JPMORGAN CHASE & CO

JPMorganChase’s accounting policies and use of estimates are integral to understanding its reported results. The Firm’s most complex accounting estimates require management’s judgment to ascertain the appropriate carrying value of assets and liabilities. The Firm has established policies and control procedures intended to ensure that estimation methods, including any judgments made as part of such methods, are well-controlled, independently reviewed and applied consistently from period to period. The methods used and judgments made reflect, among other factors, the nature of the assets or liabilities and the related business and risk management strategies, which may vary across the Firm’s businesses and portfolios. In addition, the policies and procedures are intended to ensure that the process for changing methodologies occurs in an appropriate manner. The Firm believes its estimates for determining the carrying value of its assets and liabilities are appropriate. The following is a brief description of the Firm’s critical accounting estimates involving significant judgments.

Allowance for credit losses

The Firm’s allowance for credit losses represents management’s estimate of expected credit losses over the remaining expected life of the Firm’s financial assets measured at amortized cost and certain off-balance sheet lending-related commitments. The allowance for credit losses generally comprises:

•The allowance for loan losses, which covers the Firm’s retained loan portfolios (scored and risk-rated),

•The allowance for lending-related commitments, and

•The allowance for credit losses on investment securities.

The allowance for credit losses involves significant judgment on a number of matters including development and weighting of macroeconomic forecasts, incorporation of historical loss experience, assessment of risk characteristics, assignment of risk ratings, valuation of collateral, and the determination of remaining expected life. Refer to Note 10 and Note 13 of JPMorganChase's 2024 Form 10-K for further information on these judgments as well as the Firm’s policies and methodologies used to determine the Firm’s allowance for credit losses, and Allowance for credit losses on pages 75-77 and Note 12 of this Form 10-Q for further information.

One of the most significant judgments involved in estimating the Firm’s allowance for credit losses relates to the macroeconomic forecasts used to estimate credit losses over the eight-quarter forecast period within the Firm’s methodology. The eight-

quarter forecast incorporates hundreds of macroeconomic variables ("MEVs") that are relevant for exposures across the Firm, with modeled credit losses being driven primarily by a subset of less than twenty variables. The specific variables that have the greatest effect on the modeled losses vary by portfolio and geography.

•Key MEVs for the consumer portfolio include regional U.S. unemployment rates and U.S. HPI.

•Key MEVs for the wholesale portfolio include U.S. unemployment, U.S. real GDP, U.S. equity prices, U.S. interest rates, U.S. corporate credit spreads, oil prices, U.S. commercial real estate prices and U.S. HPI.

Changes in the Firm’s assumptions and forecasts of economic conditions could significantly affect its estimate of expected credit losses in the portfolio at the balance sheet date or lead to significant changes in the estimate from one reporting period to the next.

It is difficult to estimate how potential changes in any one factor or input might affect the overall allowance for credit losses because management considers a wide variety of factors and inputs in estimating the allowance for credit losses. Changes in the factors and inputs considered may not occur at the same rate and may not be consistent across all geographies or product types, and changes in factors and inputs may be directionally inconsistent, such that improvement in one factor or input may offset deterioration in others.

To consider the impact of a hypothetical alternate macroeconomic forecast, the Firm compared the modeled credit losses determined using its central and relative adverse macroeconomic scenarios, which are two of the five scenarios considered in estimating the allowances for loan losses and lending-related commitments. The central and relative adverse scenarios each included a full suite of MEVs, but differed in the levels, paths and peaks/troughs of those variables over the eight-quarter forecast period.

For example, compared to the Firm’s central scenario shown on page 75 and in Note 12, the Firm’s relative adverse scenario assumes an elevated U.S. unemployment rate, averaging approximately 1.9% higher over the eight-quarter forecast, with a peak difference of approximately 2.6% in the third quarter of 2026.

This analysis is not intended to estimate expected future changes in the allowance for credit losses, for a number of reasons, including:

•The allowance as of September 30, 2025, reflects credit losses beyond those estimated under the central scenario due to the weight placed on the adverse scenarios.

•The impacts of changes in many MEVs are both interrelated and nonlinear, so the results of this analysis cannot be simply extrapolated for more severe changes in macroeconomic variables.

•Expectations of future changes in portfolio composition and borrower behavior can significantly affect the allowance for credit losses.

To demonstrate the sensitivity of credit loss estimates to macroeconomic forecasts as of September 30, 2025, the Firm compared the modeled estimates under its relative adverse scenario to its central scenario. Without considering offsetting or correlated effects in other qualitative components of the Firm’s allowance for credit losses, the comparison between these two scenarios for the exposures below reflect the following differences:

•An increase of approximately $1.3 billion for residential real estate loans and lending-related commitments

•An increase of approximately $3.8 billion for credit card loans

•An increase of approximately $5.2 billion for wholesale loans and lending-related commitments

This analysis relates only to the modeled credit loss estimates and is not intended to estimate changes in the overall allowance for credit losses as it does not reflect any potential changes in other adjustments to the quantitative calculation, which would also be influenced by the judgment management applies to the modeled lifetime loss estimates to reflect the uncertainty and imprecision of these modeled lifetime loss estimates based on then-current circumstances and conditions.

Recognizing that forecasts of macroeconomic conditions are inherently uncertain, the Firm believes that its process to consider the available information and associated risks and uncertainties is appropriately governed and that its estimates of expected credit losses were reasonable and appropriate for the period ended September 30, 2025.

Fair value

JPMorganChase carries a portion of its assets and liabilities at fair value. The majority of such assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a recurring basis, including trading assets and liabilities, AFS securities, structured note products and certain securities financing agreements. Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis, including certain mortgage, home equity and other loans, where the carrying value is based on the fair value of the underlying collateral.

Assets measured at fair value

The following table includes the Firm’s assets measured at fair value and the portion of such assets that are classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Refer to Note 2 for further information.

(a)For purposes of the table above, the derivative receivables total reflects the impact of netting adjustments; however, the $9.7 billion of derivative receivables classified as level 3 does not reflect the netting adjustment as such netting is not relevant to a presentation based on the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset. The level 3 balances would be reduced if netting were applied, including the netting benefit associated with cash collateral.

Valuation

Details of the Firm’s processes for determining fair value are set out in Note 2. Estimating fair value requires the application of judgment. The type and level of judgment required is largely dependent on the amount of observable market information available to the Firm. For instruments valued using internally developed valuation models and other valuation techniques that use significant unobservable inputs and are therefore classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, judgments used to estimate fair value are more significant than those required when estimating the fair value of instruments classified within levels 1 and 2.

In arriving at an estimate of fair value for an instrument within level 3, management must first determine the appropriate valuation model or other valuation technique to use. Second, the lack of observability of certain significant inputs requires management to assess relevant empirical data in deriving valuation inputs including, for example, transaction details, yield curves, interest rates, prepayment speeds, default rates, volatilities, correlations, prices (such as commodity, equity or debt prices), valuations of comparable instruments, foreign exchange rates and credit curves. Refer to Note 2 for a further discussion of the valuation of level 3 instruments, including unobservable inputs used.

For instruments classified in levels 2 and 3, management judgment must be applied to assess the appropriate level of valuation adjustments to reflect counterparty credit quality, the Firm’s creditworthiness, market funding rates, liquidity considerations, unobservable parameters, and for portfolios that meet specified criteria, the size of the net open risk position. The judgments made are typically affected by the type of product and its specific contractual terms, and the level of liquidity for the product or within the market as a whole. In periods of heightened market volatility and uncertainty judgments are further affected by the wider variation of reasonable valuation estimates, particularly for positions that are less liquid. Refer to Note 2 for a further discussion of valuation adjustments applied by the Firm.

Imprecision in estimating unobservable market inputs or other factors can affect the amount of gain or loss recorded for a particular position. Furthermore, while the Firm believes its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with those of other market participants, the methods and assumptions used reflect management judgment and may vary across the Firm’s businesses and portfolios.

The Firm uses various methodologies and assumptions in the determination of fair value. The use of methodologies or assumptions different than those used by the Firm could result in a different estimate of

fair value at the reporting date. Refer to Note 2 for a detailed discussion of the Firm’s valuation process and hierarchy, and its determination of fair value for individual financial instruments.

Credit card rewards liability

The credit card rewards liability was $15.9 billion and $14.4 billion at September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively, and is recorded in accounts payable and other liabilities on the Consolidated balance sheets. The increase in the liability was driven by continued growth in rewards points earned on higher spend and promotional offers that has outpaced redemptions throughout 2025. Refer to pages 163–164 of JPMorganChase’s 2024 Form 10-K for a description of the significant assumptions and sensitivities, associated with the Firm’s credit card rewards liability.

Income taxes

Refer to Income taxes on page 164 of JPMorganChase’s 2024 Form 10-K for a description of the significant assumptions, judgments and interpretations associated with the accounting for income taxes.

Goodwill impairment

Management applies significant judgment when testing goodwill for impairment. Refer to Goodwill impairment on page 163 of JPMorganChase’s 2024 Form 10-K for a description of the significant valuation judgments associated with goodwill impairment.

Refer to Note 14 for additional information on goodwill, including the goodwill impairment assessment as of September 30, 2025.

Litigation reserves

Refer to Note 24 of this Form 10-Q, and Note 30 of JPMorganChase’s 2024 Form 10-K for a description of the significant estimates and judgments associated with establishing litigation reserves.