Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005.

For the transition period from                          to                         

Commission File No. 1-13300

CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (703) 720-1000

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the act:

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

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

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

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

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

Large accelerated filer    x  Accelerated filer    ¨  Non-accelerated filer    ¨

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

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of the close of business on January 31, 2006.

Common Stock, $.01 Par Value: $24,720,291,843*

Common Stock, $.01 Par Value: 301,106,302 shares

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Table of Contents

CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

2005 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

PART I

Overview

Capital One Financial Corporation (the “Corporation”) is a diversified financial services company, incorporated in Delaware on July 21, 1994, whose banking and non-banking subsidiaries market a variety of financial products and services. The Corporation’s principal subsidiaries include Capital One Bank (the “Bank”), a Virginia state chartered bank that currently offers credit card products and deposit products and can also engage in a wide variety of lending and other financial activities; Capital One, F.S.B. (the “Savings Bank”), a federally chartered savings bank that offers consumer and commercial lending and consumer deposit products; Capital One Auto Finance, Inc. (“COAF”), which offers automobile and other motor vehicle financing products; and Hibernia National Bank (the “National Bank”), a nationally chartered bank that offers a broad spectrum of financial products and services to consumers, small business and commercial clients. Capital One Services, Inc. (“COSI”), another subsidiary of the Corporation, provides various operating, administrative and other services to the Corporation and its subsidiaries. The Corporation and its subsidiaries are collectively referred to as the “Company.” Unless indicated otherwise, the terms “Corporation”, “we”, “us”, and “our” refer to the Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.

The Corporation became a financial holding company on May 27, 2005, thereby allowing the Corporation the authority to engage in certain activities that are not permissible for bank holding companies, including the authority to acquire all of the subsidiaries of Hibernia Corporation (“Hibernia”), which occurred in November 2005.

As of December 31, 2005, we had $47.9 billion in deposits and $105.5 billion in managed loans outstanding. We are among the largest issuers of Visa^® (“Visa”) and MasterCard^® (“MasterCard”) credit cards in the United States based on managed credit card loans outstanding and we are the 20^th largest depository institution in the United States.

We offer our products throughout the United States. We also offer our products outside of the United States principally through Capital One Bank (Europe) plc, an indirect subsidiary of the Bank organized and located in the United Kingdom (the “U.K. Bank”), and a branch of the Bank in Canada. Our U.K. Bank has authority, among other things, to accept deposits and provide credit card and installment loans. Important factors underlying the growth of our lending and deposit activities include industry dynamics, including the level of competition, and our business strategies. These business strategies involve analyzing and applying results derived from large quantities of data to reduce credit risk, mass customizing products for consumers and achieving operational efficiency.

We strive to use data analysis to differentiate among customers based on credit risk, usage and other characteristics and to match customer characteristics with appropriate product offerings. To do this, we have built, and continue to enhance, sophisticated models and information systems. We employ a well-trained staff to identify, develop and market credit cards and other consumer products and services to satisfy the demands of a competitive and ever changing marketplace. By actively testing a wide variety of product and service features, marketing channels and other aspects of offerings, we design customized solicitations, products and services that are targeted at specific credit customer segments, thereby enhancing response levels and maximizing returns on investment within given underwriting parameters.

We build on information derived from our initial sources with continued integrated testing and model development to improve the quality, performance and profitability of our solicitation and account management initiatives. We use this approach in all areas of our business, including solicitations, account management, credit line management, pricing strategies, usage stimulation, collections, recoveries, and account and balance

3

Table of Contents

retention. An important element of our diversification and growth strategy has been to apply our methodologies to consumer financial products and services beyond credit cards, such as automobile and small business lending.

Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol COF. Our principal executive office is located at 1680 Capital One Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102 (telephone number (703) 720-1000). The Corporation maintains a website at www.capitalone.com. Documents available on our website include (i) Codes of Business Conduct and Ethics for the Corporation and the National Bank, (ii) the Corporation’s Corporate Governance Principles; (iii) and charters for the Audit and Risk, Compensation, Finance and Trust Oversight, and Governance and Nominating Committees. These documents are also available in print to any shareholder who requests a copy. In addition, we make available free of charge through our website our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after electronic filing or furnishing of such material with the SEC.

Business Description

Capital One is one of the world’s largest financial services franchises. We are a diversified financial services corporation focused primarily on consumer lending and deposits. Our principal business segments are domestic credit card lending, automobile and other motor vehicle financing and global financial services. Beginning with the first quarter of 2006, we will be reporting a banking segment. For further discussion of our segments, see pages 46-50 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Reportable Segment Summary” and pages 84-86 in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3”.

U.S. Card Segment. We offer a wide variety of credit card products throughout the United States. We customize our products to appeal to different consumer preferences and needs by combining different product features, including annual percentage rates, fees and credit limits, rewards programs and other special features. We routinely test new products to develop ones that appeal to different and changing consumer preferences. Our customized products include both products offered to a wide range of consumer credit risk profiles, as well as products aimed at special consumer interests. Our pricing strategies are risk-based; lower risk customers may likely be offered products with more favorable pricing and we expect these products to yield lower delinquencies and credit losses. On products offered to higher risk customers, however, we are likely to experience higher delinquencies and losses, and we price these products accordingly.

Auto Finance Segment. Through COAF, we purchase retail installment contracts, secured by automobiles or other motor vehicles, through dealer networks throughout the United States. Additionally, we utilize direct marketing to offer automobile financing directly to consumers. Our direct marketed products include financing for the purchase of new and used vehicles, as well as refinancing of existing motor vehicle loans. As of December 31, 2005, we are the second largest non-captive auto lender in the United States. In January 2005, we acquired Onyx Acceptance Corporation, an auto finance company that provides financing to franchised and select independent dealerships throughout the United States. The Corporation also completed the acquisition of Key Bank’s non-prime auto loan portfolio in 2005. Similar to our credit card strategy, we customize product features, such as interest rate, loan amount, and loan terms, enabling us to lend to customers with a wide range of credit profiles.

Global Financial Services Segment. Our Global Financial Services (“GFS”) segment includes a variety of diverse products offered to consumers in the United States and internationally. Domestically, GFS includes small business lending, installment lending, and healthcare financing. In addition, in early 2005, the Corporation acquired a mortgage lending business, eSmartloan. We have, and may in the future achieve further diversification through acquisition, organic growth or both. GFS also includes our international businesses, where we are using methodologies and approaches we have learned in our U.S. credit card and other consumer lending businesses in new geographies. Internationally, we are currently operating primarily in the United Kingdom and Canada. The Corporation completed its acquisition of Hfs Group, a home equity broker in the United Kingdom, in January 2005.

4

Table of Contents

Acquisition of Hibernia Corporation

On November 16, 2005, we completed our acquisition of Hibernia, a financial holding company that provides a wide array of financial products and services through its bank and non-bank subsidiaries. Under the merger agreement, Hibernia merged with and into the Corporation, and Capital One continued as the surviving corporation. We are focused on successfully integrating Hibernia into the Corporation, and beginning with the first quarter of 2006, we will begin reporting on a new Banking segment. The Banking segment will consist of Hibernia’s former businesses, excluding Hibernia’s indirect auto business and including Capital One’s existing branchless deposit business.

Geographic Diversity

Loan portfolio concentration within a specific geographic region may be regarded differently based upon the current and expected credit characteristics and performance of the portfolio. Our loan portfolio is geographically diverse. See page 114 in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 23” of this form.

Enterprise Risk Management

Risk is an inherent part of the Company’s business and activities. The Company has an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) program designed to ensure appropriate and comprehensive oversight and management of risk. The ERM program has three components. First, the Board of Directors and senior management committees oversee risk and risk management practices. Second, the centralized departments headed by the Chief Enterprise Risk Officer and the Chief Credit Officer establish risk management methodologies, processes and standards. Third, the individual business areas throughout the Company are responsible for managing risk in their businesses and performing ongoing identification, assessment and response to risks. The Company’s ERM framework includes eight categories of risk: credit, liquidity, market, operational, legal, strategic, reputation, and compliance.

Board and Senior Management Oversight

A combination of the Board and senior management committees is used to oversee the management of risk. The Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Directors oversees the Company’s accounting, financial reporting, internal controls and risk assessment and management processes. The Audit and Risk Committee also reviews periodic reporting on significant Company risks and mitigation activities and compliance with corporate risk policies. The Board Finance and Trust Oversight Committee oversees liquidity and market risk. The Executive Committee, a committee of senior management chaired by the Chief Executive Officer, provides guidance to senior executives regarding strategic risk and provides an integrated view of risk through reports by the Company’s other senior management committees:

5

Table of Contents

Integrity, Ethical Values and Risk Management Culture

The Company maintains its risk management culture through various mechanisms designed to bring the consideration of risk into daily decision making. The Company has a corporate Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, available on the Corporate Governance page of its website at www.capitalone.com/about, under which each associate is obligated to behave with integrity in dealing with customers and business partners and to comply with applicable laws and regulations. The Company also has a compliance training program and an associate performance management process that emphasize achieving business results while ensuring integrity, legal compliance and sound business management. The Company’s risk management culture is also encouraged through frequent direction and communications from the Board of Directors, senior leadership, corporate and departmental risk management policies, risk management and compliance training programs and on-going risk assessment activities in the business.

Organizational Structure for Risk Identification, Monitoring and Reporting

The Company’s organizational structure supports consideration of risk in decision making. The Company monitors its key risks, mitigation plans and its risk management capability through a system of on-going measurement and reporting to business area management, the Chief Enterprise Risk Officer, senior management committees and the Board and its committees. The corporate ERM department designs and facilitates the implementation of methodologies to identify and assess risk, analyze and aggregate risk and mitigation reporting and to evaluate and enhance the risk management culture. Each business area uses these methodologies to identify key risk exposures which are assessed according to potential likelihood and impact, as well as, the quality of the related controls. If appropriate, risk response plans are developed for risks and the business tracks progress against the plans. For significant risks reported to the senior management committees and the Board, specific executives are designated as accountable for the management and monitoring of each such risk. Across the Company, individual business areas utilize Business Risk Offices staffed by associates from the business who oversee implementation of methodologies and tools for risk identification, assessment and reporting. The Company’s Corporate Audit Services department also assesses risk and the related quality of internal controls and risk management through its audit activities. Corporate Audit Services reports on the scope and results of its work to the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Directors.

Credit Risk Management

Successful management of credit risk, the risk that borrowers may default on their financial obligations to the Company, is critical to the Company’s success. There are four primary sources of credit risk: (1) changing economic conditions, which affect customers’ ability to pay; (2) changing competitive environment, which affects customer debt loads and borrowing patterns; (3) the Company’s underwriting strategies and standards, which determine to whom we offer credit and on what terms; and (4) the quality of the Company’s internal controls, which establish a process to test that underwriting conforms to Company standards and identify credit quality issues so the Company can act upon them a timely manner. The Company is focused on managing each of these sources of credit risk.

The Company’s Chief Credit Officer is charged with overall management of credit risk. The goal is to provide strong central oversight of credit policy and credit programs while maintaining the ability of operating units to respond flexibly to changing market and competitive conditions. The Company’s Chief Credit Officer manages a corporate Credit Risk Management staff and chairs the Credit Policy Committee, a committee of senior management. The Credit Policy Committee oversees and approves corporate credit policy and credit

6

Table of Contents

performance. Its members include the Chief Credit Officer, the Chief Enterprise Risk Officer, the Controller and the Presidents of the Company’s three operating segments. Beginning in the first quarter of 2006, a new banking segment will be disclosed and the President of that segment will be a member of the Credit Policy Committee. The Credit Policy Committee also has sub-committees which provide credit oversight at the divisional level. The Chief Credit Officer, his staff, or the appropriate credit committee reviews and approves all large scale new credit programs. Smaller credit decisions are approved by credit officers appointed by the credit committee(s) and supervised by the Credit Risk Management organization. It is expected that all credit programs will also be approved by the appropriate operating executives. These organizational structures are designed so that each of the Company’s business units applies standardized practices in measuring and managing credit risk, and that all relevant factors, such as credit outlook, profitability, and the competitive, economic, and regulatory environment, are considered in making credit decisions.

The Board of Directors has established policies that limit the level and composition of risk in the total lending portfolio. The Company’s Credit Policy Committee has established policies that govern credit administration and individual lending decisions. The centralized Credit Risk Management group monitors overall composition and quality of the credit portfolio.

The Company’s credit risk profile is managed to maintain resilience to factors outside of the Company’s control, strong risk-adjusted returns, and increased diversification.

The Company’s guiding principles, strong central governance, and Board-directed credit risk tolerances are designed to keep senior executives well-informed of credit trends so they can make appropriate credit and business decisions for the Company. The Company enhances/preserves day-to-day market responsiveness and flexibility by empowering its business line managers to develop credit strategies and programs aligned with the Company’s credit risk policies and objective of long-term business profitability. The credit program development process considers the evolving needs of the target market, the competitive environment, and the economic outlook.

Most of the Company’s consumer credit strategies rely heavily on the use of sophisticated proprietary scoring models. These models consider many variables, including credit scores developed by nationally recognized scoring firms. The models are validated, monitored and maintained in accordance with detailed policies and procedures to help maintain their continued validity. The Company’s Chief Scoring Officer, a member of the Chief Credit Officer’s staff, oversees the development, implementation and maintenance of key statistical models.

Liquidity Risk Management

Liquidity risk refers to exposures generated from the use and availability of various funding sources to meet its current and future operating needs. The management of liquidity risk is overseen by the Chief Financial Officer with the advice and guidance from the Asset and Liability Management Committee and its sub-committee on funding chaired by the Treasurer. The Company currently manages and mitigates its liquidity risk through the use of a variety of funding sources to establish a maturity pattern that provides a prudent mixture of short-term and long-term funds. See page 54 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity Risk Management” for additional information.

Market Risk Management

Market risk refers to exposures generated from changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. The management of market risk is overseen by the Chief Financial Officer with the advice and guidance from the Asset and Liability Management Committee. The Company currently manages and mitigates its interest rate sensitivity through several techniques, which include, but are not limited to, managing the maturity and repricing characteristics of assets and liabilities and by entering into interest rate swaps. The Company currently manages

7

Table of Contents

and mitigates its exposure to foreign currency exchange risk by entering into forward foreign currency exchange contracts and cross currency swaps. The hedging of foreign currency exchange rates is limited to certain intercompany obligations related to international operations. See page 56 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Market Risk Management” for additional information.

Operational Risk Management

Operational risk is the risk of direct or indirect loss resulting from inadequate or failed processes, systems, people, or exposure to external events. The management of operational risk is overseen by the Chief Enterprise Risk Officer with the advice and guidance of the ERM Committee.

Operational risk is a normal part of business for any financial services firm. It may manifest itself in many ways, such as fraud by employees or persons outside the Company, business interruptions, errors related to processing and systems, and model errors. The risk of loss includes the potential for legal actions arising as a result of an operational deficiency or as a result of noncompliance with applicable laws or regulatory standards. The Company could also suffer financial loss, face regulatory action, not be able to service customers and suffer damages to its reputation.

The key governance forum for operational risk is the ERM Committee, described above. The Committee reviews significant operational risks from business unit self assessments, progress against mitigation plans and analyses of the Company’s operational loss event experience. In addition, key risk management initiatives and programs are reviewed by the Committee. Operational risk information is also reported to the Executive Committee and the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Directors. Corporate Audit Services also assesses operational risk and the related quality of internal controls and quality of risk management through its audit activities.

The key tools used in operational risk management are a risk self assessment process, an operational loss event process and economic capital quantification. Key risk exposures are identified by each business area and evaluated according to potential impact and likelihood, as well as the quality of the related controls. If appropriate, risk response plans are developed for certain identified risks and progress is tracked against the plans. Business units are required to conduct self assessments at least annually. Internal loss histories, self assessment results, and data from industry sources are combined with senior management’s assessments of future loss rates in a structured scenario approach to quantify economic capital for operational risk. The capital methodology is intended to ensure capital adequacy to withstand extreme events, and to create incentives for business areas to improve their control environments.

There are many specialized activities designed to mitigate key operational risks facing the Company. These include a dedicated fraud management department, programs for third party supplier risk management, information security and business continuity planning, data risk management, and development and maintenance of required policies and procedures. The Company incorporates the output of these functions with its analysis and reporting to senior management to achieve a broad assessment of operational risk levels and trends.

Legal Risk Management

Legal risk represents the risk of loss related to (i) new and changed laws and regulations, (ii) interpretations of law, (iii) the Company’s legal entity structure and (iv) the drafting of contracts. The management of legal risk, domestically and internationally, is overseen by the Company’s General Counsel. The Company operates in a heavily regulated industry, has an evolving corporate structure and relies significantly on certain contractual relationships, all of which contribute to the level of risk the Company faces. The Company also faces risk of loss from litigation, which is primarily managed by the Company’s legal department.

8

Table of Contents

Strategic Risk Management

Strategic risk is the risk to earnings or capital from operating the Company in a competitive environment. The Executive Committee, described above, is the principal management forum for discussion of strategic risk. The Company assesses strategic risk in its annual planning process, which includes both a top-down process set by the Board of Directors and a bottom-up process led by business lines. The Company also performs monthly financial reviews to compare business performance and risk assessments to plan. Consideration of strategic risk is also a vital component of due diligence when evaluating acquisitions or new products, ventures or markets.

Reputation Risk Management

Reputation risk represents the risk to: (i) market value; (ii) recruitment and retention of associates; and (iii) maintenance of a loyal customer base based on possible negative perceptions of Capital One’s internal and external stakeholders regarding Capital One’s business strategies and activities. The management of reputation risk is overseen by the Executive Vice President of Corporate Reputation and Governance with the advice and guidance of the Reputation Risk Management Team housed in the Corporate Affairs Department. The Company uses qualitative criteria to assess reputation risk. Various measures, both internal and external, are considered to gauge changes to the Company’s reputation and overall reputation risk and include brand market research, customer studies, internal operational loss event data and external measures.

Compliance Risk Management

Compliance risk is the risk of non-conformance to laws, rules and regulations. The management of compliance risk is overseen by the Chief Compliance Officer with the advice and guidance of the ERM Committee. The corporate compliance organization, a part of the ERM department, provides the business areas with consulting, training and assistance in the implementation of business processes to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The business areas assess compliance risk through the Company’s enterprise risk self assessment process and conduct monitoring and remediation activities for which the compliance organization establishes standards.

Technology / Systems

We leverage information technology to achieve our business objectives and to develop and deliver products and services that satisfy our customers’ needs. A key part of our strategic focus is the development of efficient, flexible computer and operational systems to support complex marketing and account management strategies and the development of new and diversified products. Our commitment to managing risk and ensuring effective controls is built into all of our strategies. We believe that the continued development and integration of these systems is an important part of our efforts to reduce costs, improve quality and provide faster, more flexible technology services. Consequently, we continuously review capabilities and develop or obtain systems, processes and competencies to meet our unique business requirements. As part of our continuous efforts to review and improve our technologies, we may either develop such capabilities internally or rely on third party outsourcers who have the ability to deliver technology that is of higher quality, lower cost, or both. Over time, we have increasingly relied on third party outsourcers to help us deliver systems and operational infrastructure. Consistent with this approach, in August 2005 Capital One and Total System Services Inc. (“TSYS ”) finalized a five year definitive agreement for TSYS to provide processing services for Capital One’s North American portfolio of consumer and small business credit card accounts. The Company believes that its transfer to this new technology platform will allow it to achieve cost savings and product and service flexibility while reducing operational risk.

Funding and Liquidity

A discussion of our funding programs and liquidity has been included in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Funding” on pages 51-56.

9

Table of Contents

Competition

Each of our credit card and other financial products is marketed to specific consumer populations across the credit spectrum. The terms of each product are actively managed to achieve a balance between risk and expected performance. For example, credit card product terms typically include the ability to reprice individual accounts upwards or downwards based on the customer’s payment and other performance. In addition, since 1998, we have marketed low non-introductory rate cards to consumers with low-risk and established credit profiles to take advantage of the favorable risk return characteristics of this consumer type. Industry competitors have continuously solicited our customers with these and other interest rate strategies. Management believes the competition has put, and will continue to put, additional pressure on our pricing and general product feature strategies.

As a marketer of credit card and other financial products, we face intense competition in all aspects of our business from numerous bank and non-bank providers of financial services. Some of these companies are substantially larger and have more resources than we do. In addition, our industry has experienced substantial consolidation and may continue to do so; this consolidation continues to create competitors who are larger and have more resources than we do. In addition, such consolidated and/or larger competitors may have a more diversified product and customer base, operational efficiencies and more versatile technology platforms than we do. Consolidation has, and may continue, to increase competitive pressures on both us and other companies in our industry.

We compete with international, national, regional and local issuers of Visa^® and MasterCard^® credit cards. In addition, American Express^®, Discover Card^® and, to a certain extent, smart cards and debit cards, represent additional competition to the general purpose credit card. In general, customers are attracted to credit card issuers largely on the basis of price, credit limit and other product features, and customer loyalty is often limited.

In motor vehicle finance, we face competition from banks and non-bank lenders who provide financing for dealer-originated loans. We also face competition from a small, but growing number of online automobile finance providers.

The National Bank competes with national and state banks for deposits, loans and trust accounts and with savings and loan associations and credit unions for loans and deposits. The National Bank also competes with other financial services providers, both inside and outside Louisiana and Texas, for loans, deposits, investments, insurance and other services and products. Additionally, we compete against other lending institutions in our healthcare financing and mortgage lending businesses.

We believe that we are able to compete effectively in both our current and new markets. There can be no assurance, however, that our ability to market products and services successfully or to obtain adequate yield on our loans will not be impacted by the nature of the competition that now exists or may later develop. In addition, some of our competitors may be substantially larger than we are, which may give those competitors advantages, including a more diversified product and customer base, operational efficiencies, broad-based local distribution capabilities, lower cost funding and more versatile technology platforms. These competitors may also consolidate with other financial institutions in ways that enhance these advantages.

Intellectual Property

As part of our overall and ongoing strategy to protect and enhance our intellectual property, we rely on a variety of protections, including copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, patents and certain restrictions on disclosure. We also undertake other measures to control access to and distribution of our other proprietary information. Despite these precautions, it may be possible for a third party to copy or otherwise obtain and use certain intellectual property or proprietary information without authorization. Our precautions may not prevent misappropriation or infringement of our intellectual property or proprietary information. In addition, our competitors also file patent

10

Table of Contents

applications for innovations that are used in our industry. The ability of our competitors to obtain such patents may adversely affect our ability to compete. Conversely, our ability to obtain such patents may increase our competitive advantage. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in such efforts, or that the ability of our competitors to obtain such patents may not adversely impact our financial results.

Employees

As of December 31, 2005, we employed approximately 21,000 employees whom we refer to as “associates.” A central part of our philosophy is to attract and maintain a highly capable staff. We view current associate relations to be satisfactory. None of our associates is covered under a collective bargaining agreement.

Supervision and Regulation

General

The Corporation is a bank holding company (“BHC”) under Section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”) (12 U.S.C. § 1842). The Corporation is subject to the requirements of the BHC Act, including its capital adequacy standards and limitations on the Corporation’s nonbanking activities, and to supervision, examination and regulation by the Federal Reserve Board (the “Federal Reserve”). Permissible activities for a BHC include those activities that are so closely related to banking as to be incident thereto such as consumer lending and other activities that have been approved by the Federal Reserve by regulation or order. Certain servicing activities are also permissible for a BHC if conducted for or on behalf of the BHC or any of its affiliates. Impermissible activities for BHCs include activities that are related to commerce such as retail sales of nonfinancial products. Under Federal Reserve policy, the Corporation is expected to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to any banks that it controls, including the Bank, the National Bank and the Savings Bank (the “Banks”), and to commit resources to support them.

On May 27, 2005, the Corporation became a “financial holding company” under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act amendments to the BHC Act (the “GLBA”). The GLBA removed many of the restrictions on the activities of BHCs that become financial holding companies. A financial holding company, and the non-bank companies under its control, are permitted to engage in activities considered financial in nature (including, for example, insurance underwriting, agency sales and brokerage, securities underwriting, dealing and brokerage and merchant banking activities); incidental to financial activities; or complementary to financial activities if the Federal Reserve determines that they pose no risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system in general.

The Corporation’s election to become a financial holding company under the GLBA certifies that the depository institutions the Corporation controls meet certain criteria, including capital, management and Community Reinvestment Act requirements. If the Corporation were to fail to continue to meet the criteria for financial holding company status, it could, depending on which requirements it failed to meet, face restrictions on new financial activities or acquisitions and/or be required to discontinue existing activities that are not generally permissible for bank holding companies.

The Bank is a banking corporation chartered under Virginia law and a member of the Federal Reserve System, the deposits of which are insured by the Bank Insurance Fund of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) up to applicable limits. In addition to regulatory requirements imposed as a result of the Bank’s international operations (discussed below), the Bank is subject to comprehensive regulation and periodic examination by the Bureau of Financial Institutions of the Virginia State Corporation Commission (the “Bureau of Financial Institutions”), the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (“FRB-R”) and the FDIC.

The National Bank is a nationally chartered bank, the deposits of which are insured by the Bank Insurance Fund of the FDIC up to applicable limits. The National Bank is subject to comprehensive regulation and periodic examination by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) and the FDIC.

11

Table of Contents

The Savings Bank is a federal savings bank chartered by the Office of Thrift Supervision (the “OTS”) and is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank System. Its deposits are insured by the Savings Association Insurance Fund of the FDIC up to applicable limits. The Savings Bank is subject to comprehensive regulation and periodic examination by the OTS and the FDIC.

The Corporation is also registered as a financial institution holding company under Virginia law and as such is subject to periodic examination by Virginia’s Bureau of Financial Institutions. The Corporation’s automobile financing activities, conducted by COAF and its subsidiaries, fall under the scrutiny of the Federal Reserve and the state agencies having supervisory authority under applicable sales finance laws or consumer finance laws in most states. The Corporation also faces regulation in the international jurisdictions in which it conducts business.

Dividends and Transfers of Funds

Dividends to the Corporation from its direct and indirect subsidiaries represent a major source of funds for the Corporation to pay dividends on its stock, make payments on its debt securities and meet its other obligations. There are various federal and state law limitations on the extent to which the Banks can finance or otherwise supply funds to the Corporation through dividends, loans or otherwise. These limitations include minimum regulatory capital requirements, federal and state banking law requirements concerning the payment of dividends out of net profits or surplus, Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W there under governing transactions between an insured depository institution and its affiliates, and general federal and state regulatory oversight to prevent unsafe or unsound practices. In general, federal banking laws prohibit, without first obtaining regulatory approval, insured depository institutions, such as the Banks, from making dividend distributions if such distributions are not paid out of available earnings or would cause the institution to fail to meet applicable capital adequacy standards. Under OTS regulations, other limitations apply to the Savings Bank’s ability to pay dividends, the magnitude of which depends upon the extent to which the Savings Bank meets its regulatory capital requirements. In addition, under Virginia law, the Bureau of Financial Institutions may limit the payment of dividends by the Bank if the Bureau of Financial Institutions determines that such a limitation would be in the public interest and necessary for the Bank’s safety and soundness.

Capital Adequacy

The Company, the Bank, the Savings Bank, and the National Bank (“the Banks”) are subject to capital adequacy guidelines adopted by federal banking regulators. For a further discussion of the capital adequacy guidelines, see page 58 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Capital Adequacy” and pages 105-106 in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 18—Regulatory Matters”. The Banks were well capitalized under these guidelines as of December 31, 2005.

Basel Committee

On May 11, 2004, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Committee”) announced that it has achieved consensus on the new Basel Capital Accord (“Basel II”), which proposes establishment of a new framework of capital adequacy for banking organizations; the Committee published the text of the framework on July 26, 2004. Despite the release of the Basel II framework, it is not clear at this time whether and in what manner the new accord will be adopted by bank regulators with respect to banking organizations that they supervise and regulate. In April 2005, federal banking regulators in the United States announced a delay in their release of proposed rulemaking in this regard. Proposed rulemaking in the United States is now expected in mid-2006, and final rules are expected to become effective prior to January 1, 2008, when banks to which the rules will apply must begin parallel running of the new capital regulations and the existing capital regulations. As the rules are currently proposed, compliance with the rules by the Company would not be mandatory. This timeline continues to be subject to change.

Although the Committee’s stated intent is that Basel II will not change the amount of overall capital in the global banking system, adoption of the proposed new accord could require individual banking organizations, including

12

Table of Contents

the Company, to increase the minimum level of capital held. The Company will continue to closely monitor regulatory action on this matter and assess the potential impact to the Company.

The federal banking regulators in the United States have also released an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that seeks comments on potential amendments to the existing regulatory capital regulations in the United States (“Basel 1A”). This rulemaking is expected to proceed along a timeline similar to the timeline for the rulemaking that will implement Basel II in the US. The Company will continue to closely monitor regulatory action on this matter and assess the potential impact to the Company.

FDICIA

Among other things, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires federal bank regulatory authorities to take “prompt corrective action” (“PCA”) with respect to insured depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. FDICIA establishes five capital ratio levels: well-capitalized, adequately-capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. As of December 31, 2005, each of the Banks met the requirements for a “well-capitalized” institution. The “well-capitalized” classification is determined solely for the purposes of applying FDICIA’s PCA provisions, as discussed below, and should not be viewed as describing the condition or future prospects of a depository institution, including the Banks. Were any of the Banks to lose their status as “well-capitalized” they could be required to increase capital or lose access to deposits.

The Banks may accept brokered deposits as part of their funding. Under FDICIA, only “well-capitalized” and “adequately-capitalized” institutions may accept brokered deposits. Adequately-capitalized institutions, however, must first obtain a waiver from the FDIC before accepting brokered deposits, and such deposits may not pay rates that significantly exceed the rates paid on deposits of similar maturity from the institution’s normal market area or the national rate on deposits of comparable maturity, as determined by the FDIC, for deposits from outside the institution’s normal market area.

Liability for Commonly-Controlled Institutions

Under the “cross-guarantee” provision of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), insured depository institutions such as the Banks may be liable to the FDIC with respect to any loss incurred or reasonably anticipated to be incurred, by the FDIC in connection with the default of, or FDIC assistance to, any commonly controlled insured depository institution. The Banks are commonly controlled within the meaning of the FIRREA cross-guarantee provision.

Investment Limitation and Qualified Thrift Lender Test

Federally-chartered savings banks such as the Savings Bank are subject to certain investment limitations. For example, federal savings banks are not permitted to make consumer loans (i.e., certain open-end or closed-end loans for personal, family or household purposes, excluding credit card loans) in excess of 35% of the savings bank’s assets. Federal savings banks are also required to meet the QTL Test, which generally requires a savings bank to maintain at least 65% “portfolio assets” (total assets less (i) specified liquid assets up to 20% of total assets, (ii) intangibles, including goodwill and (iii) property used to conduct business) in certain “qualified thrift investments” (residential mortgages and related investments, including certain mortgage backed and mortgage related investments, small business related securities, certain state and federal housing investments, education loans and credit card loans) on a monthly basis in nine out of every twelve months. Failure to qualify under the QTL Test could subject the Savings Bank to substantial restrictions on its activities, including the activity restrictions that apply generally to bank holding companies and their affiliates and potential loss of grandfathered rights under the GLB Act. As of December 31, 2005, 76% of the Savings Bank’s portfolio assets were held in qualified thrift investments, and the Savings Bank was in compliance with the QTL Test.

13

Table of Contents

Subprime Lending Guidelines

On January 31, 2001, the federal banking agencies issued “Expanded Guidance for Subprime Lending Programs” (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines, while not constituting a formal regulation, provide guidance to the federal bank examiners regarding the adequacy of capital and loan loss reserves held by insured depository institutions engaged in “subprime” lending. The Guidelines adopted a broad definition of “subprime” loans which likely covers more than one-third of all consumers in the United States. Because our business strategy is to provide credit card products and other consumer loans to a wide range of consumers, we believe that a portion of our loan assets are viewed by the examiners as “subprime.” Thus, under the Guidelines, bank examiners could require the Bank or the Savings Bank to hold additional capital (from one and one-half to three times the minimally required level of capital, as set forth in the Guidelines), or additional loan loss reserves, against such assets. As described above, as of December 31, 2005 the Bank and the Savings Bank each met the requirements for a “well-capitalized” institution. Federal examiners, however, have wide discretion as to how to apply the Guidelines and there can be no assurances that the Bank or the Savings Bank may not be required to hold additional regulatory capital against such assets.

For purposes of the Subprime Guidelines, we treat as “subprime” all loans in the Bank’s and the Savings Bank’s programs that are targeted at customers either with a Fair, Isaac and Company (“FICO”) score of 660 or below or with no FICO score. The Bank and the Savings Bank hold on average 200% of the total risk-based capital requirement that would otherwise apply to such assets.

FFIEC Account Management Guidance

On January 8, 2003, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (“FFIEC”) released Account Management and Loss Allowance Guidance (the “Guidance”). The Guidance applies to all credit lending of regulated financial institutions and generally requires that banks properly manage several elements of their credit card lending programs, including line assignments, over-limit practices, minimum payment and negative amortization, workout and settlement programs, and the accounting methodology used for various assets and income items related to credit card loans.

We believe that our credit card account management and loss allowance practices are prudent and appropriate and, therefore, consistent with the Guidance. We caution, however, that similar to the subprime Guidelines, the Guidance provides wide discretion to bank regulatory agencies in the application of the Guidance to any particular institution and its account management and loss allowance practices. Accordingly, under the Guidance, bank examiners could require changes in our account management or loss allowance practices in the future, and such changes could have an adverse impact on our financial condition or results of operation.

Regulation of Lending Activities

The activities of the Banks as consumer lenders also are subject to regulation under various federal laws, including the Truth-in-Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (the “FCRA”), the Community Reinvestment Act and the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act, as well as under various state laws. Depending on the underlying issue and applicable law, regulators are often authorized to impose penalties for violations of these statutes and, in certain cases, to order the Banks to compensate injured borrowers. Borrowers may also have a private right of action to bring actions for certain violations. Federal bankruptcy and state debtor relief and collection laws also affect the ability of the Banks to collect outstanding balances owed by borrowers. These laws plus state sales finance laws also affect the ability of our automobile financing business to collect outstanding balances.

Privacy and Fair Credit Reporting

The GLB Act requires a financial institution to disclose its privacy policy to customers and consumers, and requires that such customers or consumers be given a choice (through an opt-out notice) to forbid the sharing of

14

Table of Contents

nonpublic personal information about them with nonaffiliated third persons. The Corporation and the Banks each have a written privacy notice which is posted on the web site of the Corporation or Hibernia, as applicable, and delivered to each of its customers when customer relationships begin, and annually thereafter, in compliance with the GLB Act. In accordance with the privacy notice, the Corporation and the Banks protect the security of information about their customers, educate their employees about the importance of protecting customer privacy, and allow their customers to remove their names from the solicitation lists they use and share with others. The Corporation and the Banks require business partners with whom they share such information to have adequate security safeguards and to abide by the redisclosure and reuse provisions of the GLB Act. The Corporation and the Banks have developed and implemented programs to fulfill the expressed requests of customers and consumers to opt out of information sharing subject to the GLB Act. In addition to adopting federal requirements regarding privacy, the GLB Act also permits individual states to enact stricter laws relating to the use of customer information. California, Vermont and North Dakota, among others, have done so by statute, regulation or referendum, and other states may consider proposals which impose additional requirements or restrictions on the Corporation and/or the Bank. If the federal or state regulators of the financial subsidiaries establish further guidelines for addressing customer privacy issues, the Corporation and/or the Banks may need to amend their privacy policies and adapt their internal procedures.

Like other lending institutions, the Banks utilize credit bureau data in their underwriting activities. Use of such data is regulated under the FCRA on a uniform, nationwide basis, including credit reporting, prescreening, sharing of information between affiliates, and the use of credit data. The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (the “FACT Act”), which was enacted by Congress and signed into law in December 2003, extends the federal preemption of the FCRA permanently, although the law authorizes states to enact identity theft laws that are not inconsistent with the conduct required by the provisions of the FACT Act. If financial institutions and credit bureaus fail to alleviate the costs and consumer frustration associated with the growing crime of identity theft, financial institutions could face increased legislative/regulatory and litigation risks. In addition, federal regulators are still in the process of promulgating regulations under the FACT Act; there can be no assurance that such regulations, when enacted, will not have an adverse impact on the Company.

Investment in the Corporation and the Banks

Certain acquisitions of capital stock may be subject to regulatory approval or notice under federal or state law. Investors are responsible for ensuring that they do not, directly or indirectly, acquire shares of capital stock of the Corporation in excess of the amount which can be acquired without regulatory approval. Each of the Banks is an “insured depository institution” within the meaning of the Change in Bank Control Act. Consequently, federal law and regulations prohibit any person or company from acquiring control of the Corporation without, in most cases, prior written approval of the Federal Reserve, the OCC or the OTS, as applicable. Control is conclusively presumed if, among other things, a person or company acquires more than 25% of any class of voting stock of the Corporation. A rebuttable presumption of control arises if a person or company acquires more than 10% of any class of voting stock and is subject to any of a number of specified “control factors” as set forth in the applicable regulations. Additionallly, the Bank is a “bank” within the meaning of Chapter 13 of Title 6.1 of the Code of Virginia governing the acquisition of interests in Virginia financial institutions (the “Financial Institution Holding Company Act”). The Financial Institution Holding Company Act prohibits any person or entity from acquiring, or making any public offer to acquire, control of a Virginia financial institution or its holding company without making application to, and receiving prior approval from, the Bureau of Financial Institutions.

Non-Bank Activities

The Corporation’s non-bank subsidiaries are subject to supervision and regulation by various other federal and state authorities. Insurance agency subsidiaries are regulated by state insurance regulatory agencies in the states in which they operate. Hibernia Asset Management, L.L.C. and Hibernia Investments, L.L.C. are registered investment advisers regulated under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Hibernia Asset Management provides investment advice to investment companies subject to regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

15

Table of Contents

Hibernia Investments and Hibernia Southcoast Capital, Inc. are registered broker-dealers regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., and the Louisiana Office of Financial Institutions through the Deputy Commissioner of Securities. The Company’s broker-dealer subsidiaries are subject to, among other things, net capital rules designed to measure the general financial condition and liquidity of a broker-dealer. Under these rules, broker-dealers are required to maintain the minimum net capital deemed necessary to meet their continuing commitments to customers and others, and are required to keep a substantial portion of their assets in relatively liquid form. These rules also limit the ability of broker-dealers to transfer large amounts of capital to parent companies and other affiliates. Broker-dealers are also subject to other regulations covering their business operations, including sales and trading practices, public offerings, publication of research reports, use and safekeeping of client funds and securities, capital structure, record-keeping and the conduct of directors, officers and employees.

USA PATRIOT Act of 2001

On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”). The Patriot Act contains sweeping anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws as well as enhanced information collection tools and enforcement mechanics for the U.S. government, including: due diligence requirements for financial institutions that administer, maintain, or manage private bank accounts or correspondent accounts for non-U.S. persons; standards for verifying customer identification at account opening; rules to promote cooperation among financial institutions, regulators, and law enforcement entities in identifying parties that may be involved in terrorism or money laundering; reports by nonfinancial trades and businesses filed with the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for transactions exceeding $10,000; and filing suspicious activities reports by brokers and dealers if they believe a customer may be violating U.S. laws and regulations.

The Department of Treasury in consultation with the Federal Reserve and other federal financial institution regulators has promulgated rules and regulations implementing the Patriot Act which: prohibit U.S. correspondent accounts with foreign banks that have no physical presence in any jurisdiction; require financial institutions to maintain certain records for correspondent accounts of foreign banks; require financial institutions to produce certain records relating to anti-money laundering compliance upon request of the appropriate federal banking agency; require due diligence with respect to private banking and correspondent banking accounts; facilitate information sharing between government and financial institutions; require verification of customer identification; and require financial institutions to have in place an anti-money laundering program.

Interstate Taxation

Several states have passed legislation which attempts to tax the income from interstate financial activities, including credit cards, derived from accounts held by local state residents. Based on the volume of our business in these states and the nature of the legislation passed to date, we currently believe that this development will not materially affect our financial condition.

Legislation

Legislation has been enacted requiring additional disclosures for credit cards and other types of consumer lending. Such legislation places additional restrictions on the practices of credit card issuers and consumer lenders generally. In addition to the FCRA and FACT Act provisions discussed above, Congress has enacted broad changes to the federal Bankruptcy code, including a sweeping reform of the consumer bankruptcy provisions which, while instituting a means test for individuals filing under chapter 13 and enacting other reforms, also requires credit card issuers to provide regular disclosures to customers of the financial effect of regularly making only the minimum required payment on their accounts. Additionally, deposit insurance reform legislation has just been enacted and must now be implemented by the FDIC. Also, proposals have been made to restrict certain consumer lending practices and expand the privacy protections afforded to customers of financial

16

Table of Contents

institutions. It is unclear at this time whether and in what form any legislation will be adopted or, if adopted, what its impact on the Bank, the Savings Bank, the National Bank, COAF or the Corporation would be. Congress or individual states may in the future consider other legislation that would materially and/or adversely affect the banking or consumer lending industries.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act Compliance

On July 30, 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”) was passed into law. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act applies to all companies that are required to file periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and contains a number of significant changes relating to the responsibilities of directors and officers and reporting and governance obligations of SEC reporting companies. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act also created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “PCAOB”), a private sector, non-profit corporation whose mission is to oversee the auditors of public companies. The PCAOB recommends rulemaking to the SEC and sets certain standards for the auditors which it oversees. Since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Company has taken a variety of steps which it believes place it in substantial compliance with the effective provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Company continues to monitor SEC rulemaking and PCAOB activities to determine if additional changes are needed to comply with provisions that may become effective in the future. Furthermore, the Company’s management has supervised the design of, or has designed, internal controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurances regarding the reliability of its financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information regarding the Company is made known to them, particularly during the period in which this Annual Report on Form 10-K is being prepared and has evaluated the effectiveness of those controls as more fully set forth in “Controls and Procedures” below. The Company has, in compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, certified, in connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K, that it did not discover, during the execution of its internal control processes, any material weaknesses. Management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting excludes the evaluation of the internal controls over financial reporting of Hibernia Corporation and its subsidiaries, which were acquired on November 16, 2005. In addition, the Company’s management policy is to disclose to the Company’s auditors and the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Directors significant deficiencies, if any, in the design or operation of its internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information, as well as any fraud, whether or not material, by those that have a significant role in these processes.

International Regulation

The Bank also faces regulation in foreign jurisdictions where it currently, and may in the future, operate. Those regulations may be similar to or substantially different from the regulatory requirements the Bank faces in the United States. In the United Kingdom, the Bank operates through the U.K. Bank, which was established in 2000. The U.K. Bank is regulated by the Financial Services Authority (“FSA”) and licensed by the Office of Fair Trading (“OFT”). The U.K. Bank is an “authorized deposit taker” and thus is able to take consumer deposits in the U.K. The U.K. Bank has also been granted a full license by the OFT to issue consumer credit under the U.K.’s Consumer Credit Act—1974. The FSA requires the U.K. Bank to maintain certain regulatory capital ratios at all times. The U.K. Bank obtains capital through earnings or through additional capital infusion from the Bank, subject to approval under Regulation K of the rules administered by the Federal Reserve. If the U.K. Bank is unable to generate sufficient capital in favorable terms, it may choose to restrict its growth to maintain its required capital levels. In addition, the U.K. Bank is limited by the U.K. Companies Act—1985 in its distribution of dividends to the Bank in that such dividends may only be paid out of the U.K. Bank’s “distributable profits.”

As in the U.S., in non-U.S. jurisdictions where we operate, we face a risk that the laws and regulations that are applicable to us (or the interpretations of existing laws by relevant regulators) may change in ways that adversely impact our business. In the United Kingdom, in connection with the December 2003 Government report, “Fair, Clear and Competitive: The Consumer Credit Market in the 21^st Century”, the introduction of the Consumer

17

Table of Contents

Credit (Amendment) Bill in Parliament was confirmed on November 23, 2004. The Bill is likely to come into force in April 2006 and is expected to cover the following areas: the creation of an “unfair relationship” test for credit agreements, the creation of alternative dispute resolution options for credit agreements, a requirement on lenders to provide annual statements to borrowers outlining the full amount owed and warnings about making only minimum repayments, and a stricter licensing regime that would give the OFT new powers to fine lenders for their behavior. At this time, we cannot predict the extent to which the provisions of the draft bill will remain in the final statute, or, if implemented, how such changes would impact us. In addition, there is a current examination by the OFT of whether the levels of interchange paid by retailers in respect of MasterCard credit and charge cards in the U.K. are too high. The OFT has also launched a similar investigation into Visa interchange fees. The preliminary conclusion of the MasterCard examination is that the levels of interchange are too high which could, if not changed or if agreement is reached on a lower level of interchange, adversely affect the yield on U.K. credit card portfolios, including ours, and could therefore adversely impact our earnings. Other U.K. legal developments include communications with the OFT as to its interpretation of consumer credit law which could lead to changes in the lending agreements from time to time. The OFT is carrying out an industry wide investigation into alleged unfair contract terms in lending agreements and questioning how credit card companies calculate default charges, such as late, overlimit and returned check fees, in the U.K. The OFT asserts that the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 render unenforceable consumer lending agreement terms relating to default charges to the extent that the charge is disproportionately high in relation to the actual cost of the default to the companies. The OFT may seek an agreement with the companies to change their practices or, if this is not possible, may obtain a court injunction to prevent the continued use of the alleged unfair term. In July 2005, the Company received a letter from the OFT indicating the OFT had reached a provisional conclusion that the levels of default charges the credit card companies impose are excessive. The OFT also issued a press release the following day indicating that it had written to eight major credit card companies to consult on its provisional conclusion. The OFT had at that time, given the credit card companies three months in which to provide suitable undertakings or otherwise to address the concerns it has raised. Discussions between the OFT and the Company continue to be ongoing and the OFT has now indicated it may instead issue a statement of principles; it is unclear at this time in what the principles might state or in what way the principles might impact the Company. In the event the OFT’s view prevails, the Company’s default charges in the U.K. could be significantly reduced. In addition, should the OFT prevail in its challenge, the Company may also be subject to claims from customers seeking reimbursement of default charges. The Company is assessing the OFT challenge and cannot state what its eventual outcome will be. Any potential impact could vary based on business strategies or other actions the Company takes to attempt to limit the impact.

Statistical Information

The statistical information required by Item 1 can be found in Item 6 “Selected Financial Data”, Item 7 “Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”, as follows:

18

Table of Contents

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. We also may make written or oral forward-looking statements in our periodic reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission on Forms 10-Q and 8-K, in our annual report to shareholders, in our proxy statements, in our offering circulars and prospectuses, in press releases and other written materials and in statements made by our officers, directors or employees to third parties. Statements that are not about historical facts, including statements about our beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include information relating to our future earnings per share, growth in managed loans outstanding, product mix, segment growth, managed revenue margin, funding costs, operations costs, employment growth, marketing expense, delinquencies and charge-offs. Forward-looking statements also include statements using words such as “expect,” “anticipate,” “hope,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate,” “target” or similar expressions. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current plans, estimates and projections, and you should not unduly rely on them.

Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including the risks discussed below. Our future performance and actual results may differ materially from those expressed in these forward-looking statements. Many of the factors that will determine these results and values are beyond our ability to control or predict. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. You should carefully consider the factors discussed below in evaluating these forward-looking statements.

This section highlights specific risks that could affect our business and us. Although we have tried to discuss key factors, please be aware that other risks may prove to be important in the future. New risks may emerge at any time and we cannot predict such risks or estimate the extent to which they may affect our financial performance. In addition to the factors discussed elsewhere in this report, among the other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are the following:

We Face Intense Competition in All of Our Markets

We face intense competition from many other providers of credit cards, automobile loans, retail banking services and other consumer financial products and services. In particular, in our credit card activities, we compete with international, national, regional and local bank card issuers, with other general purpose credit or charge card issuers, and to a certain extent, issuers of smart cards and debit cards. Our credit card business also competes with providers of other types of financial services and consumer loans such as home equity lines and other mortgage related products that offer consumer debt consolidation. Thus, the cost to acquire new accounts will continue to vary among product lines and may rise. Other companies may compete with us for customers by offering lower initial interest rates and fees, higher credit limits and/or customer services or product features that are or may appear to be more attractive than those we offer. Because customers often choose credit card issuers (or other sources of financing) based on price (primarily interest rates and fees), credit limit and other product features, customer loyalty is limited. In addition, intense competition may lead to product and pricing practices that may adversely impact long-term customer loyalty; we may choose to not engage in such practices, which may adversely impact our ability to compete, particularly in the short term. Increased competition has resulted in, and may continue to cause, a decrease in credit card response rates and reduced productivity of marketing dollars invested in certain lines of business. Competition may also have an impact on customer attrition as our customers accept offers from other credit card lenders and/or providers of other consumer lending products, such as home equity financing.

Our other consumer lending businesses, including auto lending, small business lending, home loan lending, installment lending, our commercial lending businesses, and our businesses in international markets also compete on a similar variety of factors, including price, product features and customer service. These businesses may also experience a decline in marketing efficiency and/or an increase in customer attrition. Additionally, the National

19

Table of Contents

Bank competes with national and state banks for deposits, loans, and trust accounts, and also competes with other financial services companies in offering various types of financial services.

Some of our competitors may be substantially larger than we are, which may give those competitors advantages, including a more diversified product and customer base, operational efficiencies, broad-based local distribution capabilities, lower-cost funding and more versatile technology platforms. These competitors may also consolidate with other financial institutions in ways that enhance these advantages and intensify our competitive environment.

In such a competitive environment, we may lose entire accounts, or may lose account balances, to competing financial institutions, or find it more costly to maintain our existing customer base. Customer attrition from any or all of our lending products, together with any lowering of interest rates or fees that we might implement to retain customers, could reduce our revenues and therefore our earnings. Similarly, customer attrition from our deposit products, in addition to an increase of rates an/or services that we may undertake to retain those deposits, may increase our expenses and therefore reduce our earnings. We expect that competition will continue to grow more intense with respect to most of our products, including our diversified products and the products we offer internationally.

We May Experience Increased Delinquencies and Credit Losses

Like other lenders, we face the risk that our customers will not repay their loans. Rising losses or leading indicators of rising losses (higher delinquencies or bankruptcy rates; lower collateral values) may require us to increase our allowance for loan losses and may degrade our profitability if we are unable to raise revenue or reduce costs to compensate for higher losses. In addition, higher losses may adversely affect the performance of our securitizations, may increase our cost of funds, and may limit our access to financial markets. In particular, we face the following risks in this area:

20

Table of Contents

We Face Risk From Economic Downturns

Delinquencies and credit losses in the consumer finance industry generally increase during economic downturns or recessions. Likewise, consumer demand may decline during an economic downturn or recession. In the United States, we face the risk that the effects of higher energy costs, higher interest rates, pressure on housing prices and hurricane damages may weaken the economy’s labor markets. Accordingly, an economic downturn in the United States (either local or national), can hurt our financial performance as accountholders default on their loans or, in the case of credit card accounts, carry lower balances and reduce credit card purchase activity. Furthermore, because our business model is to lend across the credit spectrum, we make loans to lower credit quality customers. These customers generally have higher rates of charge-offs and delinquencies than do higher credit quality customers. Additionally, we face the risk that the recession and downturn in consumer credit in the United Kingdom may continue to worsen, which, could also hurt our financial performance.

We Face Strategic Risks in Sustaining Our Growth and Pursuing Diversification

Our growth strategy has multiple components. First, we seek to continue to grow our established businesses, such as our domestic credit card and automobile finance businesses. Second, we hope to continue to diversify our business, both geographically and in product mix. We seek to do this by growing our lending businesses, including credit cards, internationally, principally in the United Kingdom and Canada, and by identifying, pursuing and expanding new business opportunities, such as branch banking and other consumer loan products. Our acquisition of Hibernia enabled us to expand into the branch banking business, which we believe can be a growth business for the Company, and is a key component of our ongoing diversification strategy. Our ability to continue to grow is driven by the success of our fundamental business plan, the level of our investments in new businesses or regions and our ability to apply our risk management skills to new businesses. This risk has many components, including:

21

Table of Contents

We May Fail To Realize All of the Anticipated Benefits of our Merger with Hibernia Corporation.

The success of the merger will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from combining the businesses of Capital One and Hibernia. However, to realize these anticipated benefits, we must successfully combine the businesses of Capital One and Hibernia. If we are not able to achieve these objectives, the anticipated benefits of the merger, such as cost savings and other synergies, may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

Prior to the completion of the merger, Capital One and Hibernia operated independently. It is possible that the ongoing integration process could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of each company’s ongoing businesses or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with clients, customers, depositors and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger. Integration efforts between the two companies will also divert management attention and resources. These integration matters could have an adverse effect on the Company during such transition period.

Reputational Risk and Social Factors May Impact our Results

Our ability to originate and maintain accounts is highly dependent upon consumer and other external perceptions of our business practices and/or our financial health. Adverse perceptions regarding our business practices and/or our financial health could damage our reputation in both the customer and funding markets, leading to difficulties in generating and maintaining accounts as well as in financing them. Adverse developments with respect to the consumer or other external perceptions regarding the practices of our competitors, or our industry as a whole, may also adversely impact our reputation. In addition, adverse reputational impacts on third parties with whom we have important relationships, such as our independent auditors, may also adversely impact our reputation. Adverse impacts on our reputation, or the reputation of our industry, may also result in greater regulatory and/or legislative scrutiny, which may lead to laws or regulations that may change or constrain the manner in which we engage with our customers and the products we offer them. Adverse reputational impacts or events may also increase our litigation risk. See “We Face the Risk of a Complex and Changing Regulatory and Legal Environment” below. To this end, we carefully monitor internal and external developments for areas of potential reputational risk and have established governance structures to assist in evaluating such risks in our business practices and decisions.

22

Table of Contents

In addition, a variety of social factors may cause changes in credit card and other consumer finance use, payment patterns and the rate of defaults by accountholders and borrowers. These social factors include changes in consumer confidence levels, the public’s perception of the use of credit cards and other consumer debt, and changing attitudes about incurring debt and the stigma of personal bankruptcy.

We Face Risk Related to the Strength of our Operational, Technological and Organizational Infrastructure

Our ability to grow and compete is dependent on our ability to build or acquire the necessary operational and technological infrastructure and to manage the cost of that infrastructure while we expand. Similar to other large corporations, in our case, operational risk can manifest itself in many ways, such as errors related to failed or inadequate processes, faulty or disabled computer systems, fraud by employees or persons outside of Capital One and exposure to external events. We are dependent on our operational infrastructure to help manage these risks. In addition, we are heavily dependent on the strength and capability of our technology systems which we use both to interface with our customers and to manage our internal financial and other systems. Our ability to develop and deliver new products that meet the needs of our existing customers and attract new ones depends on the functionality of our technology systems. Our ability to develop and implement effective marketing campaigns also depends on our technology. Additionally, our ability to run our business in compliance with applicable laws and regulations is dependent on these infrastructures.

We continuously monitor our operational and technological capabilities and make modifications and improvements when we believe it will be cost effective to do so. In some instances, we may build and maintain these capabilities ourselves. We also outsource some of these functions to third parties. These third parties may experience errors or disruptions that could adversely impact us and over which we may have limited control. As we increase the amount of our infrastructure that we outsource to third parties, we increase our exposure to this risk. We also face risk from the integration of new infrastructure platforms and/or new third party providers of such platforms into our existing businesses. We are currently undertaking a project with Total System Services, Inc. (“TSYS”) to transfer to a new technological platform that will result in TSYS providing processing services for Capital One’s North American portfolio of consumer and small business credit card accounts. Our ability to successfully transition to this new platform as well as TSYS’s ongoing ability to provide services to us, could impact our performance in the future.

In addition to creating a solid infrastructure platform, we are also dependent on recruiting management and operations personnel with the experience to run an increasingly large and complex business. Although we take steps to retain our existing management talent and recruit new talent as needed, we face a competitive market for such talent and there can be no assurance that we will continue to be able to maintain and build a management team capable of running our increasingly large and complex business.

We May Face Limited Availability of Financing, Variation in Our Funding Costs and Uncertainty in Our Securitization Financing

In general, the amount, type and cost of our funding, including financing from other financial institutions, the capital markets and deposits, directly impacts our expense in operating our business and growing our assets and therefore, can positively or negatively affect our financial results.

A number of factors could make such financing more difficult, more expensive or unavailable on any terms both domestically and internationally (where funding transactions may be on terms more or less favorable than in the United States), including, but not limited to, financial results and losses, changes within our organization, specific events that adversely impact our reputation, changes in the activities of our business partners, disruptions in the capital markets, specific events that adversely impact the financial services industry, counter-party availability, changes affecting our assets, our corporate and regulatory structure, interest rate fluctuations, ratings agencies actions, and the legal, regulatory, accounting and tax environments governing our funding transactions.

23

Table of Contents

In addition, our ability to raise funds is strongly affected by the general state of the U.S. and world economies, and may become increasingly difficult due to economic and other factors. Also, we compete for funding with other banks, savings banks and similar companies, some of which are publicly traded. Many of these institutions are substantially larger, may have more capital and other resources and may have better debt ratings than we do. In addition, as some of these competitors consolidate with other financial institutions, these advantages may increase. Competition from these institutions may increase our cost of funds.

As part of our capital markets financing, we actively securitize our consumer loans. The occurrence of certain events may cause the securitization transactions to amortize earlier than scheduled, which would accelerate the need for additional funding. This early amortization could, among other things, have a significant effect on the ability of the Bank and the Savings Bank to meet the capital adequacy requirements as all off-balance sheet loans experiencing such early amortization would have to be recorded on the balance sheet. See pages 54-56 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity Risk Management” contained in the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Finally, Hibernia has experienced a significant increase in deposits since the Gulf Coast hurricanes, most likely as a result of customers receiving federal funds and insurance payments relating to the hurricanes. Currently, it is unclear what customers will do with these deposits on a long-term scale. It is possible that as rebuilding and reinvesting in the Gulf Coast area begins, the amount of these incremental deposits with Hibernia could decrease significantly.

We May Experience Changes in Our Debt Ratings

In general, ratings agencies play an important role in determining, by means of the ratings they assign to issuers and their debt, the availability and cost of wholesale funding. We currently receive ratings from several ratings entities for our secured and unsecured borrowings. As private entities, ratings agencies have broad discretion in the assignment of ratings. A rating below investment grade typically reduces availability and increases the cost of market-based funding, both secured and unsecured. A debt rating of Baa3 or higher by Moody’s Investors Service, or BBB- or higher by Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings, is considered investment grade. Currently, all three ratings agencies rate the unsecured senior debt of the Bank, Hibernia and the Corporation as investment grade. The following chart shows ratings for Capital One Financial Corporation, Capital One Bank and Hibernia National Bank as of December 31, 2005. As of that date, the ratings outlooks were as follows:

Because we depend on the capital markets for funding and capital, we could experience reduced availability and increased cost of funding if our debt ratings were lowered. This result could make it difficult for us to grow at or to a level we currently anticipate. The immediate impact of a ratings downgrade on other sources of funding, however, would be limited, as our deposit funding and pricing, as well as some of our unsecured corporate borrowing, is not generally determined by corporate debt ratings.

We Face Market Risk of Interest Rate and Exchange Rate Fluctuations

Like other financial institutions, we borrow money from institutions and depositors, which we then lend to customers. We earn interest on the consumer loans we make, and pay interest on the deposits and borrowings we

24

Table of Contents

use to fund those loans. Changes in these two interest rates affect the value of our assets and liabilities. If the rate of interest we pay on our borrowings increases more than the rate of interest we earn on our loans, our net interest income, and therefore our earnings, would fall. Our earnings could also be hurt if the rates on our consumer loans fall more quickly than those on our borrowings. We also seek to minimize market risk to a level that is immaterial to our net income. The financial instruments and techniques we use to manage the risk of interest rate and exchange rate fluctuations, such as asset/liability matching and interest rate and exchange rate swaps and hedges and some forward exchange contracts, may not always work successfully or may not be available at a reasonable cost. Furthermore, if these techniques become unavailable or impractical, our earnings could be subject to volatility and decreases as interest rates and exchange rates change.

Changes in interest rates also affect the balances our customers carry on their credit cards and affect the rate of pre-payment for installment loan products. When interest rates fall, there may be more low-rate product alternatives available to our customers. Consequently, their credit card balances may fall and pre-payment rates for installment loan products may rise. We can mitigate this risk by reducing the interest rates we charge or by refinancing installment loan products. However, these changes can reduce the overall yield on our portfolio if we do not adequately provide for them in our interest rate hedging strategies. When interest rates rise, there are fewer low-rate alternatives available to customers. Consequently, credit card balances may rise (or fall more slowly) and pre-payment rates on installment lending products may fall. In this circumstance, we may have to raise additional funds at higher interest rates. In our credit card business, we could, subject to legal and competitive constraints, mitigate this risk by increasing the interest rates we charge, although such changes may increase opportunities for our competitors to offer attractive products to our customers and consequently increase customer attrition from our portfolio. We could also mitigate this risk through hedging strategies, if available, if we are unable to do so, we could suffer adverse impacts on overall portfolio yield. Rising interest rates across the industry may also lead to higher delinquencies as customers face increasing interest payments both on our products and on other loans they may hold. See pages 56-57 in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Interest Rate Risk Management” contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.

We Face the Risk of a Complex and Changing Regulatory and Legal Environment

We operate in a heavily regulated industry and are therefore subject to a wide array of banking, consumer lending and deposit laws and regulations that apply to almost every element of our business. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in financial, structural and operational penalties, including receivership. In addition, efforts to comply with these laws and regulations may increase our costs and/or limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities. See “Supervision and Regulation” above. Federal and state laws and regulations, as well as laws and regulations to which we are subject in foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct business, significantly limit the types of activities in which we may engage. For example, federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations, and laws and regulations of foreign jurisdictions where we conduct business, limit the manner in which we may offer and extend credit. From time to time, the U.S. Congress, the states and foreign governments consider changing these laws and may enact new laws or amend existing laws and regulatory authorities may issue new regulations. Such new laws or regulations could limit the amount of interest or fees we can charge, restrict our ability to collect on account balances, or materially affect us or the banking or credit card industries in some other manner. Additional federal, state and foreign consumer protection legislation also could seek to expand the privacy protections afforded to customers of financial institutions and restrict our ability to share or receive customer information.

In addition, banking regulators possess broad discretion to issue or revise regulations, or to issue guidance, which may significantly impact us. For example, the Federal Trade Commission has issued, and will continue to issue, a variety of regulations under the FACT Act of 2003, the Federal Reserve has announced proposed rule-making, and has issued some final rules, and in the UK the Office of Fair Trading is conducting an industry investigation on the calculation of default charges, all of which may impact us. Additionally, the new bankruptcy reform legislation will put additional requirements on the Company regarding disclosures on the effects on consumers of making only minimum payments on their accounts. We cannot, however, predict whether and how any new

25

Table of Contents

guidelines issued or other regulatory actions taken by the banking or other regulators will be applied to the Bank, the National Bank or the Savings Bank, in what manner such regulations might be applied, or the resulting effect on us, the Bank, the National Bank or the Savings Bank. There can be no assurance that this kind of regulatory action will not have a negative impact on us and/or our financial results.

The Credit Card Industry Faces Increased Litigation Risks Relating to Industry Structure

We face possible risks from the outcomes of certain credit card industry litigation. In 1998, the United States Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against the MasterCard and Visa membership associations composed of financial institutions that issue MasterCard or Visa credit or debit cards (“associations”), alleging, among other things, that the associations had violated antitrust law and engaged in unfair practices by not allowing member banks to issue cards from competing brands, such as American Express and Discover Financial Services. In 2001, a New York district court entered judgment in favor of the Department of Justice and ordered the associations to repeal these policies. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court and, on October 4, 2004, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case. In November 2004, American Express filed an antitrust lawsuit (the “Amex lawsuit”) against the associations and several member banks alleging that the associations and member banks jointly and severally implemented and enforced illegal exclusionary agreements that prevented member banks from issuing American Express and Discover cards. The complaint requests civil monetary damages, which could be trebled. The Corporation, the Bank, and the Savings Bank are named defendants in this lawsuit.

Separately, a number of entities, each purporting to represent a class of retail merchants, have also filed antitrust lawsuits (the “Interchange lawsuits”) against the associations and several member banks, including the Corporation and its subsidiaries, alleging among other things, that the associations and member banks conspired to fix the level of interchange fees. The complaints request civil monetary damages, which could be trebled. In October 2005, the Interchange lawsuits were consolidated before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

We believe that we have meritorious defenses with respect to these cases and intend to defend these cases vigorously. At the present time, management is not in a position to determine whether the resolution of these cases will have a material adverse effect on either the consolidated financial position of the Corporation or the Corporation’s results of operations in any future reporting period.

In addition, several merchants filed class action antitrust lawsuits, which were subsequently consolidated, against the associations relating to certain debit card products. In April 2003, the associations agreed to settle the lawsuit in exchange for payments to plaintiffs and for changes in policies and interchange rates for debit cards. Certain merchant plaintiffs have opted out of the settlements and have commenced separate lawsuits. Additionally, consumer class action lawsuits with claims mirroring the merchants’ allegations have been filed in several courts. Finally, the associations, as well as certain member banks, continue to face additional lawsuits regarding policies, practices, products and fees.

With the exception of the Interchange lawsuits and the Amex lawsuit, the Corporation and its subsidiaries are not parties to the lawsuits against the associations described above and therefore will not be directly liable for any amount related to any possible or known settlements of such lawsuits. However, the Corporation’s subsidiary banks are member banks of MasterCard and Visa and thus may be affected by settlements or lawsuits relating to these issues, including changes in interchange payments. In addition, it is possible that the scope of these lawsuits may expand and that other member banks, including the Corporation’s subsidiary banks, may be brought into the lawsuits or future lawsuits. The associations are also subject to additional litigation, including suits regarding foreign exchange fees. As a result of such litigation, the associations are expected to continue to evolve as corporate entities, including by changing their governance structures, as previously announced by the associations.

Given the complexity of the issues raised by these lawsuits and the uncertainty regarding: (i) the outcome of these suits, (ii) the likelihood and amount of any possible judgments, (iii) the likelihood, amount and validity of

26

Table of Contents

any claim against the associations’ member banks, including the banks and the Corporation, and (iv) changes in industry structure that may result from the suits and (v) the effects of these suits, in turn, on competition in the industry, member banks, and interchange and association fees, we cannot determine at this time the long-term effects of these suits on us.

We Face the Risk of Fluctuations in Our Expenses and Other Costs that May Hurt Our Financial Results

Our expenses and other costs, such as operating and marketing expenses, directly affect our earnings results. In light of the extremely competitive environment in which we operate, and because the size and scale of many of our competitors provides them with increased operational efficiencies, it is important that we are able to successfully manage such expenses. Many factors can influence the amount of our expenses, as well as how quickly they may increase. For example, further increases in postal rates or termination of our negotiated service arrangement with the United States Postal Service could raise our costs for postal service. As our business develops, changes or expands, additional expenses can arise from management of outsourced services, asset purchases, structural reorganization, a reevaluation of business strategies and/or expenses to comply with new or changing laws or regulations. Other factors that can affect the amount of our expenses include legal and administrative cases and proceedings, which can be expensive to pursue or defend.

We Face Risks Related to the Impact of the Gulf Coast Hurricanes That May Be Substantial and Cannot Be Predicted

Hibernia is headquartered in New Orleans, Louisiana, and maintains branches in the areas of Louisiana and Texas that sustained significant damage from the Gulf Coast hurricanes. Hibernia’s operations in other parts of Louisiana and Texas have not been impacted, either significantly or at all, by the hurricanes.

As a result of the hurricanes, Hibernia is experiencing increased costs, including the costs of rebuilding or repairing branches and other properties as well as repairing or replacing equipment, some of which are not covered by insurance. Hibernia has also announced substantial employee and recovery related costs.

The Gulf Coast hurricanes have also affected Hibernia’s consumer, mortgage, auto, commercial and small business loan portfolios by damaging properties pledged as collateral and by impairing certain borrowers’ ability to repay their loans. In addition, Hibernia may experience losses from certain customer assistance policies, such as fee waivers, adopted in the wake of the hurricanes. The hurricanes may continue to affect Hibernia’s loan originations and loan portfolio quality into the future and could also adversely impact Hibernia’s deposit base. More generally, the combined company’s ability to compete effectively in the branch banking business in the future, especially with financial institutions whose operations were not concentrated in the affected area or which may have greater resources than the combined company, will depend primarily on Hibernia’s ability to continue normal business operations and experience growth despite the impact of the hurricanes. The severity and duration of these effects will depend on a variety of factors that are beyond Hibernia’s control, including the amount and timing of government, private and philanthropic investment (including deposits) in the region, the pace of rebuilding and economic recovery in the region generally, the extent to which the hurricanes’ property damage is covered by insurance, and the pace at which Hibernia restores its business operations in the various markets in which it operates.

None of the effects described above can be accurately predicted or quantified. As a result, significant uncertainty remains regarding the impact the hurricanes will have on the business, financial condition and results of operations of the combined company and the ability of the combined company to realize the anticipated benefits from the merger. Further, the area in which Hibernia operates may experience hurricanes and other storms in the future, and some of those hurricanes and storms may have effects similar to those caused by the Gulf Coast hurricanes.

Not applicable.

27

Table of Contents

We lease our 570,000 square foot headquarters building on 31 acres of land at 1680 Capital One Drive, McLean, Virginia. The building houses our primary executive offices and Northern Virginia staff and is leased through December 2010. In December 2005, we exercised our option to purchase the headquarters and land at a fixed cost; the purchase is expected to be completed by the end of first quarter 2006.

Additionally, we own approximately 316 acres of land in Goochland County, Virginia purchased for the construction of an office campus to consolidate certain operations in the Richmond area. In 2002, two office buildings and a support facility consisting of approximately 365,000 square feet were completed and occupied. In 2003 four office buildings and a training center consisting of approximately 690,000 square feet were completed and occupied. In 2004, one additional office building consisting of approximately 130,000 square feet was completed and in 2005, it was occupied.

Other owned facilities and land include approximately 1.8 million square feet in office buildings and approximately 350,000 square feet of land in Louisiana; approximately 800,000 square feet in office buildings and 780,000 square feet of land in Texas; 460,000 square feet in office, data and production buildings in Richmond, Virginia; and a 344,075 square feet facility in Nottingham, Great Britain, from which we conduct credit, collections, customer service and other operations.

We currently lease approximately 1.8 million square feet of office space from which credit, collections, customer service, banking and other operations are conducted, in Alabama, California, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and insignificant space for business development in other locations. We are currently migrating out of approximately 343,000 square feet of leased office space and into our campuses in McLean, Virginia and Goochland County, Virginia. Additionally we have leased approximately 933,946 square feet of land in Louisiana and Texas.

Generally, we use our properties to support all of our business segments, although our properties located outside of the U.S. are used principally to support our Global Financial Services segment, our properties in California are used principally to support our Auto Finance segment, and our properties in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi are used principally to support our Banking business. Our properties in Texas are used to support both our Auto Finance segment and our Banking business.

The information required by Item 3 is included in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 19” on pages 106-109.

During the fourth quarter of our fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, no matters were submitted for a vote of our stockholders.

28

Table of Contents

PART II

The remaining information required by Item 5 is included under the following:

29

Table of Contents

30

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

Capital One Financial Corporation (the “Corporation”) is a diversified financial services company whose banking and non-banking subsidiaries market a variety of financial products and services. The Corporation’s principal subsidiaries are Capital One Bank (the “Bank”) which currently offers credit card products and takes retail deposits, Capital One, F.S.B. (the “Savings Bank”), which offers consumer and commercial lending and consumer deposit products, Hibernia National Bank (the “National Bank”) which offers a broad spectrum of financial products and services to consumers, small businesses and commercial clients, and Capital One Auto Finance, Inc. (“COAF”) which offers automobile and other motor vehicle financing products. The Corporation and its subsidiaries are hereafter collectively referred to as the “Company”. As of December 31, 2005, the Company had $47.9 billion in deposits and $105.5 billion in managed loans outstanding and was one of the largest providers of MasterCard and Visa credit cards in the world.

The Company’s profitability is affected by the net interest income and non-interest income generated on earning assets, consumer usage and payment patterns, credit quality, levels of marketing expense and operating efficiency. The Company’s revenues consist primarily of interest income on consumer loans (including past-due fees) and securities and non-interest income consisting of servicing income on securitized loans, fees (such as annual membership, cash advance, overlimit and other fee income, collectively “fees”), cross-sell, interchange and gains on the securitizations of loans. Loan securitization transactions qualifying as sales under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) remove the loan receivables from the consolidated balance sheet; however, the Company continues to both own and service the related accounts. The Company generates earnings from its managed loan portfolio that includes both on-balance sheet and off-balance sheet loans. Interest income, fees, and recoveries in excess of the interest paid to investors and charge-offs generated from off-balance sheet loans are recognized as servicing and securitizations income.

The Company’s primary expenses are the costs of funding assets, provision for loan losses, operating expenses (including associate salaries and benefits), marketing expenses and income taxes. Marketing expenses (e.g., advertising, printing, credit bureau costs and postage) to implement the Company’s product strategies are expensed as incurred while the revenues resulting from acquired accounts are recognized over their life.

II. Significant Accounting Policies

The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements contain a summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies, including a discussion of recently issued accounting pronouncements. Several of these policies are considered to be important to the portrayal of the Company’s financial condition, since they require management to make difficult, complex or subjective judgments, some of which may relate to matters that are inherently uncertain. These policies include determination of the level of allowance for loan losses, accounting for securitization transactions, recognition of customer reward costs and finance charge and fee revenue recognition.

Additional information about accounting policies can be found in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1” on page 76.

Allowance for Loan Losses

The allowance for loan losses is maintained at the amount estimated to be sufficient to absorb probable principal losses, net of principal recoveries (including recovery of collateral), inherent in the existing reported loan portfolio. The provision for loan losses is the periodic cost of maintaining an adequate allowance. The amount of allowance necessary is determined primarily based on a migration analysis of delinquent and current accounts and forward loss curves and historical loss trends. The entire balance of an account is contractually delinquent if the minimum payment is not received by the payment due date. In evaluating the sufficiency of the allowance for loan losses, management takes into consideration the following factors: recent trends in delinquencies and

31

Table of Contents

charge-offs including bankrupt, deceased and recovered amounts; forecasting uncertainties and size of credit risks; the degree of risk inherent in the composition of the loan portfolio; economic conditions; legal and regulatory guidance; credit evaluations and underwriting policies; seasonality; and the value of collateral supporting the loans. To the extent credit experience is not indicative of future performance or other assumptions used by management do not prevail, loss experience could differ significantly, resulting in either higher or lower future provision for loan losses, as applicable.

Accounting for Securitization Transactions

Loan securitization involves the transfer of a pool of loan receivables to a trust or other special purpose entity. The trust sells an undivided interest in the pool of loan receivables to third-party investors through the issuance of asset backed securities and distributes the proceeds to the Company as consideration for the loans transferred. The Company removes loan receivables from the Consolidated Balance Sheets for securitizations that qualify as sales in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities—a Replacement of FASB Statement No. 125 (“SFAS 140”). The trusts are qualified special purpose entities as defined by SFAS 140 and are not subsidiaries of the Company and are not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The gain on sale recorded from off-balance sheet securitizations is based on the estimated fair value of the assets sold and retained and liabilities incurred, and is recorded at the time of sale, net of transaction costs. The related receivable is the interest-only strip, which is based on the present value of the estimated future cash flows from excess finance charges and past-due fees over the sum of the return paid to security holders, estimated contractual servicing fees and credit losses. Gains on securitization transactions, fair value adjustments related to residual interests and earnings on the Company’s securitizations are included in servicing and securitizations income in the Consolidated Statements of Income and amounts due from the trusts are included in accounts receivable from securitizations on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Certain estimates inherent in the determination of the fair value of the retained interests are influenced by factors outside the Company’s control, and as a result, such estimates could materially change and actual results could be materially different from such estimates. Any future gains that will be recognized in accordance with SFAS 140 will be dependent on the timing and amount of future securitizations. The Company intends to continuously assess the performance of new and existing securitization transactions, and therefore the valuation of retained interests, as estimates of future cash flows change.

Rewards

The Company offers credit cards that provide reward program members with various rewards such as airline tickets, free or deeply discounted products or cash rebates, based on purchase volume. The Company establishes a rewards liability based on points earned which are ultimately expected to be redeemed and the average cost per point redemption. As points are redeemed, the rewards liability is relieved. The cost of reward programs is reflected as a reduction to interchange income. The rewards liability will be affected over time as a result of changes in the number of account holders in the reward programs, the actual amount of points earned and redeemed, general economic conditions, the actual costs of the rewards, changes made by reward partners and changes that the Company may make to the reward programs in the future. To the extent assumptions used by management do not prevail, rewards costs could differ significantly, resulting in either a higher or lower future rewards liability, as applicable.

Finance Charge and Fee Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes earned finance charges and fee income on loans according to the contractual provisions of the credit arrangements. When the Company does not expect full payment of finance charges and fees, it does not accrue the estimated uncollectible portion as income (hereafter the “suppression amount”). To calculate the suppression amount, the Company first estimates the uncollectible portion of finance charge and fee receivables

32

Table of Contents

using a formula based on historical account migration patterns and current delinquency status. This formula is consistent with that used to estimate the allowance related to expected principal losses on reported loans. The suppression amount is calculated by adding any current period change in the estimate of the uncollectible portion of finance charge and fee receivables to the amount of finance charges and fees charged-off (net of recoveries) during the period. The Company subtracts the suppression amount from the total finance charges and fees billed during the period to arrive at total reported revenue.

The amount of finance charges and fees suppressed were $1.0 billion, $1.1 billion and $2.0 billion for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The reduction in the suppression amount was driven by the Company’s continued asset diversification beyond U.S. consumer credit cards, a continued bias toward originating higher credit quality, lower yielding loans, improved collections experience, ongoing product modifications and an overall improvement in general economic conditions. These factors drove a reduction in total finance charges and fees billed during the period and increased the likelihood of collectibility. Both the lower volume of finance charges and fees billed and the higher expectations of collectibility drove the reduction in the amount of finance charges and fees suppressed. Actual payment experience could differ significantly from management’s assumption, resulting in higher or lower future finance charge and fee income.

III. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Off-Balance Sheet Securitizations

As discussed in “Significant Accounting Policies—Accounting for Securitization Transactions,” the Company actively engages in off-balance sheet securitization transactions of loans for funding purposes. The Company receives the proceeds from third party investors for securities issued from the Company’s securitization vehicles which are collateralized by transferred receivables from the Company’s portfolio. Securities outstanding totaling $45.3 billion as of December 31, 2005, represent undivided interests in the pools of consumer loan receivables that are sold in underwritten offerings or in private placement transactions.

The securitization of consumer loans has been a significant source of liquidity for the Company. Maturity terms of the existing securitizations vary from 2006 to 2025 and, for revolving securitizations, have accumulation periods during which principal payments are aggregated to make payments to investors. As payments on the loans are accumulated and are no longer reinvested in new loans, the Company’s funding requirements for such new loans increase accordingly. The Company believes that it has the ability to continue to utilize off-balance sheet securitization arrangements as a source of liquidity; however, a significant reduction or termination of the Company’s off-balance sheet securitizations could require the Company to draw down existing liquidity and/or to obtain additional funding through the issuance of secured borrowings or unsecured debt, the raising of additional deposits or the slowing of asset growth to offset or to satisfy liquidity needs.

Recourse Exposure

The credit quality of the receivables transferred is supported by credit enhancements, which may be in various forms including interest-only strips, subordinated interests in the pool of receivables, cash collateral accounts, cash reserve accounts and accrued interest and fees on the investor’s share of the pool of receivables. Some of these credit enhancements are retained by the seller and are referred to as retained residual interests. The Company’s retained residual interests are generally restricted or subordinated to investors’ interests and their value is subject to substantial credit, repayment and interest rate risks on transferred assets if the off-balance sheet loans are not paid when due. Securitization investors and the trusts only have recourse to the retained residual interests, not the Company’s assets. See pages 109-112 in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 21” for quantitative information regarding retained interests.

33

Table of Contents

Collections and Amortization

Collections of interest and fees received on securitized receivables are used to pay interest to investors, servicing and other fees, and are available to absorb the investors’ share of credit losses. For revolving securitizations, amounts collected in excess of that needed to pay the above amounts are remitted, in general, to the Company. Under certain conditions, some of the cash collected may be retained to ensure future payments to investors. For amortizing securitizations, amounts collected in excess of the amount that is used to pay the above amounts are generally remitted to the Company, but may be paid to investors in further reduction of their outstanding principal. See page 109-112 in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 21” for quantitative information regarding revenues, expenses and cash flows that arise from securitization transactions.

Securitization transactions may amortize earlier than scheduled due to certain early amortization triggers, which would accelerate the need for funding. Additionally, early amortization would have a significant impact on the ability of the Bank and Savings Bank to meet regulatory capital adequacy requirements as all off-balance sheet loans experiencing such early amortization would be recorded on the balance sheet and accordingly would require incremental regulatory capital. As of December 31, 2005, no early amortization events related to the Company’s off-balance sheet securitizations have occurred.

The amounts of investor principal from off-balance sheet consumer loans as of December 31, 2005 that are expected to amortize into the Company’s consumer loans, or be otherwise paid over the periods indicated, are summarized in Table 9. Of the Company’s total managed loans, 43% and 52% were included in off-balance sheet securitizations for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Letters of Credit and Financial Guarantees

As a result of the acquisition of Hibernia, the Company issues letters of credit and financial guarantees (“standby letters of credit”) whereby it agrees to honor certain financial commitments in the event its customers are unable to perform. The majority of the standby letters of credit consist of financial guarantees. Collateral requirements are similar to those for funded transactions and are established based on management’s credit assessment of the customer. Management conducts regular reviews of all outstanding standby letters of credit and customer acceptances, and the results of these reviews are considered in assessing the adequacy of the Company’s allowance for loan losses.

The Company had contractual amounts of standby letters of credit of $569.2 million at December 31, 2005. As of December 31, 2005, standby letters of credit had expiration dates ranging from 2006 to 2010. The fair value of the guarantees outstanding at December 31, 2005 that have been issued since January 1, 2003, was $4.7 million and was included in other liabilities.

Loan and Line of Credit Commitments

As a result of the acquisition of Hibernia, the Company enters into commitments to extend credit are legally binding conditional agreements having fixed expirations or termination dates and specified interest rates and purposes. These commitments generally require customers to maintain certain credit standards. Collateral requirements and loan-to-value ratios are the same as those for funded transactions and are established based on management’s credit assessment of the customer. Commitments may expire without being drawn upon. Therefore, the total commitment amount does not necessarily represent future requirements. The outstanding unfunded commitments to extend credit other than credit card lines were approximately $4.7 billion as of December 31, 2005.

Funding Commitments Related to Synthetic Fuel Tax Credit Transactions

In June of 2004 and July of 2005, the Company, through two separate transactions and two consolidated special purpose entities (SPVs), purchased minority ownership interests in two entities established to operate facilities

34

Table of Contents

which produce a coal-based synthetic fuel that qualifies for tax credits pursuant to Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code. The SPVs purchased their minority interests from third parties paying $2.6 million in cash and agreeing to pay an estimated $159.1 million comprised of fixed note payments, variable payments and the funding of their share of operating losses sufficient to maintain their minority ownership percentages. Actual total payments will be based on the amount of tax credits generated through the end of 2007. In exchange, the SPVs will receive an estimated $192.0 million in tax benefits resulting from a combination of deductions, allocated operating losses, and tax credits. The Corporation has guaranteed the SPVs commitments under the purchase agreements. As of December 31, 2005, the Company has recorded $66.2 million in tax benefits and had an estimated remaining commitment for fixed note payments, variable payments and the funding of their proportionate share of the operating losses totaling $104.6 million.

Guarantees

Residual Value Guarantees

In December 2000, the Company entered into a 10-year agreement for the lease of the headquarters building being constructed in McLean, Virginia. The agreement called for monthly rent to commence upon completion, which occurred in the first quarter of 2003, and is based on LIBOR rates applied to the cost of the building funded. If, at the end of the lease term, the Company does not purchase the property, the Company guarantees a maximum residual value of up to $114.8 million representing approximately 72% of the $159.5 million cost of the building. This agreement, made with a multi-purpose entity that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of one of the Company’s lenders, provides that in the event of a sale of the property, the Company’s obligation would be equal to the sum of all amounts owed by the Company under a note issuance made in connection with the lease inception. As of December 31, 2005, the value of the building was estimated to be above the maximum residual value that the Company guarantees; thus, no deficiency existed and no liability was recorded relative to this property. During 2005, the Company notified the lender of its intention to purchase the property in 2006 and as such incurred a $20.6 million prepayment penalty related to the refinancing of the McLean headquarters facility.

Other Guarantees

In connection with certain installment loan securitization transactions, the transferee (off-balance sheet special purpose entity receiving the installment loans) entered into interest rate hedge agreements (the “swaps”) with a counterparty to reduce interest rate risk associated with the transactions. In connection with the swaps, the Corporation entered into letter agreements guaranteeing the performance of the transferee under the swaps. If at anytime the Class A invested amount equals zero and the notional amount of the swap is greater than zero resulting in an “Early Termination Date” (as defined in the securitization transaction’s Master Agreement), then (a) to the extent that, in connection with the occurrence of such Early Termination Date, the transferee is obligated to make any payments to the counterparty pursuant to the Master Agreement, the Corporation shall reimburse the transferee for the full amount of such payment and (b) to the extent that, in connection with the occurrence of an Early Termination Date, the transferee is entitled to receive any payment from the counterparty pursuant to the Master Agreement, the transferee will pay to the Corporation the amount of such payment. At December 31, 2005, the maximum exposure to the Corporation under the letter agreements was approximately $18.2 million.

IV. Reconciliation to GAAP Financial Measures

The Company’s consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP are referred to as its “reported” financial statements. Loans included in securitization transactions which qualify as sales under GAAP have been removed from the Company’s “reported” balance sheet. However, servicing fees, finance charges, and other fees, net of charge-offs, and interest paid to investors of securitizations are recognized as servicing and securitizations income on the “reported” income statement.

The Company’s “managed” consolidated financial statements reflect adjustments made related to effects of securitization transactions qualifying as sales under GAAP. The Company generates earnings from its

35

Table of Contents

“managed” loan portfolio which includes both the on-balance sheet loans and off-balance sheet loans. The Company’s “managed” income statement takes the components of the servicing and securitizations income generated from the securitized portfolio and distributes the revenue and expense to appropriate income statement line items from which it originated. For this reason, the Company believes the “managed” consolidated financial statements and related managed metrics to be useful to stakeholders.

As of and for the Year Ended December 31, 2005

V. Management Summary

Summary of the year ended December 31, 2005

The following discussion provides a summary of 2005 results compared to 2004 results and 2004 results compared to 2003 results. Each component is discussed in further detail in subsequent sections of this analysis.

Year Ended December 31, 2005 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2004

Net income increased 17% to $1.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2005, while diluted earnings per share increased 8% compared to the prior year. The growth in earnings for 2005 was driven by growth in the managed loan portfolio and contributions from 2005 acquisitions. Earnings per share growth was constrained by the increase in share count as a result of the issuance of shares in connection with the execution of the forward purchase contracts related to the mandatory convertible debt securities and stock option exercise activity.

Revenue growth was driven by growth in the managed loan portfolio and contributions from 2005 acquisitions. Provision for loan losses increased due to growth in the reported loan portfolio, estimated losses from the Gulf Coast Hurricanes, and an increase in net charge-offs resulting from the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Act of 2005 (“new bankruptcy legislation”). Non-interest expense increased in 2005 driven by increases in operating expense. The increase in operating expense was driven primarily by the 2005 acquisitions, which contributed 86% of the overall increase, and slightly higher one-time charges in 2005, offset by lower 2005 charges related to the corporate-wide cost initiatives. Although operating expenses increased for the year, operating expense as a percentage of average managed assets continued to decline, reflecting the

36

Table of Contents

Company’s improved operating efficiency. The Company’s return on managed assets of 1.72% is consistent with prior years and reflects the sustainability and diversification of the Company’s earnings stream.

The Company continues to achieve strong loan growth in its Auto Finance and Global Financial Services segments, which accounted for 91% of the loan growth in 2005 and represents 45% of managed loans at December 31, 2005, excluding $16.3 billion in loans added through the Hibernia acquisition. This growth was achieved through organic originations and the acquisition of Onyx Acceptance Corporation (“Onyx”), a specialty auto loan originator and the Key Bank portfolio which are included in the Auto Finance segment.

In 2005, the Company expanded its lending and deposit products and its distribution channels while delivering strong results and maintaining a strong balance sheet. Total assets continue to grow and the Company continues to maintain significant levels of liquidity. Capital ratios remain well above the regulatory “well capitalized” thresholds following the acquisition of Hibernia.

Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2003

Net income increased 36% over the prior year, while diluted earnings per share increased 28% compared to the prior year. The growth in earnings for 2004 was primarily driven by an increase in the managed consumer loan portfolio, a reduction in the provision for loan losses, and an increase in servicing and securitization income and other non-interest income, offset in part by an increase in marketing and operating expenses.

Managed loans consist of the Company’s reported loan portfolio combined with the off-balance sheet securitized loan portfolio. The Company has retained servicing rights for its securitized loans and receives servicing fees in addition to the excess spread generated from the off-balance sheet loan portfolio. Average managed loans increased 17% for the year ended December 31, 2004.

The managed net interest margin for the year ended December 31, 2004, decreased 76 basis points. This decrease was due to a reduction in managed earning asset yields, slightly offset by a reduction in the cost of funds. Managed loan yields decreased by 83 basis points for the year ended December 31, 2004. The decrease in managed loan yields resulted from the Company’s continued asset diversification beyond U.S. consumer credit cards and a bias toward originating higher credit quality, lower yielding loans. In addition, the Company built the average size of its liquidity portfolio by $3.5 billion, placing additional downward pressure on managed earning asset yields as the yield on the liquidity portfolio is lower than the yield on consumer loans.

For the year ended December 31, 2004, the provision for loan losses decreased to $1.2 billion from $1.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2003. The decrease in the provision for loan losses reflects a reduction in net charge-offs, improving delinquency rates and lower forecasted charge-offs for the reported loan portfolio at December 31, 2004. The improvements in the Company’s credit quality metrics are a result of the continued asset diversification beyond U.S consumer credit cards, continued bias toward originating higher credit quality, lower yielding loans, improved collection experience and an overall improvement in general economic conditions compared with the prior year.

Servicing and securitizations income increased $432.1 million as a result of a 16% increase in the average off-balance sheet loan portfolio for the year ended December 31, 2004 when compared with the prior year, partially offset by a reduction in the excess spread generated by the off-balance sheet portfolio due to a higher concentration of higher credit quality, lower yielding loans.

For the year ended December 31, 2004, other non-interest income increased 51%, when compared to the prior year. This increase is primarily attributable to $72.6 million in pre-tax gains recognized in 2004 on the sale of the Company’s joint venture investment in South Africa and sale of the French loan portfolio. The remaining variance is due to increases in income derived from purchased charged-off loan portfolios, slightly offset by a

37

Table of Contents

decrease in auto gains and an increase in losses on sales of securities available for sale and losses on the repurchases of senior notes during 2004.

Marketing expense increased 20% for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to the prior year. The increase in marketing expense resulted from favorable opportunities to originate loans during 2004 combined with continued brand investments. Operating expenses increased 7%, for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increases were primarily related to charges associated with corporate-wide cost reduction initiatives, charges related to a change in asset capitalization thresholds and charges related to the impairment of internally developed software. Although operating expenses increased, operating expenses as a percentage of average managed loans for the year ended December 31, 2004 fell 53 basis points to 5.41% from 5.94% for the prior year. This reduction reflects the continued improvement in the Company’s operating efficiencies.

2005 Significant Events

Acquisitions

In November 2005, the Company acquired Hibernia Corporation, a financial holding company headquartered in New Orleans, Louisiana. As part of the transaction, Hibernia Corporation was merged into the Corporation. Hibernia’s retail bank subsidiary, which is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the Corporation, Hibernia National Bank, has over 300 branch locations operating in Louisiana and Texas. The $5.0 billion acquisition was settled through the issuance of 32.9 million shares of the Company’s common stock and $2.2 billion in cash and resulted in $3.2 billion of goodwill.

In the first quarter of 2005, the Company acquired Onyx Acceptance Corporation, a specialty auto loan originator; Hfs Group, a United Kingdom based home equity broker; InsLogic, an insurance brokerage firm, and eSmartloan, a U.S. based online originator of home equity loans and mortgages. All were acquired in all cash transactions and resulted in $391.4 million of goodwill. In addition in the second quarter of 2005, the Company purchased a $635.3 million non-prime auto loan portfolio from Key Bank.

Gulf Coast Hurricanes

The 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes resulted in an estimated $44.1 million of loan losses expected to be realized in the future, which excludes the impact on Hibernia of $175.0 million that was reflected in Hibernia’s results prior to the acquisition. Of the total estimated impact, $28.5 million was reflected in the provision for loan losses through an increase in the allowance for loan losses and $15.6 million was reflected as a reduction of servicing and securitizations income through a write-down of retained interests related to the Company’s loan securitization programs.

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“new bankruptcy legislation”) became effective in October 2005. As a result, prior to the enactment of the new bankruptcy legislation, the Company experienced a significant increase in bankruptcy related charge-offs during 2005 which is reflected through an increase of provision for loan losses for the reported loan portfolio and through a reduction of servicing and securitizations income for the off-balance sheet loan portfolio. Reported and managed charge-offs for bankruptcies increased $146.8 million and $394.8 million, respectively, in 2005 when compared to the prior year.

Cost Reduction Initiatives and Other One-Time Items

During 2005, the Company incurred $76.3 million in employee termination and facility consolidation charges related to continued corporate-wide cost reduction initiatives. The Company also incurred a $20.6 million pre-payment penalty related to the refinancing of the McLean headquarters facility and a $28.2 million

38

Table of Contents

impairment charge related to its Global Financial Services segment insurance brokerage business. All these charges were recorded in non interest expense. As an offset, the Company recognized in non-interest income a $34.0 million gain on the sale of previously purchased charged-off loan portfolios.

Mandatory Convertible Securities

Pursuant to the original terms of the mandatory convertible securities (“Upper DECs”) issued in April of 2002, the Company completed a remarketing of $704.5 million principal amount of senior notes in February 2005. Following the remarketing, the Company extinguished $585.0 million principal amount of the remarketed senior notes using the proceeds from the issuance of $300.0 million of seven year 4.80% fixed rate senior notes and $300.0 million of twelve year 5.25% fixed rate senior notes. The Company recognized a $12.4 million loss on the extinguishment of the remarketed notes. In May 2005, the Company issued 10.4 million shares of common stock in accordance with the settlement provisions of the forward purchase contracts related to the Upper DECs. The issuance provided $747.5 million in cash proceeds.

VI. Financial Summary

Adoption of Accounting Pronouncements and Accounting Changes

In December 2003, the Company adopted the expense recognition provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123 Accounting for Stock Based Compensation (“SFAS 123”), prospectively to all awards granted, modified or settled after January 1, 2003. The adoption of SFAS 123 resulted in the recognition of compensation expense of $5.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Compensation expense resulted from the discounts provided under the Associate Stock Purchase Plan and the amortization of the estimated fair value of stock options granted during 2003.

In July 2003, the Company adopted the provisions of FASB interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an Interpretation of ARB No. 51, Revised (“FIN 46(R)”). The Company has consolidated all material variable interest entities (“VIEs”) for which the Company is the primary beneficiary, as defined by FIN 46(R). The consolidation of the VIEs resulted in a $15.0 million ($23.9 pre-tax) charge for the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Additional information about the adoption of accounting pronouncements and accounting changes can be found in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1” on page 76.

Table 1 provides a summary view of the consolidated income statement and selected metrics at and for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003.

39

Table of Contents

Table 1: Financial Summary