1

Poised to Benefit as Market TurnsPoised to Benefit as Market Turns

July 28, 2009

2

This presentation contains forward-looking statements that relate to expectations, beliefs, projections, future plans and strategies, anticipated events or trends and similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. The forward-looking statements contained herein reflect our current views about future events and financial performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties, assumptions and changes in circumstances that may cause our actual results to differ significantly from historical results and those expressed in any forward-looking statement. Some factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from historical or expected results include: factors listed in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission; changes in general economic conditions, either nationally or locally in the areas in which we conduct or will conduct our business; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations; increases in competitive pressures among financial institutions and businesses offering similar products and services; higher defaults on our loan portfolio than we expect; changes in management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses; legislative or regulatory changes or changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines; management’s estimates and projections of interest rates and interest rate policy; the execution of our business plan; and other factors affecting the financial services industry generally or the banking industry in particular.

We do not intend and disclaim any duty or obligation to update or revise any industry information or forward-looking statements set forth in this presentation to reflect new information, future events or otherwise.

ForwardForward--Looking InformationLooking Information

3

Why WAL?Why WAL?� Right time, right place, right management team

� Management track record of building franchise value in down markets and realizingshareholder value in good markets

• Expansion through strong organic growth and acquisitions

� Located in desirable markets with solid long term growth prospects

• #4 market share in Nevada, #11 in Arizona and #11 in San Diego

� Attractive commercial banking business

• Low cost and growing deposit base with a high percentage of non-interest bearing deposits

• Ability to expand by attracting seasoned bankers with long-standing relationships

� Proactive in dealing with challenges

• Credit performance better than regional peers

� Attractive valuation

� Limited exposure to additional securities impairment charges and goodwill write-offs

4

� Financial Highlights (as of 6/30/09)

� Assets: $5.7 Billion

� Loans: $4.0 Billion

� Customer Funds: $4.7 Billion

� Tang. Common: $437 Million

� TARP Preferred: $140 Million

� 41 branches across 5 bank subsidiaries in 3 states (AZ, CA, and NV)

� Avg. deposits per branch: $107 Million

� 26 branches less than 5 years old

� Successfully built through de-novo start-ups and acquisitions

� 1 FDIC assisted transaction

� 3 whole bank acquisitions

� 3 de novo start-ups

� 2 asset manager acquisitions

� 1 trust co. acquisition157

889

804

443

$2,107

Deposits

CA

CA

AZ

NV

NV

State

791032Alta Alliance Bank

1277077Torrey Pines Bank

7368811Alliance Bank of Arizona

743656First Independent Bank of Nevada

$140$2,21015Bank of Nevada

Deposits/ BranchLoansBranches(Dollars in millions)

Current SnapshotCurrent Snapshot

AZ

CA

NV

UT

Tucson

Phoenix

Bank of Nevada

Las Vegas

First Independent Bank of Nevada

Alta Alliance Bank

Oakland

San Diego

Torrey Pines Bank

Alliance Bank of Arizona

Reno

5

Experienced Management TeamExperienced Management Team

186,800United Bank Arizona25+Asset MgmtDennis Miller

119.171Sun State, First Interste25+No. NevadaGrant Markham

19,435Korn/Ferry, Wells Fargo25+No. CaliforniaArnold Grisham

40,000MBNA & DuPont25+PartnersFirstHal Erskine

59,077Cal. Bank & Trust25+So. CaliforniaGary Cady

123,033Natl Bank Arizona25+ArizonaJim Lundy

28,5261st Sec, Amer. Comrce25+So. NevadaBruce Hendricks

70,813Zions, Ahmanson25+CAOMerrill Wall

137,327Natl Bank Arizona25+CCODuane Froeschle

72,299Zions, First Interstate25+CFODale Gibbons

2,616,744Zions, SW Val. Partners25+Chair & CEORobert Sarver

Shares*PreviousYearsTitleMember

*Excludes unexercised options and warrants

6

Proactive in Dealing with ChallengesProactive in Dealing with Challenges

� Avoided subprime and condominium conversions

� Limited residential land and gaming exposure

� Held in-house single project lending limit to $15 million despite increase in legal lending limit to over $100 million during the past five years

� Anticipated R.E. downturn in ‘06 and began identifying and eliminating weakest credits

� Conservative underwriting with mean LTVs at origination of 41% on resi. land and 62% for homes

� Addressed securities portfolio concerns through aggressive writedowns

� Raised $80 million of equity through two private placements in 2008

� In November 2008, added $140 million of TARP preferred to strengthen the balance sheet

� Completed $200 million common equity raise in May of 2009

Credit

Securities

Capital

Book Value Mkt. Value

Private Label MBS

AAA 17.0 15.5

A/BBB 12.0 10.2

29.0 25.7

Publicly Traded ARPS

Bank of America 5.9 13.6

Zions 3.4 4.5

Morgan Stanley 2.2 2.9

11.5 21.0 Trust Preferred

JP Morgan 30.1 15.3

State Street 2.0 1.2

CDO's ($31 million current) 4.0 0.9

36.1 17.4

Municipals - AAA/BBB (17 issuers) 20.9 20.8

Total 97.5 84.9

7

� Flexibility and responsiveness

� Deeper market knowledge

� Local decision making

� Top management access

� Strong local boards of directors

� Significant employee and board

ownership

� Broader, more sophisticated

product and service array

� Lower funding cost

� Larger credit capacity

� Higher visibility / more offices

� Experienced professionals,

large bank expertise

Over Large National Banks

Competitive AdvantagesCompetitive Advantages

Over Small Community Banks

8

Balanced Loan CompositionBalanced Loan Composition

Residential,

15%Commercial,

19%

Consumer, 2%

Non-Owner

Occupied CRE,

32%

Owner-

Occupied CRE,

32%

Clark NV, 49%

Maricopa AZ,

5%

San Diego CA,

12%

Washoe NV,

7%Pima AZ, 10%

Bay Area, 4%

Other, 13%

Office, 20%

Residential

Land, 17%Retail, 19%

Commercial

Land, 20%

Warehouse,

11%

Multi-Family,

9% Other, 4%

Total Loan Composition Non-Owner Occupied CRE Loans (by Location)

Non-Owner Occupied CRE Loans (by Type)Total Loans ($ in millions)

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

$4,000

$4,500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2Q09

Total Loans

$1,793

$3,003

$3,633

$4,096 $4,029

9

Curtailing NPA MigrationCurtailing NPA Migration

0

25,000

50,000

75,000

100,000

125,000

150,000

175,000

200,000

Mar

-07

Jun-

07

Sep-

07

Dec

-07

Mar

-08

Jun-

08

Sep-

08

Dec

-08

Mar

-09

Jun-

09

Non-Accrual + OREO30+ Days Past Due (Leading Indicator)

10

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

$4,000

$4,500

$5,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2Q09

Total Deposits

Savings &

Money Market

38.8%

Non-Interest

Bearing

Demand

25.2%

Interest

Bearing

Demand

6.7%

Time Deposits

29.2%

� High proportion of noninterest bearing demand deposits provides strong, low-cost funding base for wide margins

2005 – 2009Q2 Total Deposit CAGR – 18.9%

Deposit Trends ($ in millions)Deposit Composition - 6/30/09

Attractive Deposit FranchiseAttractive Deposit Franchise

$2,394

$3,400$3,547

$3,652

$4,392

740

11

DDA Now/MMA/Sav CDs

75 to 90

50 to 75

25 to 50

10 to 25

40.6

53.0

47.4

27.6

33.9

45.6

42.9

62.4

54.6

30.3

36.1

29.2

13.4

22.5

18.4

4.7

10.0

25.2

Percentile

Peer Comparison: Deposit MixPeer Comparison: Deposit Mix

6/30/09

Peer group comprised of 80 publically held holding companies with assets

between $3 and $10 billion at March 31, 2009

12

6.3%

3.7%

17.5%

20.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

NV AZ San Diego U.S.

Arizona Deposit Market Share

Positioned to Take Market SharePositioned to Take Market ShareJune 30, 2008, $ in millions June 30, 2008, $ in millions

Nevada Deposit Market Share

San Diego Deposit Market Share Projected Population Growth (’08 – ’13)

Rank Institution Deposits Share (%)

1 Bank of America 9,683 26.42 Wells Fargo 9,172 25.03 Zions Bancorp 4,808 13.14 Western Alliance 2,388 6.55 U.S. Bancorp 1,760 4.86 Citibank 1,491 4.17 JPMorgan Chase 1,361 3.78 Community Bancorp 1,256 3.49 Colonial BancGroup 683 1.910 Irwin Financial 457 1.2

Total 36,702 100.0

Rank Institution Deposits Share (%)

1 JPMorgan Chase 19,804 26.72 Wells Fargo 17,302 23.33 Bank of America 16,176 21.84 Zions Bancorp 3,975 5.45 Compass 3,000 4.06 Marshall & Ilsley 2,907 3.97 Meridian 1,544 2.18 Capitol Bancorp 789 1.19 Northern Trust 753 1.010 U.S. Bancorp 699 0.911 Western Alliance 657 0.9

Total 74,211 100.0

Rank Institution Deposits Share (%)

1 Wells Fargo 10,601 22.72 Bank of America 8,550 18.33 JPMorgan Chase 7,506 16.14 Mitsubishi 4,313 9.35 Zions Bancorp 2,455 5.36 FBOP Corp. 2,057 4.47 U.S. Bancorp 2,008 4.38 Citibank 1,240 2.79 PacWest Bancorp 1,025 2.210 Comerica 637 1.411 Western Alliance 540 1.2

Total 45,715 100.0

2,550

804

2Q09

2Q09

2Q09

889

13

# 97$ 5,2673/31/09

# 158$ 2,85712/31/05

# 333$ 87212/31/02*

RankAssets (millions)Date

WAL Balance Sheet GrowthWAL Balance Sheet Growth

Western Alliance Rank Among Public Western Alliance Rank Among Public Banks & ThriftsBanks & Thrifts

* WAL IPO on 6/30/05

14

4.404.36

4.24 4.27

3.843.78

3.54

4.50

3.42

3.64

3.20

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

2005 2006 2007 2008 1Q09*

Strong, Stable Margin PremiumStrong, Stable Margin Premium

Western Alliance

Publicly held banks, assets $3b-$10b

56 bps

85 bps

*note: WAL margin reflects 1H09, peers 1Q09

15

Peer Comparison: Interest MarginPeer Comparison: Interest Margin

Earning Assets Cost of Funding Interest Margin

75 to 90

50 to 75

25 to 50

10 to 25

4.8

5.0

5.2

5.5

6.1

5.9

1.2

1.6

1.9

2.5

2.8

1.6

2.4

2.8

3.3

3.8

4.44.3

Percentile

6/30/09

Peer group comprised of 80 publically held holding companies with assets

between $3 and $10 billion at March 31, 2009

16

Improved Capital Position Improved Capital Position -- WALWAL

$732$576Total Capital

15.7%12.3%Total Capital

11.7%8.9%Tier I Leverage

9.4%5.9%Tier I Common RBC

7.7%5.3%TCE Ratio

$613$457Tier I Capital

$437$270Tangible Common

6/30/0912/31/08(millions)

17

Tang Common Equity Tier 1 Leverage Total Capital

75 to 90

50 to 75

25 to 50

10 to 25

4.0

5.1

6.5

7.9

9.5

7.7

6.3

7.9

8.9

10.2

11.211.7

10.8

11.9

13.6

14.9

16.2

15.7

Percentile

Peer Comparison: CapitalPeer Comparison: Capital

6/30/09

Peer group comprised of 80 publically held holding companies with assets

between $3 and $10 billion at March 31, 2009

18

� Conducted capital stress test modeled after the Supervisory Capital Assessment Program required of 19 largest domestic institutions with assets over $100 billion

� Employed maximum presumed two-year loan loss rate under the “More Adverse” scenario, which resulted in 10% cumulative losses when weighted by our loan mix

� Tier I Common Risk-Based Capital ratio remained above 6% after stress at 12/31/10, required level of 4%

� Actual first half 2009 loan loss rate of 2.4% annualized, or less than half the presumed loss rate for the two year period 2009 - 2010

� Tier I Common RBC ratio estimated to remain above 9% at 12/31/10, if future losses continue at same level incurred during first half 2009

SCAP Stress Test HighlightsSCAP Stress Test Highlights

19

� Continued strong operating performance: growing franchise, enviable deposit mix, stable margin, increasing cash flow

� Cleaned up investment portfolio, mark to market gain at 6/30/09, first time since IPO

� Demonstrated superior loan underwriting, credit performance metrics

� Capable of withstanding dramatically increased losses, during exceptional stress scenario from strong operating cash flow and capital position

� Well positioned to leverage distressed environment, acquisition of experienced relationship managers, financial institutions

� Valuation at tangible book, not inflated by unrecognized securities losses

Solid Tsunami WALSolid Tsunami WAL

20

�Large national banks

�Out-of-footprint regionals

�Small local banks

Competitors Under Pressure Growth Opportunities

� Attempting to consolidate recent deals or preoccupied with internal issues

� Lending at relative standstill at local business level

� Dealing with layoffs and restructuring

� Regulatory pressures

� Retreat from markets due to lack of local knowledge, risk aversion

� Balance sheet stress / credit

� Capital outlets drying up

� Customer acquisitions

� Banker team acquisitions

� Better lending terms

� Improve operating efficiency

� Failed bank / deposit acquisitions

� Opportunistic acquisitions of stressed but not failing institutions

� Population growth and density / economic recovery

� The marketplace is rich with opportunities for WAL

Landscape of OpportunitiesLandscape of Opportunities

21

July 28, 2009