Avi Reddy: Matt. One area I’d point out is, as you know, when we put the companies together, we were able to really look at individual credits. And I think the one difference with our reserves that we’ve always said versus the peer group is, there’s a significant portion of it that’s described to individually analyze loans. So within the $83-odd million that we have, there’s probably $31 million, that’s for individual credit. So we know what credits are on the weaker side, and we’ve got significant reserves associated with them, and we’re able to do that as part of the merger accounting. So I think we’ve — as opposed to people who have everything in the pooled reserve, I think the difference with them is, if something goes bad, then they’re going to have to start putting up reserves to those.
I think we try to identify everything that may or could have an issue, be conservative around it and already . And that’s what you saw this quarter, right? You saw some stuff improve, and that’s why the reserve was close — the provision was close to zero, even though we had significant loan growth. So this is just something else to think about when you do the modeling.
Stuart Lubow: And virtually everything that we have charged off this year was previously identified as a part of the merger and we took the mark. So the due diligence we did early on prove to be correct. And so we really haven’t seen any new credits — significant new credits come to us as a problem.
Matthew Breese: Great. Understood. That’s all I have. Thanks for taking my questions.
Operator: The next question comes from Manuel Navas from D.A. Davidson. Manuel, your line is open. Please go ahead.
Manuel Navas: Hey, good morning. With your outlook of kind of stay below 108% loan to deposit ratio, what’s kind of like the thinking on how quickly you might approach that? Would that be something that could happen next quarter or just kind of any color there?
Avi Reddy: No. So I think what we’re trying to say with that is, pipeline, like Stu said is really strong at this point, right? I mean, we’ve built a lot of business over the course of 2022 so we have a line of sight here on the loan portfolio in the first half of the year. And at any point in time, again, I mean, people think about loan to deposit as a period end number, right? So we’ve got some seasonality in the deposits like escrow deposits, for example, that could stay for the whole quarter, but then go out at the end of the quarter. So I think we just want to add some guardrails around which we operate. Loan growth is probably going to be stronger in the first half of the year than the second half of the year. But I think, again, we’re focused — and Kevin said this too, we’re back in the consumer market for competitive repriced deposits. So it’s not a per quarter per month thing, but we just want to stay under that threshold for this year.
Stuart Lubow: Yes. And I also think it’s important to understand that we’re going to continue to remix the portfolio out of the multi-family business and into the areas where we’ve really grown capabilities in terms of the middle market C&I, owner occupied CRE. So you should expect and could expect to see multifamily as a percentage of the total, significantly reduced over the next several years. Obviously, what that does is, improve our NIM because we’re getting 50 basis points to 100 basis points better yield on the non-multifamily part of the portfolio. And of course, deposits come along with the C&I and relationship business.
Manuel Navas: I appreciate that. I think that’s going to be my next question about mix and growth. So it’s going to be definitely more C&I. Did you give what proportion of the pipeline of C&I at the moment?
Stuart Lubow: Yes. So of that $1.5 billion, approximately 40% is C&I and owner-occupied CRE.
