JPMorgan Chase : 2026 Proxy Supplemental Presentation (14 pgs) (2026 proxy supplement)

Published: 2026-04-14 17:02:12 ET JPM

Published on 04/14/2026 at 05:02 pm EDT

‌2026 Proxy Supplement

April 2026

‌Executive Summary

We recommend shareholders vote FOR management proposals and AGAINST

shareholder proposals at the 2026 Annual Meeting

Section

Proposal number

Proposal title

Management recommendation

Rationale

Election of directors

FOR

The Board nominees possess the skills, experience, personal attributes and tenure to guide the Firm's strategy and to effectively oversee the Firm's risk management and internal control frameworks and management's execution of its responsibilities

Advisory resolution to approve executive compensation

FOR

For 2025 pay decisions, the Compensation & Management Development Committee ("CMDC") recognized the Firm's continued focus on serving its clients while investing in and executing on long-term strategic initiatives. The Firm experienced market share gains and expanded its lead, maintained a fortress balance sheet and achieved strong financial results

Ratification of independent registered public accounting firm

FOR

The members of the Audit Committee and the Board believe that continued retention of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the Firm's independent external auditor is in the best interests of JPMorganChase and its shareholders

Report on congruence of security, resiliency, and climate initiatives

AGAINST

The proposal is premised on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Firm's approach to business opportunities. It assumes the Firm cannot pursue the Security and Resiliency Initiative ("SRI") and meet its carbon intensity targets at the same time. In fact, the Firm's global, diversified franchise allows us to serve clients and communities with wide-ranging needs and manage to multiple objectives simultaneously. Many of these objectives are complementary; this includes our SRI and climate-related targets

Independent board chairman

AGAINST

We continue to disagree with this prescriptive proposal, and a majority of our shareholders have rejected similar proposals for many years. There is no consensus on a single ideal leadership structure for all companies, as evidenced by the proponent's lack of empirical support. Under the combined leadership structure, overseen by an otherwise independent Board and Lead Independent Director, the Firm continues to deliver strong results and maintain its fortress balance sheet principles, while investing in and executing on long-term strategic initiatives

Lobbying alignment

AGAINST

Given our existing oversight and disclosure practices regarding public policy engagement, lobbying and trade association membership, the requested report would impose administrative burdens and costs on the Firm without providing our shareholders with meaningful

new information

Sustainability ROI report

AGAINST

The proposal's limited focus on a Net Present Value ("NPV") and Return on Investment ("ROI") analysis excludes many of the important considerations our businesses use to drive robust financial performance and transparent reporting, which underpin our commitment to delivering long-term shareholder value

‌Executive Summary

We maintain an ongoing shareholder outreach program that gathers valuable feedback to share with our Board and management

We host ongoing discussions with shareholders to solicit their perspectives on our practices

In 2025, we engaged with approximately 338 of our shareholders and third-party stewardship firms, representing approximately 37% of the Firm's outstanding common stock,1 and engaged with leading proxy advisory firms and other stakeholders

We provided updates on several topics, including Board refreshment and management succession planning, executive compensation philosophy and disclosures and our approach to the regulatory environment. We also discussed the Firm's sustainability efforts, the Firm's human capital management strategy and shareholder voting practices, among other items. In addition, we addressed the Firm's strategy and financial and operating performance

Directors participate in these meetings as appropriate

2025 INVESTOR OUTREACH HIGHLIGHTS

Institutionally held2 stock represents

~76%

of JPM outstanding common stock

We engaged with

~48%

of JPM institutionally held outstanding common stock

Our engagements represented

~37%

of JPM outstanding common stock

Directors participated in engagements that represented

~14%

of JPM outstanding common stock

For additional information and endnotes, please see slide 12

‌ A Board Composition - Proposal 1: Election of Directors

Board nominees bring executive experiences and skills that align with the Firm's business and strategy, while maintaining a well-balanced tenure

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR our Board nominees (Proposal 1)

Composition of Board Nominees

91%

55%

Meet Our Board Nominees

James Dimon, 70

Tenure: 22 Chairman

Stephen Burke, 67

Tenure: 22 LID, CMDC*, CGNC

Linda Bammann, 70

Tenure: 13 RC*, CMDC

Michele Buck, 64

Tenure: 1 AC, CGNC

Alicia Boler Davis, 57

Tenure: 3 PRC, RC

Alex Gorsky, 65

Tenure: 4 AC, CGNC

Mellody Hobson, 57

Tenure: 8 PRC*, RC

Phebe Novakovic, 68

Tenure: 6 AC, PRC

Virginia Rometty, 68

Tenure: 6 CGNC*, CMDC

Brad Smith, 62

Tenure: 1 PRC, RC

Mark Weinberger, 64

Tenure: 2 AC*

Mr. Burke, as our Lead Independent Director, provides effective, independent oversight and maintains

clearly-defined responsibilities including, but not limited to:

Facilitating independent oversight of management

Promoting open dialogue among the independent directors during and in between Board meetings

Leading executive sessions at each regular Board meeting without the presence of the CEO

Focusing on the Board's priorities and processes

Independent Women

Committee Legend

LID

Lead Independent Director

CMDC

Compensation & Management Development Committee

CGNC

Corporate Governance & Nominating Committee

Audit Committee

Risk Committee

PRC

Public Responsibility Committee

*indicates Chair of Committee

WELL-BALANCED TENURE

1-4 years 5-8 years 9+ years

‌ B Executive Compensation - Proposal 2: Advisory Resolution To Approve Executive Compensation

The CMDC maintains a disciplined process to determine total compensation, factoring in four broad performance dimensions

The CMDC assesses performance against the Firm's Business Principles and strategic framework, as well as four broad financial and non-financial performance dimensions. The CMDC applies an ~50% weighting to its consideration of absolute and relative Business Results against the Firm's strategic priorities over multiple years (the "what"), and an ~50% weighting to its qualitative consideration of Client/Customer/Stakeholder, Risk, Controls & Conduct and Teamwork & Leadership (the "how"). No single performance dimension in isolation determines total compensation; however, it is possible for a single significant shortcoming to have a downward impact on variable compensation without limitation

~50% weighting on

the "what" Business Results

Drive high performance, the right way

Fortress balance sheet

Operational resilience

Comprehensive set of products and services

Growing powerful brands

Disciplined investment in the future

Current & multi-year financial performance, including but not limited to:

Managed Revenue1

Pre-tax income ex. Loan Loss Reserves ("LLR")1

Net Income

Return on Tangible Common Equity ("ROTCE")1

Client/Customer/Stakeholder

Focus on customer experience

Serving a diverse customer base

Customer-centric and easy to do business with

Open and transparent dialogue

Investing in and supporting our communities

Integrating environmental sustainability into business decisions

~50% weighting on the "how"

Risk, Controls & Conduct

Sound governance and controls

Culture & conduct

Focus on safety & security, including cyber

Active management of control environment

Embedding sustainable business practices

Teamwork & Leadership

Creating an open, respectful, inclusive culture

Active attraction, retention, promotion and upskilling of talent

Employer of choice for top talent from all backgrounds

Partnerships with internal stakeholders

The CMDC does not target specific positioning, nor does it use a formulaic approach in determining competitive pay levels. Instead, the CMDC uses a range of data as a reference, which is considered in the context of each executive's performance over a multi-year period, and the CMDC's assessment of the value the individual delivers to the Firm. This balanced and holistic assessment of results against long-term strategic priorities and other qualitative considerations is illustrated in the chart above, and includes considerations of responsible leadership, thoughtful governance and sustainability, where applicable

For additional information and endnotes, please see slides 12 and 13

‌ B Executive Compensation - Proposal 2: Advisory Resolution To Approve Executive Compensation

For 2025 pay, the CMDC considered the Firm's continued focus on serving clients and customers while investing in and executing on long-term strategic initiatives

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR executive compensation (Proposal 2)

The Board approved the annual compensation for 2025 for James Dimon, CEO, in the amount of $43M (~10% increase YoY)

Mr. Dimon's 2025 annual compensation reflects his continued exemplary leadership of the Firm

The CMDC considered, in part, the Firm's exceptional performance, scope and pay-for-performance alignment

Among other metrics, the CMDC considered that the Firm delivered managed revenue1 of $185.6B, which was a record for the eighth-consecutive year, as well as net income of $57.0B and ROTCE1 of 20% in addition to long-term performance

EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE

The Firm has sustained strong relative outperformance compared to its peers. In the past 10 years, achieving reported ROTCE1 of ≥18% has been rare amongst our PSU peers. The Firm achieved it 6 times and our 10 PSU peers combined have only achieved it 8 times2

YEARS OF EXCEPTIONAL (≥18%)

2016 '17 '18 '19 '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25

JPMorganChase

Bank of America Barclays

Capital One Citigroup Deutsche Bank Goldman Sachs HSBC

Morgan Stanley UBS

Wells Fargo

ROTCE PERFORMANCE

SUBSTANTIAL SIZE & SCALE

The Firm's revenue and market capitalization continue to exceed those of its primary peers, demonstrating our significantly larger size and scale

3-YEAR AVERAGE REVENUE & MARKET CAP VS. PEERS (2023-2025)2

$173 ~2.3x peer avg.

$676

$107

$334

$83

$234

$62

$212

$81

$146

JPMorgan

PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE ALIGNMENT

The Firm's relative annual CEO

pay-for-performance alignment has been consistently stronger than its primary peers, reflected by the Firm's more efficient annual CEO pay-allocation ratio

3-YEAR AVERAGE ANNUAL CEO PAY AS

JPMorganChase

0.07%

Bank of America

13%

Wells Fargo

0.17%

Citigroup

0.28%

Goldman Sachs

0.29%

Morgan Stanley

0.29%

American Express

0.41%

% OF PROFITS (2023-2025)2,3

For additional information and endnotes, please see slides 12 and 13

Chase

Bank of America

Wells Fargo

Morgan Stanley

American

$66

Express

$200

Goldman

$53

Sachs

$198

Citigroup

3-Year Average Revenue ($B)

3-Year Average Year-End Market Cap ($B)

~3.1x peer avg.

‌ C Shareholder Proposals - Proposal 5: Independent Board Chairman

Proposal 5 undermines the Board's ability to use its experience, judgment and boardroom insight to make the best-informed decision about leadership structure

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote AGAINST the Independent Chair shareholder proposal (Proposal 5)

The proposal presents no evidence that a policy to maintain a separate CEO and Chair leadership structure serves the best interests of the Firm and its shareholders

Strong results reflect exceptional leadership

The Firm continues to deliver strong results and maintain its fortress balance sheet principles, while investing in and executing on long-term strategic initiatives. In 2025, the Firm achieved a ROTCE1 of 20% that has consistently outperformed our major competitors, demonstrating effective oversight and leadership achieved through a combined structure

Combined roles is a clear "market practice"

The Board is best fit to determine structure

A market practice study shows the majority of the 100-largest U.S. public companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq have a combined CEO and Chair role, and at 39% of companies where the chair and CEO positions are separated, the chair is not independent

In the financial services sector specifically, we have seen additional consolidation of CEO and Chair roles in the past year, further evidencing the effectiveness of this leadership structure, depending on a company's circumstances

The Board has been clear that it believes a mandatory or "enduring" policy that requires a separate independent Chair undermines its discretion to respond to shareholder feedback and use its experience, judgment, and boardroom insight to make the

best-informed decision about leadership at the time and has consistently recommended against adoption of such a policy

The ask to separate the roles has been answered

The Board responded to support garnered by a proposal in 2021 to enhance our Corporate Governance Principles such that the general policy of the Board shall be that upon the next CEO transition, the Chair and Chief Executive Officer positions shall be separate and that each position shall be held by a different individual, subject to the Board's determination of the leadership structure that best serves the Firm and its shareholders at that time

The LID is a strong independent leader

The Lead Independent Director role is empowered to serve as a strong independent leader and provides effective independent oversight

The Lead Independent Director facilitates the Board's independent oversight of management, including by promoting open dialogue among independent directors during Board meetings, at executive sessions without the CEO, and in between Board meetings

The proposal's request for an "enduring" policy would require the Board to abdicate its fiduciary duty to shareholders and imposes restrictions on current and future Board action in a manner that may violate Delaware law. At least four companies have made similar arguments in exclusion letters submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission, with supporting opinions from Delaware counsel. They argue that the proposed Board policy, if implemented, would violate Delaware law because a key aspect of the proposal is that it could never be changed by the Board or the stockholders in the future even if they believed such a change to be in the best interests of the company and its stockholders

For additional information and endnotes, please see slides 12 and 13

‌ C Shareholder Proposals - Proposal 6: Lobbying Alignment

The Firm maintains internal processes to evaluate the alignment of our memberships and affiliations with our long-term strategy

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote AGAINST the Lobbying Alignment proposal (Proposal 6)

The Firm maintains strong governance to evaluate alignment

The Firm's political engagement and public policy activities are directed by our global Government Relations and Public Policy ("GRPP") team

The GRPP team reports to the Head of Corporate Responsibility, who regularly reports to the Public Responsibility Committee of the Board regarding the Firm's political engagement

At least annually, the PRC reviews the Firm's significant policies and practices regarding major lobbying priorities and principal trade association memberships that relate to the Firm's public policy objectives, which may, from time to time, result in us exiting a group when continued membership is not in the best interest of the Firm

This process allows the Firm's political engagement efforts to remain focused on public policy issues most relevant to the long-term interests of the Firm and our clients and shareholders

Public Responsibility Committee

(Principal standing Board committee)

Head of Corporate Responsibility

(Operating Committee member)

Global Government Relations and Public Policy

The PEPP Statement hosts five years of Political Engagement Reports that disclose key subjects on which we have lobbied and our aggregate annual federal lobbying expense

The Political Engagement Reports also provide links and instructions for accessing our prior-year federal quarterly lobbying reports, which include our corporate lobbying expenditures and related issues, for the public and our shareholders to access

The Political Engagement Reports also disclose our principal trade associations and the aggregate total of dues attributable to lobbying

The Political Engagement and Public Policy ("PEPP") Statement page of our website provides extensive information about our lobbying, governance and disclosure practices

The Firm focuses its lobbying efforts toward issues that may significantly affect our operations, revenue and expense outlook

Our membership in any trade association or organization does not mean we endorse each position one may take, including positions tied to

climate- or governance-related matters

The Firm makes independent decisions and, when appropriate, provides feedback on the efforts by these associations

Through ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, including shareholders, trade associations and advocacy organizations, we are able to advocate for the Firm's policy positions

The Firm believes that active engagement in policy discussions of importance to the Firm advances and protects the long-term interests of the Firm and our shareholders

Given our existing oversight and disclosure practices, the requested report would impose administrative burdens and costs on the Firm without providing our shareholders with meaningful new information

‌ C Shareholder Proposals - Proposal 4 & 7: Report on Congruence of Security, Resiliency and Climate Initiatives & Sustainability ROI Report

The Firm makes business decisions based on commercial drivers, our business principles and a clear focus on long-term shareholder value

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote AGAINST the Report on Congruence of Security, Resiliency and Climate Initiatives proposal (Proposal 4) & Sustainability ROI Report proposal (Proposal 7)

The proposals oversimplify the Firm's approach to business opportunities. Additionally, the Firm's industry-leading returns evidences disciplined management, which continues to focus on generating long-term shareholder value

PROPOSAL 4 - REPORT ON CONGRUENCE OF SECURITY,

RESILIENCY AND CLIMATE INITIATIVES PROPOSAL 7 - SUSTAINABILITY ROI REPORT

The proposal is premised on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Firm's approach to business opportunities

We have consistently noted that our targets indicate our intent to capture sustainability-related opportunities, not to restrict our financing

The Firm's global, diversified franchise allows us to serve clients and communities with wide-ranging needs and manage to multiple objectives simultaneously

Many of these objectives are complementary; this includes our SRI and climate-related targets. Many efforts that advance the SRI's Energy Independence and Resilience pillar may also aid our clients in their decarbonization efforts, which in turn will progress our carbon intensity targets

For example, advancements in technologies such as nuclear power, energy storage and grid resilience will assist many of our clients in their decarbonization efforts

The proposal's request for an analysis that is premised on an oversimplified and inaccurate understanding of the Firm's business initiatives would result in a report that would not provide shareholders with meaningful or relevant information

The proposal's limited focus on an NPV and ROI analysis excludes many of the important considerations our businesses use to drive robust financial performance and transparent reporting

We provide a wide range of financing products, investment solutions and strategic advice - each with different risk and reward profiles - to help our clients achieve their goals

Each of the Firm's Lines of Business sets its own strategy based on a variety of commercial considerations, including potential revenue opportunities, expected expense, potential strategic advantages, individual client and customer preferences and risk profiles

Sustainability-related products and services, including transactions counted toward Sustainable Development Target, are subject to the same credit review, risk assessment, and return expectations as any other business activity the Firm undertakes

The proposal's request to evaluate sustainability efforts across the Firm's franchise based on NPV and ROI metrics would not produce relevant information for shareholders

‌Appendix

Page

Appendix

Annual Meeting overview

Notes

‌Annual Meeting overview

The Annual Meeting will be held in a virtual meeting format only; there will be no physical location for shareholders to attend

Logistics

Access

Questions

Date: Tuesday, May 19, 2026

Time: 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time

Virtual meeting site: https://www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/J PM2026

To participate in the virtual meeting, visit www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/JPM 2026 and enter the 16-digit control number included on your proxy card, voting instruction form or notice you previously received

Shareholders may submit questions either before the meeting, from April 22 to May 13, 2026, or during a portion of the meeting

If you wish to submit a question before the meeting, you may log into https://www.proxyvote.com using your 16-digit control number and follow the instructions to submit a question

Alternatively, if you wish to submit a question during the meeting, log into the virtual meeting platform at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/JPM2 026 using the 16-digit control number and follow the instructions to submit a question

Questions pertinent to meeting matters will be answered during the meeting, subject to time limitations

‌Notes - Additional information and footnotes on slides

Slide 3: "We maintain an ongoing shareholder outreach program that gathers valuable feedback to share with our Board and management"

Average common stock outstanding in 2025 based on most recent data available (surveilled or reported) as of January 21, 2026 sourced from Nasdaq IRI and company data Represents institutional investors, holders with filing requirements, confirmed institutional positions and third-party engagement services sourced from Nasdaq IRI and company data

Slide 5: "The CMDC maintains a disciplined process to determine total compensation, factoring in four broad performance dimensions"

Managed Revenue, Pre-tax income ex. LLR and ROTCE are each non-GAAP financial measures; refer to Note 1 and 2 on page 13 for a further discussion of these measures

Slide 6: "For 2025 pay, the CMDC considered the Firm's continued focus on serving clients and customers while investing in and executing on long-term strategic initiatives"

Managed Revenue and ROTCE are each non-GAAP financial measures; refer to Note 1 and 2 on page 13 for a further discussion of these measures

Peer ROTCE, Revenue, Net Income, and CEO Compensation based on public disclosures (Form 10-K, Form 8-K, Annual Proxy Filings); Market Capitalization from S&P CapIQ database

Annual compensation comprises base salary, cash bonus paid and long-term incentive compensation (target value) in connection with the performance year, which may be different from amounts reported in the Summary compensation table. The percentage of profits paid is equal to 3-year average annual CEO compensation divided by 3-year average net income. Excludes special awards

Slide 7: "Proposal 5 undermines the Board's ability to use its experience, judgment and boardroom insight to make the best-informed decision about leadership structure"

ROTCE is a non-GAAP financial measure; refer to Note 1 on page 13 for a further discussion of these measures

‌Notes

NOTES ON NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

TCE, ROTCE and Pre-tax income ex. LLR are each non-GAAP financial measures. TCE represents the Firm's common stockholders' equity (i.e., total stockholders' equity less preferred stock) less goodwill and identifiable intangible assets (other than mortgage servicing rights), net of related deferred tax liabilities. ROTCE measures the Firm's net income applicable to common equity as a percentage of average TCE. Pre-tax income ex. LLR represents income on a managed basis before income tax expense (pre-tax income) excluding the change in loan loss reserves. This reflects the exclusion of the portion of the provision for credit losses attributable to the change in allowance for credit losses. TCE and ROTCE are utilized by the Firm, as well as investors and analysts, in assessing the Firm's use of equity. Pre-tax income ex. LLR is utilized by the Firm to assess the Firm's operating performance and management believes this information helps investors understand the effect on reported results and provides an alternate presentation of the Firm's performance. The following tables provide reconciliations and calculations of these measures for the periods presented

In addition to analyzing the Firm's results on a reported basis, management reviews Firmwide results on a "managed" basis; these Firmwide managed basis results are non-GAAP financial measures. The Firm also reviews the results of the lines of business on a "managed" basis. The Firm's definition of managed basis starts, in each case, with the reported U.S. GAAP results and includes certain reclassifications to present total net revenue for the Firm (and each of the reportable business segments) on a fully taxable-equivalent basis. Accordingly, revenue from investments that receive tax credits and tax-exempt securities is presented in the managed results on a basis comparable to taxable investments and securities. These financial measures allow management to assess the comparability of revenue from year-to-year arising from both taxable and tax-exempt sources. The corresponding income tax impact related to tax-exempt items is recorded within income tax expense. These adjustments have no impact on net income as reported by the Firm as a whole or by the lines of business

Average TCE, ROE, ROTCE

Average for the year ended December 31

(in millions, except per share and ratio data)

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

Common stockholders' equity

$ 224,631

$ 230,350

$ 229,222

$ 232,907

$ 236,865

$ 250,968

$ 253,068

$ 282,056

$ 312,370

$ 332,754

Less: Goodwill

47,310

47,317

47,491

47,620

47,820

49,584

50,952

52,258

52,627

52,677

Less: Other intangible assets

922

832

807

789

781

876

1,112

2,572

3,042

2,706

Add: Certain deferred tax liabilities(a)

3,212

3,116

2,231

2,328

2,399

2,474

2,505

2,883

2,970

2,921

Tangible common equity

$179,611

$185,317

$183,155

$186,826

$190,663

$ 202,982

$ 203,509

$ 230,109

$ 259,671

$ 280,292

Net income applicable to common equity

$ 23,086

$ 22,778

$ 30,923

$ 34,844

$ 27,548

$ 46,734

$ 36,081

$ 48,051

$ 57,212

$ 55,949

Return on common equity(b)

10 %

13 %

15 %

12 %

19 %

14 %

17 %

18 %

17 %

Return on tangible common equity(c)

NON-GAAP RECONCILIATIONS

Managed basis Total net revenue

(in millions)

For the year ended December 31, 2025

Reported Total net revenue

$ 182,447

Fully taxable-equivalent adjustment (a)

3,134

Managed basis Total net revenue

$ 185,581

(a) Predominantly recognized in CIB and Corporate

Represents deferred tax liabilities related to tax-deductible goodwill and to identifiable intangibles created in nontaxable transactions, which are netted against goodwill and other intangibles when calculating TCE

Represents net income applicable to common equity / average common stockholders' equity

Represents net income applicable to common equity / average TCE

‌Forward-looking statements

This Proxy Supplemental Presentation contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts.

Forward-looking statements often use words such as "anticipate," "target," "expect," "estimate," "intend," "plan," "goal," "believe" or other words of similar meaning. Forward-looking statements provide JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s ("JPMorganChase" or the "Firm") current expectations or forecasts of future events, circumstances, results or aspirations. All forward-looking statements are, by their nature, subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Firm's control. JPMorgan Chase's actual future results may differ materially from those set forth in its forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause JPMorganChase's actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements can be found in JPMorganChase's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 ("2025 Form 10-K"). Any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of the Firm speak only as of the date they are made, and JPMorganChase does not undertake to update the forward-looking statements included in this Proxy Supplemental Presentation to reflect the impact of circumstances or events that may arise after the date the forward-looking statements were made.

This document is only a summary of certain information in JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s 2026 Proxy Statement and shareholders should read the Proxy Statement in its entirety before voting their shares.

No reports, documents or websites that are cited or referred to in this Proxy Supplemental Presentation shall be deemed to form part of, or to be incorporated by reference into, this Proxy Supplemental Presentation.

Disclaimer

JPMorgan Chase & Co. published this content on April 14, 2026, and is solely responsible for the information contained herein. Distributed via Public Technologies (PUBT), unedited and unaltered, on April 14, 2026 at 21:01 UTC.