10-K

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark one)

x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from              to             .

Commission File Number 0-22759

BANK OF THE OZARKS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

ARKANSAS	71-0556208
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

17901 CHENAL PARKWAY, P. O. BOX 8811, LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS	72231-8811
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (501) 978-2265

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class	Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share	NASDAQ Global Select Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller company (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Large accelerated filer  ¨ Accelerated filer  x Smaller reporting company  ¨ Non-accelerated filer  ¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such common equity as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $278,536,561.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

Class	Outstanding at February 19, 2010
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share	16,914,640

Documents incorporated by reference: Parts I, II, III and IV of this Form 10-K incorporate certain information by reference from the Registrant’s Annual Report to Shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2009 and the Registrant’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting.

BANK OF THE OZARKS, INC.

FORM 10-K

December 31, 2009

INDEX		Page
PART I.
Item 1.	Business	1
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	18
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	27
Item 2.	Properties	28
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	30
Item 4.	RESERVED	30
PART II.
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	31
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	31
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	31
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	31
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	31
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	31
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	32
Item 9B.	Other Information	32
PART III.
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	33
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	33
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters	33
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	34
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	34
PART IV.
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	35
Exhibit Index		36
Signatures		39

PART I

Item 1. BUSINESS

The disclosures set forth in this item are qualified by Item 1A. Risk Factors, the section captioned “Forward-Looking Information,” and other cautionary statements set forth elsewhere in this report.

General

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the “Company”) is an Arkansas business corporation registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. The Company owns an Arkansas state chartered subsidiary bank, Bank of the Ozarks (the “Bank”), which conducts banking operations through 73 offices, including 65 banking offices in 34 communities throughout northern, western and central Arkansas, seven Texas banking offices in Frisco (2), Allen, Lewisville, Dallas and Texarkana (2) and a loan production office in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Company also owns Ozark Capital Statutory Trust II, Ozark Capital Statutory Trust III, Ozark Capital Statutory Trust IV and Ozark Capital Statutory Trust V, all 100%-owned finance subsidiary business trusts formed in connection with the issuance of certain subordinated debentures and related trust preferred securities, and, indirectly through the Bank, a subsidiary engaged in the development of real estate. At December 31, 2009 the Company had total assets of $2.77 billion, total loans and leases of $1.90 billion, total deposits of $2.03 billion and total common stockholders’ equity of $269 million. Net interest income for 2009 was $118.3 million, net income available to common stockholders was $36.8 million and diluted earnings per common share were $2.18.

The Company provides a wide range of retail and commercial banking services. Deposit services include checking, savings, money market, time deposit and individual retirement accounts. Loan services include various types of real estate, consumer, commercial, industrial and agricultural loans and various leasing services. The Company also provides mortgage lending; treasury management services including wholesale lock box services; remote deposit capture services; trust and wealth management services including financial planning, money management, custodial services and retirement planning; real estate appraisals; credit-related life and disability insurance; ATMs; telephone banking; on-line banking including on-line bill pay; debit cards and safe deposit boxes, among other products and services. Through third party providers, the Company offers credit cards for consumers and businesses, processing of merchant credit card transactions, and full service investment brokerage services. While the Company provides a wide variety of retail and commercial banking services, it operates in only one segment. No revenues are derived from foreign countries and no single external customer comprises more than 10% of the Company’s revenues.

With five banking offices in 1994, the Company commenced an expansion strategy, via de novo branching, into selected Arkansas markets. Since embarking on this strategy, the Company has added one or more new banking offices each year, resulting in the net addition of 68 new offices through year-end 2009.

Prior to 1994 the Company’s offices were located in two relatively rural counties in northern and western Arkansas. The Company’s de novo branching strategy initially focused on opening new branches in small communities in counties contiguous to its then existing offices. As the Company continued to open additional offices, it generally expanded into larger communities throughout much of northern, western and central Arkansas.

In 1998 and 1999 the Company expanded into Arkansas’ then three largest cities, Little Rock, Fort Smith and North Little Rock. Subsequently a majority of the Company’s Arkansas expansion has been in these cities, surrounding communities and in other Arkansas counties which are among the top ten counties in Arkansas in terms of bank deposits. While the Company has opened a few additional offices in smaller Arkansas communities since 1998, the Company’s primary focus on larger communities has resulted in a larger portion of the Company’s business coming from these more urban and suburban Arkansas markets.

In 2001 the Company opened a loan production office in Charlotte, North Carolina and in 2004 the Company opened the first three of its current seven Texas banking offices. Since their opening, the Company’s North Carolina and Texas offices have contributed significantly to its growth.

1

The Company is continuing its growth and de novo branching strategy, although it has slowed the pace of new office openings in recent years. During 2008 the Company added a new banking office in Lewisville, Texas, opened a new corporate headquarters in Little Rock, Arkansas, which includes a retail banking operation, closed a Little Rock banking office in a nearby Wal-Mart Supercenter and consolidated its Little Rock loan production office into its new corporate headquarters. During 2009 the Company added a new banking office in downtown Little Rock, added a new banking office in Allen, Texas and closed a small office in North Little Rock, Arkansas where the leased space became unavailable.

The Company anticipates moving forward with plans to open a third banking office in Benton, Arkansas in the last half of 2010 and two additional metro-Dallas area banking offices in late 2010 or in 2011. Opening new offices is subject to availability of suitable sites, hiring qualified personnel, obtaining regulatory and other approvals and many other conditions and contingencies that the Company cannot predict with certainty. The Company may increase or decrease its expected number of new office openings as a result of a variety of factors including the Company’s financial results, changes in economic or competitive conditions, strategic opportunities or other factors.

The Company anticipates that the expansion of its Arkansas branch network is substantially complete with no more than five additional Arkansas offices expected to be added in the next few years. Accordingly, the Company expects to focus the majority of its future expansion efforts in other states, primarily Texas. As of December 31, 2009 the Company’s seven Texas banking offices accounted for 33.8% of its loans and leases and 14.5% of its deposits, and its North Carolina loan production office accounted for 5.9% of its loans and leases.

Lending and Leasing Activities

The Company’s primary source of income is interest earned from its loan and lease portfolio and earnings on its investment securities portfolio. Administration of the Company’s lending function is the responsibility of the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and certain senior lenders. Such lenders perform their lending duties subject to the oversight and policy direction of the Company’s and Bank’s Board of Directors and Loan Committee. Loan or lease authority is granted to the CEO and certain senior officers by the Board of Directors. The loan or lease authority of other lending officers is assigned by the CEO. Loans and leases and aggregate loan and lease relationships exceeding $3 million and up to the Bank’s legal lending limit are authorized and approved by the Loan Committee.

Interest rates charged by the Bank vary with degree of risk, type, size, complexity, repricing frequency and other relevant factors associated with the loan or lease. Competition from other financial services companies also impacts interest rates charged on loans and leases.

The Company’s designated compliance and loan review officers are primarily responsible for the Bank’s compliance and loan review functions. Periodic reviews are performed to evaluate asset quality and the effectiveness of loan and lease administration. The results of such evaluations are included in reports which describe any identified deficiencies, recommendations for improvement and management’s proposed action plan for curing or addressing identified deficiencies and recommendations. Such reports are provided to and reviewed by the Company’s and Bank’s Audit Committee. Additionally, the reports issued by the loan review function are provided to and reviewed by the Loan Committee.

In underwriting loans and leases, primary emphasis is placed on the borrower’s or lessee’s financial condition, including its ability to generate cash flow to support its debt or lease obligations and other cash expenses. Additionally substantial consideration is given to collateral value and marketability as well as the borrower’s or lessee’s character, reputation and other relevant factors.

The Company’s loan portfolio includes most types of real estate loans, consumer loans, commercial and industrial loans, agricultural loans and other types of loans. Most of the properties collateralizing the Company’s loan portfolio are located within the trade areas of the Company’s offices. The Company’s lease portfolio consists primarily of small ticket direct financing commercial equipment leases. The equipment collateral securing the Company’s lease portfolio is located throughout the United States.

Real Estate Loans. The Company’s portfolio of real estate loans includes loans secured by residential 1-4 family, non-farm/non-residential, agricultural, construction/land development, multifamily residential (five or more family) properties and other land loans. Non-farm/non-residential loans include those secured by real estate mortgages on owner-occupied commercial buildings of various types, leased commercial, retail and office buildings, hospitals, nursing and other

2

medical facilities, hotels and motels, and other business and industrial properties. Agricultural real estate loans include loans secured by farmland and related improvements, including loans guaranteed by the Farm Service Agency. Real estate construction/land development loans include loans secured by vacant land, loans with original maturities of 60 months or less to finance land development or construction of industrial, commercial, residential or farm buildings or additions or alterations to existing structures. Included in the Company’s residential 1-4 family loans are home equity lines of credit.

The Company offers a variety of real estate loan products that are generally amortized over five to thirty years, payable in monthly or other periodic installments of principal and interest, and due and payable in full (unless renewed) at a balloon maturity generally within one to seven years. Certain loans may be structured as term loans with adjustable interest rates (adjustable daily, monthly, semi-annually, annually, or at other regular adjustment intervals usually not to exceed five years), with established “floor” and “ceiling” interest rates and both with and without balloon maturities.

Residential 1-4 family loans are underwritten primarily based on the borrower’s ability to repay, including prior credit history, and the value of the collateral. Other real estate loans are underwritten based on the ability of the property, in the case of income producing property, or the borrower’s business to generate sufficient cash flow to amortize the debt. Secondary emphasis is placed upon collateral value, financial wherewithal of any guarantors and other factors. Loans collateralized by real estate have generally been originated with loan-to-appraised-value ratios of not more than 89% for residential 1-4 family, 85% for other residential and other improved property, 80% for construction loans secured by commercial, multifamily and other non-residential properties, 75% for land development loans and 65% for raw land loans.

The Company typically requires mortgage title insurance in the amount of the loan and hazard insurance on improvements. Documentation requirements vary depending on loan size, type, degree of risk, complexity and other relevant factors.

Consumer Loans. The Company’s portfolio of consumer loans generally includes loans to individuals for household, family and other personal expenditures. Proceeds from such loans are used to, among other things, fund the purchase of automobiles, recreational vehicles, boats, mobile homes and for other similar purposes. Consumer loans made by the Company are generally collateralized and have terms typically ranging up to 72 months, depending upon the nature of the collateral, size of the loan, and other relevant factors.

Consumer loans are attractive to the Company because they generally have higher interest rates. Such loans, however, pose additional risks of collectability and loss when compared to certain other types of loans. The borrower’s ability to repay is of primary importance in the underwriting of consumer loans.

Commercial and Industrial Loans and Leases. The Company’s commercial and industrial loan portfolio consists of loans for commercial, industrial and professional purposes including loans to fund working capital requirements (such as inventory, floor plan and receivables financing), purchases of machinery and equipment and other purposes. The Company offers a variety of commercial and industrial loan arrangements, including term loans, balloon loans and lines of credit with the purpose and collateral supporting a particular loan determining its structure. These loans are offered to businesses and professionals for short and medium terms on both a collateralized and uncollateralized basis. As a general practice, the Company obtains as collateral a lien on furniture, fixtures, equipment, inventory, receivables or other assets. The Company’s leases are primarily equipment leases for commercial, industrial and professional purposes, have terms generally ranging up to 48 months and are collateralized by a lien on the leased property.

Commercial and industrial loans and leases typically are underwritten on the basis of the borrower’s or lessee’s ability to make repayment from the cash flow of its business and generally are collateralized by business assets. As a result, such loans and leases involve additional complexities, variables and risks and require more thorough underwriting and servicing than other types of loans and leases.

Agricultural (Non-Real Estate) Loans. The Company’s portfolio of agricultural (non-real estate) loans includes loans for financing agricultural production, including loans to businesses or individuals engaged in the production of timber, poultry, livestock or crops. The Company’s agricultural (non-real estate) loans are generally secured by farm machinery, livestock, crops, vehicles or other agri-related collateral. A portion of the Company’s portfolio of agricultural (non-real estate) loans is comprised of loans to individuals which would normally be characterized as consumer loans but for the fact that the individual borrowers are primarily engaged in the production of timber, poultry, livestock or crops.

3

Deposits

The Company offers an array of deposit products consisting of non-interest bearing checking accounts, interest bearing transaction accounts, business sweep accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, time deposits and individual retirement accounts. Rates paid on such deposits vary among the deposit categories due to different terms and conditions, individual deposit size, services rendered and rates paid by competitors on similar deposit products. The Company acts as depository for a number of state and local governments and government agencies or instrumentalities. Such public funds deposits are often subject to competitive bid and in many cases must be secured by the Company’s pledge of government agency or other investment securities or a letter of credit.

The Company’s deposits come primarily from within the Company’s trade area. As of December 31, 2009 the Company had $57 million in “brokered deposits,” defined as deposits which, to the knowledge of the Company, have been placed with the Bank by a person who acts as a broker in placing these deposits on behalf of others or are otherwise deemed to be “brokered” by bank regulatory authority rules and regulations. Brokered deposits are typically from outside the Company’s primary trade area, and such deposit levels may vary from time to time depending on competitive interest rate conditions and other factors.

Other Banking Services

Mortgage Lending. The Company offers a broad array of residential mortgage products including long-term fixed and variable rate loans to be sold on a servicing-released basis in the secondary market. The Company originates residential mortgage loans to be resold on the secondary market primarily through its banking offices located in Arkansas’ larger markets and in most of its Texas banking offices. Most residential mortgage loans originated in the Company’s smaller markets are either fixed rate loans which balloon periodically, typically every one to seven years, or variable rate loans and are retained by the Company in its loan portfolio.

Trust and Wealth Management Services. The Company offers a broad array of trust and wealth management services from its headquarters in Little Rock, Arkansas, with additional staff in Conway and Rogers. These trust and wealth management services include personal trusts, custodial accounts, investment management accounts, retirement accounts, corporate trust services including trustee, paying agent and registered transfer agent services, and other incidental services. As of December 31, 2009 total trust assets were approximately $870 million compared to approximately $630 million as of December 31, 2008 and approximately $645 million as of December 31, 2007.

Treasury Management Services. The Company offers treasury management products which are designed to provide a high level of specialized support to the treasury operations of business and public funds customers. Treasury management has four basic functions: collection, disbursement, management of cash and information reporting. The Company’s treasury management services include automated clearing house services (e.g. direct deposit, direct payment and electronic cash concentration and disbursement), wire transfer, zero balance accounts, current and prior day transaction reporting, lock box services, remote deposit capture services, automated credit line transfer, investment sweep accounts, reconciliation services, positive pay services, credit line analysis and account analysis.

On-line Banking. The Company offers an on-line banking service for both business customers and consumers. Through this service customers can access their account information, pay bills, transfer funds, view images of cancelled checks, reorder checks, buy U.S. Savings Bonds, change addresses, issue stop payment requests, receive detailed monthly statements and handle other banking business electronically. Businesses are offered more advanced features which allow them to handle most treasury management functions electronically and access their account information on a more timely basis, including having the ability to download transaction history into QuickBooks^© for instant reconciliation. The Company also provides businesses and consumers the option to electronically receive monthly bank statements and provides a 13-month archive of monthly statements and cancelled check images.

4

Market Area and Competition

The Company’s market areas include primarily the northern, western and central portions of Arkansas, the metropolitan Dallas, Texas area, the Texarkana area (including areas in Texas and Arkansas) and the metropolitan Charlotte, North Carolina area. At December 31, 2009, 60.3%, 33.8% and 5.9%, respectively, of the Company’s loans and leases were originated by its offices in Arkansas, Texas and North Carolina, and 85.5% and 14.5%, respectively, of the Company’s deposits were originated by its offices in Arkansas and Texas.

The banking industry in the Company’s market areas is highly competitive. In addition to competing with other commercial and savings banks and savings and loan associations, the Company competes with credit unions, finance companies, leasing companies, mortgage companies, insurance companies, brokerage and investment banking firms, asset-based non-bank lenders and many other financial service firms. Competition is based on interest rates offered on deposit accounts, interest rates charged on loans and leases, fees and service charges, the quality and scope of the services rendered, the convenience of banking facilities and, in the case of loans to commercial borrowers, relative lending limits, as well as other factors.

As of June 30, 2009, the latest date for which Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) branch data is available, the Bank’s deposits represented 4.0% of deposits for all FDIC-insured institutions in the state of Arkansas compared to 4.4% at June 30, 2008 and 4.3% at June 30, 2007. In the 20 Arkansas counties in which the Company operates, the Bank’s deposits were 6.5% of the total deposits of all banks in those counties as of June 30, 2009, compared to 7.4% of such total deposits at June 30, 2008 and 7.2% at June 30, 2007.

A substantial number of the commercial banks operating in the Company’s market area are branches or subsidiaries of much larger organizations affiliated with statewide, regional or national banking companies and as a result may have greater resources and lower costs of funds than the Company. Additionally the Company faces competition from a large number of community banks, including de novo community banks, many of which have senior management who were previously with other local banks or investor groups with strong local business and community ties. Despite the highly competitive environment, management believes the Company will continue to be competitive because of its strong commitment to quality customer service, convenient local branches, active community involvement and competitive products and pricing.

Employees

At December 31, 2009 the Company employed 707 full-time equivalent employees, compared to 705 at December 31, 2008 and 689 at December 31, 2007. This 707 full-time employee number corrects, supercedes, and replaces the slightly higher number of 722 full-time equivalent employees disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report to Shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2009. None of the Company’s employees were represented by any union or similar group. The Company has not experienced any labor disputes or strikes arising from any organized labor groups. The Company believes its employee relations are good.

Executive Officers of Registrant

The following is a list of the executive officers of the Company:

George Gleason, age 56, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Gleason has served the Company or the Bank as Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and/or President since 1979. He holds a B.A. in Business and Economics from Hendrix College and a J.D. from the University of Arkansas.

Mark Ross, age 54, Vice Chairman, President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Ross joined the Company in 1980 and has served in several key positions, becoming President in 1986, joining the Board of Directors in 1992, and adding the responsibilities of Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer to his duties as President in 2002. Mr. Ross holds a B.A. in Business Administration from Hendrix College.

Paul Moore, age 63, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer since 1995. Mr. Moore is a C.P.A. and received a B.S.B.A. in Banking, Finance and Accounting from the University of Arkansas.

5

C. E. Dougan, age 63, President of the Bank’s Western Division since 2000. Prior to that Mr. Dougan served as a director of the Company from 1997 to 2000. Mr. Dougan, who has 39 years of banking experience, was co-owner from 1996 to 2000 of Mooney-Dougan, Inc., specializing in residential real estate development, construction and investments. Prior to 1997 Mr. Dougan served 12 years as president and chief executive officer of a competitor.

Scott Hastings, age 52, President of the Bank’s Leasing Division since 2003. From 2001 to 2002 he served as division president of the leasing division of a large diversified national financial services firm. From 1995 to 2001 he served in several key positions including President, Chief Operating Officer and Director of a large regional bank’s leasing subsidiary. Mr. Hastings holds a B.A. degree from the University of Arkansas-Little Rock.

Gene Holman, age 62, President of the Bank’s Mortgage Division since 2004. Prior to 2004 Mr. Holman served as President and Chief Operating Officer of a competitor mortgage company and held various senior management positions with that company during his 21-year tenure. Mr. Holman has 36 years of real estate and mortgage banking experience. Mr. Holman is a C.P.A. and received a B.S.B.A. in Accounting from the University of Mississippi.

Rex Kyle, age 53, President of the Bank’s Trust and Wealth Management Division since 2004. Prior to 2004 Mr. Kyle was Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer in the trust division of a competitor bank. Mr. Kyle has 31 years experience as a banking trust professional providing a wide array of asset management and trust services for individuals, businesses and government entities. He holds a B.S. and M.S. in Agricultural Economics and a J.D. from Texas A&M University.

Greg McKinney, age 41, Executive Vice President and Controller since 2003. From 2001 to 2003 Mr. McKinney served as a member of the financial leadership team of a publicly-traded software development and data management company. For most of the year 2000, Mr. McKinney served as a senior audit manager of a local C.P.A. firm. From 1991 to 2000 he held various positions with a big-four public accounting firm, leaving as senior audit manager when the firm closed its Little Rock office. Mr. McKinney is a C.P.A. and holds a B.S. in Accounting from Louisiana Tech University.

Darrel Russell, age 56, President of the Bank’s Central Division since 2001 and since March 2007 co-chairman of the Loan Committee. He joined the Bank in 1983 and served as Executive Vice President of the Bank from 1997 to 2001 and Senior Vice President of the Bank from 1992 to 1997. Prior to 1992 Mr. Russell served in various positions with the Bank. He received a B.S.B.A. in Banking and Finance from the University of Arkansas.

Tyler Vance, age 35, Executive Vice President of Retail Banking since 2009. Mr. Vance joined the Company in 2006 and served as Senior Vice President from 2006 to 2009. From 2001 to 2006 Mr. Vance served as CFO of a competitor bank. From 1996 to 2000, Mr. Vance held various positions with a big-four public accounting firm. Mr. Vance is a C.P.A. and holds a B.A. in Accounting from Ouachita Baptist University. Mr. Vance was designated an executive officer of the Company by its Board of Directors effective January 19, 2010.

Messrs. Gleason, Ross, Moore, McKinney and Vance serve in the same positions with both the Company and the Bank. All other listed officers are officers of the Bank.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

In addition to the generally applicable state and federal laws governing businesses and employers, bank holding companies and banks are extensively regulated under both federal and state law. With few exceptions, state and federal banking laws have as their principal objective either the maintenance of the safety and soundness of the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) (formerly the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”) and Savings Association Insurance Fund (“SAIF”)) of the FDIC or the protection of consumers or classes of consumers, rather than the specific protection of the shareholders of the Company. Bank holding companies and banks that fail to conduct their operations in a safe and sound basis or in compliance with applicable laws can be compelled by the regulators to change the way they do business and may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions, including encumbrances imposed on their operations. To the extent that the following information describes statutory and regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to those particular statutory and regulatory provisions. Any change in applicable law or regulation may have an adverse effect on the results of operation and financial condition of the Company and the Bank.

6

Federal Regulation

The primary federal banking regulatory authority for the Company is the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “FRB”), acting pursuant to its authority to regulate bank holding companies. Because the Bank is an insured depository institution which is not a member bank of the Federal Reserve System, it is subject to regulation and supervision by the FDIC and is not subject to direct supervision by the FRB.

Recent Legislative and Regulatory Initiatives to Address Current Financial and Economic Conditions.

The Congress, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”), and federal banking regulators have taken broad action since the third quarter of 2008 to strengthen the capital and liquidity positions of financial institutions in the U.S., and to address volatility in the financial markets and the financial services industry.

On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”) was signed into law. Under EESA, Treasury has the authority, among other things, to purchase up to $700 billion of mortgages, mortgage-backed securities and certain other financial instruments from financial institutions for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets.

On October 14, 2008, Treasury announced the availability, through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) created as part of EESA, of its voluntary Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”) for qualifying public financial institutions such as U.S.-controlled banks, savings associations, and certain bank and savings and loan holding companies. Under CPP, Treasury used $250 billion of its $700 billion available under the EESA to purchase $125 billion of preferred stock in nine major financial institutions. The remaining $125 billion was used for the purchase of preferred stock in qualifying U.S.-controlled banks, savings associations, and certain bank and savings and loan holding companies engaged only in financial activities. On May 22, 2009, the FRB issued a final rule providing that senior perpetual preferred stock of a financial institution participating in the CPP, and sold to Treasury pursuant to EESA, qualifies without limit as Tier 1 capital of the institution.

On December 12, 2008, the Company and Treasury entered into a Letter Agreement including the Securities Purchase Agreement — Standard Terms incorporated therein (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company issued to Treasury, in exchange for aggregate consideration of $75,000,000, (i) 75,000 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, with a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share (“Series A Preferred Stock”), and (ii) a warrant to purchase up to 379,811 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $29.62 per share (the “Warrant”), subject to certain anti-dilution and other adjustments.

On June 1, 2009, the FRB released the criteria it would use to evaluate an application to return capital received through TARP’s CPP. As the Company’s primary regulator, the FRB was required to approve any application by the Company to return such capital to Treasury before the application was forwarded to Treasury. After reviewing its financial position and submitting the application to repurchase its Series A Preferred Stock, on November 4, 2009, the Company redeemed the Series A Preferred Stock from Treasury, and returned to Treasury the original investment amount of $75,000,000 plus accrued and unpaid dividends thereon. In addition, in accordance with Treasury’s guidelines to repurchase warrants, the Company delivered to Treasury a Warrant Repurchase Notice dated November 17, 2009 pursuant to which the Company agreed to repurchase the Warrant from Treasury at a purchase price of $2,650,000. The Company repurchased the Warrant from Treasury on November 24, 2009. Accordingly, the Company is no longer a participant in the CPP.

Pursuant to authority granted to it under EESA, on October 9, 2008, the FRB adopted an interim final rule amending Regulation D (Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions) and directed the Federal Reserve Banks to pay interest on required reserve balances (that is, balances held to satisfy depository institutions’ reserve requirements) and on excess balances (balances held in excess of required reserve balances and clearing balances). Since publication of the interim final rule, the FRB has frequently modified the method for determining the rates to be paid on required reserve balances and on excess balances. As noted in the final rule effective in July 2009, the rate of interest required to be paid on both required reserve balances and on excess balances is currently set at 0.25%. However, such rates may be reset by the FRB from time to time.

Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program. On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced a new program — the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLGP”) that provides unlimited deposit insurance on funds in non-interest

7

bearing transaction deposit accounts not otherwise covered by the existing deposit insurance limit of $250,000. Such non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts were initially insured at no cost to the institution for 30 days, with coverage continuing through December 31, 2009 at a 10 basis points annualized fee on deposit amounts in excess of $250,000. Eligible institutions were able to opt out on or before December 5, 2008. The Bank did not elect to opt out of the unlimited deposit insurance provided under the TLGP. Effective October 1, 2009, the FDIC revised the TLGP to extend until June 30, 2010 the unlimited deposit insurance on funds in non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts and to increase the fees for such insurance. The Bank did not elect to opt out of the extension of the unlimited deposit insurance provided under the TLGP. Beginning on January 1, 2010, participants in the extended deposit insurance program are charged an increased fee based on the risk category to which they are assigned for purposes of the risk-based premium system. Fees are increased from a 10 basis points annualized fee on deposit amounts in excess of $250,000 to either an annualized 15 basis points fee for Risk Category I institutions, 20 basis points for Risk Category II institutions or 25 basis points for Risk Category III and IV institutions. The Bank is currently a Risk Category I institution and accordingly will be subject to the annualized 15 basis points fee for the extended deposit insurance coverage. Also under TLGP, newly issued senior unsecured debt issued on or before October 31, 2009 is fully insured in the event the issuing institution subsequently fails, or its holding company files for bankruptcy. Institutions eligible to participate had a one time opt out option available on or before November 12, 2008. The Company opted out while the Bank did not opt out of this debt guarantee program. However, the Bank did not utilize the debt guarantee program by issuing senior unsecured debt on or before October 31, 2009.

On February 27, 2009, the FDIC modified the debt guarantee component of the TLGP to allow participating entities, with the FDIC’s permission, to issue mandatory convertible debt. This change provides financial institutions additional options for raising capital and reduces the concentration of FDIC-guaranteed debt maturing in mid-2012.

Comprehensive Financial Stability Plan of 2009. On February 10, 2009, the Secretary of the Treasury announced a comprehensive financial stability plan (the “Financial Stability Plan”), which built upon existing programs, and earmarked the second $350 billion of unused funds originally authorized under EESA. The major elements of the Financial Stability Plan include: (i) a capital assistance program that will invest in convertible preferred stock of certain qualifying institutions, (ii) a consumer and business lending initiative to fund new consumer loans, small business loans and commercial mortgage asset-backed securities issuances, (iii) a new public-private investment fund that will leverage public and private capital with public financing to purchase up to $500 billion to $1 trillion of legacy “toxic assets” from financial institutions, and (iv) assistance for homeowners by providing up to $75 billion to reduce mortgage payments and interest rates and establishing loan modification guidelines for government and private programs. In addition, all banking institutions with assets over $100 billion were required to undergo a comprehensive “stress test” to determine if they had sufficient capital to continue lending and to absorb losses that could result from a decline in the economy that is more severe than was projected. Institutions receiving assistance under the Financial Stability Plan are subject to higher transparency and accountability standards, including restrictions on dividends, acquisitions and executive compensation and additional disclosure requirements. Entering 2010, Treasury continues to develop and administer the various initiatives included in the Financial Stability Plan.

On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “Recovery Act”) was signed into law. Among other things, the Recovery Act amended in its entirety the provisions of EESA dealing with executive compensation of financial institutions participating in the TARP or CPP programs authorized under EESA. To the extent the Recovery Act provisions conflict with the Financial Stability Plan, the Company believes the Recovery Act provisions take precedence. The Recovery Act has significant implications on the compensation arrangements of institutions such as the Company that accepted or will accept government funds under the CPP or other assistance under TARP. The Recovery Act required the Secretary of the Treasury to establish standards and promulgate regulations on executive compensation practices of TARP recipients. As an issuer of preferred stock to Treasury under the CPP, and for so long as the preferred stock was outstanding, the Company was subject to numerous Recovery Act provisions, which included restrictions on bonus and incentive compensation, severance compensation and so-called “golden parachutes” to the Company’s executive officers, and provided for “clawbacks” or mandatory repayments of bonuses, retention awards or incentive compensation payments to a larger group of employees if it were later determined that such compensation payments were based on materially inaccurate financial results, as well as concerning other matters regarding executive compensation policies and practices, including the requirement that the Company provide for a non-binding advisory vote of stockholders on the executives’ overall compensation, or “say on pay,” as it is commonly referred to, at meetings where directors are to be elected. Upon the Company’s November 2009 repurchases of its Series A Preferred Stock and the redemption of the Warrant from Treasury, the Company ceased participating in the CPP. Except for limitations on the deductibility of

8

executive compensation expense for the year ended December 31, 2009, and the mandate regarding clawbacks for compensation paid or accrued while Treasury held the Series A Preferred Stock, the Company is no longer subject to the executive compensation restrictions and related mandates imposed by EESA and the Recovery Act.

The Making Home Affordable Program. On March 4, 2009, Treasury announced the “Making Home Affordable” program (the “MHA”) intended to provide assistance to homeowners by, among other things, introducing new refinancing and loan modification programs. The refinancing program is intended to allow homeowners who have loans either owned or guaranteed by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, and who have seen the value of their homes decline, to refinance their existing mortgages thereby providing them with lower mortgage payments. As part of the new loan modification program, which is intended to prevent residential mortgage foreclosures and resulting loss of home ownership, Treasury issued guidelines designed to enable mortgagors and their mortgage holders to modify existing loans and reduce homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments, thereby reducing the risk of foreclosure. In describing the MHA, Treasury also reiterated that the current administration would seek changes to bankruptcy laws to facilitate the goals of the MHA. In April 2009 and again in December of 2009, legislation designed to allow federal judges to force or “cram down” loan modification on creditors in bankruptcy proceedings was defeated in Congress. However, providing financial relief to homeowners with problem mortgages continues to be a major legislative topic and further efforts to revise bankruptcy laws or enact other measures intended to address these problems may continue in the future.

The actions described above, together with additional actions announced by Treasury and other regulatory agencies continue to develop. It is not clear at this time what long-term impact EESA, TARP, TLGP, MHA or any of the other liquidity, funding and home ownership initiatives of Treasury and other bank regulatory agencies that have been previously announced, and any additional programs that may be initiated in the future, will have on the financial markets and the financial services industry. The recently experienced extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability, which are still being addressed, could re-emerge and further adversely affect the U.S. banking industry, including the Company and the Bank, as well as the broader U.S. and global economies.

Bank Holding Company Act. The Company is subject to supervision by the FRB under the provisions of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHCA”). The BHCA restricts the types of activities in which bank holding companies may engage and imposes a range of supervisory requirements on their activities, including regulatory enforcement actions for violations of laws and policies. The BHCA limits the activities of the Company and any companies controlled by it to the activities of banking, managing and controlling banks, furnishing or performing services for its subsidiaries, and any other activity that the FRB determines to be incidental to or closely related to banking. These restrictions also apply to any company in which the Company owns 5% or more of the voting securities.

Before a bank holding company engages in any non-bank-related activity, either by acquisition or commencement of de novo operations, it must comply with the FRB’s notification and approval procedures. In reviewing these notifications, the FRB considers a number of factors, including the expected benefits to the public versus the risks of possible adverse effects. In general, the potential benefits include greater convenience to the public, increased competition and gains in efficiency, while the potential risks include undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest and unsound banking practices.

Under the BHCA, a bank holding company must obtain FRB approval before engaging in acquisitions of banks or bank holding companies. In particular, the FRB must generally approve the following actions by a bank holding company:

• the acquisition of ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting securities of any bank or bank holding company;

• the acquisition of all or substantially all of the assets of a bank; and

• the merger or consolidation with another bank holding company.

In considering any application for approval of an acquisition or merger, the FRB is required to consider various competitive factors, the financial and managerial resources of the companies and banks concerned, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, the effectiveness of the applicant in combating money laundering activities, and the applicant’s record of compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (the “CRA”). The CRA generally requires financial institutions to take affirmative action to ascertain and meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. The Attorney General of the United States may, within 30 days after approval of an acquisition by the FRB, bring an action challenging such acquisition under the federal antitrust laws, in which case the effectiveness of such approval is stayed pending a final ruling by the courts.

9

Source of Strength Doctrine. Under FRB policy and regulation, a bank holding company is required to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary banks and may not conduct its operations in an unsafe or unsound manner. In addition, it is the FRB’s policy that a bank holding company should stand ready to use available resources to provide adequate capital to its subsidiary banks during periods of financial stress or adversity and should maintain the financial flexibility and capital-raising capacity to obtain additional resources for assisting its subsidiary banks. Consistent with this, the FRB has stated that, as a matter of prudent banking, a bank holding company should generally not maintain a given rate of cash dividends unless its net income available to common stockholders has been sufficient to fully fund the dividends and the prospective rate of earnings retention appears to be consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality, and overall financial condition. A bank holding company’s failure to meet its obligations to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary banks will generally be considered by the FRB to be an unsafe and unsound banking practice or a violation of the FRB regulations, or both.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLBA”), a bank holding company that elects to become a “financial holding company” will be permitted to engage in any activity that the FRB, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, determines by regulation or order is (i) financial in nature or incidental to such financial activity or (ii) complementary to a financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety and soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally. In addition to traditional lending activities, the GLBA specifies the following activities as financial in nature:

• acting as principal, underwriter, agent or broker for insurance;

• underwriting, dealing in or making a market in securities;

• merchant banking activities; and

• providing financial and investment advice.

A bank holding company may become a financial holding company only if all depository institution subsidiaries of the holding company are well-capitalized, well-managed and have at least a satisfactory rating under the CRA. A financial holding company that falls out of compliance with such requirement may be required to cease engaging in certain activities.

National banks are also authorized by the GLBA to engage, through “financial subsidiaries,” in any activity that is permissible for a financial holding company, except (i) insurance underwriting, (ii) real estate development or real estate investment activities (unless otherwise permitted by law), (iii) insurance company portfolio investments and (iv) merchant banking. The authority of a national bank to invest in a financial subsidiary is subject to a number of conditions, including, among other things, requirements that the bank be well-managed and well-capitalized (after deducting from capital the bank’s outstanding investments in financial subsidiaries). The GLBA provides that state banks, such as the Bank, may invest in financial subsidiaries that engage as principal in activities that would only be permissible for a national bank to conduct in a financial subsidiary. This authority is generally subject to the same conditions that apply to national bank investments in financial subsidiaries.

The GLBA also includes a number of consumer protections, including provisions intended to protect privacy of bank customers’ financial information and provisions requiring disclosure of ATM fees imposed by banks on customers of other banks. Under the consumer privacy provisions mandated by the GLBA, when establishing a customer relationship, a financial institution must give the consumer information such as when it will disclose nonpublic, personal information to unaffiliated third parties, what type of information it may share and what types of affiliates may receive the information. The institution must also provide customers with annual privacy notices, a reasonable means for preventing the disclosure of information to third parties, and the opportunity to opt out of the disclosure at any time.

The Company has no current plans to elect to become a financial holding company. As long as the Company has not elected to become a financial holding company, it will remain subject to the current restrictions of the BHCA.

USA Patriot Act. Title III of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) increased the obligation of financial institutions, including banks, to identify their customers, watch for and report suspicious transactions, respond to requests for information by federal banking regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies, and share information with other financial

10

institutions. The Patriot Act also amended the BHCA and the Bank Merger Act to require federal banking regulatory authorities to consider the effectiveness of a financial institution’s anti-money laundering activities when reviewing an application to expand operations. Financial institutions, including banks, are required under final rules implementing Section 326 of the Patriot Act to establish procedures for collecting standard information from customers opening new accounts and verifying the identity of these new accountholders within a reasonable period of time.

Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003. On December 4, 2003, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (the “FACT Act”) was signed into law. The FACT Act permanently extends the national credit reporting standards of the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1978 (the “FCRA”), which would otherwise have expired on January 1, 2004, and permits consumers, including customers of the Bank, to opt out of information sharing among affiliated companies for marketing purposes. The FACT Act also requires financial institutions, including banks, to notify a customer if the institution provides negative information about the customer to a national credit reporting agency or if the credit that is granted to the customer is on less favorable terms than those generally available. Banks must comply with guidelines established by their federal banking regulators to help detect identity theft. Subsequent joint agency rules have been adopted which require financial institutions to properly dispose of consumer information derived from a consumer report in a manner consistent with the previous guidelines and to develop and implement a written identity theft program to detect, prevent and mitigate identity theft concerning certain types of accounts.

Interstate Banking. The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (the “Interstate Act”) amended the BHCA to permit bank holding companies to acquire existing banks in any state effective September 29, 1995. The Interstate Act preempted barriers that restricted entry into states and created opportunities for expansion into markets that were previously closed. Interstate banking and branching authority (discussed below) is subject to certain conditions and restrictions, such as capital adequacy, management and CRA compliance.

The Interstate Act also contained interstate branching provisions that allow multistate banking operations to merge into a single bank with interstate branches. The interstate branching provisions became effective on June 1, 1997, although states were allowed to pass laws to opt in early or to opt out completely as long as they acted prior to that date. Effective May 31, 1997, the Arkansas Interstate Banking and Branching Act of 1997 (the “Arkansas Interstate Act”) authorized banks to engage in interstate branching activities within the borders of the state of Arkansas.

Banks acquired pursuant to this branching authority may be converted to branches. Interstate branching allows banks to merge across state lines to form a single institution. Interstate merger transactions can be used to consolidate existing multistate operations or to acquire new branches. A bank can also establish a new branch as its initial entry into a state if the state has authorized de novo branching. The Arkansas Interstate Act prohibits entry into the state through de novo branching.

Deposit Insurance. The FDIC insures the deposits of the Bank to the extent provided by law. Prior to 2007, under the FDIC’s risk-based insurance system, depository institutions were assessed premiums based upon the institution’s capital position and other supervisory factors. Effective January 1, 2007, the FDIC began using a new approach to assess premiums. The FDIC places each depository institution in one of four risk categories using a two-step process, based first on capital ratios (the capital group assignment) and then on other relevant information (the supervisory group assignment). Within the lowest risk category, known as Risk Category I, rates will vary based on each institution’s CAMELS component ratings, certain financial ratios (for most institutions), and long-term debt issuer ratings (for large institutions that have such a rating).

On February 8, 2006, the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 (the “Reform Act”) was signed into law as part of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Among other provisions, the Reform Act provided for the merger of the two insurance funds, BIF and SAIF, into a new single deposit insurance fund, DIF. Prior to the merger of BIF and SAIF, the Bank’s primary insurance fund for deposits was BIF. Among other things, the Reform Act provides for the (i) modification of assessments under the risk-based assessment system, (ii) replacement of a fixed designated reserve ratio with a reserve requirement ranging between 1.15% of estimated insured deposits and 1.5% of estimated insured deposits, and (iii) payment by the FDIC of dividends when certain reserve ratios exceed certain thresholds. Because of recent depository institution failures, the DIF reserve ratio has fallen significantly below 1.15%. The Reform Act requires that the FDIC create and implement a plan to restore the reserve ratio to at least 1.15% within five years.

In October 2008, the FDIC established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Restoration Plan (the “Restoration Plan”). The Restoration Plan is a five-year recapitalization plan for the DIF (subsequently amended to cover an eight-year time

11

frame, as discussed below) based, in part, on significantly higher assessed DIF rates. In December 2008, the FDIC raised the first quarter 2009 DIF assessed rates by 7 basis points, effective January 1, 2009. Under the FDIC’s final rule, for the first quarter of 2009 the new rates ranged between 12 and 50 cents per $100 in assessable deposits depending on the risk category to which an insured depository institution was assigned. Institutions in Risk Category I were charged a rate between 12 and 14 cents per $100 in assessable deposits for the first quarter of 2009. This increase in the DIF assessed rates more than doubled the previous applicable rates for Tier I institutions.

On February 27, 2009 and again on September 29, 2009, the FDIC, acting under authority of the Reform Act and subsequent legislation in Congress passed in May 2009, amended the Restoration Plan for the DIF. Under the amended Restoration Plan, the FDIC has extended the horizon from five years to eight years to raise the DIF reserve ratio to 1.15%, in recognition of the current significant strains on banks and the financial system and the likelihood of a severe recession. The amended Restoration Plan was accompanied by a final rule that sets assessment rates and makes adjustments to recognize how the assessment system differentiates for risk. Under the final rule, beginning in April 2009 banks in Risk Category I began paying initial base rates ranging from 12 cents per $100 to 16 cents per $100 on an annual basis. Banks in Risk Categories II, III and IV began paying initial base rates of 22 cents per $100, 32 cents per $100 and 45 cents per $100, respectively, on an annual basis. All rates will increase uniformly by 3 basis points effective January 1, 2011. Changes to the assessment system include higher rates for institutions that rely significantly on secured liabilities, which would increase the FDIC’s loss in the event of institutional failure without providing additional assessment revenue. Under the final rule, assessments will be higher for institutions that rely significantly on brokered deposits but, for well-managed and well-capitalized institutions, only when accompanied by rapid asset growth. The final rule also provides incentives in the form of a reduction in assessment rates for institutions to hold long-term unsecured debt and, for smaller institutions, high levels of Tier 1 capital.

Given the decline of the DIF reserve ratio and continuing concerns regarding the number of bank failures and the solvency of the DIF, the FDIC has continued to evaluate deposit insurance assessments. On February 27, 2009, the FDIC adopted an interim rule imposing a 20 basis points emergency special assessment on the industry. However, on May 22, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule which reduced the proposed emergency special assessment from 20 basis points and instead imposed a 5 basis points special assessment on each insured depository institution’s assets minus Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, not to exceed 10 bps of domestic deposits. The Company’s special assessment was paid on September 30, 2009. On November 12, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule requiring insured depository institutions to prepay on December 30, 2009, their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009, and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012, along with each institution’s risk-based deposit insurance assessment for the third quarter of 2009. The prepaid amount is recorded as an asset with a zero risk weight and the institution will continue to record quarterly expenses for deposit insurance. For purposes of calculating the prepaid amount, assessments are measured at the institution’s assessment rate as of September 30, 2009, with a uniform increase of 3 basis points effective January 1, 2011, and are based on the institution’s assessment base for the third quarter of 2009, with growth assumed quarterly at an annual rate of 5%. If events cause actual assessments during the prepayment period to vary from the prepaid amount, institutions will pay excess assessments in cash or receive a rebate of prepaid amounts not exhausted after collection of assessments due on June 30, 2013, as applicable. The FDIC’s December 2009 collection of the assessment prepayment will not preclude the FDIC from changing assessment rates or revising the risk-based assessment system in the future.

Insured depository institutions are further assessed premiums for Financing Corporation (“FICO”) bond debt service. The FICO assessment rate for DIF ranged between a high of 1.14 basis points for the first quarter of 2009, to a low of 1.02 basis points for the fourth quarter of 2009. For the first quarter of 2010, the FICO assessment rate for DIF is 1.06 basis points resulting in a premium of $0.0106 per $100 of DIF-eligible deposits.

Capital Adequacy Requirements. The FRB monitors the capital adequacy of bank holding companies such as the Company, and the FDIC monitors the capital adequacy of the Bank. The federal bank regulators use a combination of risk-based guidelines and leverage ratios to evaluate capital adequacy.

Under the risk-based capital guidelines, bank regulators assign a risk weight to each category of assets based generally on the perceived credit risk of the asset class. The risk weights are then multiplied by the corresponding asset balances to determine a “risk-weighted” asset base. The minimum ratio of total risk-based capital to risk-weighted assets is 8.0%. At least half of the risk-based capital must consist of Tier 1 capital, which is comprised of common stock, additional paid-in capital, retained earnings, certain types of preferred stock, a limited amount of trust preferred securities and qualifying minority interests in the equity capital accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, and excludes goodwill and various intangible assets. However, on December 30, 2008, the several federal banking regulators issued a final rule providing that a banking organization may reduce

12

the amount of goodwill deducted from Tier 1 capital by the amount of any deferred tax liability associated with that goodwill. The remainder, or Tier 2 capital, may consist of amounts of trust preferred securities and other preferred stock excluded from Tier 1 capital, certain hybrid capital instruments and other debt securities and an allowance for loan and lease losses not to exceed 1.25% of risk-weighted assets. The sum of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital is “total risk-based capital.”

The leverage ratio is a company’s Tier 1 capital divided by its adjusted average total consolidated assets. The minimum required leverage ratio is 3.0% of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average assets for institutions with the highest regulatory rating of 1. All other institutions must maintain a minimum leverage ratio of 4.0%. For a tabular summary of the Company’s and the Bank’s risk-weighted capital and leverage ratios, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation-Capital Compliance” and Note 15 to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Bank regulators from time to time consider raising or otherwise modifying the capital requirements of banking organizations beyond current levels. As an example, in December 2007 federal banking regulators, including the FRB and the FDIC, jointly adopted a final rule implementing a new risk-based regulatory capital framework. The rule was effective as of April 1, 2008. By requiring the assigning of risk-based parameters and the use of specific risk-based capital formulas, the rule is intended to produce risk-based capital requirements that are more risk sensitive than the requirements existing under the current risk-based rules. Although the final rule is applicable to “core banks” having consolidated total assets of $250 billion or more, adoption of the rule’s requirements is currently optional for other banks. Similarly, in September 2009, Treasury in its policy statement “Principles for Reforming the U.S. and International Regulatory Capital Framework for Banking Firms” stated that “A principal lesson of the recent crisis is that stronger, higher capital requirements for banking firms are absolutely essential.” Although Treasury’s recent focus has been on addressing systemic risk by targeting global banking firms’ capital adequacy requirements, as the structure of the capital adequacy framework continues to be the subject of federal regulatory consideration, there is a possibility that greater capital adequacy requirements could be imposed on all participants in the domestic banking industry. Accordingly, the Company is unable to predict whether higher or otherwise modified capital requirements will be imposed, the amount or timing of any such increases or modifications and the potential effect of any future mandated use of increased risk-sensitive capital requirements. Therefore, the Company cannot predict what effect such changes to the existing capital requirements may have on it or on the Bank.

Enforcement Authority. The FRB has enforcement authority over bank holding companies and non-banking subsidiaries to forestall activities that represent unsafe or unsound practices or constitute violations of law. It may exercise these powers by issuing cease-and-desist orders or through other actions. The FRB may also assess civil penalties in amounts up to $1 million for each day’s violation against companies or individuals who violate the BHCA or related regulations. The FRB can also require a bank holding company to divest ownership or control of a non-banking subsidiary or require such subsidiary to terminate its non-banking activities. Certain violations may also result in criminal penalties.

The FDIC possesses comparable authority under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (the “FDICIA”) and other statutes with respect to the Bank. In addition, the FDIC can terminate insurance of accounts, after notice and hearing, upon a finding that the insured institution is or has engaged in any unsafe or unsound practice that has not been corrected, is in an unsafe and unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, or order of, or condition imposed by the appropriate supervisors.

The FDICIA required federal banking agencies to broaden the scope of regulatory corrective action taken with respect to depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital and related requirements and to take such actions promptly in order to minimize losses to the FDIC. In connection with FDICIA, federal banking agencies established capital measures (including both a leverage measure and a risk-based capital measure) and specified for each capital measure the levels at which depository institutions will be considered well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized or critically undercapitalized. If an institution becomes classified as undercapitalized, the appropriate federal banking agency will require the institution to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan and can suspend or greatly limit the institution’s ability to effect numerous actions including capital distributions, acquisitions of assets, the establishment of new branches and the entry into new lines of business.

The Company’s issuance of preferred stock to Treasury under the TARP’s CPP made it subject to the enforcement and oversight authority of the Office of the Special Inspector General for TARP (“SIGTARP”). SIGTARP retains authority to audit and investigate all aspects of TARP even after the capital received by the Company under the CPP has been repaid to Treasury. SIGTARP has also acted to coordinate oversight functions of other relevant inspectors general by forming the TARP Inspector General Council. Although the Company has not had any SIGTARP investigations concerning compliance with TARP, the Company remains subject to SIGTARP requests for documentation pertaining to its compliance with TARP requirements prior to its repayment of the capital received under the CPP.

13

Examination. The FRB may examine the Company and any or all of its subsidiaries. The FDIC examines and evaluates insured banks approximately every 12 months, and it may assess the institution for its costs of conducting the examinations. The FDIC has a reciprocal agreement with the Arkansas State Bank Department whereby each will accept the other’s examination reports in certain cases. The Bank generally undergoes FDIC and state examinations on a joint basis.

Reporting Obligations. As a bank holding company, the Company must file with the FRB an annual report and such additional information as the FRB may require pursuant to the BHCA. The Bank must submit to federal and state regulators annual audit reports prepared by independent auditors. The Company’s annual report, which includes the report of the Company’s independent auditors, can be used to satisfy this requirement. The Bank must submit quarterly, to the FDIC, Reports of Condition and Income (referred to in the banking industry as a Call Report).

Other Regulation. The Company’s status as a registered bank holding company under the BHCA does not exempt it from certain federal and state laws and regulations applicable to corporations generally, including, without limitation, certain provisions of the federal securities laws. The Company is subject to the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission and of state securities regulatory authorities for matters relating to the offer and sale of its securities.

The Bank’s loan operations are subject to certain federal laws applicable to credit transactions, including, among others, the federal Truth In Lending Act of 1968, as amended (“TILA”) governing disclosures of credit terms to consumer borrowers, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 requiring financial institutions to provide information to enable the public and public officials to determine whether a financial institution is fulfilling its obligation to help meet the housing needs of the community it serves, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, creed or other prohibited factors in extending credit, the FCRA governing the use and provision of information to credit reporting agencies, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act governing the manner in which consumer debts may be collected by collection agencies, the Fair Housing Act prohibiting discriminatory practices relative to real estate related transactions, including the financing of housing and the rules and regulations of the various federal agencies charged with the responsibility of implementing such federal laws. In addition, on November 17, 2008, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development published new final rules under the Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act of 1974 (“RESPA”). The new RESPA rules, which became effective January 16, 2009, are intended to afford consumers greater protection pertaining to federally related mortgage loans by requiring, among other things, improved and streamlined good faith estimate forms including clear summary information and improved disclosure of yield spread premiums.

The deposit operations of the Bank also are subject to, among other laws and regulations, the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978, which imposes a duty to maintain confidentiality of consumer financial records and prescribes procedures for complying with administrative subpoenas of financial records, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, which governs automatic deposits to and withdrawals from deposit accounts and customers’ rights and liabilities arising from the use of automated teller machines and other electronic banking services, the Truth in Savings Act requiring depository institutions to disclose the terms of deposit accounts to consumers, the Expedited Funds Availability Act requiring financial institutions to make deposited funds available according to specified time schedules and to disclose funds availability policies to consumers, and the Check Clearing for the 21^st Century Act (“Check 21”), designed to foster innovation in the payments system and to enhance its efficiency by reducing some of the legal impediments to check truncation. Check 21 created a new negotiable instrument called a substitute check and permits but does not require banks to truncate original checks, process check information electronically, and deliver substitute checks to banks that wish to continue receiving paper checks.

State Regulation

The Company and the Bank are subject to examination and regulation by the Arkansas State Bank Department. Examinations of the Bank are typically conducted annually but may be extended to 24 months if an interim examination is performed by the FDIC. The Arkansas State Bank Department may also make at any time an examination of the Company as may be necessary to disclose fully the relations between the Company and the Bank and the effect of those relations. Additionally, because the Company owns an Arkansas state-chartered bank, the Company is also required to submit certain reports filed with the FRB to the Arkansas State Bank Department.

14

Regarding usury, the Arkansas Constitution provides, in summary, that “consumer loans and credit sales” have a maximum percentage limitation of 17% per annum and that all “general loans” have a maximum interest rate limitation of 5% over the Federal Reserve Discount Rate in effect at the time the loan was made. The Arkansas Supreme Court has determined that “consumer loans and credit sales” are also “general loans” subject to the interest rate limitation discussed above. Despite such limitations, Arkansas usury laws in recent years have been preempted by federal law with respect to first lien residential real estate loans and certain loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration. Additionally, the GLBA preempted the application of the Arkansas Constitution’s usury limits to the Bank effective November 12, 1999. In a non-adversarial test case involving undisputed facts, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s ruling that the preemptive provisions of the GLBA are constitutional. Although the constitutionality of the preemption provision could be raised again in the future, the Bank currently may charge interest at rates over and above the limitations set forth in the Arkansas Constitution.

Under the Arkansas Banking Code of 1997, the acquisition by the Company of more than 25% of any class of the outstanding capital stock of any bank located in Arkansas would require approval of the Arkansas State Bank Commissioner (the “Bank Commissioner”). Further, no bank holding company may acquire any bank if after such acquisition the holding company would control, directly or indirectly, banks having 25% of the total bank deposits (excluding deposits from other banks and public funds) in the State of Arkansas. In addition, a bank holding company cannot own more than one bank subsidiary if any of its bank subsidiaries has been chartered for less than five years.

Since January 1, 1999 Arkansas law allows the Company to engage in branching activities for its bank subsidiary on a statewide basis. Immediately prior to that date, the state’s branching laws prevented state and national banks from opening branches in any county of the state other than their home county and the counties contiguous to their home county. Because the state branching laws did not limit the branching activities of federal savings banks, the Company was able to branch outside of the traditional areas of its state bank subsidiaries through the federal thrift that it acquired in February 1998. In response to the change in state branching laws, the Company merged its thrift charter into its lead state bank subsidiary in early 1999.

Since February 2009, the Bank Commissioner has had the authority, with the consent of the Governor of the State of Arkansas, to declare a state of emergency and temporarily modify or suspend banking laws and regulations in communities where such a state of emergency exists. By written order, the Bank Commissioner may also authorize a bank to close its offices and any day when such bank offices are closed will be treated as a legal holiday and any director, officer or employee of such bank shall not incur any liability. To date no such state of emergency has been declared to exist by the Bank Commissioner.

Bank Subsidiary

The lending and investment authority of the Bank is derived from Arkansas law. The lending power is generally subject to certain restrictions, including the amount which may be lent to a single borrower.

Regulations of the FDIC and the Arkansas State Bank Department limit the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Company without the prior approval of such agencies. FDIC regulations prevent insured state banks from paying any dividends from capital and allow the payment of dividends only from net profits then on hand after deduction for losses and bad debts. The Arkansas State Bank Department currently limits the amount of dividends that the Bank can pay the Company to 75% of the Bank’s net profits after taxes for the current year plus 75% of its retained net profits after taxes for the immediately preceding year.

Federal law substantially restricts transactions between financial institutions and their affiliates, particularly their non-financial institution affiliates. As a result, the Bank is sharply limited in making extensions of credit to the Company or any non-bank subsidiary, in investing in the stock or other securities of the Company or any non-bank subsidiary, in buying the assets of, or selling assets to, the Company and/or in taking such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower. Moreover, transactions between the Bank and the Company (or any non-bank subsidiary) must generally be on terms and under circumstances at least as favorable to the Bank as those prevailing in comparable transactions with independent third parties or, in the absence of comparable transactions, on terms and under circumstances that in good faith would be available to non-affiliated companies.

The federal banking laws require all insured banks to maintain reserves against their checking and transaction accounts (primarily checking accounts, NOW and Super NOW checking accounts). Because reserves must generally be maintained in cash or in non-interest bearing accounts, the effect of the reserve requirements is to increase the Bank’s cost of funds. Arkansas law requires state chartered banks to maintain such reserves as are required by the applicable federal regulatory agency.

15

The Bank is subject to Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act, which places limits on the amount of loans or extensions of credit to, or investments in, or certain other transactions with, affiliates, including the Company. In addition, limits are placed on the amount of advances to third parties collateralized by the securities or obligations of affiliates. Most of these loans and certain other transactions must be secured in prescribed amounts. The Bank is also subject to Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, which prohibits an institution from engaging in transactions with certain affiliates unless the transactions are on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to such institution or its subsidiaries, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with non-affiliated companies. The Bank is subject to restrictions on extensions of credit to executive officers, directors, certain principal shareholders, and their related interests. These extensions of credit (1) must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with third parties and (2) must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.

Proposed Legislation For Bank Holding Companies And Banks

In addition to ongoing evaluation of capital adequacy guidelines, certain proposals affecting the banking industry have been discussed from time to time. Such proposals have included, but are not limited to, the following: regulation of all insured depository institutions by a single “super” federal regulator; limitations on the number of accounts protected by the federal deposit insurance funds and further modification of the coverage limit on deposits. During 2009, federal and state legislators and regulators generated a number of bills, proposed rules, and policy statements addressing the extension of credit to borrowers with lower credit scores, regulation of mortgage market makers such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and interstate de novo branching. Proposed federal legislation is currently being considered by both houses of Congress to modernize financial regulation and create greater consumer protections. Provisions of such proposed legislation include, among others, the creation of a new independent federal Consumer Financial Protection Agency (“CFPA”) to protect consumers from abusive acts or practices, as well as alternative proposals in Congress to house such an agency like the CFPA in various existing federal agencies; the establishment of an orderly process to dismantle large and systemically important but failing institutions so that no institution is “too big to fail”; the creation of a single federal bank regulator; further regulation concerning public company executive compensation including an advisory “say on pay” vote by stockholders of financial institutions, greater mortgage reform and anti-predatory lending regulations; and the creation of a federal Office of National Insurance to develop a modern regulatory framework for insurance. In addition, proposed legislation entitled the “Banking Integrity Act of 2009” was introduced in the Senate in December 2009, and similar legislation was introduced in the House of Representatives in January 2010. The proposed legislation in the Senate and in the House of Representatives seeks to reinstate, in large part, the 1933-enacted Glass-Steagall Act’s separation of commercial banks and investment banks, which separation was repealed by the GLBA in 1999. In January 2010 President Obama proposed a similar action, commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule,” to separate commercial banking activities from investment banking. In addition to proposals by Congress, both the FRB and the FDIC have submitted proposals on incentive compensation policies at banking organizations. In October 2009 the FRB proposed to review the compensation policies at banks, including an initiative to incorporate the results of such reviews into the banks’ supervisory ratings. The FDIC’s proposal seeks to incorporate risks posed by compensation programs at banks into its risk-based deposit insurance assessment system. It is uncertain which, if any, of the proposals discussed above may become law and what effect they would have on the Company and the Bank.

Available Information

The Company makes available, free of charge, through the Investor Relations section of its Internet website at www.bankozarks.com, its annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such reports with or furnishes them to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Also the Company’s Corporate Governance Principles, Corporate Code of Ethics, Audit Committee Charter, Information Systems Steering Committee Charter, Personnel and Compensation Committee Charter, Nominating and Governance Committee Charter, Loan Committee Charter, Trust Committee Charter and ALCO and Investments Committee Charter are available under the Investor Relations section on its website.

Forward-Looking Information

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations incorporated by reference herein, other filings made by the Company with the Securities and Exchange

16

Commission and other oral and written statements or reports by the Company and its management, include certain forward-looking statements including, without limitation, statements about economic, housing market, competitive and interest rate conditions, plans, goals, beliefs, expectations and outlook for revenue growth, net income and earnings per common share, net interest margin, including the goal of maintaining or improving net interest margin, net interest income, non-interest income, including service charges on deposit accounts, mortgage lending and trust income, gains (losses) on investment securities and sales of other assets, non-interest expense, including the cost of opening new offices, achieving positive operating leverage by growing revenue at a faster rate than non-interest expense, efficiency ratio, anticipated future operating results and financial performance, asset quality, including the effects of current economic and housing market conditions, nonperforming loans and leases, nonperforming assets, net charge-offs, past due loans and leases, interest rate sensitivity, including the effects of possible interest rate changes, future growth and expansion opportunities, including plans for opening new offices, opportunities and goals for future market share growth, expected capital expenditures, loan, lease and deposit growth, changes in the volume, yield and value of the Company’s investment securities portfolio, availability of unused borrowings and other similar forecasts and statements of expectation. Words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “look,” “seek,” “may,” “will,” “trend,” “target,” “goal,” and similar expressions, as they relate to the Company or its management, identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements made by the Company and its management are based on estimates, projections, beliefs, plans and assumptions of management at the time of such statements and are not guarantees of future performance. The Company disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement based on the occurrence of future events, the receipt of new information or otherwise.

Actual future performance, outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements made by the Company and its management due to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Certain factors that may affect operating results of the Company include, but are not limited to, potential delays or other problems in implementing the Company’s growth and expansion strategy including delays in identifying satisfactory sites, hiring qualified personnel, obtaining regulatory or other approvals, obtaining permits and designing, constructing and opening new offices; the ability to attract new deposits, loans and leases; the ability to generate future revenue growth or to control future growth in non-interest expense; interest rate fluctuations, including continued interest rate changes and/or changes in the yield curve between short-term and long-term interest rates; competitive factors and pricing pressures, including their effect on the Company’s net interest margin; general economic, unemployment, credit market and housing market conditions, including their effect on the credit worthiness of borrowers and lessees and their ability to repay loans or make lease payments, collateral values and the value of investment securities; changes in legal and regulatory requirements; recently enacted and potential legislation including legislation intended to stabilize economic conditions and credit markets and legislation intended to protect homeowners and consumers; adoption of new accounting standards or changes in existing standards; and adverse results in future litigation as well as other factors described in this and other Company reports and statements. Should one or more of the foregoing risks materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results or outcomes may vary materially from those described in the forward-looking statements.

(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank)

17

Item 1A. RISK FACTORS

An investment in shares of the Company’s common stock involves certain risks. The following risks and other information in this report or incorporated in this report by reference, including the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” should be carefully considered in the evaluation of the Company before investing in shares of its common stock. These risks may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. Many of these risks are out of the Company’s direct control, though efforts are made to manage those risks while optimizing financial results. These risks are not the only ones facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties that management is not aware of or focused on or that management currently deems immaterial may also adversely affect the Company’s business and operation. This report is qualified in its entirety by all these risk factors.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Our Profitability is Dependent on Our Banking Activities.

Because the Company is a bank holding company, its profitability is directly attributable to the success of the Bank. The Company’s banking activities compete with other banking institutions on the basis of service, convenience and price. Due in part to both regulatory changes and consumer demands, banks have experienced increased competition from other entities offering similar products and services. The Company relies on the profitability of the Bank and dividends received from the Bank for payment of its operating expenses, satisfaction of its obligations and payment of dividends. (See Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report incorporated into Item 8, Part II of this report for a discussion of dividend restrictions.) As is the case with other similarly situated financial institutions, the profitability of the Bank, and therefore the Company, will be subject to the fluctuating cost and availability of funds, changes in the prime lending rate and other interest rates, changes in economic conditions in general and, because of the location of its banking offices, changes in economic conditions in Arkansas, Texas and the Carolinas in particular.

We Depend on Key Personnel for Our Success.

The Company’s operating results and ability to adequately manage its growth and minimize loan and lease losses are highly dependent on the services, managerial abilities and performance of its current executive officers and other key personnel. The Company has an experienced management team that the Board of Directors believes is capable of managing and growing the Bank. The Company does not have employment contracts with its executive officers and key personnel. Losses of or changes in its current executive officers or other key personnel and their responsibilities may disrupt the Company’s business and could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Additionally, the Company’s ability to retain its current executive officers and other key personnel may be further impacted by existing and proposed legislation and regulations affecting the financial services industry. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in retaining its current executive officers or other key personnel.

Our Operations are Significantly Affected by Interest Rate Levels.

The Company’s profitability is dependent to a large extent on net interest income, which is the difference between interest income earned on loans, leases and investment securities and interest expense paid on deposits, other borrowings and subordinated debentures. The Company is affected by changes in general interest rate levels and changes in the differential between short-term and long-term interest rates, both of which are beyond its control. Interest rate risk can result from mismatches between the dollar amount of repricing or maturing assets and liabilities, as well as from mismatches in the timing and rate at which assets and liabilities reprice. Although the Company has implemented procedures it believes will reduce the potential effects of changes in interest rates on its results of operations, these procedures may not always be successful. In addition, any substantial, unexpected or prolonged change in market interest rates could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

18

The Fiscal and Monetary Policies of the Federal Government and its Agencies Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on Our Earnings.

The FRB regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Its policies determine in large part the cost of funds for lending and investing and the return earned on those loans and investments, both of which may affect net interest income and net interest margin. Changes in the supply of money and credit can also materially decrease the value of financial assets held by the Company, such as debt securities. The FRB’s policies can also adversely affect borrowers, potentially increasing the risk that they may fail to repay their loans and leases. Changes in such policies are beyond the Company’s control and difficult to predict; consequently, the impact of these changes on the Company’s activities and results of operations is difficult to predict.

Our Business Depends on the Condition of the Local and Regional Economies Where We Operate.

A majority of the Company’s business is located in Arkansas. As a result the Company’s financial condition and results of operations may be significantly impacted by changes in the Arkansas economy. Further slowdown in economic activity, continued deterioration in housing markets or further increases in unemployment and under-employment in Arkansas may have a significant and disproportionate impact on consumer confidence and the demand for the Company’s products and services, result in an increase in non-payment of loans and leases and a decrease in collateral value, and significantly impact the Company’s deposit funding sources. Any of these events could have an adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and liquidity. Additionally, given the Company’s increasing presence in Texas and, to a lesser extent, the Carolinas, further slowdown in economic activity, continued deterioration in housing markets or further increases in unemployment and under-employment in Texas or the Carolinas could also adversely impact the Company.

Our Business May Suffer if There are Significant Declines in the Value of Real Estate.

The market value of real estate can fluctuate significantly in a short period of time as a result of market conditions in the geographic area in which the real estate is located. There continues to be a lack of sustained improvement in economic activity and housing markets and unemployment and under-employment in many of the Company’s markets has continued to increase, resulting in declining prices and excess inventories of houses to be sold in these markets. If the value of the real estate serving as collateral for the Company’s loan and lease portfolio were to decline materially, a significant part of its loan portfolio could become under-collateralized. If the loans that are collateralized by real estate become troubled during a time when market conditions are declining or have declined, the Company may not be able to realize the value of security anticipated at the time of originating the loan, which in turn could have an adverse effect on the Company’s provision for loan and lease losses and its financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Many of the Company’s foreclosed assets held for sale are comprised of real estate properties. The Company carries these properties at their estimated fair values less estimated selling costs. While the Company believes the carrying values for such assets are reasonable and appropriately reflect current market conditions, there can be no assurance that the amount of proceeds realized upon disposition of foreclosed assets will approximate the carrying value of such assets. If the proceeds are significantly less than the carrying value of foreclosed assets held for sale, the Company will record a loss on the disposition of such assets, which in turn could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

We are Subject to Environmental Liability Risk Associated With Lending Activities.

A significant portion of the Company’s loan and lease portfolio is secured by real property. During the ordinary course of business, the Company may foreclose on and take title to real properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, the Company may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. Environmental laws may require the Company to incur substantial expenses and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit the Company’s ability to use or sell the affected property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations or enforcement policies with respect to existing laws may increase the Company’s exposure to environmental liability. The Company has policies and procedures that require either formal or informal evaluation of environmental risks and liabilities on real property before originating any loan or foreclosure action, except for (i) loans originated for sale in the secondary

19

market secured by 1-4 family residential properties and (ii) certain loans where the real estate collateral is second lien collateral. These policies, procedures and evaluations may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

If We Do Not Properly Manage Our Credit Risk, Our Business Could Be Seriously Harmed.

There are substantial risks inherent in making any loan or lease, including, but not limited to –

• risks resulting from changes in economic and industry conditions;

• risks inherent in dealing with individual borrowers;

• risks resulting from uncertainties as to the future value of collateral; and

• the risk of non-payment of loans and leases.

Although the Company attempts to minimize its credit risk through prudent loan and lease underwriting procedures and by monitoring concentrations of its loans and leases, there can be no assurance that these underwriting and monitoring procedures will reduce these risks. Moreover, as the Company expands into relatively new markets, credit administration and loan and lease underwriting policies and procedures may need to be adapted to local conditions. The inability of the Company to properly manage its credit risk or appropriately adapt its credit administration and loan and lease underwriting policies and procedures to local market conditions or changing economic circumstances could have an adverse impact on its provision for loan and lease losses and its financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

We Make and Hold in Our Loan and Lease Portfolio a Significant Number of Construction/Land Development, Non-Farm/Non-Residential and Other Real Estate Loans.

The Company’s loan and lease portfolio is comprised of a significant amount of real estate loans, including a large number of construction/land development and non-farm/non residential loans. The Company’s real estate loans comprised 85.7% of its total loans and leases at December 31, 2009. In addition the Company’s construction/land development and non-farm/non-residential loans, which are a subset of its real estate loans, comprised 31.5% and 31.9%, respectively, of the Company’s total loan and lease portfolio at December 31, 2009. Real estate loans, including construction/land development and non-farm/non-residential loans, pose different risks than do other types of loan and lease categories. The Company believes it has established appropriate underwriting procedures for its real estate loans, including construction/land development and non-farm/non-residential loans, and has established appropriate allowances to cover the credit risk associated with such loans. However, there can be no assurance that such underwriting procedures are, or will continue to be, appropriate or that losses on real estate loans, including construction/land development and non-farm/non-residential loans, will require additions to its allowance for loan and lease losses, and could have an adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

We Could Experience Deficiencies in Our Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses.

The Company maintains an allowance for loan and lease losses, established through a provision for possible loan and lease losses charged to expense, that represents the Company’s best estimate of probable losses inherent in the existing loan and lease portfolio. Although the Company believes that it maintains its allowance for loan and lease losses at a level adequate to absorb losses in its loan and lease portfolio, estimates of loan and lease losses are subjective and their accuracy may depend on the outcome of future events. Experience in the banking industry indicates that some portion of the Company’s loans and leases may only be partially repaid or may never be repaid at all. Loan and lease losses occur for many reasons beyond the control of the Company. Accordingly, the Company may be required to make significant and unanticipated increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses during future periods which could materially affect the Company’s financial position, results of operations and liquidity. Additionally, bank regulatory authorities, as an integral part of their supervisory functions, periodically review the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses. These regulatory authorities may require adjustments to the allowance for loan and lease losses or may require recognition of additional loan and lease losses or charge-offs based upon their judgment. Any change in the allowance for loan and lease losses or charge-offs required by bank regulatory authorities could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

20

The Performance of Our Investment Securities Portfolio is Subject to Fluctuation Due to Changes in Interest Rates and Market Conditions.

Changes in interest rates can negatively affect the performance of most of the Company’s investment securities. Interest rate volatility can reduce unrealized gains or create unrealized losses in the Company’s portfolio. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors including monetary policies, domestic and international economic and political issues, and other factors beyond the Company’s control. Fluctuations in interest rates can materially affect both the returns on and market value of the Company’s investment securities. Additionally, actual investment income and cash flows from investment securities that carry prepayment risk, such as mortgage-backed securities and callable securities, may materially differ from those anticipated at the time of investment or subsequently as a result of changes in interest rates and market conditions.

The Company’s investment securities portfolio consists of a number of securities whose trading markets are “not active.” As a result, management had to develop internal models or other methodologies for pricing these securities that include various estimates and assumptions. There can be no assurance that the Company could sell these investment securities at the price derived by the internal model or methodology, or that it could sell these investment securities at all, which could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operation or liquidity.

Our Recent Results May Not Be Indicative of Our Future Results.

The Company may not be able to grow its business at the same rate of growth achieved in recent years or even grow its business at all. Additionally, in the future the Company may not have the benefit of several factors that have been favorable to the Company’s business in past years, such as an interest rate environment where changes in rates occur at a relatively orderly and modest pace, the ability to find suitable expansion opportunities or otherwise to capitalize on opportunities presented by economic turbulence, or other factors and conditions. Numerous factors, such as weakening or deteriorating economic conditions, regulatory and legislative considerations, and competition may impede or restrict the Company’s ability to expand its market presence or adversely impact its future operating results.

Our FDIC Deposit Insurance Premiums Will Continue to Increase.

The FDIC significantly increased premiums charged to all financial institutions for FDIC deposit insurance protection during 2009. The FDIC also (i) imposed a one-time emergency special industry-wide assessment of five basis points of each institution’s total assets less Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, not to exceed 10 bps of domestic deposits, collected on September 30, 2009, (ii) required all financial institutions to prepay the fourth quarter 2009 and the full year deposit insurance assessments for 2010, 2011 and 2012 on December 30, 2009, and (iii) adopted a uniform three bps increase in the assessment rate effective on January 1, 2011. The Company has historically paid the lowest applicable premium rate under the FDIC’s deposit insurance premium rate structure due to the Company’s sound financial position. However, should bank failures continue to increase, deposit insurance premiums may continue to escalate further. These increased FDIC premiums could have an adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations.

To Successfully Implement Our Growth and De Novo Branching Strategy, We Must Expand Our Operations in Both New and Existing Markets.

The Company intends to continue the expansion and development of its business by pursuing its growth and de novo branching strategy. The Company will also evaluate possible FDIC-assisted acquisitions of bank assets which may augment the Company’s de novo branching strategy. Accordingly, the Company’s growth prospects must be considered in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by banking companies pursuing growth strategies. In order to successfully execute its growth and de novo branching strategy, the Company must, among other things:

• identify and expand into suitable markets;

• obtain regulatory and other approvals;

• build a substantial customer base;

• maintain credit quality;

• attract sufficient deposits to fund anticipated loan and lease growth;

• attract and retain qualified bank management and staff;

• identify and acquire suitable sites for new banking offices; and

• maintain adequate common equity and regulatory capital.

21

In addition to the foregoing factors, there are considerable costs involved in opening banking offices, and such new offices generally do not generate sufficient revenues to offset their costs until they have been in operation for some time. Therefore, any new banking offices the Company opens can be expected to negatively affect its operating results until those offices reach a size at which they become profitable. The Company could also experience an increase in expenses if it encounters delays in opening any new banking offices. If the Company were to acquire bank assets and operations through FDIC-assisted transactions, the Company could also encounter difficulties in achieving profitability of those operations. Moreover, the Company cannot give any assurances that any new banking offices it opens will be successful, even after they have become established. If the Company does not manage its growth effectively and continue to successfully implement its de novo branching strategy, the Company’s business, future prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Volatility and Disruptions in the Functioning of the Financial Markets and Related Liquidity Issues Could Continue or Worsen.

The U.S. and global financial markets have experienced significant volatility and disruption in recent years. The impact of this financial crisis, together with ongoing public concerns regarding the strength of financial institutions, has led to both significant distress in financial markets and issues relating to liquidity among financial institutions. As a result of concerns about the stability of the financial markets generally, the constriction in credit, the lack of public confidence in the financial sector, and the generally weak economic conditions, the Company can give no assurance that such circumstances will not have an adverse effect, which could be material, on its financial condition, results of operation and liquidity.

We Face Strong Competition in Our Markets.

Competition in many of the Company’s banking markets is intense. The Company competes with other financial and bank holding companies, state and national commercial banks, savings and loan associations, consumer finance companies, credit unions, securities brokerages, insurance companies, mortgage banking companies, leasing companies, money market mutual funds, asset-based non-bank lenders and other financial institutions, and intermediaries, as well as non-financial institutions offering payroll and debit card services. Many of these competitors have an advantage over the Company through substantially greater financial resources, lending limits and larger distribution networks, and are able to offer a broader range of products and services. Other competitors, many of which are smaller than the Company, are privately held and thus benefit from greater flexibility in adopting or modifying growth or operational strategies than the Company. If the Company fails to compete effectively for deposit, loan, lease and other banking customers in the Company’s markets, the Company could lose substantial market share, suffer a slower growth rate or no growth and its financial condition, results of operations and liquidity could be adversely affected.

The Soundness of Other Financial Institutions Could Adversely Affect Us.

The Company’s ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and financial stability of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. The Company has exposure to various counterparties, including brokers and dealers, commercial and correspondent banks, and others. As a result, defaults by, or rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, may lead to further market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by such other institutions. Such occurrences could expose the Company to credit risk in the event of default of its counterparty and could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

We Depend on the Accuracy and Completeness of Information About Customers.

In deciding whether to extend credit or enter into certain transactions, the Company relies on information furnished by or on behalf of customers, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information. The Company may also rely on representations of those customers or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports or other financial information could have an adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

22

We May Be Subject to Claims and Litigation Asserting Lender Liability.

From time to time, and particularly during periods of economic stress, customers, including real estate developers, may make claims or otherwise take legal action pertaining to the Company’s performance of its responsibilities. These claims are often referred to as “lender liability” claims and are sometimes brought in an effort to increase leverage against the Company in workout negotiations. Lender liability claims frequently assert one or more of the following: breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, economic duress, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and similar claims. Whether customer claims and legal action related to the Company’s performance of its responsibilities are founded or unfounded, if such claims and legal actions are not resolved in a manner favorable to the Company, they may result in significant financial liability and/or adversely affect the market perception of the Company and its products and services as well as impact customer demand for those products and services. Any financial liability or reputation damage could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Our Internal Operations are Subject to a Number of Risks.

The Company’s internal operations are subject to certain risks, including, but not limited to, information system failures and errors, customer or employee fraud and catastrophic failures resulting from terrorist acts or natural disasters. The Company maintains a system of internal controls to mitigate the risks of many of these occurrences and maintains insurance coverage for certain risks. However, should an event occur that is not prevented or detected by the Company’s internal controls, and is uninsured or in excess of applicable insurance limits, it could have an adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The future success of the Company will depend, in part, upon its ability to address the needs of its customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands for convenience, as well as to create additional operational efficiencies. Many of the Company’s competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. The Company may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to its customers. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have an adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

The computer systems and network infrastructure in use by the Company could be vulnerable to unforeseen problems. The Company’s operations are dependent upon the ability to protect its computer equipment against damage from fire, severe storm, power loss, telecommunications failure or a similar catastrophic event. Any damage or failure of the Company’s computer systems or network infrastructure that causes an interruption in operations could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. In addition, the Company’s operations are dependent upon its ability to protect the computer systems and network infrastructure against damage from physical break-ins, security breaches and other disruptive problems caused by Internet users or other users. Computer break-ins and other disruptions could jeopardize the security of information stored in and transmitted through the Company’s computer systems and network, which may result in significant liability to the Company, as well as deter potential customers. Although the Company, with the help of third-party service providers, intends to continue to actively monitor and, where necessary, implement security technology and develop additional operational procedures to prevent damage or unauthorized access to its computer systems and network, there can be no assurance that these security measures or operational procedures will be successful. In addition, new developments or advances in computer capabilities or new discoveries in the field of cryptography could enable hackers to compromise or breach the security measures used by the Company to protect customer data. The Company’s failure to maintain adequate security over its customers’ personal and transactional information could expose the Company or the Bank to reputational risk and could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

We Rely on Certain External Vendors

The Company is reliant upon certain external vendors to provide products and services necessary to maintain its day-to-day operations. Accordingly, the Company’s operations are exposed to risk that these vendors will not perform in accordance with applicable contractual arrangements or the service level agreements. The Company maintains a system of policies and procedures designed to monitor vendor risks including, among other things, (i) changes in the vendor’s

23

organizational structure, (ii) changes in the vendor’s financial condition and (iii) changes in the vendor’s support for existing products and services. While the Company believes these policies and procedures help to mitigate risk, the failure of an external vendor to perform in accordance with applicable contractual arrangements or the service level agreements could be disruptive to the Company’s operations, which could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business and its financial condition and results of operations.

We May Need to Raise Additional Capital in the Future to Continue to Grow, But That Capital May Not Be Available When Needed.

Federal and state bank regulators require the Company and the Bank to maintain adequate levels of capital to support operations. On December 31, 2009, the Company’s and the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios were at “well-capitalized” levels under bank regulatory guidelines. However, the Company’s business strategy calls for the Company to continue to grow in its existing banking markets (internally and through opening additional offices) and to expand into new markets as appropriate opportunities arise. Growth in assets resulting from internal expansion and new banking offices at rates in excess of the rate at which the Company’s capital is increased through retained earnings will reduce both the Company’s and the Bank’s capital ratios unless the Company and the Bank continue to increase capital. If the Company’s or the Bank’s capital ratios fell below “well-capitalized” levels, the FDIC deposit insurance assessment rate would increase until capital is restored and maintained at a “well-capitalized” level. Additionally, should the Company’s or Bank’s capital ratios fall below “well-capitalized”, certain funding sources could become more costly or could cease to be available to the Company until such time as capital is restored and maintained at a “well-capitalized” level. A higher assessment rate resulting in an increase in FDIC deposit insurance assessments, increased cost of funding or loss of funding sources could have an adverse affect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

If, in the future, the Company needs to increase its capital to fund additional growth or satisfy regulatory requirements, its ability to raise that additional capital will depend on the Company’s financial performance and on conditions at that time in the capital markets that are outside the Company’s control. There is no assurance that the Company will be able to raise additional capital on terms favorable to it or at all. If the Company cannot raise additional capital when needed, the Company’s ability to expand its operations through internal growth or to continue operations could be impaired.

Natural Disasters May Adversely Affect Us.

The Company’s operations and customer base are located in markets where natural disasters, including tornadoes, severe storms, fires, floods and earthquakes often occur. Such natural disasters could significantly impact the local population and economies, and the Company’s business and could pose physical risks to the Company’s properties. Although the Company’s business is geographically dispersed throughout Arkansas and in portions of Texas and North Carolina, a significant natural disaster in or near one or more of the Company’s principal markets could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR INDUSTRY

We are Subject to Extensive Government Regulation That Limits or Restricts Our Activities and Could Adversely Impact Our Operations.

The Company and the Bank operate in a highly regulated industry and are subject to examination, supervision and comprehensive regulation by various federal and state agencies. Compliance with these regulations is costly and restricts certain activities, including payment of dividends, mergers and acquisitions, investments, interest rates charged for loans and leases, interest rates paid on deposits, locations of banking offices and various other activities and aspects of the Company’s and Bank’s operations. The Company and the Bank are also subject to capital guidelines established by regulators which require maintenance of adequate capital. Many of these regulations are intended to protect depositors, the public and the FDIC’s DIF rather than shareholders.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related rules and regulations issued by the SEC and the Nasdaq Stock Market have increased the scope, complexity and cost of corporate governance, reporting and disclosure practices, including the costs of completing the Company’s external audit and maintaining its internal controls.

24

Government regulation greatly affects the business and financial results of all commercial banks and bank holding companies, and increases the cost to the Company of complying with regulatory requirements. Additionally, the failure to comply with these various rules and regulations could subject the Company or the Bank to monetary penalties or sanctions or otherwise expose the Company or Bank to reputational risk and could adversely affect its results of operations.

Newly Enacted and Proposed Legislation and Regulations May Affect Our Operations and Growth.

To address the continuing turbulence in the U.S. economy and the banking and financial markets, the U.S. government has recently enacted a series of laws, regulations, guidelines and programs, many of which are discussed in the Supervision and Regulation section of this report.

Because of the recency and speed with which these and other regulatory measures have been enacted, the Company and the Bank are continuing to assess the impact of such regulatory measures on their business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Additionally, in the routine course of regulatory oversight, proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the operations and taxation of, and federal deposit insurance premiums paid by, banks and other financial institutions and companies that control financial institutions are frequently raised in the U.S. Congress, state legislatures and before bank regulatory authorities.

The likelihood of significant changes in laws and regulations in the future and the impact that such changes might have on the Company or the Bank are impossible to determine. Similarly, proposals to change the accounting and financial reporting requirements applicable to banks and other depository institutions are frequently raised by the SEC, the federal banking agencies, the Internal Revenue Service and other authorities. Further, federal intervention in financial markets and the commensurate impact on financial institutions may adversely affect the Company’s or the Bank’s rights under contracts with such other institutions and the way in which the Company conducts business in certain markets. The likelihood and impact of any future changes in these accounting and financial reporting requirements and the impact these changes might have on the Company or the Bank are also impossible to determine at this time.

There Can Be No Assurance that Enacted Legislation or Any Proposed Federal Programs Will Stabilize the U.S. Financial System and Such Legislation and Programs May Adversely Affect Us.

Several federal acts, programs and guidelines have been either signed into law or promulgated by the Treasury or the FDIC in recent months and additional laws, regulations, programs and guidance are likely to be enacted in the future. There can be no assurance, however, as to the actual impact that these acts, programs and guidelines or any other governmental program will have on the financial markets. The lack of stable financial markets or a worsening of current financial market conditions could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and access to credit or the trading price of its common stock.

The Earnings of Financial Services Companies are Significantly Affected by General Business and Economic Conditions.

The Company’s operations and profitability are impacted by general business and economic conditions in the United States and abroad. These conditions include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, money supply, political issues, legislative and regulatory changes, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, broad trends in industry and finance and the strength of the U.S. economy and the local economies in which the Company operates, all of which are beyond its control. Deterioration in economic conditions could result in an increase in loan and lease delinquencies and non-performing assets, decreases in loan and lease collateral values and a decrease in demand for products and services, among other things, any of which could have an adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Consumers May Decide Not to Use Local Banks to Complete their Financial Transactions.

Technology and other changes are allowing parties to complete, through alternative methods, financial transactions that historically have involved banks. For example, consumers can now maintain funds that would have historically been held as local bank deposits in brokerage accounts, mutual funds with an Internet-only bank, or with virtually any bank in the country through on-line banking. Consumers can also complete transactions such as purchasing goods and services, paying bills and/or transferring funds directly without the assistance of banks. The process of eliminating banks as intermediaries

25

could result in the loss of fee income, as well as the loss of customer deposits and the related income generated from those deposits. The loss of these revenue streams and the lower-cost deposits as a source of funds could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COMMON STOCK

Our Common Stock Price is Affected by a Variety of Factors, Many of Which are Outside Our Control.

Stock price volatility may make it more difficult for investors to resell shares of the Company’s common stock at times and prices they find attractive. The Company’s common stock price can fluctuate significantly in response to a variety of factors, including, among other things:

• actual or anticipated variations in quarterly results of operations;

• recommendations or changes in recommendations by securities analysts;

• operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors deem comparable to the Company;

• news reports relating to trends, concerns and other issues in the financial services industry;

• perceptions in the marketplace regarding the Company and/or its competitors;

• new technology used, or services offered, by competitors;

• significant acquisitions or business combinations, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, or capital commitments by or involving the Company or its competitors; and

• changes in governmental regulations.

General market fluctuations, industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events such as economic slowdowns, interest rate changes, credit loss trends and various other factors and events could adversely impact the price of the Company’s common stock.

We Cannot Guarantee That We Will Pay Dividends to Common Shareholders in the Future.

The Company’s principal business operations are conducted through its subsidiary bank. Cash available to pay dividends to the Company’s common shareholders is derived primarily, if not entirely, from dividends paid by the Bank. The ability of the Bank to pay dividends, as well as the Company’s ability to pay dividends to its common shareholders, will continue to be subject to and limited by the results of operations of the Bank and by certain legal and regulatory restrictions. Further, any lenders making loans to the Company or Bank may impose financial covenants that may be more restrictive than regulatory requirements with respect to the Company’s payment of dividends to common shareholders. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the Company will continue to pay dividends to its common shareholders in the future.

Certain State and/or Federal Laws May Deter Potential Acquirors and May Depress Our Stock Price.

Certain provisions of federal and state laws may have the effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or of discouraging a third party from attempting to acquire, control of the Company. Under certain federal and state laws, a person, entity, or group must give notice to applicable regulatory authorities before acquiring a significant amount, as defined by such laws, of the outstanding voting stock of a bank holding company, including the Company’s common shares. Regulatory authorities review the potential acquisition to determine if it will result in a change of control. The applicable regulatory authorities will then act on the notice, taking into account the resources of the potential acquiror, the potential antitrust effects of the proposed acquisition and numerous other factors. As a result, these statutory provisions may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt that a shareholder might consider to be in such shareholder’s best interest, including those attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares held by shareholders.

The Holders of Our Subordinated Debentures Have Rights That are Senior to Those of Our Common Shareholders.

At December 31, 2009 the Company had an aggregate of $64.9 million of floating rate subordinated debentures and related trust preferred securities outstanding. The Company guarantees payment of the principal and interest on the trust preferred securities, and the subordinated debentures are senior to shares of the Company’s common stock. As a result, the Company must make payments on the subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities) before any dividends can be paid on its common stock and, in the event of bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the subordinated debentures must be satisfied before any distributions can be made to the holders of common stock. The Company has the right to defer distributions on its subordinated debentures and the related trust preferred securities for up to five years, during which time no dividends may be paid to holders of its common stock.

26

Our Directors and Executive Officers Own a Significant Portion of Our Stock.

The Company’s directors and executive officers, as a group, beneficially owned 23.6% of its common stock as of February 1, 2010. As a result of their beneficial ownership, directors and executive officers have the ability, by voting their shares in concert, to significantly influence the outcome of matters submitted to the Company’s shareholders for approval, including the election of its directors.

Our Common Stock Trading Volume May Not Provide Adequate Liquidity for Investors.

Although shares of the Company’s common stock are listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market, the average daily trading volume in the common stock is less than that of many larger financial services companies. A public trading market having the desired characteristics of depth, liquidity and orderliness depends on the presence in the marketplace of a sufficient number of willing buyers and sellers of the common stock at any given time. This presence depends on the individual decisions of investors and general economic and market conditions over which the Company has no control. Given the daily average trading volume of the Company’s common stock, significant sales of the common stock in a brief period of time, or the expectation of these sales, could cause a decline in the price of the Company’s common stock.

Our Common Stock is Not an Insured Deposit.

The Company’s common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, losses in its value are not insured by the FDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in the Company’s common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report, and is subject to the same market forces and investment risks that affect the price of common stock in any other company, including the possible loss of some or all principal invested.

Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

27

Item 2. PROPERTIES

The Company serves its customers by offering a broad range of banking services throughout northern, western and central Arkansas and in selected Texas markets from the following banking locations:

Banking Facility (1)	Year Opened	Square Footage
Allen, Texas	2009	6,176
Little Rock (Capitol Avenue)	2009	6,721
Little Rock (Rahling Road)	2008	89,048
Lewisville, Texas	2008	4,352
Rogers (New Hope Road)	2007	9,312
Frisco, Texas (Preston & Lebanon)	2007	12,023
Fayetteville (Wedington Drive)	2007	2,784
Hot Springs (Malvern Avenue)	2007	3,575
Ozark (Porter Hillard Banking Center)	2006	9,600
Rogers (Pleasant Grove)	2006	2,784
Frisco, Texas (Lebanon & Tollway)	2006	3,575
Bella Vista (Sugar Creek Center)	2006	3,575
Bella Vista (Highlands Lancashire)	2006	3,575
Fayetteville (Crossover) (2)	2006	5,176
Hot Springs (Albert Pike)	2006	2,784
Springdale (Jones Road)	2006	2,784
Texarkana (Arkansas Blvd.).	2006	4,352
Texarkana, Texas (Richmond Road)	2006	3,016
Bentonville (Walton & Dodson)	2006	9,312
Hot Springs (Central).	2006	5,176
Rogers (47th & Olive)	2006	2,784
Texarkana, Texas (Summerhill)	2005	9,312
Bentonville (Highway 102)	2005	2,784
Russellville (West)	2005	2,784
Benton (Highway 35)	2005	2,400
Mountain Home (East)	2005	2,784
North Little Rock (Levy)	2005	2,400
Mountain Home (Main)	2005	5,176
Sherwood (3)	2004	2,400
Little Rock (Rodney Parham & West Markham) (4)	2004	4,576
Dallas, Texas (Sterling Plaza) (5)	2004	2,810
North Little Rock (East McCain)	2004	2,784
Conway (East)	2004	2,400
Russellville (East)	2004	2,800
Van Buren (Main)	2004	2,260
Cabot (South)	2004	2,800
Conway (Downtown)	2004	2,400
Benton (Military Road)	2003	2,784
Fort Smith (Phoenix)	2003	2,250
Russellville (Main)	2003	7,644
Little Rock (Taylor Loop & Cantrell)	2003	2,400
Bryant (Highway 5)	2003	2,784
Cabot (Main)	2003	4,400
Conway (Prince & Salem)	2003	2,464
Hot Springs Village (Cranford’s) (6)	2002	449
Conway (North)	2002	4,350
Maumelle	2002	3,576
Lonoke	2001	5,731

28

Banking Facility (1)	Year Opened	Square Footage
Little Rock (Otter Creek)	2001	2,400
Fort Smith (Zero)	2001	2,784
Yellville	2000	2,716
Clinton	1999	2,784
North Little Rock (North Hills) (7)	1999	4,350
Harrison (Downtown)	1999	14,000
Fort Smith (Rogers)	1998	22,500
Little Rock (Cantrell)	1998	2,700
Little Rock (Chenal) (8)	1998	5,264
Little Rock (Rodney Parham)	1998	2,500
Little Rock (Chester)	1998	1,716
Bellefonte	1997	1,444
Alma	1997	4,200
Paris	1997	3,100
Mulberry	1997	1,875
Harrison (North)	1996	3,300
Clarksville (Rogers)	1995	3,300
Van Buren (Pointer Trail)	1995	2,520
Marshall (9)	1995 (expanded 2005)	4,120
Clarksville (Main)	1994	2,520
Ozark (Westside)	1993	2,520
Western Grove	1976 (expanded 1991)	2,610
Altus	1972 (rebuilt 1998)	1,500
Ozark Operation Center (10)	1985	17,652
Jasper	1967 (expanded 1984)	4,408

(1) Unless otherwise indicated, (i) the Company owns such banking locations and (ii) the locations are in Arkansas.

(2) The Company owns the building and leases the land at this location. The initial lease term is twenty years expiring May 13, 2024 with six renewal options of five years each.

(3) The Company owns the building and leases the land at this location. The initial lease term is twenty years expiring January 10, 2024 with four renewal options of five years each.

(4) The Company owns the building and leases the land at this location. The initial lease term is twenty years expiring October 31, 2023 with six renewal options of five years each.

(5) The Company leases this facility under an initial term of three years beginning July 1, 2004. This lease has been extended through October 31, 2010.

(6) The Company leases this facility, with an initial term of five years which expired July 31, 2007, subject to five renewal options of three years each. The Company is currently in the first, three-year automatic renewal option expiring July 31, 2010.

(7) The Company owns the building and leases the land at this location. The initial lease term is twenty years expiring May 31, 2019, subject to four renewal options of five years each.

(8) This building, which previously served as the Company’s corporate headquarters, has 40,000 square feet of which 5,264 are currently used for retail banking operations. The Company leased the remaining portion of this facility for an initial 10-year term expiring November 31, 2019.

(9) The Company owns the building and leases the land at this location. The initial lease term is thirty years expiring February 28, 2024 with three renewal options of ten years each.

(10) In addition to this operations center, the Company owns two ancillary facilities located in Ozark, Arkansas. These facilities include a 4,200 square foot operations annex building which was acquired in 2005 and a 5,000 square foot warehouse building which was constructed in 1992. None of these facilities has a retail banking office.

In addition to the above banking locations, the Company has a loan production office located in Charlotte, North Carolina. The office is maintained in a leased facility with an original lease term of 48 months beginning April 20, 2009.

29

While management believes its existing banking locations are adequate for its present operations, the Company expects to continue its growth and de novo branching strategy, although it has slowed the pace of new office openings in recent years. The Company expects to open a new operations facility in Ozark, Arkansas in the second quarter of 2010, and it is moving forward with plans to open a third banking office in Benton, Arkansas in the last half of 2010 and two metro-Dallas area banking offices in late 2010 or in 2011.

Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The Company is party to various litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Although the ultimate resolution of these matters cannot be determined at this time, management of the Company does not believe such matters, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on the future results of operations, financial condition or liquidity of the Company.

Item 4. RESERVED

30

PART II

Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

The Company’s Common Stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “OZRK” and as of February 19, 2010 the Company had 200 holders of record representing approximately 7,556 beneficial owners. The other information required by Item 201 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report under the heading “Summary of Quarterly Results of Operations, Market Prices of Common Stock and Dividends” on page 43, in the Company’s Proxy Statement, as amended (the “Proxy Statement”), for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Equity Compensation Plan Information” on page 8, in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report under the heading “Company Performance” on page 44 and in this Form 10-K under the heading “We Cannot Guarantee That We Will Pay Dividends to Common Shareholders in the Future” on page 26, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

There were no sales of the Company’s unregistered securities during the period covered by this report that have not been previously disclosed in the Company’s quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or its current reports on Form 8-K.

During the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report, there were no purchases of the registrant’s equity securities by, or on behalf of, the Company or any “affiliated purchaser,” as defined in §240.10b-18(a)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The information required by Item 301 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report under the heading “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” on page 9, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The information required by Item 303 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” on pages 10 through 42, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The information required by Item 305 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of the Company’s 2009 Annual Report under the heading “Interest Rate Risk” on pages 39 and 40, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The information required by Part 210 of Regulation S-X and by Item 302 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report on pages 48 through 76 and under the heading “Summary of Quarterly Results of Operations, Market Prices of Common Stock and Dividends” on page 43, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

Not applicable.

31

Item 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.

An evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this report was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s “disclosure controls and procedures,” which are defined under SEC rules as controls and other procedures of a company that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within required time periods. Based upon that evaluation, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

(b) Internal Control over Financial Reporting.

The information required by Item 308(a) and 308(b) of Regulation S-K regarding management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting and the audit report of the independent registered public accounting firm are contained in the Company’s 2009 Annual Report on pages 45 and 46, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

The Company’s management, including the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer, have evaluated any changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s fourth quarter of its 2009 fiscal year and have concluded that there was no change during the Company’s fourth quarter of its 2009 fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

None.

32

PART III

Item 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information required by Item 401 of Regulation S-K regarding directors is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Nominees for Election as Directors” on pages 2 through 4, which information is incorporated herein by this reference. In accordance with Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K, Instruction 3, information concerning the Company’s executive officers is furnished in a separate item captioned “Executive Officers of Registrant” in Part I above.

The information required by Item 405 of Regulation S-K regarding the Company’s disclosure of any failure of its executive officers and directors to file on a timely basis reports of ownership and subsequent changes of ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission is contained in its Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Section 16(A) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” on page 23, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

In accordance with Item 406 of Regulation S-K, the Company has adopted a code of ethics that applies to certain Company executives. The code of ethics is posted on the Company’s Internet website at www.bankozarks.com under “Investor Relations.”

There were no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to the Company’s board of directors that are required to be reported by Item 407(c)(3) of Regulation S-K.

The information required by Item 407(d)(4) and Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Committees” on pages 6 through 7, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by Item 402 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” on pages 11 through 20 and under the heading “Director Compensation” on page 21, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

The information required by Item 407(e)(4) of Regulation S-K is included in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” on page 22, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

The information required by Item 407(e)(5) of Regulation S-K is included in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Compensation Committee Report” as it appears under the caption “Amended Proxy Statement Information,” on page 1 of such amendment, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS

The information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Equity Compensation Plan Information” on page 8, which information is incorporated herein by this reference. The information required by Item 403 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners” on page 9 and under the heading “Security Ownership of Management” on page 10, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

33

Item 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by Item 404 of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Certain Transactions” on page 23, which information is incorporated herein by this reference. The information required by Item 407(a) of Regulation S-K is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Nominees for Election as Directors” on pages 2 through 4, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

Item 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

The information required by Item 9(e) of Schedule 14A regarding audit fees, audit committee pre-approval policies, and related information is contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2010 annual meeting under the heading “Audit Fees; Auditors to be Present” on pages 23 through 24, which information is incorporated herein by this reference.

(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank)

34

PART IV

Item 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

(a) List the following documents filed as a part of this report:

(1) The consolidated financial statements of the Registrant.

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

(2) Financial Statement Schedules.

Summary of Quarterly Results of Operations, Market Prices of Common Stock and Dividends.

(3) Exhibits.

See Item 15(b) to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

(b) Exhibits.

The exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K are listed in the Exhibit Index at the end of this Item 15.

(c) Financial Statement Schedules.

Not applicable.

(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank)

35

EXHIBIT INDEX

The following exhibits are filed with this report or are incorporated by reference to previously filed material.

Exhibit No.
3.1	Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant, dated May 22, 1997 (previously filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the Commission on May 22, 1997, as amended, Commission File No. 333-27641, and incorporated herein by this reference).
3.2	Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant dated December 9, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Commission for the year ended December 31, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
3.3	Articles of Amendment to the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., dated December 10, 2008 (previously filed as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 10, 2008, and incorporated herein by this reference).
3.4	Amended and Restated By-Laws of the Registrant, dated December 11, 2007 (previously filed as Exhibit 3(ii) to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 11, 2007, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.1	Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, by and among U.S. Bank National Association, as Institutional Trustee, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. as Sponsor, and George G. Gleason, Mark D. Ross and Paul E. Moore, as Administrators, dated as of September 29, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.2	Form of Capital Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.3	Form of Common Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.4	Indenture, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and U.S. Bank National Association, as debenture trustee, dated as of September 29, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.5	Guarantee Agreement, by and among Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and U.S. Bank National Association, dated as of September 29, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.5 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.6	Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, by and among Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee and as Institutional Trustee, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., as Sponsor, George G. Gleason, as Administrator, Mark D. Ross, as Administrator, and Paul E. Moore, as Administrator, dated as of September 25, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.6 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.7	Form of Capital Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.7 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.8	Form of Common Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.8 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.9	Indenture, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, dated as of September 25, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.9 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).

36

4.10	Guarantee Agreement, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, dated as of September 25, 2003 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.10 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2003, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.11	Second Amended and Restated Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (As Amended and Restated as of April 20, 2004) (previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended June 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.12	Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, by and among Wilmington Trust Company, as Institutional Trustee, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. as Sponsor, and George G. Gleason, Mark D. Ross and Paul E. Moore, as Administrators, dated as of September 28, 2004 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.13	Form of Capital Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.14	Form of Common Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.15	Indenture by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, as debenture trustee, dated as of September 28, 2004 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.5 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.16	Form of Debt Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.6 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.17	Guarantee Agreement, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, dated as of September 28, 2004 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.7 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.18 (a)	Amended and Restated Declarations of Trust of Ozark Capital Statutory Trust V, dated as of September 29, 2006 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 (a) to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.18 (b)	Terms of Capital Securities and Common Securities (previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 (b) and included as Annex I to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.19	Form of Capital Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 and included as Exhibit A-1 to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.20	Form of Common Security Certificate (previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.21	Indenture dated as of September 29, 2006, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and LaSalle Bank National Association, as Trustee (previously filed as Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.22	Form of Junior Subordinated Debt Security Certificate due 2036 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.5 and included as Exhibit A to Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).

37

4.23	Guarantee Agreement dated as of September 29, 2006, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and LaSalle Bank National Association, as Trustee (previously filed as Exhibit 4.6 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended September 30, 2006, and incorporated herein by this reference).
4.24	Warrant to purchase up to 379,811 shares of Common Stock, issued on December 12, 2008 (previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 15, 2008, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.1	Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Stock Option Plan, as amended April 17, 2007 (previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the Commission for the period ended March 31, 2007, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.2	Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Registrant and its directors and certain of its executive officers (previously filed as Exhibit 10.10 to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed with the Commission on May 22, 1997, as amended, Commission File No. 333-27641, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.3	Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan, dated January 1, 2005 (previously filed as Exhibit 10 (iii) (A) to the Company’s current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 14, 2004, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.4	Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. 2009 Restricted Stock Plan (previously filed as Appendix A to the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2009 annual meeting filed with the Commission on March 4, 2009, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.5	Letter Agreement including the Securities Purchase Agreement – Standard Terms incorporated therein, dated December 12, 2008, between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and the United States Department of the Treasury (previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on December 15, 2008, and incorporated herein by this reference).
10.6	Redemption Letter Agreement, dated November 4, 2009, by and between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and the United States Department of the Treasury (previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on November 4, 2009, and incorporated herein by this reference).
13	Portions of the Registrant’s Annual Report to Shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2009 which are incorporated herein by this reference: pages 9 through 76 of such Annual Report (attached).
21	List of Subsidiaries of the Registrant (attached).
23.1	Consent of Crowe Horwath, LLP (attached).
31.1	Certification of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (attached).
31.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer (attached).
32.1	Certification of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (attached)
32.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (attached).
99.1	Certification of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 12 U.S.C. Section 5221 (attached).
99.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer pursuant to 12 U.S.C. Section 5221 (attached).

38

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

	BANK OF THE OZARKS, INC.
By:	/s/ George Gleason
	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 10, 2010

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

SIGNATURE	TITLE	DATE
/s/ George Gleason	Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Director	March 10, 2010
George Gleason
/s/ Mark Ross	Vice Chairman, President, Chief Operating Officer and Director	March 10, 2010
Mark Ross
/s/ Paul Moore	Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer	March 10, 2010
Paul Moore
/s/ Jean Arehart	Director	March 10, 2010
Jean Arehart
/s/ Steven Arnold	Director	March 10, 2010
Steven Arnold
/s/ Richard Cisne	Director	March 10, 2010
Richard Cisne
/s/ Robert East	Director	March 10, 2010
Robert East

39

/s/ Linda Gleason	Director	March 10, 2010
Linda Gleason
/s/ Henry Mariani	Director	March 10, 2010
Henry Mariani
/s/ James Matthews	Director	March 10, 2010
James Matthews
/s/ Dr. R. L. Qualls	Director	March 10, 2010
Dr. R. L. Qualls
/s/ Kennith Smith	Director	March 10, 2010
Kennith Smith

40

EX-13

Exhibit 13

Financial Information

Selected Consolidated Financial Data

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Income statement data:
Interest income	$	165,908		$	183,003		$	176,970		$	155,198		$	112,881
Interest expense		47,585			84,302			99,352			84,478			44,305
Net interest income		118,323			98,701			77,618			70,720			68,576
Provision for loan and lease losses		44,800			19,025			6,150			2,450			2,300
Non-interest income		51,051			19,349			22,975			23,231			19,252
Non-interest expense		68,632			54,398			48,252			46,390			40,080
Preferred stock dividends		6,276			227			—			—			—
Net income available to common stockholders		36,826			34,474			31,746			31,693			31,489
Common share and per common share data:
Earnings - diluted	$	2.18		$	2.04		$	1.89		$	1.89		$	1.88
Book value		15.91			14.96			11.35			10.43			8.97
Dividends		0.52			0.50			0.43			0.40			0.37
Weighted-average diluted shares outstanding (thousands)		16,900			16,874			16,834			16,803			16,766
End of period shares outstanding (thousands)		16,905			16,864			16,818			16,747			16,665
Balance sheet data at period end:
Total assets	$	2,770,811		$	3,233,303		$	2,710,875		$	2,529,400		$	2,134,882
Total loans and leases		1,904,104			2,021,199			1,871,135			1,677,389			1,370,723
Allowance for loan and lease losses		39,619			29,512			19,557			17,699			17,007
Total investment securities		506,678			944,783			578,348			620,132			574,120
Total deposits		2,028,994			2,341,414			2,057,061			2,045,092			1,591,643
Repurchase agreements with customers		44,269			46,864			46,086			41,001			35,671
Other borrowings		342,553			424,947			336,533			194,661			304,865
Subordinated debentures		64,950			64,950			64,950			64,950			44,331
Preferred stock, net of unamortized discount		—			71,880			—			—			—
Total common stockholders’ equity		269,028			252,302			190,829			174,633			149,403
Loan and lease to deposit ratio		93.84	%		86.32	%		90.96	%		82.02	%		86.12	%
Average balance sheet data:
Total average assets	$	3,002,121		$	3,017,707		$	2,601,299		$	2,365,316		$	1,912,961
Total average common stockholders’ equity		267,768			213,271			184,819			158,194			137,185
Average common equity to average assets		8.92	%		7.07	%		7.10	%		6.69	%		7.17	%
Performance ratios:
Return on average assets		1.23	%		1.14	%		1.22	%		1.34	%		1.65	%
Return on average common stockholders’ equity		13.75			16.16			17.18			20.03			22.95
Net interest margin - FTE		4.80			3.96			3.44			3.49			4.18
Efficiency ratio		37.84			42.32			46.33			47.07			43.43
Common stock dividend payout ratio		23.84			24.42			22.75			21.16			19.68
Asset quality ratios:
Net charge-offs to average loans and leases		1.75	%		0.45	%		0.24	%		0.12	%		0.11	%
Nonperforming loans and leases to total loans and leases		1.24			0.76			0.35			0.34			0.25
Nonperforming assets to total assets		3.06			0.81			0.36			0.24			0.18
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of:
Total loans and leases		2.08	%		1.46	%		1.05	%		1.06	%		1.24	%
Nonperforming loans and leases		168	%		192	%		295	%		310	%		502	%
Capital ratios at period end:
Tier 1 leverage		11.39	%		11.64	%		9.80	%		9.39	%		9.11	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital		13.78			14.21			11.79			11.71			11.94
Total risk-based capital		15.03			15.36			12.67			12.76			13.02

9

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION

AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

General

Net income available to common stockholders of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the “Company”) was $36.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, a 6.8% increase from $34.5 million in 2008. Net income available to common stockholders in 2007 was $31.7 million. Diluted earnings per common share were $2.18 for 2009, a 6.9% increase from $2.04 in 2008. Diluted earnings per common share were $1.89 in 2007.

The table below shows total assets, investment securities, loans and leases, deposits, common stockholders’ equity, net income available to common stockholders, diluted earnings per common share and book value per common share at December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and the percentage of change year over year.

							% Change
	December 31,						2009		2008
	2009		2008		2007		from 2008		from 2007
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Total assets	$	2,770,811	$	3,233,303	$	2,710,875	(14.3	)%	19.3	%
Investment securities		506,678		944,783		578,348	(46.4	)	63.4
Loans and leases		1,904,104		2,021,199		1,871,135	(5.8	)	8.0
Deposits		2,028,994		2,341,414		2,057,061	(13.3	)	13.8
Common stockholders’ equity		269,028		252,302		190,829	6.6		32.2
Net income available to common stockholders		36,826		34,474		31,746	6.8		8.6
Diluted earnings per common share		2.18		2.04		1.89	6.9		7.9
Book value per common share		15.91		14.96		11.35	6.4		31.8

Two measures used to assess performance by banking institutions are return on average assets (“ROA”) and return on average common stockholders’ equity (“ROE”). ROA measures net income available to common stockholders in relation to average total assets. It is calculated by dividing annual net income available to common stockholders by average total assets and indicates a company’s ability to employ its resources profitably. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company’s ROA was 1.23% compared with 1.14% and 1.22%, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007. ROE measures net income available to common stockholders in relation to average common stockholders’ equity. It is calculated by dividing annual net income available to common stockholders by average common stockholders’ equity and indicates how effectively a company can generate net income on the capital invested by its common stockholders. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company’s ROE was 13.75% compared with 16.16% and 17.18%, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007.

Analysis of Results of Operations

The Company is a bank holding company whose primary business is commercial banking conducted through its wholly-owned state chartered bank subsidiary – Bank of the Ozarks (the “Bank”). The Company’s results of operations depend primarily on net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income from earning assets, such as loans, leases and investments, and the interest expense incurred on interest bearing liabilities, such as deposits, borrowings and subordinated debentures. The Company also generates non-interest income, including service charges on deposit accounts, mortgage lending income, trust income, bank owned life insurance (“BOLI”) income, other charges and fees, gains and losses on investment securities and gains and losses on sales of other assets.

The Company’s non-interest expense consists primarily of employee compensation and benefits, net occupancy and equipment expense and other operating expenses. The Company’s results of operations are significantly affected by its provision for loan and lease losses and its provision for income taxes. The following discussion provides a summary of the Company’s operations for the past three years and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes presented elsewhere in this report.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income and net interest margin are analyzed in this discussion on a fully taxable equivalent (“FTE”) basis. The adjustment to convert net interest income to a FTE basis consists of dividing tax-exempt income by one minus the statutory federal income tax rate of 35%. The FTE adjustments to net interest income were $12.0 million in 2009, $10.5 million in 2008 and $3.6 million in 2007. No adjustments have been made in this analysis for income exempt from state income taxes or for interest expense deductions disallowed under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code as a result of investments in certain tax-exempt securities.

10

2009 compared to 2008

Net interest income for 2009 increased 19.4% to $130.3 million compared to $109.2 million for 2008. Net interest margin was 4.80% in 2009 compared to 3.96% in 2008. The growth in net interest income was a result of the improvement in the Company’s net interest margin, which increased 84 basis points (“bps”) from 2008 to 2009, offset in part by a reduction in the Company’s average earning assets, which decreased 1.5% from 2008 to 2009.

The Company’s improvement in its net interest margin resulted from a combination of factors including (i) improvement in the Company’s spread between yields on loans and leases and rates paid on deposits, (ii) favorable yields achieved on the Company’s investment securities portfolio and (iii) a decrease in the average interest rate paid on the Company’s other interest bearing liabilities. The Company’s net interest margin improved throughout 2009, increasing from 4.52% in the fourth quarter of 2008, to 4.73%, 4.80%, 4.80% and 4.89%, respectively, in each succeeding quarter of 2009.

The reduction in average earning assets in 2009 was due principally to a decrease in the Company’s investment securities portfolio. During 2009 the Company was a net seller of investment securities, reducing its portfolio by $438 million from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009 and its average portfolio balance by $27 million in 2009 compared to 2008. This reduction in the investment securities portfolio was a result of the Company’s ongoing evaluations of interest rate risk, including consideration of potential effects of recent United States government monetary and fiscal policy actions.

Yields on average earning assets decreased 47 bps in 2009 compared to 2008. This decrease was due primarily to a 78 bps decline in loan and lease yields in 2009, which was partially offset by a 37 bps increase in the average yield on the Company’s investment securities portfolio.

The 78 bps decrease in loan and lease yields was due primarily to the repricing of the Company’s loan and lease portfolio at lower interest rates during 2009. Beginning in September 2007 and continuing through December 2008, the Federal Open Market Committee (“FOMC”) decreased its federal funds target rate a total of 500 bps, resulting in many of the Company’s variable rate loans repricing to lower rates beginning in the third quarter of 2007 and continuing throughout 2008 and, to a lesser extent, in 2009. Additionally, the Company’s newly originated and renewed loans and leases generally priced at lower rates beginning in the third quarter of 2007 and continuing throughout 2008 and 2009 as a result of these FOMC interest rate decreases.

At December 31, 2009, approximately 53% of the Company’s variable rate loans were at their “floor” rate. In recent years, the Company has included “floor” interest rates in many of its variable rate loan contacts. The inclusion of these floor rates has helped to lessen the impact that falling interest rates have had on the Company’s loan and lease yields.

The 37 bps increase in the Company’s average yield on its investment securities in 2009 compared to 2008 was the result of a 15 bps increase in yield on taxable investment securities, a 16 bps increase in yield on tax-exempt investment securities and a shift in the composition of the portfolio to include a higher proportion of tax-exempt investment securities with generally higher FTE yields than the Company’s taxable investment securities. During 2009 tax-exempt investment securities comprised 56.1% of the average balance of the Company’s investment securities portfolio compared to 48.0% in 2008.

The 78 bps decrease in average earning asset yields in 2009 compared to 2008 was more than offset by a 129 bps decrease in the average rate on interest bearing liabilities, resulting in the overall 84 bps increase in net interest margin in 2009 compared to 2008. The decrease in the average rate on interest bearing liabilities was primarily attributable to a 156 bps decrease in the average rate on interest bearing deposits. This decrease in the average rate on interest bearing deposits was principally due to (i) the FOMC interest rate decreases which resulted in lower rates paid on deposits as they were renewed or repriced and (ii) a favorable shift in the mix of the Company’s interest bearing deposits, resulting in the Company’s average balance of time deposits, which generally pay higher rates than other interest bearing deposits, decreasing to 57.1% of average interest bearing deposits in 2009 from 69.4% in 2008.

The Company’s other borrowing sources include (i) repurchase agreements with customers (“repos”), (ii) other borrowings comprised primarily of Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas (“FHLB”) advances, and, to a lesser extent, Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”) borrowings and federal funds purchased, and (iii) subordinated debentures. The rates paid on repos decreased 68 bps for 2009 compared to 2008 primarily as a result of decreases in FOMC federal funds target rate and other rate indices. The rates paid on the Company’s other borrowings increased 21 bps in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to lower average balances of short-term

11

FHLB advances utilized in 2009 compared to 2008. The rates paid on the Company’s subordinated debentures, which are tied to a spread over the 90-day London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) and reset periodically, declined 250 bps in 2009 compared to 2008 as a result of the decrease in 90-day LIBOR during 2009.

2008 compared to 2007

Net interest income for 2008 increased 34.5% to $109.2 million compared to $81.2 million for 2007. Net interest margin was 3.96% in 2008 compared to 3.44% in 2007. The growth in net interest income was a result of the improvement in the Company’s net interest margin, which increased 52 bps from 2007 to 2008, and growth in the Company’s average earnings assets, which increased 16.6% from 2007 to 2008. The Company’s improvement in its net interest margin resulted from a combination of factors including favorable yields achieved on a large volume of tax-exempt investment securities purchased during 2008 and improvement in the Company’s spread between yields on loans, leases and other investment securities and rates paid on deposits and other funding sources. The Company’s net interest margin improved throughout 2008, increasing from 3.47% in the fourth quarter of 2007, to 3.69%, 3.77%, 3.82% and 4.52%, respectively, in each succeeding quarter of 2008.

Yields on average earning assets decreased 62 bps in 2008 compared to 2007. This decrease was due primarily to a 113 bps decline in loan and lease yields in 2008, which was partially offset by a 93 bps increase in the average yield on the Company’s investment securities.

The 113 bps decrease in loan and lease yields was due primarily to the repricing of the Company’s loan and lease portfolio at lower interest rates during 2008. As previously discussed, beginning in September 2007 and continuing through December 2008, the FOMC decreased its federal funds target rate a total of 500 bps, resulting in many of the Company’s variable rate loans repricing to lower rates beginning in the third quarter of 2007 and continuing throughout 2008. Additionally, the Company’s newly originated and renewed loans and leases generally priced at lower rates beginning in the third quarter of 2007 and continuing throughout 2008 as a result of these FOMC interest rate decreases.

The 93 bps increase in the Company’s average yield on its investment securities in 2008 compared to 2007 was the result of a six bps increase in yield on taxable investment securities, a 101 bps increase in yield on tax-exempt investment securities and a shift in the composition of the portfolio to include a higher proportion of tax-exempt investment securities. Beginning in February 2008 and continuing through December, the Company purchased various tax-exempt investment securities with favorable yields.

The 62 bps decrease in average earning asset yields in 2008 compared to 2007 was more than offset by a 121 bps decrease in the average rate on interest bearing liabilities, resulting in the overall 52 bps increase in net interest margin in 2008 compared to 2007. The decrease in the average rate on interest bearing liabilities was primarily attributable to a 123 bps decrease in the average rate of interest bearing deposits. This decrease in the average rate on interest bearing deposits was attributable to (i) the FOMC interest rate decreases through December 2008 which resulted in lower rates paid on deposits as they were renewed or repriced and (ii) a favorable shift in the mix of the Company’s interest bearing deposits, resulting in the Company’s average balance of time deposits, which generally pay higher rates than other interest bearing deposits, decreasing to 69.4% of average interest bearing deposits in 2008 from 72.7% in 2007.

The rates on the Company’s other funding sources also declined in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily as a result of decreases in the FOMC federal funds target rate and other interest rate indices in 2008. The Company’s other borrowings decreased 89 bps in 2008 compared to 2007. The rates paid on the Company’s subordinated debentures declined 201 bps in 2008 compared to 2007 as a result of the decrease in 90-day LIBOR during 2008.

Analysis of Net Interest Income

(FTE = Fully Taxable Equivalent)

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Interest income	$	165,908		$	183,003		$	176,970
FTE adjustment		12,015			10,483			3,559
Interest income - FTE		177,923			193,486			180,529
Interest expense		47,585			84,302			99,352
Net interest income - FTE	$	130,338		$	109,184		$	81,177
Yield on interest earning assets - FTE		6.55	%		7.02	%		7.64	%
Rate on interest bearing liabilities		1.95			3.24			4.45
Net interest margin - FTE		4.80			3.96			3.44

12

The following table sets forth certain information relating to the Company’s net interest income for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. The yields and rates are derived by dividing interest income or interest expense by the average balance of the related assets or liabilities, respectively, for the periods shown except where otherwise noted. Average balances are derived from daily average balances for such assets and liabilities. The average balance of loans and leases includes loans and leases on which the Company has discontinued accruing interest. The average balances of investment securities are computed based on amortized cost adjusted for unrealized gains and losses on investment securities available for sale (“AFS”) and other-than-temporary impairment writedowns. The yields on loans and leases include late fees and amortization of certain deferred fees and origination costs, which are considered adjustments to yields. The yields on investment securities include amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts. Interest expense and rates on other borrowings are presented net of interest capitalized on construction projects.

Average Consolidated Balance Sheets and Net Interest Analysis

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009						2008						2007
	Average Balance		Income/ Expense		Yield/ Rate		Average Balance		Income/ Expense		Yield/ Rate		Average Balance		Income/ Expense		Yield/ Rate
	(Dollars in thousands)
ASSETS
Earning assets:
Interest earning deposits and federal funds sold	$	552	$	10	1.88	%	$	470	$	13	2.77	%	$	311	$	19	6.08	%
Investment securities:
Taxable		322,215		18,314	5.68			395,484		21,858	5.53			452,831		24,775	5.47
Tax-exempt - FTE		411,710		34,282	8.33			365,413		29,856	8.17			139,724		10,011	7.16
Loans and leases - FTE		1,981,454		125,317	6.32			1,995,231		141,759	7.10			1,770,283		145,724	8.23
Total earning assets - FTE		2,715,931		177,923	6.55			2,756,598		193,486	7.02			2,363,149		180,529	7.64
Non-interest earning assets		286,190						261,109						238,150
Total assets	$	3,002,121					$	3,017,707					$	2,601,299
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Interest bearing liabilities:
Deposits:
Savings and interest bearing transaction	$	832,808	$	7,128	0.86	%	$	628,183	$	9,282	1.48	%	$	521,875	$	13,715	2.63	%
Time deposits of $100,000 or more		699,281		13,504	1.93			906,306		35,464	3.91			899,666		45,858	5.10
Other time deposits		409,969		9,848	2.40			516,655		19,425	3.76			487,382		23,567	4.84
Total interest bearing deposits		1,942,058		30,480	1.57			2,051,144		64,171	3.13			1,908,923		83,140	4.36
Repurchase agreements with customers		52,549		592	1.13			43,916		796	1.81			44,071		1,603	3.64
Other borrowings		384,854		14,375	3.74	(1)		441,288		15,574	3.53	(1)		215,872		9,543	4.42	(1)
Subordinated debentures		64,950		2,138	3.29			64,950		3,761	5.79			64,950		5,066	7.80
Total interest bearing liabilities		2,444,411		47,585	1.95			2,601,298		84,302	3.24			2,233,816		99,352	4.45
Non-interest bearing liabilities:
Non-interest bearing deposits		207,782						184,563						168,786
Other non-interest bearing liabilities		18,010						11,061						12,162
Total liabilities		2,670,203						2,796,922						2,414,764
Preferred stock, net of unamortized discount		60,708						4,098						—
Common stockholders’ equity		267,768						213,271						184,819
Noncontrolling interest		3,442						3,416						1,716
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	3,002,121					$	3,017,707					$	2,601,299
Net interest income - FTE			$	130,338					$	109,184					$	81,177
Net interest margin - FTE					4.80	%					3.96	%					3.44	%

(1) The interest expense and rates for other borrowings were impacted by interest capitalized on construction projects in the amount of $0.4 million, $1.1 million and $1.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. In the absence of this capitalization, these rates would have been 3.84%, 3.78% and 5.03%, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

13

The following table reflects how changes in the volume of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities and changes in interest rates have affected the Company’s interest income, interest expense and net interest income for the periods indicated. Information is provided in each category with respect to changes attributable to (1) changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by prior yield/rate); (2) changes in yield/ rate (changes in yield/rate multiplied by prior volume); and (3) changes in both yield/rate and volume (changes in yield/rate multiplied by changes in volume). The changes attributable to the combined impact of volume and yield/rate have all been allocated to the changes due to volume.

Analysis of Changes in Net Interest Income - FTE

	2009 over 2008									2008 over 2007
	Volume			Yield/ Rate			Net Change			Volume			Yield/ Rate			Net Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Increase (decrease) in:
Interest income - FTE:
Interest earning deposits and federal funds sold	$	1		$	(4	)	$	(3	)	$	4		$	(10	)	$	(6	)
Investment securities:
Taxable		(4,137	)		593			(3,544	)		(2,932	)		15			(2,917	)
Tax-exempt - FTE		3,841			585			4,426			18,434			1,411			19,845
Loans and leases - FTE		(879	)		(15,563	)		(16,442	)		16,039			(20,004	)		(3,965	)
Total interest income - FTE		(1,174	)		(14,389	)		(15,563	)		31,545			(18,588	)		12,957
Interest expense:
Savings and interest bearing transaction		1,741			(3,895	)		(2,154	)		1,569			(6,002	)		(4,433	)
Time deposits of $100,000 or more		(4,015	)		(17,945	)		(21,960	)		312			(10,706	)		(10,394	)
Other time deposits		(2,550	)		(7,027	)		(9,577	)		1,122			(5,264	)		(4,142	)
Repurchase agreements with customers		95			(299	)		(204	)		(1	)		(806	)		(807	)
Other borrowings		(2,126	)		927			(1,199	)		7,952			(1,921	)		6,031
Subordinated debentures		—			(1,623	)		(1,623	)		—			(1,305	)		(1,305	)
Total interest expense		(6,855	)		(29,862	)		(36,717	)		10,954			(26,004	)		(15,050	)
Increase (decrease) in net interest income - FTE	$	5,681		$	15,473		$	21,154		$	20,591		$	7,416		$	28,007

Non-Interest Income

The Company’s non-interest income consists primarily of (1) service charges on deposit accounts, (2) mortgage lending income, (3) trust income, (4) BOLI income, (5) appraisal fees, credit life commissions and other credit related fees, (6) safe deposit box rental, operating lease income, brokerage fees and other miscellaneous fees, (7) gains and losses on investment securities and (8) gains and losses on sales of other assets.

2009 compared to 2008

Non-interest income for 2009 increased 163.8% to $51.1 million compared to $19.3 million in 2008. The large increase in non-interest income for 2009 was primarily attributable to significant gains on investment securities.

Service charges on deposit accounts increased 3.4% to $12.4 million in 2009 compared to $12.0 million in 2008. This increase was due, in part, to the Company’s growth in transaction account deposits, which grew $113 million and increased from 44.3% to 56.8% of total deposits from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009.

Mortgage lending income increased 49.5% to $3.3 million in 2009 compared to $2.2 million in 2008. Originations of mortgage loans for sale, including both originations for home purchases and refinancings of existing mortgages, increased 43.7% to $183.6 million in 2009 compared to $128.0 million in 2008. Mortgage originations for home purchases were 39% of 2009 origination volume compared to 52% in 2008. Refinancing of existing mortgages accounted for 61% of the Company’s 2009 origination volume compared to 48% in 2008.

14

Trust income increased 18.6% to $3.1 million in 2009 compared to $2.6 million in 2008. This increase was primarily the result of continued growth in both personal and corporate trust business through adding new accounts and growing existing relationships during 2009.

BOLI income decreased 22.9% to $3.2 million in 2009 compared to $4.1 million in 2008. BOLI income was comprised of (i) increases in cash surrender value of $1.9 million in 2009 compared to $2.0 million in 2008 and (ii) $1.3 million of income from BOLI death benefits in 2009 compared to $2.1 million in 2008.

Net gains on investment securities, including the impairment charge discussed below, were $27.0 million in 2009 compared to net losses of $3.4 million in 2008. The Company sold approximately $529 million of its investment securities in 2009 and approximately $14 million of its investment securities in 2008. The Company’s investment securities portfolio included one security during 2009 categorized as a collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”). This CDO has performed in accordance with its terms and is not in default, but, because of its credit rating being downgraded to below investment grade and other factors, the Company determined during the third quarter of 2009 that it no longer expects to hold this security until maturity or until such time as fair value recovers to or above cost. As a result of the Company’s intent to dispose of this security, the Company recorded a $0.9 million charge during the third quarter of 2009 to reduce the carrying value of this security to $0.1 million.

Net losses on sales of other assets were $0.2 million in 2009 compared to net losses of $0.5 million in 2008. Non-interest income from all other sources was $2.2 million in 2009 compared to $2.4 million in 2008.

2008 compared to 2007

Non-interest income for 2008 decreased 15.8% to $19.3 million compared to $23.0 million in 2007.

Service charges on deposit accounts decreased 1.5% to $12.0 million in 2008 compared to $12.2 million in 2007. The Company believes this decrease was primarily due to a generally lower level of economic activity in 2008 compared to 2007.

Trust income increased 16.7% to $2.6 million in 2008 compared to $2.2 million in 2007. This increase was primarily the result of growth in both personal and corporate trust business.

Mortgage lending income declined 17.0% to $2.2 million in 2008 compared to $2.7 million in 2007. Originations of mortgage loans for sale decreased 20.6% to $128.0 million in 2008 compared to $161.2 million in 2007. Refinancing of existing mortgages accounted for 48% of the Company’s 2008 origination volume compared to 36% in 2007. Mortgage originations for home purchases were 52% of 2008 origination volume compared to 64% in 2007.

BOLI income increased 115.3% to $4.1 million in 2008 compared to $1.9 million in 2007. BOLI income was comprised of (i) increases in cash surrender value of $2.0 million in 2008 compared to $1.9 million in 2007 and (ii) $2.1 million of income from BOLI death benefits in 2008 compared to no death benefits in 2007.

Net losses on investment securities, including the impairment charge discussed below, were $3.4 million in 2008 compared to net gains of $0.5 million in 2007. The Company sold approximately $14 million of its investment securities in 2008 and approximately $56 million of its investment securities in 2007. During 2008 the Company determined that a bond issued by SLM Corporation (“Sallie Mae”) with a carrying value of $10.0 million and an estimated fair value of $7.0 million was other-than-temporarily impaired. As a result, the Company recorded a pretax impairment charge of $3.0 million in 2008 to write down the carrying value of the Sallie Mae bond to its estimated fair value. This bond was subsequently sold in 2009.

Net losses on sales of other assets were $0.5 million in 2008 compared to net gains of $0.5 million in 2007. On December 31, 2008, a limited liability company providing low to moderate income housing in which the Company had an investment completed a planned liquidation. As a result the Company received its share of the underlying assets, comprised of $3.9 million par value of tax-exempt investment securities. Because of the wide credit spreads attributable to such securities on the date of distribution, the Company determined that its $3.9 million investment should be written down to $3.4 million, which represented the estimated fair value of the investment securities received from dissolution of the entity. This writedown accounted for substantially all of the Company’s net losses on sales of other assets in 2008. The majority of these investment securities were subsequently sold in 2009.

15

Non-interest income from all other sources was $2.4 million in 2008 compared to $3.0 million in 2007. During 2007 the Company benefited from $0.5 million of other non-interest income from the settlement of a contested branch application.

The table below shows non-interest income for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Non-Interest Income

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Service charges on deposit accounts	$	12,421		$	12,007		$	12,193
Mortgage lending income		3,312			2,215			2,668
Trust income		3,078			2,595			2,223
Bank owned life insurance income		3,186			4,131			1,919
Appraisal, credit life commissions and other credit related fees		491			456			498
Safe deposit box rental, operating lease income, brokerage fees and other miscellaneous fees		1,231			1,218			1,160
Gains (losses) on investment securities		26,982			(3,433	)		520
(Losses) gains on sales of other assets		(177	)		(544	)		487
Other		527			704			1,307
Total non-interest income	$	51,051		$	19,349		$	22,975

Non-Interest Expense

Non-interest expense consists of salaries and employee benefits, net occupancy and equipment expense and other operating expenses.

2009 compared to 2008

Non-interest expense for 2009 increased 26.2% to $68.6 million compared to $54.4 million in 2008. The Company’s efficiency ratio for 2009 was 37.8% compared to 42.3% in 2008. This improvement in the efficiency ratio in 2009 resulted from the Company’s total revenue (the sum of FTE net interest income and non-interest income) increasing at a faster rate than its non-interest expense.

Salaries and employee benefits, the Company’s largest component of non-interest expense, increased 5.7% to $31.8 million in 2009 from $30.1 million in 2008. The Company had 722 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2009, an increase of 2.4% from 705 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2008.

Net occupancy and equipment expense for 2009 increased 9.7% to $9.7 million compared to $8.9 million in 2008. During 2009 the Company added new banking offices in downtown Little Rock, Arkansas and Allen, Texas and closed a small office in North Little Rock, Arkansas where the leased space became unavailable. At December 31, 2009, the Company had 73 offices, including 65 banking offices in Arkansas, seven Texas banking offices and one loan production office in Charlotte, North Carolina. At December 31, 2008, the Company had 72 offices.

Other operating expenses for 2009 increased 75.8% to $27.0 million compared to $15.4 million in 2008. The significant increase in other operating expenses was primarily attributable to increases in (i) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance expense, (ii) loan collection and repossession expense, (iii) write downs on other real estate owned, and (iv) other expenses.

The Company’s FDIC insurance expense increased 279.4% to $4.3 million in 2009 compared to $1.1 million in 2008. This large increase was due to (i) a special assessment levied by the FDIC on all insured institutions during the second quarter of 2009, relating to the rebuilding of the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund, which resulted in the Company incurring $1.3 million of expense and (ii) higher FDIC base insurance premium assessments for 2009 applicable to all FDIC insured institutions which resulted in increased expense of $1.9 million.

The Company’s loan collection and repossession expense increased 300.3% to $4.0 million in 2009 compared to $1.0 million in 2008. This increase was primarily attributable to the increased volume of foreclosure and repossession activity in 2009 compared to 2008.

16

During 2009 the Company recorded write downs on other real estate owned of $4.0 million compared to $1.0 million in 2008. The increase in write downs of other real estate owned in 2009 was primarily attributable to the higher volume of other real estate owned in 2009 and declines in the value of assets held in other real estate owned in 2009 as a result of economic and real estate market conditions and other factors.

The increase in other expenses in 2009 included (i) a $0.6 million write off of capitalized branch costs and (ii) a $1.0 million impairment charge on an equity investment in a real estate development project. The $0.6 million write off of capitalized branch costs resulted from the Company’s decision to indefinitely delay construction of five Arkansas branches for which it had previously incurred architectural, engineering and other capitalized pre-construction costs. It is presently uncertain as to when or if the Company will proceed with construction. The $1.0 million impairment charge resulted from the Company’s only equity investment in a real estate development project. Because the project is selling at a slower than expected pace, the Company recognized the impairment charge which reduced the Company’s investment to $2.55 million, equaling the net present value of the proceeds expected to be realized using a 15% compounded annual discount rate.

2008 compared to 2007

Non-interest expense for 2008 increased 12.7% to $54.4 million compared to $48.3 million in 2007. The Company’s efficiency ratio for 2008 was 42.3% compared to 46.3% in 2007. This improvement in the effeciency ratio resulted from the Company’s total revenue (the sum of FTE net interest income and non-interest income) increasing at a faster rate than its non-interest expense in 2008.

Salaries and employee benefits, the Company’s largest component of non-interest expense, increased 5.1% to $30.1 million in 2008 from $28.7 million in 2007. The Company had 705 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2008, an increase of 2.3% from 689 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2007.

During 2008 the Company added a new banking office in Lewisville, Texas and its new corporate headquarters in Little Rock, Arkansas, which opened in December. Simultaneous with the opening of the new headquarters, which includes a retail banking office, the Company closed a nearby Wal-Mart Supercenter branch and a nearby loan production office. At December 31, 2008, the Company had 71 full-service banking offices and one loan production office compared to 70 full-service banking offices and two loan production offices at December 31, 2007.

The following table shows non-interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Non-Interest Expense

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009		2008		2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Salaries and employee benefits	$	31,847	$	30,132	$	28,661
Net occupancy and equipment expense		9,740		8,882		8,098
Other operating expenses:
Postage and supplies		1,530		1,633		1,620
Telephone and data lines		1,806		1,630		1,415
Advertising and public relations		1,083		1,204		1,057
Professional and outside services		1,793		1,537		1,077
Software expense		1,524		1,261		1,201
FDIC and state assessments		673		664		624
FDIC insurance		4,291		1,131		701
ATM expense		745		633		674
Loan collection and repossession expense		3,999		999		328
Write down of other real estate owned		4,009		1,042		122
Amortization of intangibles		110		214		262
Other		5,482		3,447		2,414
Total non-interest expense	$	68,632	$	54,409	$	48,254

17

Income Taxes

The Company’s provision for income taxes was $12.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $9.9 million in 2008 and $14.4 million in 2007. Its effective income tax rates were 22.98%, 22.24% and 31.27%, respectively, for 2009, 2008 and 2007. The effective tax rate increased 74 bps in 2009 compared to 2008. The effective tax rate decreased 903 bps in 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to (i) the significant increase, both in volume and as a percentage of earning assets, in investment securities which are exempt from federal and/or state income taxes and (ii) the $2.1 million of non-taxable income from death benefits on BOLI in 2008 compared to none in 2007. The effective tax rates for all periods were also affected by various other factors including other non-taxable income and non-deductible expenses.

Analysis of Financial Condition

Loan and Lease Portfolio

At December 31, 2009, the Company’s loan and lease portfolio was $1.90 billion, a decrease of 5.8% from $2.02 billion at December 31, 2008. Economic conditions in 2009 diminished both the demand for loans and leases and the quality of many credit applications, resulting in the volume of new loan and lease originations in 2009 being more than offset by loan and lease paydowns.

As of December 31, 2009, the Company’s loan and lease portfolio consisted of 85.7% real estate loans, 7.9% commercial and industrial loans, 3.4% consumer loans, 2.1% direct financing leases and 0.8% agricultural loans (non-real estate). Real estate loans, the Company’s largest category of loans, include all loans made to finance the development of real property construction projects, provided such loans are secured by real estate, and all other loans secured by real estate as evidenced by mortgages or other liens. Real estate loans decreased 2.1% from $1.67 billion at December 31, 2008 to $1.63 billion at December 31, 2009.

The amount and type of loans and leases outstanding are reflected in the following table.

Loan and Lease Portfolio

	December 31,
	2009		2008		2007		2006		2005
	(Dollars in thousands)
Real estate:
Residential 1-4 family	$	282,733	$	275,281	$	279,375	$	281,400	$	271,989
Non-farm/non-residential		606,880		551,821		445,303		433,998		375,628
Construction/land development		600,342		694,527		684,775		514,899		366,827
Agricultural		86,237		84,432		91,810		88,021		74,644
Multifamily residential		55,860		61,668		31,414		50,202		31,142
Total real estate		1,632,052		1,667,729		1,532,677		1,368,520		1,120,230
Commercial and industrial		150,208		206,058		173,128		148,853		109,459
Consumer		63,561		75,015		87,867		86,048		78,916
Direct financing leases		40,353		50,250		53,446		49,705		38,060
Agricultural (non-real estate)		15,509		19,460		22,439		22,298		20,605
Other		2,421		2,687		1,578		1,965		3,453
Total loans and leases	$	1,904,104	$	2,021,199	$	1,871,135	$	1,677,389	$	1,370,723

The amount and percentage of the Company’s loan and lease portfolio by state of originating office are reflected in the following table.

Loan and Lease Portfolio by State of Originating Office

	December 31,
	2009				2008				2007
Loans and Leases Attributable to Offices In	Amount		%		Amount		%		Amount		%
	(Dollars in thousands)
Arkansas	$	1,148,053	60.3	%	$	1,333,420	66.0	%	$	1,461,657	78.1	%
Texas		643,575	33.8			588,875	29.1			315,960	16.9
North Carolina		112,476	5.9			98,904	4.9			93,518	5.0
Total	$	1,904,104	100.0	%	$	2,021,199	100.0	%	$	1,871,135	100.0	%

18

The amount and type of the Company’s real estate loans at December 31, 2009 based on the metropolitan statistical area (“MSA”) and other geographic areas in which the principal collateral is located are reflected in the following table. Data for individual states is separately presented when aggregate real estate loans in that state exceed $10 million.

Geographic Distribution of Real Estate Loans

	Residential 1-4 Family		Non-Farm/ Non- Residential		Construction/ Land Development		Agricultural		Multifamily Residential		Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Arkansas:
Little Rock - North Little Rock, AR MSA	$	78,235	$	178,473	$	88,871	$	10,730	$	7,331	$	363,640
Fort Smith, AR MSA		38,971		49,044		10,220		6,500		3,111		107,846
Fayetteville - Springdale - Rogers, AR MSA		8,765		17,784		22,518		6,508		—		55,575
Hot Springs, AR MSA		8,715		8,339		7,096		—		1,557		25,707
Western Arkansas(1)		29,999		41,052		7,739		13,623		1,527		93,940
Northern Arkansas(2)		85,121		35,817		14,358		44,834		584		180,714
All other Arkansas(3)		7,733		15,798		2,879		2,478		—		28,888
Total Arkansas		257,539		346,307		153,681		84,673		14,110		856,310
Texas:
Dallas - Fort Worth - Arlington, TX MSA		3,113		106,042		186,528		—		25,104		320,787
Houston - Baytown - Sugar Land, TX MSA		—		11,856		42,027		—		—		53,883
San Antonio, TX MSA		—		—		18,340		—		—		18,340
Austin - Round Rock, TX MSA		—		—		16,481		—		—		16,481
Texarkana, TX - Texarkana, AR MSA		10,340		11,388		3,897		388		3,917		29,930
All other Texas(3)		465		15,288		29,015		—		—		44,768
Total Texas		13,918		144,574		296,288		388		29,021		484,189
North Carolina/South Carolina:
Charlotte - Gastonia - Concord, NC/SC MSA		1,722		35,795		40,029		—		2,195		79,741
All other North Carolina(3)		237		12,576		45,328		—		—		58,141
All other South Carolina(3)		5,810		7,548		5,199		—		6,449		25,006
Total North Carolina/ South Carolina		7,769		55,919		90,556		—		8,644		162,888
California		—		2,669		31,004		—		—		33,673
Virginia		—		—		17,961		—		—		17,961
Oklahoma(4)		143		15,314		1,781		—		—		17,238
All other states(3)(5)		3,364		42,097		9,071		1,176		4,085		59,793
Total real estate loans	$	282,733	$	606,880	$	600,342	$	86,237	$	55,860	$	1,632,052

(1) This geographic area includes the following counties in Western Arkansas: Conway, Johnson, Logan, Pope and Yell counties.

(2) This geographic area includes the following counties in Northern Arkansas: Baxter, Boone, Carroll, Fulton, Marion, Newton, Searcy and Van Buren counties.

(3) These geographic areas include all MSA and non-MSA areas that are not separately reported.

(4) This geographic area includes all loans in Oklahoma except loans in Le Flore and Sequoyah counties which are included in the Fort Smith, Arkansas MSA above.

(5) Includes all states not separately presented above.

19

The amount and type of non-farm/non-residential loans at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and their respective percentage of the total non-farm/non-residential loan portfolio are reflected in the following table.

Non-Farm/Non-Residential Loans

	December 31,
	2009				2008
	Amount		%		Amount		%
	(Dollars in thousands)
Retail, including shopping centers and strip centers	$	182,343	30.0	%	$	143,565	26.0	%
Churches and schools		58,601	9.6			75,371	13.7
Office, including medical offices		53,797	8.9			62,644	11.3
Office warehouse, warehouse and mini-storage		64,608	10.6			41,253	7.5
Gasoline stations and convenience stores		17,942	3.0			15,938	2.9
Hotels and motels		39,206	6.5			24,046	4.4
Restaurants and bars		45,597	7.5			47,489	8.6
Manufacturing and industrial facilities		34,859	5.7			25,933	4.7
Nursing homes and assisted living centers		30,171	5.0			22,516	4.1
Hospitals, surgery centers and other medical		38,662	6.4			52,715	9.5
Golf courses, entertainment and recreational facilities		15,162	2.5			12,873	2.3
Other non-farm/non-residential		25,932	4.3			27,478	5.0
Total	$	606,880	100.0	%	$	551,821	100.0	%

The amount and type of construction/land development loans at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and their respective percentage of the total construction/land development loan portfolio are reflected in the following table.

Construction/Land Development Loans

	December 31,
	2009				2008
	Amount		%		Amount		%
	(Dollars in thousands)
Unimproved land	$	98,386	16.4	%	$	92,118	13.3	%
Land development and lots:
1-4 family residential and multifamily		189,691	31.6			219,174	31.6
Non-residential		74,744	12.5			102,598	14.8
Construction:
1-4 family residential:
Owner occupied		12,878	2.1			19,537	2.8
Non-owner occupied:
Pre-sold		6,626	1.1			14,791	2.1
Speculative		54,719	9.1			75,233	10.8
Multifamily		78,540	13.1			17,830	2.6
Industrial, commercial and other		84,758	14.1			153,246	22.0
Total	$	600,342	100.0	%	$	694,527	100.0	%

20

The establishment of interest reserves for construction and development loans is established banking practice, but the handling of such interest reserves varies widely within the industry. Many of the Company’s construction and development loans provide for the use of interest reserves, and based upon its knowledge of general industry practices, the Company believes that its practices related to such interest reserves, discussed below, are appropriate and conservative. When the Company underwrites construction and development loans, it considers the expected total project costs, including hard costs such as land, site work and construction costs and soft costs such as architectural and engineering fees, closing costs, leasing commissions and construction period interest. Based on the total project costs and other factors, the Company determines the required borrower cash equity contribution and the maximum amount the Company is willing to loan. In the vast majority of cases, the Company requires that all of the borrower’s cash equity contribution be contributed prior to any material loan advances. This ensures that the borrower’s cash equity required to complete the project will in fact be available for such purposes. As a result of this practice, the borrower’s cash equity typically goes toward the purchase of the land and early stage hard costs and soft costs. This results in the Company funding the loan later as the project progresses, and accordingly the Company typically funds the majority of the construction period interest through loan advances. However, when the Company initially determines the borrower’s cash equity requirement, the Company typically requires the borrower’s cash equity to cover a majority, or all, of the soft costs, including an amount equal to construction period interest, and an appropriate portion of the hard costs. During 2009, the Company advanced construction period interest totaling approximately $9.1 million on construction and development loans. While the Company advanced these sums as part of the funding process, the Company believes that the borrowers in effect had in most cases already provided for these sums as part of their initial equity contribution. Specifically, the maximum committed balance of all construction and development loans which provide for the use of interest reserves at December 31, 2009 was approximately $464 million, of which $379 million was outstanding at December 31, 2009 and $85 million remained to be advanced. The weighted average loan to cost on such loans, assuming such loans are ultimately fully advanced, will be approximately 65%, which means that the weighted average cash equity contributed on such loans, assuming such loans are ultimately fully advanced, will be approximately 35%. The weighted average final loan to value ratio on such loans, based on the most recent appraisals and assuming such loans are ultimately fully advanced, is expected to be approximately 57%.

Loan and Lease Maturities

The following table reflects loans and leases grouped by remaining maturities at December 31, 2009 by type and by fixed or floating interest rates. This table is based on actual maturities and does not reflect amortizations, projected paydowns or the earliest repricing for floating rate loans. Many loans have principal paydowns scheduled in periods prior to the period in which they mature. In addition many variable rate loans are subject to repricing in periods prior to the period in which they mature.

Loan and Lease Maturities

	1 Year or Less		Over 1 Through 5 Years		Over 5 Years		Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Real estate	$	641,280	$	896,987	$	93,785	$	1,632,052
Commercial, industrial and agricultural		82,222		78,891		4,604		165,717
Consumer		15,349		46,405		1,807		63,561
Direct financing leases		3,146		37,207		—		40,353
Other		933		1,488		—		2,421
Total	$	742,930	$	1,060,978	$	100,196	$	1,904,104
Fixed rate	$	293,004	$	531,471	$	69,092	$	893,567
Floating rate (not at a floor or ceiling rate)		77,000		39,617		12,600		129,217
Floating rate (at floor rate)		372,926		489,890		18,458		881,274
Floating rate (at ceiling rate)		—		—		46		46
Total	$	742,930	$	1,060,978	$	100,196	$	1,904,104

21

The following table reflects loans and leases as of December 31, 2009 grouped by expected amortizations, expected paydowns or the earliest repricing opportunity for floating rate loans. This cash flow or repricing schedule approximates the Company’s ability to reprice the outstanding principal of loans and leases either by adjusting rates on existing loans and leases or reinvesting principal cash flow in new loans and leases.

Loan and Lease Cash Flows or Repricing

	1 Year or Less			Over 1 Through 2 Years			Over 2 Through 3 Years			Over 3 Through 5 Years			Over 5 Years			Total
							(Dollars in thousands)
Fixed rate	$	345,847		$	224,846		$	164,938		$	111,216		$	46,720		$	893,567
Floating rate (not at a floor or ceiling rate)		124,137			614			3,280			1,186			—			129,217
Floating rate (at floor rate)(1)		879,817			—			162			1,295			—			881,274
Floating rate (at ceiling rate)		46			—			—			—			—			46
Total	$	1,349,847		$	225,460		$	168,380		$	113,697		$	46,720		$	1,904,104
Percentage of total		70.9	%		11.8	%		8.9	%		5.9	%		2.5	%		100.0	%
Cumulative percentage of total		70.9			82.7			91.6			97.5			100.0

(1) The inclusion of a floor rate in many of the Company’s loans and leases has lessened the impact of falling interest rates on the Company’s loan and lease yields. Conversely, many loans and leases with floor rates will not immediately reprice in a rising rate environment if the interest rate index and margin on such loans and leases continue to result in a computed interest rate less than the applicable floor rate. The earnings simulation model results included in the interest rate risk section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis include consideration of the impact of all interest rate floors and ceilings in loans and leases.

Nonperforming Assets

Nonperforming assets consist of (1) nonaccrual loans and leases, (2) accruing loans and leases 90 days or more past due, (3) certain restructured loans and leases providing for a reduction or deferral of interest or principal because of a deterioration in the financial position of the borrower or lessee and (4) real estate or other assets that have been acquired in partial or full satisfaction of loan or lease obligations or upon foreclosure.

The Company generally places a loan or lease on nonaccrual status when payments are contractually past due 90 days, or earlier when doubt exists as to the ultimate collection of payments. The Company may continue to accrue interest on certain loans or leases contractually past due 90 days or more if such loans or leases are both well secured and in the process of collection. At the time a loan or lease is placed on nonaccrual status, interest previously accrued but uncollected is generally reversed and charged against interest income. Nonaccrual loans and leases are generally returned to accrual status when payments are less than 90 days past due and the Company reasonably expects to collect all payments. If a loan or lease is determined to be uncollectible, the portion of the principal determined to be uncollectible will be charged against the allowance for loan and lease losses. Income on nonaccrual loans or leases is recognized on a cash basis when and if actually collected.

22

The following table presents information concerning nonperforming assets including nonaccrual and restructured loans and leases, foreclosed assets held for sale and repossessions.

Nonperforming Assets

	December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
	(Dollars in thousands)
Nonaccrual loans and leases	$	23,604		$	15,382		$	6,610		$	5,713		$	3,385
Accruing loans and leases 90 days or more past due		—			—			26			—			—
Restructured loans and leases(1)		—			—			—			—			—
Total nonperforming loans and leases		23,604			15,382			6,636			5,713			3,385
Foreclosed assets held for sale and repossessions(2)		61,148			10,758			3,112			407			356
Total nonperforming assets	$	84,752		$	26,140		$	9,748		$	6,120		$	3,741
Nonperforming loans and leases to total loans and leases		1.24	%		0.76	%		0.35	%		0.34	%		0.25	%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		3.06			0.81			0.36			0.24			0.18

(1) All restructured loans and leases as of the dates shown were on nonaccrual status and are included as nonaccrual loans and leases in this table.

(2) Foreclosed assets held for sale and repossessions are written down to estimated market value net of estimated selling costs at the time of transfer from the loan and lease portfolio. The values of such assets are reviewed from time to time throughout the holding period with the value adjusted through non-interest expense to the then estimated market value net of estimated selling costs, if lower, until disposition.

While most of the Company’s markets appear to have been less significantly impacted by weaker economic conditions than many markets nationally, the Company has not been immune to the effects of the slower economic conditions and the slow down in housing and other real estate activity.

The increases during both 2009 and 2008 in the Company’s volume of nonperforming loans and leases and ratio of nonperforming loans and leases to total loans and leases were not due to a specific customer or a specific market, but resulted from a number of loans and leases spread across the Company’s market areas.

The increase during 2009 in the Company’s volume of foreclosed assets held for sale and repossessions and the related increase in the ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets at December 31, 2009 compared to December 31, 2008 is primarily attributable to four credit relationships which were placed on non-accrual status and then transferred into other real estate owned in 2009 at the estimated fair value of the collateral received by the Company in satisfaction of the debts. The other real estate owned resulting from these four previous credit relationships includes (i) 688 residential lots, one commercial lot and a clubhouse that comprise two separate lot development projects in the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR MSA in northwest Arkansas, (ii) a number of houses, townhouses and duplexes, a small commercial building, and commercial, residential and duplex lots, all in the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR MSA, (iii) approximately 60 acres of undeveloped land located near the Dallas, Texas central business district and (iv) a 476-unit apartment complex located in Arlington, Texas.

The increase during 2008 in the Company’s volume of foreclosed assets held for sale and repossessions and the related increase in the ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 was not due to a specific customer or a specific market, but resulted from a number of assets spread across the Company’s market areas.

In accordance with the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 310, “Receivables” at December 31, 2009, the Company had reduced the carrying value of its impaired loans and leases (all of which were included in nonaccrual loans and leases) by $9.7 million to the estimated fair value of such loans and leases of $19.2 million. The $9.7 million adjustment to reduce the carrying value of impaired loans and leases to estimated fair value consisted of $8.1 million of partial charge-offs and $1.7 million of specific loan and lease loss allocations.

23

The following table presents information concerning the geographic location of nonperforming assets at December 31, 2009. Nonaccrual loans and leases are reported in the physical location of the principal collateral. Other real estate owned is reported in the physical location of the asset. Repossessions are reported at the physical location where the borrower resided or had its principal place of business at the time of repossession.

Geographic Distribution of Nonperforming Assets

	Nonaccrual Loans and Leases		Other Real Estate Owned and Repossessions		Total Nonperforming Assets
	(Dollars in thousands)
Arkansas	$	15,943	$	32,258	$	48,201
Texas		4,541		28,457		32,998
North Carolina		1,112		—		1,112
South Carolina		1,937		344		2,281
All other		71		89		160
Total	$	23,604	$	61,148	$	84,752

Allowance and Provision for Loan and Lease Losses

The Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses was $39.6 million at December 31, 2009, or 2.08% of total loans and leases, compared with $29.5 million, or 1.46% of total loans and leases, at December 31, 2008. The allowance for loan and lease losses was $19.6 million, or 1.05% of loans and leases, at December 31, 2007. The Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses was equal to 168% of its total nonperforming loans and leases at December 31, 2009 compared to 192% at December 31, 2008 and 295% at December 31, 2007. The increase in the allowance for loan and lease losses is due to a number of factors, including changes in loss estimates for individual loans and leases and certain categories of loans and leases, slower economic and housing market conditions and uncertainty regarding economic conditions in general. While the Company believes the current allowance is appropriate, changing economic and other conditions may require future adjustments to the allowance for loan and lease losses.

The amounts of provision to the allowance for loan and lease losses are based on the Company’s analysis of the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses utilizing the criteria discussed below. The provision for loan and lease losses for 2009 was $44.8 million compared to $19.0 million in 2008 and $6.2 million in 2007. The Company’s increase in its provision for loan and lease losses and its net charge-offs for 2009 compared to 2008 were significantly impacted by slower economic conditions, including the write-downs of the carrying value of the four credit relationships previously discussed, and other factors.

24

An analysis of the allowance for loan and lease losses for the periods indicated is shown in the following table.

Analysis of the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
	(Dollars in thousands)
Balance, beginning of period	$	29,512		$	19,557		$	17,699		$	17,007		$	16,133
Loans and leases charged off:
Real estate:
Residential 1-4 family		1,619			1,079			215			124			196
Non-farm/non-residential		3,182			552			182			132			47
Construction/land development		20,188			3,059			796			58			—
Agricultural		844			645			37			—			—
Multifamily/residential		4,355			250			—			—			—
Total real estate		30,188			5,585			1,230			314			243
Commercial and industrial		3,347			1,259			1,798			872			706
Consumer		1,303			1,783			1,046			709			785
Direct financing leases		648			734			367			63			—
Agricultural (non-real estate)		399			270			203			107			50
Total loans and leases charged off		35,885			9,631			4,644			2,065			1,784
Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off:
Real estate:
Residential 1-4 family		99			55			25			5			53
Non-farm/non-residential		147			76			3			4			17
Construction/land development		82			29			—			4			23
Agricultural		—			—			19			—			—
Multifamily residential		1			—			—			—			—
Total real estate		329			160			47			13			93
Commercial and industrial		566			51			62			47			102
Consumer		183			317			209			234			152
Direct financing leases		67			21			27			13			—
Agricultural (non-real estate)		47			12			7			—			11
Total recoveries		1,192			561			352			307			358
Net loans and leases charged off		34,693			9,070			4,292			1,758			1,426
Provision charged to operating expense		44,800			19,025			6,150			2,450			2,300
Balance, end of period	$	39,619		$	29,512		$	19,557		$	17,699		$	17,007
Net charge-offs to average loans and leases		1.75	%		0.45	%		0.24	%		0.12	%		0.11	%
Allowance for loan and lease losses to total loans and leases		2.08	%		1.46	%		1.05	%		1.06	%		1.24	%
Allowance for loan and lease losses to nonperforming loans and leases		168	%		192	%		295	%		310	%		502	%

Provisions to and the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses are determined in accordance with ASC Topic 310 “Receivables” and ASC Topic 450, “Contingencies,” and are based on the Company’s judgment and evaluation of the loan and lease portfolio utilizing objective and subjective criteria. The objective criteria utilized by the Company to assess the adequacy of its allowance for loan and lease losses and required additions to such allowance consists primarily of an internal grading system and specific allowances determined in accordance with ASC Topic 310. The Company also utilizes a peer group analysis and an historical analysis in an effort to validate the overall adequacy of its allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition to these objective criteria, the Company subjectively assesses the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses and the need for additions thereto, with consideration given to the nature, mix and volume of the portfolio, overall portfolio quality, review of specific problem loans and leases, national, regional and local business and economic conditions that may affect borrowers’ or lessees’ ability to pay, the value of collateral securing the loans and leases, and other relevant factors.

25

The Company’s internal grading system analysis assigns grades to all loans and leases except residential 1-4 family loans and consumer loans. Graded loans and leases are assigned to one of seven risk grades, with each grade being assigned a specific allowance allocation percentage. The grade for each individual loan or lease is determined by the account officer and other approving officers at the time the loan or lease is made and changed from time to time to reflect an ongoing assessment of loan or lease risk. Grades are reviewed on specific loans and leases from time to time by senior management and as part of the Company’s internal loan review process. Residential 1-4 family and consumer loans are assigned an allowance allocation percentage based on past due status. Allowance allocation percentages for the various risk grades and past due categories are determined by management and are adjusted periodically. In determining these allowance allocation percentages, management considers, among other factors, historical loss percentages for risk-rated loans and leases, residential 1-4 family loans and consumer loans. Additionally, management considers a variety of subjective criteria in determining the allowance allocation percentages.

All loans and leases deemed to be impaired are evaluated individually. The Company considers a loan or lease to be impaired when based on current information and events, it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms thereof. Most of the Company’s nonaccrual loans and leases and loans and leases that have been restructured from their original contractual terms are considered impaired. Many of the Company’s impaired loans and leases are dependent upon collateral for repayment. For such loans and leases, impairment is measured by comparing collateral value, net of holding and selling costs, to the current investment in the loan or lease. For all other impaired loans and leases, the Company compares estimated discounted cash flows to the current investment in the loan or lease. To the extent that the Company’s current investment in a particular loan or lease exceeds its estimated net collateral value or its estimated discounted cash flows, the impaired amount is (i) specifically considered in the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses or (ii) immediately charged off as a reduction of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

The Company maintains specific reserves for certain loans and leases not considered impaired where (i) the customer is continuing to make regular payments, although payments may be past due, (ii) there is a reasonable basis to believe the customer may continue to make regular payments, although there is also an elevated risk that the customer may default, and (iii) the collateral or other repayment sources are likely to be insufficient to recover the current investment in the loan or lease if a default occurs. The Company evaluates such loans and leases to determine whether a specific reserve is needed for the loan or lease. For the purpose of calculating the amount of the specific reserve appropriate for any such loan or lease, management assumes that (i) no further regular payments occur and (ii) all sums recovered will come from liquidation of collateral and collection efforts from other payment sources. To the extent that the Company’s current investment in a particular loan or lease evaluated for the need for a specific reserve exceeds its net collateral value or its estimated discounted cash flows, such excess is allocated as a specific reserve for purposes of the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

The Company also includes further allowance allocation for risk-rated and certain other loans, including commercial real estate loans, that are in markets determined by management to be “stressed”. Stressed markets may include any specific geography experiencing (i) high unemployment substantially above the U.S. average, (ii) significant over-development in one or more commercial real estate categories, (iii) recent or announced loss of a major employer or significant workforce reductions, (iv) significant declines in real estate values, and (v) various other factors. The additional allowance for such stressed markets compensates for the expectation that a higher risk of loss is anticipated for the “work-out” or liquidation of a real estate loan in a stressed market versus a market that is not experiencing any significant levels of stress. The required allocation percentage applicable to real estate loans in stressed markets may be applied to the total market or it may be determined at the individual loan level based on collateral value, loan-to-value ratios, strength of the borrower and/or guarantor, viability of the underlying project and other factors.

The sum of all allowance amounts derived as described above, combined with a reasonable unallocated allowance determined by management that reflects inherent but undetected losses in the portfolio and imprecision in the allowance methodology, is utilized as the primary indicator of the appropriate level of allowance for loan and lease losses. The portion of the allowance that is not derived by the allowance allocation percentages compensates for the uncertainty and complexity in estimating loan and lease losses,

26

including factors and conditions that may not be fully reflected in the determination and application of the allowance allocation percentages. The factors and conditions evaluated in determining the unallocated portion of the allowance may include the following: (1) general economic and business conditions affecting key lending areas, (2) credit quality trends (including trends in nonperforming loans and leases expected to result from existing conditions), (3) trends that could affect collateral values, (4) seasoning of the loan and lease portfolio, (5) specific industry conditions affecting portfolio segments, (6) recent loss experience in particular segments of the portfolio, (7) concentrations of credit to single borrowers or related borrowers or to specific industries, or in specific collateral types in the loan and lease portfolio, including concentrations of credit in commercial real estate loans, (8) the Company’s expansion into new markets, (9) the offering of new loan and lease products, (10) expectations regarding the current business cycle, (11) bank regulatory examination results and (12) findings of the internal loan review department. At December 31, 2009 management believed it was appropriate to maintain an unallocated portion of the allowance not derived by the allowance allocation percentages that ranges from 15% to 25% of the total allowance for loan and lease losses.

In addition to the internal grading system, specific impairment analyses, specific reserve analyses and the “stressed” markets allocation, the Company compares the allowance for loan and lease losses (as a percentage of total loans and leases) maintained by the Bank to the peer group average percentages as shown on the most recently available FDIC’s Uniform Bank Performance Report and FRB’s Bank Holding Company Performance Report. This comparison is an effort to validate the overall adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

Although the Company does not determine the overall allowance based upon the amount of loans or leases in a particular type or category (except in the case of residential 1-4 family and consumer loans), risk elements attributable to particular loan or lease types or categories are considered in assigning loan and lease grades to individual loans and leases. These risk elements include the following: (1) for non-farm/non-residential, multifamily residential, and agricultural real estate loans, the debt service coverage ratio (income from the property in excess of operating expenses compared to loan repayment requirements), operating results of the owner in the case of owner-occupied properties, the loan-to-value ratio, the age, condition, value, nature and marketability of the collateral and the specific risks and volatility of income, property value and operating results typical of properties of that type; (2) for construction and land development loans, the perceived feasibility of the project including the ability to sell developed lots or improvements constructed for resale or ability to lease property constructed for lease, the quality and nature of contracts for presale or preleasing, if any, experience and ability of the developer and loan-to-value ratios; (3) for commercial and industrial loans and leases, the operating results of the commercial, industrial or professional enterprise, the borrower’s or lessee’s business, professional and financial ability and expertise, the specific risks and volatility of income and operating results typical for businesses in the applicable industry and the age, condition, value, nature and marketability of collateral; and (4) for non-real estate agricultural loans and leases, the operating results, experience and ability of the borrower or lessee, historical and expected market conditions and the age, condition, value, nature and marketability of collateral. In addition, for each category the Company considers secondary sources of income and the financial strength of the borrower or lessee and any guarantors.

The Board of Directors reviews the analysis of the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses on a quarterly basis, or more frequently as needed, to determine whether the amount of monthly provisions are adequate or whether additional provisions should be made to the allowance. While the allowance is determined by (i) management’s assessment and grading of individual loans and leases in the case of loans and leases other than residential 1-4 family loans and consumer loans, (ii) the past due status of residential 1-4 family loans and consumer loans, (iii) allowances made for specific loans and leases and (iv) “stressed” market allocations, the total allowance amount is available to absorb losses across the Company’s entire loan and lease portfolio.

27

The following table sets forth the sum of the amounts of the allowance for loan and lease losses attributable to individual loans and leases within each category, or loan and lease categories in general, and the unallocated allowance. The table also reflects the percentage of loans and leases in each category to the total portfolio of loans and leases for each of the periods indicated. These allowance amounts have been computed using the Company’s internal grading system, specific impairment analyses, specific special reserve analyses and “stressed” markets allocations. The amounts shown are not necessarily indicative of the actual future losses that may occur within particular categories.

Allocation of the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

	December 31,
	2009				2008				2007				2006				2005
	Allowance		% of Loans and Leases		Allowance		% of Loans and Leases		Allowance		% of Loans and Leases		Allowance		% of Loans and Leases		Allowance		% of Loans and Leases
	(Dollars in thousands)
Real estate:
Residential 1-4 family	$	3,600	14.9	%	$	2,170	13.6	%	$	2,217	14.9	%	$	3,052	16.8	%	$	3,423	19.8	%
Non-farm/non-residential		6,574	31.9			4,396	27.3			3,470	23.8			3,085	25.9			3,368	27.4
Construction/land development		11,585	31.5			8,560	34.4			5,192	36.6			3,381	30.7			2,820	26.8
Agricultural		750	4.5			745	4.2			791	4.9			765	5.2			562	5.5
Multifamily residential		710	2.9			1,658	3.0			198	1.7			272	3.0			235	2.2
Commercial and industrial		3,587	7.9			2,421	10.2			1,439	9.3			1,373	8.9			1,111	8.0
Consumer		2,599	3.4			1,894	3.7			2,280	4.7			2,179	5.1			2,062	5.8
Direct financing leases		1,560	2.1			808	2.5			335	2.8			305	3.0			286	2.8
Agricultural (non-real estate)		222	0.8			137	1.0			142	1.2			150	1.3			200	1.5
Other		67	0.1			72	0.1			65	0.1			77	0.1			41	0.2
Unallocated allowance		8,365				6,651				3,428				3,060				2,899
Total	$	39,619			$	29,512			$	19,557			$	17,699			$	17,007

The Company maintains an internally classified loan and lease list that, along with the list of nonaccrual loans and leases, the list of impaired loans and leases, the list of loans and leases with specific reserves, and the “stressed” market allocations, helps management assess the overall quality of the loan and lease portfolio and the adequacy of the allowance. Loans and leases classified as “substandard” have clear and defined weaknesses such as highly leveraged positions, unfavorable financial ratios, uncertain repayment sources or poor financial condition which may jeopardize collectability of the loan or lease. Loans and leases classified as “doubtful” have characteristics similar to substandard loans and leases, but also have an increased risk that a loss may occur or at least a portion of the loan or lease may require a charge-off if liquidated. Although loans and leases classified as substandard do not duplicate loans and leases classified as doubtful, both substandard and doubtful loans and leases may include some that are past due at least 90 days, are on nonaccrual status or have been restructured. Loans and leases classified as “loss” are charged off. At December 31, 2009 substandard loans and leases not designated as nonaccrual or 90 days past due totaled $26.1 million, compared to $41.6 million at December 31, 2008 and $10.0 million at December 31, 2007. No loans or leases were designated as doubtful or loss at December 31, 2009, 2008 or 2007.

Administration of the Bank’s lending function is the responsibility of the Chief Executive Officer and certain senior lenders. Such officers perform their lending duties subject to the oversight and policy direction of the Board of Directors and the loan committee. Loan or lease authority is granted to the Chief Executive Officer and certain other senior officers as determined by the Board of Directors. Loan or lease authorities of other lending officers are assigned by the Chief Executive Officer.

Loans or leases and aggregate loan and lease relationships exceeding $3.0 million up to the legal lending limit of the Bank are authorized by the loan committee, which during 2009 consisted of any five or more directors and three of the Bank’s senior officers. At least quarterly, the Company’s loan committee reviews various reports of loan and lease concentrations, loan and lease originations and commitments over $100,000, internally classified and watch list loans and leases and various other loan and lease reports. At least quarterly the Board of Directors reviews summary reports of past due loans and leases and activity in the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses and various other loan and lease reports.

The Company’s compliance and loan review officers are responsible for the Bank’s compliance and loan review areas. Periodic reviews are scheduled for the purpose of evaluating asset quality and effectiveness of

28

loan and lease administration. The compliance and loan review officers prepare reports which identify deficiencies, establish recommendations for improvement and outline management’s proposed action plan for curing the identified deficiencies. These reports are provided to and reviewed by the Company’s audit committee. Additionally, the reports issued by the Company’s loan review function are provided to and reviewed by the Company’s loan committee.

Investment Securities

At December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company classified all of its investment securities portfolio as available for sale. Accordingly, its investment securities are stated at estimated fair value in the consolidated financial statements with the unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported as a separate component of stockholders’ equity and included in other comprehensive income (loss).

At December 31, 2007, the Company owned stock in the FHLB and Arkansas Banker’s Bancorporation, Inc (“ABB”). In 2008 ABB was acquired by and merged into First National Banker’s Bankshares, Inc. (“FNBB”) via a tax-free exchange of stock. Accordingly, at December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company owned stock in the FHLB and FNBB. The FHLB, ABB and FNBB shares do not have readily determinable fair values and are carried at cost.

The following table presents the amortized cost and the fair value of investment securities as of the dates indicated.

Investment Securities

	December 31,
	2009				2008				2007
	Amortized Cost		Fair Value(1)		Amortized Cost		Fair Value(1)		Amortized Cost		Fair Value(1)
	(Dollars in thousands)
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	385,581	$	393,887	$	517,166	$	542,740	$	163,339	$	166,467
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		93,159		94,510		371,110		371,561		370,061		344,346
Securities of U.S. Government agencies		—		—		—		—		42,029		42,092
Corporate obligations		1,596		1,865		6,953		6,953		9,953		7,646
Collateralized debt obligation		100		100		1,000		683		1,044		1,044
FHLB and FNBB/ABB stock		16,316		16,316		22,846		22,846		16,753		16,753
Total	$	496,752	$	506,678	$	919,075	$	944,783	$	603,179	$	578,348

(1) The Company utilizes independent third parties as its principal sources for determining fair value. For investment securities traded in an active market, the fair values are based on quoted market prices if available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on market prices for comparable securities, broker quotes or comprehensive interest rate tables, pricing matrices or a combination thereof. For investment securities traded in a market that is not active, fair value is determined using unobservable inputs.

The Company’s investment securities portfolio is reported at amortized cost adjusted for unrealized gains and losses and for any impairment charges. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, unrealized net gains totaled $9.9 million and $25.7 million, respectively. At December 31, 2007, unrealized net losses totaled $24.8 million. Management believes that all of its unrealized losses on individual investment securities at December 31, 2009 are the result of fluctuations in interest rates and do not reflect deterioration in the credit quality of its investments. Accordingly management considers these unrealized losses to be temporary in nature. The Company does not have the intent to sell these investment securities and more likely than not would not be required to sell these investment securities before fair value recovers to amortized cost.

At December 31, 2009, the Company’s investment securities portfolio included one security categorized as a CDO. This CDO has performed in accordance with its terms and is not in default, but, because of its credit rating being downgraded to below investment grade and other factors, the Company determined during the third quarter of 2009 that it no longer expects to hold this security until maturity or until such time as fair value recovers to or above cost. As a result of the Company’s intent to dispose of this security, the Company recorded a $0.9 million charge during the third quarter of 2009 to reduce the carrying value of this security to $0.1 million.

29

During 2008 the Company’s investment securities portfolio included a bond issued by Sallie Mae with an amortized cost of $10.0 million and an estimated fair value of $7.0 million. At December 31, 2008 the Company concluded that the Sallie Mae bond was other-than-temporarily impaired and recorded a pretax charge of $3.0 million to reduce the carrying value of this bond to its estimated fair value. This bond was subsequently sold in 2009.

The Company had net gains of $27.9 million from the sale of $529 million of investment securities in 2009 compared to net losses of $0.4 million from the sale of $14 million of investment securities in 2008 and net gains of $0.5 million from the sale of $56 million of investment securities in 2007. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, investment securities totaling $247 million, $1.64 billion and $40 million matured or were called by the issuer. The Company purchased $322 million, $1.96 billion and $70 million, respectively, of investment securities during 2009, 2008 and 2007.

From February through December of 2008, the Company purchased a large volume of tax-exempt investment securities which the Company expected to be relatively temporary investments. The opportunity to acquire these securities at unusually favorable yields was due to unusual market conditions. The interest rates on the majority of these securities reset weekly, resulting in the securities being repurchased or called on a weekly basis. As expected, the Company’s volume of these investments declined during 2008 from $290 million at March 31, 2008, to $85 million at December 31, 2008. The remainder of these securities were called or otherwise paid off in the first and second quarters of 2009.

In addition, during the fourth quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009, the Company purchased other investment securities which offered relatively good value at the time of purchase and consisted of tax-exempt mortgage-backed securities issued by housing authorities of states and political subdivisions (“Municipal Housing Authority Bonds”). These Municipal Housing Authority Bonds are primarily backed by single family or multi-family residential mortgages, the repayment of which is guaranteed by the Government National Mortgage Association, Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, U.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs, Federal Housing Agency or U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development.

During 2009 the Company sold most of the Municipal Housing Authority Bonds and a substantial portion of its U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities. This reduction of the Company’s investment securities portfolio was a result of management’s ongoing evaluations of interest rate risk, including consideration of the potential effects of recent United States government monetary and fiscal policy actions.

The Company invests in securities it believes offer good relative value at the time of purchase, and it will, from time to time reposition its investment securities portfolio. In making its decisions to sell or purchase securities, the Company considers credit ratings, call features, maturity dates, relative yields, current market factors, interest rate risk and other relevant factors.

30

The following table presents the types and estimated fair values of the Company’s investment securities at December 31, 2009 based on credit ratings by one or more nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

Credit Ratings of Investment Securities

	AAA(1)			AA(2)			A(3)			BBB(4)			B(5)			Non-Rated(6)			Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Obligations of states and political subdivisions:
Arkansas	$	12,136		$	16,475		$	75,800		$	11,826		$	—		$	187,410		$	303,647
Non-Arkansas		12,955			9,168			24,665			21,777			—			21,675			90,240
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		94,510			—			—			—			—			—			94,510
Corporate obligations		—			—			—			1,865			—			—			1,865
Collateralized debt obligation		—			—			—			—			100			—			100
FHLB and FNBB stock		15,933			—			—			—			—			383			16,316
Total	$	135,534		$	25,643		$	100,465		$	35,468		$	100		$	209,468		$	506,678
Percentage of total		26.8	%		5.1	%		19.8	%		7.0	%		0.0	%		41.3	%		100.0	%
Cumulative percentage of total		26.8	%		31.9	%		51.7	%		58.7	%		58.7	%		100.0	%

(1) Includes securities rated Aaa by Moody’s, AAA by Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) or a comparable rating by other nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

(2) Includes securities rated Aa1 to Aa3 by Moody’s, AA+ to AA- by S&P or a comparable rating by other nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

(3) Includes securities rated A1 to A3 by Moody’s, A+ to A- by S&P or a comparable rating by other nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

(4) Includes securities rated Baa1 to Baa3 by Moody’s, BBB+ to BBB- by S&P or a comparable rating by other nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

(5) Includes securities rated B1 to B3 by Moody’s, B+ to B- by S&P or a comparable rating by other nationally-recognized credit rating agencies.

(6) Includes all securities that are not rated or securities that are not rated but that have a rated credit enhancement where the Company has ignored such credit enhancement. For these securities, the Company has performed its own evaluation of the security and/or the underlying issuer and believes that such security or its issuer would warrant a credit rating of investment grade (i.e., Baa3 or better by Moody’s or BBB- or better by S&P or a comparable rating by another nationally-recognized credit rating agency).

The following table presents the unaccreted discount and unamortized premium of the Company’s investment securities for the dates indicated.

Unaccreted Discount and Unamortized Premium

	Amortized Cost		Unaccreted Discount		Unamortized Premium			Par Value
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2009:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	385,581	$	8,796	$	(22	)	$	394,355
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		93,159		445		(25	)		93,579
Corporate obligations		1,596		274		—			1,870
Collateralized debt obligation		100		900		—			1,000
FHLB and FNBB stock		16,316		—		—			16,316
Total	$	496,752	$	10,415	$	(47	)	$	507,120
December 31, 2008:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	517,166	$	28,779	$	(19	)	$	545,926
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		371,110		8,252		(139	)		379,223
Corporate obligations		6,953		3,047		—			10,000
Collateralized debt obligation		1,000		—		—			1,000
FHLB and FNBB stock		22,846		—		—			22,846
Total	$	919,075	$	40,078	$	(158	)	$	958,995

31

During 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company recognized discount accretion, net of premium amortization, of $4.5 million, $1.0 million and $0.9 million, respectively, which is considered an adjustment to the yield of its investment securities.

The following table reflects the expected maturity distribution of the Company’s investment securities, at fair value, as of December 31, 2009 and weighted-average yields (for tax-exempt obligations on a FTE basis) of such securities. The maturity for all investment securities is shown based on each security’s contractual maturity date, except (1) equity securities with no contractual maturity date which are shown in the longest maturity category, (2) U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities are allocated among various maturities based on an estimated repayment schedule utilizing Bloomberg median prepayment speeds based on interest rate levels at December 31, 2009, (3) mortgage-backed securities issued by housing authorities of state and political subdivisions are allocated among various maturities based on an estimated repayment schedule projected by management as of December 31, 2009, and (4) callable investment securities when the Company has received notification of call are included in the maturity category in which the call occurs or is expected to occur. Actual maturities will differ from contractual maturities because issuers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties. The weighted-average yields - FTE are calculated based on the coupon rate and amortized cost for such securities and do not include any projected discount accretion or premium amortization.

Expected Maturity Distribution of Investment Securities

	1 Year or Less			Over 1 Through 5 Years			Over 5 Through 10 Years			Over 10 Years			Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	3,769		$	25,562		$	31,901		$	332,655		$	393,887
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		39,543			48,880			6,087			—			94,510
Corporate obligations		—			—			—			1,865			1,865
Collateralized debt obligation		—			—			—			100			100
FHLB and FNBB stock(1)		—			—			—			16,316			16,316
Total	$	43,312		$	74,442		$	37,988		$	350,936		$	506,678
Percentage of total		8.5	%		14.7	%		7.5	%		69.3	%		100.0	%
Cumulative percentage of total		8.5	%		23.2	%		30.7	%		100.0	%
Weighted-average yield - FTE(2)		5.29	%		5.68	%		6.98	%		7.54	%		7.03	%

(1) Includes approximately $16.3 million of FHLB stock which has historically paid quarterly dividends at a variable rate approximating the federal funds rate.

(2) The weighted-average yields - FTE are calculated based on the coupon rate and amortized cost for such securities and do not include any projected discount accretion or premium amortization.

Deposits

The Company’s lending and investing activities are funded primarily by deposits. The Company’s total deposits decreased 13.3% to $2.03 billion at December 31, 2009, compared to $2.34 billion at December 31, 2008. This decrease was primarily due to the Company adjusting its balance sheet as it reduced its investment securities portfolio during 2009.

While the Company’s total deposits decreased during 2009, several favorable changes occurred in the Company’s deposit mix. Non-interest bearing demand deposits grew $38 million from $186 million at December 31, 2008 to $224 million at December 31, 2009. Total non-CD deposits grew $113 million from $1.04 billion at December 31, 2008 to $1.15 billion at December 31, 2009. Brokered deposits decreased from $385 million, or 16.4% of total deposits, at December 31, 2008 to $57 million, or 2.8% of total deposits, at December 31, 2009.

Total deposits at December 31, 2009 consisted of 43.2% time deposits and 56.8% demand, savings and interest bearing transaction deposits. Total deposits at December 31, 2008 consisted of 55.7% time deposits and 44.3% demand, savings and interest bearing transaction deposits.

32

The following table reflects the average balance and average rate paid for each deposit category shown for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Average Deposit Balances and Rates

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009				2008				2007
	Average Balance		Average Rate Paid		Average Balance		Average Rate Paid		Average Balance		Average Rate Paid
	(Dollars in thousands)
Non-interest bearing accounts	$	207,782	—		$	184,563	—		$	168,786	—
Interest bearing accounts:
Transaction (NOW)		431,587	0.58	%		400,145	1.18	%		403,288	2.48	%
Savings		33,568	0.11			28,437	0.11			25,746	0.22
Money market		367,653	1.24			199,601	2.27			92,841	3.95
Time deposits less than $100,000		409,969	2.40			516,655	3.76			487,382	4.84
Time deposits $100,000 or more		699,281	1.93			906,306	3.91			899,666	5.10
Total deposits	$	2,149,840			$	2,235,707			$	2,077,709

The following table sets forth, by time remaining to maturity, time deposits in amounts of $100,000 and over at December 31, 2009.

Maturity Distribution of Time Deposits of $100,000 and Over

	December 31, 2009
	(Dollars in thousands)
3 months or less	$	276,960
Over 3 to 6 months		145,181
Over 6 to 12 months		96,548
Over 12 months		21,545
Total	$	540,234

The amount and percentage of the Company’s deposits by state of originating office are reflected in the following table.

Deposits by State of Originating Office

	December 31,
Deposits Attributable to Offices In	2009				2008				2007
	Amount		%		Amount		%		Amount		%
	(Dollars in thousands)
Arkansas	$	1,734,870	85.5	%	$	2,032,335	86.8	%	$	1,922,746	93.5	%
Texas		294,124	14.5			309,079	13.2			134,315	6.5
Total	$	2,028,994	100.0	%	$	2,341,414	100.0	%	$	2,057,061	100.0	%

Other Interest Bearing Liabilities

The Company also relies on other interest bearing liabilities to fund its lending and investing activities. Such liabilities consist of repurchase agreements with customers, other borrowings (primarily FHLB advances and, to a lesser extent, FRB borrowings and federal funds purchased) and subordinated debentures.

Total other interest bearing liabilities were $452 million at December 31, 2009, a decrease of $85 million from $537 million at December 31, 2008. Repurchase agreements with customers decreased 5.5% to $44 million at December 31, 2009 from $47 million at December 31, 2008. Other borrowings, including FHLB advances, FRB borrowings and federal funds purchased, decreased 19.4% to $343 million at December 31, 2009 from $425 million at December 31, 2008. During 2009 the Company utilized a portion of the liquidity generated from the sales of its investment securities portfolio to repay short-term borrowings.

33

The following table reflects the average balance and average rate paid for each category of other interest bearing liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

Average Balances and Rates of Other Interest Bearing Liabilities

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009				2008				2007
	Average Balance		Average Rate Paid		Average Balance		Average Rate Paid		Average Balance		Average Rate Paid
	(Dollars in thousands)
Repurchase agreements with customers	$	52,549	1.13	%	$	43,916	1.81	%	$	44,071	3.64	%
Other borrowings(1)		384,854	3.74			441,228	3.53			215,872	4.42
Subordinated debentures		64,950	3.29			64,950	5.79			64,950	7.80
Total other interest bearing liabilities	$	502,353	3.40	%	$	550,094	3.66	%	$	324,893	4.99	%

(1) Included in other borrowings at December 31, 2009 are FHLB advances that contain quarterly call features and mature as follows: 2010, $60.0 million at 6.27% weighted-average interest rate (“WAR”); 2017, $260.0 million at 3.90% WAR; and 2018, $20.0 million at 2.53% WAR.

Capital Resources and Liquidity

Capital Resources

Subordinated Debentures. At December 31, 2009, the Company had an aggregate of $64.9 million of subordinated debentures and related trust preferred securities outstanding consisting of $20.6 million of subordinated debentures and securities issued in 2006 that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at LIBOR plus 1.60%; $15.4 million of subordinated debentures and securities issued in 2004 that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at LIBOR plus 2.22%; and $28.9 million of subordinated debentures and securities issued in 2003 that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at a weighted-average rate of LIBOR plus 2.925%. These subordinated debentures and securities generally mature 30 years after issuance and may be prepaid at par, subject to regulatory approval, on or after approximately five years from the date of issuance, or at an earlier date upon certain changes in tax laws, investment company laws or regulatory capital requirements. These subordinated debentures and the related trust preferred securities provide the Company additional regulatory capital to support its expected future growth and expansion.

Preferred Stock and Common Stock Warrant. On December 12, 2008, as part of the United States Department of the Treasury’s (the “Treasury”) Capital Purchase Program made available to certain financial institutions in the U.S. pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), the Company and the Treasury entered into a Letter Agreement including the Securities Purchase Agreement–Standard Terms incorporated therein (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company issued to the Treasury, in exchange for aggregate consideration of $75.0 million, (i) 75,000 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, par value $0.01 and liquidation preference $1,000 per share (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), and (ii) a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase up to 379,811 shares (the “Warrant Common Stock”) of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at an exercise price of $29.62 per share.

On November 4, 2009, the Company redeemed all of the Series A Preferred Stock for $75.0 million plus accrued and unpaid dividends, with the approval of the Company’s primary regulator in consultation with the Treasury. On November 24, 2009, the Company repurchased the Warrant from the Treasury for $2.65 million, which was charged against the Company’s additional paid-in capital.

The Series A Preferred Stock qualified as Tier 1 capital and paid cumulative cash dividends quarterly at a rate of 5% per annum while outstanding. The Series A Preferred Stock was non-voting, other than class voting rights on certain matters that could adversely affect the Series A Preferred Stock. While the Series A Preferred Stock was outstanding, the Company could not, without Treasury’s consent, increase its dividend rate per share of common stock or repurchase its common stock.

Prior to its repurchase by the Company, the Warrant was immediately exercisable and had a 10-year term. The Treasury could not exercise voting power with respect to any shares of Warrant Common Stock until the Warrant had been exercised.

34

In addition, the Purchase Agreement (i) granted the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, the Warrant and the Warrant Common Stock certain registration rights, (ii) subjected the Company to certain of the executive compensation limitations included in the EESA and (iii) allowed the Treasury to unilaterally amend any of the terms of the Purchase Agreement to the extent required to comply with any changes after December 12, 2008 in applicable federal statutes.

Upon receipt of the aggregate consideration from the Treasury on December 12, 2008, the Company allocated the $75.0 million proceeds on a pro rata basis to the Series A Preferred Stock and the Warrant based on relative fair values. In estimating the fair value of the Warrant, the Company utilized the Black-Scholes model which includes assumptions regarding the Company’s common stock prices, stock price volatility, dividend yield, the risk free interest rate and the estimated life of the Warrant. The fair value of the Series A Preferred Stock was determined using a discounted cash flow methodology and a discount rate of 12%. As a result, the Company assigned $3.1 million of the aggregate proceeds to the Warrant and $71.9 million to the Series A Preferred Stock. The discount assigned to the Series A Preferred Stock was expected to be amortized over a five-year period, which was the expected life of the Series A Preferred Stock at the time it was issued, up to the $75.0 million liquidation value of such preferred stock, with the cost of such amortization being reported as additional preferred stock dividends. As a result of the redemption, the remaining unamortized discount of $2.7 million was recognized as an additional preferred stock dividend in the fourth quarter of 2009.

Common Stock Dividend Policy. In 2009 the Company paid dividends of $0.52 per share. In 2008 and 2007 the Company paid dividends of $0.50 per share and $0.43 per share, respectively. In 2007 the per share dividend was $0.10 per quarter in the first and second quarters, $0.11 in the third quarter and $0.12 in the fourth quarter. In 2008, the per share dividend was $0.12 per quarter in the first and second quarters and $0.13 per quarter in the third and fourth quarters. In 2009 the per share dividend was $0.13 in each quarter. On January 19, 2010, the Company’s board of directors approved a dividend of $0.14 per common share to be paid during the first quarter of 2010. The determination of future dividends on the Company’s common stock will depend on conditions existing at that time.

Tangible Common Equity. The Company uses its tangible common equity ratio as the principal measure of the strength of its capital. The tangible common equity ratio is calculated by dividing total common equity less intangible assets by total assets less intangible assets. The Company’s tangible common equity ratio was 9.53% at December 31, 2009, compared to 7.64% at December 31, 2008 and 6.83% at December 31, 2007.

Preferred Stock Dividend. The Series A Preferred Stock paid cumulative quarterly dividends at a rate of 5% per annum while it was outstanding. These cash dividends and the amortization of the issuance discount resulted in total dividends of $6.3 million in 2009. These total dividends consisted of $3.6 million in dividends and amortization of the issuance discount prior to the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock and $2.7 million in additional preferred stock dividend recognized at the time of the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock, which represented the remaining unamortized discount on the Series A Preferred Stock.

Capital Compliance

Bank regulatory authorities in the United States impose certain capital standards on all bank holding companies and banks. These capital standards require compliance with certain minimum “risk-based capital ratios” and a minimum “leverage ratio.” The risk-based capital ratios consist of (1) Tier 1 capital (common stockholders’ equity excluding goodwill, certain intangibles and net unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale investment securities, but including, subject to limitations, trust preferred securities, certain types of preferred stock and other qualifying items) to risk-weighted assets and (2) total capital (Tier 1 capital plus Tier 2 capital which includes the qualifying portion of the allowance for loan and lease losses and the portion of trust preferred securities not counted as Tier 1 capital) to risk-weighted assets. The Tier 1 leverage ratio is measured as Tier 1 capital to adjusted quarterly average assets.

35

The Company’s consolidated risk-based capital and leverage ratios exceeded these minimum requirements at December 31, 2009 and 2008 and are presented in the following table, followed by the capital ratios of the Bank at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Consolidated Capital Ratios

	December 31,
	2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Tier 1 capital:
Common stockholders’ equity	$	269,028		$	252,302
Preferred stock, net of unamorized discount		—			71,880
Allowed amount of trust preferred securities		63,000			63,000
Net unrealized (gains) losses on investment securities AFS		(6,032	)		(15,624	)
Less goodwill and certain intangible assets		(5,554	)		(5,664	)
Total Tier 1 capital		320,442			365,894
Tier 2 capital:
Qualifying allowance for loan and lease losses		29,207			29,512
Total risk-based capital	$	349,649		$	395,406
Risk-weighted assets	$	2,326,185		$	2,574,881
Adjusted quarterly average assets - fourth quarter	$	2,813,053		$	3,143,959
Ratios at end of period:
Tier 1 leverage		11.39	%		11.64	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital		13.78			14.21
Total risk-based capital		15.03			15.36
Minimum ratio guidelines:
Tier 1 leverage(1)		3.00	%		3.00	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital		4.00			4.00
Total risk-based capital		8.00			8.00
Minimum ratio guidelines to be “well capitalized”:
Tier 1 leverage		5.00	%		5.00	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital		6.00			6.00
Total risk-based capital		10.00			10.00

(1) Regulatory authorities require institutions to operate at varying levels (ranging from 100-200 bps) above a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3% depending upon capitalization classification.

Bank Capital Ratios

	December 31,
	2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Stockholders’ equity - Tier 1 capital	$	299,683		$	346,941
Tier 1 leverage ratio		10.72	%		11.09	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio		12.96			13.48
Total risk-based capital ratio		14.22			14.63

36

Liquidity

Liquidity represents an institution’s ability to provide funds to satisfy demands from depositors, borrowers and other creditors by either converting assets into cash or accessing new or existing sources of incremental funds. Liquidity risk arises from the possibility the Company may be unable to satisfy current or future financial commitments. The ALCO and Investments Committee (“ALCO”), which reports to the Board of Directors, has primary responsibility for oversight of the Company’s liquidity, funds management, asset/ liability (interest rate risk) position and investment portfolio functions.

The objective of managing liquidity risk is to ensure the cash flow requirements resulting from depositor, borrower and other creditor demands are met, as well as operating cash needs of the Company, and the cost of funding such requirements and needs is reasonable. The Company maintains a liquidity risk management policy and a contingency funding plan that include policies and procedures for managing liquidity risk. Generally the Company relies on deposits, loan and lease repayments and repayments of its investment securities as its primary sources of funds. The principal deposit sources utilized by the Company include consumer, commercial and public funds customers in the Company’s markets. The Company has used these funds, together with wholesale deposit sources such as brokered deposits, FHLB advances, FRB borrowings, federal funds purchased and other sources of short-term borrowings, to make loans and leases, acquire investment securities and other assets and to fund continuing operations.

Deposit levels may be affected by a number of factors, including rates paid by competitors, general interest rate levels, returns available to customers on alternative investments, general economic and market conditions and other factors. Loan and lease repayments are a relatively stable source of funds but are subject to the borrowers’ and lessees’ ability to repay the loans and leases, which can be adversely affected by a number of factors including changes in general economic conditions, adverse trends or events affecting business industry groups or specific businesses, declines in real estate values or markets, business closings or lay-offs, inclement weather, natural disasters and other factors. Furthermore, loans and leases generally are not readily convertible to cash. Accordingly, the Company may be required from time to time to rely on secondary sources of liquidity to meet loan, lease and deposit withdrawal demands or otherwise fund operations. Such secondary sources include FHLB advances, secured and unsecured federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks and FRB borrowings.

At December 31, 2009 the Company had substantial unused borrowing availability. This availability was primarily comprised of the following four options: (1) $244 million of available blanket borrowing capacity with the FHLB, (2) $132 million of investment securities available to pledge for federal funds or other borrowings, (3) $42 million of available unsecured federal funds borrowing lines and (4) up to $101 million of available borrowing capacity from borrowing programs of the FRB.

The Company anticipates it will continue to rely primarily on deposits, loan and lease repayments and repayments of its investment securities to provide liquidity. Additionally, where necessary, the sources of borrowed funds described above will be used to augment the Company’s primary funding sources.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and FDIC Temporary Liquidity Guaranty Program. On October 3, 2008, Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the EESA. The EESA, among other things, included a provision for an increase in the amount of deposits insured by the FDIC from $100,000 to $250,000 through December 31, 2013.

On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced a new program – the Temporary Liquidity Guaranty Program (“TLGP”) that both provides unlimited deposit insurance on certain transaction accounts and provided a guarantee of newly issued senior unsecured debt. The Bank elected to participate in both aspects of the TLGP, although it did not issue any senior unsecured debt under the TLGP. The senior unsecured debt guarantee program expired on October 31, 2009.

The unlimited deposit insurance covers funds, to the extent such funds are not otherwise covered by the existing deposit insurance limit of $250,000, in (i) non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts and (ii) certain interest bearing transaction deposit accounts where the participating institution agrees to pay interest on such deposits at a rate not to exceed 50 bps. Such covered transaction accounts were initially

37

insured through December 31, 2009 at a fee of 10 bps per annum paid by the Company’s bank subsidiary to the FDIC on deposit amounts in excess of $250,000. In August 2009, the FDIC extended, and the Bank elected to continue to participate in, the unlimited deposit insurance through June 30, 2010. The fee payable by the Company to the FDIC to continue participation in this insurance program increased to 15 bps per annum on deposits in excess of $250,000 and was effective beginning January 1, 2010.

Sources and Uses of Funds. Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $48 million, $46 million and $43 million, respectively, for 2009, 2008 and 2007. Net cash provided by operating activities is comprised primarily of net income, adjusted for certain non-cash items and for changes in various operating assets and liabilities.

Investing activities provided $476 million in 2009 and used $493 million in 2008 and $191 million in 2007. The Company’s primary sources and uses of cash for investing activities include net loan and lease fundings, which provided $12 million in 2009 and used $174 million and $207 million, respectively, in 2008 and 2007, purchases of premises and equipment in conjunction with its growth and de novo branching strategy, which used $9 million, $28 million and $19 million, respectively, in 2009, 2008 and 2007 and net activity in its investment securities portfolio, which provided $454 million in 2009, used $303 million in 2008 and provided $27 million in 2007. Proceeds from dispositions of premises and equipment and other assets provided $17 million in 2009, $8 million in 2008 and $7 million in 2007, and proceeds from BOLI death benefits provided $2.1 million in 2009 and $3.9 million in 2008 (none in 2007).

Financing activities used $487 million in 2009 and provided $441 million and $153 million, respectively, for 2008 and 2007. The Company’s primary financing activities include net changes in deposit accounts, which used $312 million in 2009 and provided $284 million and $12 million, respectively, in 2008 and 2007, and net proceeds from or repayments of other borrowings and repurchase agreements with customers, which used $85 million in 2009, provided $89 million in 2008 and provided $147 million in 2007. In addition the Company paid common stock cash dividends of $8.8 million, $8.4 million and $7.2 million, respectively, in 2009, 2008 and 2007, and the Company paid preferred stock cash dividends of $3.4 million in 2009 (none in 2008 and 2007). The Company’s financing activities were impacted by $75 million of proceeds received in 2008 from the issuance of Series A Preferred Stock and the Warrant in connection with the Company’s participation in the Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program and the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock for $75 million in 2009, as well as the repurchase of the Warrant for $2.65 million in 2009.

Contractual Obligations. The following table presents, as of December 31, 2009, significant fixed and determinable contractual obligations to third parties by contractual date with no consideration given to earlier call or prepayment features. Other obligations consist primarily of contractual obligations for capital expenditures, software contracts and various other contractual obligations.

Contractual Obligations

	1 Year or Less		Over 1 Through 3 Years		Over 3 Through 5 Years		Over 5 Years		Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Time deposits(1)	$	848,774	$	45,718	$	499	$	89	$	895,080
Deposits without a stated maturity(2)		1,151,879		—		—		—		1,151,879
Repurchase agreements with customers(1)		44,269		—		—		—		44,269
Other borrowings(1)		75,568		21,708		21,660		309,994		428,930
Subordinated debentures(1)		1,883		3,428		3,424		91,901		100,636
Lease obligations		395		622		512		1,988		3,517
Other obligations		18,556		3,127		483		—		22,166
Total contractual obligations	$	2,141,324	$	74,603	$	26,578	$	403,972	$	2,646,477

(1) Includes unpaid interest through the contractual maturity on both fixed and variable rate obligations. The interest included on variable rate obligations is based upon interest rates in effect at December 31, 2009. The contractual amounts to be paid on variable rate obligations are affected by changes in interest rates. Future changes in interest rates could materially affect the contractual amounts to be paid.

(2) Includes interest accrued and unpaid through December 31, 2009.

38

Off-Balance Sheet Commitments. The following table details the amounts and expected maturities of significant off-balance sheet commitments as of December 31, 2009. Commitments to extend credit do not necessarily represent future cash requirements as these commitments may expire without being drawn.

Off-Balance Sheet Commitments

	1 Year or Less		Over 1 Through 3 Years		Over 3 Through 5 Years		Over 5 Years		Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Commitments to extend credit(1)	$	112,145	$	79,982	$	6,463	$	1,247	$	199,837
Standby letters of credit		8,686		808		11		—		9,505
Total commitments	$	120,831	$	80,790	$	6,474	$	1,247	$	209,342

(1) Includes commitments to extend credit under mortgage interest rate locks of $8.9 million that expire in one year or less.

Interest Rate Risk

Interest rate risk results from timing differences in the repricing of assets and liabilities or from changes in relationships between interest rate indexes. The Company’s interest rate risk management is the responsibility of the ALCO.

The Company regularly reviews its exposure to changes in interest rates. Among the factors considered are changes in the mix of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, interest rate spreads and repricing periods. Typically, the ALCO reviews on at least a quarterly basis the Company’s relative ratio of rate sensitive assets (“RSA”) to rate sensitive liabilities (“RSL”) and the related cumulative gap for different time periods. However, the primary tool used by ALCO to analyze the Company’s interest rate risk and interest rate sensitivity is an earnings simulation model.

This earnings simulation modeling process projects a baseline net interest income (assuming no changes in interest rate levels) and estimates changes to that baseline net interest income resulting from changes in interest rate levels. The Company relies primarily on the results of this model in evaluating its interest rate risk. This model incorporates a number of factors including: (1) the expected exercise of call features on various assets and liabilities, (2) the expected rates at which various RSA and RSL will reprice, (3) the expected growth in various interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities and the expected interest rates on such new assets and liabilities, (4) the expected relative movements in different interest rate indexes which are used as the basis for pricing or repricing various assets and liabilities, (5) existing and expected contractual cap and floor rates on various assets and liabilities, (6) expected changes in administered rates on interest bearing transaction, savings, money market and time deposit accounts and the expected impact of competition on the pricing or repricing of such accounts and (7) other relevant factors. Inclusion of these factors in the model is intended to more accurately project the Company’s expected changes in net interest income resulting from interest rate changes. The Company models its change in net interest income assuming interest rates go up 100 bps, up 200 bps, up 300 bps, up 400 bps, down 100 bps and down 200 bps. For purposes of this model, the Company has assumed that the change in interest rates phases in over a 12-month period. While the Company believes this model provides a reasonably accurate projection of its interest rate risk, the model includes a number of assumptions and predictions which may or may not be correct and may impact the model results. These assumptions and predictions include inputs to compute baseline net interest income, growth rates, expected changes in administered rates on interest bearing deposit accounts, competition and a variety of other factors that are difficult to accurately predict. Accordingly, there can be no assurance the earnings simulation model will accurately reflect future results.

39

The following table presents the earnings simulation model’s projected impact of a change in interest rates on the projected baseline net interest income for the 12-month period commencing January 1, 2010. This change in interest rates assumes parallel shifts in the yield curve and does not take into account changes in the slope of the yield curve.

Earnings Simulation Model Results

Change in Interest Rates (in bps)	% Change in Projected Baseline Net Interest Income
+400	(1.2)%
+300	(1.6)
+200	(1.5)
+100	(0.8)
-100	Not meaningful
-200	Not meaningful

In the event of a shift in interest rates, the Company may take certain actions intended to mitigate the negative impact to net interest income or to maximize the positive impact to net interest income. These actions may include, but are not limited to, restructuring of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, seeking alternative funding sources or investment opportunities and modifying the pricing or terms of loans and leases and deposits.

Impact of Inflation and Changing Prices

The consolidated financial statements and related notes presented elsewhere in this report have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. This requires the measurement of financial position and operating results in terms of historical dollars without considering the changes in the relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation. Unlike most industrial companies, the vast majority of the assets and liabilities of the Company are monetary in nature. As a result, interest rates have a greater impact on the Company’s performance than do the effects of general levels of inflation. Interest rates do not necessarily move in the same direction or to the same extent as the prices of goods and services.

Growth and Expansion

The Company is continuing its growth and de novo branching strategy, although it has slowed the pace of new office openings in recent years. In the third quarter of 2009, the Company opened a new banking office in downtown Little Rock. In the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company opened a banking office in Allen, Texas and closed a small office in North Little Rock where the leased space became unavailable. During 2008 the Company added a new banking office in Lewisville, Texas, opened its new corporate headquarters in Little Rock, Arkansas, closed a Little Rock banking office in a Wal-Mart Supercenter located near its new corporate headquarters, and consolidated its Little Rock loan production office into its new corporate headquarters. During 2007 the Company added three new Arkansas banking offices, including offices in Hot Springs, Fayetteville and Rogers, and replaced a temporary office in Frisco, Texas with a new permanent facility. At December 31, 2009, the Company conducted banking operations through 73 offices, including 65 banking offices in 34 communities throughout northern, western and central Arkansas, seven Texas banking offices and a loan production office in Charlotte, North Carolina.

The Company expects to open its new operations facility in Ozark, Arkansas in the second quarter of 2010, and it is moving forward with plans to open a third banking office in Benton, Arkansas in the last half of 2010 and two metro-Dallas area banking offices in late 2010 or in 2011. Opening new offices is subject to availability of suitable sites, hiring qualified personnel, obtaining regulatory and other approvals and many other conditions and contingencies that the Company cannot predict with certainty. The Company may increase or decrease its expected number of new offices as a result of a variety of factors including the Company’s financial results, changes in economic or competitive conditions, strategic opportunities or other factors.

During 2009 the Company spent $9.2 million on capital expenditures for premises and equipment. The Company’s capital expenditures for 2010 are expected to be in the range of $7 to $12 million, including progress payments on construction projects expected to be completed in 2010 or 2011, furniture and

40

equipment costs, and acquisition of sites for future development. Actual expenditures may vary significantly from those expected, depending on the number and cost of additional branch offices acquired or constructed and sites acquired for future development, progress or delays encountered on ongoing and new construction projects, delays in or inability to obtain required approvals and other factors.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s determination of (i) the provisions to and the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses, (ii) the fair value of its investment securities portfolio and (iii) the fair value of foreclosed assets held for sale involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity than its other significant accounting policies discussed in Note 1 to the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Accordingly, the Company considers the determination of (i) the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses, (ii) the fair value of its investment securities portfolio and (iii) the fair value of foreclosed assets held for sale to be critical accounting policies.

Provisions to and adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses. Provisions to and the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses are determined in accordance with ASC Topic 310 and ASC Topic 450, and are based on the Company’s evaluation of the loan and lease portfolio utilizing objective and subjective criteria as described in this report. See the “Analysis of Financial Condition” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for a detailed discussion of the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses. Changes in the criteria used in this evaluation or the availability of new information could cause the allowance to be increased or decreased in future periods. In addition bank regulatory agencies, as part of their examination process, may require adjustments to the allowance for loan and lease losses based on their judgments and estimates.

Fair value of the investment securities portfolio. The Company has classified all of its investment securities as AFS. Accordingly, its investment securities are stated at estimated fair value in the consolidated financial statements with unrealized gains and losses, net of related income taxes, reported as a separate component of stockholders’ equity and any related changes are included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

The Company utilizes independent third parties as its principal sources for determining fair value of its investment securities. For investment securities traded in an active market, the fair values are based on quoted market prices if available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on market prices for comparable securities, broker quotes or comprehensive interest rate tables, pricing matrices or a combination thereof. For investment securities traded in a market that is not active, fair value is determined using unobservable inputs.

The fair values of the Company’s investment securities traded in both active and inactive markets can be volatile and may be influenced by a number of factors including market interest rates, prepayment speeds, discount rates, credit quality of the issuer, general market conditions including market liquidity conditions and other factors. Factors and conditions are constantly changing and fair values could be subject to material variations that may significantly impact the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Fair value of foreclosed assets held for sale. Repossessed personal properties and real estate acquired through or in lieu of foreclosure are measured on a non-recurring basis and are initially recorded at the lesser of current principal investment or fair value less estimated cost to sell at the date of repossession or foreclosure. Valuations of these assets are periodically reviewed by management with the carrying value of such assets adjusted through non-interest expense to the then estimated fair value net of estimated selling costs, if lower, until disposition. Fair values of other real estate are generally based on third party appraisals, broker price opinions or other valuations of the property.

41

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of certain recently issued accounting pronouncements.

Forward-Looking Information

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, other filings made by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other oral and written statements or reports by the Company and its management include certain forward-looking statements including, without limitation, statements about economic, housing market, competitive and interest rate conditions; plans, goals, beliefs, expectations and outlook for revenue growth; net income and earnings per common share; net interest margin; net interest income; non-interest income, including service charges on deposit accounts, mortgage lending and trust income, gains (losses) on investment securities and sales of other assets; non-interest expense, including the cost of opening new offices and the cost of FDIC deposit insurance assessments; efficiency ratio; anticipated future operating results and financial performance; asset quality, including the effects of current economic and housing market conditions; nonperforming loans and leases; nonperforming assets; net charge-offs; past due loans and leases; litigation; interest rate sensitivity, including the effects of possible interest rate changes and the potential effects on interest rates of recent U.S. Government monetary and fiscal policy; future growth and expansion opportunities including plans for opening new offices; opportunities and goals for future market share growth; expected capital expenditures; loan, lease and deposit growth; changes in the volume, yield and value of the Company’s investment securities portfolio; availability of unused borrowings and other similar forecasts and statements of expectation. Words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “look,” “seek,” “may,” “will,” “could,” “trend,” “target,” “goal,” and similar expressions, as they relate to the Company or its management, identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements made by the Company and its management are based on estimates, projections, beliefs, plans and assumptions of management at the time of such statements and are not guarantees of future performance. The Company disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement based on the occurrence of future events, the receipt of new information or otherwise.

Actual future performance, outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements made by the Company and its management due to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Certain factors that may affect operating results of the Company include, but are not limited to, potential delays or other problems in implementing the Company’s growth and expansion strategy including delays in identifying satisfactory sites, hiring qualified personnel, obtaining regulatory or other approvals, obtaining permits and designing, constructing and opening new offices; the ability to attract new deposits, loans and leases; the ability to generate future revenue growth or to control future growth in non-interest expense; interest rate fluctuations, including continued interest rate changes and/or changes in the yield curve between short-term and long-term interest rates; competitive factors and pricing pressures, including their effect on the Company’s net interest margin; general economic, unemployment, credit market and housing market conditions, including their effect on the creditworthiness of borrowers and lessees, collateral values and the value of investment securities; changes in legal and regulatory requirements; changes in regular or special assessments by the FDIC for deposit insurance; recently enacted and potential legislation including legislation intended to stabilize economic conditions and credit markets and legislation intended to protect homeowners or consumers; adoption of new accounting standards or changes in existing standards; and adverse results in future litigation as well as other factors described in this and other Company reports and statements. Should one or more of the foregoing risks materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results or outcomes may vary materially from those described in the forward-looking statements.

42

Summary of Quarterly Results of

Operations, Market Prices of Common Stock and Dividends

Unaudited

	2009 - Three Months Ended
	Mar. 31			June 30			Sept. 30			Dec. 31
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Total interest income	$	45,262		$	42,586		$	39,904		$	38,157
Total interest expense		(14,928	)		(12,324	)		(10,672	)		(9,662	)
Net interest income		30,334			30,262			29,232			28,495
Provision for loan and lease losses		(10,600	)		(21,100	)		(7,500	)		(5,600	)
Non-interest income		9,373			22,610			5,810			13,257
Non-interest expense		(16,187	)		(17,945	)		(15,499	)		(19,001	)
Income taxes		(2,537	)		(3,250	)		(2,599	)		(4,472	)
Noncontrolling interest		(23	)		—			25			17
Preferred stock dividends and amortization of preferred stock discount		(1,074	)		(1,076	)		(1,078	)		(3,048	)
Net income available to common stockholders	$	9,286		$	9,501		$	8,391		$	9,648
Per common share:
Earnings - diluted	$	0.55		$	0.56		$	0.50		$	0.57
Cash dividends		0.13			0.13			0.13			0.13
Bid price per common share:
Low	$	17.05		$	19.88		$	21.20		$	22.27
High		29.43			26.25			26.76			29.78
	2008 - Three Months Ended
	Mar. 31			June 30			Sept. 30			Dec. 31
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Total interest income	$	44,820		$	45,672		$	45,030		$	47,481
Total interest expense		(23,069	)		(22,069	)		(20,414	)		(18,750	)
Net interest income		21,751			23,603			24,616			28,731
Provision for loan and lease losses		(3,325	)		(4,000	)		(3,400	)		(8,300	)
Non-interest income		5,125			5,557			4,871			3,796
Non-interest expense		(12,881	)		(13,467	)		(13,828	)		14,233
Income taxes		(2,905	)		(3,111	)		(3,255	)		(655	)
Noncontrolling interest		—			25			7			(21	)
Preferred stock dividends and amortization of preferred stock discount		—			—			—			(227	)
Net income available to common stockholders	$	7,765		$	8,607		$	9,011		$	9,091
Per common share:
Earnings - diluted	$	0.46		$	0.51		$	0.53		$	0.54
Cash dividends		0.12			0.12			0.13			0.13
Bid price per common share:
Low	$	19.61		$	14.86		$	14.14		$	20.85
High		26.18			26.33			30.94			32.36

See Note 15 to Consolidated Financial Statements for discussion of dividend restrictions.

43

Company Performance

The graph below shows a comparison for the period commencing December 31, 2004 through December 31, 2009 of the cumulative total stockholder returns (assuming reinvestment of dividends) for the common stock of the Company, the S&P Smallcap Index and the NASDAQ Financial Index, assuming a $100 investment on December 31, 2004.

	12/31/2004		12/31/2005		12/31/2006		12/31/2007		12/31/2008		12/31/2009
OZRK (Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.)	$	100	$	110	$	99	$	80	$	92	$	93
SML (S&P Smallcap Index)	$	100	$	108	$	124	$	124	$	85	$	107
NDF (NASDAQ Financial Index)	$	100	$	102	$	117	$	108	$	77	$	80

44

Report of Management on the Company’s

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

March 10, 2010

Management of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of assets; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, and that receipts and expenditures are made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, have been detected. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies and procedures may deteriorate.

Management of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., including the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer, has assessed the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting described in “Internal Control – Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, management has concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2009, based on the specified criteria.

The effectiveness of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting has been audited by Crowe Horwath LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included herein.

George Gleason	Paul Moore
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer	Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer

45

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Board of Directors and Shareholders

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

We have audited Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Report of Management on the Company’s Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. as of December 31, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2009, and our report dated March 10, 2010, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Brentwood, Tennessee

March 10, 2010

46

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Board of Directors and Shareholders

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. at December 31, 2009 and 2008 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 10, 2010, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Brentwood, Tennessee

March 10, 2010

47

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

	December 31,
	2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
ASSETS
Cash and due from banks	$	77,678		$	40,665
Interest earning deposits		616			317
Cash and cash equivalents		78,294			40,982
Investment securities - available for sale (“AFS”)		506,678			944,783
Loans and leases		1,904,104			2,021,199
Allowance for loan and lease losses		(39,619	)		(29,512	)
Net loans and leases		1,864,485			1,991,687
Premises and equipment, net		156,204			152,586
Foreclosed assets held for sale, net		61,148			10,758
Accrued interest receivable		14,760			18,877
Bank owned life insurance		47,421			46,384
Intangible assets, net		5,554			5,664
Other, net		36,267			21,582
Total assets	$	2,770,811		$	3,233,303
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Deposits:
Demand non-interest bearing	$	223,741		$	185,613
Savings and interest bearing transaction		927,977			852,656
Time		877,276			1,303,145
Total deposits		2,028,994			2,341,414
Repurchase agreements with customers		44,269			46,864
Other borrowings		342,553			424,947
Subordinated debentures		64,950			64,950
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities		17,575			27,525
Total liabilities		2,498,341			2,905,700
Commitments and contingencies
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock; $0.01 par value; 1,000,000 shares authorized:
Series A fixed rate cumulative perpetual; liquidation preference of $1,000 per share; 75,000 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2008; no shares outstanding at December 31, 2009		—			71,880
Common stock; $0.01 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; 16,904,540 and 16,864,140 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively		169			169
Additional paid-in capital		41,584			43,314
Retained earnings		221,243			193,195
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		6,032			15,624
Total stockholders’ equity before noncontrolling interest		269,028			324,182
Noncontrolling interest		3,442			3,421
Total stockholders’ equity		272,470			327,603
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	2,770,811		$	3,233,303

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

48

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Interest income:
Loans and leases	$	125,301		$	141,726		$	145,669
Investment securities:
Taxable		18,314			21,858			24,775
Tax-exempt		22,283			19,406			6,507
Deposits with banks and federal funds sold		10			13			19
Total interest income		165,908			183,003			176,970
Interest expense:
Deposits		30,480			64,171			83,140
Repurchase agreements with customers		592			796			1,603
Other borrowings		14,375			15,574			9,543
Subordinated debentures		2,138			3,761			5,066
Total interest expense		47,585			84,302			99,352
Net interest income		118,323			98,701			77,618
Provision for loan and lease losses		44,800			19,025			6,150
Net interest income after provision for loan and lease losses		73,523			79,676			71,468
Non-interest income:
Service charges on deposit accounts		12,421			12,007			12,193
Mortgage lending income		3,312			2,215			2,668
Trust income		3,078			2,595			2,223
Bank owned life insurance income		3,186			4,131			1,919
Gains (losses) on investment securities		26,982			(3,433	)		520
(Losses) gains on sales of other assets		(177	)		(544	)		487
Other		2,249			2,378			2,965
Total non-interest income		51,051			19,349			22,975
Non-interest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits		31,847			30,132			28,661
Net occupancy and equipment		9,740			8,882			8,098
Other operating expenses		27,045			15,395			11,495
Total non-interest expense		68,632			54,409			48,254
Income before taxes		55,942			44,616			46,189
Provision for income taxes		12,859			9,926			14,445
Net income		43,083			34,690			31,744
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest		19			11			2
Preferred stock dividends and amortization of preferred stock discount		6,276			227			—
Net income available to common stockholders	$	36,826		$	34,474		$	31,746
Basic earnings per common share	$	2.18		$	2.05		$	1.89
Diluted earnings per common share	$	2.18		$	2.04		$	1.89

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

49

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

	Preferred Stock— Series A		Common Stock		Additional Paid-In Capital		Retained Earnings			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)			Non- Controlling Interest			Total
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Balances - January 1, 2007	$	—	$	167	$	36,779	$	142,609		$	(4,922	)	$	—		$	174,633
Comprehensive income:
Net income		—		—		—		31,744			—			—			31,744
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest		—		—		—		2			—			(2	)		—
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gains/losses on investment securities AFS, net of $6,359 tax effect		—		—		—		—			(9,853	)		—			(9,853	)
Reclassification adjustment for gains/losses included in income, net of $204 tax effect		—		—		—		—			(316	)		—			(316	)
Total comprehensive income																	21,575
Common stock dividends paid, $0.43 per share		—		—		—		(7,216	)		—			—			(7,216	)
Investment in noncontrolling interest		—		—		—		—			—			3,434			3,434
Issuance of 71,700 shares of common stock on exercise of stock options		—		1		545		—			—			—			546
Tax benefit on exercise of stock options		—		—		420		—			—			—			420
Stock-based compensation expense		—		—		869		—			—			—			869
Balances - December 31, 2007		—		168		38,613		167,139			(15,091	)		3,432			194,261
Comprehensive income:
Net income		—		—		—		34,690			—			—			34,690
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest		—		—		—		11			—			(11	)		—
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gains/losses on investment securities AFS, net of $18,478 tax effect		—		—		—		—			28,628			—			28,628
Reclassification adjustment for gains/losses included in income, net of $1,346 tax effect		—		—		—		—			2,087			—			2,087
Total comprehensive income																	65,405
Common stock dividends paid, $0.50 per share		—		—		—		(8,418	)		—			—			(8,418	)
Issuance of 75,000 shares of preferred stock and a warrant for 379,811 shares of common stock		71,851		—		3,149		—			—			—			75,000
Preferred stock dividends		—		—		—		(198	)		—			—			(198	)
Amortization of preferred stock discount		29		—		—		(29	)		—			—			—
Issuance of 45,900 shares of common stock on exercise of stock options		—		1		407		—			—			—			408
Tax benefit on exercise of stock options		—		—		283		—			—			—			283
Stock-based compensation expense		—		—		862		—			—			—			862
Balances - December 31, 2008		71,880		169		43,314		193,195			15,624			3,421			327,603

50

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (continued)

	Preferred Stock— Series A			Common Stock		Additional Paid-In Capital			Retained Earnings			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)			Non- Controlling Interest			Total
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Balances - December 31, 2008		71,880			169		43,314			193,195			15,624			3,421			327,603
Comprehensive income:
Net income		—			—		—			43,083			—			—			43,083
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest		—			—		—			19			—			(19	)		—
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized gains/losses on investment securities AFS, net of $4,393 tax effect		—			—		—			—			6,806			—			6,806
Reclassification adjustment for gains/losses included in income, net of $10,584 tax effect		—			—		—			—			(16,398	)		—			(16,398	)
Total comprehensive income																			33,491
Common stock dividends paid, $0.52 per share		—			—		—			(8,778	)		—			—			(8,778	)
Preferred stock dividends		—			—		—			(3,156	)		—			—			(3,156	)
Amortization of preferred stock discount		463			—		—			(463	)		—			—			—
Redemption of 75,000 shares of preferred stock		(72,343	)		—		—			(2,657	)		—			—			(75,000	)
Repurchase of a warrant for 379,811 shares of common stock		—			—		(2,650	)		—			—			—			(2,650	)
Issuance of 21,800 shares of common stock on exercise of stock options		—			—		258			—			—			—			258
Tax (expense) benefit on exercise and forfeiture of stock options		—			—		(50	)		—			—			—			(50	)
Stock-based compensation expense		—			—		712			—			—			—			712
Noncontrolling interest cash contribution		—			—		—			—			—			40			40
Issuance of 18,600 shares of unvested common stock under restricted stock plan		—			—		—			—			—			—			—
Balances - December 31, 2009	$	—		$	169	$	41,584		$	221,243		$	6,032		$	3,442		$	272,470

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

51

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$	43,083		$	34,690		$	31,744
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation		4,172			3,552			3,286
Amortization		110			214			262
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest		19			11			2
Provision for loan and lease losses		44,800			19,025			6,150
Write down of other real estate owned		4,009			1,042			122
Write down of other assets		1,639			520			—
Net accretion of investment securities		(4,466	)		(1,008	)		(900	)
(Gains) losses on investment securities		(26,982	)		3,433			(520	)
Originations of mortgage loans for sale		(185,075	)		(127,822	)		(161,223	)
Proceeds from sales of mortgage loans for sale		184,195			127,873			163,296
Losses (gains) on sales of premises and equipment and other assets		177			544			(487	)
Deferred income tax benefit		(1,706	)		(6,146	)		(1,057	)
Increase in cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance (“BOLI”)		(1,932	)		(1,984	)		(1,919	)
Tax benefits on exercise of stock options		(111	)		(283	)		(420	)
Stock-based compensation expense		712			862			869
BOLI death benefits in excess of cash surrender value		(1,254	)		(2,147	)		—
Changes in other assets and liabilities:
Accrued interest receivable		4,117			(1,392	)		(36	)
Other assets, net		(12,598	)		(3,993	)		88
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities		(4,946	)		(909	)		3,413
Net cash provided by operating activities		47,963			46,082			42,670
Cash flows from investing activities:
Proceeds from sales of investment securities AFS		528,542			13,588			56,240
Proceeds from maturities/calls/paydowns of investment securities AFS		246,888			1,642,437			40,383
Purchases of investment securities AFS		(321,925	)		(1,959,464	)		(70,153	)
Net fundings of portfolio loans and leases		12,293			(173,987	)		(206,969	)
Purchases of premises and equipment		(9,199	)		(27,901	)		(18,848	)
Proceeds from disposition of premises and equipment and other assets		17,438			8,186			6,949
Proceeds from BOLI death benefits		2,149			3,894			—
Cash (paid for) received from interests in unconsolidated investments and noncontrolling interest		(15	)		(192	)		1,839
Net cash provided (used) by investing activities		476,171			(493,439	)		(190,559	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net (decrease) increase in deposits		(312,420	)		284,353			11,969
Net (repayments of) proceeds from other borrowings		(82,394	)		88,414			141,872
Net (decrease) increase in repurchase agreements with customers		(2,595	)		778			5,085
Proceeds from exercise of stock options		258			408			546
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock and common stock warrant		—			75,000			—
Redemption of preferred stock		(75,000	)		—			—
Repurchase of common stock warrant		(2,650	)		—			—
Tax benefits on exercise of stock options		111			283			420
Cash dividends paid on common stock		(8,778	)		(8,418	)		(7,216	)
Cash dividends paid on preferred stock		(3,354	)		—			—
Net cash (used) provided by financing activities		(486,822	)		440,818			152,676
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		37,312			(6,539	)		4,787
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of year		40,982			47,521			42,734
Cash and cash equivalents - end of year	$	78,294		$	40,982		$	47,521

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

52

Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007

1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Organization - Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the “Company”) is a bank holding company headquartered in Little Rock, Arkansas, which operates under the rules and regulations of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The Company owns a wholly-owned state chartered bank subsidiary - Bank of the Ozarks (the “Bank”), four 100%-owned finance subsidiary business trusts - Ozark Capital Statutory Trust II (“Ozark II”), Ozark Capital Statutory Trust III (“Ozark III”), Ozark Capital Statutory Trust IV (“Ozark IV”) and Ozark Capital Statutory Trust V (“Ozark V”) (collectively, the “Trusts”) and, indirectly through the Bank, a subsidiary engaged in the development of real estate. The Bank is subject to the regulation of certain federal and state agencies and undergoes periodic examinations by those regulatory authorities. The Bank has banking offices located in northern, western, and central Arkansas, Frisco, Lewisville, Allen, Dallas and Texarkana, Texas and a loan production office in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Basis of presentation, use of estimates and principles of consolidation - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, the Bank and the real estate investment subsidiary. Significant intercompany transactions and amounts have been eliminated. These consolidated financial statements were issued on March 10, 2010, which is the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated by management for recognition or disclosure purposes.

Subsidiaries in which the Company has majority voting interest (principally defined as owning a voting or economic interest greater than 50%) or where the Company exercises control over the operating and financial policies of the subsidiary through an operating agreement or other means are consolidated. Investments in companies in which the Company has significant influence over voting and financing decisions (principally defined as owning a voting or economic interest of 20% to 50%) and investments in limited partnerships and limited liability companies where the Company does not exercise control over the operating and financial policies are generally accounted for by the equity method of accounting. Investments in limited partnerships and limited liability companies in which the Company’s interest is so minor such that it has virtually no influence over operating and financial policies are generally accounted for by the cost method of accounting.

The voting interest approach is not applicable for entities that are not controlled through voting interests or in which the equity investors do not bear the residual economic risk. In such instances, Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 810, “Consolidation,” provides guidance on when the assets, liabilities and activities of a variable interest entity (“VIE”) should be included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The provisions of ASC Topic 810 require a VIE to be consolidated by a company if that company is considered the primary beneficiary of the VIE’s activities. The Company has determined that the 100%-owned finance subsidiary Trusts are VIEs, but that the Company is not the primary beneficiary of the Trusts. Accordingly, the Company does not consolidate the activities of the Trusts into its financial statements, but instead reports its ownership interests in the Trusts as other assets and reports the subordinated debentures issued to the Trusts as a liability in the consolidated balance sheets. The distributions on the subordinated debentures are reported as interest expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of income.

Cash and cash equivalents - For cash flow purposes, cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, amounts due from banks and interest bearing deposits with banks.

Investment securities - Management determines the appropriate classification of investment securities at the time of purchase and reevaluates such designation as of each balance sheet date. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company has classified all of its investment securities as available for sale (“AFS”).

AFS investment securities are stated at estimated fair value, with the unrealized gains and losses determined on a specific identification basis. Such unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, are reported as a separate component of stockholders’ equity and included in other comprehensive income (loss). The Company utilizes independent third parties as its principal pricing sources for determining fair value. For investment securities traded in an active market, fair values are measured on a recurring basis obtained from an independent pricing service and based on quoted market prices if available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted market prices of comparable securities, broker quotes or comprehensive interest rate tables, pricing matrices or a combination thereof. For investment securities traded in a market that is not active, fair value is determined using unobservable inputs.

53

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company owned stock in the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas (“FHLB”) and First National Banker’s Bankshares, Inc. (“FNBB”). The FHLB and FNBB shares do not have readily determinable fair values and are carried at cost.

Declines in the fair value of investment securities below their cost are reviewed at least quarterly by the Company for other-than-temporary impairment. Factors considered during such review include, among other things, the length of time and extent that fair value has been less than cost, the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, and whether the Company has the intent to sell the investment security before any anticipated recovery in fair value.

Interest and dividends on investment securities, including the amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts through maturity, or in the case of mortgage-backed securities, over the estimated life of the security, are included in interest income. Realized gains or losses on the sale of investment securities are recognized on the specific identification method at the time of sale and are included in non-interest income. Purchases and sales of investment securities are recognized on a trade-date basis.

Loans and leases - Loans that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff are reported at their outstanding principal balance adjusted for any charge-offs, deferred fees or costs on originated loans, and unamortized premiums or discounts on purchased loans. Interest on loans is recognized on an accrual basis and is calculated using the simple interest method on daily balances of the principal amount outstanding. Loan origination fees and costs are generally deferred and recognized over the life of the loan as an adjustment to yield on the related loan.

Leases are classified as either direct financing leases or operating leases, based on the terms of the agreement. Direct financing leases are reported as the sum of (i) total future lease payments to be received, net of unearned income, and (ii) estimated residual value of the leased property. Operating leases are recorded at the cost of the leased property, net of accumulated depreciation. Income on direct financing leases is included in interest income and is recognized on a basis that achieves a constant periodic rate of return on the outstanding investment. Income on operating leases is recognized as non-interest income on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company has entered into off-balance sheet financial instruments consisting of commitments to extend credit and letters of credit. Such financial instruments are recorded in the financial statements when they are funded. Related fees are generally recognized when collected.

Mortgage loans held for sale are included in the Company’s loans and leases and totaled $6.6 million and $5.7 million, respectively, at December 31, 2009 and 2008. Mortgage loans held for sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value. Gains and losses from the sales of mortgage loans are the difference between the selling price of the loan and its carrying value, net of discounts and points, and are recognized as mortgage lending income when the loan is sold to investors and servicing rights are released.

As part of its standard mortgage lending practice, the Company issues a written put option, in the form of an interest rate lock commitment (“IRLC”), such that the interest rate on the mortgage loan is established prior to funding. In addition to the IRLC, the Company also enters into a forward sale commitment (“FSC”) for the sale of its mortgage loan originations to reduce its market risk on such originations in process. The IRLC on mortgage loans held for sale and the FSC have been determined to be derivatives as defined by ASC Topic 815, “Derivatives and Hedging.” Accordingly, the fair values of derivative assets and liabilities for the Company’s IRLC and FSC are based primarily on the fluctuation of interest rates between the date on which the particular IRLC and FSC were entered into and year-end. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, the Company had recorded IRLC and FSC derivative assets of $0.2 million and $0.5 million and had recorded corresponding derivative liabilities of $0.2 million and $0.5 million. The notional amounts of loan commitments under both the IRLC and FSC were $8.9 million and $15.0 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Allowance for loan and lease losses (“ALLL”) - The ALLL is established through a provision for such losses charged against income. All or portions of loans or leases deemed to be uncollectible are charged against the ALLL when management believes that collectibility of all or some portion of outstanding principal is unlikely. Subsequent recoveries, if any, of loans or leases previously charged off are credited to the ALLL.

The ALLL is maintained at a level management believes will be adequate to absorb probable incurred losses in the loan and lease portfolio. Provision to and the adequacy of the ALLL are determined in

54

accordance with ASC Topic 310, “Receivables,” and ASC Topic 450, “Contingencies,” and are based on evaluations of the loan and lease portfolio utilizing objective and subjective criteria. The objective criteria primarily include an internal grading system, specific allowances determined in accordance with ASC Topic 310 and “stressed” markets allocations. The Company also utilizes a peer group analysis and an historical analysis in an effort to validate the overall adequacy of its ALLL. The subjective criteria take into consideration such factors as the nature, mix and volume of the portfolio, overall portfolio quality, review of specific problem loans and leases, national, regional and local business and economic conditions that may affect the borrowers’ or lessees’ ability to pay, the value of collateral securing the loans and leases and other relevant factors. Changes in any of these criteria or the availability of new information could require adjustment of the ALLL in future periods. While a specific allowance has been calculated under ASC Topic 310 for impaired loans and leases and for loans and leases where the Company has otherwise determined a specific reserve is appropriate, no portion of the Company’s ALLL is restricted to any individual loan or lease or group of loans or leases, and the entire ALLL is available to absorb losses from any and all loans and leases.

The Company’s policy generally is to place a loan or lease on nonaccrual status when payment of principal or interest is contractually past due 90 days, or earlier when concern exists as to the ultimate collection of principal and interest. Nonaccrual loans or leases are generally returned to accrual status when principal and interest payments are less than 90 days past due and the Company reasonably expects to collect all principal and interest. The Company may continue to accrue interest on certain loans and leases contractually past due 90 days if such loans or leases are both well secured and in the process of collection. Loans and leases for which the terms have been modified and for which the borrower or lessee is experiencing financial difficulties are considered troubled debt restructurings and are included in impaired loans and leases.

All loans and leases deemed to be impaired are evaluated individually in accordance with ASC Topic 310. The Company considers a loan or lease to be impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms thereof. Many of the Company’s nonaccrual loans or leases and all loans or leases that have been restructured from their original contractual terms are considered impaired. The majority of the Company’s impaired loans and leases are dependent upon collateral for repayment. Accordingly, impairment is generally measured by comparing collateral value, net of holding and selling costs, to the current investment in the loan or lease. For all other impaired loans and leases, the Company compares estimated discounted cash flows to the current investment in the loan or lease. To the extent that the Company’s current investment in a particular loan or lease exceeds its estimated net collateral value or its estimated discounted cash flows, the impaired amount is specifically considered in the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses, or is immediately charged off as a reduction of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

For certain loans and leases not considered impaired where (i) the customer is continuing to make regular payments, although payments may be past due, (ii) there is a reasonable basis to believe the customer may continue to make regular payments, although there is also an elevated risk that the customer may default, and (iii) the collateral or other repayment sources are likely to be insufficient to recover the current investment in the loan if a default occurs, the Company evaluates such loans and leases to determine whether a specific reserve is needed for the loan or lease. For the purpose of calculating the amount of the specific reserve appropriate for any such loan or lease, management assumes that (i) no further regular payments occur and (ii) all sums recovered will come from liquidation of collateral and collection efforts from other payment sources. To the extent that the Company’s current investment in a particular loan or lease evaluated for the need for a specific reserve exceeds its net collateral value or its estimated discounted cash flows, such excess is considered a specific reserve for purposes of the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

The Company also includes further allowance allocation for risk-rated and certain other loans, including commercial real estate loans, that are in markets determined by management to be “stressed”. Stressed markets may include any specific geography experiencing (i) high unemployment substantially above the U.S. average, (ii) significant over-development in one or more commercial real estate categories, (iii) recent or announced loss of a major employer or significant workforce reductions, (iv) significant declines in real estate values, and (v) various other factors. The additional allowance for such stressed markets compensates for the expectation that a higher risk of loss is anticipated for the “work-out” or liquidation of a real estate loan in a stressed market versus a market that is not experiencing any significant levels of stress. The required allocation percentage applicable to real estate loans in stressed markets may be applied to the total market or it may be determined at the individual loan level based on collateral value, loan-to-value ratios, strength of the borrower and/or guarantor, viability of the underlying project and other factors.

55

The accrual of interest on loans and leases is discontinued when, in management’s opinion, the borrower or lessee may be unable to meet payments as they become due. When interest accrual is discontinued, all unpaid accrued interest is reversed. Interest income is subsequently recognized only to the extent cash payments are received.

Premises and equipment - Premises and equipment are reported at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization are computed on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Depreciable lives for the major classes of assets are generally 45 years for buildings and 3 to 25 years for furniture, fixtures, equipment and certain building improvements. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the asset’s estimated useful life or the term of the lease. Accelerated depreciation methods are used for income tax purposes. Maintenance and repair charges are expensed as incurred.

Foreclosed assets held for sale - Repossessed personal properties and real estate acquired through or in lieu of foreclosure are initially recorded at the lesser of current principal investment or fair value less estimated cost to sell at the date of repossession or foreclosure. Valuations of these assets are periodically reviewed by management with the carrying value of such assets adjusted through non-interest expense to the then estimated fair value net of estimated selling costs, if lower, until disposition. Gains and losses from the sale of repossessions, foreclosed assets and other real estate are recorded in non-interest income, and expenses to maintain the properties are included in non-interest expense.

Income taxes - The Company utilizes the asset and liability method in accounting for income taxes. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based upon the difference between the values of the assets and liabilities as reflected in the financial statements and their related tax basis using enacted tax rates in effect for the year or years in which the differences are expected to be recovered or settled. As changes in tax laws or rates are enacted, deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted through the provision for income taxes.

The Company recognizes a tax position as a benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that the tax position would be sustained in a tax examination, with a tax examination being presumed to occur. The amount recognized is the largest amount of tax benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized on examination. For tax positions not meeting the “more likely than not” test, no tax benefit is recorded.

The Company files consolidated tax returns. The Bank and the other consolidated entities provide for income taxes on a separate return basis and remit to the Company amounts determined to be currently payable. The Company recognizes interest related to income tax matters as interest income or expense, and penalties related to income tax matters are recognized as non-interest expense. The Company is no longer subject to income tax examinations by U.S. federal tax authorities for years prior to 2006.

Bank owned life insurance (“BOLI”) - BOLI consists of life insurance purchased by the Company on a qualifying group of officers with the Company designated as owner and beneficiary of the policies. The earnings on BOLI policies are used to offset a portion of employee benefit costs. BOLI is carried at the policies’ realizable cash surrender values with changes in cash surrender values and death benefits received in excess of cash surrender values reported in non-interest income.

Intangible assets - Intangible assets consist of goodwill, bank charter costs and core deposit intangibles. Goodwill represents the excess purchase price over the fair value of net assets acquired in business acquisitions. The Company had goodwill of $5.2 million at both December 31, 2009 and 2008. As required by ASC Topic 350, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other,” the Company performed its annual impairment test of goodwill as of October 1, 2009. This test indicated no impairment of the Company’s goodwill.

Bank charter costs represent costs paid to acquire a Texas bank charter and are being amortized over 20 years. Bank charter costs totaled $239,000 at both December 31, 2009 and 2008, less accumulated amortization of $70,000 and $58,000 at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Core deposit intangibles represent premiums paid for deposits acquired via acquisition and are being amortized over 8 to 10 years. Core deposit intangibles totaled $2.3 million at both December 31, 2009 and 2008, less accumulated amortization of $2.2 million and $2.1 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The aggregate amount of amortization expense for the Company’s core deposit and bank charter intangibles is expected to be $110,000 in 2010; $56,000 in 2011; and $12,000 per year in years 2012 through 2014.

56

Earnings per common share - Earnings per common share are computed using the two-class method prescribed under ASC Topic 260, “Earnings Per Share,” as the Company has determined that its outstanding non-vested stock awards granted under its restricted stock plan are participating securities within the meaning of ASC Topic 260. Under the two-class method, basic earnings per share are computed by dividing net earnings allocated to common stock by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the applicable period. Diluted earnings per common share is computed by dividing reported earnings allocated to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding after consideration of the dilutive effect, if any, of the Company’s common stock options and common stock warrant using the treasury stock method.

Stock-based compensation - The Company has an employee stock option plan, a non-employee director stock option plan and an employee restricted stock plan, which are described more fully in Note 12. The Company accounts for these stock-based compensation plans in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 718, “Compensation – Stock Compensation,” and ASC Topic 505, “Equity.”

ASC Topic 718 requires entities to measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award. Such cost is to be recognized over the vesting period of the award. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company recognized $0.7 million, $0.9 million and $0.9 million, respectively, of non-interest expense as a result of applying the provisions of ASC Topic 718 to its stock-based compensation plans.

Segment disclosures - ASC Topic 280, “Segment Reporting,” establishes standards for reporting information about operating segments and related disclosures about products and services, geographic areas and major customers. As the Company operates in only one segment – community banking – ACS Topic 280 has no impact on the Company’s financial statements or its disclosure of segment information. No revenues are derived from foreign countries and no single external customer comprises more than 10% of the Company’s revenues.

Recent accounting pronouncements - In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements.” ASU 2010-06 amends Topic 820 by requiring more robust disclosures about (i) the different classes of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, (ii) the valuation techniques and inputs used, (iii) the activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, and (iv) the transfers between Levels 1, 2, and 3. Among other things, ASU 2010-06 requires separate disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements as opposed to presenting such activity on a net basis. The new disclosures required by ASU 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements which are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2010. Management has determined that the provisions of ASU 2010-06, upon its adoption, will not have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or liquidity, but it will require expansion of the Company’s existing disclosures about fair value measurements.

In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-05, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Escrowed Share Arrangements and the Presumption of Compensation.” ASU 2010-05 amends Topic 718 by codifying Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Topic D-110 which provides the position of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) regarding whether certain transactions under escrowed share arrangements, such as the Company’s restricted stock plan, represent compensation. Because the provisions of ASU 2010-05 were previously effective for the Company under EITF Topic D-110, ASU 2010-05 did not impact the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810): Accounting and Reporting for Decreases in Ownership of a Subsidiary – a Scope Clarification.” ASU 2010-02 amends Topic 810 to clarify guidance on accounting for decreases in ownership of a subsidiary that is deemed a noncontrolling interest in consolidated financial statements. The provisions of ASU 2010-02 are effective beginning in the first interim or annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2009. Management expects the adoption of ASU 2010-02 will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In December 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-17, “Consolidation (Topic 810): Improvements to Financial Reporting Involved with Variable Interest Entities.” ASU 2009-17 amends Topic 810 and replaces the quantitative-based risks and rewards calculation for determining which reporting entity, if any, has a

57

controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity with an approach focused on identifying which reporting entity has the power to direct the activities of a variable interest entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and (1) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or (2) the right to receive benefits from the entity. ASU 2009-17 also requires additional disclosures about a reporting entity’s involvement in variable interest entities, which will enhance the information provided to users of financial statements. The provisions of ASU 2009-17 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods that begin after November 15, 2009. Management does not expect adoption of ASU 2009-17 will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In December 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-16, “Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets.” ASU 2009-16 amends Topic 860 and is intended to improve financial reporting by eliminating the exceptions for qualifying special-purpose entities from the consolidation guidance and the exception that permitted sale accounting for certain mortgage securitizations when a transferor has not surrendered control over the transferred financial assets. In addition, ASU 2009-16 requires enhanced disclosures about the risks that a transferor continues to be exposed to because of its continuing involvement in transferred financial assets. The provisions of ASU 2009-16 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009. Management has determined that ASU 2009-16 will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In August 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-05, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Measuring Liabilities at Fair Value.” ASU 2009-05 amends Topic 820 and provides clarification that in circumstances in which a quoted price in an active market for the identical liability is not available, a reporting entity is required to measure fair value using a valuation technique that (i) uses the quoted price of the identical liability when traded as an asset, (ii) uses quoted prices for similar liabilities or similar liabilities when traded as assets, or (iii) is otherwise consistent with the principles of Topic 820 such as an income approach or a market approach. The provisions of ASU 2009-05 were effective for interim and annual periods beginning after its issuance in August of 2009. Adoption of ASU 2009-05 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In August 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-04, “Accounting for Redeemable Equity Instruments.” ASU 2009-04 updated Topic 480 to include SEC guidance on accounting for redeemable equity investments, including share-based payment arrangements with employees, and whether such instruments should be classified as a liability or equity. ASU 2009-04 also addresses earnings per share calculations and the impact such instruments have on these calculations. The provisions of ASU 2009-04 were effective immediately upon issuance and did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or its earnings per common share calculations.

In June 2009, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 168, “The FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, a Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162.” SFAS No. 168 was issued to replace SFAS No. 162 as a result of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification™ (the “Codification”) which has become the source of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles recognized by the FASB. The Codification supersedes all existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards, and all other non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the Codification has become non-authoritative. The provisions of SFAS No. 168 were effective for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. The adoption of SFAS No. 168 did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In May 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 165, “Subsequent Events.” SFAS No. 165 has been included in the Codification under Topic 855, “Subsequent Events,” and establishes general standards for disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued. In particular, SFAS No. 165 sets forth (i) the period after the balance sheet date during which management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or transactions that may occur for potential recognition or disclosure in the financial statements, (ii) the circumstances under which an entity should recognize events of transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its financial statements, and (iii) the disclosures that an entity should make about events or transactions that occurred after the balance sheet date. The provisions of SFAS No. 165 were effective for the Company for the first interim period ended after June 15, 2009. The adoption of SFAS No. 165 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, liquidity or financial statement disclosures.

58

In April 2009, the FASB issued the following FASB Staff Positions:

• FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, “Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary Impairments” (“FSP 115-2/124-2”);

• FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, “Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments” (“FSP 107-1/28-1”); and

• FAS 157-4, “Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly” (“FSP 157-4”).

FSP 115-2/124-2 amends the other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) guidance in GAAP for debt securities to make the guidance more operational and to improve the presentation and disclosure of OTTI on debt and equity securities in financial statements. The provisions of FSP 115-2/124-2 (i) amend an investor required assertion regarding the ability and intent to hold a security, (ii) bifurcate OTTI between the portion related to a credit loss and the portion related to all other factors, and (iii) require presentation of total OTTI in the income statement with an offset for the amount of OTTI that is recognized in other comprehensive income.

FSP 107-1/28-1 amends SFAS No. 107 to require disclosures about fair value of financial instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies as well as in annual financial statements.

FSP 157-4 provides additional guidance for estimating fair value in accordance with SFAS No. 157 when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have significantly decreased. It also includes guidance on identifying circumstances that indicate a transaction is not orderly.

The provisions of FSP 115-2/124-2, FSP 107-1/28-1 and FSP 157-4 were included in the Codification under Topic 820 and were effective for interim periods ended after June 15, 2009. The adoption of these FSPs did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity but did expand the Company’s disclosure about fair values.

Reclassifications - Certain reclassifications of 2008 and 2007 amounts have been made to conform with the 2009 financial statements presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on prior years’ net income, as previously reported.

2. Investment Securities

The following is a summary of the amortized cost and estimated fair values of investment securities, all of which are classified as AFS:

	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized Gains		Gross Unrealized Losses			Estimated Fair Value
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2009:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	385,581	$	10,517	$	(2,211	)	$	393,887
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		93,159		1,351		—			94,510
Corporate obligations		1,596		269		—			1,865
Collateralized debt obligation		100		—		—			100
FHLB and FNBB stock		16,316		—		—			16,316
Total investment securities AFS	$	496,752	$	12,137	$	(2,211	)	$	506,678
December 31, 2008:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	517,166	$	31,753	$	(6,179	)	$	542,740
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		371,110		3,187		(2,736	)		371,561
Corporate obligation		6,953		—		—			6,953
Collateralized debt obligation		1,000		—		(317	)		683
FHLB and FNBB stock		22,846		—		—			22,846
Total investment securities AFS	$	919,075	$	34,940	$	(9,232	)	$	944,783

59

The following shows gross unrealized losses and estimated fair value of investment securities AFS, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual investment securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position:

	Less than 12 Months				12 Months or More				Total
	Estimated Fair Value		Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Unrealized Losses
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2009:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	90,010	$	1,453	$	32,967	$	758	$	122,977	$	2,211
Total temporarily impaired securities	$	90,010	$	1,453	$	32,967	$	758	$	122,977	$	2,211
December 31, 2008:
Obligations of states and political subdivisions	$	117,686	$	6,154	$	2,309	$	25	$	119,995	$	6,179
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		69,765		1,781		80,512		955		150,277		2,736
Collateralized debt obligation		683		317		—		—		683		317
Total temporarily impaired securities	$	188,134	$	8,252	$	82,821	$	980	$	270,955	$	9,232

At December 31, 2009, the Company’s investment securities portfolio included one security categorized as a collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”). This CDO has performed in accordance with its terms and is not in default, but, because its credit rating was downgraded to below investment grade and other factors, the Company determined during the third quarter of 2009 that it no longer expects to hold this security until maturity or until such time as fair value recovers to or above cost. As a result of the Company’s intent to dispose of this security, the Company recorded a $0.9 million charge during the third quarter of 2009 to reduce the carrying value of this security to $0.1 million.

At December 31, 2008, the Company’s investment securities portfolio included a bond issued by SLM Corporation (“Sallie Mae”) with an amortized cost of $10.0 million and an estimated fair value of $7.0 million. During 2008 the Company concluded that the Sallie Mae bond was other-than-temporarily impaired and recorded a pretax charge of $3.0 million to reduce the carrying value of this bond to its estimated fair value. This bond was subsequently sold in 2009.

In evaluating the Company’s unrealized loss positions for other-than-temporary impairment for the investment securities portfolio, management considers the credit quality of the issuer, the nature and cause of the unrealized loss, the severity and duration of the impairments and other factors. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, management determined the unrealized losses were the result of fluctuations in interest rates and did not reflect deteriorations of the credit quality of the investments. Accordingly, management believes that all of its unrealized losses on investment securities are temporary in nature. The Company does not have the intent to sell these investment securities and more likely than not would not be required to sell these investment securities before fair value recovers to amortized cost.

60

A maturity distribution of investment securities AFS reported at amortized cost and estimated fair value as of December 31, 2009 is as follows:

	Amortized Cost		Estimated Fair Value
	(Dollars in thousands)
Due in one year or less	$	42,696	$	43,312
Due after one year to five years		73,243		74,442
Due after five years to ten years		36,586		37,988
Due after ten years		344,227		350,936
Total	$	496,752	$	506,678

For purposes of this maturity distribution, all investment securities are shown based on their contractual maturity date, except (i) FHLB and FNBB stock with no contractual maturity date are shown in the longest maturity category, (ii) U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities are allocated among various maturities based on an estimated repayment schedule utilizing Bloomberg median prepayment speeds and interest rate levels at December 31, 2009 and (iii) mortgage-backed securities issued by housing authorities of states and political subdivisions are allocated among various maturities based on an estimated repayment schedule projected by management as of December 31, 2009. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because issuers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.

Sales activities and other-than-temporary impairment charges of the Company’s investment securities AFS are summarized as follows:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Sales proceeds	$	528,542		$	13,588		$	56,240
Gross realized gains	$	30,802		$	360		$	530
Gross realized losses		(2,920	)		(777	)		(10	)
Other-than-temporary impairment charges		(900	)		(3,016	)		—
Net gains (losses) on investment securities	$	26,982		$	(3,433	)	$	520

Investment securities with carrying values of $344.6 million and $596.4 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, were pledged to secure public funds and trust deposits and for other purposes required or permitted by law.

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, there were no holdings of investment securities of any one issuer, other than U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities issued by either the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or the Federal National Mortgage Association, in an amount greater than 10% of stockholders’ equity.

3. Loans and Leases

The Company maintains a diversified loan and lease portfolio. The following is a summary of the loan and lease portfolio by principal category:

	December 31,
	2009		2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Real estate:
Residential 1-4 family	$	282,733	$	275,281
Non-farm/non-residential		606,880		551,821
Construction/land development		600,342		694,527
Agricultural		86,237		84,432
Multifamily residential		55,860		61,668
Commercial and industrial		150,208		206,058
Consumer		63,561		75,015
Direct financing leases		40,353		50,250
Agricultural (non-real estate)		15,509		19,460
Other		2,421		2,687
Total loans and leases	$	1,904,104	$	2,021,199

61

The Company’s direct financing leases include estimated residual values of $0.8 million at December 31, 2009 and $1.4 million at December 31, 2008, and are presented net of unearned income totaling $5.3 million and $7.0 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The above table includes deferred costs, net of deferred fees, that totaled $1.6 million and $0.6 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Loans and leases on which the accrual of interest has been discontinued aggregated $23.6 million and $15.4 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Interest income recorded during 2009, 2008 and 2007 for nonaccrual loans and leases at December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $1.3 million, $0.6 million and $0.3 million, respectively. Under the original terms, these loans and leases would have reported $2.5 million, $1.1 million and $0.6 million of interest income during 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.

4. Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (“ALLL”)

The following is a summary of activity within the ALLL:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Balance - beginning of year	$	29,512		$	19,557		$	17,699
Loans and leases charged off		(35,885	)		(9,631	)		(4,644	)
Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off		1,192			561			352
Net loans and leases charged off		(34,693	)		(9,070	)		(4,292	)
Provision charged to operating expense		44,800			19,025			6,150
Balance - end of year	$	39,619		$	29,512		$	19,557

The following is a summary of the Company’s impaired loans and leases:

	December 31,
	2009		2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Impaired loans and leases with an allocated allowance	$	1,938	$	3,068
Impaired loans and leases without an allocated allowance		18,927		9,380
Total impaired loans and leases(1)	$	20,865	$	12,448
Total allowance allocated to impaired loans and leases	$	1,661	$	343

(1) At December 31, 2009, $2.8 million of nonaccrual loans and leases were not deemed impaired. At December 31, 2008, $2.9 million of nonaccrual loans and leases were not deemed impaired.

The average carrying value of all impaired loans and leases during the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $22.8 million and $11.9 million, respectively.

5. Premises and Equipment

The following is a summary of premises and equipment:

	December 31,
	2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Land	$	54,760		$	55,586
Construction in process		5,827			7,372
Buildings and improvements		92,278			84,579
Leasehold improvements		5,004			4,928
Equipment		23,752			22,045
Gross premises and equipment		181,621			174,510
Accumulated depreciation		(25,417	)		(21,924	)
Premises and equipment, net	$	156,204		$	152,586

The Company capitalized $0.4 million, $1.1 million and $1.3 million of interest on construction projects during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.

Included in occupancy expense is rent of $483,000, $605,000 and $657,000 incurred under noncancelable operating leases in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, for leases of real estate in connection with buildings and premises. These leases contain certain renewal and purchase options according to the terms of the agreements. Future amounts due under noncancelable operating leases at December 31, 2009 are as follows: $395,000 in 2010, $311,000 in 2011, $311,000 in 2012, $264,000 in 2013, $248,000 in 2014 and $1,988,000 thereafter. Rental income recognized during 2009, 2008 and 2007 for leases of buildings and premises and for equipment leased under operating leases was $500,000, $566,000 and $517,000, respectively.

62

6. Deposits

The aggregate amount of time deposits with a minimum denomination of $100,000 was $540.2 million and $796.4 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The following is a summary of the scheduled maturities of all time deposits:

	December 31,
	2009		2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Up to one year	$	832,905	$	1,275,112
Over one to two years		41,328		23,805
Over two to three years		2,521		2,394
Over three to four years		338		1,574
Over four to five years		111		241
Thereafter		73		19
Total time deposits	$	877,276	$	1,303,145

7. Borrowings

Short-term borrowings with original maturities less than one year include FHLB advances, Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”) borrowings, treasury, tax and loan note accounts and federal funds purchased. The following is a summary of information relating to these short-term borrowings:

	December 31,
	2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Average annual balance	$	44,028		$	100,594
December 31 balance		1,742			84,104
Maximum month-end balance during year		108,690			201,329
Interest rate:
Weighted-average - year		0.37	%		2.01	%
Weighted-average - December 31		0.00			0.51

At both December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had fixed rate FHLB advances with original maturities exceeding one year of $340.8 million. These fixed rate advances bear interest at rates ranging from 2.53% to 6.43% at December 31, 2009, are collateralized by a blanket lien on a substantial portion of the Company’s real estate loans and are subject to prepayment penalties if repaid prior to maturity date. At December 31, 2009, the Bank had $244 million of unused FHLB borrowing availability.

At December 31, 2009, aggregate annual maturities and weighted-average rates of FHLB advances with an original maturity of over one year were as follows:

Maturity	Amount		Weighted- Average Rate
(Dollars in thousands)
2010	$	60,034	6.27	%
2011		31	4.80
2012		21	4.64
2013		18	4.54
2014		19	4.54
Thereafter		280,688	3.84
Total	$	340,811	4.27

Included in the above table are $340.0 million of FHLB advances that contain quarterly call features and are callable as follows:

	Amount		Weighted- Average Interest Rate		Maturity
	(Dollars in thousands)
Callable quarterly	$	60,000	6.27	%	2010
Callable quarterly		260,000	3.90		2017
Callable quarterly		20,000	2.53		2018
Total	$	340,000	4.24

63

8. Subordinated Debentures

At December 31, 2009 the Company had the following issues of trust preferred securities outstanding and subordinated debentures owed to the Trusts:

Description	Subordinated Debentures Owed to Trusts		Trust Preferred Securities of the Trusts		Interest Rate at December 31, 2009		Final Maturity Date
	(Dollars in thousands)
Ozark III	$	14,434	$	14,000	3.23	%	September 25, 2033
Ozark II		14,433		14,000	3.15		September 29, 2033
Ozark IV		15,464		15,000	2.49		September 28, 2034
Ozark V		20,619		20,000	1.90		December 15, 2036
Total	$	64,950	$	63,000

On September 25, 2003, Ozark III sold to investors in a private placement offering $14 million of adjustable rate trust preferred securities, and on September 29, 2003, Ozark II sold to investors in a private placement offering $14 million of adjustable rate trust preferred securities (collectively, “2003 Securities”). The 2003 Securities bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 2.95% for Ozark III and 90-day LIBOR plus 2.90% for Ozark II. The aggregate proceeds of $28 million from the 2003 Securities were used to purchase an equal principal amount of adjustable rate subordinated debentures of the Company that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day LIBOR plus 2.95% for Ozark III and 90-day LIBOR plus 2.90% for Ozark II (collectively, “2003 Debentures”).

On September 28, 2004, Ozark IV sold to investors in a private placement offering $15 million of adjustable rate trust preferred securities (“2004 Securities”). The 2004 Securities bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day LIBOR plus 2.22%. The $15 million proceeds from the 2004 Securities were used to purchase an equal principal amount of adjustable rate subordinated debentures of the Company that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day LIBOR plus 2.22% (“2004 Debentures”).

On September 29, 2006 Ozark V sold to investors in a private placement offering $20 million of adjustable rate trust preferred securities (“2006 Securities”). The Securities bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day LIBOR plus 1.60%. The $20 million proceeds from the 2006 Securities were used to purchase an equal principal amount of adjustable rate subordinated debentures of the Company that bear interest, adjustable quarterly, at 90-day LIBOR plus 1.60% (“2006 Debentures”).

In addition to the issuance of these adjustable rate securities, Ozark II and Ozark III collectively sold $0.9 million, Ozark IV sold $0.4 million and Ozark V sold $0.6 million of trust common equity to the Company. The proceeds from the sales of the trust common equity were used, respectively, to purchase $0.9 million of 2003 Debentures, $0.4 million of 2004 Debentures and $0.6 million of 2006 Debentures issued by the Company.

At both December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had an aggregate of $64.9 million of subordinated debentures outstanding and had an asset of $1.9 million representing its investment in the common equity issued by the Trusts. At both December 31, 2009 and 2008, the sole assets of the Trusts are the respective adjustable rate debentures and the liabilities of the respective Trusts are the 2003 Securities, the 2004 Securities and the 2006 Securities. The Trusts had aggregate common equity of $1.9 million and did not have any restricted net assets at both December 31, 2009 and 2008. The Company has, through various contractual arrangements, fully and unconditionally guaranteed all obligations of the Trusts with respect to the 2003 Securities, the 2004 Securities and the 2006 Securities. Additionally, there are no restrictions on the ability of the Trusts to transfer funds to the Company in the form of cash dividends, loans or advances. The Company has the option to defer interest payments on the subordinated debentures from time to time for a period not to exceed five consecutive years.

These securities generally mature at or near the thirtieth anniversary date of each issuance. However, these securities and debentures may be prepaid at par, subject to regulatory approval, prior to maturity at any time on or after September 25 and 29, 2008 for the two issues of 2003 Securities and 2003 Debentures, on or after September 28, 2009 for the 2004 Securities and 2004 Debentures, and on or after December 15, 2011 for the 2006 Securities and 2006 Debentures, or at an earlier date upon certain changes in tax laws, investment company laws or regulatory capital requirements.

64

9. Income Taxes

The following is a summary of the components of the provision (benefit) for income taxes:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Current:
Federal	$	12,151		$	13,400		$	13,332
State		2,414			2,672			2,170
Total current		14,565			16,072			15,502
Deferred:
Federal		(1,308	)		(5,161	)		(938	)
State		(398	)		(985	)		(119	)
Total deferred		(1,706	)		(6,146	)		(1,057	)
Provision for income taxes	$	12,859		$	9,926		$	14,445

The reconciliation between the statutory federal income tax rate and effective income tax rate is as follows:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009		2008		2007
Statutory federal income tax rate	35.0	%	35.0	%	35.0	%
Increase (decrease) in taxes resulting from:
State income taxes, net of federal benefit	2.3		2.5		2.9
Effect of non-taxable interest income	(12.0	)	(10.8	)	(4.2	)
Effect of BOLI and other non-taxable income	(2.0	)	(3.4	)	(1.6	)
Other, net	(0.3	)	(1.1	)	(0.8	)
Effective income tax rate	23.0	%	22.2	%	31.3	%

Income tax benefits from the exercise of stock options in the amount of $0.1 million, $0.3 million and $0.4 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, were recorded as an increase to additional paid-in capital.

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, income taxes refundable of $2.9 million and $0.6 million, respectively, were included in other assets.

The types of temporary differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their financial reporting amounts that give rise to deferred income tax assets and liabilities and their approximate tax effects are as follows:

	December 31,
	2009		2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Deferred tax assets:
Allowance for loan and lease losses	$	14,756	$	11,772
Stock-based compensation under the fair value method		1,395		1,270
Deferred compensation		704		746
Other real estate owned		980		311
Gross deferred tax assets		17,835		14,099
Deferred tax liabilities:
Accelerated depreciation on premises and equipment		7,577		5,447
Investment securities AFS		3,612		8,901
FHLB stock dividends		363		538
Other, net		548		1,220
Gross deferred tax liabilities		12,100		16,106
Net deferred tax assets (liabilities)	$	5,735	$	(2,007	)

65

10. Preferred Stock

On December 12, 2008, as part of the United States Department of the Treasury’s (the “Treasury”) Capital Purchase Program made available to certain financial institutions in the U.S. pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), the Company and the Treasury entered into a Letter Agreement including the Securities Purchase Agreement – Standard Terms incorporated therein (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which the Company issued to the Treasury, in exchange for aggregate consideration of $75.0 million, (i) 75,000 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, par value $0.01 and liquidation preference $1,000 per share (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), and (ii) a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase up to 379,811 shares (the “Warrant Common Stock”) of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at an exercise price of $29.62 per share.

On November 4, 2009, the Company redeemed all of the Series A Preferred Stock for $75.0 million, plus accrued and unpaid dividends, with the approval of the Company’s primary regulator in consultation with the Treasury. On November 24, 2009, the Company repurchased the Warrant from the Treasury for $2.65 million, which was charged against the Company’s additional paid-in capital.

The Series A Preferred Stock qualified as Tier 1 capital and paid cumulative cash dividends quarterly at a rate of 5% per annum while outstanding. The Series A Preferred Stock was non-voting, other than class voting rights on certain matters that could adversely affect the Series A Preferred Stock. While the Series A Preferred Stock was outstanding, the Company could not, without Treasury’s consent, increase its dividend rate per share of common stock or repurchase its common stock.

Prior to its repurchase by the Company, the Warrant was immediately exercisable and had a 10-year term. The Treasury could not exercise voting power with respect to any shares of Warrant Common Stock until the Warrant had been exercised.

In addition, the Purchase Agreement (i) granted the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, the Warrant and the Warrant Common Stock certain registration rights, (ii) subjected the Company to certain of the executive compensation limitations included in the EESA and (iii) allowed the Treasury to unilaterally amend any of the terms of the Purchase Agreement to the extent required to comply with any changes after December 12, 2008 in applicable federal statutes.

Upon receipt of the aggregate consideration from the Treasury on December 12, 2008, the Company allocated the $75.0 million proceeds on a pro rata basis to the Series A Preferred Stock and the Warrant based on relative fair values. In estimating the fair value of the Warrant, the Company utilized the Black-Scholes model which includes assumptions regarding the Company’s common stock prices, stock price volatility, dividend yield, the risk free interest rate and the estimated life of the Warrant. The fair value of the Series A Preferred Stock was determined using a discounted cash flow methodology and a discount rate of 12%. As a result, the Company assigned $3.1 million of the aggregate proceeds to the Warrant and $71.9 million to the Series A Preferred Stock. The discount assigned to the Series A Preferred Stock was expected to be amortized over a five-year period, which was the expected life of the Series A Preferred Stock at the time it was issued, up to the $75.0 million liquidation value of such preferred stock, with the cost of such amortization being reported as additional preferred stock dividends. This resulted in a total dividend with a consistent annual effective yield of 5.98% prior to the Company’s redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock. As a result of the redemption, the remaining unamortized discount of $2.7 million was recognized as an additional preferred stock dividend in the fourth quarter of 2009.

11. Employee Benefit Plans

The Company maintains a qualified retirement plan (the “401(k) Plan”) with a salary deferral feature designed to qualify under Section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). The 401(k) Plan permits the employees of the Company to defer a portion of their compensation in accordance with the provisions of Section 401(k) of the Code. Matching contributions may be made in amounts and at times determined by the Company. Certain other statutory limitations with respect to the Company’s contribution under the 401(k) Plan also apply. Amounts contributed by the Company for a participant will vest over six years and will be held in trust until distributed pursuant to the terms of the 401(k) Plan.

Contributions to the 401(k) Plan are invested in accordance with participant elections among certain investment options. Distributions from participant accounts are not permitted before age 65, except in the event of death, permanent disability, certain financial hardships or termination of employment. The Company made matching cash contributions to the 401(k) Plan during 2009, 2008 and 2007 of $0.5 million, $0.4 million and $0.3 million, respectively.

66

Prior to January 1, 2005, all full-time employees of the Company were eligible to participate in the 401(k) Plan. Beginning January 1, 2005, certain key employees of the Company have been excluded from further salary deferrals to the 401(k) Plan, but may make salary deferrals through participation in the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan, an unfunded deferred compensation arrangement for the group of employees designated as key employees, including certain of the Company’s executive officers, was adopted by the Company’s board of directors on December 14, 2004 and became effective January 1, 2005. Under the terms of the Plan, eligible participants may elect to defer a portion of their compensation. Such deferred compensation will be distributable in lump sum or specified installments upon separation from service with the Company or upon other specified events as defined in the Plan. The Company has the ability to make a contribution to each participant’s account, limited to one half of the first 6% of compensation deferred by the participant and subject to certain other limitations. Amounts deferred under the Plan are to be invested in certain approved investments (excluding securities of the Company or its affiliates). Company contributions to the Plan in 2009, 2008 and 2007 totaled $117,000, $104,000 and $103,000, respectively. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had Plan assets, along with an equal amount of liabilities, totaling $2.4 million and $1.8 million, respectively, recorded on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

12. Stock-Based Compensation

The Company has a nonqualified stock option plan for certain key employees and officers of the Company. This plan provides for the granting of nonqualified options to purchase up to 1.5 million shares of common stock in the Company. No option may be granted under this plan for less than the fair market value of the common stock, defined by the plan as the average of the highest reported asked price and the lowest reported bid price, on the date of the grant. While the vesting period and the termination date for the employee plan options are determined when options are granted, all such employee options outstanding at December 31, 2009 were issued with a vesting period of three years and an expiration of seven years after issuance. The Company also has a nonqualified stock option plan for non-employee directors. The non-employee director plan calls for options to purchase 1,000 shares of common stock to be granted to each non-employee director the day after the annual stockholders’ meeting. Additionally, a non-employee director elected or appointed for the first time as a director on a date other than an annual meeting shall be granted an option to purchase 1,000 shares of common stock. These options are exercisable immediately and expire ten years after issuance. All shares issued in connection with options exercised under both the employee and non-employee director stock option plans are in the form of newly-issued shares.

The following table summarizes stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2009:

	Options		Weighted-Average Exercise Price/Share		Weighted-Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years)	Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in thousands)
Outstanding - January 1, 2009	553,000		$	28.39
Granted	77,600			24.47
Exercised	(21,800	)		11.83
Forfeited	(46,050	)		30.17
Outstanding - December 31, 2009	562,750		$	28.34	4.4	$	1,502	(1)
Fully vested and expected to vest- December 31, 2009	534,570		$	28.40	4.4	$	1,431	(1)
Exercisable - December 31, 2009	314,200		$	28.81	3.3	$	954	(1)

(1) Based on average trade value of $29.27 per share on December 31, 2009.

Intrinsic value for stock options is defined as the difference between the current market value and the exercise price. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $0.3 million, $1.0 million and $1.6 million, respectively.

Options to purchase 77,600 shares, 117,950 shares and 122,600 shares, respectively, were granted during 2009, 2008 and 2007 with a weighted-average fair value of $7.09, $7.33 and $7.37, respectively. The fair value for each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model that uses the following assumptions. The Company uses the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of the grant to determine the risk-free interest rate. The expected dividend yield is estimated using the

67

current annual dividend level and recent stock price of the Company’s common stock at the date of grant. Expected stock volatility is based on historical volatilities of the Company’s common stock. The expected life of the options is calculated based on the “simplified” method as provided for under SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 110.

The weighted-average assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model for the years indicated were as follows:

	2009		2008		2007
Risk-free interest rate	2.32	%	2.61	%	4.40	%
Expected dividend yield	2.13	%	1.88	%	1.54	%
Expected stock volatility	37.0	%	32.8	%	22.4	%
Expected life (years)	5.0		5.0		5.0

The total fair value of options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock that vested during the years ended 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $0.9 million, $1.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively. Total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested stock-based compensation was $0.9 million at December 31, 2009 and is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.1 years.

Effective April 21, 2009, the Company’s shareholders voted to approve the Company’s restricted stock plan permitting issuance of up to 200,000 shares of restricted stock or restricted stock units. All officers and employees of the Company are eligible to receive awards under the restricted stock plan. The benefits or amounts that may be received by or allocated to any particular officer or employee of the Company under the restricted stock plan will be determined in the sole discretion of the Company’s board of directors or its personnel and compensation committee. Shares of common stock issued under the restricted stock plan may be shares of original issuance, shares held in treasury or shares that have been reacquired by the Company.

The following table summarizes non-vested restricted stock activity for the year ended December 31, 2009. There were no grants of restricted stock awards or restricted stock activity prior to 2009.

	Year Ended December 31, 2009
Balance - beginning of year	—
Granted	18,600
Forfeited	—
Earned and issued	—
Balance - end of year	18,600

The fair value of the restricted stock awards is amortized to compensation expense over the vesting period (generally three years) and is based on the market price of the Company’s common stock at the date of grant multiplied by the number of shares granted that are expected to vest. The weighted-average grant date fair value of restricted stock granted during 2009 was $0.5 million, or $24.44 per share. Stock-based compensation expense for restricted stock included in non-interest expense was $24,000 for 2009. Unrecognized compensation expense for nonvested restricted stock awards was $0.4 million at December 31, 2009 and is expected to be recognized over 2.8 years.

13. Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers. These financial instruments include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit.

The Company’s exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. The Company has the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments.

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other

68

termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Since these commitments may expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. The Company evaluates each customer’s creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by the Company upon extension of credit, is based on management’s credit evaluation of the counterparty. The type of collateral held varies but may include accounts receivable, inventory, property, plant and equipment, and other real or personal property.

The Company had outstanding commitments to extend credit, excluding mortgage IRLCs, of $191.0 million and $339.2 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The commitments extend over varying periods of time with the majority to be disbursed or to expire within a one-year period.

Outstanding standby letters of credit are contingent commitments issued by the Company generally to guarantee the performance of a customer in third party borrowing arrangements. The terms of the letters of credit are generally for a period of one year. The maximum amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these letters of credit at December 31, 2009 and 2008 is $9.5 million and $10.3 million, respectively. The Company holds collateral to support letters of credit when deemed necessary. The total of collateralized commitments at December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $8.0 million and $8.3 million, respectively.

14. Related Party Transactions

The Company has had, in the ordinary course of business, lending transactions with certain of its officers, directors, director nominees and their related and affiliated parties (related parties). The aggregate amount of loans to such related parties at December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $8.2 million and $4.4 million, respectively. New loans and advances on prior commitments made to such related parties were $5.6 million, $0.9 million and $3.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Repayments of loans made by such related parties were $1.8 million, $5.4 million and $25.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. During 2008 advances totaling $8.9 million were removed from the Company’s related party loans as a result of changes in the composition of such related parties.

Wiring and cabling installation for certain of the Company’s facilities were performed by an entity whose ownership includes a member of the Company’s board of directors. Total payments to this entity were $119,000 in 2009, $224,000 in 2008 and none in 2007 for such installation contract work. This entity was awarded each of these contracts as a result of it being the low bidder in a competitive bid process.

15. Regulatory Matters

The Company is subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Company must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of the Company’s assets, liabilities and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Company’s capital amounts and classification are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about component risk weightings and other factors.

Federal regulatory agencies generally require the Company and the Bank to maintain minimum Tier 1 and total capital to risk-weighted assets of 4.0% and 8.0%, respectively, and Tier 1 capital to average quarterly assets (Tier 1 leverage ratio) of at least 3.0%. Tier 1 capital generally consists of common equity, retained earnings, certain types of preferred stock, qualifying minority interest and trust preferred securities, subject to limitations, and excludes goodwill and various intangible assets. Total capital includes Tier 1 capital, any amounts of trust preferred securities excluded from Tier 1 capital, and the lesser of the ALLL or 1.25% of risk-weighted assets. At December 31, 2009 and 2008 the Company’s and the Bank’s Tier 1 and total capital ratios and their Tier 1 leverage ratios exceeded minimum requirements.

69

The actual and required regulatory capital amounts and ratios of the Company and the Bank at December 31, 2009 and 2008 were as follows:

	Actual				Required
					For Capital Adequacy Purposes				To Be Well Capitalized Under Prompt Corrective Action Provisions
	Amount		Ratio		Amount		Ratio		Amount		Ratio
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2009:
Total capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Company	$	349,649	15.03	%	$	186,095	8.00	%	$	232,619	10.00	%
Bank		328,714	14.22			184,952	8.00			231,191	10.00
Tier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Company		320,442	13.78			93,047	4.00			139,571	6.00
Bank		299,683	12.96			92,476	4.00			138,714	6.00
Tier 1 leverage (to average assets):
Company		320,442	11.39			84,392	3.00			140,653	5.00
Bank		299,683	10.72			83,904	3.00			139,841	5.00
December 31, 2008:
Total capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Company	$	395,406	15.36	%	$	205,990	8.00	%	$	257,488	10.00	%
Bank		376,453	14.63			205,840	8.00			257,300	10.00
Tier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Company		365,894	14.21			102,995	4.00			154,493	6.00
Bank		346,941	13.48			102,920	4.00			154,380	6.00
Tier 1 leverage (to average assets):
Company		365,894	11.64			94,319	3.00			157,198	5.00
Bank		346,941	11.09			93,813	3.00			156,355	5.00

As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the most recent notification from the regulators categorized the Company and the Bank as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. There are no conditions or events since that notification that management believes have changed the Company’s or the Bank’s category.

The state bank commissioner’s approval is required before the Bank can declare and pay any dividend of 75% or more of the net profits of the Bank after all taxes for the current year plus 75% of the retained net profits for the immediately preceding year. At December 31, 2009, the Bank could not pay dividends without the approval of regulatory authorities as a result of the $75 million dividend paid by the Bank to the Company for the redemption of the Series A Preferred Stock. At December 31, 2008, $34.5 million was available for payment of dividends by the Bank without the approval of regulatory authorities.

Under FRB regulation, the Bank is also limited as to the amount it may loan to its affiliates, including the Company, and such loans must be collateralized by specific obligations. The maximum amount available for loan from the Bank to the Company is limited to 10% of the Bank’s capital and surplus or approximately $31.0 million and $36.7 million, respectively, at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

The Bank is required by bank regulatory agencies to maintain certain minimum balances of cash or deposits primarily with the FRB. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, these required balances aggregated $6.2 million and $4.4 million, respectively.

16. Fair Value Measurements

In accordance with ASC Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” the Company applied the following fair value hierarchy in the measurement of certain of its assets and liabilities on a fair value basis.

Level 1 - Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.

Level 2 - Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations whose inputs are observable.

Level 3 - Instruments whose inputs are unobservable.

70

The following table sets forth the Company’s assets and liabilities at December 31, 2009 and 2008 that are accounted for at fair value:

	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2009:
Assets:
Investment securities AFS(1):
Obligations of state and political subdivisions	$	—	$	377,297	$	16,590	$	393,887
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		—		94,510		—		94,510
Corporate obligations		—		1,865		—		1,865
Collateralized debt obligation		—		—		100		100
Total investment securities AFS		—		473,672		16,690		490,362
Impaired loans and leases		—		—		19,204		19,204
Foreclosed assets held for sale, net		—		—		61,148		61,148
Derivative assets - IRLC and FSC		—		—		210		210
Total assets at fair value	$	—	$	473,672	$	97,252	$	570,924
Liabilities:
Derivative liabilities - IRLC and FSC	$	—	$	—	$	210	$	210
Total liabilities at fair value	$	—	$	—	$	210	$	210
December 31, 2008:
Assets:
Investment securities AFS(1)
Obligations of state and political subdivisions	$	85,275	$	435,081	$	22,384	$	542,740
U.S. Government agency residential mortgage-backed securities		—		371,561		—		371,561
Corporate obligations		—		—		6,953		6,953
Collateralized debt obligation		—		—		683		683
Total investment securities AFS		85,275		806,642		30,020		921,937
Impaired loans and leases		—		—		12,105		12,105
Foreclosed assets held for sale, net		—		—		10,758		10,758
Derivative assets - IRLC and FSC		—		—		477		477
Total assets at fair value	$	85,275	$	806,642	$	53,360	$	945,277
Liabilities:
Derivative liabilities - IRLC and FSC	$	—	$	—	$	477	$	477
Total liabilities at fair value	$	—	$	—	$	477	$	477

(1) Does not include $16.3 million and $22.8 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, of shares of FHLB and FNBB stock that do not have readily determinable fair values and are carried at cost.

The following methods and assumptions are used to estimate the fair value of the Company’s assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value.

Investment securities - The Company utilizes independent third parties as its principal pricing sources for determining fair value. For investment securities traded in an active market, fair values are measured on a recurring basis and based on quoted market prices if available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted market prices of comparable securities, broker quotes or comprehensive interest rate tables, pricing matrices or a combination thereof. For investment securities traded in a market that is not active, fair value is determined using unobservable inputs.

The Company has determined that certain of its investment securities had a limited to non-existent trading market at December 31, 2009 and 2008. As a result, the Company considers these investments as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. The following is a description of those investment securities and the fair value methodology used for such securities.

Obligations of state and political subdivisions - The fair values of certain obligations of state and political subdivisions consisting of unrated Arkansas private placement special improvement district bonds (“SID bonds”) in the amount of $16.6 million and $19.0 million at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, were calculated using Level 3 hierarchy inputs and assumptions as the trading market for such securities was determined to be “not active”. This determination was based on the limited number of trades or, in certain cases, the existence of no reported trades for the SID bonds and the private placement

71

nature of such SID bonds. The SID bonds are prepayable at par value at the option of the issuer. As a result, management believes the SID bonds should be valued at the lower of (i) the matrix pricing provided by the Company’s third party pricing services for comparable unrated municipal securities or (ii) par value. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the third party pricing matrices valued the Company’s total portfolio of SID bonds at $17.4 million and $19.8 million, respectively, which exceeded the aggregate par value of the SID bonds by $0.8 million at both December 31, 2009 and 2008. Accordingly, at December 31, 2009 and 2008 the Company reported the SID bonds at par value of $16.6 million and $19.0 million, respectively.

Collateralized debt obligation – At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company’s investment securities portfolio included one security categorized as a collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”). At December 31, 2008, the Company considered this security as a Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy based on a trading market that was determined to be “not active” based on the limited number of trades, small block sizes, and the significant spreads between the bid and ask price. Accordingly, the Company developed an internal model for pricing this security based on the present value of expected cash flows of the instruments at an appropriate risk-adjusted discount rate. Additionally, the Company reviewed other information such as historical and current performance of the bond, performances of underlying collateral, if any, deferral or default rates, if any, cash flow projections, liquidity and credit premiums required by market participants, financial trend analysis with respect to the individual issuing entities and other factors in determining the appropriate risk-adjusted discount rates and expected cash flows.

During 2009 this CDO has continued to perform in accordance with its terms and is not in default, but, because its credit rating was downgraded to below investment grade and other factors, the Company determined during the third quarter of 2009 that it no longer expects to hold this security until maturity or until such time as fair value recovers to or above cost. As a result of the Company’s intent to dispose of this security, the Company recorded a $0.9 million charge during the third quarter of 2009 to reduce the carrying value of this security to $0.1 million at December 31, 2009. The Company continued to report this CDO as a Level 3 security in the fair value hierarchy at December 31, 2009.

Corporate obligations – The trading market for one of its investment securities categorized as a corporate obligation with a fair value at December 31, 2008 of $7.0 million was determined to be “not active” based on the limited number of trades, small block sizes, and the significant spreads between the bid and ask price. Accordingly, the Company developed an internal model for pricing this security based on the present value of expected cash flows of the instruments at an appropriate risk-adjusted discount rate. Additionally, the Company reviewed other information such as historical and current performance of the bond, performances of underlying collateral, if any, deferral or default rates, if any, cash flow projections, liquidity and credit premiums required by market participants, financial trend analysis with respect to the individual issuing entities and other factors in determining the appropriate risk-adjusted discount rates and expected cash flows. This bond was subsequently sold in 2009.

Impaired loans and leases – Fair values are measured on a nonrecurring basis and are based on the underlying collateral value of the impaired loan or lease, net of holding and selling costs, or the estimated discounted cash flows for such loan or lease. In accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 310, the Company has reduced the carrying value of its impaired loans and leases (all of which are included in nonaccrual loans and leases) by $9.7 million and $4.0 million, respectively, to the estimated fair value of $19.2 million and $12.1 million, respectively, for such loans and leases at December 31, 2009 and 2008. The $9.7 million and $4.0 million, respectively, adjustment to reduce the carrying value of impaired loans and leases to estimated fair value during 2009 and 2008 consisted of $8.1 million and $3.7 million, respectively, of partial charge-offs and $1.7 million and $0.3 million, respectively, of specific loan and lease loss allocations.

Foreclosed assets held for sale, net – Repossessed personal properties and real estate acquired through or in lieu of foreclosure are measured on a non-recurring basis and are initially recorded at the lesser of current principal investment or fair value less estimated cost to sell at the date of repossession or foreclosure. Valuations of these assets are periodically reviewed by management with the carrying value of such assets adjusted through non-interest expense to the then estimated fair value net of estimated selling costs, if lower, until disposition. Fair values of other real estate are generally based on third party appraisals, broker price opinions or other valuations of the property, resulting in a Level 3 classification.

Derivative assets and liabilities – The fair values of IRLC and FSC derivative assets and liabilities are measured on a recurring basis and are based primarily on the fluctuation of interest rates between the date on which the IRLC and FSC were entered and the measurement date.

72

The following table presents additional information about assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis and for which the Company has utilized Level 3 inputs to determine fair value:

	Investment Securities AFS			Derivative Assets- IRLC and FSC			Derivative Liabilities- IRLC and FSC
	(Dollars in thousands)
Balances - January 1, 2008	$	—		$	80		$	(80	)
Total realized gains/(losses) included in earnings		(3,016	)		397			(397	)
Total unrealized gains/(losses) included in other comprehensive income		1,271			—			—
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net		—			—			—
Transfers in and/or out of Level 3		31,765			—			—
Balances - December 31, 2008		30,020		$	477		$	(477	)
Total realized gains/(losses) included in earnings		(3,753	)		(267	)		267
Total unrealized gains/(losses) included in other comprehensive income		317			—			—
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net		(6,524	)		—			—
Transfers in and/or out of Level 3		(3,370	)		—			—
Balances - December 31, 2009	$	16,690		$	210		$	(210	)

17. Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of financial instruments.

Cash and due from banks - For these short-term instruments, the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair value.

Investment securities - The Company utilizes independent third parties as its principal pricing sources for determining fair value. For investment securities traded in an active market, fair values are measured on a recurring basis and based on quoted market prices if available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted market prices of comparable securities, broker quotes or comprehensive interest rate tables, pricing matrices or a combination thereof. For investment securities traded in a market that is not active, fair value is determined using unobservable inputs. The Company’s investments in the common stock of the FHLB and FNBB of $16.3 million at December 31, 2009 and $22.8 million at December 31, 2008 do not have readily determinable fair values and are carried at cost.

Loans and leases - The fair value of loans and leases is estimated by discounting the future cash flows using the current rate at which similar loans or leases would be made to borrowers or lessees with similar credit ratings and for the same remaining maturities.

Deposit liabilities - The fair value of demand deposits, savings accounts, money market deposits and other transaction accounts is the amount payable on demand at the reporting date. The fair value of fixed maturity time deposits is estimated using the rate currently available for deposits of similar remaining maturities.

Repurchase Agreements- For these short-term instruments, the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair value.

Other borrowed funds - For these short-term instruments, the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair value. The fair value of long-term instruments is estimated based on the current rates available to the Company for borrowings with similar terms and remaining maturities.

Subordinated debentures - The fair values of these instruments are based primarily upon discounted cash flows using rates for securities with similiar terms and remaining maturities.

Derivative assets and liabilities - The fair values of IRLC and FSC derivative assets and liabilities are based primarily on the fluctuation of interest rates between the date on which the IRLC and FSC were entered and year-end.

Off-balance sheet instruments - The fair values of commercial loan commitments and letters of credit are based on fees currently charged to enter into similar agreements, taking into account the remaining terms of the agreements and were not material at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

The fair values of certain of these instruments were calculated by discounting expected cash flows, which contain numerous uncertainties and involve significant judgments by management. Fair value is the estimated amount at which financial assets or liabilities could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties other than in a forced or liquidation sale. Because no market exists for certain of these financial

73

instruments and because management does not intend to sell these financial instruments, the Company does not know whether the fair values shown below represent values at which the respective financial instruments could be sold individually or in the aggregate.

The following table presents the estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments:

	2009				2008
	Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Estimated Fair Value
	(Dollars in thousands)
Financial assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	78,294	$	78,294	$	40,982	$	40,982
Investment securities AFS		506,678		506,678		944,783		944,783
Loans and leases, net of ALLL		1,864,485		1,841,953		1,991,687		1,982,418
Derivative assets - IRLC and FSC		210		210		477		477
Financial liabilities:
Demand, NOW, savings and money market account deposits	$	1,151,718	$	1,151,718	$	1,038,269	$	1,038,269
Time deposits		877,276		881,463		1,303,145		1,313,996
Repurchase agreements with customers		44,269		44,269		46,864		46,864
Other borrowings		342,553		423,404		424,947		519,517
Subordinated debentures		64,950		27,650		64,950		47,565
Derivative liabilities - IRLC and FSC		210		210		477		477

18. Supplemental Cash Flow Information

Supplemental cash flow information is as follows:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008		2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Cash paid during the period for:
Interest	$	49,692		$	86,591	$	97,867
Income taxes		14,504			15,045		12,917
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:
Loans transferred to foreclosed assets held for sale		74,122			17,259		8,345
Loans advanced for sales of foreclosed assets		3,132			2,457		1,487
Net change in unrealized gains and losses on investment securities AFS		(15,783	)		50,539		(16,733	)
Unsettled AFS investment security trades:
Purchases		8,372			14,038		—
Sales/calls		—			2,525		—
Securities received on dissolution of unconsolidated investments		—			3,370		—

19. Other Operating Expenses

The following is a summary of other operating expenses:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009		2008		2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Postage and supplies	$	1,530	$	1,633	$	1,620
Telephone and data lines		1,806		1,630		1,415
Advertising and public relations		1,083		1,204		1,057
Professional and outside services		1,793		1,537		1,077
Software		1,524		1,261		1,201
FDIC Insurance		4,291		1,131		701
Loan collection and repossession expense		3,999		999		328
Write down of other real estate owned		4,009		1,042		122
Other		7,010		4,958		3,974
Total other operating expenses	$	27,045	$	15,395	$	11,495

74

20. Earnings Per Common Share (“EPS”)

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted EPS:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009		2008		2007
	(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Numerator:
Distributed earnings allocated to common stock	$	8,778	$	8,418	$	7,216
Undistributed earnings allocated to common stock		28,048		26,056		24,530
Net earnings allocated to common stock	$	36,826	$	34,474	$	31,746
Denominator:
Denominator for basic EPS—weighted-average common shares		16,880		16,849		16,789
Effect of dilutive securities—stock options		20		25		45
Denominator for diluted EPS—weighted-average common shares and assumed conversions		16,900		16,874		16,834
Basic EPS	$	2.18	$	2.05	$	1.89
Diluted EPS	$	2.18	$	2.04	$	1.89

Options to purchase 487,350 shares, 464,200 shares and 340,150 shares, respectively, of the Company’s common stock at a weighted-average exercise price of $30.02 per share, $30.86 per share and $32.62 per share, respectively, were outstanding during 2009, 2008 and 2007, but were not included in the computation of diluted EPS because the options’ exercise price was greater than the average market price of the common shares and inclusion would have been antidilutive. Additionally, a warrant for the purchase of 379,811 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $29.62 was outstanding at December 31, 2008 (none at December 31, 2009 and 2007) but was not included in the diluted EPS computation as inclusion would have been antidilutive.

21. Parent Company Financial Information

The following condensed balance sheets, income statements and statements of cash flows reflect the financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the parent company:

Condensed Balance Sheets

	December 31,
	2009		2008
	(Dollars in thousands)
Assets
Cash	$	8,437	$	10,247
Investment in consolidated bank subsidiary		310,161		367,137
Investment in unconsolidated Trusts		1,950		1,950
Investments securities AFS		485		1,724
Loans		8,768		4,888
Land for future branch site		1,875		1,875
Excess cost over fair value of net assets acquired		1,092		1,092
Other, net		1,554		1,537
Total assets	$	334,322	$	390,450
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Accounts payable and other liabilities	$	46	$	129
Accrued interest payable		171		374
Preferred stock dividends payable		—		198
Income taxes payable		127		617
Subordinated debentures		64,950		64,950
Total liabilities		65,294		66,268
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, net of unamortized discount		—		71,880
Common stock		169		169
Additional paid-in capital		41,584		43,314
Retained earnings		221,243		193,195
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		6,032		15,624
Total stockholders’ equity		269,028		324,182
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	334,322	$	390,450

75

Condensed Statements of Income

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Income:
Dividends from Bank	$	92,200		$	14,400		$	12,600
Dividends from Trusts		64			113			152
Interest		984			183			94
Other		138			137			180
Total income		93,386			14,833			13,026
Expenses:
Interest		2,138			3,760			5,066
Other operating expenses		2,258			2,411			2,072
Total expenses		4,396			6,171			7,138
Net income before income tax benefit and equity in undistributed earnings of Bank		88,990			8,662			5,888
Income tax benefit		1,482			2,432			2,814
Equity in undistributed earnings of Bank		(47,370	)		23,607			23,044
Net income		43,102			34,701			31,746
Preferred stock dividends and amortization of preferred stock discount		(6,276	)		(227	)		—
Net income available to common stockholders	$	36,826		$	34,474		$	31,746

Condensed Statements of Cash Flows

	Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007
	(Dollars in thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$	43,102		$	34,701		$	31,746
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Equity in undistributed earnings of Bank		47,370			(23,607	)		(23,044	)
Gain on sale of investment securities AFS		(162	)		—			—
Deferred income tax benefit		(63	)		(330	)		(341	)
Stock-based compensation expense		712			862			869
Tax benefits on exercise of stock options		(111	)		(283	)		(420	)
Changes in other assets and other liabilities		(802	)		999			2,013
Net cash provided by operating activities		90,046			12,342			10,823
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net increase in loans		(3,880	)		(2,449	)		(2,438	)
Proceeds from sales of investment securities AFS		1,437			—			—
Proceeds from sales of other investments		—			—			2,269
Equity contributed to Bank		—			(87,000	)		(16,000	)
Net cash used by investing activities		(2,443	)		(89,449	)		(16,169	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from exercise of stock options		258			408			546
Tax benefits on exercise of stock options		111			283			420
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock and common stock warrant		—			75,000			—
Redemption of preferred stock		(75,000	)		—			—
Repurchase of common stock warrant		(2,650	)		—			—
Cash dividends paid on preferred stock		(3,354	)		—			—
Cash dividends paid on common stock		(8,778	)		(8,418	)		(7,216	)
Net cash (used) provided by financing activities		(89,413	)		67,273			(6,250	)
Net decrease in cash		(1,810	)		(9,834	)		(11,596	)
Cash - beginning of year		10,247			20,081			31,677
Cash - end of year	$	8,437		$	10,247		$	20,081

76

EX-21

Exhibit 21

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

1. Bank of the Ozarks, an Arkansas state chartered bank.

2. Ozark Capital Statutory Trust II, a Connecticut business trust.

3. Ozark Capital Statutory Trust III, a Delaware business trust.

4. Ozark Capital Statutory Trust IV, a Delaware business trust.

5. Ozark Capital Statutory Trust V, a Delaware business trust.

6. The Highlands Group, Inc., an Arkansas corporate subsidiary of Bank of the Ozarks.

7. Arlington Park, LLC, a 50% owned Arkansas LLC subsidiary of The Highlands Group, Inc.

8. HOJ Equities, LLC, a 100% owned Texas LLC subsidiary of Bank of the Ozarks.

EX-23.1

Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-32173 on Form S-8 pertaining to the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Stock Purchase Plan, Registration Statement No. 333-74577 on Form S-8 pertaining to the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. 401K Retirement Savings Plan and in Registration Statement No. 333-32175 on Form S-8 pertaining to the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. Non-employee Director Stock Option Plan of our reports dated March 10, 2010 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which reports appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009.

/s/ Crowe Horwath LLP

Brentwood, Tennessee

March 10, 2010

EX-31.1

CERTIFICATIONS Exhibit 31.1

I, George Gleason, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 10, 2010

/s/ George Gleason

George Gleason

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

EX-31.2

Exhibit 31.2

I, Paul Moore, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 10, 2010

/s/ Paul Moore

Paul Moore

Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer

EX-32.1

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, George Gleason, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

March 10, 2010

/s/ George Gleason

George Gleason

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

EX-32.2

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul Moore, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

March 10, 2010

/s/ Paul Moore

Paul Moore

Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer

EX-99.1

Exhibit 99.1

BANK OF THE OZARKS, INC.

FIRST FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 31 C.F.R. § 30.15

AS AUTHORIZED BY 12 U.S.C. 5221 (SECTION 111 OF THE

EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT OF 2008, AS AMENDED)

MARCH 10, 2010

I, George Gleason, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., certify, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5221, based on my knowledge, that:

(i) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. discussed, reviewed and evaluated with Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s designated senior risk officer at least every six months, during the period beginning on the later of June 15, 2009, or ninety days after the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date (the “Applicable Period”) the senior executive officer (“SEO”) compensation plans and the employee compensation plans and the risks these plans pose to Bank of the Ozarks, Inc;

(ii) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has identified and limited during the Applicable Period the features of the SEO compensation plans that could lead SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that could threaten the value of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., and during that same Applicable Period has identified any features of the employee compensation plans that pose risks to Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and has limited those features to ensure that Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not unnecessarily exposed to risks;

(iii) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has reviewed, at least every six months during the Applicable Period, the terms of each employee compensation plan and identified any features of the plan that could encourage the manipulation of reported earnings of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to enhance the compensation of an employee and has limited any such features;

(iv) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will certify to the reviews of SEO compensation plans and employee compensation plans required under (i) and (iii) above;

(v) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will provide a narrative description of how it limited during any part of the most recently completed fiscal year that included a TARP Period the features in

(A) SEO compensation plans that could lead SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that could threaten the value of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.;

(B) Employee compensation plans that unnecessarily expose Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to risks; and

(C) Employee compensation plans that could encourage the manipulation of reported earnings of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to enhance the compensation of an employee;

(vi) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has required that bonus payments, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, as amended (“EESA”), of the SEOs and the twenty next most highly compensated employees be subject to a recovery or “clawback” provision during any part of the most recently completed fiscal year that was a TARP period if the bonus payments were based on materially inaccurate financial statements or any other materially inaccurate performance metric criteria;

(vii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has prohibited any golden parachute payment, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, to an SEO or any of the next five most highly compensated employees during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and the United States Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(viii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has limited bonus payments to its applicable employees in accordance with section 111 of EESA and the regulations and guidance established thereunder during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(ix) The board of directors of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has established an excessive or luxury expenditures policy, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, by the later of September 14, 2009, or ninety days after the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury; this policy has been provided to Treasury and its primary regulatory agency; Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and its employees have complied with this policy during the Applicable Period; and any expenses that, pursuant to this policy, required approval of the board of directors, a committee of the board of directors, an SEO, or an executive officer with a similar level of responsibility, were properly approved;

(x) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not required to permit a non-binding shareholder resolution in compliance with any applicable Federal securities rules and regulations on the disclosures provided under the Federal securities laws related to SEO compensation paid or accrued during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(xi) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will disclose the amount, nature, and justification for the offering during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date of any perquisites, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, whose total value exceeds $25,000 for any employee who is subject to the bonus payment limitations identified in paragraph (vii);

(xii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will disclose whether Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., the board of directors of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., or the compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has engaged during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date, a compensation consultant; and the services the compensation consultant or any affiliate of the compensation consultant provided during this period;

(xiii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has prohibited the payment of any gross-ups, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, to the SEOs and the next twenty most highly compensated employees during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(xiv) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has substantially complied with all other requirements related to employee compensation that are provided in the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury, including any amendments;

(xv) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has submitted to Treasury a complete and accurate list of the SEOs and the twenty next most highly compensated employees for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, with the non-SEOs ranked in descending order of level of annual compensation, and with the name, title, and employer of each SEO and most highly compensated employee identified, but Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not required to submit a list of such persons for the current fiscal year because, as of November 4, 2009, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. was no longer a recipient of TARP Capital Purchase Program funds; and

(xvi) I understand that a knowing and willful false or fraudulent statement made in connection with this certification may be punished by fine, imprisonment, or both.

/s/ George Gleason

George Gleason

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

EX-99.2

Exhibit 99.2

BANK OF THE OZARKS, INC.

FIRST FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 31 C.F.R. § 30.15

AS AUTHORIZED BY 12 U.S.C. 5221 (SECTION 111 OF THE

EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT OF 2008, AS AMENDED)

MARCH 10, 2010

I, Paul Moore, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., certify, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5221, based on my knowledge, that:

(i) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. discussed, reviewed and evaluated with Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s designated senior risk officer at least every six months, during the period beginning on the later of June 15, 2009, or ninety days after the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date (the “Applicable Period”) the senior executive officer (“SEO”) compensation plans and the employee compensation plans and the risks these plans pose to Bank of the Ozarks, Inc;

(ii) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has identified and limited during the Applicable Period the features of the SEO compensation plans that could lead SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that could threaten the value of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., and during that same Applicable Period has identified any features of the employee compensation plans that pose risks to Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and has limited those features to ensure that Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not unnecessarily exposed to risks;

(iii) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has reviewed, at least every six months during the Applicable Period, the terms of each employee compensation plan and identified any features of the plan that could encourage the manipulation of reported earnings of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to enhance the compensation of an employee and has limited any such features;

(iv) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will certify to the reviews of SEO compensation plans and employee compensation plans required under (i) and (iii) above;

(v) The compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will provide a narrative description of how it limited during any part of the most recently completed fiscal year that included a TARP Period the features in

(A) SEO compensation plans that could lead SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that could threaten the value of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.;

(B) Employee compensation plans that unnecessarily expose Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to risks; and

(C) Employee compensation plans that could encourage the manipulation of reported earnings of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. to enhance the compensation of an employee;

(vi) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has required that bonus payments, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, as amended (“EESA”), of the SEOs and the twenty next most highly compensated employees be subject to a recovery or “clawback” provision during any part of the most recently completed fiscal year that was a TARP period if the bonus payments were based on materially inaccurate financial statements or any other materially inaccurate performance metric criteria;

(vii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has prohibited any golden parachute payment, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, to an SEO or any of the next five most highly compensated employees during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and the United States Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(viii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has limited bonus payments to its applicable employees in accordance with section 111 of EESA and the regulations and guidance established thereunder during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(ix) The board of directors of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has established an excessive or luxury expenditures policy, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, by the later of September 14, 2009, or ninety days after the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury; this policy has been provided to Treasury and its primary regulatory agency; Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and its employees have complied with this policy during the Applicable Period; and any expenses that, pursuant to this policy, required approval of the board of directors, a committee of the board of directors, an SEO, or an executive officer with a similar level of responsibility, were properly approved;

(x) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not required to permit a non-binding shareholder resolution in compliance with any applicable Federal securities rules and regulations on the disclosures provided under the Federal securities laws related to SEO compensation paid or accrued during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(xi) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will disclose the amount, nature, and justification for the offering during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date of any perquisites, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, whose total value exceeds $25,000 for any employee who is subject to the bonus payment limitations identified in paragraph (vii);

(xii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. will disclose whether Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., the board of directors of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., or the compensation committee of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has engaged during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of the Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date, a compensation consultant; and the services the compensation consultant or any affiliate of the compensation consultant provided during this period;

(xiii) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has prohibited the payment of any gross-ups, as defined in the regulations and guidance established under section 111 of EESA, to the SEOs and the next twenty most highly compensated employees during the period beginning on the later of the closing date of the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury or June 15, 2009 and ending with the last day of Bank of the Ozarks, Inc.’s fiscal year containing that date;

(xiv) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has substantially complied with all other requirements related to employee compensation that are provided in the agreement between Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Treasury, including any amendments;

(xv) Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. has submitted to Treasury a complete and accurate list of the SEOs and the twenty next most highly compensated employees for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, with the non-SEOs ranked in descending order of level of annual compensation, and with the name, title, and employer of each SEO and most highly compensated employee identified, but Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. is not required to submit a list of such persons for the current fiscal year because, as of November 4, 2009, Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. was no longer a recipient of TARP Capital Purchase Program funds; and

(xvi) I understand that a knowing and willful false or fraudulent statement made in connection with this certification may be punished by fine, imprisonment, or both.

/s/ Paul Moore

Paul Moore

Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer