XML 32 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.25.3
REGULATORY MATTERS AND CAPITAL ADEQUACY
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2025
Regulatory Capital Requirements under Banking Regulation [Abstract]  
REGULATORY MATTERS AND CAPITAL ADEQUACY REGULATORY MATTERS AND CAPITAL ADEQUACY
Regulatory Matters

Our business is subject to extensive federal and state laws and regulations, as well as related regulation and supervision, including by the FDIC, CFPB and other federal and state authorities. Pending and future laws and regulations (federal and state) may adversely impact our business. Without limiting the foregoing, CB is subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the Delaware Office of the State Bank Commissioner and the FDIC. CCB is also subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the Utah Department of Financial Institutions and the FDIC. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can trigger certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary actions by our regulators. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, both Banks must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of their assets and liabilities as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The capital amounts and classification are also subject to qualitative judgments by these regulators about components, risk weightings and other factors. In addition, both Banks are limited in the amounts they can pay as dividends to the Parent Company.

Quantitative measures, established by regulations to ensure capital adequacy, require the Banks to maintain minimum amounts and ratios of Tier 1 capital to average assets, and Common equity tier 1, Tier 1 capital and Total capital, all to risk-weighted assets. Failure to meet these minimum capital requirements can result in certain mandatory, and possibly additional discretionary actions by the Banks’ regulators that if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on CB’s and/or CCB’s operating activities, as well as our operating activities. Based on these regulations, as of September 30, 2025 and 2024, each Bank met all capital requirements to which it was subject, and maintained capital ratios in excess of the minimums required to qualify as well capitalized. The Banks seek to maintain capital levels and ratios in excess of the minimum regulatory requirements inclusive of the 2.5% Capital Conservation Buffer. Although Bread Financial is not a bank holding company as defined under the Bank Holding Company Act, we seek to maintain capital levels and ratios in excess of the minimums required for bank holding companies.
As of September 30, 2025 the actual capital ratios and minimum ratios for the Company, as well as each Bank, are as follows:

Actual RatioMinimum Ratio for
Capital Adequacy
Purposes		Minimum Ratio to be
Well Capitalized under
Prompt Corrective
Action Provisions
Total Company
Common equity tier 1 capital ratio (1)
14.0 %4.5 %6.5 %
Tier 1 capital ratio (2)
14.0 6.0 8.0 
Total risk-based capital ratio (3)
17.5 8.0 10.0 
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio (4)
12.4 4.0 5.0 
Total risk-weighted assets (5)
$18,714 
Comenity Bank
Common equity tier 1 capital ratio (1)
15.4 %4.5 %6.5 %
Tier 1 capital ratio (2)
15.4 6.0 8.0 
Total risk-based capital ratio (3)
16.8 8.0 10.0 
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio (4)
13.5 4.0 5.0 
Comenity Capital Bank
Common equity tier 1 capital ratio (1)
15.4 %4.5 %6.5 %
Tier 1 capital ratio (2)
15.4 6.0 8.0 
Total risk-based capital ratio (3)
19.0 8.0 10.0 
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio (4)
13.6 4.0 5.0 
__________________________________
(1)Common equity tier 1 capital ratio represents tier 1 capital divided by total risk-weighted assets. In the calculation of tier 1 capital, we follow the Basel III Standardized Approach and therefore Total stockholders' equity has been reduced, primarily by Goodwill and intangible assets, net.
(2)Tier 1 capital ratio represents tier 1 capital divided by total risk-weighted assets. In the calculation of tier 1 capital, we follow the Basel III Standardized Approach and therefore Total stockholders' equity has been reduced, primarily by Goodwill and intangible assets, net.
(3)Total risk-based capital ratio represents total capital divided by total risk-weighted assets. In the calculation of total capital, we follow the Basel III Standardized Approach and therefore tier 1 capital has been increased by tier 2 capital, which for us is comprised of subordinated notes, as well as the allowable portion of the Allowance for credit losses.
(4)Tier 1 leverage capital ratio represents tier 1 capital divided by total average assets, after certain adjustments.
(5)Total risk-weighted assets are generally measured by allocating assets, and specified off-balance sheet exposures, to various risk categories as defined by the Basel III Standardized Approach.

We are also involved, from time to time, in reviews, investigations, subpoenas, supervisory actions and other proceedings (both formal and informal) by governmental agencies regarding our business, which could subject us to significant fines, penalties, obligations to change our business practices, significant restrictions on our existing business or ability to develop new business, cease-and-desist orders, safety-and-soundness directives or other requirements resulting in increased expenses, diminished income and damage to our reputation.

In November 2023, following the consent of the Board of Managers of Comenity Servicing LLC (the Servicer), the FDIC issued a consent order to the Servicer. The Servicer is not one of our Bank subsidiaries, but is our wholly-owned subsidiary that services substantially all of our loans. The consent order arose out of the June 2022 transition of our credit card processing services to strategic outsourcing partners and addresses certain shortcomings in the Servicer’s information technology (IT) systems development, project management, business continuity management, cloud operations, and third-party oversight. The Servicer entered into the consent order for the purpose of resolving these matters without admitting or denying any violations of law or regulation set forth in the order. The consent order does not contain any monetary penalties or fines.
The Servicer continues to take significant steps to strengthen the organization’s IT governance and address the other issues identified in the consent order, working diligently to ensure that all requirements of the consent order are satisfied. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Servicer has taken steps to address each provision within the consent order and continues to comply with each ongoing requirement. The Servicer is committed to complying with the longer-term requirements of the consent order, including the enhancement of its compliance management processes and related corporate governance, compliance with the applicable system conversion requirements, and enhanced risk management and reporting. The Servicer has submitted nearly all of the required deliverables under the consent order to the FDIC for its review and consideration. The Board of Managers of the Servicer continues to oversee its compliance with the requirements of the consent order and provide effective challenge to the Servicer’s management toward that end. The Board of Directors of each of the Banks also receives reporting about the Servicer and monitors the Servicer’s compliance with the provisions of the consent order.