Item 7.01. Regulation FD Disclosure

Forward-Looking Statements

When used in this Current Report on Form 8-K and in other reports filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, in press releases or other public shareholder communications, or in oral statements made with the approval of an authorized executive officer, the words or phrases "believe," "will," "should," "will likely result," "are expected to," "will continue" "is anticipated," "estimate," "project," "plans," or similar expressions are intended to identify "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. These statements may relate to our future financial performance, strategic plans or objectives, revenues or earnings projections, or other financial items. By their nature, these statements are subject to numerous uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the statements.

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results anticipated or projected include, but are not limited to, the following
(1) expected cost savings, synergies and other benefits from our merger and acquisition activities might not be realized within the anticipated time frames or at all, and costs or difficulties relating to integration matters, including but not limited to customer and employee retention, might be greater than expected; (2) the credit risks of lending activities, including changes in the level and direction of loan delinquencies and write-offs and changes in estimates of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, which could necessitate additional provisions for loan losses, resulting both from loans we originate and loans we acquire from other financial institutions; (3) results of examinations by the Office of Comptroller of Currency and other regulatory authorities, including the possibility that any such regulatory authority may, among other things, require us to increase our allowance for loan losses or write-down assets; (4) competitive pressures among depository institutions;
(5) interest rate movements and their impact on customer behavior and net interest margin; (6) the impact of repricing and competitors' pricing initiatives on loan and deposit products; (7) fluctuations in real estate values; (8) the ability to adapt successfully to technological changes to meet customers' needs and developments in the market place; (9) our ability to realize the residual values of our direct finance, leveraged, and operating leases; (10) our ability to access cost-effective funding; (11) changes in financial markets; (12) changes in economic conditions in general and in the Chicago metropolitan area in particular; (13) the costs, effects and outcomes of litigation; (14) new legislation or regulatory changes, including but not limited to changes in federal and/or state tax laws or interpretations thereof by taxing authorities and other governmental initiatives affecting the financial services industry; (15) changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines; (16) our future acquisitions of other depository institutions or lines of business; and (17) future goodwill impairment due to changes in our business, changes in market conditions, or other factors.

MB Financial does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date on which the forward-looking statement is made.

Set forth below are investor presentation materials.

---

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Investor Presentation May 2009 NASDAQ: MBFI

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Forward looking statements When used in this presentation and in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in other press releases or other public shareholder communications, or in oral statements made with approval of an authorized executive officer, the words or phrases "believe," "will," "should," "will likely result," "are expected to," "will continue" "is anticipated," "estimate," "project," "plans," or similar expressions are intended to identify "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. These statements may relate to our future financial performance, strategic plans or objectives, revenues or earnings projections, or other financial items. By their nature, these statements are subject to numerous uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results anticipated or projected include, but are not limited to, the following (1) expected cost savings, synergies and other benefits from our merger and acquisition activities might not be realized within the anticipated time frames or at all, and costs or difficulties relating to integration matters, including but not limited to customer and employee retention, might be greater than expected; (2) the credit risks of lending activities, including changes in the level and direction of loan delinquencies and write-offs and changes in estimates of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, which could necessitate additional provisions for loan losses, resulting both from loans we originate and loans we acquire from other financial institutions; (3) results of examinations by the Office of Comptroller of Currency and other regulatory authorities, including the possibility that any such regulatory authority may, among other things, require us to increase our allowance for loan losses or write-down assets; (4) competitive pressures among depository institutions;
(5) interest rate movements and their impact on customer behavior and net interest margin; (6) the impact of repricing and competitors' pricing initiatives on loan and deposit products; (7) fluctuations in real estate values; (8) the ability to adapt successfully to technological changes to meet customers' needs and developments in the market place;
(9) our ability to realize the residual values of our direct finance, leveraged, and operating leases; (10) our ability to access cost-effective funding; (11) changes in financial markets; (12) changes in economic conditions in general and in the Chicago metropolitan area in particular; (13) the costs, effects and outcomes of litigation; (14) new legislation or regulatory changes, including but not limited to changes in federal and/or state tax laws or interpretations thereof by taxing authorities and other governmental initiatives affecting the financial services industry; (15) changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines; (16) our future acquisitions of other depository institutions or lines of business; and (17) future goodwill impairment due to changes in our business, changes in market conditions, or other factors. MB Financial does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date on which the forward-looking statement is made.

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] MB Financial is a leading commercial bank serving the Chicago market Source: SNL Financial, Company management Note: Business line financial data as of March 31, 2009 Provides much of the funding for commercial lending business Provides 60% of deposits and 15% of loans +14% CAGR Key differentiation attributes include convenience, ATM freedom and extended deposit cut-off times Retail Banking Rapidly growing private bank that targets wealthy individuals ($3bn AUM) Asset Management and Trust focus Vision Investment Services provides brokerage services through branch network Wealth Management Largest, most developed business unit, drives company performance (+16% CAGR) Loans to middle-market companies with revenues ranging from $5 to $100mm Double digit organic growth Treasury management products for companies of all sizes Commercial Banking Lines of business Chicago MSA MB Financial Bank, N.A. Former Heritage Community Bank Offices Kane DeKalb La Salle Kendall Grundy Will Cook DuPage Lake McHenry Chicago Branches strategically located to have access to 79% of middle market companies

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Commercial related loan growth 1 +16% CAGR $826 $1,081 $1,190 $1,416 $1,709 $1,977 $2,656 $2,819 $3,111 $3,125 $718 $717 $775 $848 $944 $1,039 $1,413 $1,877 $2,172 $2,246 $1,544 $1,798 $1,965 $2,264 $2,653 $3,016 $4,696 $5,283 $5,371 $4,069 $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1Q 2009 Millions Commercial and Industrial (including lease loans) Commercial Real Estate (including construction real estate)

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Deposit growth +14% CAGR $391 $431 $456 $552 $623 $641 $924 $876 $960 $1,019 $447 $496 $490 $620 $713 $636 $1,041 $1,263 $1,465 $1,762 $311 $325 $352 $448 $523 $469 $391 $368 $440 $1,079 $1,202 $1,316 $1,396 $1,568 $1,545 $2,572 $2,506 $2,838 $2,857 $272 $615 $570 $478 $865 $819 $474 $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500 $5,000 $5,500 $6,000 $6,500 $7,000 $7,500 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1Q 2009 Millions Brokered CDs Time & Public Funds Savings NOW & MMDA Non-Interest Bearing $5,581 $5,514 $2,780 $2,577 $3,176 $3,699 $3,906 $2,372 $6,897 $6,496

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Strong position in one of the nation's leading MSAs Chicago MSA Rankings Source: SNL DataSource. Data as of June 30, 2008. Includes pending acquisitions through March 16, 2009 1 Reflects total growth in the projection period from 2008 through 2013 Top U.S. MSAs (sorted by deposits) Demographics Cook County DuPage County National Average 1 MSA Deposits ($bn) Projected population growth (%) Median HH income ($) Projected HH income growth (%) New York $785 2.24% $66,612 18.8% Los Angeles 305 4.24 61,237 17.2 Chicago 272 5.01 67,234 17.1 San Francisco 180 2.75 81,038 19.6 Las Vegas 168 22.12 58,391 16.3 Rank Institution Branches Total Deposits in Market ($mm) Total Market Share (%) 1 JPMorgan Chase 478 42,193 15.5 2 Bank of America 201 36,148 13.3 3 Harris (Bank of Montreal) 212 26,256 9.7 4 Northern Trust 19 12,239 4.5 5 PNC Financial Services 140 11,824 4.4 6 Fifth Third 173 8,401 3.1 7 Corus Bankshares 14 8,016 3.0 8 Citigroup 74 7,662 2.8 9 Wintrust Financial 77 7,300 2.7 10 MB Financial 78 6,171 2.2 11 Charter One (Royal Bank of Scotland) 132 5,697 2.1 12 PrivateBancorp 8 5,163 1.9 13 First Midwest 87 5,147 1.9 14 TCF Financial 213 3,331 1.2 15 FBOP 33 3,085 1.1 All Other Institutions 82,976 30.6 MSA Total 3,346 271,610 100.0 $54,749 $67,234 $60,068 $84,952 17.0% 17.1% 19.4% 25.7% Median HH income Projected HH income growth1

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] MB has achieved steady growth despite challenging market conditions Source: Company filings, SNL Financial Note: Chicago peers consist of banks headquartered in Chicago MSA with assets between $2.5bn and $15.0bn and include: Amcore, First Midwest, Old Second, Midwest Banc, PrivateBancorp, Taylor, Wintrust 1 Core Revenue = net interest income + other income less any non-core revenue, such as net gain
(loss) on sale of securities available for sale and net gain (loss) on sale of assets 2003-2008: 11.0% CAGR 2003-2008: 11.0% CAGR Core Revenue ($mm) Net interest income ($mm) 3.80% 3.64% 3.77% 3.51% 3.74% 3.55% 3.51% 3.41% 3.32% 3.23% 3.16% 2.96% $131 $149 $169 $188 $212 $221 $109 $117 $128 $132 $95 $96 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 MBFI Chicago Peers $190 $209 $230 $259 $303 $321 $116 $116 $123 $141 $154 $204 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 MBFI1 Chicago Peers

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] All Other Fees˛ 2.9% Deposit Service Fees 8.1% Lease Financing Revenues 5.5% Merchant Processing Fees 5.4% Trust and Asset Mgmt and Brokerage Fees 4.9% Loan Service Fees 2.3% with a well-diversified revenue base Source: Company filings for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 1 Excludes non-core revenue (i.e. net gain/(loss) on sale of securities available for sale and assets) ˛ Includes increase in cash surrender value of life insurance and other operating revenue Focus on growing fee income Likely expansion areas include deposit fees, trust and asset management and leasing Fee Income1 29.1% of Total Core Revenue1 Net Interest Income 70.9% of Total Core Revenue1

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Loan and deposit composition As of March 31, 2009 Total: $6.3 Billion Yield on loans: 5.25% Source:
Company filings Note: Loan and deposit composition consist of GAAP data. Yield on loans and cost of deposits are based on the first quarter of 2009 Total:
$6.9 Billion Cost of deposits: 2.43% Loan Composition Deposit Composition Construction, 12% Commercial Real Estate, 37% Commercial leases, 12% 1-4 family, 5% Other, 4% Commercial loans, 24% Home equity, 6% Non-interest bearing, 15% Money market and NOW, 26% Savings, 6% Certificates of deposit, 39% Other, 2% Brokered deposits, 12%

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Construction loan geographic distribution by type Source: Company filings As of March 31, 2009 (Dollars in thousands) 12.4% $ 764,876 1.3% $ 77,100 7.4% $ 446,682 3.7% $ 241,094 Total construction loans 5.1% 311,370 0.7% 43,947 3.5% 211,442 0.9% 55,981 Total commercial construction related credits 0.3% 18,665 0.3% 18,665 - - - - Medical 0.3% 13,904 - - 0.1% 3,129 0.2% 10,775 Schools 2.6% 163,397 0.2% 12,426 1.9% 117,489 0.5% 33,482 Office, retail and hotel 0.8% 48,745 0.2% 12,856 0.6% 35,889 0.0% - Industrial 1.1% 64,243 - - 0.9% 52,519 0.2% 11,724 Improved lots and construction 0.0% $ 2,416 - $ - 0.0% $ 2,416 0.0% $ - Unimproved land Commercial construction related credits 7.3% 453,506 0.6% 33,153 3.9% 235,240 2.8% 185,113 Total residential construction related credits 0.8% 50,253 0.1% 7,661 0.6% 34,962 0.1% 7,630 Townhomes 0.4% 21,231 0.1% 4,549 0.2% 10,625 0.1% 6,057 Apartments 3.0% 186,503 0.1% 3,990 0.9% 55,687 2.0% 126,826 Condominiums 3.0% 190,085 0.3% 16,953 2.1% 128,532 0.6% 44,600 Improved lots and single family construction 0.1% $ 5,434 - $ - 0.1% $ 5,434 - $ - Unimproved land Residential construction related credits % of Total Loans Amount % of Total Loans Amount % of Total Loans Amount % of Total Loans Amount Total Other States and Northwest Indiana Chicago Suburban Illinois

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Construction loss reserves by risk category and type Source: Company filings As of March 31, 2009 (Dollars in thousands) 10% $ 764,876 2% $ 428,476 10% $ 191,944 34% $ 144,456 Total construction loans 5% 311,370 1% 251,310 10% 30,333 37% 29,727 Total commercial construction related credits 3% 18,665 3% 18,665 - - -
- Medical 1% 13,904 1% 13,904 - - - - Schools 6% 163,397 1% 137,402 16% 11,992 47% 14,003 Office and Retail 1% 48,745 0% 40,169 6% 8,576 - - Industrial 8% 64,243 1% 40,247 5% 8,272 28% 15,724 Improved lots and construction 4% $ 2,416 0% $ 923 6% $ 1,493 - $ - Unimproved land Commercial construction related credits 13% 453,506 3% 177,166 10% 161,611 35% 114,729 Total residential construction related credits 12% 50,253 1% 16,586 13% 18,742 23% 14,925 Townhomes 2% 21,231 2% 17,636 2% 3,595 - - Apartments 7% 186,503 3% 73,818 9% 96,656 15% 16,029 Condos 21% 190,085 4% 65,292 10% 41,018 41% 83,775 Improved lots and single family construction 2% $ 5,434 1% $ 3,834 6% $ 1,600 - $ - Unimproved land Residential construction related credits % of Loan Balance Reserved Amount % of Loan Balance Reserved Amount % of Loan Balance Reserved Amount % of Loan Balance Reserved Amount Total Pass Loans List Loans Loans (NPLs) and Other Watch Non-Performing Potential Problem and Risk Category

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Robust credit infrastructure Credit infrastructure Source: Company management 1 Reports to Chief Commercial Banking Officer ˛ Reports to Audit Committee 3 Reports to CEO, MB Financial, Inc. 1 2 3 Thomas Prothero Chief Operating Officer, Commercial Banking ( Senior Credit Officer ) Portfolio Support and Advisory 5 FTEs Credit Analysts/LDPs 33 FTEs Loan Review 4 FTEs Appraisal Review 7 FTEs Credit Administration 4 FTEs Construction Loan Administration 6 FTEs Default Administration 19 FTEs Thomas Watts Chief Credit Officer ( Credit Underwriting and Approval ) Small Business Lending, Business Banking 4 FTEs Managed Asset Supervision - CRE 4 FTEs Sr Credit Officer, Managed Asset Supervision C & I and CRE 1 FTE Syndicated Lending Portfolio C & I and CRE 1 FTE Sr Credit Officer, Managed Asset Supervision - CRE 1 FTE Managed Asset Supervision C & I 8 FTEs Credit Officer, Business Banking, Ukrainian Village 1 FTE

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Credit metrics compare favorably to local peers Source: SNL Financial, Company filings Note: Chicago peers consist of median data for banks headquartered in Chicago MSA with assets between $2.5bn and $15.0bn and include: Amcore, First Midwest, Old Second, Midwest Banc, PrivateBancorp, Taylor, Wintrust 1 Nonperforming assets include loans 90+ days past due & accruing NPAs1/Assets (%) Reserves/Loans (%) Construction Loans/Total Loans (%) Reserves/Loans (%) 0.65 1.13 1.45 1.71 2.57 1.10 1.06 1.91 2.36 3.61 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 2009Q1 MBFI Chicago Peers
14 12 12 15 15 15 12 14 14 15 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3
2008Q4 2009Q1 MBFI Chicago Peers 1.35 1.38 2.31 2.84 1.37 1.77 2.05 1.46 1.23 1.20 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 2009Q1 MBFI Chicago Peers 155 78 86 73 63 76 88
99 67 45 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 2009Q1 MBFI
Chicago Peers

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] MB Financial has maintained stronger capital levels than peers TCE/TA (%) TCE/RWA (%) Tier 1 Ratio (%) Total Capital Ratio (%) Source: SNL Financial, Company filings. Information not yet available for regulatory data as of March 31, 2009. Note: Chicago peers consist of median data for banks headquartered in Chicago MSA with assets between $2.5bn and $15.0bn and include:
Amcore, First Midwest, Old Second, Midwest Banc, PrivateBancorp, Taylor, Wintrust 6.2 6.0 6.1 5.6 5.1 5.6 5.5 4.9 4.6 4.6 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 2009Q1 MBFI Chicago Peers 9.8 8.7 9.6 9.6 12.1 8.2 9.0 10.2 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 MBFI Chicago Peers 7.3 7.4 7.1 6.8 5.5 5.5 7.6 6.5 2008Q1 2008Q2 2008Q3 2008Q4 MBFI Chicago Peers 2008Q2 11.59 10.54 2008Q3 11.65 10.72 2008Q4 14.07 13.07 MBFI Chicago Peers

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Strong liquidity position Primary sources of funds are retail and commercial deposits, short-term and long-term borrowings, public funds and funds generated from operations Continued to build significant liquidity in the first quarter of 2009 Strong funding growth - deposits increased by $1.1 bn compared to the first quarter of 2008 The average remaining term of our brokered CDs is 1.4 years Ability to borrow an additional $92 million from the Federal Home Loan Bank At March 31, 2009, the Company had $328 million of unpledged investment securities Ability to borrow an additional $145 million through the Federal Reserve Term Auction Facility at March 31, 2009 Source:
Company filings, Company management Note: Financial data as of March 31, 2009 Liquidity sources 1,707 Amount ($mm) Core funding: Non-interest bearing deposits $1,019 Money market and NOW accounts 1,762 Savings accounts 440 Certificates of deposit 2,690 Customer repurchase agreements 274 Total core funding 6,185 Wholesale funding: Public funds deposits 166 Brokered deposit accounts 819 Other short-term borrowings 201 Long-term borrowings 312 Subordinated debt 50 Junior subordinated notes issued to capital trusts 159 Total wholesale funding 1,707 Total funding $7,892

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Market dislocation may create many in-footprint opportunities in the Chicago MSA Represents $54bn in total deposits, or over 20% of total deposits in MSA At least 22 of these banks have a non-performing assets to total assets ratio greater than 6.5% At least 42 of these banks are experiencing credit stress, with a Texas Ratio greater than 50% Source:
SNL Financial, FactSet, Company filings 1 Non-performing assets divided by (tangible equity plus allowance for loan losses) Over 120 Banks with Assets Greater than $150mm and Less Than $5bn MB Financial's competitive advantage MBFI Chicago peers 2.1% 2.8% Reserves/loans Texas Ratio Frequency1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0.0 0.1 to 10.0 10.1 to 20.0 20.1 to 30.0 30.1 to 40.0 40.1 to 50.0 50.1 to 60.0 60.1 to 70.0 70.1 to 80.0 80.1 to 90.0 90.1 to 100.0 100.1 to 110.0 110.1 to 120.0 120.1 to 130.0 Over 130 Texas Ratio (percent) Number of Banks 2.6% 3.6% NPAs/assets NPAs/Assets Frequency 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 0.0 0.1 to 0.5 0.6 to 1.0 1.1 to 1.5 1.6 to 2.0 2.1 to 2.5 2.6 to 3.0 3.1 to 3.5 3.6 to 4.0 4.1 to 4.5 4.6 to 5.0 5.1 to 5.5 5.6 to 6.0 6.1 to 6.5 Over 6.5 NPAs/Assets (percent) Number of Banks Reserves to NPL's 78.00% 45.00%

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Disciplined acquiror and experienced integrator 2000 2002 2004 FSL Holdings (Chicago, IL) February 8, 2001 $41mm all cash 2006 2008 2009 First Security Fed Financial (Chicago, IL) January 9, 2004 $67mm in stock; $83mm cash Acquired $501mm in assets and $314mm in deposits First Lincolnwood (Lincolnwood, IL) December 27, 2001 $35mm all cash Acquired $227mm in assets and $183mm in deposits South Holland Bancorp (South Holland, IL) November 1, 2002 $93mm all cash Acquired $532mm in assets and $454mm in deposits MidCity Financial (Chicago, IL) April 19, 2001 $275mm all stock Merger of equals Combined assets and deposits of $3,465mm and $2,822mm, respectively First Oak Brook Bancshares (Oak Brook, IL) May 1, 2006 $304mm in stock; $74mm cash Acquired $2,362mm in assets and $1,914mm in deposits Heritage Community Bank (Glenwood, IL) February 27, 2009 FDIC assisted deal Entered into a loss-sharing agreement with the FDIC on all purchased assets Source: SNL Financial, Company filings Cedar Hill Associates, LLC (Chicago,
IL) April 18, 2008 Asset management firm with approximately $960mm in assets under management LaSalle Systems Leasing, Inc. April 12, 2002 $40mm all cash

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] MB Financial acquires all deposits of Heritage Community Bank with minimal credit exposure Source:
SNL Financial, company filings Note: Financial data as of December 31, 2008 1 Credit exposure after loss sharing agreement of $16.4mm - asset discount of $14.5mm Transaction overview Key transaction metrics Chicago MSA On February 27, 2009, Heritage Community Bank, of Glenwood, Illinois, was closed and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was appointed as receiver MB Financial (MBFI) assumed all of the deposits of Heritage Community Bank ($214mm) at a premium of $2.1mm and all assets ($226mm) at a discount of $14.5mm The FDIC will reimburse MBFI for 80% of charge-offs up to $51.8mm and 95% over $51.8mm Loss-sharing starts from dollar one 90-day option to purchase the Bank's owned premises and equipment or assume leases on the leased branches Immediately accretive to MBFI Very minimal loss exposure McHenry Lake DeKalb Kane DuPage Cook Will Kendall Grundy La Salle At announcement ($mm) Assets acquired $226 Loans acquired 173 Effective credit exposure1 2 Asset premium (discount) (14) Deposits acquired 214 Core 210 Core deposit intangibles created 2

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Summary Premier middle market franchise in Chicago MSA Well-diversified core revenue base with stable growth Conservative credit management Well positioned for opportunistic acquisitions in core geographies Strong and experienced management team

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Appendix

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Non-GAAP disclosure reconciliations This schedule reconciles one financial measure in our presentation determined by a method other than in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP"). This measure is net interest margin on a fully tax equivalent basis. Net interest margin on a fully tax equivalent basis is determined by dividing net interest income on a fully tax equivalent basis by average interest-earning assets. The most directly comparable GAAP measure, net interest margin, is determined by dividing net interest income by average interest-earning assets. The tax equivalent adjustment to net interest income recognizes the income tax savings when comparing taxable and tax-exempt assets and assumes a 35% tax rate. We believe that it is a standard practice in the banking industry to present net interest margin on a fully tax equivalent basis, and accordingly believe that providing this measure may be useful for peer comparison purposes. The following table reconciles net interest margin on a fully tax equivalent basis to net interest margin for the periods presented: 3.16% 3.32% 3.51% 3.74% 3.77% 3.80% Net interest margin, fully tax equivalent 0.13% 0.12% 0.11% 0.12% 0.10% 0.08% Plus: Tax equivalent effect 3.03% 3.20% 3.40% 3.62% 3.67% 3.72% Net interest margin 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Non-GAAP disclosure reconciliations (continued) The following table presents a reconciliation of tangible common equity to shareholders' common equity (in thousands): $ 436,863 $ 471,976 $ 485,104 $ 475,871 $ 477,051 Tangible common equity 17,545 16,754 17,348 17,941 15,949 Less: Other intangible, net of tax benefit 387,069 387,069 387,069 387,069 379,047 Less:
Goodwill $ 841,477 $ 875,799 $ 889,521 $ 880,881 $ 872,047 Common stockholders' equity - as reported 2009 2008 2008 2008 2008 March 31, December 31, September 30, June 30, March 31,

[[Image Removed: GRAPHIC]] Investor Presentation May 2009 NASDAQ: MBFI