanged. Net interest income benefited from decreases in interest expense of $16.3 million on certificates and other time deposits, $1.4 million on advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and $1.1 million on subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, as well as an increase of $1.5 million in interest income on debt securities. These changes were substantially offset by a decrease of $17.6 million in interest income on loans and a $2.5 million increase in interest expense on interest-bearing demand and savings deposits. The NIM increased four bps from 3.29% for the three months ended June 30, 2024 to 3.33% for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was primarily due to decreased funding costs on deposits, advances and subordinated debt resulting from interest rate cuts for the year over year period, partially offset by the related declines in rates earned on interest-earnings assets, primarily loans.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $13.5 million, a decrease of $790 thousand, or 5.5%, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The change was primarily due to a $1.6 million decrease in government guaranteed loan income, partially offset by an $850 thousand increase in customer swap income during the period.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $2.9 million, or 27.6%. The increase was primarily due to a $1.2 million increase in customer swap income, a $728 thousand increase in service charges and fees on deposit accounts, a $528 thousand increase in loan fees and a $368 thousand increase in government guaranteed loan income for the year over year period.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense was $67.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $66.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $328 thousand, or 0.5%. The increase was primarily due to a $920 thousand increase in other noninterest expense, a $627 thousand increase in professional and regulatory fees and a $580 thousand increase in marketing expenses compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The increase was largely offset by a $1.7 million decrease in salaries and employee benefits primarily due to $733 thousand in lower payroll taxes, which are historically higher in the first quarter, as well as decreases of $678 thousand in bonus expense, $370 thousand in employee insurance expense and $340 thousand in stock grant expenses, offset partially by a $1.0 million increase in salaries expense. In addition, deferred loan origination costs, which reduce salaries expense, were $399 thousand higher for the three months ended June 30, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $4.0 million, or 6.4%. The increase was primarily due to a $2.2 million increase in salaries and employee benefits driven by a $4.7 million increase in salaries expense and incentives accruals and a $521 thousand increase in payroll taxes, offset by decreases of $1.1 million in stock grant expense and $661 thousand in severance expense, as well as $1.6 million higher deferred loan origination costs, which reduces salaries and employee benefit expense. Additionally, there was a $1.1 million increase in other noninterest expense, driven primarily by higher OREO expenses, and a $636 thousand increase in marketing expenses during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the same period in the prior year.

    Income Tax

    Income tax expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 totaled $8.5 million, which is consistent with the amount recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 21.6% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to 22.7% for the three months ended March 31, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, income tax expense increased by $295 thousand, or 3.6%, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 23.2% for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

    Financial Condition

    Total loans held for investment (“LHI”), excluding MW was $8.78 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $44.7 million compared to March 31, 2025.

    Total deposits were $10.42 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $247.2 million compared to March 31, 2025. The decrease was primarily the result of decreases of $185.4 million in noninterest bearing deposits and $171.4 million in interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits, partially offset by an increase of $113.5 million in certificates and other time deposits.

    Credit Quality

    NPAs totaled $75.2 million, or 0.60% of total assets, of which $66.0 million represented LHI and $9.2 million represented OREO at June 30, 2025, compared to $96.9 million, or 0.77% of total assets, at March 31, 2025. The Company had net charge-offs of $1.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Annualized net charge-offs to average loans outstanding were five bps for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 17 bps and 28 bps for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

    ACL as a percentage of LHI was 1.19% at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 and 1.16% at June 30, 2024. ACL as a percentage of LHI (excluding MW) was 1.28% at June 30, 2025, 1.27% at March 31, 2025 and 1.23% at June 30, 2024. The Company recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.8 million, $4.0 million and $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. The provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was primarily attributable to changes in economic factors for the period. The balance for unfunded commitments increased to $8.9 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $7.4 million at March 31, 2025, and we recorded a $1.5 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to a $1.3 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and no provision recorded for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in the allowance for unfunded commitments was attributable to increases in unfunded balances and changes in economic factors for the period.

    Dividend Information

    On July 18, 2025, Veritex’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share on its outstanding shares of common stock. The dividend will be paid on or after August 21, 2025 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Veritex’s management uses certain non-GAAP (U.S. generally accepted accounting principles) financial measures to evaluate its operating performance and provide information that is important to investors. However, non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, Veritex’s reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Specifically, Veritex reviews and reports tangible book value per common share of the Company; operating earnings; tangible common equity to tangible assets; return on average tangible common equity; pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans; diluted operating earnings per share; operating return on average assets; operating return on average tangible common equity; and operating efficiency ratio. Veritex has included in this earnings release information related to these non-GAAP financial measures for the applicable periods presented. Please refer to “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights at the end of this earnings release for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

    About Veritex Holdings, Inc.

    Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Veritex is a bank holding company that conducts banking activities through its wholly owned subsidiary, Veritex Community Bank, with locations throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and in the Houston metropolitan area. Veritex Community Bank is a Texas state chartered bank regulated by the Texas Department of Banking and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. For more information, visit www.veritexbank.com.

    CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    This communication may contain certain forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, certain plans, expectations, goals, projections, and statements about the benefits of the proposed transaction, the plans, objectives, expectations and intentions of Veritex and Huntington, the expected timing of completion of the transaction, and other statements that are not historical facts and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties that are beyond the control of Veritex and Huntington. Such statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, estimates, uncertainties and other important factors that change over time and could cause actual results to differ materially from any results, performance, or events expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including as a result of the factors referenced below. Statements that do not describe historical or current facts, including statements about beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as expect, anticipate, continue, believe, intend, estimate, plan, trend, objective, target, goal, or similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as will, may, might, should, would, could, or similar variations. The forward-looking statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

    Veritex and Huntington caution that the forward-looking statements in this communication are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to assess and are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond Veritex’s and Huntington’s control. While there is no assurance that any list of risks and uncertainties or risk factors is complete, below are certain factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in the forward-looking statements or historical performance: changes in general economic, political, or industry conditions; deterioration in business and economic conditions, including persistent inflation, supply chain issues or labor shortages, instability in global economic conditions and geopolitical matters, as well as volatility in financial markets; changes in U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs; the impact of pandemics and other catastrophic events or disasters on the global economy and financial market conditions and our business, results of operations, and financial condition; the impacts related to or resulting from bank failures and other volatility, including potential increased regulatory requirements and costs, such as FDIC special assessments, long-term debt requirements and heightened capital requirements, and potential impacts to macroeconomic conditions, which could affect the ability of depository institutions, including us, to attract and retain depositors and to borrow or raise capital; unexpected outflows of uninsured deposits which may require us to sell investment securities at a loss; changing interest rates which could negatively impact the value of our portfolio of investment securities; the loss of value of our investment portfolio which could negatively impact market perceptions of us and could lead to deposit withdrawals; the effects of social media on market perceptions of us and banks generally; cybersecurity risks; uncertainty in U.S. fiscal and monetary policy, including the interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve; volatility and disruptions in global capital, foreign exchange and credit markets; movements in interest rates; competitive pressures on product pricing and services; success, impact, and timing of our business strategies, including market acceptance of any new products or services including those implementing our “Fair Play” banking philosophy; changes in policies and standards for regulatory review of bank mergers; the nature, extent, timing, and results of governmental actions, examinations, reviews, reforms, regulations, and interpretations, including those related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, as well as those involving the SEC, OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB and state-level regulators; the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the right of one or both of the parties to terminate the merger agreement between Veritex and Huntington; the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against Veritex and Huntington; delays in completing the transaction; the failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the transaction); the failure to obtain Veritex shareholder approval or to satisfy any of the other conditions to the transaction on a timely basis or at all; the possibility that the anticipated benefits of the transaction are not realized when expected or at all, including as a result of the impact of, or problems arising from, the integration of the two companies or as a result of the strength of the economy and competitive factors in the areas where Veritex and Huntington do business; the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events; diversion of management’s attention from ongoing business operations and opportunities; potential adverse reactions or changes to business, customer or employee relationships, including those resulting from the announcement or completion of the transaction; the ability to complete the transaction and integration of Veritex and Huntington successfully; the dilution caused by Huntington’s issuance of additional shares of its capital stock in connection with the transaction; and other factors that may affect the future results of Veritex and Huntington. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described above can be found in Veritex’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the SEC and available on Veritex’s investor relations website, ir.veritexbank.com, under the heading “Financials” and in other documents Veritex files with the SEC, and in Huntington’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and available in the “Investor Relations” section of Huntington’s website, http://www.huntington.com, under the heading “Investor Relations” and in other documents Huntington files with the SEC.

    All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements set forth above. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and are based on information available at that time. Neither Veritex nor Huntington assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, new information or future events, changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or other factors affecting forward-looking statements that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by federal securities laws. If Veritex or Huntington update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that Veritex or Huntington will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements. As forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, caution should be exercised against placing undue reliance on such statements.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    Per Share Data (Common Stock):                            
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57     $ 0.53     $ 0.46     $ 0.57     $ 0.50     $ 1.10     $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.45       0.56       0.50       1.09       0.94  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       29.37       29.53       28.49       30.39       28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share1     22.68       22.33       21.61       21.72       20.62       22.68       20.62  
    Dividends paid per common share outstanding2     0.22       0.22       0.20       0.20       0.20       0.44       0.40  
                                 
    Common Stock Data:                            
    Shares outstanding at period end     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350       54,265       54,350  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding for the period     54,251       54,486       54,489       54,409       54,457       54,368       54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding for the period     54,766       55,123       55,237       54,932       54,823       54,944       54,832  
                                 
    Summary of Credit Ratios:                            
    ACL to total LHI     1.19 %     1.19 %     1.18 %     1.21 %     1.16 %     1.19 %     1.16 %
    NPAs to total assets     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, to total assets3     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total loans and OREO     0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3     0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  
                                 
    Summary Performance Ratios:                            
    Return on average assets3     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Return on average equity3     7.56       7.27       6.17       7.79       7.10       7.42       6.72  
    Return on average tangible common equity1, 3     10.79       10.49       9.04       11.33       10.54       10.64       10.03  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       67.04       61.94       59.11       61.03       60.72  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.20       3.30       3.29       3.32       3.27  
                                 
    Selected Performance Metrics – Operating:                        
    Diluted operating EPS1   $ 0.56     $ 0.54     $ 0.54     $ 0.59     $ 0.52     $ 1.10     $ 1.05  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1, 3     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1, 3     1.82       1.89       1.72       1.83       1.83       1.86       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1,3     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1,3     10.79       10.70       10.69       11.74       10.94       10.75       11.14  
    Operating efficiency ratio1     61.15       60.62       62.98       60.63       58.41       60.88       58.57  
                                 
    Veritex Holdings, Inc. Capital Ratios:                        
    Average stockholders’ equity to average total assets     13.19 %     12.96 %     12.58 %     12.31 %     12.26 %     13.07 %     12.34 %
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets1     10.16       9.95       9.54       9.37       9.14       10.16       9.14  
    Tier 1 capital to average assets (leverage)4     10.73       10.55       10.32       10.06       10.06       10.73       10.06  
    Common equity tier 1 capital4     11.05       11.04       11.09       10.86       10.49       11.05       10.49  
    Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets4     11.32       11.31       11.36       11.13       10.75       11.32       10.75  
    Total capital to risk-weighted assets4     13.46       13.46       13.96       13.91       13.45       13.46       13.45  
    Risk-weighted assets4   $ 11,435,978     $ 11,318,220     $ 11,247,813     $ 11,290,800     $ 11,450,997     $ 11,435,978     $ 11,450,997  

    1 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.
    2 Dividend amount represents dividend paid per common share subsequent to each respective quarter end.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    4 June 30, 2025 ratios and risk-weighted assets are estimated.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands)


        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)       (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    ASSETS                    
    Cash and due from banks   $ 66,696     $ 81,088     $ 52,486     $ 54,165     $ 53,462  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks     703,869       768,702       802,714       1,046,625       598,375  
    Cash and cash equivalents     770,565       849,790       855,200       1,100,790       651,837  
    Debt securities, net     1,418,804       1,463,157       1,478,538       1,423,610       1,349,354  
    Other investments     73,986       69,452       69,638       71,257       75,885  
    Loans held for sale (“LHFS”)     69,480       69,236       89,309       48,496       57,046  
    LHI, MW     669,052       571,775       605,411       630,650       568,047  
    LHI, excluding MW     8,783,988       8,828,672       8,899,133       9,028,575       9,209,094  
    Total loans     9,522,520       9,469,683       9,593,853       9,707,721       9,834,187  
    ACL     (112,262 )     (111,773 )     (111,745 )     (117,162 )     (113,431 )
    Bank-owned life insurance     86,048       85,424       85,324       84,776       84,233  
    Bank premises, furniture and equipment, net     116,642       112,801       113,480       114,202       105,222  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)     9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256  
    Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization     25,006       27,974       28,664       32,825       35,817  
    Goodwill     404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452  
    Other assets     212,889       210,863       226,200       211,471       232,518  
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                    
    Deposits:                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits   $ 2,133,294     $ 2,318,645     $ 2,191,457     $ 2,643,894     $ 2,416,727  
    Interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits     5,009,137       5,180,495       5,061,157       4,204,708       3,979,454  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750       2,679,221       2,958,861       3,625,920       3,744,596  
    Correspondent money market deposits     482,739       486,762       541,117       561,489       584,067  
    Total deposits     10,417,920       10,665,123       10,752,592       11,036,011       10,724,844  
    Accounts payable and other liabilities     135,647       151,579       183,944       168,415       180,585  
    Advances from FHLB     169,000                          
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     156,082       155,909       230,736       230,536       230,285  
    Total liabilities     10,878,649       10,972,611       11,167,272       11,434,962       11,135,714  
    Stockholders’ equity:                    
    Common stock     617       615       613       613       612  
    Additional paid-in capital     1,329,803       1,329,626       1,328,748       1,324,929       1,321,995  
    Retained earnings     545,015       526,044       507,903       493,921       473,801  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (38,528 )     (42,170 )     (65,076 )     (40,330 )     (76,713 )
    Treasury stock     (187,688 )     (180,635 )     (171,119 )     (171,119 )     (171,079 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     1,649,219       1,633,480       1,601,069       1,608,014       1,548,616  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except per share data)

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months
    Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    Interest income:                            
    Loans, including fees   $ 149,354   $ 146,505   $ 154,998     $ 167,261   $ 166,979   $ 295,859   $ 328,921  
    Debt securities     16,883     17,106     16,893       15,830     15,408     33,989     29,103  
    Deposits in financial institutions and Fed Funds sold     8,039     9,244     11,888       12,571     7,722     17,283     15,772  
    Equity securities and other investments     847     870     940       1,001     1,138     1,717     2,038  
    Total interest income     175,123     173,725     184,719       196,663     191,247     348,848     375,834  
    Interest expense:                            
    Transaction and savings deposits     48,080     45,165     44,841       47,208     45,619     93,245     92,403  
    Certificates and other time deposits     28,539     30,268     40,279       46,230     44,811     58,807     85,303  
    Advances from FHLB     113     27     130       47     1,468     140     2,859  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     2,056     2,824     3,328       3,116     3,113     4,880     6,227  
    Total interest expense     78,788     78,284     88,578       96,601     95,011     157,072     186,792  
    Net interest income     96,335     95,441     96,141       100,062     96,236     191,776     189,042  
    Provision for credit losses     1,750     4,000     2,300       4,000     8,250     5,750     15,750  
    Provision (benefit) for unfunded commitments     1,500     1,300     (401 )             2,800     (1,541 )
    Net interest income after provisions     93,085     90,141     94,242       96,062     87,986     183,226     174,833  
    Noninterest income:                            
    Service charges and fees on deposit accounts     5,702     5,611     5,612       5,442     4,974     11,313     9,870  
    Loan fees     2,735     2,495     2,265       3,278     2,207     5,230     4,717  
    Loss on sales of debt securities             (4,397 )                 (6,304 )
    Government guaranteed loan income, net     1,688     3,301     5,368       780     1,320     4,989     3,934  
    Customer swap income     1,550     700     509       271     326     2,250     775  
    Other income     1,824     2,182     699       3,335     1,751     4,006     4,248  
    Total noninterest income     13,499     14,289     10,056       13,106     10,578     27,788     17,240  
    Noninterest expense:                            
    Salaries and employee benefits     34,957     36,624     37,446       37,370     32,790     71,581     66,155  
    Occupancy and equipment     4,511     4,650     4,633       4,789     4,585     9,161     9,262  
    Professional and regulatory fees     5,558     4,931     5,564       4,903     5,617     10,489     11,670  
    Data processing and software expense     5,507     5,403     5,741       5,268     5,097     10,910     9,953  
    Marketing     2,612     2,032     2,896       2,781     1,976     4,644     3,522  
    Amortization of intangibles     2,438     2,438     2,437       2,438     2,438     4,876     4,876  
    Telephone and communications     233     330     323       335     365     563     626  
    Other     11,346     10,426     12,154       12,216     10,273     21,772     19,193  
    Total noninterest expense     67,162     66,834     71,194       70,100     63,141     133,996     125,257  
    Income before income tax expense     39,422     37,596     33,104       39,068     35,423     77,018     66,816  
    Income tax expense     8,516     8,526     8,222       8,067     8,221     17,042     15,458  
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882     $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358  
                                 
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57   $ 0.53   $ 0.46     $ 0.57   $ 0.50   $ 1.10   $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45     $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding     54,251     54,486     54,489       54,409     54,457     54,368     54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237       54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

        For the Quarter Ended
        June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Assets                                    
    Interest-earning assets:                                    
    Loans1   $ 8,875,970     $ 141,688   6.40 %   $ 8,886,905     $ 140,329   6.40 %   $ 9,344,482     $ 160,323   6.90 %
    LHI, MW     523,203       7,666   5.88       426,724       6,176   5.87       420,946       6,656   6.36  
    Debt securities     1,440,369       16,883   4.70       1,467,220       17,106   4.73       1,352,293       15,408   4.58  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     707,933       8,039   4.55       827,751       9,244   4.53       560,586       7,722   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,779       847   4.80       70,696       870   4.99       78,964       1,138   5.80  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,618,254       175,123   6.05       11,679,296       173,725   6.03       11,757,271       191,247   6.54  
    ACL     (112,369 )             (111,563 )             (115,978 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     933,328               938,401               937,413          
    Total assets   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                                    
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,502,672     $ 48,080   3.50 %   $ 5,449,091     $ 45,165   3.36 %   $ 4,570,329     $ 45,619   4.01 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,742,655       28,539   4.17       2,726,309       30,268   4.50       3,591,035       44,811   5.02  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     9,813       113   4.62       2,333       27   4.69       106,648       1,468   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     155,985       2,056   5.29       191,638       2,824   5.98       230,141       3,113   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,411,125       78,788   3.76       8,369,371       78,284   3.79       8,498,153       95,011   4.50  
                                         
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,244,745               2,345,586               2,346,908          
    Other liabilities     142,925               170,389               192,036          
    Total liabilities     10,798,795               10,885,346               11,037,097          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,640,418               1,620,788               1,541,609          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Net interest rate spread2           2.29 %           2.24 %           2.04 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 96,335   3.33 %       $ 95,441   3.31 %       $ 96,236   3.29 %

    1 Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million and $58.5 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the quarter are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except percentages)
        For the Six Months Ended
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
    Assets                        
    Interest-earning assets:                        
    Loans1   $ 8,881,407     $ 282,017   6.40 %   $ 9,314,148     $ 317,908   6.86 %
    LHI, MW     475,230       13,842   5.87       350,252       11,013   6.32  
    Debt securities     1,453,721       33,989   4.71       1,323,644       29,103   4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     767,511       17,283   4.54       572,589       15,772   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,738       1,717   4.89       77,616       2,038   5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,648,607       348,848   6.04       11,638,249       375,834   6.49  
    ACL     (111,969 )             (114,104 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     935,850               933,229          
    Total assets   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,476,030     $ 93,245   3.43 %   $ 4,604,887     $ 92,403   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,734,527       58,807   4.34       3,437,385       85,303   4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     6,094       140   4.63       103,819       2,859   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     173,713       4,880   5.67       230,011       6,227   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,390,364       157,072   3.78       8,376,102       186,792   4.48  
                             
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,294,887               2,351,112          
    Other liabilities     156,580               192,422          
    Total liabilities     10,841,831               10,919,636          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,630,657               1,537,738          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Net interest rate spread2           2.26 %           2.01 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 191,776   3.32 %       $ 189,042   3.27 %

    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the six month periods are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


    Yield Trend
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average yield on interest-earning assets:                            
    Loans1   6.40 %   6.40 %   6.56 %   6.89 %   6.90 %   6.40 %   6.86 %
    LHI, MW   5.88     5.87     5.83     6.75     6.36     5.87     6.32  
    Total Loans   6.37     6.38     6.53     6.89     6.88     6.38     6.84  
    Debt securities   4.70     4.73     4.61     4.55     4.58     4.71     4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks   4.55     4.53     4.87     5.41     5.54     4.54     5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments   4.80     4.99     5.18     5.25     5.80     4.89     5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets   6.05 %   6.03 %   6.15 %   6.49 %   6.54 %   6.04 %   6.49 %
                                 
    Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities:                            
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   3.50 %   3.36 %   3.57 %   4.00 %   4.01 %   3.43 %   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits   4.17     4.50     4.83     5.00     5.02     4.34     4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and other   4.62     4.69     4.88     5.73     5.54     4.63     5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes   5.29     5.98     5.74     5.38     5.44     5.67     5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3.76 %   3.79 %   4.12 %   4.46 %   4.50 %   3.78 %   4.48 %
                                 
    Net interest rate spread2   2.29 %   2.24 %   2.03 %   2.03 %   2.04 %   2.26 %   2.01 %
    Net interest margin3   3.33 %   3.31 %   3.20 %   3.30 %   3.29 %   3.32 %   3.27 %

      
    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million, $46.4 million, $54.3 million and $58.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, respectively and $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024 respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.

    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.

    Supplemental Yield Trend

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average cost of interest-bearing deposits   3.73 %   3.74 %   4.07 %   4.44 %   4.46 %   3.73 %   3.33 %
    Average costs of total deposits, including noninterest-bearing   2.93     2.91     3.16     3.42     3.46     2.92     2.48  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


       
    LHI and Deposit Portfolio Composition    
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    LHI1                                        
    Commercial and Industrial (“C&I”)   $ 2,692,209     30.6 %   $ 2,717,037     30.7 %   $ 2,693,538     30.2 %   $ 2,728,544     30.2 %   $ 2,798,260     30.4 %
    Real Estate:                                        
    Owner occupied commercial (“OOCRE”)     800,881     9.1       795,808     9.0       780,003     8.8       807,223     8.9       806,285     8.7  
    Non-owner occupied commercial (“NOOCRE”)     2,311,466     26.3       2,266,526     25.6       2,382,499     26.7       2,338,094     25.9       2,369,848     25.7  
    Construction and land     1,142,457     13.0       1,214,260     13.7       1,303,711     14.7       1,436,540     15.8       1,536,580     16.7  
    Farmland     31,589     0.4       31,339     0.4       31,690     0.4       32,254     0.4       30,512     0.3  
    1-4 family residential     1,086,342     12.3       1,021,293     11.6       957,341     10.7       944,755     10.5       917,402     10.0  
    Multi-family residential     718,946     8.2       782,412     8.9       750,218     8.4       738,090     8.2       748,740     8.1  
    Consumer     8,796     0.1       8,597     0.1       9,115     0.1       11,292     0.1       9,245     0.1  
    Total LHI1   $ 8,792,686     100 %   $ 8,837,272     100 %   $ 8,908,115     100 %   $ 9,036,792     100 %   $ 9,216,872     100 %
                                             
    MW     669,052           571,775           605,411           630,650           568,047      
                                             
    Total LHI1   $ 9,461,738         $ 9,409,047         $ 9,513,526         $ 9,667,442         $ 9,784,919      
                                             
    Total LHFS     69,480           69,236           89,309           48,496           57,046      
                                             
    Total loans   $ 9,531,218         $ 9,478,283         $ 9,602,835         $ 9,715,938         $ 9,841,965      
                                             
    Deposits                                        
    Noninterest-bearing   $ 2,133,294     20.5 %   $ 2,318,645     21.7 %   $ 2,191,457     20.4 %   $ 2,643,894     24.0 %   $ 2,416,727     22.5 %
    Interest-bearing transaction     603,861     5.8       863,462     8.1       839,005     7.8       421,059     3.8       523,272     4.9  
    Money market     3,856,812     37.0       3,730,446     35.0       3,772,964     35.1       3,462,709     31.4       3,268,286     30.5  
    Savings     548,464     5.3       586,587     5.5       449,188     4.2       320,940     2.9       187,896     1.8  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750     26.8       2,679,221     25.1       2,958,861     27.5       3,625,920     32.8       3,744,596     34.9  
    Correspondent money market accounts     482,739     4.6       486,762     4.6       541,117     5.0       561,489     5.1       584,067     5.4  
    Total deposits   $ 10,417,920     100 %   $ 10,665,123     100 %   $ 10,752,592     100 %   $ 11,036,011     100 %   $ 10,724,844     100 %
                                             
    Total loans to deposits ratio     91.5 %         88.9 %         89.3 %         88.0 %         91.8 %    
                                             
    Total loans to deposit ratio, excluding MW loans and LHFS     84.4 %         82.9 %         82.8 %         81.9 %         85.9 %    

    1Total LHI does not include deferred fees of $8.7 million, $8.6 million, $9.0 million, $8.2 million and $7.8 million at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.


    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality
      For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
      (Dollars in thousands)        
    NPAs:                          
    Nonaccrual loans $ 61,142     $ 69,188     $ 52,521     $ 55,335     $ 58,537     $ 61,142     $ 58,537  
    Nonaccrual PCD loans1   196       196             70       73       196       73  
    Accruing loans 90 or more days past due2   4,641       3,249       1,914       2,860       143       4,641       143  
    Total nonperforming loans held for investment (“NPLs”)   65,979       72,633       54,435       58,265       58,753       65,979       58,753  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)   9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256       9,218       24,256  
    Total NPAs $ 75,197     $ 96,901     $ 79,172     $ 67,299     $ 83,009     $ 75,197     $ 83,009  
                               
    Charge-offs:                          
    1-4 family residential $     $     $     $     $ (31 )   $     $ (31 )
    Multifamily                           (198 )           (198 )
    OOCRE                                       (120 )
    NOOCRE   (215 )     (3,090 )     (5,113 )           (1,969 )     (3,305 )     (6,262 )
    C&I   (1,571 )     (918 )     (4,586 )     (2,259 )     (5,601 )     (2,489 )     (6,547 )
    Consumer   (55 )     (212 )     (420 )     (54 )     (30 )     (267 )     (101 )
    Total charge-offs $ (1,841 )   $ (4,220 )   $ (10,119 )   $ (2,313 )   $ (7,829 )   $ (6,061 )   $ (13,259 )
                               
    Recoveries:                          
    1-4 family residential $ 1     $ 21     $ 2     $ 3     $     $ 22     $ 1  
    OOCRE   186                         120       186       120  
    NOOCRE               1,323                          
    C&I   131       32       1,047       1,962       361       163       457  
    MW                     46                    
    Consumer   262       195       30       33       497       457       546  
    Total recoveries $ 580     $ 248     $ 2,402     $ 2,044     $ 978     $ 828     $ 1,124  
                               
    Net charge-offs $ (1,261 )   $ (3,972 )   $ (7,717 )   $ (269 )   $ (6,851 )   $ (5,233 )   $ (12,135 )
                               
    Provision for credit losses $ 1,750     $ 4,000     $ 2,300     $ 4,000     $ 8,250     $ 5,750     $ 15,750  
                               
    ACL $ 112,262     $ 111,773     $ 111,745     $ 117,162     $ 113,431     $ 112,262     $ 113,431  
                               
    Asset Quality Ratios:                          
    NPAs to total assets   0.60 %     0.77 %     0.62 %     0.52 %     0.65 %     0.60 %     0.65 %
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total assets   0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total LHI and OREO   0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    NPLs to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    NPLs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    ACL to total LHI   1.19       1.19       1.18       1.21       1.16       1.19       1.16  
    ACL to total LHI, excluding MW   1.28       1.27       1.25       1.30       1.23       1.28       1.23  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3   0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  

    1 Nonaccrual PCD loans consist of PCD loans that transitioned upon adoption of ASC 326 Financial Instruments – Credit Losses and were accounted for on a pooled basis that have subsequently been placed on nonaccrual status.
    2 Accruing loans greater than 90 days past due exclude purchase credit deteriorated loans greater than 90 days past due that are accounted for on a pooled basis.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    We identify certain financial measures discussed in this earnings release as being “non-GAAP financial measures.” In accordance with SEC rules, we classify a financial measure as being a non-GAAP financial measure if that financial measure excludes or includes amounts, or is subject to adjustments that have the effect of excluding or including amounts, that are included or excluded, as the case may be, in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, in our statements of income, balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Non-GAAP financial measures do not include operating and other statistical measures or ratios calculated using exclusively either one or both of (i) financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP and (ii) operating measures or other measures that are not non-GAAP financial measures.

    The non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the most directly comparable or other financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. Moreover, the manner in which we calculate the non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release may differ from that of other companies reporting measures with similar names. You should understand how such other financial institutions calculate their financial measures that appear to be similar or have similar names to the non-GAAP financial measures we have discussed in this earnings release when comparing such non-GAAP financial measures.

    Tangible Book Value Per Common Share. Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (b) tangible book value per common share as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by number of common shares outstanding. For tangible book value per common share, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is book value per common share.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in changes from period to period in book value per common share exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing total book value while not increasing our tangible book value.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and presents our tangible book value per common share compared with our book value per common share:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Common shares outstanding     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350  
                         
    Book value per common share   $ 30.39     $ 30.08     $ 29.37     $ 29.53     $ 28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share   $ 22.68     $ 22.33     $ 21.61     $ 21.72     $ 20.62  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets. Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity, less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; (b) tangible assets as total assets less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) tangible common equity to tangible assets as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by tangible assets (as described in clause (b)). For tangible common equity to tangible assets, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is total stockholders’ equity to total assets.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the relative changes from period to period in common equity and total assets, in each case, exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing both total stockholders’ equity and assets while not increasing our tangible common equity or tangible assets.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and total assets to tangible assets and presents our tangible common equity to tangible assets:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Tangible Assets                    
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible Assets   $ 12,109,548     $ 12,185,333     $ 12,345,145     $ 12,617,342     $ 12,256,259  
    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets     10.16 %     9.95 %     9.54 %     9.37 %     9.14 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity. Return on average tangible common equity is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles (which we refer to as “return”) as net income, plus amortization of core deposit intangibles, less tax benefit at the statutory rate; (b) average tangible common equity as total average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) return (as described in clause (a)) divided by average tangible common equity (as described in clause (b)). For return on average tangible common equity, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is return on average equity.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the return on common equity, exclusive of the impact of core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and core deposit intangibles have the effect of increasing total stockholders’ equity while not increasing our tangible common equity. This measure is particularly relevant to acquisitive institutions that may have higher balances in goodwill and core deposit intangibles than non-acquisitive institutions.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, average tangible common equity to average common equity and net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles, net of taxes to net income and presents our return on average tangible common equity:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 30,996     $ 26,807     $ 32,927     $ 29,128     $ 63,828     $ 55,210  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity (Annualized)     10.79 %     10.49 %     9.04 %     11.33 %     10.54 %     10.64 %     10.03 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Operating Earnings, Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings and performance metrics calculated using Operating Earnings and Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings, including Diluted Operating Earnings per Share, Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Loans, Operating Return on Average Tangible Common Equity and Operating Efficiency Ratio. Operating earnings, pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and the performance metrics calculated using these metrics, listed below, are non-GAAP measures used by management to evaluate the Company’s financial performance. We calculate (a) operating earnings as net income plus BOLI 1035 exchange charges, plus severance payments, plus loss on sales of debt securities available for sale (“AFS”), net, plus FDIC special assessment, less tax impact of adjustments, plus nonrecurring tax adjustments. We calculate (b) diluted operating earnings per share as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by weighted average diluted shares outstanding. We calculate (c) pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as operating earnings as described in clause (a) plus provision for income taxes, plus provision (benefit) for credit losses and unfunded commitments. We calculate (d) pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets as pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (e) operating return on average assets as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (f) operating return on average tangible common equity as operating earnings as described in clause (a), adjusted for the amortization of intangibles and tax benefit at the statutory rate, divided by total average tangible common equity (average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization). We calculate (g) operating efficiency ratio as noninterest expense plus adjustments to operating noninterest expense divided by noninterest income plus adjustments to operating noninterest income, plus net interest income.

    We believe that these measures and the operating metrics calculated utilizing these measures are important to management and many investors in the marketplace who are interested in understanding the ongoing operating performance of the Company and provide meaningful comparisons to its peers.

    The following tables reconcile, as of the dates set forth below, operating net income and pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and related metrics:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882   $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges1         517                 517    
    Plus: Severance payments2             1,545     1,487     613         613
    Plus: Loss on sales of AFS securities, net             4,397                 6,304
    Plus: FDIC special assessment                     134         134
    Operating pre-tax income     30,906     29,587     30,824     32,488     27,949     60,493     58,409
    Less: Tax impact of adjustments         109     1,248     307     166     109     1,489
    Plus: Nonrecurring tax adjustments         229     193         527     229     527
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906   $ 29,707   $ 29,769   $ 32,181   $ 28,310   $ 60,613   $ 57,447
                                 
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237     54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45   $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94
    Diluted operating EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.54   $ 0.54   $ 0.59   $ 0.52   $ 1.10   $ 1.05

    1Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    2Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands)   Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
    Pre-Tax, Pre-Provision Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Plus: Provision for income taxes     8,516       8,526       8,222       8,067       8,221       17,042       15,458  
    Plus: Provision for credit losses and unfunded commitments     3,250       5,300       1,899       4,000       8,250       8,550       14,209  
    Plus: Severance payments3                 1,545       1,487       613             613  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net                 4,397                         6,304  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2           517                         517        
    Plus: FDIC special assessment                             134             134  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings   $ 42,672     $ 43,413     $ 40,945     $ 44,555     $ 44,420     $ 86,085     $ 88,076  
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
                                 
    Average loans   $ 9,399,173     $ 9,313,629     $ 9,449,565     $ 9,661,774     $ 9,765,428     $ 9,356,637     $ 9,664,400  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82 %     1.89 %     1.72 %     1.83 %     1.83 %     1.86 %     1.83 %
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
                                 
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 29,769     $ 32,181     $ 28,310     $ 60,613     $ 57,447  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 31,633     $ 31,694     $ 34,107     $ 30,236     $ 64,465     $ 61,299  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Less: Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Less: Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79 %     10.70 %     10.69 %     11.74 %     10.94 %     10.75 %     11.14 %
                                 
    Efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.91 %     67.04 %     61.94 %     59.11 %     61.03 %     60.72 %
    Operating efficiency ratio                            
    Net interest income   $ 96,335     $ 95,441     $ 96,141     $ 100,062     $ 96,236     $ 191,776     $ 189,042  
    Noninterest income     13,499       14,289       10,056       13,106       10,578       27,788       17,240  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2           517                         517        
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net                 4,397                         6,304  
    Operating noninterest income     13,499       14,806       14,453       13,106       10,578       28,305       23,544  
    Noninterest expense     67,162       66,834       71,194       70,100       63,141       133,996       125,257  
    Less: FDIC special assessment                             134             134  
    Less: Severance payments3                 1,545       1,487       613             613  
    Operating noninterest expense   $ 67,162     $ 66,834     $ 69,649     $ 68,613     $ 62,394     $ 133,996     $ 124,510  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.62 %     62.98 %     60.63 %     58.41 %     60.88 %     58.57 %

    1 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    2 Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    3 Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

    The MIL Network

  • India reaffirms commitment to ‘Pact for Future’ at UN dialogue

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    India reiterated its strong commitment to the Pact for the Future and its annexes, the Global Digital Compact (GDC) and the Declaration on Future Generations, during the third interactive informal dialogue held to review the pact.

    Describing the initiative as a vital step in the global community’s collective efforts to address emerging and long-term challenges, India emphasised the importance of inclusive, forward-looking international cooperation.

    The informal interactive dialogue on Thursday aimed to provide a platform for member States to exchange ideas and share practices, looking ahead to 2028 in the implementation of the pact.

    At the Summit of the Future on 22 September 2024, world leaders adopted the Pact for the Future and its annexes: the Global Digital Compact and Declaration on Future Generations. This historic agreement is the culmination of years of inclusive dialogue and collaboration aimed at modernising international cooperation to address today’s realities and prepare for tomorrow’s challenges.

    “India believes the 2028 review should be results-oriented and forward-looking. We must particularly ensure dedicated attention to critical reform areas, especially UN Security Council expansion and international financial architecture reform, where progress has been insufficient,” said Parvathaneni Harish, Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations, addressing the session.

    “As regards Security Council reforms, the majority agree that the body should be reflective of the current geopolitical realities. This would be critical to enhance the Council’s credibility, legitimacy and efficacy. During the 79th session, the IGN has concluded without any concrete progress. Member states need to redouble the efforts to achieve real reforms and resist efforts by a group of countries to maintain the status quo. Negotiations based on a text need to commence at the earliest,” he added.

    He asserted that India strongly supports strategic alignment to maximise impact and avoid duplication.

    “Ideally, UN@80 goals should have been part of the Pact framework and pursued as part of negotiations among member states last year. However, moving forward, we should ensure that implementation and review of the Pact should be aligned with UN@80 initiative,” Harish stressed.

    Emphasising that the review should be linked with the 2027 SDG Summit outcomes to create a unified narrative on sustainable development progress, the Ambassador said, “we should also build on sectoral reviews including the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, the World Social Summit, the WSIS+20 Review and Peacebuilding Architecture Review while leveraging existing mechanisms like the High-Level Political Forum and ECOSOC for reporting.”

    India also called for coherence and complementarities with ongoing processes within the G20, WTO, World Bank and IMF, particularly in the context of sustainable financing and fair and equitable global financial architecture.

    “India believes that these ongoing reviews and processes, as mentioned above, must inform the design and content of the 2028 Pact review. The 2028 review must not only be a stock-taking exercise but should deliver concrete next steps for the implementation cycle ahead. We particularly need clear benchmarks for Security Council reform with timelines for text-based negotiations,” Harish noted.

    He further said that an important outcome of the implementation of GDC is the decision to establish an Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance within the UN Framework.

    “We look forward to a fruitful conclusion of the on-going negotiations and adoption of the modalities resolution on the basis of consensus. India remains committed to working collaboratively with all stakeholders to ensure the effective implementation of the Pact and its annexes and look forward to continued dialogue and briefings in this regard,” he concluded.

    (IANS)

  • Right reforms to spur investment, credit and GDP growth in India: HSBC

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    At a time when global supply chains are getting rejigged, if India can do the right reforms, it could become a meaningful producer and exporter of goods, which could spur investment, credit and GDP growth, an HSBC report said on Friday.

    In the chicken-and-egg debate of who rises first, GDP growth or credit growth, we thankfully, have a new contender – reforms, said the report by HSBC Global Investment Research.

    “The reforms include lowering tariff rates, signing trade deals, welcoming FDI inflows, and improving ease of doing business. A start has been made. But for impact, reforms need to run deep,” it added.

    The report said that market memory can be short.

    “Same time last year, we were fretting about weak deposit growth. Today, we are fretting about weak credit growth. We believe one thing is common across both episodes. That while all eyes are on the RBI to resolve the situation, the central bank can only partly address the problem using the monetary policy levers at its disposal,” it further stated.

    Instead, the root of the problem, and the real solution, in both instances, lies elsewhere – the real economy and the composition of GDP growth.

    Last year’s deposit drag was a two-fold problem – concerns on tepid deposit growth and compositional shifts (too few sticky deposits). Once inflation started to fall, the RBI loosened monetary policy, pushing base money growth up.

    “Real deposit growth started to rise in early 2025. But did the RBI solve the entire problem? Perhaps not. Some rise in deposits would have happened anyway (the credit-deposit ratio tends to mean revert). And the deposit composition problem persists,” the report mentioned.

    Can the RBI help? Yes, it can, and it has, by cutting the repo rate by 100bp, and infusing large amounts of domestic liquidity.

    “Will it solve the entire credit slowdown problem? Likely not. Because just as the deposit composition issue had its roots in the real economy, the credit softness issue does too,” said the report.

    (IANS)

  • MIL-OSI Europe: President Costa to travel to Japan and China for high-level Summits

    Source: Council of the European Union

    The President of the European Council, António Costa, will travel to Japan and China, together with the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, to represent the EU in the EU-Japan Summit on 23 July and EU-China Summit on 24 July.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: OLAF played key role in Ukraine’s uncovering of massive underground pesticide production

    Source: European Anti-Fraud Offfice

    Press release 20/2025 
    PDF version

    A far-reaching investigation coordinated by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has played a central part in uncovering a sophisticated criminal network in Ukraine which engaged in mass production and counterfeiting of agrochemical products. These were falsely labelled under some of the leading agrochemical brands in Europe and the USA. As a result, Ukrainian authorities conducted 89 searches across the country that led to the seizure of hundreds of tons of illicit products worth over 2.3 million EUR. 

    Ukrainian authorities recently dismantled a large-scale criminal network producing and selling illicit pesticides on an industrial scale. Police raids uncovered several underground workshops and resulted in the confiscation of more than 175 tons of counterfeit agrochemicals as well as raw materials for their production. These were ordered from China and contained potent and poisonous substances. 

    In addition, a separate production of packaging for these products was discovered, together with fake labels, plastic packaging, holographic security elements of various trademarks and seals of business entities. Part of the seized products are believed to have been intended for European market, posing a significant threat to food security, environmental safety and legitimate agrochemical companies. You can read more about the operation in the press release of the Ukrainian State Customs Service here and the National Police of Ukraine here.

    OLAF’s role in the operation focused on strategic gathering, analysis and sharing of intelligence as well as cross-border coordination that led to the setting up of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) between Romania, Ukraine and OLAF under the umbrella of EUROJUST. The investigation started in 2023 with a 2024 to the seizure of additional 1000 litres of counterfeit crop protection products in Romania and in the end helped to identify and later dismantle the source: an illegal large-scale manufacturing operation in Ukraine. 

    National Police of Ukraine, Department for Combating Smuggling and Violations of Customs Rules of the State Customs Service of Ukraine, Office of the Prosecutor General in Ukraine as well as Financial and economic Police Bihor county in Romania and Public Prosecution office Oradea in Romania provided critical support during the operation. 

    Ville Itälä, Director-General of OLAF, said: “This is a textbook example of how operational actions unfold across borders. What started like isolated seizures in Bulgaria and Romania turned out to be the surface of a much deeper operation in Ukraine. Thanks to the methodical investigation and strong cooperation with our partners, we were able to trace the supply chain all the way to the source. This way, we help to protect not only European markets but also legitimate businesses, farmers and the environment.”

    OLAF remains committed to tackling cross-border crime and protecting the European Union from the dangers posed by counterfeit products. 

    OLAF mission, mandate and competences:
    OLAF’s mission is to detect, investigate and stop fraud with EU funds.    

    OLAF fulfils its mission by:
    •    carrying out independent investigations into fraud and corruption involving EU funds, so as to ensure that all EU taxpayers’ money reaches projects that can create jobs and growth in Europe;
    •    contributing to strengthening citizens’ trust in the EU Institutions by investigating serious misconduct by EU staff and members of the EU Institutions;
    •    developing a sound EU anti-fraud policy.

    In its independent investigative function, OLAF can investigate matters relating to fraud, corruption and other offences affecting the EU financial interests concerning:
    •    all EU expenditure: the main spending categories are Structural Funds, agricultural policy and rural development funds, direct expenditure and external aid;
    •    some areas of EU revenue, mainly customs duties;
    •    suspicions of serious misconduct by EU staff and members of the EU institutions.

    Once OLAF has completed its investigation, it is for the competent EU and national authorities to examine and decide on the follow-up of OLAF’s recommendations. All persons concerned are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in a competent national or EU court of law.

    For further details:

    Pierluigi CATERINO
    Spokesperson
    European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)
    Phone: +32(0)2 29-52335  
    Email: olaf-media ec [dot] europa [dot] eu (olaf-media[at]ec[dot]europa[dot]eu)
    https://anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu
    LinkedIn: European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)
    X: x.com/EUAntiFraud
    Bluesky: euantifraud.bsky.social

    If you’re a journalist and you wish to receive our press releases in your inbox, please leave us your contact data.
     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • PM Modi flags off four new Amrit Bharat trains in poll-bound Bihar

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi flagged off four new Amrit Bharat trains in Bihar’s Motihari on Friday and also laid the foundation stone and inaugurated multiple development projects worth over Rs 7,200 crore.

    The Amrit Bharat will runs between Rajendra Nagar Terminal (Patna) and New Delhi, Bapudham Motihari and Delhi (Anand Vihar Terminal), Darbhanga and Lucknow (Gomti Nagar), and Malda Town and Lucknow (Gomti Nagar) via Bhagalpur.

    PM Modi also handed over keys to some beneficiaries as part of the Griha Pravesh ceremony for 12,000 beneficiaries and released over Rs 160 crore to 40,000 beneficiaries of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana-Gramin.

    He also released Rs 400 crore to around 61,500 Self-Help Groups in Bihar under Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana-National Rural Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NRLM). With a special focus on women-led development, over 10 crore women have been connected to Self-Help Groups (SHGs).

    The visit by PM Modi comes ahead of the Assembly elections, which are set to be held in the state later this year.

    In line with his commitment to boost connectivity and infrastructure, PM Modi dedicated multiple rail projects to the nation. It includes automatic signalling between the Samastipur-Bachhwara rail line that will enable efficient train operations in this section. The doubling of the Darbhanga-Thalwara and Samastipur-Rambhadrapur rail lines is part of the Darbhanga-Samastipur doubling project, worth over Rs 580 crore, which will enhance the capacity of train operations and reduce delays.

    Another rail project includes the development of infrastructure for maintaining Vande Bharat trains at Patliputra. Automatic signalling on the Bhatni-Chhapra Gramin rail line (114 km) to enable streamlined train operations. Upgradation of the traction system in the Bhatni-Chhapra Gramin section to enable higher train speeds by strengthening the traction system infrastructure and optimising energy efficiency.

    The Darbhanga-Narkatiaganj rail line doubling project is worth approximately Rs 4,080 crore, aimed at increasing sectional capacity, enabling the operation of more passenger and freight trains, and strengthening connectivity between North Bihar and the rest of the country.

    (ANI)

  • INS Nistar, India’s first indigenous diving support vessel, commissioned in Visakhapatnam

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    In a boost to India’s maritime capabilities, INS Nistar, the country’s first indigenously designed and constructed Diving Support Vessel (DSV), was commissioned into the Indian Navy on Friday in Visakhapatnam. The commissioning ceremony took place in the presence of Union Minister of State for Defence Sanjay Seth, senior naval officials, and representatives from Hindustan Shipyard Limited (HSL), the shipbuilder.

    INS Nistar is the first of two DSVs being built by HSL and is equipped for complex deep-sea saturation diving and submarine rescue operations, a capability limited to a few global navies. It features cutting-edge equipment including Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs), a Self-Propelled Hyperbaric Lifeboat, and Diving Compression Chambers, enabling salvage operations up to 300-metre deep. The vessel also serves as a mother ship for the Indian Navy’s deep submergence rescue vessel.

    Speaking at the ceremony, MoS Defence Sanjay Seth hailed the induction as a major milestone in the Aatmanirbhar Bharat initiative, noting that all 57 warships currently under construction for the Navy are being built indigenously. He praised the Navy and the Indian shipbuilding industry for their innovation and commitment to self-reliance.

    Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Dinesh K Tripathi described INS Nistar as both a “technological asset” and an “operational enabler.”

    “Nistar will provide critical submarine rescue support to the Indian Navy as well as our regional partners. This will enable India to emerge as a ‘Preferred Submarine Rescue Partner’ in this region. The commissioning of Nistar is testimony to the growing capability and maturity of our maritime industrial base, and another shining example of Aatmanirbhar Bharat,” he said.

    With over 80% indigenous content and the participation of 120 MSMEs, the 118-meter vessel -displacing more than 10,000 tons – marks a leap forward in India’s undersea warfare and rescue capabilities. It replaces the erstwhile INS Nistar, a Soviet-origin ship decommissioned in the 1980s.

  • MIL-OSI: Prosafe SE: Prospectus published

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    18 July 2025 – Reference is made to the stock exchange announcement published by Prosafe SE (“Prosafe” or the “Company“) on 24 April 2025 where it was announced that Prosafe had agreed the terms of a recapitalization (the “Recapitalization“) which, inter alia, includes a recapitalization of USD 193 million into 321,635,718 new shares in the Company (the “New Shares“) and an offering of up to 17,868,651 warrants to shareholders in the Company as of 16 May 2025 as registered in the Euronext Securities Oslo (VPS) on the record date 20 May 2025 (the “Warrants“), subject to final approval being obtained by all lenders.

    In preparation for the implementation and closing of the Recapitalization, a prospectus has been approved by the Norwegian Financial Supervisory Authority and published by the Company for the purposes of the listing of the New Shares on Euronext Oslo Børs and the offering of Warrants (the “Prospectus“) in accordance with the resolutions passed by the Company’s extraordinary general meeting on 16 May 2025.

    The Prospectus is available on www.prosafe.com.

    The Company expects that the Recapitalization will be effective shortly, and the Company will issue an announcement confirming effectiveness of the Recapitalization once the registration of the share capital increase related to the issuance of New Shares has been registered with the Norwegian Register of Business Enterprises, following which the Company’s registered share capital will be EUR 3,395,043.69 divided into 339,504,369 shares, each with a par value of EUR 0.01. Subject to completion of the closing procedures for the Recapitalization, such registration is expected to take place on or about 21 July 2025.

    For further information, please contact:

    Terje Askvig, CEO

    Phone: +47 952 03 886

    Reese McNeel, CFO

    Phone: +47 415 08 186

    This information is subject to the disclosure requirements pursuant to section 5-12 of the Norwegian Securities Trading Act and the requirements of Oslo Børs’ Continuing Obligations.

    The MIL Network