Will Matthews: Sure. Thanks, Mike, for the question. Yeah. On Page 31 is our fee income percentage. You can see that it was $65 million this quarter, 58 basis points of average assets. And of course, that was within our guidance. We said at the low-end of the 55% to 65% range in the fourth quarter just with what we saw. Our — we’re just kind of reiterating the same guidance for 2024. We would sort of expect non-interest income to average assets to be in the 55 to 65 basis points for the full year. It’s going to start on the lower end of the range, like the fourth — like we had in the fourth quarter for the first half of the year and probably the upper end of the range in the back half of the year. And the reasoning for that is just sort of the yield curve normalizing and sort of our interest rate-sensitive businesses like mortgage and correspondent — they just performed better when things are a little bit more normal from that perspective.
So as you kind of take that into 2025, we would expect our non-interest income to average assets to return to that 60 to 70 basis points, which was approximately the 2022 level. So the way I kind of think about the variability in margin and our kind of our interest-sensitive businesses is we need a little bit more yield curve normalization for those things to sort of get back to, I’ll call it, more normal levels. So that’s kind of how we’re thinking about it. And like you mentioned, correspondent with the — and mortgage, although mortgage is probably less volatile at this point. But correspondent, I don’t think that probably if you think about the fixed income business until they start cutting rates, that’s probably not going to improve a lot our interest rate swap business because of the lack of loan volume in the industry in the fourth quarter, probably in the first quarter, it’s probably not going to ramp towards the back half of the year as rates stabilize.
Michael Rose: Very helpful. And then maybe if I can just squeeze one more in for John. Just reflecting on your comments at the beginning of the call around technology costs, I think I was struck by how much the spend has increased in three years’ time or four years’ time, up $68 million. As you think about going forward, just conceptually, any larger technology products or rehauls that you need to do? Or is it just more around the edges because that’s a pretty big lift in costs in a couple of years? Thanks.
John Corbett: Yeah, sure. I think our motto for 2023 was building a better bank and really was focused on the customer experience, the employee experience and getting feedback from our team, how to take friction out of the technology. For 2024, it’s kind of finished the drill is the theme, and it’s really the technology and process improvements that were already put in place the last couple of years. We just want to complete those projects. So there’s really not, Michael, new significant technology platforms that we’ve got in the queue to update. So I think the bulk of our technology spending increases is in the rearview mirror. I mean there’s always going to be growth in that category, but nowhere near the level we’ve seen in the last few years.
Steven Young: Michael, this is Steve. The only other comment I would make is, remember, when we did the MOE back four years ago, that was one of the main reasons we did it. There was an investment in technology that we needed to make. And so we use that period as an opportunity to take cost out of certain areas and reallocate it to the technology. And so that’s sort of been the story in the last several years.
Michael Rose: Make sense. Thanks for all the color.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Brandon King with Truist Securities. Your line is open.
Brandon King: Hey, good morning.
John Corbett: Hi, Brandon.
Brandon King: So I appreciate the near-term guidance on expenses, but are you expecting expenses to stay in that similar range throughout the year? Or what kind of growth rate do you think is a good base case assumption?
Will Matthews: Yes, Brandon, thanks. I’d say for the full year, I think around that $1 billion number is about what we would expect at this point. There are, of course, some components of compensation, et cetera, that fluctuate with revenue volumes in some of the fee businesses in particular, if that turns out differently, then we expect those could move up or down. But for the full year, I think consensus has us right around $1 billion, and that feels like a pretty good spot based on what we see today.
Brandon King: Okay. And on fees, with the CFPB overdraft proposal, are you considering any potential changes to your overdraft policies? And I guess if not, what could be the potential impact if that does go into effect?
Steven Young: Yes, Brandon, it’s Steve. We made some changes, maybe 15 to 18 months ago. We aren’t contemplating any new changes. I know there was a new paper that came out a few days ago. But as I understand it, the earliest that would be approved is in October 2025. So I think it’s probably just too early. And, of course, we’re thinking about it. But we haven’t run the math on any effect that would have on us for sure. But anyway, that’s how we’re thinking about it.
Brandon King: Okay. And then lastly, on deposit pricing. I know CDs continue to be a headwind near-term, but could you potentially quantify or give some context around near-term CDP pricing, and then as you’re looking in doing the numbers, when could that potentially turn into a tailwind maybe either in 2024 through 2025.
Steven Young: Sure, Brandon. This is Steve. I think we have about $4 billion of CDs. I think 90% of that roughly come due in 2024. We have a fair amount coming due in the first quarter, I want to say it’s not quite half, but it’s a fair amount. So as we think about repricing, we’re just — CDs by nature, retail CDs are generally pretty short in nature, and we retooled a couple of our retail products to continue to shorten those up. But at the end of the day, CDs only make up 12% of our total deposits. So it will be a little bit of a tailwind. I think the exception price for negotiated rates on the money markets, probably the place we put more liability sensitivity as we thought about it.
Brandon King: Okay. Thanks for taking my questions.
John Corbett: Thank you.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Samuel Varga with UBS. Your line is open.
