Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

or

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File Number: 000-25887

PRIVATEBANCORP, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Ten North Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60602

(Address of principal executive offices)

(312) 683-7100

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

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

Common Stock, no par value

9.50% Cumulative Trust Preferred Securities

(and the Guarantee with respect thereto)

Indicate by checkmark 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 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 the 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. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes x No ¨

The aggregate market value of the voting common equity of the Registrant held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $462,407,485 based on the closing price of the common stock of $27.48 on June 30, 2004, as reported by the NASDAQ National Market.

As of March 7, 2005, the Registrant had outstanding 20,404,289 shares of common stock.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III.

Table of Contents

FORM 10-K

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PART I

Overview

We organized PrivateBancorp as a Delaware corporation in 1989 to serve as the holding company for a Chicago-based de novo (or start-up) bank designed to provide highly personalized financial services primarily to affluent individuals, professionals, entrepreneurs and their business interests. In 1991, The PrivateBank and Trust Company was one of the first banks newly formed in the Chicago area at that time. The organizers had significant senior level banking experience and many potential client contacts from prior banking positions.

As the financial industry has consolidated, and smaller, independent banks have been acquired by national, multi-bank holding companies, many financial institutions have focused on a mass-market approach using automated customer service which de-emphasizes personal contact. We believe that the centralization of decision-making power at these large institutions has resulted in disruption of client relationships as frontline bank employees who have limited decision-making authority fill little more than a processor role for their customers. At many of these large institutions, services are provided by employees in the “home office” who evaluate requests without the benefit of personal contact with the customer or an overall view of the customer’s relationship with the institution.

We believe that this trend has been particularly frustrating to affluent individuals, professionals, owners of closely held businesses and commercial real estate investors who traditionally have been accustomed to dealing directly with senior bank executives. These clients typically seek banking relationships managed by a decision-maker that can deliver a prompt response to their requests and custom tailor a banking solution to meet their needs.

We have two banking subsidiaries—The PrivateBank and Trust Company, which we also refer to as The PrivateBank – Chicago, and The PrivateBank, which we also refer to as The PrivateBank – St. Louis. Using the European tradition of “private banking” as our model, we provide our clients with traditional individual and corporate banking services, including a variety of loan and deposit products, and wealth management services. Our goal is to be the primary source of financial products and services for our clients. We strive to develop a valued relationship with our clients, using an experienced team of managing directors, to serve client’s individual and corporate banking needs, and by tailoring our products and services to consistently meet those needs. Our clients consist of individuals, small to medium-size businesses, commercial real estate investors and professionals. On June 15, 2004, we formed a new subsidiary, The PrivateBank Mortgage Company, as a result of our acquisition of Corley Financial Corporation, a Chicago-based mortgage-banking boutique.

Our managing directors are strategically located in eleven locations, all in the Midwestern United States. Currently, we have eight offices in the Chicago metropolitan area. These offices are strategically located in downtown Chicago; the Gold Coast; in the affluent North Shore communities of Wilmette, Winnetka and Lake Forest; in Oak Brook, centrally located in the fast growing west suburban DuPage County; and in St. Charles and Geneva, in the far western Fox Valley area. We currently operate from one location in the St. Louis market where we established The PrivateBank – St. Louis, a federally chartered savings bank, in June 2000. On December 30, 2002, we purchased a controlling interest in a Chicago-based investment adviser, Lodestar Investment Counsel, LLC. In April 2004 the Company announced plans to open a new office in downtown Milwaukee, Wisconsin to be known as The PrivateBank; this office will be open for business in March 2005.

We completed our initial public offering in June of 1999. Since year-end 1999 to December 31, 2004, we have grown our asset base at a compound annual rate of 38% to $2.5 billion. During the

Table of Contents

same period, loans have grown at a compound annual rate of 33% to $1.7 billion, deposits at a compound annual rate of 33% to $1.9 billion and core deposits at a compound annual rate of 28% to $1.4 billion. Wealth Management assets under management grew at a compound annual rate of 21% to $1.7 billion. Diluted earnings per share (EPS) have grown at a compound annual rate of 42% to $1.30 (split-adjusted) since year-end 1999.

The PrivateBank Approach

Our clients may connect to Trust Plus Online Access, Private NetBanking, and Business NetBanking directly through the Internet. Clients can also connect to PrivateLine Access directly through the telephone. Through Trust Plus Online Access, wealth management clients may access account balance and history information in a read-only format through the Internet. Business NetBanking allows clients to access deposit and loan information, initiate stop payments, initiate bill payments, establish repetitive wire transfers and authorize transactions that clear through the Automated Clearing House (ACH). Currently, clients may:

2

Table of Contents

As technology changes, we intend to modify and enhance our electronic banking products. We believe that in the future, a growing number of our clients will desire both personal and electronic services. We intend to work to improve and expand dual-delivery systems providing the quality of service to which our clients are accustomed.

3

Table of Contents

Strategy for Growth

We seek to enhance long-term stockholder value through internal growth, expanded product lines and selective geographic expansion. We expect to continue to evaluate possible acquisition candidates and new office locations and we intend to pursue opportunities that we perceive to be attractive to the long-term value of our franchise. Our growth strategy, which relies on our continued development, retention, and expansion of our experienced management group, entails five key components:

4

Table of Contents

The PrivateBank – Chicago and The PrivateBank – St. Louis

We offer banking services to our clients at a personal level. We believe this is not the same as personal banking service. We define private banking as offering banking products and services to our clients when they want it, how they want it and where they want it. We tailor our products and services to fit our clients instead of making our clients fit our products and services. We plan to offer similar services to the clients of our Milwaukee Bank, when it opens. Our services fall into four general categories:

5

Table of Contents

Lending Activities

We provide a full range of commercial, real estate and personal lending products and services to our clients. Our loans are concentrated in six major areas: (1) commercial real estate; (2) commercial; (3) construction; (4) home equity; (5) personal; and (6) residential real estate. We have adopted loan policies that contain general lending guidelines and are subject to review and revision by our board of directors. We extend credit consistent with these comprehensive loan policies.

The goal of our lending program is to meet the credit needs of our diverse client base while using sound credit principles to protect our asset quality. Our business and credit strategy is relationship-

6

Table of Contents

driven and we strive to provide a reliable source of credit, a variety of lending alternatives, and sound financial advice to our clients. When extending credit, our decisions are based upon our client’s ability to repay the loan from non-speculative sources. The quality and integrity of the borrower is crucial in the loan approval process. We monitor the performance of our loan portfolio through regular contact with our clients, continuous portfolio review, careful monitoring of delinquency reports and reliance on our loan review function.

We have retained an independent, outside resource to perform our loan review function, which ensures that our loan review process remains independent of the loan production and administration processes. Our loan reviewer examines individual credits to critique individual problems and the entire portfolio to comment on any systemic weaknesses. The reviewer reports directly to the audit committee of our board of directors on a quarterly basis. The board reviews the report on the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis. The methodology for computing the allowance for loan losses includes loan loss provisions based on the loan reviewer’s findings, delinquency trends, historical loan loss experience and current economic trends.

Our legal lending limits, based on our banks’ statements of financial condition, are calculated not to exceed 25% of capital plus unencumbered reserves. At December 31, 2004, The PrivateBank – Chicago’s legal lending limit was $40.2 million and The PrivateBank – St. Louis’s legal lending limit was $2.75 million. A bank’s legal lending limit is the maximum amount of credit that the bank may commit to any one individual or business entity after aggregating all related credit.

In addition to our chief credit officer, certain individuals have been designated acting chief credit officers, credit officers, officers with lending authority, and residential real estate lending officers. No single individual has sole authority to approve a loan. As the size of aggregate credit exposure increases, additional officers are required to approve the loan requests. This serves several purposes: (a) larger credits get more scrutiny, (b) most senior credit officers become involved in the decision- making process for the vast majority of dollars loaned without approving a proportionate number of loan requests, and (c) we become more consistent in administration of credit as credit officers gain a better understanding of our overall portfolio and credit culture.

Our chief credit officer, or his designee, is involved in all credit decisions when the aggregate credit exposure is in excess of $250,000. The loan committee of The PrivateBank – Chicago reviews all credit decisions over $2.5 million and the loan/investment committee of The PrivateBank – St. Louis reviews all credit decisions over $250,000. Prior approval is required for credit exposure in excess of $7.5 million and for all credits related to our board members or our managing directors. Loans are approved at the bank level by a management loan committee or by obtaining the approval of credit officers as required by our loan policies. We believe that this process allows us to be more responsive to our clients’ needs by being able to approve credit without waiting for scheduled committee meetings. We also use management committee meetings to discuss complex credits or when we feel that a particular credit may be informative to everyone in the loan approval process. As a thrift, The PrivateBank – St. Louis is required to maintain a specific percentage of its loan portfolio in qualified residential real estate loans. To address this regulatory requirement, from time to time, The PrivateBank – St. Louis has and intends to continue to purchase qualifying loans from The PrivateBank – Chicago in exchange for loans generated in the St. Louis market that do not meet the criteria for qualified-thrift-loans. We attempt to price sales of loans between the banks so as to allow each bank to achieve equal risk rewards from a yield perspective.

Prior to purchasing any loans, the chief credit officer of The PrivateBank – Chicago will apply the same credit policies and procedures as are followed for any other loan approval. Likewise, The PrivateBank – St. Louis will apply the same lending discipline to loans purchased from The PrivateBank – Chicago as it does for externally generated loans.

7

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth our loan portfolio by category as of December 31, 2004 and 2003:

Commercial Real Estate Loans. Our commercial real estate portfolio is comprised of loans secured by various types of collateral; 15% of the portfolio is secured by 1-4 family housing units located in the Chicago metropolitan area; 18% is secured by multi-family real estate; 15% is secured by construction and land developments and 26% is secured by other types of commercial real estate collateral including commercial and service businesses owned by clients. The remainder of the portfolio is comprised of loans secured by industrial developments, warehouses, or retail centers.

Risks inherent in real estate lending are related to the market value of the property taken as collateral, the underlying cash flows and documentation. It is important to accurately assess property values through careful review of appraisals. Some examples of risky commercial real estate lending include loans secured by properties with widely fluctuating market values or income properties occupied by renters with unstable sources of income, and not perfecting liens on property taken as collateral. We mitigate these risks by understanding real estate values in areas in which we lend, investigating the sources of cash flow servicing the debt on the property and adhering to our loan documentation policy.

Commercial real estate loan products include permanent and mini-permanent financing, transaction loans to purchase properties prior to permanent financing, and lines of credit secured by commercial real estate portfolios. We typically structure mini-permanent and permanent financing as adjustable rate mortgages, or ARMs. An ARM structure allows our clients to lock in an interest rate for a fixed period of time in order to avoid interest rate risk during the lock-in period. The vast majority of our ARM loans have initial fixed pricing for between one to five years. Each ARM loan has language defining repricing beyond the initial fixed pricing term. Transaction loans to purchase commercial property typically have maturities of one year or less. Lines of credit secured by commercial real estate portfolios are typically granted for one year with annual extensions after a successful underwriting review. Interest rates for our lines of credit typically are based on a floating rate formula.

In our credit analysis process for commercial real estate loans, we typically review the appraised value of the property, the ability of the property as collateral to service debt, the significance of any outside income of the borrower or income from other properties owned by the borrowers, and the strength of guarantors, if any. Our real estate appraisal policy addresses selection of appraisers, appraisal standards, environmental issues and specific requirements for different types of properties, and has been approved by our loan committee.

While we have included prepayment penalty clauses in our commercial real estate fixed loan portfolio, due to the relatively short-term nature of the portfolio, collection of prepayment penalties has not had a significant impact on our overall reported yield.

Commercial Loans. Our commercial loan portfolio is comprised of lines of credit for working capital, term loans for equipment and expansion, and letters of credit. These loans are made to

8

Table of Contents

businesses affiliated with our clients, or to clients directly for business purposes. The vast majority of our commercial loans are personally guaranteed. Unsecured loans are made to businesses when a guarantor, as a secondary source of repayment, has a significant ability to repay and a significant interest in the business entity. Commercial loans can contain risk factors unique to the business of each borrower. In order to mitigate these risks, we seek to gain an understanding of the business of each borrower, place appropriate value on collateral taken and structure the loan properly to make sure that collateral values are maintained while loans are committed. Appropriate documentation of commercial loans is also important to protect our interests.

Our lines of credit typically are limited to a percentage of the value of the assets securing the line, and priced by a floating rate formula. In general, lines of credit are reviewed annually and are supported by accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. Depending on the risk profile of the borrower, we may require periodic aging of receivables, and inventory and equipment listings to verify the quality of the borrowing base prior to advancing funds. Our term loans are also typically secured by the assets of our clients’ businesses. Term loans typically have maturities between one to five years, with either floating or fixed rates of interest. Commercial borrowers are required to provide updated personal and corporate financial statements at least annually. Letters of credit are an important product to many of our clients. We issue standby or performance letters of credit, and can service the international needs of our clients through correspondent banks. We use the same underwriting standards for letters of credit as we do for funded loans.

Our credit approval process for commercial loans is comprehensive. We typically review the current and future cash needs of the borrower, the business strategy, management’s ability, the strength of the collateral, and the strength of the guarantors. While our loan policies have guidelines for advances on different types of collateral, we establish eligible asset values on a case-by-case basis for each borrower. Our officer on the account must be able to validate his or her position during the approval process.

Our commercial lending underwriting process includes an evaluation of the borrower’s historical and projected balance sheet, income statement, liquidity and cash flow as well as the collateral to determine the level of creditworthiness of the borrower. Generally, these loans are secured by a first priority security interest in all the assets of the borrower and also include the support of a personal guarantee of one or more of the principals of the borrower. Our policy permits an advance rate of 80% for accounts receivable; 25-50% for inventory; and 65% for machinery/equipment, which are confirmed periodically with the use of monthly borrowing base certificates to monitor the eligible collateral. In each case, based upon the overall credit, liquidity and the collateral, a risk rating is established for the loan.

At December 31, 2004 our commercial loan portfolio totaled $285.3 million. The Company tracks this portfolio by the portion that is secured by collateral and the portion that is unsecured. At December 31, 2004, $278.5 million of the total commercial loan portfolio was secured and $6.8 million was unsecured.

Residential Real Estate Loans. Our residential real estate portfolio consists primarily of first and second mortgage loans for 1-4 unit residential properties. We do not generally originate long-term fixed rate loans for our own portfolio due to interest rate risk considerations. However, we do originate these loans for sale into the secondary market. On June 15, 2004, we formed a new subsidiary, The PrivateBank Mortgage Company, as a result of our acquisition of Corley Financial Corporation. The majority of the loans originated by The PrivateBank Mortgage Company are sold into the secondary market; otherwise the loans are purchased by one of the subsidiary banks and held in the respective loan portfolios. The PrivateBank – St. Louis also originates residential real estate loans for sale in the secondary market. For our own portfolio, we originate ARM loans typically structured with 30-year maturities and initial rates fixed for between one to five years with annual repricing beyond the initial term.

9

Table of Contents

Our credit review process mirrors the standards set by traditional secondary market sources. We review appraised value and debt service ratios, and we gather data during the underwriting process in accordance with the various laws and regulations governing residential real estate lending. Our real estate appraisal policy sets specific standards for valuing residential property.

Following the establishment of The PrivateBank Mortgage Company, we have begun to enter into forward mandatory commitments to sell mortgage loans. We have not sought to establish contractual arrangements to sell a pipeline of loan originations. Rather, we tend to sell mortgage loans on a loan-by-loan best efforts basis to certain mortgage investors. Our policy is to obtain prior approval from secondary market sources regarding the planned loan sale before we commit to originate any fixed-rate residential mortgage loans.

We believe that we have a competitive advantage in our ability to offer financing for our clients who have non-traditional income sources or require large mortgage loans. We have developed secondary market sources for mortgages, including several able to provide financing in amounts in excess of $1.0 million per loan. By offering our own ARM loans, we can offer credit to individuals who are self-employed or have significant income from partnerships or investments. The secondary market often will not take the time or will be unable to make exceptions for otherwise qualified borrowers. We also have experience in making loans to qualified borrowers secured by co-ops. Co-op loans are not conventional mortgage loans and are by their nature difficult to sell. However, due to the nature of the Company’s business, the banks tend to make jumbo loans secured by higher priced properties, and we believe the resale market for co-op properties in this category is generally similar to higher-end condominium and fee-simple residential properties. We believe that we are one of a limited number of financial institutions in the Chicago area making these loans.

Personal Loans. Our personal loan portfolio consists of loans to secure funds for personal investment, loans to acquire personal assets such as automobiles and boats, and personal lines of credit. Frequently, our borrowers prefer not to liquidate assets to secure funds for investment or personal acquisitions. They will use these assets as collateral for personal loans, or if their financial statements and personal reputations are sufficient, we will grant unsecured credit. Knowing our borrowers is a key factor in originating personal loans. When personal loans are unsecured, we believe that the character and integrity of the borrower becomes as important as the borrower’s financial statement.

Our clients request a combination of lines of credit, floating-rate term loans and fixed-rate term loan products. Many of our clients use their personal investment portfolios as collateral for personal loans. Personal lines of credit are used for a variety of purposes such as the comfort of having funds available for future uses or establishing a line of credit as overdraft protection. We respond quickly to the needs of our clients within the limits set by our loan policy.

Personal loans are subject to the same approval process as all other types of loans. Each loan is underwritten to ensure that it has adequate collateral coverage and/or cash flow. Annual financial statements are required of each personal borrower.

Home Equity Loans. Our home equity loan portfolio consists of traditional home equity lines of credit prevalent in the market today. In general, we advance up to 80% on the value of a home, less the amount of prior liens. However, we may vary from that percentage depending on the value of the home, type of dwelling, and the personal financial situation of the borrower. Home equity loans are funded either through draws requested by our clients or by special home equity credit drafts that function as bank checks. Home equity loans are approved using the same standards as residential mortgage loans. Our borrower’s personal cash flow is compared to debt service requirements to determine our borrower’s ability to repay. Home equity loans are competitively priced and are based on a floating rate formula.

10

Table of Contents

Construction Loans. Our construction loan portfolio consists of single residential properties, multi-family properties, and commercial projects. As construction lending has greater inherent risk, we closely monitor the status of each construction loan throughout its term. Typically, we require full investment of the borrower’s equity in construction projects prior to injecting our funds. Generally, we do not allow borrowers to recoup their equity from the sale proceeds of finished units (if applicable) until we have recovered our funds on the overall project. We use a title company to disburse periodic draws from the construction line to ensure that there will be no title problems at the end of the project.

Our construction loans are often the highest yielding loans in our portfolio due to the inherent risks and the monitoring requirements. These loans typically have floating rates, commitment fees and release fees. During our credit approval process, factors unique to construction loans are considered. These include assessment of the market for the finished product, reasonableness of the construction budget, ability of the borrower to fund cost overruns, and the borrower’s ability to liquidate and repay the loan at the point when the loan-to-value ratio is the greatest. We seek to manage these risks by, among other things, ensuring that the collateral value of the property throughout the construction process does not fall below acceptable levels, ensuring that funds disbursed are within parameters set by the original construction budget, and properly documenting each construction draw. Due to our more stringent standards for underwriting and monitoring construction loans and the credit profile of our borrowers, we are comfortable with the risk associated with this portfolio and are committed to construction lending as an integral part of our lending program.

Investment Activities

The Bank maintains an actively managed investment portfolio intended to maximize risk-adjusted total return, provide liquidity, enhance net interest margin, and improve the quality of the Bank’s asset/liability position. We invest primarily in mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) backed by U.S. agencies such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, bank-qualified tax-exempt obligations of state and local political subdivisions, and the common stock of the FHLB (Chicago). We also may invest in corporate debt or other securities as permitted by our investment policy. More than 90% of the bond portfolio is rated either “AAA” by S&P or “Aaa” by Moody’s, as it is our stated intent to take very little credit risk in the investment portfolio.

When evaluating the effectiveness of our investment strategy, we employ a methodology that focuses on the total return of the portfolio over reasonably long periods of time such as one, three and five years. The investment portfolio is managed by the Bank’s Investment Officer, and he reviews the portfolio management activities and financial results with the investment committee of the board of directors.

As currently structured, the investment portfolio attempts to manage the bank’s net asset/liability position by countering the interest rate risk characteristics of the loan portfolio. Most of the loans on the balance sheet are either floating-rate or have very short maturities. If interest rates change, these assets will reprice very quickly. Overall, the investment portfolio has a longer duration than the loan portfolio, which has the effect of making the bank’s net interest rate risk position more neutral.

At December 31, 2004 our investment in FHLB (Chicago) was $207.0 million. On January 11, 2005 we redeemed $20.0 million of our FHLB (Chicago) stock to take advantage of increasing yields available in other earning assets, which reduced our investment to $187.0 million. Currently, we plan to limit our investment in FHLB stock to no more than $187.0 million. We closely monitor the activities of FHLB (Chicago), and continue to believe the FHLB (Chicago) stock is a prudent investment for our company. Management has conducted extensive research and due diligence on the FHLB (Chicago) and such due diligence is ongoing. Management updates the investment committee routinely on the results of its due diligence, which includes a periodic review of the financial condition of the FHLB (Chicago).

11

Table of Contents

The dividend paid by the FHLB (Chicago) on its stock is not guaranteed and may increase or decrease in the future. For example, during 2004, certain other Federal Home Loan Banks for various reasons substantially reduced the amount of their dividend or, in one case, suspended the payment of dividends. The Bank can elect at any time to redeem FHLB stock at par, excluding the minimum of $12.5 million that is required to support FHLB advances. The FHLB (Chicago) has communicated to the Bank that generally the stock will be redeemed immediately upon request within a relatively short period of time; however, the FHLB (Chicago) has the right to require six months advance notice of such planned sale before the liquidation at par actually occurs. For more information concerning this investment please see the “Liquidity” section of “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

In addition, we have made investments in the communities surrounding our banking offices as a part of our community reinvestment program. In 2003, The PrivateBank – Chicago committed to a multi-year program of investment in the Chicago Community Reinvestment Fund of $3 million and to the Chicago Equity Fund of $2 million. These groups focus on rebuilding and revitalizing Chicago neighborhoods through tax credit incentives. We have also purchased participations in pools of loans from Neighborhood Housing Services (NHS). NHS is a not-for-profit organization that helps provide affordable housing to low- and moderate-income residents in the Chicago area. We also purchased $5.3 million in mortgage backed securities, which are comprised of CRA eligible loans from within the Bank’s assessment area. In helping to create a market for these loans, we believe we have taken steps to encourage origination of CRA eligible loans by many financial organizations within our surrounding communities.

Additional Chicago community development activities in 2004 included over $132 million in community development lending. These loans are designed to create and develop affordable housing in low to moderate income areas found within our communities or to support stabilization and revitalization in economically stressed neighborhoods. Additionally, CRA qualified grants or contributions by The PrivateBank – Chicago grew by 20% in 2004 compared to 2003. Finally, The PrivateBank – Chicago managers and staff donated more than 1,300 hours to CRA qualified organizations (a 68% increase over 2003) and more than 1,550 hours to other not-for-profit community organizations (a 264% increase over 2003). Chicago personnel continued strong support of Operation Hope’s Financial Literacy Program in the Chicago Public Schools and the Tax Assistance Program (TAP) to help low income citizens complete their tax returns. Volunteer work in the TAP helped return more than $115,000 in 2004 tax refunds to this group.

In 2004, The PrivateBank – St. Louis continued to expand its CRA program through a combination of a focus on small business lending and an ongoing effort to work with community housing organizations in the St. Louis area. Small business lending emphasized financing new housing construction and the rehabilitation of existing housing in low and moderate income census tracts. For example, The PrivateBank – St.Louis partnered with a minority developer to purchase land and construct eight town homes in the Gaslight Square area of St. Louis, a revitalization zone now experiencing a renaissance. In addition to being a 50% owner of the project, The PrivateBank –St. Louis is also the construction lender. The project broke ground in January 2005.

Executive management of The PrivateBank – St.Louis has taken a leadership role in several community housing and small business assistance organizations. Our managing directors currently serve on the Board of Directors for several of these assistance organizations. The PrivateBank –St. Louis was also the first local bank to commit to the Ways to Work Program, which provides loans to low and moderate-income borrowers to finance the purchase of automobiles.

Asset-Liability Management Committee

We have an asset/liability committee (“ALCO”) comprised of selected senior executives who are charged with the dual goals of optimization and stabilization of net interest income over time while

12

Table of Contents

adhering to prudent banking practices. ALCO oversees asset growth, liquidity and capital, and directs our overall acquisition and allocation of funds. At its meetings, ALCO reviews issues including:

ALCO is also responsible for monitoring compliance with our investment policy. On a monthly basis, ALCO presents asset liability management reporting to the investment committee of the board of directors who reviews the portfolio of reports we prepare for our board of directors and all the decisions made by ALCO affecting net interest income.

Wealth Management

Within our Wealth Management Business Unit, we provide investment management, fiduciary and general wealth management services. These services are provided primarily to high net worth individuals and families. Our investment management services include active and passive strategies using individual marketable securities as well as funds and other commingled vehicles. Our fiduciary services include personal trust and estate administration, guardianship administration, retirement plan and account administration, and custodial services. Our wealth management services include investment planning, assisting with the selection and oversight of external investment managers, and financial planning services. We also provide certain brokerage services.

Our wealth management and investment management personnel work with our clients to help them define their investment objectives, goals and constraints, and develop appropriate investment strategies. We help clients decide whether to utilize internally implemented passive investment strategies or external investment managers. We have chosen to make external investment managers available to our clients, thereby providing them opportunities for better manager diversification than if they were restricted to using only internal investment management services. We also allow our clients to designate specific investment managers, thereby enabling them to maintain existing relationships they may have within the financial community. We help clients electing to use external investment managers with the selection of those managers, and we then monitor the managers’ ongoing performance. This process sometimes is conducted pursuant to PrivateBank Counselor, an asset allocation program that combines outside professional portfolio management with an investment plan that is tailored to the individual client’s personal financial goals.

Our wealth management and fiduciary personnel work with our clients and their attorneys to help them develop and implement their estate plans. Fiduciary personnel administering trusts and estates work closely with beneficiaries to ensure that their needs are met and to advise them on financial matters. For example, as fiduciaries of a trust or estate, our responsibilities may include:

13

Table of Contents

In addition to administrating accounts related to trusts and estates, we also administer:

We also provide our clients with custodial services for the safekeeping of their assets.

Consistent with our private banking approach, we emphasize a high level of personal service throughout our Wealth Management Department, including prompt responses to client inquiries, the daily collection and investment of interest and dividend income, daily or weekly valuations, tracking of tax information, customized reporting, and prompt security settlement. We also administer individual retirement accounts, 401(k) plans, profit sharing plans and employee stock option plans.

Wealth management services are currently offered at The PrivateBank – St. Louis through the Wealth Management Department of The PrivateBank – Chicago.

In December 2002, The PrivateBank – Chicago acquired a controlling interest in Lodestar Investment Counsel, LLC, a Chicago-based investment adviser. Lodestar applies an active investment management philosophy to equity, fixed income and balanced accounts for clients of The PrivateBank as well as its own investment management clients who do not receive other wealth management services from The PrivateBank. Lodestar manages accounts primarily for high net-worth individuals and families, retirement plans and charitable organizations with investable assets in excess of $1.0 million, and shares a similar focus on highly personalized client service. Lodestar operates independent of the Wealth Management Department of The PrivateBank – Chicago.

We seek to continue to grow our entire wealth management business through referrals from managing directors and other personnel within The PrivateBank, referrals from other professional advisors to wealthy individuals and families, referrals from our existing client base, and direct business development efforts of personnel in the Wealth Management Department. On a consolidated basis, the Wealth Management Department had responsibility for approximately $1.7 billion in assets at December 31, 2004. This total included $1.1 billion under management within the Wealth Management Department, $648.8 million under management by Lodestar, and $455.4 million in custody-only accounts.

The following table shows the breakdown of these assets by account classification and related gross revenue for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004:

14

Table of Contents

We have chosen to outsource some of the investment management aspect of our wealth management business so that we may offer our clients diversity and flexibility of investment representation and to allow us to impartially evaluate investment performance. This structure also allows our clients to independently designate one or more specific advisors enabling them to maintain existing relationships they may have within the financial community. If the client does not have such a relationship in place, we help them select an investment management firm to best service their needs. Based on the client’s investment strategy and objectives and the account attributes, one or more investment managers will be selected from a group of approved advisors. We continue to direct our energies towards building the breadth and depth of our wealth management area and intend to pursue further acquisitions of asset management firms similar to the 2002 acquisition by The PrivateBank –Chicago of an 80% interest in Lodestar.

We recognized trust fee revenue of approximately $2.2 million during 2004 from wealth management services provided for those clients where a third-party investment manager is utilized, including Lodestar. In 2004, we paid $1.0 million to third-party investment managers. The fees we pay to third-party investment managers are included in the professional fees category of non-interest expense. Of our third-party investment managers, only Lodestar individually managed more than 5% of our total Wealth Management assets under management as of December 31, 2004.

We have established controls over our trust activities to safeguard the assets of our clients against operational and administrative risk. We have a system of internal controls that is designed to keep our operating risk at appropriate levels. Our system of internal controls includes policies and procedures relating to authorization, approval, documentation, and monitoring of transactions. Administrative risk involves potential losses associated with our performance of fiduciary responsibilities to clients. To manage this risk, we have established corporate policies and procedures to ensure that obligations to clients are discharged faithfully and in compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements. These policies and procedures provide guidance and establish standards related to the creation, sale, and management of investment products, trade execution, and counterparty selection.

Competition

We do business in the highly competitive financial services industry. Our geographic market is primarily the greater Chicago, St. Louis, and Milwaukee metropolitan areas. The financial services industry is comprised of commercial banks, thrifts, credit unions, investment banks, brokerage houses, money managers, and other providers of financial products and services. These firms compete with us for one or more of the following: loans, deposits, wealth management services, or investment products. Some of these firms have business units that promote themselves as “private banks.” The typical private banking competitor is a unit of a large commercial bank catering to the upper echelon of that bank’s customer base.

We view ourselves as the only private bank in the Chicago, St. Louis, and Milwaukee markets focused solely on offering an extended range of traditional banking and wealth management products to affluent professionals, entrepreneurial individuals and their business interests. While our products may be similar to those of our competitors, we attempt to distinguish ourselves by emphasizing consistent delivery of the superior levels of personal service and responsiveness desired by our clients.

For commercial and commercial real estate lending, we compete with a number of major Chicago-area financial institutions and suburban banks and, in the St. Louis market, with St. Louis-based financial institutions and banking offices. For wealth management services, we compete with the largest Chicago-area banks and some investment managers. For private banking services, we compete with the private banking departments of major Chicago and St. Louis-area financial institutions, some suburban banks, and brokerage houses. For residential mortgage lending, we

15

Table of Contents

compete with banks, savings and loans, mortgage brokers and numerous other financial services firms offering mortgage loans in our market areas. Several of our competitors are national or international in scope.

Some of our competitors are not subject to the same degree of regulation as that imposed on bank holding companies, federally insured state chartered banks, national banks and federal savings banks and may be able to price loans and deposits more aggressively. In addition, the larger banking organizations, investment banks and brokerage houses have significantly greater resources than we do. As a result, some of our competitors have advantages over us in name recognition and market penetration.

Employees

As of December 31, 2004, we had approximately 261 full-time equivalent employees, including 7 full-time Lodestar employees. The salaries of all of our employees are paid by either The PrivateBank – Chicago, The PrivateBank – St. Louis, or The PrivateBank Mortgage Company, with the exception of certain employees who perform services for the Holding Company, whose salaries are partially paid by PrivateBancorp.

We provide our employees with a comprehensive program of benefits, some of which are on a contributory basis, including comprehensive medical and dental plans, life insurance plans, and a 401(k) plan. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Available Information

Our Internet address is www.pvtb.com. We make available at this Internet address, free of charge, our 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 we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

Banking is a highly regulated industry. The following is a summary of several applicable statutes and regulations. However, these summaries are not complete, and you should refer to the statutes and regulations for more information. Also, these statutes and regulations are likely to change in the future, and we cannot predict what effect these changes, if made, will have on our operations. Finally, please remember that the supervision, regulation and examination of banks and bank holding companies by bank regulatory agencies are intended primarily for the protection of customers rather than stockholders of banks and bank holding companies.

Bank Holding Company Regulation

PrivateBancorp is registered as a “bank holding company” with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”) pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the regulations issued thereunder are collectively referred to as the “BHC Act”), and we are subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Federal Reserve.

16

Table of Contents

Minimum Capital Requirements. The Federal Reserve has adopted risk-based capital requirements for assessing bank holding company capital adequacy. These standards define capital and establish minimum capital ratios in relation to assets, both on an aggregate basis and as adjusted for credit risks and off-balance sheet exposures. Under the Federal Reserve’s risk-based guidelines applicable to PrivateBancorp, capital is classified into two categories.

For bank holding companies, Tier 1, or “core,” capital consists of:

less:

Tier 2, or “supplementary,” capital consists of:

Under the Federal Reserve’s capital guidelines, bank holding companies are required to maintain a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-weighted assets of 8%, of which at least 4% must be in the form of Tier 1 capital. The Federal Reserve has established a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3% for strong bank holding companies (those rated a composite “1” under the Federal Reserve’s rating system). For all other bank holding companies, the minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is 4%. In addition, the Federal Reserve continues to consider the Tier 1 leverage ratio (after deducting all intangibles) in evaluating proposals for expansion or new activities.

In its capital adequacy guidelines, the Federal Reserve emphasizes that the foregoing standards are supervisory minimums and that banking organizations generally are expected to operate well above the minimum ratios. These guidelines also state that banking organizations experiencing growth, whether internally or by making acquisitions, are expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum levels.

17

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2004, we had regulatory capital in excess of the Federal Reserve’s well-capitalized requirements. Our total risk-based capital ratio at December 31, 2004 was 11.29% and our leverage ratio was 7.71%.

Acquisitions. The BHC Act requires prior Federal Reserve approval for, among other things, the acquisition by a bank holding company of direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares or substantially all the assets of any bank, or for a merger or consolidation of a bank holding company with another bank holding company. With limited exceptions, the BHC Act prohibits a bank holding company from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of voting shares of any company which is not a bank or bank holding company and from engaging directly or indirectly in any activity other than banking or managing or controlling banks or performing services for its authorized subsidiaries. A bank holding company may, however, engage in or acquire an interest in a company that engages in activities which the Federal Reserve has determined, by regulation or order, to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto, such as owning and operating a savings association, performing functions or activities that may be performed by a trust company, owning a mortgage company, or acting as an investment or financial advisor. The Federal Reserve, as a matter of policy, may require a bank holding company to be well-capitalized at the time of filing an acquisition application and upon consummation of the acquisition. Under the BHC Act and Federal Reserve regulations, we are prohibited from engaging in tie-in arrangements in connection with an extension of credit, lease, sale of property, or furnishing of services. That means that, except with respect to traditional banking products, we may not condition a client’s purchase of one of our services on the purchase of another service. The passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, however, allows bank holding companies to become financial holding companies. Financial holding companies do not face the same prohibitions to entering into certain business transactions that bank holding companies currently face. See the discussion of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act below.

Interstate Banking and Branching Legislation. Under the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (the “Interstate Banking Act”), bank holding companies are allowed to acquire banks across state lines subject to various requirements of the Federal Reserve. In addition, under the Interstate Banking Act, banks are permitted, under some circumstances, to merge with one another across state lines and thereby create a main bank with branches in separate states. After establishing branches in a state through an interstate merger transaction, a bank may establish and acquire additional branches at any location in the state where any bank involved in the interstate merger could have established or acquired branches under applicable federal and state law.

Ownership Limitations. Under the Illinois Banking Act, any person who acquires more than 10% of our stock may be required to obtain the prior approval of the commissioner of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (the “Commissioner”). Under the Change in Bank Control Act, a person may be required to obtain the prior regulatory approval of the Federal Reserve before acquiring the power to directly or indirectly control the management, operations or policies of PrivateBancorp or before acquiring control of 10% or more of any class of our outstanding voting stock.

Dividends. The Federal Reserve has issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies. In the policy statement, the Federal Reserve expressed its view that a bank holding company experiencing earnings weaknesses should not pay cash dividends exceeding its net income or which could only be funded in ways that weakened the bank holding company’s financial health, such as by borrowing. Additionally, the Federal Reserve possesses enforcement powers over bank holding companies and their non-bank subsidiaries to prevent or remedy actions that represent unsafe or unsound practices or violations of applicable statutes and regulations. Among these powers is the ability to prohibit or limit the payment of dividends by banks and bank holding companies.

Under a longstanding policy of the Federal Reserve, we are expected to act as a source of financial strength to our banking subsidiaries and to commit resources to support them. The Federal

18

Table of Contents

Reserve takes the position that in implementing this policy, it may require us to provide financial support when we otherwise would not consider ourselves able to do so.

In addition to the restrictions on dividends imposed by the Federal Reserve, Delaware law also places limitations on our ability to pay dividends. For example, we may not pay dividends to our stockholders if, after giving effect to the dividend, we would not be able to pay our debts as they become due. Because a major source of our revenue could be dividends that we expect to receive from our banking subsidiaries, our ability to pay dividends will depend on the amount of dividends paid by our banking subsidiaries. We cannot be sure that our banking subsidiaries will pay such dividends to us.

Bank Regulation

The PrivateBank – Chicago is subject to supervision and examination by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation and, as a non-member, FDIC-insured bank, to supervision and examination by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). As an affiliate of The PrivateBank – Chicago, we are also subject to examination by the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. The PrivateBank – Chicago is a member of the FHLB (Chicago). The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”) requires prior FDIC approval for any merger and/or consolidation by or with another depository institution, as well as for the establishment or relocation of any bank or branch office. The FDIA also gives the FDIC the power to issue cease and desist orders. A cease and desist order could either prohibit a bank from engaging in certain unsafe and unsound bank activities or could require a bank to take certain affirmative action. The FDIC also supervises compliance with the federal laws and regulations which, in addition to several other mandates, place restrictions on loans by FDIC-insured banks to an executive officer, director or principal shareholder of the bank, the bank holding company which owns the bank, and any subsidiary of such bank holding company. The FDIC also examines The PrivateBank – Chicago for its compliance with statutes that restrict and, in some cases, prohibit certain transactions between a bank and its affiliates. Among other provisions, these laws place restrictions upon:

Also, The PrivateBank – Chicago is subject to restrictions with respect to engaging in the issuance, underwriting, public sale or distribution of certain types of securities and to restrictions upon:

Furthermore, all banks are affected by the credit policies of the Federal Reserve, which regulates the national supply of bank credit. Such regulation influences overall growth of bank loans, investments, and deposits and may also affect interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. The Federal Reserve’s monetary policies have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and we expect this trend to continue in the future.

19

Table of Contents

Dividends. The Illinois Banking Act provides that an Illinois bank may not pay dividends of an amount greater than its current net profits after deducting losses and bad debts while such bank continues to operate a banking business. For the purpose of determining the amount of dividends that an Illinois bank may pay, bad debts are defined as debts upon which interest is past due and unpaid for a period of six months or more unless such debts are well-secured and in the process of collection.

In addition to the foregoing, the ability of PrivateBancorp and The PrivateBank – Chicago to pay dividends may be affected by the various minimum capital requirements and the capital and non-capital standards established under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvements Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), as described below.

Federal Reserve System. The PrivateBank – Chicago is subject to Federal Reserve regulations requiring depository institutions to maintain non-interest-earning reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). The Federal Reserve regulations generally require 3% reserves on the first $47.6 million of transaction accounts plus 10% on the remainder. The first $7.0 million of otherwise reservable balances (subject to adjustments by the Federal Reserve) are exempted from the reserve requirements. The PrivateBank – Chicago is in compliance with that requirement.

Standards for Safety and Soundness. The FDIA, as amended by FDICIA and the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, requires the FDIC, together with the other federal bank regulatory agencies, to prescribe standards of safety and soundness, by regulations or guidelines, relating generally to operations and management, asset growth, asset quality, earnings, stock valuation, and compensation. The FDIC and the other federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted a set of guidelines prescribing safety and soundness standards pursuant to FDICIA. The guidelines establish general standards relating to internal controls and information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, fees and benefits. In general, the guidelines require, among other things, appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage the risks and exposures specified in the guidelines. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal stockholder. In addition, the FDIC adopted regulations that authorize, but do not require, the FDIC to order an institution that has been given notice by the FDIC that it is not satisfying the safety and soundness guidelines to submit a compliance plan. If, after being so notified, an institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan or fails in any material respect to implement an accepted compliance plan, the FDIC must issue an order directing action to correct the deficiency and may issue an order directing other actions of the types to which an undercapitalized institution is subject under the “prompt corrective action” provisions of FDICIA. If an institution fails to comply with such an order, the FDIC may seek to enforce its order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil money penalties. The FDIC and the other federal bank regulatory agencies have also proposed guidelines for asset quality and earning standards.

Prompt Corrective Action. FDICIA requires the federal banking regulators, including the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, to take prompt corrective action with respect to depository institutions that fall below minimum capital standards and prohibits any depository institution from making any capital distribution that would cause it to be undercapitalized. Institutions that are not adequately capitalized may be subject to a variety of supervisory actions, including restrictions on growth, investment activities, capital distributions and affiliate transactions, and will be required to submit a capital restoration plan which, to be accepted by the regulators, must be guaranteed in part by any company having control of the institution (for example, the company or a stockholder controlling the company). In other respects, FDICIA provides for enhanced supervisory authority, including greater authority for the

20

Table of Contents

appointment of a conservator or receiver for critically under-capitalized institutions. The capital-based prompt corrective action provisions of FDICIA and its implementing regulations apply to FDIC-insured depository institutions. However, federal banking agencies have indicated that, in regulating bank holding companies, the agencies may take appropriate action at the holding company level based on their assessment of the effectiveness of supervisory actions imposed upon subsidiary insured depository institutions pursuant to the prompt corrective action provisions of FDICIA. Also, under FDICIA, insured depository institutions with assets greater than $500 million at the beginning of a fiscal year, must submit an annual report for that year, including financial statements and a management report, to each of the FDIC, any appropriate federal banking agency, and any appropriate bank supervisor. The PrivateBank – Chicago had assets of more than $500 million at the beginning of fiscal year 2004, and must therefore provide an annual report as required by FDICIA.

As of December 31, 2004, PrivateBancorp, Inc. and each of its subsidiaries had capital in excess of the requirements for a “well-capitalized” institution under the prompt corrective action provisions of FDICIA.

Insurance of Deposit Accounts. Under FDICIA, as FDIC-insured institutions, The PrivateBank –Chicago and The PrivateBank – St. Louis are required to pay deposit insurance premiums based on the risk they pose to the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”) and the Savings Association Insurance Fund, respectively. The FDIC has authority to raise or lower assessment rates on insured deposits in order to achieve statutorily required reserve ratios in the insurance funds and to impose special additional assessments. Each depository institution is assigned to one of three capital groups: “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized” or “undercapitalized.” Within each capital group, institutions are assigned to one of three supervisory subgroups: “A” (institutions with few minor weaknesses), “B” (institutions which demonstrate weaknesses which, if not corrected, could result in significant deterioration of the institution and increased risk of loss to BIF), and “C” (institutions that pose a substantial probability of loss to BIF unless effective corrective action is taken). Accordingly, there are nine combinations of capital groups and supervisory subgroups to which varying assessment rates would be applicable. An institution’s assessment rate depends on the capital category and supervisory category to which it is assigned. During 2004, The PrivateBank – Chicago paid deposit insurance premiums in the aggregate amount of $214,069. During 2004, The PrivateBank – St. Louis paid deposit insurance premiums in the aggregate amount of $77,116.

Deposit insurance may be terminated by the FDIC upon a finding that an institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC. Such terminations can only occur, if contested, following judicial review through the federal courts. We do not know of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of our deposit insurance.

Community Reinvestment. Under the CRA, a financial institution has a continuing and affirmative obligation to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions, or limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community. However, institutions are rated on their performance in meeting the needs of their communities. Performance is tested in three areas: (a) lending, to evaluate the institution’s record of making loans in its assessment areas; (b) investment, to evaluate the institution’s record of investing in community development projects, affordable housing, and programs benefiting low or moderate income individuals and business; and (c) service, to evaluate the institution’s delivery of services through its branches, ATMs and other offices. The CRA requires each federal banking agency, in connection with its examination of a financial institution, to assess and assign one of four ratings to the institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community and to take such record into account in its evaluation of certain applications by the institution, including

21

Table of Contents

applications for charters, branches and other deposit facilities, relocations, mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of assets or assumptions of liabilities, and savings and loan holding company acquisitions. The CRA also requires that all institutions make public disclosure of their CRA ratings.

The PrivateBank – Chicago was assigned a “satisfactory” rating in September 2003 a result of its last CRA examination. The PrivateBank – St. Louis was assigned a “satisfactory” rating in June 2001 as a result of its last CRA examination.

Bank Secrecy Act. Under the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”), a financial institution is required to have systems in place to detect certain transactions, based on the size and nature of the transaction. Financial institutions are generally required to report cash transactions involving more than $10,000 to the United States Treasury. In addition, financial institutions are required to file suspicious activity reports for transactions that involve more than $5,000 and which the financial institution knows, suspects or has reason to suspect involves illegal funds, is designed to evade the requirements of the BSA or has no lawful purpose. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, enacted in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, requires bank regulators to consider a financial institution’s compliance with the BSA when reviewing applications. Final rules implementing customer identification procedures to be followed by financial institutions have been released and must be complied with by all financial institutions subject to the BSA.

Compliance with Consumer Protection Laws. The PrivateBank – Chicago is subject to many federal consumer protection statutes and regulations including the CRA, the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. Among other things, these acts:

From time to time we have been made aware of certain deficiencies in our consumer compliance program. Management believes that any deficiencies have already been or are in the process of being corrected. In the event that consumer compliance deficiencies were to continue over time, enforcement or administrative actions by the appropriate federal banking regulators could result. Such action could in turn affect the implementation of our growth strategies.

Enforcement Actions. Federal and state statutes and regulations provide financial institution regulatory agencies with great flexibility to undertake an enforcement action against an institution that fails to comply with regulatory requirements, particularly capital requirements. Possible enforcement actions range from the imposition of a capital plan and capital directive to civil money penalties, cease and desist orders, receivership, conservatorship or the termination of deposit insurance.

22

Table of Contents

Impact of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) amended or repealed certain provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act and other legislation that restricted the ability of bank holding companies, securities firms and insurance companies to affiliate with one another. The GLB Act has established a comprehensive framework to permit affiliations among commercial banks, insurance companies and securities firms. Also, a bank holding company that meets certain criteria may certify that it satisfies certain criteria and become a financial holding company, and thereby engage in a broader range of activity than permitted for a bank holding company.

The GLB Act also imposes requirements on financial institutions with respect to customer privacy by generally prohibiting disclosure of non-public personal information to non-affiliated third parties unless the customer has been given the opportunity to object and has not objected to such disclosure. Financial institutions are further required to disclose their privacy policies to customers annually. The FDIC and the other federal regulators have promulgated implementing regulations outlining the duties or responsibilities of financial institutions with regard to customer privacy. These regulations do not supersede state regulations regarding privacy, except to the extent that state regulations conflict with these regulations. The privacy regulations of the Illinois Banking Act continue to apply to The PrivateBank, except to the extent they conflict with the GLB Act and its implementing regulations.

To the extent the GLB Act permits banks, securities firms and insurance companies to affiliate, the financial services industry may experience further consolidation. This consolidation could result in a growing number of larger financial institutions that offer a wider variety of financial services than we currently offer and that can aggressively compete in the markets we currently serve.

The PrivateBank – St. Louis. The PrivateBank – St. Louis is a federally chartered savings bank. Accordingly, it is governed by and subject to extensive regulation, examination and supervision by the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”), and is required to comply with the rules and regulations of the OTS under the Home Owners’ Loan Act (“HOLA”). As a federally chartered savings bank, The PrivateBank – St. Louis has greater flexibility in pursuing interstate branching than an Illinois state bank. Due to its ability to establish branches in other states, it is anticipated that The PrivateBank – Wisconsin will be established as a branch office of The PrivateBank – St. Louis. Thus, The PrivateBank – Wisconsin will be subject to the same regulation and supervision as The PrivateBank – St. Louis. The activities of The The PrivateBank – St. Louis are also governed by the FDIA. The FDIC has back-up regulatory authority over The PrivateBank – St. Louis. Although The PrivateBank – St. Louis has a different primary federal regulator from The PrivateBank – Chicago, most, if not all, of the federal statutes and regulations applicable to The PrivateBank – Chicago are also applicable to The PrivateBank – St. Louis. The PrivateBank – St. Louis is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) of Des Moines and may be subject to examination by the FHLB of Des Moines.

Under such regulation and supervision, The PrivateBank – St. Louis is required to file reports with the OTS and the FDIC concerning its activities and financial condition in addition to obtaining regulatory approvals prior to establishing branches or entering into certain transactions such as mergers with, or acquisitions of, other financial institutions. In addition, The PrivateBank – St. Louis is required in situations to either apply to or provide notice to the OTS before declaring a dividend. The OTS also conducts periodic examinations to test The PrivateBank – St. Louis’s compliance with various regulatory and safety and soundness requirements. This regulation and supervision establishes a comprehensive framework of supervision and is intended primarily for the protection of the insurance fund and depositors. The regulatory structure also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including discretion with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes. Any change in such regulatory requirements and policies, whether by the OTS, the FDIC or the Congress, could have a material adverse impact on us, The PrivateBank – St. Louis and our operations.

23

Table of Contents

The PrivateBank – St. Louis is also required to be a qualified thrift lender (“QTL”). The HOLA requires savings institutions to meet a QTL test, under which the institution is required to either qualify as a “domestic building and loan association” under the Internal Revenue Code or maintain at least 65% of its “portfolio assets” (total assets less (1) specified liquid assets up to 20% of total assets; (2) intangibles, including goodwill; and (3) the value of property used to conduct business) in certain “qualified thrift investments,” (primarily residential mortgages and related investments, including certain mortgage-backed securities) in at least nine months out of each twelve-month period. A savings institution that fails the QTL test is subject to certain operating restrictions, such as not being able to retain or operate out-of-state branches, and may be required to convert to a bank charter. In meeting the QTL test, The PrivateBank – St. Louis may be assisted by The PrivateBank – Chicago through the purchase by The PrivateBank – St. Louis of certain mortgage loans from The PrivateBank – Chicago.

SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES

LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995

This report contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and we are including this statement for purposes of these safe harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies and expectations, can generally be identified by use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “project,” or similar expressions. Our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain and actual results may differ materially from those predicted in forward-looking statements. Factors which might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, fluctuations in market rates of interest and loan and deposit pricing; greater than anticipated deterioration in asset quality due to a prolonged economic downturn in the greater Chicago, St. Louis and Milwaukee metropolitan areas; legislative or regulatory changes; adverse developments or changes in the composition of our loan or investment portfolios; changes in the current redemption practices of the FHLB (Chicago) relating to its stock; unexpected difficulties in integrating or operating the mortgage banking business; unanticipated construction or other delays relating to our new office to be located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; significant increases in competition; difficulties in identifying attractive acquisition opportunities or strategic partners to complement our private banking approach and the products and services we offer; the possible dilutive effect of potential acquisitions or expansion, and our ability to raise new capital as needed and the timing, amount and type of such capital raises. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements.

24

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following persons serve as executive officers of PrivateBancorp:

Ralph B. Mandell (64), a director since 1989, is a co-founder of PrivateBancorp and The PrivateBank – Chicago. A director of The PrivateBank – Chicago and a director of The PrivateBank – St. Louis, he has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of PrivateBancorp and The PrivateBank – Chicago since 1994 and assumed the additional title of President of both entities in March 1999. From inception until 1994, Mr. Mandell had the title of Co-Chairman. Prior to starting The PrivateBank – Chicago and PrivateBancorp, Mr. Mandell was the Chief Operating Officer of First United Financial Services, Inc., from 1985 to 1989, and served as its President from 1988 to 1989. First United, a company that was traded on the NASDAQ National Market, was sold to First Chicago Corporation in 1987. He also served as President of Oak Park Trust & Savings Bank from 1985 until 1988. Prior thereto, Mr. Mandell had served as Executive Vice President of Oak Park Trust & Savings Bank since 1979.

Gary S. Collins (46) has been a Managing Director of The PrivateBank – Chicago since 1991, and in 2001 was elected Co-Vice Chairman of The PrivateBank – Chicago. Prior to joining The PrivateBank, he served as Senior Vice President at First Colonial Bancshares of Avenue Bank of Oak Park and before that, Senior Vice President at First Bank of Oak Park, formerly known as Oak Park Trust and Savings Bank. Mr. Collins is a graduate of DePaul University with a B.S. in Finance. In the past, he has served as Director of the Illinois Mortgage Bankers Association and Chairman of the Loan Committee of the Oak Park Development Corporation.

Richard C. Jensen (59) has been a Director since January 2000. Mr. Jensen has been a Managing Director of The PrivateBank – Chicago since November 1999. He became Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and a Managing Director of The PrivateBank – St. Louis upon receipt of its banking charter in June 2000. From May 1998 until joining us, Mr. Jensen served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Missouri Holding, Inc. From March to May 1998, he served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Royal Banks of Missouri. For the previous 18 years, Mr. Jensen served in various executive positions with National Bank and its predecessor, Boatmen’s Bank, in St. Louis.

Hugh H. McLean (46) has been Co-Vice Chairman of The PrivateBank – Chicago since 2001 and a Managing Director of The PrivateBank – Chicago since 1996. He serves as head of the The PrivateBank – Chicago suburban offices. Prior to joining the bank, he served as a regional manager with Firstar Bank Illinois and its predecessor from 1990 to 1996, and as head of a commercial banking division at American National Bank and Trust Company in Chicago from 1987 to 1990, where he was employed from 1980 to 1990.

James A. Ruckstaetter (58) has been a Managing Director since 1999 and the Chief Credit Officer of The PrivateBank – Chicago since January 2000. His diverse experience includes credit and loan administration, commercial lending and residential real estate lending. Mr. Ruckstaetter’s career spans 30 years including various executive positions with leading Chicago area financial institutions. From January 1998 until June 1999, he was President and CEO of Pan American Bank, a community bank on the west side of Chicago. From September 1994 to December 1997, Mr. Ruckstaetter served as a Senior Vice President Relationship Manager at Bank of America.

Dennis L. Klaeser (47) was named Chief Financial Officer of PrivateBancorp and Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director of The PrivateBank – Chicago on April 1, 2003. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Klaeser was a senior research analyst with Robert W. Baird & Co. since mid-2002. From 2000 until mid-2002, he was managing director and head of the US Financial Institutions Group at Andersen Corporate Finance, a division of Arthur Andersen LLP. From 1994 until 2000, Mr. Klaeser served in various capacities at First Union Securities (previously EVEREN

25

Table of Contents

Securities), including managing director of EVEREN’s financial institutions group from 1997 until 1999, and following First Union’s acquisition of EVEREN, as managing director of the bank group from 1999 until 2000.

William A. Goldstein (64) is the President of Lodestar Investment Counsel, LLC, and Managing Director of the Company, and has over 40 years of experience in the investment industry. Mr. Goldstein was appointed to the Board of Directors of The PrivateBank – Chicago in January 2003 and elected a Director of PrivateBancorp in April 2003. Prior to founding Lodestar in 1989, he was a Principal in the founding of Burton J. Vincent, Chesley & Co. where he served as Executive Vice President and Director. In 1983 the firm was acquired by Prescott, Ball & Turben (a subsidiary of Kemper Corporation). There Mr. Goldstein was Chairman and Director of Prescott Asset Management, and President of Selected Special Shares, a publicly traded mutual fund.

John B. Williams (53) has been a director since April 2004, and serves as Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of The PrivateBank – Wisconsin. Mr. Williams was president of U.S. Bank Wisconsin from 2000 through 2003. For the previous 30 years, Mr. Williams held various positions with U.S. Bank and its predecessors Firstar and First Wisconsin. Mr. Williams also serves on the board of directors of United Way of Greater Milwaukee, Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater Milwaukee and YMCA of Metropolitan Milwaukee, Medical College of Wisconsin, Southeastern Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District, United Performing Arts Foundation and Wisconsin Tax Payers Alliance.

Wallace L. Head (54), a director of The PrivateBank – Chicago since December 2004, was named Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and a Managing Director of a soon-to-be created subsidiary of PrivateBancorp, which will include its wealth management and trust business. Mr. Head served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of Family Office Exchange LLC, from 2002 until joining The PrivateBank – Chicago. Previously, he was Senior Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the Strong Private Client Business unit at Strong Capital Management, Inc. beginning in 1999. From 1992 until 1999, he was a Managing Director at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., establishing a new Chicago office providing discretionary investment management and related investment planning services to high net worth individuals and families, foundations and endowments. Mr. Head founded Head/Ellerman, Inc. in 1980, a consulting firm that provided comprehensive personal financial planning services to corporate executives and other individuals. After Head/Ellerman, Inc. was acquired by Arthur Andersen & Co. in 1983, Mr. Head became a tax partner and national director of individual tax and financial advisory services at Anderson and served in that capacity until 1992. He began his career in 1976 with the former Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co. (now Bank of America) in the bank’s personal financial planning division.

James F. Brady (57), was named Managing Director of The PrivateBank Mortgage Company in June of 2004 following the acquisition of Corley Financial Corporation. Mr. Brady served as President and was an owner of Corley Financial Corporation from 1987 until acquisition date. From 1983 to 1986, he served as Principal of The Newtrend Group, a company developing venture capital and specializing in banking software. Before joining The Newtrend Group, he held various management positions with General Electric Company in the United States, Europe and Canada beginning in 1970. Mr. Brady received his M.B.A. from the University of Chicago and his B.S.degree from Fordham University.

We currently have ten physical banking locations, in addition to the space occupied by each of Lodestar and The PrivateBank Mortgage Company. We have a variety of renewal options in each of our properties and certain rights to secure additional space. The main offices of PrivateBancorp and The PrivateBank – Chicago are located in the central business and financial district of Chicago. We lease 43,058 square feet comprising the entire second, fifth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth floors and

26

Table of Contents

part of the eleventh floor of a building located at Ten North Dearborn Street. This lease expires on or about August 31, 2006. Late in 2004, we announced that we signed a long term 77,381 sq. ft. lease at 70 West Madison Street, Chicago. We will relocate our headquarters and Loop banking office to that location during 2006.

We established a north suburban office in the affluent North Shore area located at 517 Green Bay Road, Wilmette, Illinois, in October 1994. We lease approximately 5,300 square feet on the first floor of a commercial building. This lease expires on June 30, 2006 with three one year options to renew.

In January 1997, we opened a third office of The PrivateBank – Chicago in rapidly growing, west suburban DuPage County at 1603 West Sixteenth Street, Oak Brook, Illinois. We lease approximately 4,200 square feet on the first floor of a two-story office building. This lease expires on December 14, 2006.

In January 2000, we opened our Fox Valley office at 24 South Second Street, St. Charles, Illinois. We purchased this building from Towne Square Realty in June of 2002. The office currently pays rent to us.

In May 2001, we opened a second office in the Fox Valley area at the Herrington Train Station at 308 Crescent Place in Geneva, Illinois. We lease approximately 1,700 square feet within the commuter station building. This lease expires March 1, 2006.

The PrivateBank – St. Louis office is located at 1401 South Brentwood Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri. We lease approximately 16,508 square feet in total on the first and second floors of a commercial building. This lease expires on February 4, 2009. In 2004, the Bank signed an amendment to this lease for an additional 2,576 square feet of space included in this total.

Our offices in Lake Forest and Winnetka, Illinois, were both acquired as part of the purchase of Johnson Bank Illinois. Our Lake Forest office is on the first floor of a two-story office building located at 920 South Waukegan Road, Lake Forest, Illinois. The lease is for approximately 9,400 square feet and expires on June 30, 2006. Our Winnetka office leases approximately 5,100 square feet and is located at 1000 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, Illinois. Effective June 30, 2003, management exercised the first of three possible options to extend the lease to June 30, 2008 on the same terms, covenants and conditions as the base lease.

Lodestar leases approximately 4,759 square feet in a building located at 208 South LaSalle Street in downtown Chicago. The lease expires on December 31, 2007.

The PrivateBank Mortgage Company leases approximately 4,183 square feet in a building located at 640 North LaSalle in downtown Chicago. The lease expires on June 29, 2007.

In July of 2004, The PrivateBank – Chicago leased approximately 4,800 square feet of space at 919 N. Michigan Avenue located in the historic Palmolive Building in Chicago’s Gold Coast neighborhood. The initial term of the lease is fourteen years.

In November of 2004, The PrivateBank – Wisconsin leased approximately 12,920 square feet of permanent space at 743 Water Street in downtown Milwaukee. The Bank currently occupies 2,500 square feet of temporary space until the buildout is complete later this year. The initial term of the lease is ten years.

The PrivateBank – Chicago is one of the named defendants in the matter of G. George Fox v. North Federal Savings Bank and The PrivateBank (Case No. 03 L 006102) filed in May 2003 and now

27

Table of Contents

pending in the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. The suit asserts various claims resulting from the alleged wrongful dishonor by the bank of a $400,000 cashier’s check drawn on the bank and made payable to the plaintiff in May 2000 as earnest money for a proposed real estate transaction involving a client of the bank. The plaintiff claims damages in excess of $150,000 plus interest, costs and attorneys’ fees. This matter continues in litigation, and the Company cannot reasonably estimate potential liability, if, any, that the Company may incur in connection with this matter. However, management does not expect the ultimate resolution of this matter to materially impact the Company’s financial condition or results of operation.

From time to time, we may be party to various other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of our business. Since we act as a depository of funds, we may be named from time to time as a defendant in various lawsuits (such as garnishment proceedings) involving claims to the ownership of funds in particular accounts. Neither PrivateBancorp nor any of our subsidiaries is currently a defendant in any such proceedings that we believe will have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

None.

28

Table of Contents

PART II

Our common stock is quoted on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “PVTB.” As of March 7, 2005, we had approximately 295 holders of record of our common stock. The table below sets forth the intra-day high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported by NASDAQ for the periods indicated (on a split-adjusted basis).

Holders of our common stock are entitled to receive dividends that the board of directors may declare from time to time. We may only pay dividends out of funds that are legally available for that purpose. Because consolidated net income consists largely of the net income of our subsidiaries, dividend payments to stockholders are dependent upon our receipt of dividends from our subsidiaries. See “Supervision and Regulation” above for a discussion of regulatory restrictions on dividend declarations. Our dividend declaration is discretionary and will depend on our earnings and financial condition, regulatory limitations, tax considerations and other factors.

We have paid quarterly dividends on our common stock since the third quarter of 1995. While the board of directors expects to continue to declare dividends quarterly, there can be no assurance that we will continue to pay dividends at these levels or at all. The following table shows the history of per share cash dividends declared and paid on our common stock for the last two years.

29

Table of Contents

The following table provides information about purchases by the Company during the quarter ended December 31, 2004 of equity securities that are registered by the Company pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act.

30

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes certain selected consolidated financial and other data of PrivateBancorp at or for the periods indicated. The balance sheet and statement of income data are derived from our December 31, 2004 consolidated financial statements that have been audited by Ernst & Young LLP for the years ended 2004, 2003, and 2002. This information should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included pursuant to Item 8 of this report. See “Index to Consolidated Financial Statements” on page F-1.

31

Table of Contents

(Footnotes continued on next page)

32

Table of Contents

33

Table of Contents

Overview

PrivateBancorp was organized as a Delaware corporation in 1989 to serve as the holding company for a Chicago-based de novo (start-up) bank. Our flagship downtown Chicago location opened in 1991. We expanded to Wilmette in north suburban Cook County in 1994 and the Oak Brook facility in west suburban DuPage County was established in 1997. We established the St. Charles office in January 2000, in connection with our purchase of Towne Square Financial Corporation (a company which was in the process of forming a de novo, or start-up bank) on August 3, 1999. On February 11, 2000, we consummated our acquisition of Johnson Bank Illinois adding two additional locations in Lake Forest and Winnetka, Illinois. During the second quarter 2000, we received regulatory approval to create a new banking subsidiary and on June 23, 2000, PrivateBancorp capitalized The PrivateBank – St. Louis. In May 2001, The PrivateBank – Chicago opened a second branch in the Fox Valley area in Geneva, Illinois. In December 2002, The PrivateBank – Chicago acquired an 80% controlling interest in Lodestar Investment Counsel LLC, a Chicago-based investment adviser with $648.8 million of assets under management at December 31, 2004. On June 15, 2004, the Company formed a new subsidiary, The PrivateBank Mortgage Company, as a result of the acquisition of Corley Financial Corporation, a Chicago based mortgage banking firm. On July 27, 2005, the Company opened a new Chicago banking office in the historic Palmolive Building at the corner of North Michigan Avenue and Walton Place in Chicago’s affluent Gold Coast neighborhood. The Company plans to open a new banking office in Wisconsin to operate as The PrivateBank at 743 N. Water Street in downtown Milwaukee in the third quarter of 2005. The PrivateBank – Wisconsin will commence operations in a temporary location in March 2005.

We completed our initial public offering in June of 1999. Since year-end 1999 to December 31, 2004, we have grown our asset base at a compound annual rate of 38% to $2.5 billion. During the same period, loans have grown at a compound annual rate of 33% to $1.7 billion, deposits at a compound annual rate of 33% to $1.9 billion and core deposits at a compound annual rate of 28% to $1.4 billion. Wealth Management assets under management grew at a compound annual rate of 21% to $1.7 billion. Diluted earnings per share (EPS) have grown at a compound annual rate of 42% to $1.30 (split-adjusted) since year-end 1999.

For financial information regarding our four separate lines of business, The PrivateBank – Chicago, The PrivateBank – St. Louis, Wealth Management Services and Holding Company Activities, see “Operating Segments Results” beginning on page 47 and “Note 2—Operating Segments” to our consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2004, included on page F-13.

The profitability of our operations depends on our net interest income, provision for loan losses, non-interest income, and non-interest expense. Net interest income is dependent on the amounts and yields of interest-earning assets as compared to the amounts and rates on interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest income is sensitive to changes in market rates of interest as well as to the execution of our asset/liability management strategy. The provision for loan losses is affected by changes in the loan portfolio, management’s assessment of the collectability of the loan portfolio, loss experience, as well as economic and market factors.

Non-interest income consists primarily of net security gains and Wealth Management fee income, and to a lesser extent, fees for ancillary banking services. Non-interest income from fees and deposit service charges are below peer group levels. This is largely the result of the profile of our typical client. Our clients tend to have larger deposit account balances than customers of traditional banks. Because average balances tend to be high, we do not earn high service charge income typical of many retail banks.

34

Table of Contents

Non-interest expenses are heavily influenced by the growth of operations. Our growth directly affects the majority of our expense categories.

Critical Accounting Policies

Generally accepted accounting principles are complex and require management to apply significant judgment to various accounting, reporting and disclosure matters. Management must use assumptions and estimates to apply these principles where actual measurements are not possible or practical. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements included herein. Reference should also be made to our significant accounting policies set out in the notes to consolidated financial statements, beginning on page F-8. Below is a discussion of our critical accounting policies. These policies are critical because they are highly dependent upon subjective or complex judgments, assumptions and estimates. Changes in such estimates may have a significant impact on the financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Management has reviewed the application of these policies with the Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors.

For PrivateBancorp, Inc., accounting policies that are viewed as critical to us are those relating to estimates and judgments regarding the determination of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses and the estimation of the valuation of goodwill and the useful lives applied to intangible assets.

Allowance for Loan Losses

We maintain an allowance for loan losses at a level management believes is sufficient to absorb credit losses inherent in our loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses represents our estimate of probable losses in the portfolio at each balance sheet date and is based on a review of available and relevant information. The allowance contains provisions for probable losses that have been identified relating to specific borrowing relationships as well as probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio and credit undertakings that are not specifically identified. Our allowance for loan losses is reassessed monthly to determine the appropriate level of the allowance. The amount of the allowance for loan losses is determined based on a variety of factors, including assessment of the credit risk of the loans in the portfolio, volume of loans in the portfolio, delinquent loans, impaired loans, evaluation of current economic conditions in the market area, actual charge-offs and recoveries during the period and historical loss experience. The unallocated portion of the reserve involves the exercise of judgment by management and reflects various considerations, including management’s view that the reserve should have a margin that recognizes the imprecision inherent in the process of estimating credit losses.

Management adjusts the allowance for loan losses by recording a provision for loan losses in an amount sufficient to maintain the allowance at the level determined appropriate. Loans are charged-off when deemed to be uncollectible by management. We believe that the allowance for loan losses is adequate to provide for estimated probable credit losses inherent in our loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.15% as of December 31, 2004 compared to 1.23% as of December 31, 2003.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

During 2001, The PrivateBank – Chicago recorded approximately $12.2 million in goodwill in connection with the Johnson Bank Illinois acquisition. During 2002, the Company recorded $8.4 million of goodwill and $2.5 million in customer intangibles in connection with the acquisition of Lodestar. During 2004, the Company recorded $1.3 million of goodwill in connection with the acquisition of Corley Financial Corporation. Intangible assets are amortized over an estimated useful life of 15 years. Effective January 1, 2002, the Company adopted FAS No. 142, which requires that goodwill and

35

Table of Contents

intangible assets that have indefinite lives no longer be amortized but be reviewed for impairment annually, or more frequently if certain indicators arise. Prior to the adoption of FAS No. 142, goodwill was being amortized using the straight-line method over a period of 15 years. The Company did not incur any goodwill impairment in 2002 in adopting FAS 142. An annual impairment test of goodwill is performed each year by the Company. Impairment losses on recorded goodwill will be recorded as operating expenses.

Goodwill at December 31, 2004 was $20.5 million and $19.2 million at December 31, 2003. Amortization expense related to the Lodestar customer intangible assets is expected to be recorded in the amount of $168,000 each year for 15 years. The customer intangible balance as of December 31, 2004 was $2.2 million.

36

Table of Contents

CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Net Income

Our net income for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $27.0 million, or $1.30 per diluted share, compared to $19.1 million, or $1.06 per diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2003. Our 2004 diluted earnings per share increased 23% as compared to the prior year earnings per share. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $19.1 million, or $1.06 per diluted share, compared to $11.0 million, or $0.71 per diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2002. Our 2003 earnings per share increased 49% as compared to the prior year earnings per share.

The increase in net income for 2004 is primarily attributable to growth in the balance sheet, particularly increases in loans, which were funded by growth in deposits and stabilization of our net interest margin. Increased fee income, mainly from increases in wealth management revenue, also contributed to the improvement in net income during 2004.

The increase in earnings from operations for 2003 as compared to 2002 is primarily attributable to growth in the balance sheet, particularly in loans and investment securities, funded by growth in deposits and improvement in our net interest margin. Increased fee income, mainly from increases in wealth management revenue, and income from the sale of residential real estate loans in the secondary market, also contributed to the improvement in income.

Net Interest Income

Net interest income is the difference between interest income and fees on earning assets and interest expense and amortization of fees on deposits and borrowings. Interest income includes amortization of loan origination fees recorded from loans. Interest expense includes amortization of prepaid fees on brokered deposits and issuance costs of trust preferred securities. Net interest margin represents the net interest income on a tax equivalent basis as a percentage of average earning assets during the period. Net interest margin reflects the spread between average yields earned on interest earning assets and the average rates paid on interest bearing deposits and borrowings. The volume of non-interest bearing funds, largely comprised of demand deposits and capital, also affects the net interest margin.

Net interest income was $73.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $57.1 million for 2003, an increase of 29%. Net interest income is affected by both the volume of assets and liabilities held and the corresponding rates earned and paid. The increase in net interest income for 2004 is primarily attributable to growth in earning assets. Average earning assets for 2004 were $2.1 billion compared to $1.6 billion for 2003, an increase of 31%. Our net interest margin (on a tax equivalent basis) was 3.63% for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to 3.62% for the prior year.

During 2004, increased volumes of interest earning assets at higher rates were offset by increased interest rates on liabilities. Our cost of funds was greater during 2004 than 2003, 2.11% compared to 2.03%, respectively, and our earning assets yielded 5.48% in 2004 compared to 5.46% in 2003. Non-interest bearing funds impact net interest margin since they represent non-interest bearing sources of funds that are deployed in interest bearing assets. Non-interest bearing funds positively impacted net interest margin by 0.26% at December 31, 2004 and by 0.19% at December 31, 2003.

During 2004, our net interest margin was impacted by increases in the costs of our average interest bearing liabilities throughout the year. We lengthened the maturity of funding sources, with a resulting increase in our cost of funds. The increase in cost of funds was primarily due to increases in

37

Table of Contents

money market deposit rates, some of which are tied to prime, as well as higher rates paid on short-term borrowings and Federal Home Loan Bank advances. The increase in our cost of funds was partially offset by improvements in our yield on earnings assets, which were positively impacted by the increases in the prime rate of interest. Approximately two-thirds of the loan portfolio is indexed to the prime rate of interest or otherwise adjusts with other short-term interest rates. The rising interest rate environment that we experienced in 2004 increased the impact of our non-interest bearing funds on our overall net interest margin and also offset the decline in net interest spread on a year-over-year basis.

Net interest income was $57.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to $40.6 million for 2002, an increase of 41%. The increase in net interest income for 2003 was primarily attributable to growth in earning assets. Average earning assets for 2002 were $1.6 billion compared to $1.3 billion for 2002, an increase of 23%. Our net interest margin (on a tax equivalent basis) was 3.62% for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to 3.44% for the prior year.

During 2003, our net interest margin was impacted by decreases in the costs of our average interest bearing liabilities throughout the year. We made significant changes to funds borrowed during the second half of the year, prepaying a $30.0 million, 6.21% fixed rate FHLB advance that was scheduled to mature on December 5, 2003. We replaced the advance with two new FHLB advances totaling $30.0 million with substantially longer maturities and lower interest rates than the original advance. Late in the third quarter we repaid $30.0 million outstanding on a 3.50% line of credit. During the fourth quarter of 2003 we added an additional $78.0 million of borrowings through the FHLB at market rates or at lower rates of interest than the debt that was refunded. Margin was further improved by a one-half percentage point increase on the third quarter FHLB dividend to 7.0%; the FHLB paid annualized dividends of 6.5% for the first, second and fourth quarters of 2003.

A changing interest rate environment has an effect on our net interest margin. A large portion of our loan portfolio is based on floating interest rates and may reprice faster than our deposits and floating rate borrowings. For 2005, we expect our net interest margin to decrease slightly if interest rates remain unchanged. We expect to renew our maturing funding sources at higher rates than what we are currently recognizing. Margin also will be compressed because of reduced dividends on our investment in FHLB (Chicago) stock. The Company’s annualized yield on this investment was 6.0% for the fourth quarter 2004, and will be a maximum of 5.5% for the first quarter 2005. In the event the FHLB (Chicago) substantially reduces the dividend payable on its stock, our interest income and, accordingly, our earnings, may be adversely affected. During the fourth quarter of 2004, dividends received on our investment in FHLB (Chicago) stock represented $3.2 million, or 9.5%, of our interest income on a tax equivalent basis, for the quarter. We closely monitor the activities of the FHLB (Chicago), and continue to believe the FHLB (Chicago) stock is a prudent investment for the Company. We expect our net interest margin to remain stable or improve slightly if market interest rates increase relative to 2004 levels. Alternatively, if market interest rates decrease, we expect our net interest margin to experience pressure.

38

Table of Contents

The following table presents a summary of our net interest income and related net interest margin, calculated on a tax equivalent basis (dollars in thousands):