SLM Corp Investor Forum Summary

The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.

Question: Moshe Orenbuch - Cowen and Company LLC - Analyst : Great. Certainly would agree that the new sales approach is superior to the old one. Maybe you could just talk a little bit about the decision to still grow the balance sheet at 8% to 9%? I might have thought that with the ability to earn an ongoing earnings stream from the assets sold that you might not need to grow the balance sheet that high and become even more capital efficient. As a corollary, to the extent that this does reduce risk, do you need a lower capital level for the loans on your balance sheet, as you go forward?

Question: Moshe Orenbuch - Cowen and Company LLC - Analyst : Got it. Maybe just from a housekeeping standpoint: Things like the use of the excess capital and the monetization of the other non-loan opportunities that you described, is there anything in these vignettes for the financial impacts of that?

Question: Moshe Orenbuch - Cowen and Company LLC - Analyst : But that's also true, Melissa, for the use of excess capital for share repurchase? Is that correct or not? LSEG STREETEVENTS | www.lseg.com | Contact Us consent of LSEG. 'LSEG' and the LSEG logo are registered trademarks of LSEG and its affiliated companies. DECEMBER 08, 2025 / 10:00PM, SLM.OQ - SLM Corp Investor Forum

Question: Moshe Orenbuch - Cowen and Company LLC - Analyst : If it were used for share repurchase, that would be incremental to EPS?

Question: Sanjay Sakhrani - Keefe Bruyette & Woods Inc - Analyst : Appreciate all the color here. First question for Jon. Jon, you talked about just the [PE] sustainability of the capital there and financial crisis. I'm just curious, what happens in the scenario where the forward-look -- there's not as much demand for forward flow agreements? How do we think about the puts-and-takes of the strategy? Did you guys contemplate that, as you thought of the different permutations?

Question: Sanjay Sakhrani - Keefe Bruyette & Woods Inc - Analyst : Yeah. Like, a lot of the strategy on the asset management side is predicated on the sustainability of private capital flows into the market to enter into these forward-flow agreements. I'm just curious, like, in a scenario where there's not as much capital available, what are the contingency plans to sustain the plan? LSEG STREETEVENTS | www.lseg.com | Contact Us consent of LSEG. 'LSEG' and the LSEG logo are registered trademarks of LSEG and its affiliated companies. DECEMBER 08, 2025 / 10:00PM, SLM.OQ - SLM Corp Investor Forum

Question: Sanjay Sakhrani - Keefe Bruyette & Woods Inc - Analyst : Got it. Appreciate that. And then, just going back to some of the questions that were asked before. Like, we don't exactly know the structure of this forward-flow agreement with KKR. Just to be clear, like, that's something that you guys will have disclosed or aren't disclosed, (inaudible) come back into that in some capacity? And then, just as I look at slide 33, in terms of the assumptions that you guys have made, it doesn't show, like, capital return. I'm just going back to most of what you were saying. These estimates that we see on slide 30 probably don't include that -- elements of that capital return because it's not listed in the assumptions?

Question: John Hecht - Jefferies LLC - Analyst : Actually, I think Sanjay asked a lot of my questions. One of them, youmay or may not be able to provide details on this because it is going to be related to parts of the agreement. But I'm wondering, can you, at least, maybe framework for us, like, interest rate exposure? When you're contemplating different interest rates scenarios with your private credit counterparty, are you just assuming, like, a fixed spread to some benchmark or is there other, like, hedging factors in this and that are contemplated in order to preserve some type of return threshold for the counterparty?

Question: Giuliano Bologna - Compass Point Research and Trading LLC - Analyst : I'm curious, going back to a similar question but you obviously get the 2% (inaudible) for the strategic partnership loan sales.

Question: Giuliano Bologna - Compass Point Research and Trading LLC - Analyst : That makes sense. And then, maybe as a follow-up, it looks like the non-interest expense increases (inaudible). (inaudible) function change next year -- call it, $100 million -- and that's scaling beyond that, it seems like the revenue generation part of the program should be less than that, if you assume a steady-state (inaudible) regular (inaudible) sales. I'm curious, when you think about the breakeven of the new strategy, is there a sense around when (inaudible) expenses related to pursuing the opportunity should be overweighted or, at least, surpassed the incremental revenue from the strategic partners related to sales?

Question: Giuliano Bologna - Compass Point Research and Trading LLC - Analyst : That makes sense. And then, you're referring to asset management framework or similar to an asset management base framework for the strategic partnerships. I'm assuming that there's probably some performance or credit-related governor on the back-end economics and we're seeing greater outperformeramance (inaudible) make less. Is that a fair assumption?

Question: Mihir Bhatia - Bofa Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings Inc - Analyst : I had a couple here. Maybe the first one I wanted to ask, just, look, I recognize five years a long time and it's a ways out. But I just wanted to get your view on, is the rate of EPS growth in -- as you move into year 2 to 5, if you will, understanding the first year of build out here -- but is that CAGR of EPS growth sustainable from -- in your perspective -- from your point of view, just as fee revenue from these partnerships continues to build? Is that how we should be thinking about this? Is that how you're thinking about it? Is the end goal here, relatedly, the idea that, hey, if we can get cost to EPS growth, we should get some multiple expansion on our stock? Just trying to understand the motivation of this big change in strategy.

Question: Mihir Bhatia - Bofa Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings Inc - Analyst : Got it. No. I appreciate that color. The other question I wanted to ask was just about -- I think you mentioned in your prepared remarks the potential to originate loans that would be outside your bank's typical risk appetite. Just a couple of questions that that brings up: One, is that contemplated in your illustrative or would that be all upside to us in the illustrative side? And then, relatedly, at what point do you decide what's going on the balance sheet; what's going into spot sales; what partnership, loan portfolios? Are they all, like, similar loans today? Or do you decide that at the point of origination? How does that work?

Question: Mihir Bhatia - Bofa Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings Inc - Analyst : Got it. And then, just my last question, if I could squeeze one more in: Just in terms of the partnerships that have been signed, is KKR the only one that is being signed or are there others that you have not announced yet? Just trying to understand how much of the sales is already baked in.

Question: Mihir Bhatia - Bofa Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings Inc - Analyst : Understood. Thank you,