Use these links to rapidly review the document
DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION Table of Contents

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

---

FORM 10-K

ý    ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011
or

o    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from              to             . Commission file Number 1-34242

(Exact Name of registrant as specified in its charter)

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

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. ý Yes o No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). ý Yes o 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 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. ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

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

The aggregate market value of the shares of common stock of the Registrant issued and outstanding on June 30, 2011, which excludes 395,000 shares held by all directors, officers and affiliates of the Registrant as a group, was approximately $23.1 million. This figure is based on the closing price of $10.00 per share of the Registrant's common stock on June 30, 2011, the last business day of the Registrant's second fiscal quarter.

As of March 21, 2012, the Registrant had outstanding 2,702,205 shares of Common Stock, $1 par value per share.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant's definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

   

---

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION

Table of Contents

---

Table of Contents

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION
FORM 10-K

Forward-Looking Statements

        DNB Financial Corp. (the "Corporation"), may from time to time make written or oral "forward-looking statements," including statements contained in DNB's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (including this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the exhibits hereto and thereto), in its reports to stockholders and in other communications by DNB, which are made in good faith by DNB pursuant to the "safe harbor" provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

        These forward-looking statements include statements with respect to DNB's beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, estimates and intentions, that are subject to significant risks and uncertainties, and are subject to change based on various factors (some of which are beyond DNB's control). The words "may," "could," "should," "would,""will," "believe," "anticipate," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause DNB's financial performance to differ materially from the plans, objectives, expectations, estimates and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements: the strength of the United States economy in general and the strength of the local economies in which DNB conducts operations; the effects of, and changes in, trade, monetary and fiscal policies and laws, including interest rate policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the recent downgrade, and any future downgrades, in the credit rating of the U.S. Government and federal agencies; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations; the timely development of and acceptance of new products and services of DNB and the perceived overall value of these products and services by users, including the features, pricing and quality compared to competitors' products and services; the willingness of users to substitute competitors' products and services for DNB's products and services; the success of DNB in gaining regulatory approval of its products and services, when required; the impact of changes in laws and regulations applicable to financial institutions (including laws concerning taxes, banking, securities and insurance); technological changes; acquisitions; changes in consumer spending and saving habits; the nature, extent, and timing of governmental actions and reforms, including the rules of participation for the Trouble Asset Relief Program voluntary Capital Purchase Program under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which may be changed unilaterally and retroactively by legislative or regulatory actions; and the success of DNB at managing the risks involved in the foregoing.

        DNB cautions that the foregoing list of important factors is not exclusive. Readers are also cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management's analysis only as of the date of this report, even if subsequently made available by DNB on its website or otherwise. DNB does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time by or on behalf of DNB to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this report.

        For a complete discussion of the assumptions, risks and uncertainties related to our business, you are encouraged to review our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including this Form 10-K, as well as any changes in risk factors that we may identify in our quarterly or other reports filed with the SEC.

1

---

Table of Contents

Part I

Item 1.        Business

(a) General Description of Registrant's Business and Its Development

        DNB Financial Corporation (the "Registrant" or "DNB"), a Pennsylvania business corporation, is a bank holding company registered with and supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve Board). The Registrant was incorporated on October 28, 1982 and commenced operations on July 1, 1983 upon consummation of the acquisition of all of the outstanding stock of Downingtown National Bank, now known as DNB First, National Association (the "Bank"). Since commencing operations, DNB's business has consisted primarily of managing and supervising the Bank, and its principal source of income has been derived from the Bank. At December 31, 2011, DNB had total consolidated assets, total liabilities and stockholders' equity of $607.1 million, $556.0 million, and $51.1 million, respectively.

        The Bank was organized in 1860. The Bank is a national banking association that is a member of the Federal Reserve System, the deposits of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"). The Bank is a full service commercial bank providing a wide range of services to individuals and small to medium sized businesses in the southeastern Pennsylvania market area, including accepting time, demand, and savings deposits and making secured and unsecured commercial, real estate and consumer loans. In addition, the Bank has eleven full service and two limited service branches and a full-service wealth management group known as "DNB First Wealth Management". The Bank's financial subsidiary, DNB Financial Services, Inc., (also know as "DNB Investments & Insurance") is a Pennsylvania licensed insurance agency, which, together with the Bank, sells a broad variety of insurance and investment products. The Bank's other subsidiaries are Downco, Inc. and DN Acquisition Company, Inc. which were incorporated in December 1995 and December 2008, respectively, for the purpose of acquiring and holding Other Real Estate Owned acquired through foreclosure or deed in-lieu-of foreclosure, as well as Bank-occupied real estate. In accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the Registrant and the Bank operate as one segment, and therefore do not report segment financial information.

        The Bank's headquarters is located at 4 Brandywine Avenue, Downingtown, Pennsylvania. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank had total assets of $606.7 million, total deposits of $497.9 million and total stockholders' equity of $60.0 million. The Bank's business is not seasonal in nature. The FDIC, to the extent provided by law, insures its deposits. On December 31, 2011, the Bank had 107 full-time employees and 23 part-time employees.

        The Bank derives its income principally from interest charged on loans and, to a lesser extent, interest earned on investments, fees received in connection with the origination of loans, wealth management and other services. The Bank's principal expenses are interest expense on deposits and borrowings and operating expenses. Funds for activities are provided principally by operating revenues, deposit growth and the repayment of outstanding loans and investments.

        The Bank encounters vigorous competition from a number of sources, including other commercial banks, thrift institutions, other financial institutions and financial intermediaries. In addition to commercial banks, Federal and state savings and loan associations, savings banks, credit unions and industrial savings banks actively compete in the Bank's market area to provide a wide variety of banking services. Mortgage banking firms, real estate investment trusts, finance companies, insurance companies, leasing companies and brokerage companies, financial affiliates of industrial companies and certain government agencies provide additional competition for loans and for certain financial services. The Bank also competes for interest-bearing funds with a number of other financial intermediaries, which offer a diverse range of investment alternatives, including brokerage firms and mutual fund companies.

2

---

Table of Contents

(b) Financial Information About Geographic Areas

        The geographic information required by Item 101(d) of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is impracticable for the Registrant to calculate, however, the Registrant does not believe that a material amount of revenues in any of the last three years were attributable to customers outside of the United States, nor does it believe that a material amount of its long-lived assets in any of the past three years were located outside of the United States.

Supervision and Regulation — Registrant

        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("Sarbanes-Oxley") imposes significant requirements and restrictions on publicly-held companies, such as the Registrant. These provisions include requirements governing the composition and responsibilities of audit committees, financial disclosures and reporting and restrictions on personal loans to directors and officers. Sarbanes-Oxley, among other things, mandates chief executive and chief financial officer certifications of periodic financial reports, additional financial disclosures concerning off-balance sheet items, and speedier transaction reporting requirements for executive officers, directors and 10% shareholders. Rules promulgated by the SEC pursuant to Sarbanes-Oxley impose substantial reporting and compliance obligations on management and boards of directors, and new obligations and restrictions have been placed on auditors and audit committees that are intended to enhance their independence from management. In addition, penalties for non-compliance with the Federal securities laws are heightened. The Registrant has, and will incur, significant additional expense complying with Sarbanes-Oxley requirements.

Federal Banking Laws

        The Registrant is subject to a number of complex Federal banking laws, most notably the provisions of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended ("Bank Holding Company Act") and the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978 ("Change in Control Act"), and to supervision by the Federal Reserve Board.

Bank Holding Company Act — Financial Holding Companies

        The Bank Holding Company Act requires a "company" (including the Registrant) to secure the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board before it owns or controls, directly or indirectly, more than five percent (5%) of the voting shares or substantially all of the assets of any bank. It also prohibits acquisition by any "company" (including the Registrant) of more than five percent (5%) of the voting shares of, or interest in, or all or substantially all of the assets of, any bank located outside of the state in which a current bank subsidiary is located unless such acquisition is specifically authorized by laws of the state in which such bank is located. A "bank holding company" (including the Registrant) is prohibited from engaging in or acquiring direct or indirect control of more than five percent (5%) of the voting shares of any company engaged in non-banking activities unless the Federal Reserve Board, by order or regulation, has found such activities to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. In making this determination, the Federal Reserve Board considers whether the performance of these activities by a bank holding company would offer benefits to the public that outweigh possible adverse effects. Applications under the Bank Holding Company Act and the Change in Control Act are subject to review, based upon the record of compliance of the applicant with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 ("CRA"). See further discussion below.

        The Registrant is required to file an annual report with the Federal Reserve Board and any additional information that the Federal Reserve Board may require pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act. The Federal Reserve Board may also make examinations of the Registrant and any or all of its subsidiaries. Further, under Section 106 of the 1970 amendments to the Bank Holding Company Act and the Federal Reserve Board's regulations, a bank holding company and its subsidiaries are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with any extension of credit or provision of credit or provision of

3

---

Table of Contents

any property or services. The so-called "anti-tie-in" provisions state generally that a bank may not extend credit, lease, sell property or furnish any service to a customer on the condition that the customer provide additional credit or service to the bank, to its bank holding company or to any other subsidiary of its bank holding company or on the condition that the customer not obtain other credit or service from a competitor of the bank, its bank holding company or any subsidiary of its bank holding company.

        Permitted Non-Banking Activities.  The Federal Reserve Board permits bank holding companies to engage in non-banking activities so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. A number of activities are authorized by Federal Reserve Board regulation, while other activities require prior Federal Reserve Board approval. The types of permissible activities are subject to change by the Federal Reserve Board. Revisions to the Bank Holding Company Act contained in the Federal Gramm-Leach Bliley Act of 1999 permit certain eligible bank holding companies to qualify as "financial holding companies" and thereupon engage in a wider variety of financial services such as securities and insurance activities.

        Gramm-Leach Bliley Act of 1999 ("GLB").  This law repeals certain restrictions on bank and securities firm affiliations, and allows bank holding companies to elect to be treated as a "financial holding company" that can engage in approved "financial activities," including insurance, securities underwriting and merchant banking. Banks without holding companies can engage in many of these new financial activities through a "financial subsidiary." The law also mandates functional regulation of bank securities activities. Banks' exemption from broker-dealer regulation would be limited to, for example, trust, safekeeping, custodian, shareholder and employee benefit plans, sweep accounts, private placements (under certain conditions), self-directed IRAs, third party networking arrangements to offer brokerage services to bank customers, and the like. It also requires banks that advise mutual funds to register as investment advisers. The legislation provides for state regulation of insurance, subject to certain specified state preemption standards. It establishes which insurance products banks and bank subsidiaries may provide as principal or underwriter, and prohibits bank underwriting of title insurance, but also preempts state laws interfering with affiliations. GLB prohibits approval of new de novo thrift charter applications by commercial entities and limits sales of existing so-called "unitary" thrifts to commercial entities. The law bars banks, savings and loans, credit unions, securities firms and insurance companies, as well as other "financial institutions," from disclosing customer account numbers or access codes to unaffiliated third parties for telemarketing or other direct marketing purposes, and enables customers of financial institutions to "opt out" of having their personal financial information shared with unaffiliated third parties, subject to exceptions related to the processing of customer transactions and joint financial services marketing arrangements with third parties, as long as the institution discloses the activity to its customers and requires the third party to keep the information confidential. It requires policies on privacy and disclosure of information to be disclosed annually, requires federal regulators to adopt comprehensive regulations for ensuring the security and confidentiality of consumers' personal information, and allows state laws to give consumers greater privacy protections. The GLB is likely to increase the competition the Bank faces, and this increased competition is likely to come from a wider variety of non-banking competitors as well as banks.

Change in Bank Control Act

        Under the Change in Control Act, no person, acting directly or indirectly or through or in concert with one or more other persons, may acquire "control" of any Federally insured depository institution unless the appropriate Federal banking agency has been given 60 days prior written notice of the proposed acquisition and within that period has not issued a notice disapproving of the proposed acquisition or has issued written notice of its intent not to disapprove the action. The period for the agency's disapproval may be extended by the agency. Upon receiving such notice, the Federal agency is required to provide a copy to the appropriate state regulatory agency, if the institution of which control is to be acquired is state chartered, and the Federal agency is obligated to give due consideration to the views and recommendations

4

---

Table of Contents

of the state agency. Upon receiving a notice, the Federal agency is also required to conduct an investigation of each person involved in the proposed acquisition. Notice of such proposal is to be published and public comment solicited thereon. A proposal may be disapproved by the Federal agency if the proposal would have anticompetitive effects, if the proposal would jeopardize the financial stability of the institution to be acquired or prejudice the interests of its depositors, if the competence, experience or integrity of any acquiring person or proposed management personnel indicates that it would not be in the interest of depositors or the public to permit such person to control the institution, if any acquiring person fails to furnish the Federal agency with all information required by the agency, or if the Federal agency determines that the proposed transaction would result in an adverse effect on a deposit insurance fund. In addition, the Change in Control Act requires that, whenever any Federally insured depository institution makes a loan or loans secured, or to be secured, by 25% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a Federally insured depository institution, the president or chief executive officer of the lending bank must promptly report such fact to the appropriate Federal banking agency regulating the institution whose stock secures the loan or loans.

        Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP).  In response to the financial crisis affecting the banking system and financial markets, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA") was signed into law and established the Troubled Assets Relief Program known as TARP administered by the U.S. Treasury Department. As part of TARP, the Treasury established the Capital Purchase Program ("CPP") to provide up to $700 billion of funding to eligible financial institutions through the purchase of capital stock and other financial instruments for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets. In connection with EESA, there have been numerous actions by the Federal Reserve Board, Congress, the Treasury, the FDIC, the SEC and others to further the economic and banking industry stabilization efforts under EESA.

        The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (sometimes called ARRA), which became effective February 17, 2009, contains expansive new restrictions on executive compensation for financial institutions such as the Registrant that participate in the CPP. ARRA amends EESA by continuing all the same compensation and governance restrictions. It also adds the following major new requirements so long as the Registrant has any obligations under the CPP (other than the warrants to purchase our common stock issued to the Treasury): prohibition on payment of any "bonus, retention award, or incentive compensation" to the Registrant's chief executive officer, other than bonus amounts payable pursuant to agreements in effect on or before February 11, 2009, but permitting the Registrant to issue "long-term" restricted stock, with a value not exceeding one-third of the total amount of annual compensation of the employee receiving the stock, and not fully vesting until after CPP obligations have been satisfied; requiring every company receiving CPP assistance to permit a non-binding shareholder vote to approve the compensation of executives as disclosed in the Registrant's proxy statement; prohibiting any payment to a senior executive officer or any of the next five most highly-compensated employees for departure from the Registrant for any reason, except for payments for services performed or benefits accrued; extending the EESA clawback of bonus or other incentive payment based on materially inaccurate financial or other performance criteria to the next 20 most highly compensated employees in addition to the senior executive officers; prohibiting a CPP participant from implementing any compensation plan that that would encourage manipulation of the reported earnings of the Registrant to enhance the compensation of any of its employees; requiring our Benefits & Compensation Committee to meet at least semiannually to discuss and evaluate employee compensation plans in light of an assessment of any risk to the Registrant posed by such plans; requiring the chief executive officer and chief financial officer to provide a written certification of compliance with the executive compensation restrictions in ARRA in a registrant's annual filings with the SEC; and requiring each CPP participant to implement a company-wide policy regarding excessive or luxury expenditures, including excessive expenditures on entertainment or events, office and facility renovations, aviation or other transportation services. ARRA requires the Treasury Department and the SEC to issue rules to implement its new executive compensation restrictions. On June 10, 2009, the Treasury Department announced an interim final rule on the executive compensation standards for

5

---

Table of Contents

recipients of TARP funds. The interim final rule provides that it supersedes all prior rules and guidance on executive compensation limitations under the TARP program. Among other things, in terms of its application to the Bank, the interim final rule contains the following provisions:

        1.    Limitations on Executive Compensation for Companies Receiving TARP Assistance.    The interim final rule:

•

Limits bonuses paid to the most highly compensated executive officer.



•

Prohibits any golden parachute payment to a senior executive officer or any of the next 5 most highly compensated employees. While ARRA limited the definition of golden parachutes to payments for an employee's departure for any reason, the rule also includes payments made in connection with a change in control of the Bank.



•

Implements the ARRA mandate that bonuses paid to senior executive officers and next 20 most highly compensated employees be subject to a clawback if the payment was based on materially inaccurate performance criteria, and requires that the TARP recipient actually exercise its clawback rights in such a case unless the TARP recipient can demonstrate that it would be unreasonable to do so (for example, if the expense of enforcing the clawback right exceeds the benefits of doing so).

        2.    Implementation of ARRA Requirements for Compensation Practices.    The rule:

•

Expands on EESA's requirement that compensation plans for senior executive officers be limited to avoid incentives for unnecessary risk-taking, ARRA's expansion of that requirement to cover all employee compensation plans, and ARRA's requirement that no employee compensation plan encourage the manipulation of earnings, by requiring that a bank's compensation committee of the financial institution conduct an analysis of whether compensation, plans or practices encourage unnecessary risk-taking.



•

Implements ARRA's requirement that the board of directors of each TARP recipient put in place a company-wide policy on luxury or excessive expenditures and requires that the policy mandate prompt internal reporting of any violations of the policy, and that the CEO and the CFO of each TARP recipient certify that any expenditure requiring the approval of the board of directors or a senior executive officer was properly approved.



•

Implements and clarifies ARRA's shareholder "say on pay" resolution requirement.

        3.    Additional Compensation and Governance Standards.    The rule adopts the following new requirements:

•

Prohibits the payment to senior executive officers and the 20 next most highly compensated employees of a tax "gross-up," or a payment to cover taxes due on compensation such as golden parachutes and perquisites.



•

Requires a TARP recipient such as the Bank to disclose to the Treasury Department and its primary federal regulator any perquisites provided to any employee subject to ARRA's bonus limitations with total value exceeding $25,000 and, in that case, provide those agencies a narrative description of, and justification for, the benefit.



•

Requires a TARP recipient such as the Bank to disclose to the Treasury Department and its primary federal regulator whether the Bank or its compensation committee engaged a compensation consultant and to provide to those agencies a narrative description of the services provided by any such consultant, including any non-compensation related services provided by the consultant or any of its affiliates, as well as a description of the use of any "benchmarking" procedures in the consultant's analysis.

6

---

Table of Contents

        4.    Certification Requirements.    The rule requires TARP recipients to provide:

•

Within ninety days of the completion of each fiscal year, a TARP recipient's principal executive officer and principal financial officer must provide a certification to its primary federal regulatory agency and the Treasury Department regarding the TARP recipient's compliance with rules established by EESA, ARRA and the interim final rule.



•

At least once each fiscal year, a TARP recipient's compensation committee must provide to its primary federal regulator and the Treasury Department a narrative description identifying each senior executive officer compensation plan and explaining how the plan does not encourage its senior executive officers to take unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the TARP recipient. The compensation committee must also identify each employee compensation plan (whether or not it covers senior executive officers), explain how any unnecessary risks posed by the plan have been limited, and further explain how the plan does not encourage the manipulation of reported earnings to enhance the compensation of any employee.

        Participation in U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program  On January 30, 2009, as part of the Capital Purchase Program administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, the Registrant entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the U.S. Treasury, pursuant to which the Registrant issued and sold on January 30, 2009, and the U.S. Treasury purchased for cash on that date (i) 11,750 shares of the Registrant's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2008A, par value $10.00 per share, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share (the "CPP Shares"), and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 186,311 shares of the Registrant's common stock, $1.00 par value, at an exercise price of $9.46 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $11,750,000 in cash. The issuance and sale of these securities was a private placement exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.

        On August 4, 2011, DNB entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to which DNB issued and sold to the Treasury 13,000 shares of its Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A ("Series 2011A Preferred Stock"), having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share for aggregate proceeds of $13.0 million. The Securities Purchase Agreement was entered into, and the Series 2011A Preferred Stock was issued, pursuant to the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), a $30 billion fund established under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, that encourages lending to small businesses by providing capital to qualified community banks with assets of less than $10 billion. The securities sold in this transaction were exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as a transaction by DNB not involving a public offering. Of the $13.0 million in aggregate proceeds, $11,879,000 was used on August 4, 2011 to repurchase all CPP Shares ($11,750,000 was paid in principal and $128,900 in dividends related to the CPP Shares) held by the Treasury as described above.

        On September 21, 2011, DNB entered into a letter agreement (the "Warrant Letter Agreement") with the Treasury. Pursuant to the Warrant Letter Agreement, DNB Financial Corporation repurchased from the Treasury the warrant to purchase 186,311 shares of DNB Financial Corporation's common stock issued to the Treasury in January 2009 under CPP. DNB Financial Corporation paid a purchase price of $458,000 for the warrant.

        Prior to the date we repurchased the CPP Shares, we were subject to certain restrictions under the TARP requirements with respect to share repurchases, payments of dividends to our common stock shareholders, and our executive compensation. Specifically, we were limited in our ability to pay cash dividend on our common stock nor could we engage in any share repurchases, without prior approval of the Treasury. With respect to our executive compensation, during the period in which the CPP Shares were outstanding, we were prohibiting from (i) paying or accruing bonuses, retention awards and incentive compensation, other than qualifying long-term restricted stock or pursuant to certain preexisting employment contracts, to our five most highly-compensated employees, (ii) providing severance benefits,

7

---

Table of Contents

or other benefits due to a change in control of DNB, to our senior executive officers ("SEOs") and next five most highly compensated employees, and (iii) providing tax "gross-ups" to our SEOs and the next 20 most highly compensated employees. We were also required to make subject to clawback any bonus, retention award, or incentive compensation paid to any of the SEOs and any of the next twenty most highly compensated employees if such compensation was based on materially inaccurate financial statements or any other materially inaccurate performance metric criteria, and to establish and maintain a policy on luxury or excessive expenditures. In addition, the compensation committee of our board of directors was required to semi-annually evaluate and review the risks involved in employee compensation plans. Finally, for the 2011 taxable year, we are prohibited from deducting more than $500,000 in annual compensation, including performance-based compensation, to each of the executives covered under Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). Except for this compensation deduction limitation, the above requirements and restrictions no longer apply to DNB as of August 4, 2011.

        Participation in the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program.  Due to the recent difficult economic conditions, deposit insurance per account owner has been raised to $250,000 for all types of accounts. That coverage was made permanent by the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, the FDIC adopted an optional Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program by which, for a fee, noninterest-bearing transaction accounts would receive unlimited insurance coverage until June 30, 2010, subsequently extended to December 31, 2010, and certain senior unsecured debt issued by institutions and their holding companies between October 13, 2008 and October 31, 2009 would be guaranteed by the FDIC through June 30, 2012, or in some cases, December 31, 2012. The Dodd-Frank Act has provided for continued unlimited coverage for certain non-interest bearing accounts until December 31, 2012 (see discussion of Dodd-Frank Act on page 14).

        Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  The federal government is considering a variety of reforms related to banking and the financial industry including, without limitation, the newly adopted Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act is intended to promote financial stability in the U.S., reduce the risk of bailouts and protect against abusive financial services practices by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system and ending "to big to fail" institutions. It is the broadest overhaul of the U.S. financial system since the Great Depression, and much of its impact will be determined by the scope and substance of many regulations that will need to be adopted by various regulatory agencies to implement its provisions. For these reasons, the overall impact on DNB and its subsidiaries is unknown at this time.

        The Dodd-Frank Act delegates to various federal agencies the task of implementing its many provisions through regulation. Hundreds of new federal regulations, studies and reports addressing all of the major areas of the new law, including the regulation of banks and their holding companies, will be required, ensuring that federal rules and policies in this area will be further developing for months and years to come. Based on the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and anticipated implementing regulations, it is highly likely that banks and thrifts as well as their holding companies will be subject to significantly increased regulation and compliance obligations.

        The Dodd-Frank Act could require us to make material expenditures, in particular personnel training costs and additional compliance expenses, or otherwise adversely affect our business or financial results. It could also require us to change certain of our business practices, adversely affect our ability to pursue business opportunities we might otherwise consider engaging in, cause business disruptions and/or have other impacts that are as-of-yet unknown to DNB and the Bank. Failure to comply with these laws or regulations, even if inadvertent, could result in negative publicity, fines or additional licensing expenses, any of which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow and results of operations. For example, a provision of the Dodd-Frank Act is intended to preclude bank holding companies from treating future trust preferred securities issuances as Tier 1 capital for regulatory capital adequacy purposes. This provision may narrow the number of possible capital raising opportunities DNB and other bank holding companies might have in the future. As another example, the new law establishes the Consumer Financial

8

---

Table of Contents

Protection Bureau, which has been given substantive rule-making authority under most of the consumer protection regulations affecting the Bank and its customers. The Bureau and new rules it will issue may materially affect the methods and costs of compliance by the Bank in connection with future consumer related transactions.

Pennsylvania Banking Laws

        Under the Pennsylvania Banking Code of 1965, as amended ("PA Code"), the Registrant is permitted to control an unlimited number of banks, subject to prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board as more fully described above. The PA Code authorizes reciprocal interstate banking without any geographic limitation. Reciprocity between states exists when a foreign state's law authorizes Pennsylvania bank holding companies to acquire banks or bank holding companies located in that state on terms and conditions substantially no more restrictive than those applicable to such an acquisition by a bank holding company located in that state. Interstate ownership of banks in Pennsylvania with banks in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, New York and other states is currently authorized. However, state laws still restrict de novo formations of branches in other states. Pennsylvania law also provides Pennsylvania state chartered institutions elective parity with the power of national banks, federal thrifts, and state-chartered institutions in other states as authorized by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("Competing Institutions"). In some cases, this may give state chartered institutions broader powers than national banks such as the Bank, and may increase competition the Bank faces from other banking institutions.

Environmental Laws

        The Registrant, the Bank and the Bank's customers are subject in the course of their activities to a growing number of Federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. Neither the Registrant nor the Bank anticipates that compliance with environmental laws and regulations will have any material effect on capital expenditures, earnings, or on its competitive positions.

Supervision and Regulation — Bank

        The operations of the Bank are subject to Federal and State statutes applicable to banks chartered under the banking laws of the United States, to members of the Federal Reserve System and to banks whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. Bank operations are also subject to regulations of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC"), the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC.

        The primary supervisory authority of the Bank is the OCC, who regularly examines the Bank. The OCC has the authority to prevent a national bank from engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice in conducting its business.

        Federal and state banking laws and regulations govern, among other things, the scope of a bank's business, the investments a bank may make, the reserves against deposits a bank must maintain, loans a bank makes and collateral it takes, the activities of a bank with respect to mergers and consolidations and the establishment of branches. All nationally and state-chartered banks in Pennsylvania are permitted to maintain branch offices in any county of the state. National bank branches may be established only after approval by the OCC. It is the general policy of the OCC to approve applications to establish and operate domestic branches, including ATMs and other automated devices that take deposits, provided that approval would not violate applicable Federal or state laws regarding the establishment of such branches. The OCC reserves the right to deny an application or grant approval subject to conditions if (1) there are significant supervisory concerns with respect to the applicant or affiliated organizations, (2) in accordance with CRA, the applicant's record of helping meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operation, is less than satisfactory, or (3) any financial or other business arrangement, direct or indirect, involving the proposed branch or device and bank "insiders" (directors, officers, employees and 10% or greater shareholders) involves terms and conditions more favorable to the insiders than would be available in a comparable transaction with unrelated parties.

9

---

Table of Contents

        The Bank, as a subsidiary of a bank holding company, is subject to certain restrictions imposed by the Federal Reserve Act on any extensions of credit to the bank holding company or its subsidiaries, on investments in the stock or other securities of the bank holding company or its subsidiaries and on taking such stock or securities as collateral for loans. The Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve Board regulations also place certain limitations and reporting requirements on extensions of credit by a bank to principal shareholders of its parent holding company, among others, and to related interests of such principal shareholders. In addition, such legislation and regulations may affect the terms upon which any person becoming a principal shareholder of a holding company may obtain credit from banks with which the subsidiary bank maintains a correspondent relationship.

Capital Adequacy

        Federal banking laws impose on banks certain minimum requirements for capital adequacy. Federal banking agencies have issued certain "risk-based capital" guidelines, and certain "leverage" requirements on member banks such as the Bank. Banking regulators have authority to require higher minimum capital ratios for an individual bank or bank holding company in view of its circumstances.

        Minimum Capital Ratios. The risk-based guidelines require all banks to maintain two "risk-weighted assets" ratios. The first is a minimum ratio of total capital ("Tier 1" and "Tier 2" capital) to risk-weighted assets equal to 8.00%; the second is a minimum ratio of "Tier 1" capital to risk-weighted assets equal to 4.00%. Assets are assigned to five risk categories, with higher levels of capital being required for the categories perceived as representing greater risk. In making the calculation, certain intangible assets must be deducted from the capital base. The risk-based capital rules are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profiles among banks and bank holding companies and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets.

        The risk-based capital rules also account for interest rate risk. Institutions with interest rate risk exposure above a normal level would be required to hold extra capital in proportion to that risk. A bank's exposure to declines in the economic value of its capital due to changes in interest rates is a factor that the banking agencies will consider in evaluating a bank's capital adequacy. The rule does not codify an explicit minimum capital charge for interest rate risk. The Bank currently monitors and manages its assets and liabilities for interest rate risk, and management believes that the interest rate risk rules which have been implemented and proposed will not materially adversely affect our operations.

        The "leverage" ratio rules require banks which are rated the highest in the composite areas of capital, asset quality, management, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to market risk to maintain a ratio of "Tier 1" capital to "adjusted total assets" (equal to the bank's average total assets as stated in its most recent quarterly Call Report filed with its primary federal banking regulator, minus end-of-quarter intangible assets that are deducted from Tier 1 capital) of not less than 3.00%. For banks which are not the most highly rated, the minimum "leverage" ratio will range from 4.00% to 5.00%, or higher at the discretion of the bank's primary federal regulator, and is required to be at a level commensurate with the nature of the level of risk of the bank's condition and activities.

        For purposes of the capital requirements, "Tier 1" or "core" capital is defined to include common stockholders' equity and certain non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock and related surplus. "Tier 2" or "qualifying supplementary" capital is defined to include a bank's allowance for loan and lease losses up to 1.25% of risk-weighted assets, plus certain types of preferred stock and related surplus, certain "hybrid capital instruments" and certain term subordinated debt instruments.

        The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the "Basel Committee") released a comprehensive list of proposals for changes to capital, leverage, and liquidity requirements for banks in December 2009 (commonly referred to as "Basel III"). In July 2010, the Basel Committee announced the design for its capital and liquidity reform proposals.

10

---

Table of Contents

        In September 2010, the oversight body of the Basel Committee announced minimum capital ratios and transition periods providing: (i) the minimum requirement for the Tier 1 common equity ratio will be increased from the current 2.0% level to 4.5% (to be phased in by January 1, 2015); (ii) the minimum requirement for the Tier 1 capital ratio will be increased from the current 4.0% to 6.0% (to be phased in by January 1, 2015); (iii) an additional 2.5% of Tier 1 common equity to total risk-weighted assets (to be phased in between January 1, 2016 and January 1, 2019; and (iv) a minimum leverage ratio of 3.0% (to be tested starting January 1, 2013). The proposals also narrow the definition of capital, excluding instruments that no longer qualify as Tier 1 common equity as of January 1, 2013, and phasing out other instruments over several years. It is unclear how U.S. banking regulators will define "well-capitalized" in their implementation of Basel III.

        The liquidity proposals under Basel III include: (i) a liquidity coverage ratio (to become effective January 1, 2015); (ii) a net stable funding ratio (to become effective January 1, 2018); and (iii) a set of monitoring tools for banks to report minimum types of information to their regulatory supervisors.

        In December 2010, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision ("the Basel Committee") presented to the public the Basel III rules text, which proposes new global regulatory standards on bank capital adequacy and liquidity. The Basel Committee continued to refine Basel III during 2011 and seeks to strengthen global capital and liquidity rules with the goal of promoting a more resilient banking sector. The framework sets out tougher capital requirements, the introduction of a new leverage ratio calculation, higher requirements for minimum capital ratios, and higher risk-weightings for assets, as they relate to capital calculations. Basel III also establishes two minimum standards for liquidity to promote short-term resilience, as well as resilience over a longer period of time through a stable maturity structure of assets and liabilities.

        Capital and liquidity standards consistent with Basel III will be formally implemented in the United States through a series of rulemakings. The U.S. bank agencies intend to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking during the first quarter of 2012 and a final rule later in the year that would implement the Basel III capital reforms. While it continues to evaluate the impact of this framework on its operations and reporting, DNB's capital ratios as of December 31, 2011 are well in excess of those minimum ratios proposed by both Basel III and the Federal Reserve.

        Prompt Corrective Action. Federal banking law mandates certain "prompt corrective actions," which Federal banking agencies are required to take, and certain actions which they have discretion to take, based upon the capital category into which a Federally regulated depository institution falls. Regulations have been adopted by the Federal bank regulatory agencies setting forth detailed procedures and criteria for implementing prompt corrective action in the case of any institution that is not adequately capitalized. Under the rules, an institution will be deemed to be "adequately capitalized" or better if it exceeds the minimum Federal regulatory capital requirements. However, it will be deemed "undercapitalized" if it fails to meet the minimum capital requirements, "significantly undercapitalized" if it has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 6.0%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio that is less than 3.0%, or a leverage ratio that is less than 3.0%, and "critically undercapitalized" if the institution has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets that is equal to or less than 2.0%. The rules require an undercapitalized institution to file a written capital restoration plan, along with a performance guaranty by its holding company or a third party. In addition, an undercapitalized institution becomes subject to certain automatic restrictions including a prohibition on the payment of dividends, a limitation on asset growth and expansion, and in certain cases, a limitation on the payment of bonuses or raises to senior executive officers, and a prohibition on the payment of certain "management fees" to any "controlling person". Institutions that are classified as undercapitalized are also subject to certain additional supervisory actions, including increased reporting burdens and regulatory monitoring, a limitation on the institution's ability to make acquisitions, open new branch offices, or engage in new lines of business, obligations to raise additional capital, restrictions on transactions with affiliates, and restrictions on interest rates paid by the institution on deposits. In certain cases, bank regulatory agencies may require replacement of senior executive officers or directors, or sale of

11

---

Table of Contents

the institution to a willing purchaser. If an institution is deemed to be "critically undercapitalized" and continues in that category for four quarters, the statute requires, with certain narrowly limited exceptions, that the institution be placed in receivership.

        DNB's management believes that the Bank is "well capitalized" for regulatory capital purposes. Please see the table detailing the Bank's compliance with minimum capital ratios, at footnote 17 ("Regulatory Matters") to DNB's audited financial statements on this Form 10-K.

        Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the OCC possesses the power to prohibit institutions regulated by it, such as the Bank, from engaging in any activity that would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice and in violation of the law. Moreover, Federal law enactments have expanded the circumstances under which officers or directors of a bank may be removed by the institution's Federal supervisory agency; unvested and further regulated lending by a bank to its executive officers, directors, principal shareholders or related interests thereof; and unvested management personnel of a bank from serving as directors or in other management positions with certain depository institutions whose assets exceed a specified amount or which have an office within a specified geographic area; and unvested management personnel from borrowing from another institution that has a correspondent relationship with their bank.

        Interstate Banking. Federal law permits interstate bank mergers and acquisitions. Limited branch purchases are still subject to state laws. Pennsylvania law permits out-of-state banking institutions to establish branches in Pennsylvania with the approval of the Pennsylvania Banking Department, provided the law of the state where the banking institution is located would permit a Pennsylvania banking institution to establish and maintain a branch in that state on substantially similar terms and conditions. It also permits Pennsylvania banking institutions to maintain branches in other states. The Dodd-Frank Act created a more permissive interstate branching regime by permitting banks to establish branches de novo in any state if a bank chartered by such state would have been permitted to establish the branch. Bank management anticipates that interstate banking will continue to increase competitive pressures in the Bank's market by permitting entry of additional competitors, but management is of the opinion that this will not have a material impact upon the anticipated results of operations of the Bank.

        Bank Secrecy Act and OFAC. Under the Bank Secrecy Act ("BSA"), the Bank is required to report to the Internal Revenue Service, currency transactions of more than $10,000 or multiple transactions of which the Bank is aware in any one day that aggregate in excess of $10,000. Civil and criminal penalties are provided under the BSA for failure to file a required report, for failure to supply information required by the BSA or for filing a false or fraudulent report. The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control ("OFAC") administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries, terrorism-sponsoring jurisdictions and organizations, and international narcotics traffickers based on U.S. foreign policy and national security goals. OFAC acts under presidential wartime and national emergency powers and authority granted by specific legislation to impose controls on transactions and freeze foreign assets under U.S. jurisdiction. Acting under authority delegated from the Secretary of the Treasury, OFAC promulgates, develops, and administers the sanctions under its statutes and executive orders. OFAC requirements are separate and distinct from the BSA, but both OFAC requirements and the BSA share a common national security goal. Because institutions and regulators view compliance with OFAC sanctions as related to BSA compliance obligations, supervisory examination for OFAC compliance is typically connected to examination of an institution's BSA compliance. Examiners focus on a banking organization's compliance processes and evaluate the sufficiency of a banking organization's implementation of policies, procedures and systems to ensure compliance with OFAC regulations.

        USA PATRIOT Act. The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (together with its implementing regulations, the "Patriot Act"), designed to deny terrorists and others the ability to obtain access to the United States financial system, has significant implications for banks and other financial institutions. It requires DNB and its

12

---

Table of Contents

subsidiary to implement new policies and procedures or amend existing policies and procedures with respect to, anti-money laundering, compliance, suspicious activity and currency transaction reporting and due diligence on customers, as well as related matters. The Patriot Act permits and in some cases requires information sharing for counter-terrorist purposes between federal law enforcement agencies and financial institutions, as well as among financial institutions, and it requires federal banking agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of an institution in combating money laundering activities, both in ongoing examinations and in connection with applications for regulatory approval.

        Deposit Insurance Assessments. The deposits of the Bank are insured by the FDIC up to the limits set forth under applicable law and are subject to deposit insurance premium assessments. The FDIC imposes a risk based deposit premium assessment system, under which the amount of FDIC assessments paid by an individual insured depository institution, such as the Bank, is based on the level of risk incurred in its activities. The FDIC places a depository institution in one of four risk categories determined by reference to its capital levels and supervisory ratings. In addition, in the case of those institutions in the lowest risk category, the FDIC further determines its assessment rates based on certain specified financial ratios. Pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the FDIC has authority and the responsibility to establish deposit insurance assessments at rates sufficient to maintain the designated reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund at a level between 1.15% and 1.5% of estimated insured deposits, and to take action to restore the designated reserve ratio to at least 1.15% of estimated insured deposits when it falls below that level. As of June 30, 2008, the designated reserve ratio fell below 1.15%, to 1.01%. On October 7, 2008, the FDIC established a restoration plan which it has updated periodically since then to respond to deteriorating economic conditions. Conditions in the banking industry have continued to deteriorate through 2008 and 2009. According to the FDIC's Quarterly Banking Profile for the Fourth Quarter 2009, as of December 30, 2009 the designated reserve ratio had fallen to (0.39%), down from (0.16%) on September 30, 2009, and 0.36% as of December 31, 2008. The FDIC reports that the December 31, 2009 reserve ratio is the lowest on record for a combined bank and thrift insurance fund. In response to the declining reserve ratio, the FDIC took a series of extraordinary deposit insurance assessment actions during 2009.

        Effective as of April 1, 2011, the FDIC adopted changes to its base and risk-based deposit insurance rates. Pursuant to the new rules, a bank's annual assessment base rates were as follows, depending on the bank's risk category:

Initial and Total Base Assessment Rates*

        On November 12, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule to require insured institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009, and for all of 2010, 2011, and

13

---

Table of Contents

2012. The prepaid assessment was collected on December 30, 2009, along with the institution's regular quarterly risk-based deposit insurance assessment for the third quarter of 2009. For purposes of calculating the prepaid assessment, each institution's assessment rate was its total base assessment rate in effect on September 30, 2009. In calculating the prepayment attributable to 2011 and thereafter, it is calculated using the September 29, 2009 increase in 2011 base assessment rates. In addition, future deposit growth was reflected in the prepayment by assuming that an institution's third quarter 2009 assessment base would be increased quarterly at a 5 percent annual growth rate through the end of 2012. The FDIC began to draw down institutions' prepaid assessments on March 30, 2010, representing payment for the regular quarterly risk-based assessment for the fourth quarter of 2009. In announcing these initiatives, the FDIC stated that, while the prepaid assessment would not immediately affect bank earnings, each institution would record the entire amount of its prepaid assessment as a prepaid expense asset as of December 30, 2009, the date the payment was made and, as of December 31, 2009 and each quarter thereafter, record an expense or charge to earnings for its regular quarterly assessment and an offsetting credit to the prepaid assessment until the asset is exhausted. Once the asset is exhausted, institutions would resume paying and accounting for quarterly deposit insurance assessments as they currently do. The total amount of the Bank's deposit insurance assessment prepayment was $3.1 million.

        The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank Act, that was enacted by Congress on July 15, 2010, and was signed into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010, enacted a number of changes to the federal deposit insurance regime that will affect the deposit insurance assessments the Bank will be obligated to pay in the future. For example:

•

The law permanently raises the federal deposit insurance limit to $250,000 per account ownership. This change may have the effect of increasing losses to the FDIC insurance fund on future failures of other insured depository institutions.



•

The new law makes deposit insurance coverage unlimited in amount for non-interest bearing transaction accounts until December 31, 2012. This change may also have the effect of increasing losses to the FDIC insurance fund on future failures of other insured depository institutions.



•

The law increases the insurance fund's minimum designated reserve ratio from 1.15 to 1.35, and removes the current 1.50 cap on the reserve ratio. The law gives the FDIC discretion to suspend or limit the declaration or payment of dividends even when the reserve ratio exceeds the minimum designated reserve ratio.

        The Dodd-Frank Act expands the base for FDIC insurance assessments, requiring that assessments be based on the average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital of a financial institution. On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule to implement the foregoing provision of the Dodd-Frank Act and to make other changes to the deposit insurance assessment system applicable to insured depository institutions with over $10 billion in assets. Among other things, the final rule eliminates risk categories and the use of long-term debt issuer ratings in calculating risk-based assessments, and instead implements a scorecard method, combining CAMELS ratings and certain forward-looking financial measures to assess the risk an institution poses to the Deposit Insurance Fund. The final rule also revises the assessment rate schedule for large institutions and highly complex institutions to provide assessments ranging from 2.5 to 45 basis points. Except as specifically provided, the final rule took effect for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011, and is reflected in the December 31, 2011 fund balance and the invoices for assessments due December 31, 2011.

        Each of these changes may increase the rate of FDIC insurance assessments to maintain or replenish the FDIC's deposit insurance fund. This could, in turn, raise the Bank's future deposit insurance assessment costs. On the other hand, the law changes the deposit insurance assessment base so that it will generally be equal to consolidated assets less tangible equity. This change of the assessment base from an emphasis on deposits to an emphasis on assets is generally considered likely to cause larger banking organizations to pay a disproportionately higher portion of future deposit insurance assessments, which

14

---

Table of Contents

may, correspondingly, lower the level of deposit insurance assessments that smaller community banks such as the Bank may otherwise have to pay in the future. On December 14, 2010, the FDIC issued a final rule setting the insurance fund's designated reserve ratio at 2, which is in excess of the 1.35 minimum designated reserve ratio established by the Dodd-Frank Act. While it is likely that the new law will increase the Bank's future deposit insurance assessment costs, the specific amount by which the new law's combined changes will affect the Bank's deposit insurance assessment costs is hard to predict, particularly because the new law gives the FDIC enhanced discretion to set assessment rate levels.

        In addition to deposit insurance assessments, banks are subject to assessments to pay the interest on Financing Corporation bonds. The Financing Corporation was created by Congress to issue bonds to finance the resolution of failed thrift institutions. The FDIC sets the Financing Corporation assessment rate every quarter. The current annual Financing Corporation assessment rate is 66 basis points on the deposit insurance assessment base, as defined above, which we anticipate will result in an aggregate estimated FICO assessment payment by the Bank of $55,000 in 2012.

        Other Laws and Regulations. The Bank is subject to a variety of consumer protection laws, including the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act adopted as part of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 ("FDICIA"), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and the regulations adopted hereunder. In the aggregate, compliance with these consumer protection laws and regulations involves substantial expense and administrative time on the part of the Bank and DNB.

        Legislation and Regulatory Changes. From time to time, legislation is enacted which has the effect of increasing the cost of doing business, limiting or expanding permissible activities and/or affecting the competitive balance between banks and other financial institutions. Proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the operations and taxation of banks, bank holding companies and other financial institutions are frequently made in Congress, and before various bank regulatory agencies. No prediction can be made as to the likelihood of any major changes or the impact such changes might have on DNB and its subsidiary Bank.

        Effect of Government Monetary Policies. The earnings of DNB are and will be affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States Government and its agencies (particularly the Federal Reserve Board). The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board have had and will likely continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through its power to implement national monetary policy in order, among other things, to curb inflation or combat a recession. The Federal Reserve Board has a major effect upon the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its open market operations in United States Government securities and through its regulation of, among other things, the discount rate on borrowing of member banks and the reserve requirements against member bank deposits. It is not possible to predict the nature and impact of future changes in monetary and fiscal policies.

        All of DNB's revenues are attributable to customers located in the United States, and primarily from customers located in Southeastern Pennsylvania. All of Registrant's assets are located in the United States and in Southeastern Pennsylvania. Registrant has no activities in foreign countries and hence no risks attendant to foreign operations.

        DNB files reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). The public may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC's Public Reference Room at 450 fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The SEC Internet site's address is http://www.sec.gov. DNB maintains a corporate website at www.dnbfirst.com. We will provide printed copies of our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on

15

---

Table of Contents

Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to these reports at no charge upon written request. Requests should be made to DNB Financial Corporation, 4 Brandywine Avenue, Downingtown, PA 19335, Attention: Gerald F. Sopp, Chief Financial Officer.

Item 1A.        Risk Factors

        Not applicable.

Item 1B.        Unresolved Staff Comments

        None.

Item 2.        Properties

        The main office of the Bank is located at 4 Brandywine Avenue, Downingtown, Pennsylvania 19335. DNB's registered office is also at this location. DNB pays no rent or other form of consideration for the use of the Bank's main office as its principal executive office. The Bank leases its operations center located at 104 Brandywine Avenue, Downingtown. The Bank also leases the Chadds Ford office, West Goshen office, Exton office, West Chester office and limited service offices in Media and at the Tel Hai Retirement Community. The Bank owns the remainder of its existing branches as described below. The Bank had a net book value of $6.5 million for all branches owned plus leasehold improvements on offices leased at December 31, 2011. The Bank's trust department and wealth management unit, operating under the name, "DNB First Wealth Management," have offices in the Bank's Exton Office.

        The bank has thirteen offices located in Chester and Delaware Counties, Pennsylvania. In addition to the Main Office discussed above, they are:

Item 3.        Legal Proceedings

        DNB is a party to a number of lawsuits arising in the ordinary course of business. While any litigation causes an element of uncertainty, management is of the opinion that the liability, if any, resulting from the actions, will not have a material effect on the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Item 4.        Mine Safety Disclosures

        Not Applicable.

16

---

Table of Contents

Part II

Item 5.        Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

(a) Market Price of and Dividends on Registrant's Common Equity

        DNB Financial Corporation's common stock, par value $1.00 per share, is listed for trading on Nasdaq Capital Markets under the symbol DNBF. Current price information is available from account executives at most brokerage firms as well as the firms listed at the back of this report who are market makers of DNB's common stock. There were approximately 1,100 stockholders who owned 2.7 million shares of common stock outstanding at March 15, 2012. Quarterly high and low sales prices are set forth below:

        The information required with respect to the frequency and amount of DNB's cash dividends declared on each class of its common equity for the two most recent fiscal years is set forth in the section of this report titled, "Item 6 — Selected Financial Data" on page 19.

        The information required with respect to securities authorized for issuance under DNB's equity compensation plans is set forth in "Item 12 — Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters" on page 95.

(b) Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

        On January 30, 2009, as part of the CPP administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, DNB Financial Corporation entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the U.S. Treasury. On August 4, 2011, DNB repurchased all CPP Shares in conjunction with its participation in the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), (see additional discussion in Participation in U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program and Small Business Lending Fund program, on page 7 of this Form 10-K).

(c) Purchases of Equity Securities by DNB and Affiliated Purchasers

        The following table provides information on repurchases by or on behalf of DNB or any "affiliated purchaser" (as defined in Regulation 10b-18(a)(3)) of its common stock in each month of the quarter ended December 31, 2011.

17

---

Table of Contents

        On July 25, 2001, DNB authorized the buyback of up to 175,000 shares of its common stock over an indefinite period. On August 27, 2004, DNB increased the buyback from 175,000 to 325,000 shares of its common stock over an indefinite period.

        As more fully discussed beginning on page 3 in the "Supervision and Regulation" section of Item 1. "Business" of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, DNB's ability to repurchase its common stock was limited by the terms of the Purchase Agreement between DNB and the U.S. Treasury. Under the CPP, prior to the earlier of (i) January 30, 2012, or (ii) the date on which the Series A Preferred Stock is redeemed in whole or the U.S. Treasury has transferred all of the Series A Preferred Stock to unaffiliated third parties, the consent of the U.S. Treasury was required to repurchase any shares of common stock except in connection with benefit plans in the ordinary course of business and certain other limited exceptions. This restriction on the repurchase of common stock was effective through, August 4, 2011 when all requisite funds were repaid to the Treasury.

        As more fully discussed beginning on page 3 in the "Supervision and Regulation" section of Item 1. "Business" of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, DNB's ability to repurchase its common stock was limited by the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement between DNB and the U.S. Treasury regarding its participation in the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund (SBLF). Under the SBLF, effective August 4, 2011, so long as any share of Series 2011A Preferred Stock remains outstanding, DNB may repurchase or redeem any shares of Capital Stock, only if, after giving effect to such dividend, repurchase or redemption, DNB's Tier 1 capital would be at least equal to the Tier 1 Dividend Threshold, as specified in the agreement and that the dividends on such stock have all been contemporaneously declared and paid.

(d) Corporation Performance Graph

        The following graph presents the 5 year cumulative total return on DNB Financial Corporation's common stock, compared to the S&P 500 Index and the S&P 500 Financial Index for the 5 year period ended December 31, 2011. The comparison assumes that $100 was invested in DNB's common stock and each of the foregoing indices and that all dividends have been reinvested.

CORPORATION PERFORMANCE
COMPARISON OF FIVE YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN
AMONG DNB FINANCIAL CORP., the S&P 500 INDEX and the S&P 500 FINANCIAL INDEX

18

---

Table of Contents

Item 6.        Selected Financial Data

The selected financial data set forth below is derived in part from, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto, contained elsewhere herein.

19

---

Table of Contents

Item 7.        Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

I.     Introductory Overview

        DNB Financial Corporation is a bank holding company whose bank subsidiary, DNB First, National Association (the "Bank") is a nationally chartered commercial bank with trust powers, and a member of the FDIC. DNB provides a broad range of banking services to individual and corporate customers through its thirteen community offices located throughout Chester and Delaware Counties, Pennsylvania. DNB is a community banking organization that focuses its lending and other services on businesses and consumers in the local market area. DNB funds all these activities with retail and business deposits and borrowings. Through its Wealth Management division, the Bank provides wealth management and trust services to individuals, businesses and non-profit organizations. The Bank and its subsidiary, DNB Investments and Insurance, make available certain non-depository products and services, such as securities brokerage, mutual funds, life insurance and annuities.

        DNB earns revenues and generates cash flows by lending funds to commercial and consumer customers in its marketplace. DNB generates its largest source of interest income through its lending function. A secondary source of interest income is DNB's investment portfolio, which provides liquidity and cash flows for future lending needs.

        In addition to interest earned on loans and investments, DNB earns revenues from fees it charges customers for non-lending services. These services include wealth management and trust services; brokerage and investment services; cash management services; banking and ATM services; as well as safekeeping and other depository services.

        To ensure we remain well positioned to meet the growing needs of our customers and communities and to meet the challenges of the 21st century, we've worked to build awareness of our full-service capabilities and ability to meet the needs of a wide range of customers. This served to not only retain our existing, customer base, but to position ourselves as an attractive financial institution on which younger individuals and families can build their dreams. To that end, DNB continues to make appropriate investments in all areas of our business, including people, technology, facilities and marketing.

        Highlights of DNB's results for the year-end December 31, 2011 include:

•

Increased earnings — Net income increased $1.2 million or 33.6% year over year. Net income was $4.9 million or $1.53 per share in 2011, compared to $3.7 million or $1.16 per share in 2010.



•

Improvement of net interest margin — DNB's net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, improved 48 basis points from 3.24% in 2010 to 3.72% in 2011. The most significant factor in this improvement was the reduction in the cost of interest bearing liabilities, which declined from 1.37% in 2010 to 0.93% in 2011. In addition, management shifted assets into higher yielding categories by increasing the average loan portfolio by $7.5 million or 1.9%, and reducing the average investment portfolio by $6.6 million or 4.4%.



•

Control of non-interest expenses — DNB continued its focus on expense control and improving operational efficiencies throughout the bank. As a result, non-interest expenses decreased $178,000 from 2010, primarily because 2010's results included a $560,000 prepayment penalty paid to the FHLB of Pittsburgh. Absent this item, non-interest expenses would have increased slightly by $382,000 or 2.3%, primarily related to an increase in salary and employee benefits due to a higher level of full-time equivalent employees year over year.



•

Strengthened capital position — Shareholder's equity increased $5.8 million to $51.1 million at December 31, 2011 compared to December 31, 2010, reflecting our solid earnings growth and participation in the Treasury's SBLF Program.

20

---

Table of Contents

        The global and U.S. economies have experienced significantly reduced business activity as a result of disruptions in the financial system during the past three years. Dramatic declines in the housing market during the past three years, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks. As a result of the recession, retail customers may delay borrowing from DNB as unemployment remains high and availability to borrow against equity in primary residences diminishes. As the U.S. economy moves through a period of recession, delinquencies will rise as the value of homes decline and DNB's borrowers experience financial difficulty due to corporate downsizing, reduced sales, or other negative events which may impact their ability to meet their contractual loan payments. As a result of these negative trends in the economy and their impact on our borrowers' ability to repay their loans, DNB made a $1.5 million provision in 2011 in response to DNB's increased level of loans and leases which grew $7.5 million to $403.7 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $396.2 million at December 31, 2010.

        In addition, DNB's net interest margin has been impacted by these changes in the economy. Management has been aggressive in managing DNB's cost of funds during the year by implementing carefully planned pricing strategies, designed to offset the decline in rates on earning assets, while matching liquidity needs. Our composite cost of funds for 2011 dropped 44 basis points to 0.93%, from 1.37% in 2010. DNB's net interest margin increased to 3.72% in 2011 from 3.24% in 2010. This improvement is attributable to a lower composite cost of funds, coupled with a shift in assets from lower yielding investments into higher yielding loans.

        Earnings. For the year ended December 31, 2011, DNB reported net income of $4.9 million, an increase of $1.2 million from the $3.7 million reported for the year ended December 31, 2010, or $1.53 per share versus $1.16 per share, respectively, on a fully diluted basis. DNB's earnings were favorably impacted by a higher net interest margin, lower provisions for credit losses and lower levels of non-interest expense. During 2011, DNB recognized $38,000 in gains on sales of securities, down from $2.0 million in 2010. Although DNB reported an increase in earnings of 34%, our operations and earnings are subject to the same negative economic conditions challenging all commercial banking institutions.

        Asset Quality. Non-performing assets were $11.6 million at December 31, 2011 compared to $11.5 million at December 31, 2010. Non-performing assets as of December 31, 2011 were comprised of $7.4 million of non-accrual loans and leases, $210,000 of loans and leases delinquent over ninety days and still accruing, as well as $3.8 million of Other Real Estate Owned ("OREO") and $212,000 in other repossessed assets. As of December 31, 2011, the non-performing loans to total loans ratio increased to 1.89% compared to 1.82% at December 31, 2010. The non-performing assets to total assets ratio decreased to 1.91% at December 31, 2011, compared to 1.92% at December 31, 2010. The allowance for credit losses was $6.2 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $5.9 million at December 31, 2010. The allowance to total loans was 1.53% at December 31, 2011 compared to 1.49% at December 31, 2010. DNB's delinquency ratio (the total of all delinquent loans and leases plus loans greater than 90 days and still accruing, divided by total loans and leases) was 2.19% at December 31, 2011, up from 1.97% at December 31, 2010. The increase in delinquencies during 2011 occurred primarily in the consumer and commercial loan portfolios.

II.    Overview of Financial Condition — Major Changes and Trends

        At December 31, 2011, DNB had consolidated assets of $607.1 million and a Tier I/Leverage Capital Ratio of 10.14%. Loans and leases comprise 69.5% of earning assets, while investments and overnight funds constitute the remainder. During 2011, assets increased $4.8 million to $607.1 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $602.3 million at December 31, 2010. During the same period, investment securities decreased $6.6 million to $144.0 million, while the loan and lease portfolio increased $7.5 million, or 1.90%, to $403.7 million. Deposits increased $4.8 million to $497.5 million at December 31,

21

---

Table of Contents

2011. DNB's liabilities are comprised of a high level of core deposits with a low cost of funds in addition to a moderate level of borrowings with costs that are more volatile than core deposits.

        Comprehensive 5-Year Plan. During the second quarter of 2011, management updated the 5-year strategic plan that was designed to reposition its balance sheet and improve core earnings. Through the plan, management will endeavor to expand its loan portfolio through new originations, increased loan participations, as well as strategic loan and lease receivable purchases. Management also plans to reduce the absolute level of borrowings with cash flows from existing loans and investments as well as from new deposit growth. A discussion on DNB's Key Strategies follows below:

•

Focus on penetrating existing markets to maximize profitability



•

Grow loans and diversify the mix



•

Improve asset quality



•

Reduce long-term borrowings



•

Focus on profitable customer segments



•

Grow and diversify non-interest income, primarily in the wealth management area



•

Focus on reducing DNB's cost of funds by changing DNB's mix of deposits



•

Focus on cost containment and improving operational efficiencies

        Strategic Plan Update. During the year ended December 31, 2011, management focused on strengthening DNB's net interest margin, reducing our composite cost of funds as well as strengthening capital ratios. To accomplish these goals, management shifted assets out of lower yielding investments and into higher yielding loans. This caused the average balance of loans and leases to increase to $408.8 million yielding 5.60% in 2011, from $371.5 million of loans and leases yielding 5.73% in 2010. The composite cost of funds for the year ended December 31, 2011 was 0.93% compared to 1.37% in 2010. The net interest margin for the year ended December 31, 2011 increased 48 basis points to 3.72%, up from 3.24% in 2010. Management continued to actively manage deposits during 2011 to reduce its composite cost of funds. Transaction and savings accounts increased $37.8 million during 2011 to $392.3 million, compared to December 31, 2010, while time deposits declined $33.0 million to $105.2 million compared to December 31, 2010. The Tier 1 (leverage) Capital ratio increased to 10.14% at December 31, 2011, up from 9.25% at December 31, 2010.

        Management's strategies are designed to direct DNB's tactical investment decisions and support financial objectives. DNB's most significant revenue source continues to be net interest income, defined as total interest income less total interest expense, which in 2011 accounted for approximately 85.5% of total revenue. To produce net interest income and consistent earnings growth over the long-term, DNB must generate loan and deposit growth at acceptable economic spreads within its market area. To generate and grow loans and deposits, DNB must focus on a number of areas including, but not limited to, the economy, branch expansion, sales practices, customer satisfaction and retention, competition, customer behavior, technology, product innovation and credit performance of its customers.

        Management has made a concerted effort to improve the measurement and tracking of business lines and overall corporate performance levels. Improved information systems have increased DNB's ability to track key indicators and enhance corporate performance levels. Better measurement against goals and objectives and increased accountability will be integral in attaining desired loan, deposit and fee income production.

        On January 30, 2009, as part of the CPP administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, DNB Financial Corporation entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the U.S. Treasury. On August 4, 2011, DNB repurchased all CPP Shares in conjunction

22

---

Table of Contents

with its participation in the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), (see additional discussion in Participation in U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program and Small Business Lending Fund program, on page 7 of this Form 10-K).On September 21, 2011, DNB entered into the Warrant Letter Agreement with the Treasury. Pursuant to the Warrant Letter Agreement, DNB Financial Corporation repurchased from Treasury the warrant to purchase 186,311 shares of DNB Financial Corporation's common stock issued to Treasury in January 2009 under CPP. DNB Financial Corporation paid a purchase price of $458,000 for the warrant.

III.  DNB's Principal Products and Services

        Loans and Lending Services. DNB's primary source of earnings and cash flows is derived from its lending function. The commercial loan and lease portfolios amounted to $333.6 million or 82.6% of total loans as of December 31, 2011. DNB focuses on providing these products to small to mid-size businesses throughout Chester and Delaware Counties. In keeping with DNB's goal to match customer business initiatives with products designed to meet their needs, DNB offers a wide variety of fixed and variable rate loans that are priced competitively. DNB serves this market by providing funds for the purchase of business property or ventures, working capital lines, Small Business Administration loans, lease financing for equipment and for a variety of other purposes.

        As a community bank, DNB also serves consumers by providing home equity and home mortgages, as well as term loans for the purchase of consumer goods. During the current economic environment, consumer loans declined $5.1 million or 10.4% from the prior year due to lower demand for this product as a result of falling housing prices and a high unemployment rate.

        In addition to providing funds to customers, DNB also provides a variety of services to its commercial customers. These services, such as cash management, remote capture, commercial sweep accounts, internet banking, letters of credit and other lending services are designed to meet our customer needs and help them become successful. DNB provides these services to assist its customers in obtaining financing, securing business opportunities, providing access to new resources and managing cash flows.

        Deposit Products and Services. DNB's primary source of funds is derived from customer deposits, which are typically generated by DNB's thirteen branch offices. DNB's deposit base, while highly concentrated in central Chester County, extends to southern Chester County and into parts of Delaware and Lancaster Counties. In addition, a growing amount of new deposits are being generated through expanded government service offerings and as a part of comprehensive loan or wealth management relationships.

        The majority of DNB's deposit mix consists of low costing core deposits, (demand, NOW and savings accounts). The remaining deposits are comprised of rate-sensitive money market and time products. DNB offers tiered savings and money market accounts, designed to attract high dollar, less volatile funds. Certificates of deposit and IRAs are traditionally offered with interest rates commensurate with their terms.

        Non-Deposit Products and Services. DNB offers non-deposit products and services through its subsidiaries under the names "DNB Investments & Insurance" and "DNB First Investment Management & Trust." Revenues under these entities were $785,000 and $834,000 for 2011 and 2010, respectively.

23

---

Table of Contents

DNB Investments & Insurance.  Through a partnership with PrimeVest Financial Services, DNB Investments & Insurance offers a complete line of investment and insurance products.

DNB First Investment Management & Trust.  DNB First Investment Management & Trust offers a full line of services, which includes the following:

IV.    Material Challenges, Risks and Opportunities

A.    Interest Rate Risk Management.

        Interest rate risk is the exposure to adverse changes in net interest income due to changes in interest rates. DNB considers interest rate risk a predominant risk in terms of its potential impact on earnings. Interest rate risk can occur for any one or more of the following reasons: (a) assets and liabilities may mature or re-price at different times; (b) short-term or long-term market rates may change by different amounts; or (c) the remaining maturity of various assets or liabilities may shorten or lengthen as interest rates change.

        The principal objective of DNB's interest rate risk management is to evaluate the interest rate risk included in certain on and off balance sheet accounts, determine the level of risk appropriate given DNB's business strategy, operating environment, capital and liquidity requirements and performance objectives, and manage the risk consistent with approved guidelines. Through such management, DNB seeks to reduce the vulnerability of its operations to changes in interest rates. DNB's Asset Liability Committee (the "ALCO") is responsible for reviewing DNB's asset/liability policies and interest rate risk position and making decisions involving asset liability considerations. The ALCO meets on a monthly basis and reports trends and DNB's interest rate risk position to the Board of Directors on a quarterly basis. The extent of the movement of interest rates is an uncertainty that could have a negative impact on DNB's earnings. (See additional discussion in Item 7a. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk on page 48 of this Form 10-K.)

1.    Net Interest Margin

        DNB's net interest margin is the ratio of net interest income to average interest-earning assets. Unlike the interest rate spread, which measures the difference between the rates on earning assets and interest paying liabilities, the net interest margin measures that spread plus the effect of net free funding sources. This is a more meaningful measure of profitability because a bank can have a narrow spread but a high level of equity and non-interest-bearing deposits, resulting in a good net interest margin. One of the most

24

---

Table of Contents

critical challenges DNB faced over the last several years was the impact of historically low interest rates and a narrower spread between short-term rates and long-term rates as noted in the tables below.

 

        In general, financial institutions price their fixed rate loans off of 5 and 10 year treasuries and price their deposits off of shorter indices, like the Federal Funds Sold rate. As you can see in the table above, the spread between the Federal Funds Sold rate and the 5 year treasury has ranged from 2.44% to a negative 0.62% during the last 6 years. The spread between the Federal Funds Sold rate and the 10 year treasury has ranged from 3.60% to a negative 0.55% during the last 6 years. As a result of the compression between long and short term rates, many banks, including DNB, have seen their net interest margin fluctuate during the last 6 years.

        The table below provides, for the periods indicated, information regarding: (i) DNB's average balance sheet; (ii) the total dollar amounts of interest income from interest-earning assets and the resulting average yields (tax-exempt yields have been adjusted to a tax equivalent basis using a 34% tax rate); (iii) the total dollar amounts of interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities and the resulting average costs; (iv) net interest income; (v) net interest rate spread; and (vi) net interest margin. Average balances were calculated based on daily balances. Non-accrual loan balances are included in total loans. Loan fees and costs are included in interest on total loans.

25

---

Table of Contents

Average Balances, Rates, and Interest Income and Expense
(Dollars in thousands)

2.    Rate / Volume Analysis

        During 2011, net interest income, before the provision for credit losses, increased $2.7 million or 14.31% on a tax equivalent basis. As shown in the Rate/Volume Analysis on the following page, $2.5 million was attributable to volume changes and $252,000 to rate changes. The volume changes were mostly attributable to increased levels of loans and leases of $37.3 million, offset by decreased levels of investment securities of $29.9 million and decreased levels of FHLBP advances of $12.7 million. The average balance of loans and leases was $408.8 million in 2011 compared to $371.5 million in 2010. The average balance of investment securities was $153.0 million in 2011 compared to $182.9 million in 2010. The average balance of FHLBP advances was $20.3 million in 2011 compared to $33.1 million in 2010. The decrease in yields on interest-earning assets and the decrease in rates on interest-bearing liabilities offset

26

---

Table of Contents

each other, resulting in a $252,000 favorable difference. The tax equivalent yield on securities declined to 2.34% in 2011 from 2.63% in 2010. The favorable change due to rate on savings deposits was $938,000 which had an average rate of 0.33% in 2011 and 0.64% in 2010. The favorable change due to rate on time deposits was $309,000 which had an average rate of 1.77% in 2011 and 1.98% in 2010. DNB's composite cost of funds decreased to 0.93% in 2011 compared to 1.37% in 2010.

        The following table sets forth, among other things, the extent to which changes in interest rates and changes in the average balances of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities have affected interest income and expense for the periods noted (tax-exempt yields have been adjusted to a tax equivalent basis using a 34% tax rate). For each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, information is provided with respect to changes attributable to (i) changes in rate (change in rate multiplied by old volume) and (ii) changes in volume (change in volume multiplied by new rate). The net change attributable to the combined impact of rate and volume has been allocated proportionately to the change due to rate and the change due to volume.

Rate / Volume Analysis
(Dollars in thousands)

3.    Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis

        The largest component of DNB's total income is net interest income, and the majority of DNB's financial instruments are comprised of interest rate-sensitive assets and liabilities with various terms and maturities. The primary objective of management is to maximize net interest income while minimizing interest rate risk. Interest rate risk is derived from timing differences in the re-pricing of assets and liabilities, loan prepayments, deposit withdrawals, and differences in lending and funding rates. The Asset/Liability Committee ("ALCO") actively seeks to monitor and control the mix of interest rate-sensitive assets and interest rate-sensitive liabilities.

        ALCO continually evaluates interest rate risk management opportunities, including the use of derivative financial instruments. Management believes that hedging instruments currently available are not

27

---

Table of Contents

cost-effective, and therefore, has focused its efforts on increasing DNB's spread by attracting lower-costing retail deposits and in some instances, borrowing from the FHLB of Pittsburgh.

        DNB reports its callable agency investments ($43.4 million at December 31, 2011) and callable FHLBP advances ($20 million at December 31, 2011) at their Option Adjusted Spread ("OAS") effective duration date, as opposed to the call or maturity date. In management's opinion, using effective duration dates on callable securities and advances provides a better estimate of the option exercise date under any interest rate environment. The OAS methodology is an approach whereby the likelihood of option exercise takes into account the coupon on the security, the distance to the call date, the maturity date and current interest rate volatility. In addition, prepayment assumptions derived from historical data have been applied to mortgage-related securities, which are included in investments. (See additional discussion in Item 7a. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk on page 48 of this Form 10-K.)

B.    Liquidity and Market Risk Management

        Liquidity is the ability to meet current and future financial obligations. The Bank further defines liquidity as the ability to respond to deposit outflows as well as maintain flexibility to take advantage of lending and investment opportunities. The Bank's primary sources of funds are operating earnings, deposits, repurchase agreements, principal and interest payments on loans, proceeds from loan sales, sales and maturities of mortgage backed and investment securities, and FHLBP advances. The Bank uses the funds generated to support its lending and investment activities as well as any other demands for liquidity such as deposit outflows. While maturities and scheduled amortization of loans and securities are predictable sources of funds, deposit flows, mortgage prepayments, loan and security sales and the exercise of call features are greatly influenced by general interest rates, economic conditions and competition.

        The objective of DNB's asset/liability management function is to maintain consistent growth in net interest income within DNB's policy limits. This objective is accomplished through the management of liquidity and interest rate risk, as well as customer offerings of various loan and deposit products. DNB maintains adequate liquidity to meet daily funding requirements, anticipated deposit withdrawals, or asset opportunities in a timely manner. Liquidity is also necessary to meet obligations during unusual, extraordinary or adverse operating circumstances, while avoiding a significant loss or cost. DNB's foundation for liquidity is a stable deposit base as well as a marketable investment portfolio that provides cash flow through regular maturities or that can be used for collateral to secure funding in an emergency. As part of its liquidity management, DNB maintains assets, which comprise its primary liquidity (Federal funds sold, investments and interest-bearing cash balances, less pledged securities).

C.    Credit Risk Management

        DNB defines credit risk as the risk of default by a customer or counter-party. The objective of DNB's credit risk management strategy is to quantify and manage credit risk on an aggregate portfolio basis as well as to limit the risk of loss resulting from an individual customer default. Credit risk is managed through a combination of underwriting, documentation and collection standards. DNB's credit risk management strategy calls for regular credit examinations and quarterly management reviews of large credit exposures and credits experiencing credit quality deterioration. DNB's loan review procedures provide objective assessments of the quality of underwriting, documentation, risk grading and charge-off procedures, as well as an assessment of the allowance for credit loss reserve analysis process. As the U.S. economy moves through a period of recession, it is possible that delinquencies and non-performing assets may rise as the value of homes decline and DNB's borrowers experience financial difficulty due to corporate downsizing, reduced sales, or other negative events which will impact their ability to meet their contractual loan payments. To minimize the impact on DNB's earnings and maintain sound credit quality, management continues to aggressively monitor credit and credit relationships that may be impacted by such adverse factors.

28

---

Table of Contents

D.    Competition

        In addition to the challenges related to the interest rate environment, community banks in Chester and Delaware Counties have been experiencing increased competition from large regional and international banks entering DNB's marketplace through mergers and acquisitions. Competition for loans and deposits has negatively affected DNB's net interest margin. To compensate for the increased competition, DNB, along with other area community banks, has aggressively sought and marketed customers who have been disenfranchised by these mergers. To attract these customers, DNB has introduced new deposit products, such as Mobile Banking, Choice Checking, Credit Cards as well as Executive and employee packages. In addition, DNB has introduced Remote Capture to our commercial customers to expedite their collection of funds.

V.     Recent Developments

A.    Accounting Developments Affecting DNB

        In April 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-02 for guidance on Receivables (Topic 310) regarding a creditor's determination of whether a restructuring is a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in this update apply to all creditors, both public and nonpublic, that restructure certain receivables. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that both of the following exist: the restructuring constitutes a concession and the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. The amendments clarify the guidance on a creditor's evaluation of whether it has granted a concession and on a creditor's evaluation of whether a debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. For public entities, the amendments in this update are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. As a result of applying these amendments, an entity may identify receivables that are newly considered impaired. For purposes of measuring impairment of those receivables, an entity should apply the amendments prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011. The adoption did not have a material impact on DNB's consolidated financial statements.

        In December, 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-12, Deferral of the Effective Date to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update 2011-05. In response to stakeholder concerns regarding the operational ramifications of the presentation of these reclassifications for current and previous years, the FASB has deferred the implementation date of this provision to allow time for further consideration. The requirement in ASU 2011-05, Presentation of Comprehensive Income, for the presentation of a combined statement of comprehensive income or separate, but consecutive, statements of net income and other comprehensive income is still effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011 for public companies, and fiscal years ending after December 15, 2011 for nonpublic companies. The adoption of ASU No. 2011-05 will not have a material impact on DNB's consolidated financial statements.

VI.   Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

        The following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Generally accepted accounting principles are complex and require management to apply significant judgment to various accounting, reporting and disclosure matters. Management must use assumptions and estimates to apply these principles where actual measurement is not possible or practical. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

        In management's opinion, the most critical accounting policies and estimates impacting DNB's consolidated financial statements are listed below. These policies are critical because they are highly dependent upon subjective or complex judgments, assumptions and estimates. Changes in such estimates may have a significant impact on the financial statements. For a complete discussion of DNB's significant accounting policies, see the footnotes to the Consolidated Financial Statements and discussion throughout this Form 10-K.

29

---

Table of Contents

1.    Determination of the allowance for credit losses.    Credit loss allowance policies involve significant judgments, estimates and assumptions by management which may have a material impact on the carrying value of net loans and, potentially, on the net income recognized by DNB from period to period. The allowance for credit losses is based on management's ongoing evaluation of the loan and lease portfolio and reflects an amount considered by management to be its best estimate of the amount necessary to absorb known and inherent losses in the portfolio. Management considers a variety of factors when establishing the allowance, such as the impact of current economic conditions, diversification of the portfolios, delinquency statistics, results of loan review and related classifications, and historic loss rates. In addition, certain individual loans which management has identified as problematic are specifically provided for, based upon an evaluation of the borrower's perceived ability to pay, the estimated adequacy of the underlying collateral and other relevant factors. In addition, regulatory authorities, as an integral part of their examinations, periodically review the allowance for credit losses. They may require additions to the allowance based upon their judgments about information available to them at the time of examination. Although provisions have been established and segmented by type of loan, based upon management's assessment of their differing inherent loss characteristics, the entire allowance for credit losses is available to absorb further losses in any category.

        Management uses significant estimates to determine the allowance for credit losses. Because the allowance for credit losses is dependent, to a great extent, on conditions that may be beyond DNB's control, management's estimate of the amount necessary to absorb credit losses and actual credit losses could differ. DNB's current judgment is that the allowance for credit losses remains appropriate at December 31, 2011.

VII. 2011 Financial Results

A.    Liquidity

        Management maintains liquidity to meet depositors' needs for funds, to satisfy or fund loan commitments, and for other operating purposes. DNB's foundation for liquidity is a stable and loyal customer deposit base, cash and cash equivalents, and a marketable investment portfolio that provides periodic cash flow through regular maturities and amortization, or that can be used as collateral to secure funding. Primary liquidity includes investments, Federal funds sold, and interest-bearing cash balances, less pledged securities. DNB also anticipates scheduled payments and prepayments on its loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios. In addition, DNB maintains borrowing arrangements with various correspondent banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia to meet short-term liquidity needs. Through these relationships, DNB has available credit of approximately $184.7 million at December 31, 2011. Management believes that DNB has adequate resources to meet its short-term and long-term funding requirements.

        As of December 31, 2011, deposits totaled $497.5 million, up $4.8 million from $492.7 million at December 31, 2010. There were $66.0 million in certificates of deposit (including IRAs) scheduled to mature during the next twelve months. At December 31, 2011, DNB had $57.7 million in un-funded loan commitments. In addition, there was $4.0 million in un-funded letters of credit. Management anticipates the majority of these commitments will be funded by means of normal cash flows.

30

---

Table of Contents

        The following table sets forth the composition of DNB's deposits at the dates indicated.

Deposits By Major Classification
(Dollars in thousands)

Capital Resources and Adequacy

        Stockholders' equity was $51.1 million at December 31, 2011 compared to $45.2 million at December 31, 2010. The increase in stockholders' equity was primarily a result of year-to-date earnings of $4.9 million. Stockholders equity also increased by $1.3 million due to participation in the U.S. Treasury's SBLF program and repayment of DNB's obligation under the U.S. Treasury's Capital Purchase Program ("CPP") as described below as well as a $1.3 million, net-of-tax other comprehensive income adjustment for unrealized gains on the securities portfolio. These additions to stockholders equity were partially offset by an unrealized actuarial loss on DNB's pension totaling $539,000, $458,000 to purchase a warrant DNB issued to the Treasury in its 2009 participation in CPP, $348,000 of dividends paid on DNB's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2008A , $321,000 of dividends paid on DNB's common stock, and $215,000 of dividends accrued or paid on DNB's Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A.

        On January 30, 2009, as part of the Capital Purchase Program ("CPP") of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 administered by the United States Department of the Treasury ("the Treasury"), DNB entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the Treasury, pursuant to which DNB issued and sold on January 30, 2009, and the Treasury purchased for cash on that date (i) 11,750 shares of DNB's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2008A, par value $10.00 per share, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share ("the CPP Shares"), and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 186,311 shares of DNB's common stock, $1.00 par value, at an exercise price of $9.46 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $11,750,000 in cash. This transaction closed on January 30, 2009. The issuance and sale of these securities was a private placement exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. The Bank provided dividends to DNB in connection with the $11,750,000 of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock sold on January 30, 2009 as part of the CPP through its redemption in 2011.

        On August 4, 2011, DNB entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to which DNB issued and sold to the Treasury 13,000 shares of its Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A ("Series 2011A Preferred Stock"), having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share for aggregate proceeds of $13,000,000. The Securities Purchase Agreement was entered into, and the Series 2011A Preferred Stock was issued, pursuant to the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), a $30 billion fund established under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, that encourages lending to small businesses by providing capital to qualified community banks with assets of less than $10 billion. Of the $13 million in aggregate proceeds, $11,879,000 was used to repurchase all CPP Shares ($11,750,000 was paid in principal and $128,900 in accrued, unpaid dividends related to the CPP Shares) held by the Treasury as described above. The securities sold in this transaction

31

---

Table of Contents

were exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as a transaction by DNB not involving a public offering.

        On September 21, 2011, DNB entered into the Warrant Letter Agreement with the Treasury. Pursuant to the Warrant Letter Agreement, DNB Financial Corporation repurchased from Treasury the warrant to purchase 186,311 shares of DNB Financial Corporation's common stock issued to Treasury in January 2009 under CPP. DNB Financial Corporation paid a purchase price of $458,000 for the warrant.

        Management believes that DNB and the Bank have each met the definition of "well capitalized" for regulatory purposes on December 31, 2011. The Bank's capital category is determined for the purposes of applying the bank regulators' "prompt corrective action" regulations and for determining levels of deposit insurance assessments and may not constitute an accurate representation of DNB's or the Bank's overall financial condition or prospects. DNB's capital exceeds the Federal Reserve Bank's ("FRB's") minimum leverage ratio requirements for bank holding companies (see additional discussion in Regulatory Matters — Footnote 17 to DNB's consolidated financial statements).

        Under federal banking laws and regulations, DNB and the Bank are required to maintain minimum capital as determined by certain regulatory ratios. Capital adequacy for regulatory purposes, and the capital category assigned to an institution by its regulators, may be determinative of an institution's overall financial condition.

B.    Results of Operations

1.    Summary of Performance

(a)    Summary of Results

        For the year ended December 31, 2011, DNB reported net income of $4.9 million versus $3.7 million for 2010. Per share earnings on a fully diluted basis were $1.53, up from $1.16 for the prior year. The global and U.S. economies are experiencing significantly reduced business activity as a result of disruptions in the financial system during the past three years. The United States, Europe and many other countries across the globe are struggling with too much debt and weaker streams of revenues as a result of recessionary pressures and high unemployment. Dramatic declines in the housing market, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks. Residential real estate activity in the Third Federal Reserve District (the "Third District") has been sluggish with real estate agents reporting little traffic. A backlog of foreclosures, the volume of which was especially large in New Jersey, and flat to slightly falling house prices continue to dampen demand for new and used homes. New construction activity continues to shift from the single-family market toward the multifamily market. Commercial and industrial real estate activity has been mixed in the Third District during 2011. Slow, steady growth was observed with vacancy rates generally falling, rents steady or occasionally rising, and concessions steady or occasionally falling. The overall outlook for demand of nonresidential space is for continued slow growth.

        As a result of the recession, retail customers may delay borrowing from DNB as unemployment remains high and availability to borrow against equity in primary residences diminishes. In addition, many commercial customers have postponed their capital purchases until they see signs of an improving economy and clear direction from the legislative branch of the government. Locally, business activity in the Third District has been more mixed and somewhat weaker overall. Several sectors have continued to report slow, steady growth, and a few sectors have grown faster, while others have shifted to reporting slower growth, no growth, or declines. Manufacturing activity has shown some modest increases in new orders and shipments. On balance, bank lending has remained mostly flat. Residential real estate and construction was perhaps most impacted by stock market volatility. Generally positive results were reported by service-sector firms. Upward price pressures from food, energy, and other commodities have

32

---

Table of Contents

lessened somewhat. The ability to pass along costs remains mixed, and there is little evidence of wage pressure.

        In response to ongoing uncertainty, many of the Third District's business contacts, many of which have business models similar to DNB's small business clients, have slightly lowered their expectations, with most firms projecting slow to flat growth for 2012. Third District manufacturers have reported further modest increases in new orders and shipments. Retailers are hopeful for stronger sales; auto dealers are uncertain. Bankers have lowered their expectations for loan growth. The Third Districts' Commercial real estate contacts and service-sector firms have continued to expect slow growth; however, uncertainty has increased.

        Although DNB's earnings have been impacted by the general economic conditions, the impact has not been as severe as it has been in many parts of the nation, due to a relatively healthier economic climate in the Third Federal Reserve District and specifically Chester County. DNB's franchise spans both Chester and Delaware counties in southeastern Pennsylvania. The majority of loans have been made to businesses and individuals in Chester County and the majority of deposits are from businesses and individuals within the County. According to available census data, Chester County's population has grown at approximately 15%, compared to 13% for the nation and 3% for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The median household income in Chester County is $72,288 and the County ranks 14th nationally in disposable income. Chester County's unemployment rate stood at 5.4% as of December 2011, compared to the Pennsylvania unemployment rate of 7.4% and 8.3% nationally. Traditionally, the unemployment rate has been the lowest in the surrounding five-county area and it ranks among the lowest unemployment rates in the Commonwealth. Chester County has a civilian labor force of 266,100, with manufacturing jobs representing 23.1% of the workforce and retail shopping comprising 13.8% of the total employment. During the last few years, the County has been able to keep most of its major employers, however some of them have downsized in order to remain competitive. Chester County is home to several Fortune 500 companies. Thirteen Chester County employers have 1,000 employees or more. Of these 13 companies, two companies have more than 5,000 employees.

        As the U.S. and local economy moves through a period of reduced business activity and historically high unemployment rates, delinquencies will rise as the value of homes decline and DNB's borrowers experience financial difficulty due to corporate downsizing, reduced sales, or other negative events which may impact their ability to meet their contractual loan payments. As a result, growth in the loan portfolio and continued negative trends in the economy and their impact on our borrowers' ability to repay their loans, DNB made a $1.5 million provision for credit losses during the year ended December 31, 2011.

        These and other factors have impacted our operations. We continue to focus on the consistency and stability of core earnings and balance sheet strength which are critical success factors in today's challenging economic environment. During 2011, our focused and prudent approach allowed us to restructure the balance sheet and improve our net interest margin, while continuing to build capital. We significantly reduced our funding cost and funded loan growth with increased core deposits and capital. We controlled non-interest expenses and made investments in core business lines.

(b)    Significant Events, Transactions and Economic Changes Affecting Results

        Some of DNB's significant events during 2011 include:

•

Total loans and leases were $403.7 million at December 31, 2011, up $7.5 million or 1.9% from 2010. The increase was primarily the result of originations by our loan officers, coupled with strategic purchases of Small Business Administration and United States Department of Agriculture guaranteed loans. Commercial mortgage loans grew $14.2 million or 6.5% to $232.3 million and commercial loans increased $3.6 million or 3.7% to $101.1 million. This was offset by declines in consumer loans of $5.1 million or 10.5% to $43.6 million, primarily due to the current economic environment, which has lessened consumer demand for home equity loan products as a result of

33

---

Table of Contents

falling housing prices and a high unemployment rate. In addition, commercial leases declined $700,000 or 78.7% and residential mortgage loans declined $4.5 million or 14.5%.

•

DNB continued its focus on expense control and improving operational efficiencies throughout the bank. As a result, non-interest expenses decreased $178,000 from 2010, primarily because the 2010's result included a $560,000 prepayment penalty paid to the FHLB of Pittsburgh. Absent this item, non-interest expenses would have increased moderately by $382,000 or 2.3%, primarily related to an increase in salary and employee benefits due to a higher level of full-time equivalent employees year over year.



•

DNB made $1.5 million in provisions for credit losses during the year in response to the $7.5 million growth in the loan portfolio, as well as the impact that the economy has had on several borrowers. DNB's allowance for credit losses to total loans and leases ratio increased from 1.49% at December 31, 2010, to 1.53% at December 31, 2011.

(c)    Trends and Uncertainties

        Please refer to Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Introductory Overview on page 20 of this Form 10-K.

(d)    Material Changes in Results

        Please refer to the discussion above in the section titled "Significant Events, Transactions and Economic Changes Affecting Results."

(e)    Effect of Inflation and Changing Rates

        For detailed discussion of the effects of inflation and changes in rates on DNB's results, refer to the discussion below on "Net Interest Income."

2.    Net Interest Income

        DNB's earnings performance is primarily dependent upon its level of net interest income, which is the excess of interest income over interest expense. Interest income includes interest earned on loans and leases (net of interest reversals on non-performing loans), investments and Federal funds sold, as well as net loan fee amortization and dividend income. Interest expense includes the interest cost for deposits, FHLBP advances, repurchase agreements, corporate debentures, Federal funds purchased and other borrowings.

        During the year ended December 31, 2011, management focused on strengthening DNB's net interest margin, as well as reducing our composite cost of funds. To accomplish these goals, management shifted assets out of lower yielding investments and into higher yielding loans. DNB grew loans by $7.5 million or 1.9% during 2011 and reduced its investment portfolio by $6.6 million or 4.4% during 2011. In addition to this shift in assets, DNB reduced its composite cost of funds from 1.25% in 2010 to .83% in 2011. Management continued to actively manage deposits during 2011 to reduce its composite cost of funds. Transaction and savings accounts increased $37.8 million during 2011 to $392.3 million, while time deposits declined $33.0 million to $105.2 million at December 31, 2011.

        Interest earned on loans and leases was $22.7 million for 2011 compared to $21.2 million for 2010. The average balance on loans and leases was $408.8 million with an average yield of 5.60% in 2011 compared to an average balance of $371.5 million with an average yield of 5.73% in 2010.

        Interest and dividends on investment securities was $3.5 million and $4.8 million for 2011 and 2010, respectively. The average balance on investment securities was $153.0 million with an average yield of 2.34% in 2011 compared to $182.9 million with an average yield of 2.63% in 2010. Interest and dividends

34

---

Table of Contents

decreased $1.3 million, primarily due to a lower average balance of securities and a lower yield on securities year over year. Total investment securities decreased $6.6 million from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011 primarily due to $89.6 million of sales, maturities, calls and pay-downs during 2011, offset by the purchase of $82.5 million of securities during 2011.

        During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, DNB sold its entire municipal securities portfolio, which had a book value of approximately $26.9 million for a net loss of $64,000. Management sold the municipal securities out of the HTM portfolio due to media and headline risk related to municipal budget shortfalls, which management believes could impair the value of the bonds. In particular, management believes that reported problems with budgets, in California and other states across the country that are experiencing budget shortfalls, could trickle down to individual municipalities. In addition, numerous municipalities are struggling financially as promised pensions benefits for public sector employees represent a massive overhang that threatens the financial future of many cities and states. This was a change in circumstances that was unusual and non-recurring, and could not have been reasonably anticipated when the bonds were placed in the HTM Portfolio. In addition to the municipal securities, management sold mortgaged backed securities with a book value of $3.0 million out of the HTM portfolio for a net gain of $39,000. Such sales are allowed under ASC 320 guidelines, as more than 85% of the principal outstanding at acquisition had been paid down, due to prepayments and normal scheduled payments. During 2011, DNB purchased municipal securities which had an amortized cost of $12.4 million at December 31, 2011. All of these municipal securities were issued by school districts within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. They are backed by the full faith, credit and taxing power of the issuing school district. All have strong underlying credit ratings and $11.2 million of these securities are insured by a highly rated insurance company. In addition to these layers of credit rating, 100% of these securities are further enhanced by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through Pennsylvania's State Aid Intercept Program.

        Interest on deposits was $3.2 million for 2011 compared to $4.9 million for 2010. The average balance of interest-bearing deposits was $441.5 million with an average rate of 0.73% for 2011 compared to $448.1 million with an average rate of 1.09% for 2010. The decrease in rate during both periods was primarily attributable to a lower interest rate environment.

        Interest on FHLBP advances was $864,000 for 2011 compared to $1.5 million for 2010. The average balance on FHLBP advances was $20.3 million with an average rate of 4.25% for 2011 compared to $33.1 million with an average rate of 4.53% for 2010. During the first quarter of 2010, DNB paid off $18.0 million of high cost FHLBP borrowings and incurred $560,000 in FHLBP pre-payment penalties.

        Interest on repurchase agreements was $142,000 for 2011 compared to $197,000 for 2010. The average balance on repurchase agreements was $26.0 million with an average rate of 0.55% for 2011 compared to $24.4 million with an average rate of 0.81% for 2010. The decrease in rate was primarily the result of the lower interest rate environment during 2011.

3.    Provision for Credit Losses

        To provide for known and inherent losses in the loan and lease portfolio, DNB maintains an allowance for credit losses. There was a $1.5 million provision made in 2011, compared to a $2.2 million provision made in 2010. Management made a $1.5 million provision in 2011 primarily in response to DNB's increased level of loans outstanding. During 2011, loans increased $7.5 million or 1.9%.

        For a detailed discussion on DNB's reserving methodology, refer to "Item 1 — Determination of the allowance for credit losses" which can be found under "Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates".

4.    Non-Interest Income

        Non-interest income includes service charges on deposit products; fees received in connection with the sale of non-depository products and services, including fiduciary and investment advisory services

35

---

Table of Contents

offered through DNB First Wealth Management; securities brokerage products and services and insurance products and services offered through DNB Investments & Insurance; and other sources of income such as increases in the cash surrender value of Bank Owned Life Insurance ("BOLI"), net gains on sales of investment securities, SBA loans and other real estate owned ("OREO") properties. In addition, DNB receives fees for cash management, remote capture, merchant services, debit cards, safe deposit box rentals and similar activities.

        Non-interest income was $3.6 million for 2011 compared to $5.4 million for 2010. The $1.8 million decrease was primarily due to a $2.0 million decrease in net gains on sale of investment securities year over year. During 2011, DNB recognized $38,000 in net gains on the sale, redemption and calls of securities having a book value of $69.4 million. During 2010, DNB recognized $2.0 million in net gains on the sale, redemption and calls of securities having a book value of $256.2 million. In addition to the decrease in gains on the sale of securities, year over year, service charges on deposits declined by $134,000, primarily due to reduced non-sufficient funds charges. DNB recognized $281,000 from gains on SBA loan sales during 2011, while there were no such gains in 2010.

5.    Non-Interest Expense

        Non-interest expense includes salaries & employee benefits, furniture & equipment, occupancy, professional & consulting fees as well as marketing, printing & supplies, FDIC insurance, PA shares tax, FHLB prepayment penalties and other less significant expense items. DNB continued its focus on expense control and improving operational efficiencies throughout the bank. As a result, non-interest expenses decreased $178,000 from 2010, primarily because 2010 results included a $560,000 prepayment penalty paid to the FHLB of Pittsburgh. Absent this item, non-interest expenses would have increased slightly by $382,000 or 2.3%.

Salary and employee benefits.    Salary and employee benefits were $8.8 million for 2011 compared to $8.4 million for 2010. The increase was attributable to a higher level of full-time equivalent employees year over year.

Furniture and equipment.    Furniture and equipment expense was $1.3 million for 2011 compared to $1.4 million for 2010. The decrease was primarily attributable to lower depreciation on existing furniture and equipment.

Occupancy.    Occupancy expense was $1.9 million for 2011 compared to $1.7 million for 2010. The $186,000 increase was due to a $164,000 increase in office building rental expense. The increase was primarily due to the expiration of the amortization period of a gain on a sale-lease-back transaction that occurred in 2005. The remaining $22,000 increase was due to higher expenditures for snow removal, utilities and security.

FDIC insurance.    FDIC insurance expense was $562,000 in 2011 compared to $809,000 in 2010. The $247,000 decrease was primarily due to changes adopted by the FDIC, effective April 1, 2011, to its base and risk-based deposit insurance rates. Pursuant to the new rules, DNB's annual assessment base rates were based on the bank's risk category. Prior to the FDIC adopting these new assessment base rates, insurance premiums were primarily based on the level of DNB's insured deposits. (See "Deposit Insurance Assessments" on page 13 of this Form 10-K)

FHLBP prepayment penalties.    DNB paid off $18.0 million of high cost FHLBP borrowings during the first quarter of 2010 and paid the FHLBP $560,000 of pre-payment penalties. There were no such penalties in 2011.

6.    Income Taxes

        Income tax expense was $2.1 million for 2011, compared to $1.6 million for 2010. Income tax expense for each period differs from the amount determined at the statutory rate of 34.0% due to tax-exempt

36

---

Table of Contents

income on loans and investment securities, DNB's ownership of BOLI policies and tax credits recognized on a low-income housing limited partnership. The effective tax rates for 2011 and 2010 were 29.6% and 30.7%, respectively. The lower effective tax in 2011 was primarily due to higher levels of tax-exempt investment securities in 2011, compared to 2010.

Financial Condition Analysis

1.    Investment Securities

        DNB's investment portfolio consists of US agency securities, mortgage-backed securities issued by US Government agencies, collateralized mortgage obligations, state and municipal securities, bank stocks, and other bonds and notes. In addition to generating revenue, DNB maintains the investment portfolio to manage interest rate risk, provide liquidity, provide collateral for borrowings and to diversify the credit risk of earning assets. The portfolio is structured to maximize DNB's net interest income given changes in the economic environment, liquidity position and balance sheet mix.

        Given the nature of the portfolio, and its generally high credit quality, management normally expects to realize all of its investment upon the maturity of such instruments. Management determines the appropriate classification of securities at the time of purchase. Investment securities are classified as: (a) securities held to maturity ("HTM") based on management's intent and ability to hold them to maturity; (b) trading account ("TA") securities that are bought and held principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term; and (c) securities available for sale ("AFS"). DNB does not currently maintain a trading account portfolio.

        Securities classified as AFS include securities that may be sold in response to changes in interest rates, changes in prepayment assumptions, the need to increase regulatory capital or other similar requirements. DNB does not necessarily intend to sell such securities, but has classified them as AFS to provide flexibility to respond to liquidity needs.

        DNB's investment portfolio (HTM and AFS securities) totaled $144.0 million at December 31, 2011, down $6.6 million or 4.41% from $150.6 million at December 31, 2010.

        As of June 16, 2011, DNB reclassified 3 mortgage backed securities and 2 collateralized mortgage obligations with book values (net carrying amount) of $12.5 million and $7.7 million, respectively, from available-for-sale (AFS) to held-to-maturity (HTM). Reclassifying these 5 securities to HTM will reduce the volatility and possible future negative effect on DNB's capital ratios, because HTM securities are not marked-to-market through other comprehensive income, but carried at their amortized cost basis. In addition, the 5 securities that were reclassified to HTM will continue to produce strong cash flows for DNB's operating and funding needs. The fair value of the 3 mortgage backed securities and 2 collateralized mortgage obligations was $12.4 million and $7.7 million, respectively at June 16, 2011, the date of their reclassification. The $116,000 difference between their book value and their fair value will be amortized as an adjustment to the carrying value of the investment securities over the remaining lives.

        During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, DNB sold its entire municipal securities portfolio, which had a book value of approximately $26.9 million for a net loss of $64,000. Management sold the municipal securities out of the HTM portfolio due to media and headline risk related to municipal budget shortfalls, which management believes could impair the value of the bonds. In particular, management believes that reported problems with budgets, in California and other states across the country that are experiencing budget shortfalls, could trickle down to individual municipalities. In addition, numerous municipalities are struggling financially as promised pensions benefits for public sector employees represent a massive overhang that threatens the financial future of many cities and states. This was a change in circumstances that was unusual and non-recurring, and could not have been reasonably anticipated when the bonds were placed in the HTM Portfolio. In addition to the municipal securities, management sold mortgaged backed securities with a book value of $3.0 million out of the HTM portfolio for a net gain of $39,000. Such sales

37

---

Table of Contents

are allowed under ASC 320 guidelines, as more than 85% of the principal outstanding at acquisition had been paid down, due to prepayments and normal scheduled payments. During 2011, DNB purchased municipal securities which had an amortized cost of $12.4 million at December 31, 2011. All of these municipal securities were issued by school districts within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. They are backed by the full faith, credit and taxing power of the issuing school district. All have strong underlying credit ratings and $11.2 million of these securities are insured by a highly rated insurance company. In addition to these layers of credit rating, 100% of these securities are further enhanced by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through Pennsylvania's State Aid Intercept Program.

        At December 31, 2011, approximately 75% of DNB's investments were in the AFS portfolio and 25% were in the HTM portfolio. Investments consist mainly of mortgage-backed securities and Agency notes backed by government sponsored enterprises, such as FHLMC, FNMA and FHLB. Management regularly reviews its investment portfolio to determine whether any securities are other than temporarily impaired. DNB did not invest in securities backed by sub-prime mortgages. At December 31, 2011, the combined AFS and HTM portfolios had an unrealized pretax gain of $2.2 million and an unrealized pretax loss of $926,000. There were no other than temporarily impaired securities.

        The following tables set forth information regarding the composition, stated maturity and average yield of DNB's investment security portfolio as of the dates indicated (tax-exempt yields have been adjusted to a tax equivalent basis using a 34% tax rate). The first two tables do not include amortization or anticipated prepayments on mortgage-backed securities. Callable securities are included at their stated maturity dates.

Investment Maturity Schedule, Including Weighted Average Yield
(Dollars in thousands)

 

38

---

Table of Contents

Composition of Investment Securities
(Dollars in thousands)

2.    Loans and Lease Portfolio

        DNB's loan and lease portfolio consists primarily of commercial and residential real estate loans, commercial loans and lines of credit (including commercial construction), commercial leases and consumer loans. The portfolio provides a stable source of interest income, monthly amortization of principal and, in the case of adjustable rate loans, re-pricing opportunities.

        Total loans and leases were $403.7 million at December 31, 2011, up $7.5 million or 1.9% from 2010. The increase was primarily the result of originations by our loan officers, coupled with strategic purchases of Small Business Administration and United States Department of Agriculture guaranteed loans. Commercial mortgage loans grew $14.2 million or 6.5% to $232.3 million and commercial loans increased $3.6 million or 3.7% to $101.1 million. This was offset by declines in consumer loans of $5.1 million or 10.4% to $43.6 million, primarily due to the current economic environment, which has lessened consumer demand for home equity loan products as a result of falling housing prices and a higher unemployment rate. In addition, commercial leases declined $707,000 or 78.7% and residential mortgage loans declined $4.5 million or 14.5%.

        The following table sets forth information concerning the composition of total loans outstanding, net of unearned income and fees and the allowance for credit losses, as of the dates indicated.

Total Loans and Leases Outstanding, Net of Allowance for Credit Losses
(Dollars in thousands)

39

---

Table of Contents

        The following table sets forth information concerning the contractual maturities of the loan portfolio, net of unearned income and fees. For amortizing loans, scheduled repayments for the maturity category in which the payment is due are not reflected below, because such information is not readily available.

Loan and Lease Maturities
(Dollars in thousands)

3.    Non-Performing Assets

        Total non-performing assets increased $69,000 to $11.6 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $11.5 million at December 31, 2010. The $69,000 increase was attributable to a $209,000 increase in non-performing loans, a $210,000 increase in loans 90 days past due and still accruing, offset by a $350,000 reduction in other real estate owned & other repossessed property. As a result of the slight increase in non-performing loans and a $7.5 million net growth in loans, the non-performing loans to total loans ratio increased slightly to 1.89% at December 31, 2011, from 1.82% at December 31, 2010. The non-performing assets to total assets ratio decreased to 1.91% at December 31, 2011 from 1.92% at December 31, 2010. The allowance to non-performing loans ratio decreased from 81.5% at December 31, 2010 to 80.7% at December 31, 2011. DNB continues to work diligently to improve asset quality by adhering to strict underwriting standards and improving lending policies and procedures. Non-performing assets have, and will continue to have, an impact on earnings; therefore management intends to continue working aggressively to reduce the level of such assets.

        Non-performing assets are comprised of non-accrual loans and leases, loans and leases delinquent over ninety days and still accruing, troubled debt restructurings ("TDRs") as well as Other Real Estate Owned ("OREO") and other repossessed assets. Non-accrual loans and leases are loans and leases for which the accrual of interest ceases when the collection of principal or interest payments is determined to be doubtful by management. It is the policy of DNB to discontinue the accrual of interest when principal or interest payments are delinquent 90 days or more (unless the loan principal and interest are determined by management to be fully secured and in the process of collection), or earlier if considered prudent. Interest received on such loans is applied to the principal balance, or may, in some instances, be recognized as income on a cash basis. A non-accrual loan or lease may be restored to accrual status when management expects to collect all contractual principal and interest due and the borrower has demonstrated a sustained period of repayment performance in accordance with the contractual terms. OREO consists of real estate acquired by foreclosure. Other repossessed assets are primarily assets from DNB's commercial lease portfolio that were repossessed. OREO and other repossessed assets are carried at the lower of cost or estimated fair value, less estimated disposition costs. Any significant change in the level of non-performing assets is dependent, to a large extent, on the economic climate within DNB's market area.

40

---

Table of Contents

        DNB's Credit Policy Committee monitors the performance of the loan and lease portfolio to identify potential problem assets on a timely basis. Committee members meet to design, implement and review asset recovery strategies, which serve to maximize the recovery of each troubled asset. As of December 31, 2011, DNB had $9.2 million of loans classified as substandard, which, although performing at that date, are believed to require increased supervision and review; and may, depending on the economic environment and other factors, become non-performing assets in future periods. The amount of such loans at December 31, 2010 was $11.3 million. The majority of the loans are secured by commercial real estate, with lesser amounts being secured by residential real estate, inventory and receivables.

        The following table sets forth those assets that are: (i) placed on non-accrual status, (ii) contractually delinquent by 90 days or more and still accruing, (iii) troubled debt restructurings other than those included in items (i) and (ii), and (iv) OREO as a result of foreclosure or voluntary transfer to DNB as well as other repossessed assets.

Non-Performing Assets
(Dollars in thousands)

        Included in the loan portfolio are loans for which DNB has ceased the accrual of interest (i.e. non-accrual loans). Loans of approximately $7.4 million and $7.2 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, were on a non-accrual basis. DNB also had loans of approximately $210,000 and $1,000 that were 90 days or more delinquent, but still accruing, as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. If

41

---

Table of Contents

contractual interest income had been recorded on non-accrual loans, interest would have been increased as shown in the following table:

4.    Allowance for Credit Losses

        To provide for known and inherent losses in the loan and lease portfolios, DNB maintains an allowance for credit losses. Provisions for credit losses are charged against income to increase the allowance when necessary. Loan and lease losses are charged directly against the allowance and recoveries on previously charged-off loans and leases are added to the allowance. In establishing its allowance for credit losses, management considers the size and risk exposure of each segment of the loan and lease portfolio, past loss experience, present indicators of risk such as delinquency rates, levels of non-accruals, the potential for losses in future periods, and other relevant factors. Management's evaluation of criticized and classified loans generally includes reviews of borrowers of $100,000 or greater. Consideration is also given to examinations performed by regulatory agencies, primarily the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC").

        Management reviews and establishes the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, guidance provided by the Securities and Exchange Commission and as prescribed in OCC Bulletin 2006-47. Its methodology for assessing the appropriateness of the allowance consists of several key elements which include: specific allowances for identified impaired loans; and allowances by loan type for pooled homogenous loans. In considering national and local economic trends, we review a variety of information including Federal Reserve publications, general economic statistics, foreclosure rates and housing statistics published by third parties. We believe this improves the measure of inherent loss over a complete economic cycle and reduces the impact for qualitative adjustments. The unallocated portion of the allowance is intended to provide for probable losses not otherwise accounted for in management's other elements of its overall estimate. An unallocated component is maintained to cover uncertainties such as changes in the national and local economy, concentrations of credit, expansion into new markets and other factors that could affect management's estimate of probable losses. The unallocated component of the allowance reflects the margin of imprecision inherent in the underlying assumptions used in the methodologies for estimating specific and general losses in the portfolio.

        In addition, DNB reviews historical loss experience for the commercial real estate, commercial, residential real estate, home equity and consumer installment loan pools to determine a historical loss factor. The historical loss factors are then applied to the current portfolio balances to determine the required reserve percentage for each loan pool based on risk rating. Historical losses are segregated into risk-similar groups and a loss ratio is determined for each group over a three year period. The three year average loss ratio by type is then used to calculate the estimated loss based on the current balance of each group. This three year time period is appropriate given DNB's historical level of losses and, more importantly, represents the current economic environment.

        This analysis is intended to assess the potential for loss within the loan portfolio and to substantiate the adequacy of the allowance. Should the analysis indicate that the allowance is not adequate, management will recommend a provision expense be made in an amount equal to the shortfall derived. In establishing and reviewing the allowance for adequacy, emphasis has been placed on utilizing the

42

---

Table of Contents

methodology prescribed in OCC Bulletin 2006-47. Management believes that the following factors create a comprehensive system of controls in which management can monitor the quality of the loan portfolio. Consideration has been given to the following factors and variables which may influence the risk of loss within the loan portfolio:

•

Changes in the nature and volume of the portfolio and in the terms of loans



•

Changes in the volume and severity of past due loans, the volume of non-accrual loans, and the volume and severity of adversely classified or graded loans



•

The existence and effect of any concentrations of credit, and changes in the level of such concentrations



•

Changes in lending policies and procedures, including changes in underwriting standards and collection, charge-off, and recovery practices not considered elsewhere in estimating credit losses



•

Changes in the experience, ability, and depth of lending management and other relevant staff



•

Changes in the quality of the institution's loan review system



•

Changes in international, national, regional, and local economic and business conditions and developments that affect the collectability of the portfolio, including the condition of various market segments



•

The effect of other external factors such as competition and legal and regulatory requirements on the level of estimated credit losses in the institution's existing portfolio



•

Changes in the value of underlying collateral for collateral-dependent loans

        Portfolio risk includes the levels and trends in delinquencies, impaired loans, changes in the loan rating matrix and trends in volume and terms of loans. Management is satisfied with the stability of the past due and non-performing loans and believes there has been no further decline in the quality of the loan portfolio due to any trend in delinquent or adversely classified loans. In determining the adequacy of the allowance, management considered the deterioration of asset quality in DNB's commercial mortgage and residential first mortgage portfolios, which were factors contributing to the increase in the level of allowance during 2011 and 2010. In addition to ordering new appraisals and creating specific reserves on impaired loans, the allowance allocation rates were increased, reflective of delinquency trends which have been caused by continued weakness in the housing markets, falling home equity values, and rising unemployment. New appraisal values we have obtained for existing loans have generally been consistent with trends indicated by Case-Schiller and other indices.

        Given the contraction in real estate values, DNB closely monitors the loan to value ratios of all classified assets and requires periodic current appraisals to monitor underlying collateral values. Management also reviews borrower, sponsorship and guarantor's financial strength along with their ability and willingness to provide financial support of their obligations on an immediate and continuing basis.

        There was a $1.5 million provision made in 2011, compared to $2.2 million in 2010. DNB's percentage of allowance for credit losses to total loans and leases was 1.53% at December 31, 2011 compared to 1.49%, 1.52% and 1.36% for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Management monitors DNB's performance metrics including those ratios related to non-performing loans and leases. The allowance as a percentage of total loans and leases has been relatively flat over the last four years (1.36%-1.53%) at the same time DNB has seen deterioration in the credit quality of the loan portfolio, as evidenced by the increase in non-performing assets since 2008 ($7.7 million, $13.7 million, $11.5 million, and $11.6 million at December 31, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively. Net charge-offs were $1.2 million in 2011 compared to $1.8 million and $434,000 in 2010 and 2009, respectively. The percentage of net charge-offs to total average loans and leases were 0.29%, 0.49% and 0.13% during the three years ending December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively. Management is not aware of any

43

---

Table of Contents

potential problem loans, which were accruing and current at December 31, 2011, where serious doubt exists as to the ability of the borrower to comply with the present repayment terms and that would result in a significant loss to DNB.

        The increase in the allowance for loan loss ratio reflects management's estimate of the level of inherent losses in the portfolio, which continued to increase during 2011 due to a $7.5 million increase in gross loans, a recessionary economy, continued high unemployment, a weakened housing market and deterioration in income-producing properties.

        We typically establish a general valuation allowance on classified loans which are not impaired. In establishing the general valuation allowance, we segregate these loans by category. The categories used by DNB include "doubtful," "substandard," "special mention," "watch list" and "pass." For commercial and construction loans, the determination of the category for each loan is based on periodic reviews of each loan by our lending and credit officers as well as an independent, third-party consultant. The reviews include a consideration of such factors as recent payment history, current financial data, cash flow, financial projections, collateral evaluations, guarantor or sponsorship financial strength and current economic and business conditions. Categories for mortgage and consumer loans are determined through a similar review. Classification of a loan within a category is based on identified weaknesses that increase the credit risk of loss on the loan. Each category carries a loss factor for the allowance percentage to be assigned to the loans within that category. The allowance percentage, is determined based on inherent losses associated with each type of lending as determined through consideration of our loss history with each type of loan, trends in credit quality and collateral values, and an evaluation of current economic and business conditions.

        We establish a general allowance on non-classified loans to recognize the inherent losses associated with lending activities, but which, unlike specific allowances, have not been allocated to particular problem loans. This general valuation allowance is determined by segregating the loans by loan category and assigning allowance percentages to each category. An evaluation of each category is made to determine the need to further segregate the loans within each category by type. For our residential mortgage and consumer loan portfolios, we identify similar characteristics throughout the portfolio including credit scores, loan-to-value ratios and collateral. For our commercial real estate and construction loan portfolios, a further analysis is made in which we segregated the loans by type based on the purpose of the loan and the collateral properties securing the loan. Various risk factors for each type of loan are considered, including the impact of general economic and business conditions, collateral value trends, credit quality trends and historical loss experience.

        As of December 31, 2011, DNB had $11.6 million of non-performing assets, which included $7.6 million of non-performing or impaired loans and $4.0 million of OREO. Loans are reviewed for impairment in accordance with FASB ASC 310-10-35. Impaired loans can either be secured or unsecured, not including large groups of smaller balance loans that are collectively evaluated. Impairment is measured by the difference between the loan amount and the present value of the future cash flow discounted at the loan's effective interest rate. Management measures loans for impairment by using the fair value of collateral for collateral dependent loans. In general, management reduces the amount of the appraisal by the estimated cost of acquisition and disposition of the underlying collateral and compares that adjusted value with DNB's carrying value. As part of the general allowance, DNB reserves at the rate of approximately 6% to 10% on non-performing or impaired loans. DNB establishes a specific valuation allowance on impaired loans that have a collateral shortfall, including estimated costs to sell in comparison to the carrying value of the loan. Of the $7.6 million of impaired loans at December 31, 2011, $4.8 million had a valuation allowance of $1.2 million and $2.8 million had no specific allowance above the general allowance as of December 31, 2011. For those impaired loans that management determined that no specific valuation allowance was necessary, management has reviewed the appraisal for each loan and determined that there is no shortfall in the collateral. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we

44

---

Table of Contents

recognized $1.2 million in charge-offs related to impaired loans. An impaired loan may not represent an expected loss.

        We typically order new third-party appraisals or collateral valuations when a loan becomes impaired or is transferred to OREO. This is done within two weeks of a loan becoming impaired or a loan moving to OREO. It generally takes two to eight weeks to receive the appraisals, depending on the type of property being appraised. We recognize any provision or related charge-off within two weeks of receiving the appraisal after the appraisal has been reviewed by DNB. We generally order a new appraisal for all impaired real estate loans having a balance of $100,000 or higher, every twelve months, unless management determines more frequent appraisals are necessary. We use updated valuations when time constraints do not permit a full appraisal process, to reflect rapidly changing market conditions. Because appraisals and updated valuations utilize historical data in reaching valuation conclusions, the appraised or updated value may or may not reflect the actual sales price that we will receive at the time of sale. Management uses the qualitative factor "Changes in the value of underlying collateral for collateral-dependent loans" to calculate any required write-down to mitigate this risk.

        Real estate appraisals typically include up to three approaches to value: the sales comparison approach, the income approach (for income-producing property) and the cost approach. Not all appraisals utilize all three approaches to value. Depending on the nature of the collateral and market conditions, the appraiser may emphasize one approach over another in determining the fair value of collateral.

        Appraisals may also contain different estimates of value based on the level of occupancy or future improvements. "As-is" valuations represent an estimate of value based on current market conditions with no changes to the collateral's use or condition. "As-stabilized" or "as-completed" valuations assume that the collateral is improved to a stated standard or achieves its highest and best use in terms of occupancy. "As-stabilized" valuations may be subject to a present value adjustment for market conditions or the schedule for improvements.

        In connection with the valuation process, we will typically develop an exit strategy for the collateral by assessing overall market conditions, the current condition and use of the asset and its highest and best use. For most income-producing real estate, investors value most highly a stable income stream from the asset; consequently, we conduct a comparative evaluation to determine whether conducting a sale on an "as-is" basis or on an "as-stabilized" basis is most likely to produce the highest net realizable value and compare these values with the costs incurred and the holding period necessary to achieve the "as stabilized" value.

        Our estimates of the net realizable value of collateral include a deduction for the expected costs to sell the collateral or such other deductions as deemed appropriate. For most real estate collateral, we apply a seven to ten percent deduction to the value of real estate collateral to determine its expected costs to sell the asset. This estimate generally includes real estate commissions, one year of real estate taxes and miscellaneous repair and closing costs. If we receive a purchase offer that requires unbudgeted repairs, or if the expected holding period for the asset exceeds one year, then we include the additional real estate taxes and repairs or other holding costs in the expected costs to sell the collateral on a case-by-case basis.

45

---

Table of Contents

Analysis of Allowance for Credit Losses
(Dollars in thousands)

        The following table sets forth the composition of DNB's allowance for credit losses at the dates indicated.

Composition of Allowance for Credit Losses
(Dollars in thousands)

5.    Certain Regulatory Matters

        Recent market conditions have made it difficult or uneconomical to access the capital markets. As a result, at the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009, the United States Congress, the Treasury, and the FDIC announced various programs designed to enhance market liquidity and bank capital. On January 30, 2009, as part of the CPP administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, DNB Financial Corporation entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the U.S.

46

---

Table of Contents

Treasury. On August 4, 2011, DNB repurchased all CPP Shares in conjunction with its participation in the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), (see additional discussion in Participation in U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program and Small Business Lending Fund program, on page 7 of this Form 10-K).

        Dividends payable to DNB by the Bank are subject to certain regulatory limitations. Under normal circumstances, the payment of dividends in any year without regulatory permission is limited to the net profits (as defined for regulatory purposes) for that year, plus the retained net profits for the preceding two calendar years. The sum of these items amounted to $5.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. During 2011, the Bank paid $2.8 million to DNB. During 2012, the Bank will need to provide dividends to DNB in connection with the $13.0 million of Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock sold on August 4, 2011 as part of the Small Business Lending Fund program administered by the United States Treasury.

        The FDIC has authority to assess and change federal deposit insurance assessment rates on assessable deposits of the Bank. For further information, please refer to the discussion of FDIC deposit insurance assessments under Part I, Item 1 ("Business"), section (c) ("Narrative Description of Business") — "Supervision and Regulation — Bank" under the heading "Deposit Insurance Assessments" on page 13 of this report. DNB's FDIC insurance expense was $562,000 in 2011.

        DNB was well capitalized at December 31, 2011 and met all regulatory capital requirements. Please refer to Footnote 17 for a table that summarizes required capital ratios and the corresponding regulatory capital positions of DNB and the Bank at December 31, 2011.

        The Board of Directors of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (FHLBP) declared a dividend equal to an annual yield of 0.10% on February 22, 2012. The $648 dividend received by DNB on February 23, 2012 was calculated on our average balance of FHLBP stock held from October 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. On February 23, 2012, the FHLBP repurchased excess capital stock. The amount of excess capital stock repurchased by the FHLBP from any member was the lesser of five percent of the member's total capital stock outstanding or its excess capital stock outstanding. The FHLBP repurchased 1,266 shares from DNB for $126,600 on February 23, 2012.

6.    Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

        In the normal course of business, various commitments and contingent liabilities are outstanding, such as guarantees and commitments to extend credit, borrow money or act in a fiduciary capacity, which are not reflected in the consolidated financial statements. Management does not anticipate any significant losses as a result of these commitments.

        DNB had outstanding stand-by letters of credit totaling $4.0 million and unfunded loan and lines of credit commitments totaling $57.7 million at December 31, 2011.

        These instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amount recognized on the balance sheet. The exposure to credit loss, in the event of non-performance by the party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit and stand-by letters of credit, is represented by the contractual amount. Management uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance-sheet instruments.

        Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require the payment of a fee. DNB evaluates each customer's creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral, if any, obtained upon the extension of credit, usually consists of real estate, but may include securities, property or other assets.

47

---

Table of Contents

        Stand-by letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by DNB to guarantee the performance or repayment of a financial obligation of a customer to a third party. Those guarantees are primarily issued to support public and private borrowing arrangements. The credit risks involved in issuing letters of credit are essentially the same as those involved in extending loan facilities to customers. DNB holds various forms of collateral to support these commitments.

        DNB maintains borrowing arrangements with various correspondent banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia to meet short-term liquidity needs. Through these relationships, DNB has available credit of approximately $184.7 million at December 31, 2011. At December 31, 2011, DNB had borrowed $20.0 million and the FHLBP had issued letters of credit, on DNB's behalf, totaling $20.0 million against its available credit lines.

        As of December 31, 2011, approximately $45.1 million of assets are held by DNB First Wealth Management in a fiduciary, custody or agency capacity. These assets are not assets of DNB, and are not included in the consolidated financial statements.

        The following table sets forth DNB's known contractual obligations as of December 31, 2011. The amounts presented below do not include interest.

Contractual Obligations
(Dollars in thousands)

Off Balance Sheet Obligations
(Dollars in thousands)

        During 2012, the Bank will need to provide dividends to DNB in connection with the $13.0 million of Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock sold on August 4, 2011 as part of the Small Business Lending Fund program administered by the United States Treasury. These payments are not included in the table above.

Item 7A.        Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

        To measure the impacts of longer-term asset and liability mismatches beyond two years, DNB utilizes Key Rate Duration and Economic Value of Equity ("EVE") models. The Key Rate Duration measures the differences in durations in various maturity buckets and indicates potential asset and liability mismatches.

48

---

Table of Contents

Because of balance sheet optionality, an EVE analysis is also used to dynamically model the present value of asset and liability cash flows, with rates ranging up or down 200 basis points. The economic value of equity is likely to be different if rates change. Results falling outside prescribed ranges require action by management. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, DNB's variance in the economic value of equity as a percentage of assets with an instantaneous and sustained parallel shift of 200 basis points was within its negative 3% guideline, as shown in the table below. The change as a percentage of the present value of equity with a 200 basis point increase or decrease at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was within DNB's negative 25% guideline.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
(Dollars in thousands)

49

---

Table of Contents

Item 8.        Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

        

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(Dollars in thousands, except share data)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

50

---

Table of Contents

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

51

---

Table of Contents

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income
(Dollars in thousands)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

52

---

Table of Contents

DNB FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Dollars in thousands)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

53

---

Table of Contents

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(1)    SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

        DNB Financial Corporation (the "Corporation" or "DNB") through its wholly owned subsidiary, DNB First, National Association (the "Bank"), formerly Downingtown National Bank, has been serving individuals and small to medium sized businesses of Chester County, Pennsylvania since 1860. DNB Capital Trust I and II are special purpose Delaware business trusts, which are not consolidated (see additional discussion in Junior Subordinated Debentures — Footnote 9). The Bank is a locally managed commercial bank providing personal and commercial loans and deposit products, in addition to investment and trust services from thirteen community offices. The Bank encounters vigorous competition for market share from commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions and other financial intermediaries.

        The consolidated financial statements of DNB and its subsidiary, the Bank, which together are managed as a single operating segment, are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles applicable to the banking industry.

        In preparing the consolidated financial statements, management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the balance sheets, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Although our current estimates contemplate current conditions and how we expect them to change in the future, it is reasonably possible that in 2012, actual conditions could be worse than anticipated in those estimates, which could materially affect our results of operations and financial condition. Amounts subject to significant estimates are items such as the allowance for credit losses and lending related commitments, the fair value of repossessed assets, pension and post-retirement obligations, the fair value of financial instruments and other-than-temporary impairments. Among other effects, such changes could result in future impairments of investment securities, and establishment of allowances for credit losses and lending related commitments as well as increased benefit plans' expenses.

        Principles of Consolidation    The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of DNB and its wholly owned subsidiary, the Bank. All significant inter-company transactions have been eliminated.

        Cash and Due From Banks    For purposes of the consolidated statement of cash flows, cash and due from banks, and federal funds sold are considered to be cash equivalents. Generally, federal funds are sold for one-day periods.

        Investment Securities    Investment securities are classified and accounted for as follows:

        Held-To-Maturity ("HTM") includes debt securities that DNB has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity. Debt securities are reported at cost, adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts.

        Available-For-Sale ("AFS") includes debt and equity securities not classified as HTM securities. Securities classified as AFS are securities that DNB intends to hold for an indefinite period of time, but not necessarily to maturity. Such securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized holding gains and losses excluded from earnings and reported, net of tax (if applicable), as a separate component of stockholders' equity. Realized gains and losses on the sale of AFS securities are computed on the basis of specific identification of the adjusted cost of each security. Amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts for all types of securities are computed using a method approximating a level-yield basis.

        Other Than Temporary Impairment Analysis Securities are evaluated on a quarterly basis, and more frequently when market conditions warrant such an evaluation, to determine whether declines in their value are other-than-temporary. To determine whether a loss in value is other-than-temporary, management utilizes criteria such as the reasons underlying the decline, the magnitude and duration of the decline, and whether or not management intends to sell or expects that it is more likely than not that it will

54

---

Table of Contents

be required to sell the security prior to an anticipated recovery of the fair value. Once a decline in value for a debt security is determined to be other-than-temporary, the other-than-temporary impairment is separated into (a) the amount of the total other-than-temporary impairment related to a decrease in cash flows expected to be collected from the debt security (the credit loss) and (b) the amount of the total other-than-temporary impairment related to all other factors. The amount of the total impairment related to credit losses should be included in earnings. The amount of the total impairment related to all other factors should be included in other comprehensive income. DNB recorded no impairment charges in 2011 or 2010.

        Restricted Stock includes investments in Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (FHLBP), Federal Reserve Bank (FRB) and Atlantic Central Bankers Bank (ACBB) stock which are carried at cost and are redeemable at par with certain restrictions. Investments in these stocks are necessary to participate in FHLB, FRB and ACBB programs. On December 23, 2008, the FHLBP announced that it would indefinitely suspend dividend payments and repurchases of excess capital stock, due to low short-term interest rates, increased costs of maintaining liquidity and constrained access to debt markets at attractive rates. Management's evaluation and determination of whether these investments are impaired is based on their assessment of the ultimate recoverability of their cost rather than by recognizing temporary declines in value. The determination of whether a decline affects the ultimate recoverability of an investment's cost is influenced by criteria such as (1) the significance of the decline in net assets of the FHLBP as compared to the capital stock amount for the FHLBP and the length of time the decline has persisted, (2) commitments by the FHLBP to make payments required by law or regulation and the level of such payments in relation to the operating performance of the FHLBP, and (3) the impact of legislative and regulatory changes on institutions and, accordingly, on the customer base of the FHLBP. Subsequent to the December 23, 2008 announcement, the FHLBP repurchased $577,000 and $164,000 of excess capital stock during 2011 and 2010, respectively. The Board of Directors of the FHLBP declared a dividend equal to an annual yield of 0.10% on February 22, 2012. The $648 dividend received by DNB on February 23, 2012 was calculated on our average balance of FHLBP stock held from October 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. On February 23, 2012, the FHLBP repurchased 1,266 shares of excess capital stock for $126,600. The amount of excess capital stock repurchased by the FHLBP from any member was the lesser of five percent of the member's total capital stock outstanding or its excess capital stock outstanding.

        Loans and Leases    Loans receivable that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff are stated at their outstanding unpaid principal balances, net of an allowance for credit losses and any deferred fees or costs. Interest income is accrued on the unpaid principal balance. Loan origination fees, net of certain direct origination costs, are deferred and recognized as an adjustment of the yield (interest income) of the related loans. DNB is generally amortizing these amounts over the contractual life of the loan. Premiums and discounts on purchased loans are amortized as adjustments to interest income using the effective yield method.

        The loans receivable portfolio is segmented into commercial and consumer loans. Commercial loans consist of the following classes: commercial mortgages, commercial term loans, and commercial leases. Consumer loans consist of the following classes: residential mortgages and consumer loans.

        For all classes of loans receivable, the accrual of interest is discontinued when the contractual payment of principal or interest has become 90 days past due or management has serious doubts about further collectability of principal or interest, even though the loan is currently performing. A loan may remain on accrual status if it is in the process of collection and is either guaranteed or well secured. When a loan or lease is placed on non-accrual, interest accruals cease and uncollected accrued interest is reversed and charged against current income. Interest received on nonaccrual loans including impaired loans generally is either applied against principal or reported as interest income, according to management's judgment as to the collectability of principal. Generally, loans are restored to accrual status when the obligation is brought current, has performed in accordance with the contractual terms for a reasonable period of time (generally six months) and the ultimate collectability of the total contractual principal and

55

---

Table of Contents

interest is no longer in doubt. The past due status of all classes of loans receivable is determined based on contractual due dates for loan payments.

        Deferred Loan Fees and Costs    Loan origination and commitment fees and related direct-loan origination costs of completed loans are deferred and accreted to income as a yield adjustment over the life of the loan using the level-yield method. The accretion to income is discontinued when a loan is placed on non-accrual status. When a loan is paid off, any unamortized net deferred fee balance is credited to income. When a loan is sold, any unamortized net deferred fee balance is considered in the calculation of gain or loss.

        Allowance for Credit Losses    The allowance for credit losses consists of the allowance for loan losses and represents management's estimate of losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date and is recorded as a reduction to loans. The allowance for credit losses is increased by the provision for loan losses, and decreased by charge-offs, net of recoveries. Loans deemed to be uncollectible are charged against the allowance for loan losses, and subsequent recoveries, if any, are credited to the allowance. All, or part, of the principal balance of loans receivable are charged off to the allowance as soon as it is determined that the repayment of all, or part, of the principal balance is highly unlikely. Non-residential consumer loans are generally charged off no later than 120 days past due on a contractual basis, earlier in the event of Bankruptcy, or if there is an amount deemed uncollectible. No portion of the allowance for loan losses is restricted to any individual loan or groups of loans, and the entire allowance is available to absorb any and all loan losses.

        The allowance for credit losses is maintained at a level considered adequate to provide for losses that can be reasonably anticipated. Management performs a quarterly evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance. The allowance is based on DNB's past loan loss experience, known and inherent risks in the portfolio, adverse situations that may affect the borrower's ability to repay, the estimated value of any underlying collateral, composition of the loan portfolio, current economic conditions and other relevant factors. This evaluation is inherently subjective as it requires material estimates that may be susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available.

        The allowance consists of specific, general and unallocated components. The specific component relates to loans that are classified as impaired. For loans that are classified as impaired, an allowance is established when the discounted cash flows (or collateral value or observable market price) of the impaired loan is lower than the carrying value of that loan. The general component covers pools of loans by loan class including commercial loans not considered impaired, as well as smaller balance homogeneous loans, such as residential real estate, home equity and other consumer loans. These pools of loans are evaluated for loss exposure, based upon historical loss rates for each of these categories of loans, adjusted for qualitative factors. These qualitative risk factors include:

1.

Lending policies and procedures, including underwriting standards and collection, charge-off, and recovery practices

2.

National, regional, and local economic and business conditions as well as the condition of various market segments, including the value of underlying collateral for collateral dependent loans

3.

Nature and volume of the portfolio and terms of loans

4.

Experience, ability, and depth of lending management and staff

5.

Volume and severity of past due, classified and nonaccrual loans as well as and other loan modifications

6.

Quality of DNB's loan review system, and the degree of oversight by DNB's Board of Directors

7.

Existence and effect of any concentrations of credit and changes in the level of such concentrations

8.

Effect of external factors, such as competition and legal and regulatory requirements

9.

Changes in the value of underlying collateral for collateral-dependent loans

56

---

Table of Contents

        Each factor is assigned a value to reflect improving, stable or declining conditions based on management's best judgment using relevant information available at the time of the evaluation. Adjustments to the factors are supported through documentation of changes in conditions in a narrative accompanying the allowance for credit loss calculation.

        Commercial real estate lending entails significant additional risks as compared with single-family residential property lending. Such loans typically involve large loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers. The payment experience on such loans is typically dependent on the successful operation of the real estate project. The success of such projects is sensitive to changes in supply and demand conditions in the market for commercial real estate as well as economic conditions generally.

        Construction lending is generally considered to involve a higher level of risk as compared to single-family residential lending, due to the concentration of principal in a limited number of loans and borrowers and the effects of general economic conditions on developers and builders. Moreover, a construction loan can involve additional risks because of the inherent difficulty in estimating both a property's value at completion of the project and the estimated cost (including interest) of the project. The nature of these loans is such that they are generally more difficult to evaluate and monitor. DNB has attempted to minimize the foregoing risks by, among other things, limiting the extent of its construction lending and has adopted underwriting guidelines which impose stringent loan-to-value, debt service and other requirements for loans which are believed to involve higher elements of credit risk, by limiting the geographic area in which DNB will do business and by working with builders with whom it has established relationships.

        Consumer loans generally have shorter terms and higher interest rates than mortgage loans but generally involve more credit risk than mortgage loans because of the type and nature of the collateral and, in certain cases, the absence of collateral. In addition, consumer lending collections are dependent on the borrower's continuing financial stability, and thus are more likely to be adversely effected by job loss, divorce, illness and personal bankruptcy. In most cases, any repossessed collateral for a defaulted consumer loan will not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance because of improper repair and maintenance of the underlying security. The remaining deficiency often does not warrant further substantial collection efforts against the borrower. DNB believes that the generally higher yields earned on consumer loans compensate for the increased credit risk associated with such loans and that consumer loans are important to its efforts to provide a full range of services to its customers.

        An unallocated component is maintained to cover uncertainties that could affect management's estimate of probable losses. The unallocated component of the allowance reflects the margin of imprecision inherent in the underlying assumptions used in the methodologies for estimating specific and general losses in the portfolio.

        A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that DNB will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower's prior payment record and the amount of the shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed. Impairment is measured on a loan by loan basis for commercial and industrial loans, commercial real estate loans and commercial construction loans by either the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent.

        An allowance for credit losses is established for an impaired loan if its carrying value exceeds its estimated fair value. The estimated fair values of substantially all of DNB's impaired loans are measured based on the estimated fair value of the loan's collateral.

57

---

Table of Contents

        For commercial loans secured by real estate, estimated fair values are determined primarily through third-party appraisals. When a real estate secured loan becomes impaired, a decision is made regarding whether an updated certified appraisal of the real estate is necessary. This decision is based on various considerations, including the age of the most recent appraisal, the loan-to-value ratio based on the original appraisal and the condition of the property. Appraised values are discounted to arrive at the estimated selling price of the collateral, which is considered to be the estimated fair value. The discounts also include estimated costs to sell the property.

        For commercial and industrial loans secured by non-real estate collateral, such as accounts receivable, inventory and equipment, estimated fair values are determined based on the borrower's financial statements, inventory reports, accounts receivable agings or equipment appraisals or invoices. Indications of value from these sources are generally discounted based on the age of the financial information or the quality of the assets.

        Large groups of smaller balance homogeneous loans are collectively evaluated for impairment. Accordingly, DNB does not separately identify individual residential mortgage loans, with the exception of certain purchased residential loans, home equity loans and other consumer loans for impairment disclosures, unless such loans are the subject of a troubled debt restructuring agreement.

        Loans whose terms are modified are classified as troubled debt restructurings if DNB grants such borrowers concessions and it is deemed that those borrowers are experiencing financial difficulty. Concessions granted under a troubled debt restructuring generally involve a temporary reduction in interest rate or an extension of a loan's stated maturity date. Non-accrual troubled debt restructurings are restored to accrual status if principal and interest payments, under the modified terms, are current for six consecutive months after modification. Loans classified as troubled debt restructurings are designated as impaired.

        The allowance calculation methodology includes further segregation of loan classes into risk rating categories. The borrower's overall financial condition, repayment sources, guarantors and value of collateral, if appropriate, are evaluated annually for commercial loans or when credit deficiencies arise, such as delinquent loan payments, for commercial and consumer loans. Credit quality risk ratings include regulatory classifications of special mention, substandard, doubtful and loss. Loans criticized special mention have potential weaknesses that deserve management's close attention. If uncorrected, the potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of the repayment prospects. Loans classified substandard have a well-defined weakness or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. They include loans that are inadequately protected by the current sound net worth and paying capacity of the obligor or of the collateral pledged, if any. Loans classified doubtful have all the weaknesses inherent in loans classified substandard with the added characteristic that collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of current conditions and facts, is highly improbable. Loans classified as a loss are considered uncollectible and are charged to the allowance for loan losses. Loans not classified are rated pass.

        In addition, Federal regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review DNB's allowance for credit losses and may require DNB to recognize additions to the allowance based on their judgments about information available to them at the time of their examination, which may not be currently available to management. Based on management's comprehensive analysis of the loan portfolio, management believes the current level of the allowance for credit losses is appropriate at December 31, 2011.

        Other Real Estate Owned & Other Repossessed Property    Other real estate owned ("OREO") and other repossessed property consists of properties acquired as a result of, or in-lieu-of, foreclosure as well as other repossessed assets. Properties classified as OREO are initially recorded at fair value less cost to sell at the date of foreclosure, establishing a new cost basis. Subsequent to foreclosure, valuations are periodically performed by management and the assets are carried at the lower of carrying value or fair value, less estimated costs to sell. Costs relating to the development or improvement of the properties are capitalized

58

---

Table of Contents

and costs relating to holding the properties are charged to expense. DNB had OREO and other repossessed property totaling $4.0 million at December 31, 2011 and $4.3 million at December 31, 2010.

        Office Properties and Equipment    Office properties and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the expected useful lives of the assets. The costs of maintenance and repairs are expensed as they are incurred; renewals and betterments are capitalized. All long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment, based on the fair value of the asset. In addition, long-lived assets to be disposed of are generally reported at the lower of carrying amount or fair value, less cost to sell. Gains or losses on disposition of premises and equipment are reflected in operations.

        Income Taxes    DNB accounts for income taxes in accordance with the income tax accounting guidance set forth in FASB ASC Topic 740, Income Taxes.

        The income tax accounting guidance results in two components of income tax expense: current and deferred. Current income tax expense reflects taxes to be paid or refunded for the current period by applying the provisions of the enacted tax law to the taxable income or excess of deductions over revenues. DNB determines deferred income taxes using the liability (or balance sheet) method. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is based on the tax effects of the differences between the book and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and enacted changes in tax rates and laws are recognized in the period in which they occur.

        DNB recognizes interest and penalties on income taxes as a component of income tax expense. DNB is no longer subject to examinations by taxing authorities for the years before January 1, 2008.

        Pension Plan    The Bank maintains a noncontributory defined benefit pension plan covering substantially all employees over the age of 21 with one year of service. Plan benefits are based on years of service and the employee's monthly average compensation for the highest five consecutive years of their last ten years of service (see Note 14 — Benefit Plans).

        Stock Based Compensation    Stock compensation accounting guidance (FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation — Stock Compensation) requires that the compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions be recognized in financial statements. That cost will be measured based on the grant date fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. The stock compensation accounting guidance covers a wide range of share-based compensation arrangements including stock options, restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights, and employee share purchase plans.

        The stock compensation accounting guidance requires that compensation cost for all stock awards be calculated and recognized over the employees' service period, generally defined as the vesting period. For awards with graded-vesting, compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire award. A Black Sholes model is used to estimate the fair value of stock options, while the market price of DNB's common stock at the date of grant is used for restricted stock awards.

        Preferred Stock    Preferred stock ranks senior to common stock with respect to dividends and has preference in the event of liquidation.

        Fixed rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series 2008A — The shares of fixed rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series 2008A ("Series 2008A Preferred Stock") issued to the United States Treasury ("U.S. Treasury") under the TARP Capital Purchase Program ("CPP") of the Emergency Economics Stabilization Act of 2008 and the warrants issued under the CPP were accounted for as permanent equity on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. The proceeds received were allocated between the Series 2008A Preferred Stock and the warrants based upon their relative fair values as of the date of issuance which resulted in the recording of a discount of the Series 2008A Preferred Stock upon issuance that reflects the value allocated to the warrants. The discount was accreted by a charge to retained earnings on a straight-line basis over the expected life of the preferred stock of five years and then in full when the CPP preferred stock was redeemed in 2011. DNB paid cumulative dividends at a rate of five percent per annum while these shares were outstanding. Dividends were payable quarterly in arrears and accrued as earned over the period the Series 2008A Preferred Stock was outstanding. Preferred dividends paid (declared and accrued) and the related accretion was deducted from net income for computing income available to common stockholders and earnings per share computations.

59

---

Table of Contents

        Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A — The shares of Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A ("Series 2011A Preferred Stock") issued to the United States Treasury ("U.S. Treasury") under the Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF") are accounted for as permanent equity on DNB's Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. Proceeds received from the issuance of the SBLF preferred stock were used to redeem the CPP preferred stock.

        The Series 2011A Preferred Stock is entitled to receive non-cumulative dividends payable quarterly. The dividend rate, which is calculated on the aggregate Liquidation Amount, was initially set at 3.874% per annum based upon the current level of "Qualified Small Business Lending", or "QSBL" (as defined in the Securities Purchase Agreement) by DNB's wholly owned subsidiary, DNB First, National Association (the "Bank"). The dividend rate for future dividend periods will be set based upon the "Percentage Change in Qualified Lending" (as defined in the Securities Purchase Agreement) between each dividend period and the "Baseline" QSBL level. Such dividend rate may vary from 1% per annum to 5% per annum for the second through tenth dividend periods depending on the volume of QSBL the Bank originates in future periods, and will be fixed at a rate between 1% per annum to 7% per annum and remain unchanged up to four and one-half years following the funding date (the eleventh through the first half of the nineteenth dividend periods). If the Series 2011A Preferred Stock remains outstanding for more than four-and-one-half years, the dividend rate will be fixed at 9%. Prior to that time, in general, the dividend rate decreases as the level of the Bank's QSBL increases. At December 31, 2011 the dividend rate was 4.14%. Such dividends are not cumulative, but DNB may only declare and pay dividends on its common stock (or any other equity securities junior to the Series 2011A Preferred Stock) if it has declared and paid dividends for the current dividend period on the Series 2011A Preferred Stock, and will be subject to other restrictions on its ability to repurchase or redeem common stock and other securities. In addition, if (i) DNB has not timely declared and paid dividends on the Series 2011A Preferred Stock for six dividend periods or more, whether or not consecutive, and (ii) shares of Series 2011A Preferred Stock with an aggregate liquidation preference of at least $13,000,000 are still outstanding, the Treasury (or any successor holder of Series 2011A Preferred Stock) may designate two additional directors to be elected to DNB's Board of Directors. Preferred dividends paid (declared and accrued) is deducted from net income for computing income available to common stockholders and earnings per share computations.

        Earnings Per Share (EPS)    Basic EPS is computed based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur from unvested stock awards and the exercise of stock options and warrants computed using the treasury stock method. Stock options and awards for which the exercise price exceeds the average market price over the period have an anti-dilutive effect on EPS and, accordingly, are excluded from the EPS calculation. Treasury shares are not deemed outstanding for earnings per share calculations.

        Comprehensive Income    Comprehensive income consists of net income and other comprehensive income. Other comprehensive income includes unrealized gains on securities available for sale, accretion of discount on securities transferred from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity and unrealized losses related to factors other than credit on debt securities, and changes in the funded status of the pension plan which are also recognized as separate components of stockholders' equity.

        Treasury Stock    Common stock shares repurchased are recorded as treasury stock at cost.

        Trust Assets    Assets held by DNB First Wealth Management in fiduciary or agency capacities are not included in the consolidated financial statements since such items are not assets of DNB. Operating income and expenses of DNB First Wealth Management are included in the consolidated statements of operations and are recorded on an accrual basis.

        Subsequent Events    Management has evaluated events and transactions occurring subsequent to December 31, 2011 for items that should potentially be recognized or disclosed in these Consolidated

60

---

Table of Contents

Financial Statements. The evaluation was conducted through the date these financial statements were issued.

        Accounting Developments Affecting DNB    

        In April 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-02 for guidance on Receivables (Topic 310) regarding a creditor's determination of whether a restructuring is a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments in this update apply to all creditors, both public and nonpublic, that restructure certain receivables. In evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring, a creditor must separately conclude that both of the following exist: the restructuring constitutes a concession and the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. The amendments clarify the guidance on a creditor's evaluation of whether it has granted a concession and on a creditor's evaluation of whether a debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. For public entities, the amendments in this update are effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. As a result of applying these amendments, an entity may identify receivables that are newly considered impaired. For purposes of measuring impairment of those receivables, an entity should apply the amendments prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011. The adoption did not have a material impact on DNB's consolidated financial statements.

        In December, 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-12, Deferral of the Effective Date to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update 2011-05. In response to stakeholder concerns regarding the operational ramifications of the presentation of these reclassifications for current and previous years, the FASB has deferred the implementation date of this provision to allow time for further consideration. The requirement in ASU 2011-05, Presentation of Comprehensive Income, for the presentation of a combined statement of comprehensive income or separate, but consecutive, statements of net income and other comprehensive income is still effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011 for public companies, and fiscal years ending after December 15, 2011 for nonpublic companies. The adoption of ASU No. 2011-05 will not have a material impact on DNB's consolidated financial statements.

61

---

Table of Contents

(2) INVESTMENT SECURITIES

        The amortized cost and estimated fair values of investment securities, as of the dates indicated, are summarized as follows:

 

62

---

Table of Contents

        Included in unrealized losses are market losses on securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for twelve months or more and those securities that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for less than twelve months. The table below details the aggregate unrealized losses and aggregate fair value of the underlying securities whose fair values are below their amortized cost at December 31, 2011 and 2010.

 

        As of December 31, 2011, there were 2 mortgage backed securities, 18 corporate bonds, 1 agency note, 2 collateralized mortgage obligations and 6 equity securities which were in an unrealized loss position. Seventeen of these 29 securities did not meet the criteria of having market value loss greater than 10% of book value or had been impaired for more than 12 months. DNB does not intend to sell these securities and management of DNB does not expect to be required to sell any of these securities prior to a recovery of its cost basis. Management does not believe any individual unrealized loss as of December 31, 2011 represents an other-than-temporary impairment. There were 5 corporate bonds and 6 equity securities that were impaired for more than 12 months and one corporate bond that had a market value loss of greater than 10% of book value. DNB reviews its investment portfolio on a quarterly basis judging each investment for other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI). The OTTI analysis focuses on duration and amount a security is below book. As of December 31, 2011, the following securities were reviewed:

        Corporates The unrealized loss on six investments in the Corporate Bond portfolio were caused by interest rate increases and increased spreads in this sector. Some of the bonds have had downgrades since they were purchased. The book value of the six securities is $5.7 million and the unrealized loss is $608,000. Three of the bonds have been impaired for more than twelve months and had a loss less than 10% of the book value. Two of the bonds have been impaired for more than twelve months and had a loss greater than 10% of the book value. One of the bonds had a loss greater than 10% of the book value and was impaired

63

---

Table of Contents

for less than twelve months. The contractual terms of those investments do not permit the issuer to settle these securities at a price less than the amortized cost basis of the investments. Based on this analysis and an evaluation of DNB's ability and intent to hold these investments for a reasonable period of time sufficient for each security to increase to DNB's cost, DNB does not intend to sell these investments and it is not more likely than not that DNB will be required to sell the investments before recovery of their cost, DNB does not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2011.

        Equity securities.    DNB's investment in six marketable equity securities consist primarily of investments in common stock of community banks in Pennsylvania. The unrealized losses on the six investments in the Equity securities portfolio were all impaired for more than twelve months. The severity and duration of the impairment are driven by higher collateral losses, wider credit spreads, and changes in interest rates within the financial services sector. DNB evaluated the prospects of all issuers in relation to the severity and duration of the impairment. Based on this analysis and an evaluation of DNB's ability and intent to hold these investments for a reasonable period of time sufficient for each security to increase to DNB's cost, DNB does not intend to sell these investments and it is not more likely than not that DNB will be required to sell the investments before recovery of their cost, DNB does not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2011.

        The amortized cost and estimated fair value of investment securities as of December 31, 2011, by contractual maturity, are shown below. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because certain securities may be called or prepaid without penalties.

        During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, DNB sold its entire municipal securities portfolio, which had a book value of approximately $26.9 million for a net loss of $64,000. Management sold the municipal securities out of the HTM portfolio due to media and headline risk related to municipal budget shortfalls, which management believes could impair the value of the bonds. In particular, management believes that reported problems with budgets, in California and other states across the country that are experiencing budget shortfalls, could trickle down to individual municipalities. In addition, numerous municipalities are struggling financially as promised pensions benefits for public sector employees represent a massive overhang that threatens the financial future of many cities and states. This was a change in circumstances that was unusual and non-recurring, and could not have been reasonably anticipated when the bonds were placed in the HTM Portfolio. In addition to the municipal securities, management sold mortgaged backed securities with a book value of $3.0 million out of the HTM portfolio for a net gain of $39,000. Such sales are allowed under ASC 320 guidelines, as more than 85% of the principal outstanding at acquisition had been paid down, due to prepayments and normal scheduled payments. During 2011, DNB purchased municipal securities which had an amortized cost of $12.4 million at December 31, 2011. All of these municipal securities were issued by school districts within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. They are backed by the full faith, credit and taxing power of the issuing school district. All have strong underlying credit ratings and $11.2 million of these securities are insured by a highly rated insurance company. In addition to these guarantees, 100% of these securities are guaranteed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through Pennsylvania's State Aid Intercept Program.

64

---

Table of Contents

        In June 2011, DNB reclassified 3 mortgage backed securities and 2 collateralized mortgage obligations with book values (net carrying amount) of $12.5 million and $7.7 million, respectively, from available-for-sale (AFS) to held-to-maturity (HTM). The fair value of the 3 mortgage backed securities and 2 collateralized mortgage obligations was $12.4 million and $7.7 million, respectively. The $116,000 difference between their book value and their fair value will be amortized as an adjustment to the carrying value of the investment securities over the remaining lives.

        DNB sold $27.8 million and $196.1 million securities from the AFS portfolio during 2011 and 2010, respectively. DNB also sold $0 and $29.9 million securities from the HTM portfolio during 2011 and 2010, respectively. The sales from HTM in 2010 are discussed in the paragraph above. Gains and losses resulting from investment sales, redemptions or calls were as follows:

        At December 31, 2011 and 2010, investment securities with a carrying value of approximately $96 million and $105 million, respectively, were pledged to secure public funds, repurchase agreements, FHLBP advances and for other purposes as required by law. See Footnote 7 regarding the use of certain securities as collateral.

(3)    LOANS AND LEASES

        DNB has a significant concentration of residential and commercial mortgage loans collateralized by first mortgage liens on properties located in Chester County. DNB did not have any concentration of loans to borrowers engaged in similar activities that exceed 10% of total loans at December 31, 2011, except for loans of approximately $86.2 million relating to commercial real estate buildings. See Footnote 7 regarding the use of certain loans as collateral.

65

---

Table of Contents

(4)    ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES

        Changes in the allowance for credit losses, for the years indicated, are as follows:

        The performance and credit quality of the loan portfolio is also monitored by analyzing the age of the loans receivable as determined by the length of time a recorded payment is past due. The following tables present the classes of the loan portfolio summarized by the past due status as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010:

Age Analysis of Past Due Loans Receivables

66

---

Table of Contents

        The following table sets forth those assets that are: (i) placed on non-accrual status, (ii) contractually delinquent by 90 days or more and still accruing, (iii) troubled debt restructurings other than those included in items (i) and (ii), and (iv) OREO as a result of foreclosure or voluntary transfer to DNB as well as other repossessed assets.

Non-Performing Assets

67

---

Table of Contents

        The following tables summarize information in regards to impaired loans by loan portfolio class as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 and for the years then ended.

Impaired Loans

68

---

Table of Contents

69

---

Table of Contents

        The following tables present the classes of the loan portfolio summarized by the aggregate pass rating and the classified ratings of special mention, substandard and doubtful within DNB's internal risk rating system as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

Credit Quality Indicators

 

70

---

Table of Contents

        The following tables set forth the activity and composition of DNB's allowance for credit losses at the dates indicated.

Allowance for Credit Losses and Recorded Investment in Financing Receivables

 

71

---

Table of Contents

(5)    OFFICE PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT

        Amounts charged to operating expense for depreciation for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 amounted to $913,000 and $1.1 million, respectively.

(6)    DEPOSITS

        Included in interest bearing time deposits are certificates of deposit issued in amounts of $100,000 or more in the amount of $50.6 million and $72.4 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. These certificates and their remaining maturities at December 31, 2011 were as follows:

        Certificates of deposit scheduled to mature have the following remaining maturities:

(7)    FHLBP ADVANCES AND SHORT-TERM BORROWED FUNDS

        DNB's short-term borrowed funds consist of borrowings at the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (FHLBP), repurchase agreements and Federal funds purchased. Repurchase agreements and Federal funds purchased generally represent one-day borrowings. Borrowings at the FHLBP consist of overnight and 90 day borrowings. DNB had $23.8 million of repurchase agreements at December 31, 2011 with an average rate of 0.40% and $23.3 million of repurchase agreements at December 31, 2010 with an average rate of .65%.

72

---

Table of Contents

        In addition to short-term borrowings, DNB maintains borrowing arrangements with a correspondent bank and the FHLBP, as well as access to the discount window at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia to meet short-term liquidity needs. Through these relationships, DNB has available credit of approximately $184.7 million. DNB has a maximum borrowing capacity at the FHLBP of approximately $167.7 million. At December 31, 2011, DNB had $20.0 million of outstanding long-term advances, which mature at various dates through the year-ended December 31, 2015, as shown in the table below. These advances are collateralized by loans and investment securities, and a lien on the Bank's FHLBP stock. At December 31, 2010, DNB had $25.0 million of outstanding long-term advances with an average rate of 4.43%. All of the advances are convertible term advances and are callable, at the FHLBP's option, at various dates. If an advance is called by the FHLBP, DNB has the option of repaying the borrowing, or continuing to borrow at three month Libor plus 10-14 basis points, depending on the advance. In addition to the $20.0 million of borrowings from the FHLBP at December 31, 2011, the FHLBP had issued letters of credit, on DNB's behalf, totaling $20.0 million against DNB's available credit lines. These letters of credit were used to secure public deposits as required by law.

        Other borrowings totaled $598,000 at December 31, 2011 in lease obligations. Other borrowings at December 31, 2010 totaled $2.6 million and included a $621,000 lease obligation and a $2.0 million secured financing. In December, 2010, DNB transferred SBA loans of $2.0 million which were accounted for as a secured financing as of December 31, 2010. Pursuant to ASC 860, Transfers and Servicing, such SBA loan transfer are treated as a secured financing until the recourse period expires which is generally 90 days.

(8)    CAPITAL LEASE AND OPERATING LEASE OBLIGATIONS

        Included in other borrowings is a long-term capital lease agreement, which relates to DNB's West Goshen branch. As of December 31, 2011 the lease has a carrying amount of $343,000, net of accumulated depreciation of $407,000, and is included in the balance of office properties and equipment in the accompanying statements of financial condition. The following is a schedule of the future minimum capital lease payments, together with the present value of the net minimum lease payments, as of December 31, 2011:

73

---

Table of Contents

        The following is a schedule of the future minimum operating lease payments as of December 31, 2011.

(9)    JUNIOR SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES

        DNB has two issuances of junior subordinated debentures (the "debentures") as follows. The majority of the proceeds of each issuance were invested in DNB's subsidiary, DNB First, National Association, to increase the Bank's capital levels. The junior subordinated debentures issued in each case qualify as a component of capital for regulatory purposes. DNB Capital Trust I and II are special purpose Delaware business trusts, which are not consolidated.

DNB Capital Trust I

        DNB's first issuance of junior subordinated debentures was on July 20, 2001. This issuance of debentures are floating rate and were issued to DNB Capital Trust I, a Delaware business trust in which DNB owns all of the common equity. DNB Capital Trust I issued $5 million of floating rate (6 month Libor plus 3.75%, with a cap of 12%) capital preferred securities to a qualified institutional buyer. The proceeds of these securities were used by the Trust, along with DNB's capital contribution, to purchase $5,155,000 principal amount of DNB's floating rate junior subordinated debentures. The preferred securities have been redeemable since July 25, 2006 and must be redeemed upon maturity of the debentures on July 25, 2031.

DNB Capital Trust II

        DNB's second issuance of junior subordinated debentures was on March 30, 2005. This issuance of debentures are floating rate and were issued to DNB Capital Trust II, a Delaware business trust in which DNB owns all of the common equity. DNB Capital Trust II issued $4.0 million of floating rate (the rate was fixed at 6.56% for the first 5 years and is now adjusting at a rate of 3-month LIBOR plus 1.77%) capital preferred securities. The proceeds of these securities were used by the Trust, along with DNB's capital contribution, to purchase $4,124,000 principal amount of DNB's floating rate junior subordinated debentures. The preferred securities have been redeemable since May 23, 2010. The preferred securities must be redeemed upon maturity of the debentures on May 23, 2035.

(10)    FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

        FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, establishes a fair value hierarchy based on the nature of data inputs for fair value determinations, under which DNB is required to value each asset within its scope using assumptions that market participations would utilize to value that asset. When DNB uses its own assumptions, it is required to disclose additional information about the assumptions used and the effect of the measurement on earnings or the net change in assets for the period.

74

---

Table of Contents

        The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under FASB ASC Topic 820 are as follows:

        Level 1—Quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.

        Level 2—Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active and model derived valuations whose inputs are observable or whose significant value drivers are observable.

        Level 3—Instruments whose significant value drivers are unobservable.

        A description of the valuation methodologies used for assets measured at fair value is set forth below:

        DNB's available-for-sale investment securities, which generally include U.S. government agencies and mortgage backed securities, collateralized mortgage obligations, corporate bonds and equity securities are reported at fair value. These securities are valued by an independent third party ("preparer"). The preparer's evaluations are based on market data. They utilize evaluated pricing models that vary by asset and incorporate available trade, bid and other market information. For securities that do not trade on a daily basis, their evaluated pricing applications apply available information such as benchmarking and matrix pricing. The market inputs normally sought in the evaluation of securities include benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes (only obtained from market makers or broker/dealers recognized as market participants), issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bid, offers and reference data. For certain securities additional inputs may be used or some market inputs may not be applicable. Inputs are prioritized differently on any given day based on market conditions.

        U.S. Government agencies are evaluated and priced using multi-dimensional relational models and option adjusted spreads. State and municipal securities are evaluated on a series of matrices including reported trades and material event notices. Mortgage backed securities are evaluated using matrix correlation to treasury or floating index benchmarks, prepayment speeds, monthly payment information and other benchmarks. Other investments are evaluated using a broker-quote based application, including quotes from issuers.

        Impaired loans are those loans that the Bank has measured impairment generally based on the fair value of the loan's collateral. Fair value is generally determined based upon independent third-party appraisals of the properties, or discounted cash flows based upon the expected proceeds. These assets are included as Level 3 fair values, based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurements.

        OREO assets are adjusted to fair value less estimated selling costs upon transfer of the loans to OREO. Subsequently, OREO assets are carried at the lower of carrying value or fair value. Fair value is based upon independent market prices, appraised values of the collateral or management's estimation of the value of the collateral. There assets are included as level 3 fair values.

75

---

Table of Contents

        The following table summarizes the assets at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 that are recognized on DNB's balance sheet using fair value measurement determined based on the differing levels of input.

 

        Impaired loans.    Impaired loans, which are measured for impairment using the fair value of the collateral for collateral dependent loans, had a carrying amount of $7.6 million at December 31, 2011. Of this, $4.8 million had a valuation allowance of $1.2 million and $2.8 million had no valuation allowance as of December 31, 2011. Impaired loans had a carrying amount of $7.2 million at December 31, 2010. Of this, $4.8 million had a valuation allowance of $493,000 and $2.4 million had no valuation allowance as of December 31, 2010.

        Other Real Estate Owned & other repossessed property.    Other real estate owned ("OREO") consists of properties acquired as a result of, or in-lieu-of, foreclosure. Properties or other assets (primarily repossessed assets formerly leased) are classified as OREO and other repossessed property are initially recorded at fair value less cost to sell at the date of foreclosure, establishing a new cost basis. Subsequent to foreclosure, valuations are periodically performed by management and the assets are carried at the lower of carrying value or fair value, less estimated costs to sell. Costs relating to the development or improvement of the assets are capitalized and costs relating to holding the assets are charged to expense.

76

---

Table of Contents

DNB had $4.0 million of such assets at December 31, 2011, which consisted of $3.8 million in OREO and $212,000 in other repossessed property. DNB had $4.3 million of such assets at December 31, 2010, which consisted of $4.1 million in OREO and $220,000 in other repossessed property. Subsequent to the repossession of these assets, DNB wrote down the carrying values by $23,000 in other repossessed assets during the year ending December 31, 2011.

        Below is management's estimate of the fair value of all financial instruments, whether carried at cost or fair value on DNB's consolidated balance sheet. The carrying amounts and estimated fair values of financial instruments at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are as follows:

        The specific estimation methods and assumptions used can have a substantial impact on the resulting fair values of financial instruments. Following is a brief summary of the significant assumptions, methods, and estimates used in estimating fair value.

        Limitations    Fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time, based on relevant market information about the financial instrument. These estimates do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering for sale at one time DNB's entire holdings of a particular financial instrument. Because no market exists for a significant portion of DNB's financial instruments, fair value estimates are based on judgments regarding future expected loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various financial instruments, and other factors. These estimates are subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment and therefore cannot be determined with precision. Changes in assumptions could significantly affect the estimates.

        Cash and Cash Equivalents, Investment Securities, Accrued Interest Receivable and Accrued Interest Payable     The carrying amounts for short-term investments (cash and cash equivalents) and accrued interest receivable and payable approximate fair value. The fair value of investment securities are determined by an independent third party ("preparer"). The preparer's evaluations are based on market data. They utilize evaluated pricing models that vary by asset and incorporate available trade, bid and other market information. For securities that do not trade on a daily basis, their evaluated pricing applications apply available information such as benchmarking and matrix pricing. The market inputs normally sought in the evaluation of securities include benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes (only obtained from market makers or broker/dealers recognized as market participants), issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bid, offers and reference data. For certain securities additional inputs may

77

---

Table of Contents

be used or some market inputs may not be applicable. Inputs are prioritized differently on any given day based on market conditions.

        U.S. Government agencies are evaluated and priced using multi-dimensional relational models and option adjusted spreads. State and municipal securities are evaluated on a series of matrices including reported trades and material event notices. Mortgage backed securities are evaluated using matrix correlation to treasury or floating index benchmarks, prepayment speeds, monthly payment information and other benchmarks. Other investments are evaluated using a broker- quote based application, including quotes from issuers. The carrying amount of non-readily marketable equity securities approximates liquidation value.

        Loans    Fair values are estimated for portfolios of loans with similar financial characteristics. Loans are segregated by type such as commercial, commercial mortgages, residential mortgages, consumer and non-accrual loans. The fair value of performing loans is calculated by discounting expected cash flows using an estimated market discount rate. Expected cash flows include both contractual cash flows and prepayments of loan balances. Prepayments on consumer loans were determined using the median of estimates of securities dealers for mortgage-backed investment pools.

        The estimated discount rate considers credit and interest rate risk inherent in the loan portfolios and other factors such as liquidity premiums and incremental servicing costs to an investor. Management has made estimates of fair value discount rates that it believes to be reasonable. However, because there is no market for many of these financial instruments, management has no basis to determine whether the fair value presented would be indicative of the value negotiated in an actual sale.

        The fair value for non-accrual loans not based on fair value of collateral was derived through a discounted cash flow analysis, which includes the opportunity costs of carrying a non-performing asset. An estimated discount rate was used for these non-accrual loans, based on the probability of loss and the expected time to recovery.

        Deposits and Borrowings    The fair values disclosed for demand deposits are, by definition, equal to the amount payable on demand at the reporting date (that is, their carrying amounts). The carrying amounts of variable-rate money market accounts, savings accounts, and interest checking accounts approximate their fair values at the reporting date. Fair values for fixed-rate CDs are estimated using a discounted cash flow calculation that applies interest rates currently being offered on certificates to a schedule of aggregated expected monthly maturities on time deposits.

        Off-balance-sheet Instruments (Disclosed at Cost)    Off-balance-sheet instruments are primarily comprised of loan commitments, which are generally priced at market at the time of funding. Fees on commitments to extend credit and stand-by letters of credit are deemed to be immaterial and these instruments are expected to be settled at face value or expire unused. It is impractical to assign any fair value to these instruments. At December 31, 2011, un-funded loan commitments totaled $57.7 million. Stand-by letters of credit totaled $4.0 million at December 31, 2011. At December 31, 2010, un-funded loan commitments totaled $65.7 million. Stand-by letters of credit totaled $2.4 million at December 31, 2010.

78

---

Table of Contents

(11)    FEDERAL INCOME TAXES

        Income tax expense (benefit) was comprised of the following:

        The effective income tax rates of 29.6% for 2011 and 30.7% for 2010 were different than the applicable statutory Federal income tax rate of 34%. The reason for these differences follows:

79

---

Table of Contents

        The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are presented below:

        As of December 31, 2011, DNB had no material unrecognized tax benefits or accrued interest and penalties. It is DNB's policy to account for interest and penalties accrued relative to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. Federal and state tax years 2008 through 2011 were open for examination as of December 31, 2011.

        DNB had capital loss carryovers of $1,293,000 which expired on December 31, 2010. DNB had recorded a valuation allowance of $441,000 for the entire amount of tax benefits associated with this item. During 2010, DNB incurred $3,000 of capital losses that could not be used. They will expire on December 31, 2013. A $1,000 valuation allowance has been recorded for the tax benefits associated with this item. In addition, DNB had net operating loss carryovers with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of $5.7 million and $5.4 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively for which a full valuation allowance has been established. These carryovers will begin to expire in 2021. In addition, DNB had AMT carry forwards as of December 31, 2010 of $33,000. The AMT credit carry forward is expected to be fully utilized on the 2011 federal tax return, however, if it is not, it has an indefinite life and management believes it is more likely than not that these credits will be utilized. All LIHC carry forward have been used.

80

---

Table of Contents

(12)    EARNINGS PER SHARE

        Basic earnings per share ("EPS") is computed based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is computed using the treasury stock method and reflects the potential dilution that could occur from the exercise of stock options, and warrants and the amortized portion of unvested stock awards. Stock options and unvested stock awards for which the exercise or the grant price exceeds the average market price over the period have an anti-dilutive effect on EPS and, accordingly, are excluded from the calculation. Treasury shares are not deemed outstanding for calculations. There were 0 anti-dilutive stock warrants outstanding, 148,459 anti-dilutive stock options outstanding, and 0 anti-dilutive stock awards at December 31, 2011. There were 186,311 anti-dilutive stock warrants, 158,975 anti-dilutive stock options outstanding and 8,550 anti-dilutive stock awards at December 31, 2010. See Note 17 for a discussion of stock warrants issued in conjunction with Preferred shares issued to the U.S. Treasury Department as part of the CPP. The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share:

(13)    OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

        The components of "Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)" and the related tax effects are as follows:

81

---

Table of Contents

        The components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) included in stockholders' equity, are as follows:

(14)    BENEFIT PLANS

        Pension Plan    The Bank maintains a defined benefit pension plan (the "Plan") covering all employees, including officers, who have been employed for one year and have attained 21 years of age. Prior to May 1, 1985, an individual must have attained the age of 25 and accrued one year of service. The Plan provides pension benefits to eligible retired employees at 65 years of age equal to 1.5% of their average monthly pay multiplied by their years of accredited service (maximum 40 years). The accrued benefit is based on the monthly average of their highest five consecutive years of their last ten years of service. The Plan generally covers only full-time employees.

        Effective December 31, 2003, DNB amended its Plan to curtail future eligibility and so that no participants will earn additional benefits under the Plan after December 31, 2003. As a result of this amendment, no further service or compensation was credited under the Plan after December 31, 2003. The Plan, although frozen, will continue to provide benefit payments and employees can still earn vesting credits until retirement.

        The following table sets forth the Plan's funded status, as of the measurement dates of December 31, 2011 and 2010 and amounts recognized in DNB's consolidated financial statements at December 31, 2011 and 2010:

82

---

Table of Contents

        The amounts and changes in DNB's pension benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:

        The Plan's assets are invested using an asset allocation strategy in units of certain equity, bond, real estate and money market funds. The following table summarizes the weighted average asset allocations as of the dates indicated:

        Equity securities consist mainly of equity common trust funds and mutual funds. Fixed income securities consist mainly of fixed income common trust funds and individual securities. Pension plan assets are invested with a moderate growth objective, with target asset allocations of approximately 50 - 60% bonds and cash and approximately 40 - 50% in stocks.

83

---

Table of Contents

        Net periodic pension costs for the years indicated include the following components:

DNB's estimated future benefit payments are as follows:

        The fair value of DNB's pension plan assets by asset category are as follows:

84

---

Table of Contents

        Retirement and Death Benefit Agreement    On November 24, 1999, the Bank and Henry F. Thorne, its then current Chief Executive Officer (the "Executive"), entered into a Death Benefit Agreement providing for supplemental death and retirement benefits for him (the "Supplemental Plan"). On December 23, 2003, the Supplemental Plan was replaced by a Retirement and Death Benefit Agreement (the "Replacement Plan").

        The Replacement Plan provides that the Bank and the Executive share in the rights to the cash surrender value and death benefits of a split-dollar life insurance policy (the "Policy") The policy is designed to provide the Executive, upon attaining age 65, with projected annual after-tax payments of approximately $35,000. In addition, the Policy is intended to provide the Executive with a projected death benefit of $750,000.

        In July 2008, DNB commenced making monthly payments of $3,658 to the Executive. The remaining liability under the plan was $730,000 and $740,000 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The annual expense for the same respective periods was $41,000 and $44,000.

        Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan for Chairman and Chief Executive Officer    On December 20, 2006, the Board of Directors of DNB Financial Corporation approved, and effective April 1, 2007 and December 8, 2008 modified, a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (also known as a SERP) for its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, William S. Latoff. The purpose of the SERP is to provide Mr. Latoff a pension supplement beginning at age 70 for 15 years in approximately equal amounts each year and to compensate him for the loss of retirement plan funding opportunities from his other business interests because of his commitments to DNB as Chairman and CEO.

        The remaining liability under the plan was $1.1 million and $1.1 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The annual expense for the same respective periods was $63,000 and $60,000.

        401(k) Retirement Savings Plan    In 1994, the Bank adopted a retirement savings plan intended to comply with Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Participants are permitted to authorize pre-tax savings contributions to a separate trust established under the 401(k) plan, subject to limitations on deductibility of contributions imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. Effective July 1, 2007 the Bank amended the plan to allow after-tax contributions to be made as well. The contributions are subject to the same limitations. Effective January 1, 2010, management indicated that it would evaluate discretionary matching contributions each quarter based upon DNB's financial performance. DNB had no matching contributions to the 401(k) plan in 2011 and 2010.

        Profit Sharing Plan    The Bank maintains a Profit Sharing Plan for eligible employees. The plan provides that the Bank make contributions equal to 3% of the eligible participant's W-2 wages. DNB's

85

---

Table of Contents

related expense associated with the Profit Sharing Plan was $219,000 and $216,000 in 2011 and 2010, respectively.

        Stock Option Plan    DNB has a Stock Option Plan for employees and directors. Under the plan, options (both qualified and non-qualified) to purchase a maximum of 643,369 (as adjusted for subsequent stock dividends) shares of DNB's common stock could be issued to employees and directors.

        Under the plan, option exercise prices must equal the fair market value of the shares on the date of option grant and the option exercise period may not exceed ten years. Vesting of options under the plan is determined by the Plan Committee. There were 156,144 and 189,007 shares available for grant at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. All options with the exception of 44,600 options granted on April 23, 2010 and 44,600 options granted on December 12, 2011 are immediately exercisable. The options granted on April 23, 2010 have a fair value of $100,000 or $2.25 per share, based on a risk free interest rate of 3.273%, a dividend yield of 1.73% and a volatility of 35.564% and are subject to four year cliff vesting. These options which expire on April 23, 2017 if not exercised or cancelled, have an exercise price of $6.93 per share, and the shares are restricted from resale for two years after exercise. These options are exercisable only at and after such time as the market value of the common stock first equals or exceeds $7.97, which is 115% of the $6.93 exercise price. The options granted on December 12, 2011 have a fair value of $141,000 or $3.17 per share, based on a risk free interest rate of 1.445%, a dividend yield of 1.16% and a volatility of 36.513% and are subject to three year cliff vesting. These options which expire on December 12, 2018 if not exercised or cancelled, have an exercise price of $10.31 per share, and the shares are restricted from resale for two years after exercise. These options are exercisable only at and after such time as the market value of the common stock first equals or exceeds $11.34, which is 110% of the $10.31 exercise price. DNB expensed $27,000 and $17,000 during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively and anticipates additional expense of $57,000 through April 23, 2014 for the options granted on April 23, 2010 and $139,000 through December 12, 2014 for the options granted on December 12, 2011, the dates the options can first be exercised.

        Stock option activity is indicated below:

86

---

Table of Contents

        The weighted-average price and weighted average remaining contractual life for the outstanding options are listed below for the dates indicated.

 

        Other Stock-Based Compensation    DNB maintains an Incentive Equity and Deferred Compensation Plan. The plan provides that up to 243,101 (as adjusted for subsequent stock dividends) shares of common stock may be granted, at the discretion of the Board, to individuals of DNB. Shares already granted are issuable on the earlier of three years after the date of the grant or a change in control of DNB if the recipients are then employed by DNB ("Vest Date"). Upon issuance of the shares, resale of the shares is restricted for an additional one year, during which the shares may not be sold, pledged or otherwise disposed of. Prior to the Vest Date and in the event the recipient terminates association with DNB for reasons other than death, disability or change in control, the recipient forfeits all rights to the shares that would otherwise be issued under the grant.

        Share awards granted by the plan were recorded at the date of award based on the market value of shares. Awards are being amortized to expense over the three-year cliff-vesting period. DNB records compensation expense equal to the value of the shares being amortized. For the twelve-month periods ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, $61,000 and $121,000 was amortized to expense. At December 31, 2011, approximately $195,000 in additional compensation will be recognized over the weighted average

87

---

Table of Contents

remaining service period of approximately 2.67 years. At December 31, 2011, 177,424 shares were reserved for future grants under the plan. Stock grant activity is indicated below.

(15)    COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OFF-BALANCE-SHEET RISK

        In the normal course of business, various commitments and contingent liabilities are outstanding, such as guarantees and commitments to extend credit, borrow money or act in a fiduciary capacity, which are not reflected in the consolidated financial statements. Management does not anticipate any significant losses as a result of these commitments.

        DNB had outstanding stand-by letters of credit totaling $4.0 million and unfunded loan and lines of credit commitments totaling $57.7 million at December 31, 2011, of which, $55.2 million were variable rate and $2.5 million were fixed rate.

        These instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amount recognized on the balance sheet. The exposure to credit loss in the event of non-performance by the party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit and stand-by letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount. Management uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance-sheet instruments.

        Stand-by letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by DNB to guarantee the performance or repayment of a financial obligation of a customer to a third party. Those guarantees are primarily issued to support public and private borrowing arrangements. The credit risks involved in issuing letters of credit are essentially the same as those involved in extending loan facilities to customers. DNB holds various forms of collateral to support these commitments.

        Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. DNB evaluates each customer's creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral, if any, obtained upon the extension of credit, usually consists of real estate, but may include securities, property or other assets.

        DNB maintains borrowing arrangements with correspondent banks and the FHLB of Pittsburgh, as well as access to the discount window at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia to meet short-term liquidity needs. Through these relationships, DNB has available credit of approximately $184.7 million.

        Approximately $45.1 million of assets were held by DNB First Wealth Management in a fiduciary, custody or agency capacity at December 31, 2011. These assets are not assets of DNB, and are not included in the consolidated financial statements.

88

---

Table of Contents

        DNB is a party to a number of lawsuits arising in the ordinary course of business. While any litigation causes an element of uncertainty, management is of the opinion that the liability, if any, resulting from the actions, will not have a material effect on the accompanying financial statements.

(16)    PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL INFORMATION

        Condensed financial information of DNB Financial Corporation (parent company only) follows:

 

89

---

Table of Contents

(17)    REGULATORY MATTERS

        Recent market conditions have made it difficult or uneconomical to access the capital markets. As a result, the United States Congress, the Treasury, and the FDIC have announced various programs designed to enhance market liquidity and bank capital.

        In response to the financial crisis affecting the banking system and financial markets, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA") was signed into law and established the Troubled Assets Relief Program ("TARP") administered by the U.S. Treasury Department ("Treasury"). As part of TARP, the Treasury established the Capital Purchase Program ("CPP") to provide up to $700 billion of funding to eligible financial institutions through the purchase of capital stock and other financial instruments for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets. In connection with EESA, there have been numerous actions by the Federal Reserve Board, Congress, the Treasury, the FDIC, the SEC and others to further the economic and banking industry stabilization efforts under EESA. It remains unclear at this time what further legislative and regulatory measures will be implemented under EESA affecting DNB.

        On January 30, 2009, as part of the CPP administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, DNB Financial Corporation entered into a Letter Agreement and a Securities Purchase Agreement with the U.S. Treasury, pursuant to which DNB issued and sold on January 30, 2009, and the U.S. Treasury purchased for cash on that date (i) 11,750 shares of DNB's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2008A, par value $10.00 per share, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per

90

---

Table of Contents

share (the "CPP Shares"), and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 186,311 shares of DNB's common stock, $1.00 par value, at an exercise price of $9.46 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $11,750,000 in cash. This transaction closed on January 30, 2009. The issuance and sale of these securities was a private placement exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. From January 30, 2009 to August 4, 2011, the Bank provided dividends to DNB in connection with the Series 2008A Preferred Stock.. The Series 2008A Preferred Stock had priority over DNB's common stock with regard to the payment of dividends and liquidation distribution. The Series 2008A Preferred Stock qualified as Tier 1 capital. DNB paid cumulative dividends at a rate of five percent per annum while these shares were outstanding. Dividends were payable quarterly in arrears and accrued as earned over the period the Series 2008A Preferred Stock was outstanding. Preferred dividends paid (declared and accrued) and the related accretion was deducted from net income for computing income available to common stockholders and earnings per share computations. Dividends were payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15, and November 15 of each year.

        As further response to the economic crisis, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("ARRA"), more commonly known as the economic stimulus or economic recovery package, was signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Obama. ARRA included a wide variety of programs intended to stimulate the economy and provide for extensive infrastructure, energy, health, and education needs. In addition, ARRA imposed certain new executive compensation and corporate expenditure limits on all current and future TARP recipients until they had repaid the Treasury.,

        On August 4, 2011, DNB entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to which DNB issued and sold to the Treasury 13,000 shares of its Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series 2011A ("Series 2011A Preferred Stock"), having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share (the CPP Shares"), for aggregate proceeds of $13,000,000. The Securities Purchase Agreement was entered into, and the Series 2011A Preferred Stock was issued, pursuant to the Treasury's Small Business Lending Fund program ("SBLF"), a $30 billion fund established under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, that encourages lending to small businesses by providing capital to qualified community banks with assets of less than $10 billion. Of the $13 million in aggregate proceeds, $11,879,000 was used on August 4, 2011 to repurchase all CPP Shares ($11,750,000 was paid in principal and $128,900 in accrued, unpaid dividends related to the CPP Shares) held by the Treasury as described above. The securities sold in this transaction were exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as a transaction by DNB not involving a public offering.

        On September 21, 2011, DNB entered into the Warrant Letter Agreement with the Treasury. Pursuant to the Warrant Letter Agreement, DNB Financial Corporation repurchased from the Treasury the warrant to purchase 186,311 shares of DNB Financial Corporation's common stock issued to Treasury in January 2009 under CPP. DNB Financial Corporation paid a purchase price of $458,000 for the warrant.

        Under the Federal Reserve's Regulation H, DNB First, National Association may not, without regulatory approval, declare or pay a dividend to DNB if the total of all dividends declared in a calendar year exceeds the total of (a) the Bank's net income for that year and (b) its retained net income for the preceding two calendar years, less any required transfers to additional paid-in capital or to a fund for the retirement of preferred stock.

        Federal banking agencies impose three minimum capital requirements—Total risk-based, Tier 1 risk-based and Leverage capital. The risk-based capital ratios measure the adequacy of a bank's capital against the riskiness of its assets and off-balance sheet activities. Failure to maintain adequate capital is a basis for "prompt corrective action" or other regulatory enforcement action. In assessing a bank's capital adequacy, regulators also consider other factors such as interest rate risk exposure; liquidity, funding and market risks; quality and level of earnings; concentrations of credit, quality of loans and investments; risks of any nontraditional activities; effectiveness of bank policies; and management's overall ability to monitor and control risks.

91

---

Table of Contents

        Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require DNB to maintain certain minimum amounts and ratios as set forth below. Management believes that DNB and the Bank meet all capital adequacy requirements to which they are subject. The Bank is considered "Well Capitalized" under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. To be categorized as Well Capitalized, the Bank must maintain minimum ratios as set forth below. There are no conditions or events since the most recent regulatory notification that management believes would have changed the Bank's category. Actual capital amounts and ratios are presented below.

92

---

Table of Contents

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Board of Directors and
Stockholders of DNB Financial Corporation

        We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of financial condition of DNB Financial Corporation and subsidiaries (the "Corporation") as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Corporation's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

        We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Corporation is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Corporation's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

        In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of DNB Financial Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Malvern, Pennsylvania
March 22, 2012

93

---

Table of Contents

Item 9.        Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

        None

Item 9A.        Controls and Procedures

        DNB's Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have reviewed and evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) as of December 31, 2011, the end of the period covered by this report, in accordance with the requirements of Exchange Act Rule 240.13a-15(b). Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer have concluded that DNB's current disclosure controls and procedures are effective and timely, providing them with material information relating to DNB and its subsidiaries required to be disclosed in the report DNB files under the Exchange Act.

Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

        Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Management assessed the effectiveness of DNB's internal control over financial reporting at December 31, 2011. To make this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control — Integrated Framework. Management believes that, as of December 31, 2011 DNB's internal control over financial reporting was effective. This annual report on Form 10-K does not include an attestation report of DNB's independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management's report was not subject to attestation by DNB's independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to the exemption provided to issuers that are not "large accelerated filers" or "accelerated filers".

Item 9B.        Other Information

        None

Part III

Item 10.        Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant

        The information required herein with respect to Registrant's directors and officers is incorporated by reference to pages 7-38 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, and the information required herein with respect to compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is incorporated by reference to page 8 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. DNB has adopted a Code of Ethics that applies to DNB's principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller or persons performing similar functions. DNB's current Code of Ethics is incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit 14 to this report.

Item 11.        Executive Compensation

        The information required herein is incorporated by reference to pages 22-26 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

94

---

Table of Contents

Item 12.        Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

        (a)   Information Regarding Equity Compensation Plans

        The following table summarizes certain information relating to equity compensation plans maintained by DNB as of December 31, 2011:

        (b)   The balance of the information required herein is incorporated by reference to Page 7 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Item 13.        Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence

        The information required herein is incorporated by reference to pages 39-40 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Item 14.        Principal Accountant Fees and Services

        The information required herein is incorporated by reference to page 44 of DNB's Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

95

---

Table of Contents

Part IV

Item 15.        Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

        (a)(1) Financial Statements.

        The consolidated financial statements listed below, together with an opinion of ParenteBeard LLC dated March 22, 2012 for the year ending December 31, 2011 with respect thereto, are set forth beginning at page 50 of this report under Item 8, "Financial Statements and Supplementary Data."

        (a)(2)    Not applicable

        (a)(3)    Exhibits, pursuant to Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

        The exhibits listed on the Index to Exhibits on pages 98-102 of this report are incorporated by reference or filed or furnished herewith in response to this Item.

96

---

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

        Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

97

---

Table of Contents

Index to Exhibits

98

---

Table of Contents

99

---

Table of Contents

100

---

Table of Contents

101

---

Table of Contents

102

---

Table of Contents

---

Table of Contents

---