MORGAN STANLEY

Regulatory Capital Framework

We are a financial holding company (“FHC”) under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended and are subject to the regulation and oversight of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve”). The Federal Reserve establishes capital requirements for us, including

Table of Contents

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

“well-capitalized” standards, and evaluates our compliance with such capital requirements. The OCC establishes similar capital requirements and standards for our U.S. Bank Subsidiaries. The regulatory capital requirements are largely based on the Basel III capital standards established by the Basel Committee and also implement certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. For us to remain an FHC, we must remain well-capitalized in accordance with standards established by the Federal Reserve, and our U.S. Bank Subsidiaries must remain well-capitalized in accordance with standards established by the OCC. In addition, many of our regulated subsidiaries are subject to regulatory capital requirements, including regulated subsidiaries registered as swap dealers with the CFTC or conditionally registered as security-based swap dealers with the SEC or registered as broker-dealers or futures commission merchants. For additional information on regulatory capital requirements for our U.S. Bank Subsidiaries, as well as our subsidiaries that are swap entities, see Note 15 to the financial statements.

Regulatory Capital Requirements

We are required to maintain minimum risk-based and leverage-based capital and TLAC ratios. For more information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Capital Requirements” in the 2024 Form 10-K. For additional information on TLAC, see “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity, Long-Term Debt and Clean Holding Company Requirements” herein.

Risk-Based Regulatory Capital. Risk-based capital ratio requirements apply to Common Equity Tier 1 (“CET1”) capital, Tier 1 capital and Total capital (which includes Tier 2 capital), each as a percentage of RWA, and consist of regulatory minimum required ratios plus our capital buffer requirement. Capital requirements require certain adjustments to, and deductions from, capital for purposes of determining these ratios.

Risk-Based Regulatory Capital Ratio Requirements

1. For additional information on the SCB, see “Capital Plans, Stress Tests and the Stress Capital Buffer” herein and in the 2024 Form 10-K.

2. For a further discussion of the G-SIB capital surcharge, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Requirements—G-SIB Capital Surcharge” in the 2024 Form 10-K.

3. The CCyB can be set up to 2.5%, but is currently set by the Federal Reserve at zero.

The capital buffer requirement represents the amount of CET1 capital we must maintain above the minimum risk-based capital requirements in order to avoid restrictions on our

ability to make capital distributions, including the payment of dividends and the repurchase of stock, and to pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers. Our capital buffer requirement computed under the standardized approaches for calculating credit risk and market RWAs (“Standardized Approach”) is equal to the sum of our SCB, G-SIB capital surcharge and CCyB, and our capital buffer requirement computed under the applicable advanced approaches for calculating credit risk, market risk and operational risk RWAs (“Advanced Approach”) is equal to our 2.5% capital conservation buffer, G-SIB capital surcharge and CCyB.

1. Required ratios represent the regulatory minimum plus the capital buffer requirement.

Our risk-based capital ratios are computed under each of (i) the Standardized Approach and (ii) the Advanced Approach. The credit risk RWA calculations between the two approaches differ in that the Standardized Approach requires calculation of RWA using prescribed risk weights and exposure methodologies, whereas the Advanced Approach utilizes models to calculate exposure amounts and risk weights. At September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, the differences between the actual and required ratios were lower under the Standardized Approach.

Leverage-Based Regulatory Capital. Leverage-based capital requirements include a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%, a minimum SLR of 3% and an enhanced supplementary leverage ratio (“eSLR”) capital buffer of at least 2%.

CECL Deferral. Beginning on January 1, 2020, we elected to defer the effect of the adoption of CECL on our risk-based and leverage-based capital amounts and ratios, as well as our RWA, adjusted average assets and supplementary leverage exposure calculations, over a five-year transition period. The deferral impacts began to phase in at 25% per year from January 1, 2022, were phased-in at 75% from January 1, 2024 and were fully phased-in from January 1, 2025.

Table of Contents

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

Regulatory Capital Ratios

Risk-based capital

1. Required ratios are inclusive of any buffers applicable as of the date presented.

Leveraged-based capital

1. Adjusted average assets represents the denominator of the Tier 1 leverage ratio and is composed of the average daily balance of consolidated on-balance sheet assets for the quarters ending on the respective balance sheet dates, reduced by disallowed goodwill, intangible assets, investments in covered funds, defined benefit pension plan assets, after-tax gain on sale from assets sold into securitizations, investments in our own capital instruments, certain deferred tax assets and other capital deductions.

2. Supplementary leverage exposure is the sum of Adjusted average assets used in the Tier 1 leverage ratio and other adjustments, primarily: (i) for derivatives, potential future exposure and the effective notional principal amount of sold credit protection offset by qualifying purchased credit protection; (ii) the counterparty credit risk for repo-style transactions; and (iii) the credit equivalent amount for off-balance sheet exposures.

3. Required ratios are inclusive of any buffers applicable as of the date presented.

Regulatory Capital

1. Other adjustments and deductions used in the calculation of CET1 capital primarily includes net after-tax DVA, the credit spread premium over risk-free rate for derivative liabilities, defined benefit pension plan assets, after-tax gain on sale from assets sold into securitizations, investments in our own capital instruments and certain deferred tax assets.

Table of Contents

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

RWA Rollforward

Regulatory VaR—VaR for regulatory capital requirements

In the current year period, Credit risk RWA increased under both the Standardized and Advanced Approaches. Under the Standardized Approach, the increase was primarily due to higher Derivatives exposures, particularly in foreign exchange, growth in lending within the Institutional Securities business segment, Securities financing transactions, Other credit risk driven by higher warehouse loan securitizations, cash and deferred tax assets, and growth in Equity investments. Under the Advanced Approach, the increase was primarily due to higher Derivatives exposures, particularly in foreign exchange, growth in lending within the Institutional Securities business segment, Other credit risk driven by higher warehouse loan securitizations, cash and deferred tax assets, and growth in Equity investments.

Market risk RWA increased in the current year period under both the Standardized and Advanced Approaches, primarily driven by higher Specific Risk due to Non-Securitization standardized charges, Regulatory VaR and Regulatory Stressed VaR, partially offset by lower incremental risk charges driven by decreased exposures to non-investment grade issuances.

The decrease in Operational risk RWA in the current year period is primarily related to lower execution-related losses, partially offset by an increase in litigation-related incidents.

Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity, Long-Term Debt and Clean Holding Company Requirements

The Federal Reserve has established external TLAC, long-term debt (“LTD”) and clean holding company requirements for top-tier BHCs of U.S. G-SIBs (“covered BHCs”), including the Parent Company. These requirements are designed to ensure that covered BHCs will have enough loss-absorbing resources at the point of failure to be recapitalized through the conversion of eligible LTD to equity or otherwise by imposing losses on eligible LTD or other forms of TLAC where an SPOE resolution strategy is used.

Required and Actual TLAC and Eligible LTD Ratios

1. Required ratios are inclusive of applicable buffers.

2. External TLAC consists of CET1 capital and Additional Tier 1 capital (each excluding any noncontrolling minority interests), as well as eligible LTD.

3. Consists of TLAC-eligible LTD reduced by 50% for amounts of unpaid principal due to be paid in more than one year but less than two years from each respective balance sheet date.

We are in compliance with all TLAC requirements as of September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

For a further discussion of TLAC and related requirements, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Requirements—Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity, Long-Term Debt and Clean Holding Company Requirements” in the 2024 Form 10-K.

Capital Plans, Stress Tests and the Stress Capital Buffer

The Federal Reserve has capital planning and stress test requirements for large BHCs, which form part of the Federal Reserve’s annual CCAR framework.

We must submit, on at least an annual basis, a capital plan to the Federal Reserve, taking into account the results of separate annual stress tests designed by us and the Federal Reserve, so that the Federal Reserve may assess our systems and processes that incorporate forward-looking projections of revenues and losses to monitor and maintain our internal capital adequacy. As insured depository institutions (“IDIs”) with less than $250 billion of average total assets over the four most recent consecutive quarters, our U.S. Bank Subsidiaries are not subject to company-run stress test regulatory requirements.

Table of Contents

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

As part of its annual capital supervisory stress testing process, the Federal Reserve determines an SCB for each large BHC, including us.

Our SCB remained at 6.0% through September 30, 2025. Together with other features of the regulatory capital framework, this SCB resulted in an aggregate Standardized Approach CET1 required ratio of 13.5%.

For the 2025 capital planning and stress test cycle, we submitted our capital plan and company-run stress test results to the Federal Reserve on April 7, 2025. On September 30, 2025, the Federal Reserve announced that it had reduced Morgan Stanley’s SCB from 5.1% to 4.3%, effective on October 1, 2025 in response to the Firm seeking reconsideration of its preliminary SCB announced in June 2025. Together with other features of the regulatory capital framework, this SCB results in an aggregate Standardized Approach CET1 ratio of 11.8%. Generally, our SCB is determined annually based on the results of the supervisory stress test.

On April 17, 2025, the Federal Reserve proposed revisions to the SCB and CCAR frameworks. See “Regulatory Developments and Other Matters—Proposed Changes to Capital Requirements” herein. If relevant, the Firm will provide updated information on applicable regulatory capital standards in response to a final rulemaking, including any change in the Firm’s SCB.

We also disclosed a summary of the results of our company-run stress tests on our Investor Relations website and increased our quarterly common stock dividend to $1.00 per share from $0.925, beginning with the common stock dividend announced on July 16, 2025.

For additional information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Requirements—Capital Plans, Stress Tests and the Stress Capital Buffer” in the 2024 Form 10-K.

Attribution of Average Common Equity According to the Required Capital Framework

Our required capital (“Required Capital”) estimation is based on the Required Capital framework, an internal capital adequacy measure. Common equity attribution to the business segments is based on capital usage calculated under the Required Capital framework, as well as each business segment’s relative contribution to our total Required Capital.

The Required Capital framework is a risk-based and leverage-based capital measure, which is compared with our regulatory capital to ensure that we maintain an amount of going concern capital after absorbing potential losses from stress events, where applicable, at a point in time. The amount of capital allocated to the business segments is generally set at the beginning of each year and remains fixed throughout the year until the next annual reset unless a significant business change

occurs (e.g., acquisition or disposition). We define the difference between our total average common equity and the sum of the average common equity amounts allocated to our business segments as Parent Company common equity. We generally hold Parent Company common equity for prospective regulatory requirements, organic growth, potential future acquisitions and other capital needs.

Average Common Equity Attribution under the Required Capital Framework 1

1. The attribution of average common equity to the business segments is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Selected Non-GAAP Financial Information” herein.

We continue to evaluate our Required Capital framework with respect to the impact of evolving regulatory requirements, as appropriate.

Resolution and Recovery Planning

We are required to submit once every two years to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC a resolution plan that describes our strategy for a rapid and orderly resolution under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in the event of our material financial distress or failure. We submitted our 2025 targeted resolution plan on June 30, 2025.

As described in our most recent resolution plan, our preferred resolution strategy is an SPOE strategy, which would impose losses on the holders of eligible LTD and other forms of eligible TLAC issued by the Parent Company before any losses are imposed on creditors of our supported entities and without requiring taxpayer or government financial support.

For more information about resolution and recovery planning requirements and our activities in these areas, including the implications of such activities in a resolution scenario, see “Business—Supervision and Regulation—Financial Holding Company—Resolution and Recovery Planning,” “Risk Factors—Legal, Regulatory and Compliance Risk” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Requirements—Resolution and Recovery Planning” in the 2024 Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

Regulatory Developments and Other Matters

Proposed Changes to Capital Requirements

On April 17, 2025, the Federal Reserve proposed revisions to the SCB and CCAR frameworks applicable to us, aimed at reducing the volatility of the capital requirements stemming from the Federal Reserve’s annual stress test results. Under the proposal, our SCB would be based, in part, on the average of the post-stress capital decline embedded in the Federal Reserve’s stress test results over two consecutive years. Additionally, the proposal would shift the annual effective date of the revised SCB from October 1 to January 1 of the following year and modify certain elements of the Federal Reserve’s CCAR program.

Proposed Changes to the Enhanced Supplementary Leverage Ratio

On June 25, 2025, the U.S. banking agencies released a proposal to modify eSLR requirements applicable to U.S. G-SIBs and their U.S. IDI subsidiaries. If adopted, the proposal would modify the eSLR buffer applicable to U.S. G-SIBs to equal 50 percent of each BHC’s Method 1 G-SIB capital surcharge, applied above the 3.0% minimum SLR requirement, and would modify eSLR standards for U.S. G-SIBs’ IDI subsidiaries to have the same form and calibration as the BHC-level standard. As a result, under the proposal, the Firm and its U.S. Bank Subsidiaries would each have been subject to a 3.5% SLR requirement (inclusive of a 0.5% eSLR buffer) as of June 30, 2025, as compared with current standards, which impose a 5.0% SLR requirement on the Firm (inclusive of a 2.0% eSLR buffer) and require the U.S. Bank Subsidiaries to meet a 6.0% SLR requirement above the minimum 3.0% SLR requirement to be deemed “well capitalized.” The Federal Reserve has also proposed conforming modifications to the SLR component of TLAC and LTD requirements, which currently incorporate the U.S. G-SIB 2.0% eSLR buffer. For more information on the leverage-based regulatory capital standards, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Regulatory Requirements” in the 2024 Form 10-K.

Supervisory Stress Testing Proposals

On October 24, 2025, the Federal Reserve proposed revisions to its supervisory stress testing framework through two related proposals. The first proposal would modify the timeline and operation of the annual supervisory stress test, including through revisions to the Federal Reserve’s supervisory stress testing policy statements, and solicits comment on the Federal Reserve’s supervisory stress testing models. The second proposal solicits comment on the Federal Reserve’s proposed scenarios for the 2026 supervisory stress test. We continue to monitor developments related to these proposals.