Thanks guys. Operator The next question comes from Michael Rose from Raymond James. Michael, your line is open. Please go ahead. Michael Rose Hey, good morning everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. Just wanted to get a sense for your willingness to maybe actually accelerate some of your hiring efforts and some of the business build-outs that you’ve obviously laid out at Investor Day. There’s a bank the other day that basically said the hiring opportunities are greater than they could remember in recent times, just given that lenders seem to be kind of idled as demand slows and then banks kind of pull back. Just wanted to get an update on maybe some of those initiatives and would you actually consider actually accelerating some of that at the expense of near-term profits but to position yourselves better on kind of the other side of whatever sort of cycle we’re going to have?
Thanks.Kevin Blair Yes, Michael, obviously, there’s disruption in the marketplace and that presents opportunities, and that hasn’t changed over the last several years. And you can see from our rest of year guidance, we’re continuing to grow expenses. And we think that, that will, given our revenue guidance, still allow us to present positive operating leverage. But we want to make sure that we’re opportunistic. We’re leaning in. We believe that in times of crisis or in times like this is when share shifts hands, and we want to make sure that we take advantage of that. And that means that we’re out there still attracting top talent. We’ve been adding middle market talent. We have three additional CIB team members that will be joining us in the next several months when they’re finished with their garden weave.
Across our commercial segment, we’re adding talent in our high-growth markets. And the only thing that’s changing there is we want to make sure that we’re putting a higher bar on the individuals that we’re hiring. And I would love to be able to do just not individuals, but to bring over teams.But when we look at the payback period of a new relationship manager or a new private wealth adviser, we want to make sure that given that there is probably an economic downturn in our near future that we are expecting higher levels of talent and that, that NPV is not going to be impacted because we’re bringing in actually better talent, and they’re going to perform within our expectations. So yes, we do think that’s an opportunity. You won’t see us trying to shrink our way to prosperity.
We think there’s a tremendous opportunity in the Southeast, and we think talent is a big piece of that.Michael Rose Helpful. And then maybe just one on the loan growth guidance. Is the change really just a function of moving the consumer loans to HFS, I’m sorry if I missed that, but just wanted to get a sense for kind of what the delta is because it does seem like we have good kind of momentum, utilization rates up, kind of, etcetera? Thanks. Kevin Blair Obviously, Michael, that’s $450 million we moved over there. So that’s a component of it. But we also have seen softening on the demand side. Our pipelines are off about 25% when you look at it across the board. And that’s us being prudent on one side where CRE pipelines were up [ph] 95% versus last year.
The growth that we’re seeing there, as I mentioned earlier, really fund ups of our construction lines but not a lot of new production.So the pipelines are declining. We still think that we’ll be able to grow in that mid-single-digit level just because we have so many business units that are fairly new, whether it’s expansion of our middle market team where we’ve increased our RMs 50% over the last couple of years, our CIB, which grew another $40 million this past quarter. So the difference for us is that on the C&I front, we have a lot of new initiatives and new talent that will continue to produce despite the fact that overall pipelines are diminishing a bit.Michael Rose Thanks for taking my questions guys. Operator The next question comes from Jared Shaw from Wells Fargo.
Jared, your line is open. Please go ahead. Jared Shaw Hey guys, good morning. Maybe just when we look at the update for higher levels of CET1 and the higher liquidity that’s on the balance sheet, how long should we be thinking you want to retain higher liquidity and capital, I know you said a lot of it is due to the current immediacy of the crisis but should we think that as we go into 2024 were more normalized levels of liquidity and that, that CET1 ratio could come back down below 10% or do you feel this could be a new normal for a little longer?Jamie Gregory As we think about capital ratios is largely dependent on the environment. And so it depends on the stability of the outlook and where the economy is, where the banking industry is. There are a lot of components that are outside of the risk inherent on our balance sheet.
And so that’s how we think about it. We think that getting to 10% or higher in the near term makes sense. And it’s probably safe to think about that as the next year or so, and then we’re constantly reassessing. But that’s generally how we think about it, and that’s not a new strategy for us. The last quarter that our deposits, that our dollars of CET1 declined was the third quarter of 2019. And since then every quarter, we have accreted dollars of CET1. We’ve accreted $1.4 billion of CET1 over that time period. And we’ve deployed that to clients here in the Southeast. And so as we think about that strategy, it’s really nothing new for us. And that’s our intent going forward. We grew CET1 13 basis points this quarter. We expect it to continue growing that ratio as we get to the 10% area.But longer term, when we look at our stress testing, our modeling in a severe adverse scenario, there’s nothing that points us to the magical 10% number.
Our math would tell us that you could run with a CET1 lower than that. And so we’ll assess where we are, where the economic outlook, where peers are as we go forward. But right now, we’re comfortable accreting up to the 10%. We think that’s the prudent thing to do.Jared Shaw Okay, thanks. And then just as a follow-up, you mentioned that you used a higher weighting on a more adverse scenario for CECL. If you hadn’t done that, would we have actually seen either dollars of ACL decline or a ratio decline? And I guess what is that weighting to the more adverse scenario now?Jamie Gregory Yes. So when you — you’re right that we did adjust our weightings. You can see that in our table on Slide 17, the weighting change. Basically, our outlook right now continues to align to that slow growth scenario.
