FULT 10-K Fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2010

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010,

or

Commission File Number: 0-10587

FULTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(717) 291-2411

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.     Yes ¨ No x

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.    Yes x 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).    Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) 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. ¨

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,” 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).    Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the voting Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the average bid and asked prices on June 30, 2010, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $1.9 billion. The number of shares of the registrant’s Common Stock outstanding on January 31, 2011 was 199,132,000.

Portions of the Definitive Proxy Statement of the Registrant for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on April 28, 2011 are incorporated by reference in Part III.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

General

Fulton Financial Corporation (the Corporation) was incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania on February 8, 1982 and became a bank holding company through the acquisition of all of the outstanding stock of Fulton Bank on June 30, 1982. In 2000, the Corporation became a financial holding company as defined in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB Act), which allowed the Corporation to expand its financial services activities under its holding company structure (See “Competition” and “Supervision and Regulation”). The Corporation directly owns 100% of the common stock of seven community banks and twelve non-bank entities. As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation had approximately 3,530 full-time equivalent employees.

The common stock of Fulton Financial Corporation is listed for quotation on the Global Select Market of The NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol FULT. The Corporation’s internet address is www.fult.com . Electronic copies of the Corporation’s 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K are available free of charge by visiting “Investor Relations” at www.fult.com . Electronic copies of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K are also available at this internet address. These reports are posted as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Bank and Financial Services Subsidiaries

The Corporation’s seven subsidiary banks are located primarily in suburban or semi-rural geographical markets throughout a five-state region (Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and Virginia). Each of these banking subsidiaries delivers financial services in a highly personalized, community-oriented style, and many decisions are made by the local management team in each market. Where appropriate, operations are centralized through common platforms and back-office functions.

From time to time, in some markets and in certain circumstances, merging subsidiary banks allows the Corporation to leverage one bank’s stronger brand recognition over a larger market. It also enables the Corporation to create operating and marketing efficiencies and avoid direct competition between two or more subsidiary banks. For example, in 2010, the former Delaware National Bank subsidiary consolidated into Fulton Bank, N.A. In 2009, the former Peoples Bank of Elkton subsidiary and the former Hagerstown Trust Company subsidiary merged into The Columbia Bank to consolidate the Corporation’s Maryland franchise.

The Corporation’s subsidiary banks are located in areas that are home to a wide range of manufacturing, distribution, health care and other service companies. The Corporation and its banks are not dependent upon one or a few customers or any one industry, and the loss of any single customer or a few customers would not have a material adverse impact on any of the subsidiary banks.

Each of the subsidiary banks offers a full range of consumer and commercial banking products and services in its local market area. Personal banking services include various checking account and savings deposit products, certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. The subsidiary banks offer a variety of consumer lending products to creditworthy customers in their market areas. Secured loan products include home equity loans and lines of credit, which are underwritten based on loan-to-value limits specified in the lending policy. Subsidiary banks also offer a variety of fixed and variable-rate products, including construction loans and jumbo loans. Residential mortgages are offered through Fulton Mortgage Company, which operates as a division of each subsidiary bank. Consumer loan products also include automobile loans, automobile and equipment leases, personal lines of credit, credit cards and checking account overdraft protection.

Commercial banking services are provided to small and medium sized businesses (generally with sales of less than $100 million) in the subsidiary banks’ market areas. The maximum total lending commitment to an individual borrower was $33.0 million as of December 31, 2010, which is below the Corporation’s regulatory lending limit. Commercial lending options include commercial, financial, agricultural and real estate loans. Floating, adjustable and fixed rate loans are provided, with floating and adjustable rate loans generally tied to an index such as the Prime Rate or the London Interbank Offering Rate. The Corporation’s commercial lending policy encourages relationship banking and provides strict guidelines related to customer creditworthiness and collateral requirements. In addition, equipment leasing, credit cards, letters of credit, cash management services and traditional deposit products are offered to commercial customers.

The Corporation also offers investment management, trust, brokerage, insurance and investment advisory services to consumer and commercial banking customers in the market areas serviced by the subsidiary banks.

3

Table of Contents

In the fall of 2009, Fulton Bank converted its Pennsylvania state charter to a national charter and became Fulton Bank, National Association (Fulton Bank, N.A.) and the Corporation’s investment management and trust services subsidiary, Fulton Financial Advisors, N.A., became an operating subsidiary of Fulton Bank, N.A. Subsequently, on January 1, 2010, Fulton Financial Advisors, N.A. merged into Fulton Bank, N.A., thereby becoming a division of Fulton Bank, N.A.

The Corporation’s subsidiary banks deliver their products and services through traditional branch banking, with a network of full service branch offices. Electronic delivery channels include a network of automated teller machines, telephone banking and online banking. The variety of available delivery channels allows customers to access their account information and perform certain transactions, such as transferring funds and paying bills, at virtually any hour of the day.

The following table provides certain information for the Corporation’s banking subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010.

Non-Bank Subsidiaries

The Corporation owns 100% of the common stock of six non-bank subsidiaries which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes: (i) Fulton Reinsurance Company, LTD, which engages in the business of reinsuring credit life and accident and health insurance directly related to extensions of credit by the banking subsidiaries of the Corporation; (ii) Fulton Financial Realty Company, which holds title to or leases certain properties upon which Corporation branch offices and other facilities are located; (iii) Central Pennsylvania Financial Corp., which owns certain limited partnership interests in partnerships invested in low and moderate income housing projects; (iv) FFC Management, Inc., which owns certain investment securities and other passive investments; (v) FFC Penn Square, Inc., which owns trust preferred securities issued by a subsidiary of Fulton Bank, N.A; and (vi) Fulton Insurance Services Group, Inc., which engages in the sale of various life insurance products.

The Corporation owns 100% of the common stock of six non-bank subsidiaries which are not consolidated for financial reporting purposes. The following table provides information for these non-bank subsidiaries, whose sole assets consist of junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures issued by the Corporation, as of December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):

Competition

The banking and financial services industries are highly competitive. Within its geographical region, the Corporation’s subsidiaries face direct competition from other commercial banks, varying in size from local community banks to larger regional and national

4

Table of Contents

banks, credit unions and non-bank entities. With the growth in electronic commerce and distribution channels, the banks also face competition from financial institutions that do not have a physical presence in the Corporation’s geographical markets.

The industry is also highly competitive due to the GLB Act. Under the GLB Act, banks, insurance companies or securities firms may affiliate under a financial holding company structure, allowing expansion into non-banking financial services activities that were previously restricted. These include a full range of banking, securities and insurance activities, including securities and insurance underwriting, issuing and selling annuities and merchant banking activities. While the Corporation does not currently engage in all of these activities, the ability to do so without separate approval from the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) enhances the ability of the Corporation – and financial holding companies in general – to compete more effectively in all areas of financial services.

As a result of the GLB Act, there is a great deal of competition for customers that were traditionally served by the banking industry. While the GLB Act increased competition, it also provided opportunities for the Corporation to expand its financial services offerings. The Corporation competes through the variety of products that it offers and the quality of service that it provides to its customers. However, there is no guarantee that these efforts will insulate the Corporation from competitive pressure, which could impact its pricing decisions for loans, deposits and other services and could ultimately impact financial results.

Market Share

Although there are many ways to assess the size and strength of banks, deposit market share continues to be an important industry statistic. This publicly available information is compiled, as of June 30th of each year, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The Corporation’s banks maintain branch offices in 53 counties across five states. In 10 of these counties, the Corporation ranked in the top three in deposit market share (based on deposits as of June 30, 2010). The following table summarizes information about the counties in which the Corporation has branch offices and its market position in each county.

5

Table of Contents

Supervision and Regulation

The Corporation operates in an industry that is subject to various laws and regulations that are enforced by a number of Federal and state agencies. Changes in these laws and regulations, including interpretation and enforcement activities, could impact the cost of operating in the financial services industry, limit or expand permissible activities or affect competition among banks and other financial institutions.

6

Table of Contents

The following discussion summarizes the current regulatory environment for financial holding companies and banks, including a summary of the more significant laws and regulations.

Regulators – The Corporation is a registered financial holding company, and its subsidiary banks are depository institutions whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The Corporation and its subsidiaries are subject to various regulations and examinations by regulatory authorities. The following table summarizes the charter types and primary regulators for each of the Corporation’s subsidiary banks.

Federal statutes that apply to the Corporation and its subsidiaries include the GLB Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), the Bank Holding Company Act (BHCA), the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, among others. In general, these statutes and related interpretations establish the eligible business activities of the Corporation, certain acquisition and merger restrictions, limitations on intercompany transactions, such as loans and dividends, and capital adequacy requirements, among other statutes and regulations.

The Corporation is subject to regulation and examination by the FRB, and is required to file periodic reports and to provide additional information that the FRB may require. In addition, the FRB must approve certain proposed changes in organizational structure or other business activities before they occur. The BHCA imposes certain restrictions upon the Corporation regarding the acquisition of substantially all of the assets of or direct or indirect ownership or control of any bank for which it is not already the majority owner.

Capital Requirements – There are a number of restrictions on financial and bank holding companies and FDIC-insured depository subsidiaries that are designed to minimize potential loss to depositors and the FDIC insurance funds. If an FDIC-insured depository subsidiary is “undercapitalized,” the bank holding company is required to ensure (subject to certain limits) the subsidiary’s compliance with the terms of any capital restoration plan filed with its appropriate banking agency. Also, a bank holding company is required to serve as a source of financial strength to its depository institution subsidiaries and to commit resources to support such institutions in circumstances where it might not do so absent such policy. Under the BHCA, the FRB has the authority to require a bank holding company to terminate any activity or to relinquish control of a non-bank subsidiary upon the FRB’s determination that such activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial soundness and stability of a depository institution subsidiary of the bank holding company.

Bank holding companies are required to comply with the FRB’s risk-based capital guidelines that require a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of 8%. At least half of the total capital is required to be Tier 1 capital. In addition to the risk-based capital guidelines, the FRB has adopted a minimum leverage capital ratio under which a bank holding company must maintain a level of Tier 1 capital to average total consolidated assets of at least 3% in the case of a bank holding company which has the highest regulatory examination rating and is not contemplating significant growth or expansion. For all other bank holding companies, the minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is 4%. Banking organizations with supervisory, financial, operational, or managerial weaknesses, as well as organizations that are anticipating or experiencing significant growth, are expected to maintain capital ratios well above the minimum levels. Moreover, higher capital ratios may be required for any bank holding company if warranted by its particular circumstances or risk profile. In all cases, bank holding companies should hold capital commensurate with the level and nature of the risks, including the volume and severity of problem loans, to which they are exposed.

Dividends and Loans from Subsidiary Banks – There are also various restrictions on the extent to which the Corporation and its non-bank subsidiaries can receive loans from its banking subsidiaries. In general, these restrictions require that such loans be secured by designated amounts of specified collateral and are limited, as to any one of the Corporation or its non-bank subsidiaries, to 10% of the lending bank’s regulatory capital (20% in the aggregate to all such entities).

7

Table of Contents

The Corporation is also limited in the amount of dividends that it may receive from its subsidiary banks. Dividend limitations vary, depending on the subsidiary bank’s charter and whether or not it is a member of the Federal Reserve System. Generally, subsidiaries are prohibited from paying dividends when doing so would cause them to fall below the regulatory minimum capital levels. Additionally, limits may exist on paying dividends in excess of net income for specified periods. See “Note J – Regulatory Matters” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding regulatory capital and dividend and loan limitations.

Federal Deposit Insurance – Substantially all of the deposits of the Corporation’s subsidiary banks are insured up to the applicable limits by the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) of the FDIC, generally up to $250,000 per insured depositor. The Corporation’s subsidiary banks are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the DIF.

The subsidiary banks pay deposit insurance premiums based on assessment rates established by the FDIC. The FDIC has established a risk-based assessment system under which institutions are classified and pay premiums according to their perceived risk to the Federal deposit insurance funds. The FDIC is not required to charge deposit insurance premiums when the ratio of deposit insurance reserves to insured deposits is maintained above specified levels.

In May 2009, the FDIC levied a special assessment applicable to all insured depository institutions totaling 5 basis points of each institution’s total assets less Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, resulting in a one-time pre-tax charge of $7.7 million for the Corporation. In November 2009, the FDIC issued a ruling requiring insured depository institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. As of December 31, 2010, the balance of prepaid FDIC assessments included in other assets on the Corporation’s consolidated balance sheet was $47.9 million.

In October 2010, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC adopted a DIF restoration plan to ensure a 1.35% fund reserve ratio by September 30, 2020. On at least a semi-annual basis, the FDIC will determine if a future adjustment of assessment rates will be needed based on its income and loss projections for the DIF. In November 2010, the FDIC issued a ruling which, effective December 31, 2010, provides unlimited coverage for non-interest bearing transaction accounts until December 31, 2012.

In February 2011, the FDIC issued a ruling that amends the deposit insurance assessment base from total domestic deposits to average total assets, minus average tangible equity, effective April 1, 2011. In connection with this ruling, the FDIC also created a two scorecard system, one for large depository institutions that have more than $10 billion in assets and another for highly complex institutions that have over $50 billion in assets. As of December 31, 2010, none of the Corporation’s individual subsidiary banks had assets in excess of $10 billion and would therefore, not meet the classification of large depository institutions under this ruling. The Corporation’s FDIC insurance assessments under this latest ruling would be approximately $12 million on an annualized basis, based on balances as of December 31, 2010.

USA Patriot Act – Anti-terrorism legislation enacted under the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (Patriot Act) expanded the scope of anti-money laundering laws and regulations and imposed significant new compliance obligations for financial institutions, including the Corporation’s subsidiary banks. These regulations include obligations to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing.

Failure to comply with the Patriot Act’s requirements could have serious legal, financial and reputational consequences. The Corporation has adopted appropriate policies, procedures and controls to address compliance with the Patriot Act and will continue to revise and update its policies, procedures and controls to reflect required changes.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 – The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley), which was signed into law in July 2002, impacts all companies with securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including the Corporation. Sarbanes-Oxley created new requirements in the areas of corporate governance and financial disclosure including, among other things, (i) increased responsibility for Chief Executive Officers and Chief Financial Officers with respect to the content of filings with the SEC; (ii) enhanced requirements for audit committees, including independence and disclosure of expertise; (iii) enhanced requirements for auditor independence and the types of non-audit services that auditors can provide; (iv) accelerated filing requirements for SEC reports; (v) disclosure of a code of ethics; (vi) increased disclosure and reporting obligations for companies, their directors and their executive officers; and (vii) new and increased civil and criminal penalties for violations of securities laws. Many of the provisions became effective immediately, while others became effective as a result of rulemaking procedures delegated by Sarbanes-Oxley to the SEC.

8

Table of Contents

Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley requires management to issue a report on the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting. In addition, the Corporation’s independent registered public accountants are required to issue an opinion on the effectiveness of the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting. These reports can be found in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”. Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer as required by Sarbanes-Oxley and the resulting SEC rules can be found in the “Signatures” and “Exhibits” sections.

Regulatory Developments – On July 21, 2010, the President of the United States signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act created the Financial Stability Oversight Council, with oversight authority for monitoring and regulating systemic risk, and the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, which will have broad regulatory and enforcement powers over consumer financial products and services. The scope of the Dodd-Frank Act impacts many aspects of the financial services industry, and it requires the development and adoption of many implementing regulations over the next several months and years.

An investment in the Corporation’s common stock involves certain risks, including, among others, the risks described below. In addition to the other information contained in this report, you should carefully consider the following risk factors.

Difficult conditions in the economy and the capital markets may materially adversely affect the Corporation’s business and results of operations.

The Corporation’s results of operations and financial condition are affected by conditions in the capital markets and the economy generally. The capital and credit markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruption in recent years. The volatility and disruption in these markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices of, and credit availability to, certain companies without regard to those companies’ underlying financial strength.

Concerns over the availability and cost of credit and the decline in the U.S. real estate market also contributed to increased volatility in the capital and credit markets and diminished expectations for the economy. These factors precipitated the recent economic slowdown, and may have an adverse effect on the Corporation.

Included among the potential adverse effects of economic downturns on the Corporation are the following:

Any of these scenarios could require the Corporation to charge-off a higher percentage of its loans and/or increase its provision for credit losses, which would negatively impact its results of operations.

Approximately $5.2 billion, or 43.4%, of the Corporation’s loan portfolio was in commercial mortgage and construction loans at December 31, 2010. The Corporation did not have a concentration of credit risk with any single borrower, industry or geographical location. However, the performance of real estate markets and the weak economic conditions in general may adversely impact the performance of these loans.

In addition, the amount of the Corporation’s provision for credit losses and the percentage of loans it is required to charge-off may be impacted by the overall risk composition of the loan portfolio. In 2010, the Corporation’s provision for loan losses was $160.0 million. While the Corporation believes that its allowance for loan losses as of December 31, 2010 is sufficient to cover losses inherent in the loan portfolio on that date, the Corporation may be required to increase its provision for credit losses or charge-off a higher percentage of loans due to changes in the risk characteristics of the loan portfolio, thereby negatively impacting its results of operations.

9

Table of Contents

The potential exists for new federal or state regulations regarding lending and funding practices, capital requirements, deposit insurance premiums, other bank-focused special assessments and liquidity standards. Bank regulatory agencies are expected to be active in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, which may result in the issuance of formal enforcement orders.

The Corporation, however, may at some point choose to raise additional capital to support its continued growth. The Corporation’s ability to raise additional capital will depend, in part, on conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of the Corporation’s control. Accordingly, the Corporation may be unable to raise additional capital, if and when needed, on terms acceptable to the Corporation, or at all. If the Corporation cannot raise additional capital when needed, its ability to further expand operations through internal growth and acquisitions could be materially impacted. In addition, future issuances of equity securities could dilute the interests of existing shareholders and could cause a decline in the Corporation’s stock price.

In addition to primary sources of liquidity in the form of principal and interest payments on outstanding loans and investments and deposits, the Corporation maintains secondary sources that provide it with additional liquidity. These secondary sources include secured and unsecured borrowings from sources such as the FRB and Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) and third-party commercial banks. The Corporation maintains a strong liquidity position and believes that it is well positioned to withstand current market conditions. However, market liquidity conditions have been negatively impacted by disruptions in the capital markets in the past and such disruptions could, in the future, have a negative impact on secondary sources of liquidity.

Changes in interest rates may have an adverse effect on the Corporation’s net income or loss.

The Corporation is affected by fiscal and monetary policies of the Federal government, including those of the FRB, which regulates the national money supply in order to manage recessionary and inflationary pressures. Among the techniques available to the FRB are engaging in open market transactions of U.S. Government securities, changing the discount rate and changing reserve requirements against bank deposits. The use of these techniques may also affect interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits.

Net interest income is the most significant component of the Corporation’s net income, accounting for approximately 76% of total revenues in 2010. The narrowing of interest rate spreads, the difference between interest rates earned on loans and investments and interest rates paid on deposits and borrowings, could adversely affect the Corporation’s net interest income and financial condition. Regional and local economic conditions as well as fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government, including those of the FRB, may affect prevailing interest rates. The Corporation cannot predict or control changes in interest rates.

10

Table of Contents

The supervision and regulation to which the Corporation is subject can be a competitive disadvantage.

The Corporation is a registered financial holding company, and its subsidiary banks are depository institutions whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The Corporation is extensively regulated under federal and state banking laws and regulations that are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole. In general, these laws and regulations establish: the eligible business activities for the Corporation; certain acquisition and merger restrictions; limitations on intercompany transactions such as loans and dividends; capital adequacy requirements; requirements for anti-money laundering programs; and other compliance matters, among other regulations. Compliance with these statutes and regulations is important to the Corporation’s ability to engage in new activities and to consummate additional acquisitions. In addition, the Corporation is subject to changes in federal and state tax laws as well as changes in banking and credit regulations, accounting principles and governmental economic and monetary policies. While these statutes and regulations are generally designed to minimize potential loss to depositors and the FDIC insurance funds, they do not eliminate risk, and compliance with such statutes and regulations increases the Corporation’s expense, requires management’s attention and can be a disadvantage from a competitive standpoint with respect to non-regulated competitors.

Federal and state banking regulators also possess broad powers to take supervisory actions, as they deem appropriate. These supervisory actions may result in higher capital requirements, higher insurance premiums and limitations on the Corporation’s activities that could have a material adverse effect on its business and profitability.

The federal government, the FRB and other governmental and regulatory bodies have taken, and may in the future take other actions, in response to the stress on the financial system. For example, in response to the recent stress affecting the banking system and financial markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial institutions, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) was enacted. Pursuant to the EESA, the U.S. Treasury was authorized to, among other things, deploy up to $750 billion into the financial system. On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was enacted, which amended EESA. Such actions, although intended to aid the financial markets, and continued volatility in the markets could materially and adversely affect the Corporation’s business, financial condition and results of operations, or the trading price of the Corporation’s common stock.

Recently enacted financial reform legislation may have a significant impact on the Corporation’s business and results of operations.

On July 21, 2010, the President of the United States signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act creates the Financial Stability Oversight Council, with oversight authority for monitoring and regulating systemic risk, and the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, which will have broad regulatory and enforcement powers over consumer financial products and services. The Dodd-Frank Act also changes the responsibilities of the current federal banking regulators, imposes additional corporate governance and disclosure requirements in areas such as executive compensation and proxy access, and limits or prohibits proprietary trading and hedge fund and private equity activities of banks. The scope of the Dodd-Frank Act impacts many aspects of the financial services industry, and it requires the development and adoption of many implementing regulations over the next several months and years. The effects of the Dodd-Frank Act on the financial services industry will depend, in large part, upon the extent to which regulators exercise the authority granted to them under the Dodd-Frank Act and the approaches taken in implementing regulations. Additional uncertainty regarding the effect of the Dodd-Frank Act exists due to the potential for additional legislative changes to the Dodd-Frank Act. The Corporation, as well as the broader financial services industry, is continuing to assess the potential impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on its business and operations, but at this stage, the extent of the impact cannot be determined with any degree of certainty. However, the Corporation is likely to be impacted by the Dodd-Frank Act in the areas of corporate governance, deposit insurance assessments, capital requirements, risk management, stress testing, and regulation under consumer protection laws.

Price fluctuations in securities markets, as well as other market events, such as a disruption in credit and other markets and the abnormal functioning of markets for securities, could have an impact on the Corporation’s results of operations.

As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation’s equity investments consisted of FHLB and Federal Reserve Bank stock ($96.4 million), common stocks of publicly traded financial institutions ($33.1 million), and mutual funds and other equity investments ($7.0 million). The value of the securities in the Corporation’s equity portfolio may be affected by a number of factors, including factors that impact the performance of the U.S. securities market in general and specific risks associated with the financial institution sector. Historically, gains on sales of stocks of other financial institutions had been a recurring component of the Corporation’s earnings. However, general economic conditions and uncertainty surrounding the financial institution sector as a whole has impacted the value of these securities.

11

Table of Contents

Declines in bank stock values, in general, as well as, deterioration in the performance of specific banks could result in additional other-than-temporary impairment charges.

As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation had $122.2 million of corporate debt securities issued by financial institutions. As with stocks of financial institutions, continued declines in the values of these securities, combined with adverse changes in the expected cash flows from these investments, could result in additional other-than-temporary impairment charges. Included in corporate debt securities as of December 31, 2010 were $8.3 million in pooled trust preferred securities. Further deterioration in the ability of banks, within pooled trust preferred holdings, to make contractual debt payments could result in an adverse impact on the credit-related valuation portion of these securities.

As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation had $349.6 million of municipal securities issued by various municipalities in its investment portfolio. Ongoing uncertainty with respect to the financial viability of municipal insurers places much greater emphasis on the underlying strength of issuers. Increasing pressure on local tax revenues of issuers due to adverse economic conditions could also have an adverse impact on the underlying credit quality of issuers. The Corporation evaluates existing and potential holdings primarily on the underlying credit worthiness of the issuing municipality and then, to a lesser extent, on the credit enhancement corresponding to the individual issuance. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 94% of municipal securities were supported by the general obligation of corresponding municipalities. In addition, approximately 69% of these securities were school district issuances that are supported by the general obligation of the corresponding municipalities, as of December 31, 2010.

The Corporation’s investment management and trust division, Fulton Financial Advisors, previously held student loan auction rate securities, also known as auction rate certificates (ARCs), for some of its customers’ accounts. From the second quarter of 2008 through 2009, the Corporation purchased illiquid ARCs from customers of Fulton Financial Advisors. Total ARCs included in the Corporation’s investment securities at December 31, 2010 were $260.7 million. Continued uncertainty with respect to resolution of auction rate security market illiquidity and the current low interest rate environment could adversely affect the performance of individual holdings.

The Corporation’s investment management and trust services income could also be impacted by fluctuations in the securities markets. A portion of this revenue is based on the value of the underlying investment portfolios. If the values of those investment portfolios decrease, whether due to factors influencing U.S. securities markets in general, or otherwise, the Corporation’s revenue could be negatively impacted. In addition, the Corporation’s ability to sell its brokerage services is dependent, in part, upon consumers’ level of confidence in securities markets.

If the goodwill that the Corporation has recorded in connection with its acquisitions becomes impaired, it could have a negative impact on the Corporation’s results of operations.

The Corporation has historically supplemented its internal growth with strategic acquisitions of banks, branches and other financial services companies. If the purchase price of an acquired company exceeds the fair value of the company’s net assets, the excess is carried on the acquirer’s balance sheet as goodwill. Companies must evaluate goodwill for impairment at least annually. Write-downs of the amount of any impairment, if necessary, are to be charged to earnings in the period in which the impairment occurs. Based on its annual goodwill impairment tests, the Corporation determined that no impairment charges were necessary in 2009 or 2010. During 2008, the Corporation recorded a $90.0 million goodwill impairment charge. As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation had $535.5 million of goodwill on its consolidated balance sheet. There can be no assurance that future evaluations of goodwill will not result in additional impairment charges.

The competition the Corporation faces is significant and may reduce the Corporation’s customer base and negatively impact the Corporation’s results of operations.

There is significant competition among commercial banks in the market areas served by the Corporation. In addition, as a result of the deregulation of the financial industry, the Corporation also competes with other providers of financial services such as savings and loan associations, credit unions, consumer finance companies, securities firms, insurance companies, commercial finance and leasing companies, the mutual funds industry, full service brokerage firms and discount brokerage firms, some of which are subject to less extensive regulations than the Corporation is with respect to the products and services they provide. Some of the Corporation’s competitors, including certain super-regional and national bank holding companies that have made acquisitions in its market area, have greater resources than the Corporation has and, as such, may have higher lending limits and may offer other services not offered by the Corporation.

12

Table of Contents

The Corporation also experiences competition from a variety of institutions outside its market areas. Some of these institutions conduct business primarily over the internet and may thus be able to realize certain cost savings and offer products and services at more favorable rates and with greater convenience to the customer.

Competition may adversely affect the rates the Corporation pays on deposits and charges on loans, thereby potentially adversely affecting the Corporation’s profitability. The Corporation’s profitability depends upon its continued ability to successfully compete in the market areas it serves while achieving its objectives.

The heightened, industry-wide attention associated with the processing of residential mortgage foreclosures may adversely affect the Corporation’s business.

In late 2010, the media began reporting on possible processing errors and documentation problems in mortgage foreclosures at several of the nation’s largest banks and mortgage servicing businesses. As a result of the economic downturn which began in 2008 and which persists today, larger banks and mortgage servicing companies have been challenged with processing tens of thousands of foreclosures nationwide. It has been reported that, in some foreclosures, the procedural steps (which often vary by state and in some cases by local jurisdictions within a state) required to complete a foreclosure have not been followed. As a result, there were questions concerning the validity of some foreclosures. The foreclosure procedures used by banks and servicing companies have also come under scrutiny by consumer advocates, attorneys representing borrowers, state Attorney Generals and banking regulators.

As a financial institution, the Corporation offers a variety of residential mortgage loan products. A majority of the mortgage loans originated by the Corporation are made in the Corporation’s five-state market. The Corporation also services loans owned by investors in accordance with the investors’ guidelines. A small percentage of the Corporation’s residential mortgage borrowers default on their mortgage loans. When this occurs, the Corporation attempts to resolve the default in a way that provides the greatest return to the Corporation or is in accordance with investor guidelines; typically, options are pursued that allow the borrower to remain the owner of their home. However, when these efforts are not successful, it becomes necessary for the Corporation to foreclose on the loan. Unlike larger banks and mortgage servicers, however, the Corporation analyzes whether foreclosure is necessary on a case-by-case basis and the number of residential foreclosures undertaken by the Corporation is not substantial. The Corporation only initiated approximately 400 residential foreclosure actions during 2010 for residential loans the Corporation owned or serviced for investors.

Although the number of foreclosures undertaken by the Corporation on residential mortgage loans in its portfolio or that the Corporation services for others is substantially less than those of larger banks and mortgage servicers, the Corporation has recently received inquiries from banking regulators, title insurance companies and others regarding its foreclosure procedures. As a result of these inquiries and the publicity surrounding the mortgage foreclosure area nationally, the Corporation has reviewed the requirements for foreclosures in each of the states where most of its foreclosures occur and its own foreclosure procedures. In addition, the Corporation has consulted with the law firms it uses to undertake foreclosures in each of the states in its primary markets and in other states where it has substantial mortgage lending activities regarding foreclosure procedures. The Corporation will continue to conduct such reviews and consultation. The Corporation does not expect any deficiencies that it has discovered, or which it might discover in the future, as a result of these reviews and consultations to have a material impact on the financial position or results of operations of the Corporation.

Increases in FDIC insurance premiums may adversely affect the Corporation’s earnings.

In response to the impact of economic conditions since 2008 on banks generally and on the FDIC deposit insurance fund, the FDIC changed its risk-based assessment system and increased base assessment rates. On November 12, 2009, the FDIC adopted a rule requiring banks to prepay three years’ worth of premiums to replenish the depleted insurance fund.

In February 2011, as required under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC issued a ruling pursuant to which the assessment base against which FDIC assessments for deposit insurance are made will change. Instead of FDIC insurance assessments being based upon an insured bank’s deposits, FDIC insurance assessments will generally be based on an insured bank’s total average assets minus average tangible equity. With this change, the Corporation expects that its overall FDIC insurance cost will decline. However, a change in the risk categories applicable to the Corporation’s bank subsidiaries, further adjustments to base assessment rates and any special assessments could have a material adverse effect on the Corporation.

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires that the FDIC take steps necessary to increase the level of the Deposit Insurance Fund to 1.35% of total insured deposits by September 30, 2020. In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a Restoration Plan to achieve that goal. Certain elements of the Restoration Plan are left to future FDIC rulemaking, as are the potential for increases to the assessment rates, which

13

Table of Contents

may become necessary to achieve the targeted level of the DIF. Future FDIC rulemaking in this regard may have a material adverse effect on the Corporation.

The Corporation is a holding company and relies on dividends from its subsidiaries for substantially all of its revenue and its ability to make dividends, distributions and other payments.

The Corporation is a separate and distinct legal entity from its banking and nonbanking subsidiaries, and depends on the payment of dividends from its subsidiaries, principally its banking subsidiaries, for substantially all of its revenues. As a result, the Corporation’s ability to make dividend payments on its common stock depends primarily on certain federal and state regulatory considerations and the receipt of dividends and other distributions from its subsidiaries. There are various regulatory and prudential supervisory restrictions, which may change from time to time, that impact on the ability of its banking subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other payments to it. For additional information regarding the regulatory restrictions Corporation and its subsidiaries, see “Item 1 Business - Supervision and Regulation”.

If, in the opinion of the applicable regulatory authority, a bank under its jurisdiction is engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice, such authority may require, after notice and hearing, that such bank cease and desist from such practice. Depending on the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation’s banking subsidiaries, the applicable regulatory authority might deem the Corporation to be engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice if its banking subsidiaries were to pay dividends. The Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have issued policy statements generally requiring insured banks and bank holding companies only to pay dividends out of current operating earnings. In 2009, the FRB released a supervisory letter advising bank holding companies, among other things, that as a general matter a bank holding company should inform its Federal Reserve Bank and should eliminate, defer or significantly reduce its dividends if (1) the bank holding company’s net income available to shareholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends, (2) the bank holding company’s prospective rate of earnings is not consistent with the bank holding company’s capital needs and overall current and prospective financial condition, or (3) the bank holding company will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios.

Anti-takeover provisions could negatively impact the Corporation’s shareholders.

Provisions of Pennsylvania law and of the Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of the Corporation or have the effect of discouraging a third party from attempting to acquire control of the Corporation. The Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws include certain provisions which may be considered to be “anti-takeover” in nature because they may have the effect of discouraging or making more difficult the acquisition of control over the Corporation by means of a hostile tender offer, exchange offer, proxy contest or similar transaction. These provisions are intended to protect the Corporation’s shareholders by providing a measure of assurance that the Corporation’s shareholders will be treated fairly in the event of an unsolicited takeover bid and by preventing a successful takeover bidder from exercising its voting control to the detriment of the other shareholders. However, the anti-takeover provisions set forth in the Corporation’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, taken as a whole, may discourage a hostile tender offer, exchange offer, proxy solicitation or similar transaction relating to the Corporation’s common stock. To the extent that these provisions actually discourage such a transaction, holders of the Corporation’s common stock may not have an opportunity to dispose of part or all of their stock at a higher price than that prevailing in the market. In addition, some of these provisions make it more difficult to remove, and thereby may serve to entrench, the Corporation’s incumbent directors and officers, even if their removal would be regarded by some shareholders as desirable.

The Corporation relies on its systems and certain counterparties, and certain failures could materially affect its operations.

The Corporation’s businesses are dependent on its ability to process, record and monitor a large number of transactions. If any of its financial, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, the Corporation could be materially adversely affected. Third parties with which the Corporation does business could also be sources of operational risk to the Corporation, including relating to breakdowns or failures of such parties’ own systems. Any of these occurrences could diminish the Corporation’s ability to operate one or more of the Corporation’s businesses, or result in potential liability to clients, reputational damage and regulatory intervention, any of which could materially adversely affect the Corporation.

If personal, confidential or proprietary information of customers or clients in the Corporation’s possession were to be mishandled or misused, the Corporation could suffer significant regulatory consequences, reputational damage and financial loss. Such mishandling or misuse could include, for example, if such information were erroneously provided to parties who are not permitted to have the

14

Table of Contents

information, either by fault of the Corporation’s systems, employees or counterparties, or where such information is intercepted or otherwise inappropriate taken by third parties.

The Corporation may be subject to disruptions of the Corporation’s operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond the Corporation’s control, which may include, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages, natural disasters, disease pandemics or other damage to property or physical assets or terrorist acts. Such disruptions may give rise to losses in service to customers and loss or liability to the Corporation.

The Corporation’s framework for managing risks may not be effective in mitigating risk and loss to the Corporation.

The Corporation’s risk management framework seeks to mitigate risk and loss. The Corporation has established processes and procedures intended to identify, measure, monitor, report and analyze the types of risk to which the Corporation is subject, including liquidity risk, credit risk, market risk and reputational risk, among others. However, as with any risk management framework, there are inherent limitations to the Corporation’s risk management strategies and there may exist, or develop in the future, risks that the Corporation has not appropriately anticipated or identified. If the Corporation’s risk management framework proves to be ineffective, the Corporation could suffer unexpected losses and could be materially adversely affected.

Negative publicity could damage the Corporation’s reputation.

Reputation risk, or the risk to the Corporation’s earnings and capital from negative public opinion, is inherent in the Corporation’s business. Negative public opinion could adversely affect the Corporation’s ability to keep and attract customers and expose it to adverse legal and regulatory consequences. Negative public opinion could result from the Corporation’s actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, regulatory, compliance, mergers and acquisitions, and disclosure, sharing or inadequate protection of customer information and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to that conduct. Because the Corporation conducts the majority of its businesses under the “Fulton” brand, negative public opinion about one business could affect the Corporation’s other businesses.

The Corporation may incur fines, penalties and other negative consequences from regulatory violations, possibly even inadvertent or unintentional violations.

The Corporation maintains systems and procedures designed to ensure that it complies with applicable laws and regulations. However, some legal/regulatory frameworks provide for the imposition of fines or penalties for noncompliance even though the noncompliance was inadvertent or unintentional and even though there was in place at the time systems and procedures designed to ensure compliance. For example, the Corporation is subject to regulations issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) that prohibit financial institutions from participating in the transfer of property belonging to the governments of certain foreign countries and designated nationals of those countries. OFAC may impose penalties for inadvertent or unintentional violations even if reasonable processes are in place to prevent the violations. There may be other negative consequences resulting from a finding of noncompliance, including restrictions on certain activities. Such a finding may also damage the Corporation’s reputation (see above) and could restrict the ability of institutional investment managers to invest in the Corporation’s securities.

None.

15

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes the Corporation’s full-service branch properties, by subsidiary bank, as of December 31, 2010. Remote service facilities (mainly stand-alone automated teller machines) are excluded.

The following table summarizes the Corporation’s other significant administrative properties. Banking subsidiaries also maintain administrative offices at their respective main banking branches, which are included within the preceding table.

There are no legal proceedings pending against Fulton Financial Corporation or any of its subsidiaries which are expected to have a material impact upon the financial position and/or the operating results of the Corporation.

16

Table of Contents

Common Stock

As of December 31, 2010, the Corporation had 199.1 million shares of $2.50 par value common stock outstanding held by approximately 45,000 holders of record. The closing price per share of the Corporation’s common stock on December 31, 2010 was $10.34. The common stock of the Corporation is traded on the Global Select Market of The NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol FULT.

The following table presents the quarterly high and low prices of the Corporation’s common stock and per common share cash dividends declared for each of the quarterly periods in 2010 and 2009.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

The following table provides information about options outstanding under the Corporation’s 2004 Stock Option and Compensation Plan as of December 31, 2010:

17

Table of Contents

Performance Graph

The graph below shows cumulative investment returns to shareholders based on the assumptions that (A) an investment of $100.00 was made on December 31, 2005, in each of the following: (i) Fulton Financial Corporation common stock; (ii) the stock of all U. S. companies traded on The NASDAQ Stock Market and (iii) common stock of the performance peer group approved by the Board of Directors on September 21, 2004 consisting of bank and financial holding companies located throughout the United States with assets between $6-20 billion which were not a party to a merger agreement as of the end of the period and (B) all dividends were reinvested in such securities over the past five years. The graph is not indicative of future price performance.

The graph below is furnished under this Part II, Item 5 of this Form 10-K and shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the Commission or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Not Applicable.

18

Table of Contents

5-YEAR CONSOLIDATED SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL RESULTS

(dollars in thousands, except per-share data)