ITRON, INC.

2111 N. Molter Road

Liberty Lake, Washington 99019

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON MAY 10, 2018

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Itron, Inc. (Itron or Company) will be held at the Houston Marriott Marquis Hotel in the Kingwood Room, at 1777 Walker Street, Houston, Texas, 77010, at 4:00 p.m., local time, on Thursday, May 10, 2018, for the following purposes:

The Board of Directors has established the close of business on March 5, 2018 as the record date for the determination of shareholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the annual meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

Members of the Company’s management will not make any formal presentation as part of the annual meeting, but will be available to address questions from shareholders, as appropriate. In addition, we expect all of our director nominees together with those directors continuing in office will attend the annual meeting.

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE SHAREHOLDER ANNUAL MEETING TO BE HELD ON MAY 10, 2018:

Our proxy statement is attached. Financial and other information concerning Itron is contained in our Annual Report to Shareholders for the 2017 fiscal year. The proxy statement and our Annual Report are available for all shareholders at www.edocumentview.com/ITRI

Your vote is very important. To ensure representation at the annual meeting, shareholders are urged to vote as promptly as possible. To vote your shares, please refer to the voting instruction form on the website noted above, or review the section titled “Quorum and Voting” beginning on page two of the accompanying proxy statement. Any shareholder attending the annual meeting may vote in person even if that shareholder has returned a proxy.

Liberty Lake, Washington

March 23, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROXY STATEMENT

This proxy statement is being furnished to shareholders of Itron, Inc. in connection with the solicitation by our Board of Directors of proxies for use at the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The meeting will be held in the Kingwood Room of the Houston Marriott Marquis Hotel, located at 1777 Walker Street, Houston, Texas, 77010, at 4:00 p.m., local time, on Thursday, May 10, 2018, for the purposes listed in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The Company’s principal executive office is at 2111 North Molter Road, Liberty Lake, Washington 99019.

Internet Availability of Annual Meeting Materials

Our proxy materials will be available for you to access over the Internet. On or about March 29, 2018, we will mail to our shareholders a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (Notice) directing shareholders to the website provided on the Notice where they can access our proxy materials and view instructions on how to vote via the Internet or by phone. The Notice will also provide instructions for obtaining paper copies of the proxy materials and a proxy card, if requested by a shareholder.

The following proxy materials will be available for you to review online:

Proposals to Be Voted On at the Annual Meeting

At the annual meeting, we will consider and vote on the following proposals:

Record Date and Outstanding Shares

Holders of record of our common stock at the close of business on March 5, 2018, are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the annual meeting. On the record date, there were 39,122,512 shares of our common stock outstanding. Each outstanding share of our common stock will entitle its holder to one vote on each of the three directors to be elected and one vote on each other matter to be voted on at the annual meeting. Each of our directors and executive officers intends to vote or direct the vote of all shares of common stock over which he or she has voting control in favor of: (1) the election of the nominees for director; (2) the advisory approval of the compensation we paid our named executive officers in 2017; and (3) the ratification of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent registered public accountant.

1

Quorum and Voting

Each shareholder is entitled to one vote per share of common stock held on each matter to be voted on. The presence at the annual meeting, in person or by proxy, of holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock on the record date will constitute a quorum. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” (shares held by a broker or nominee who does not have the authority, express or discretionary, to vote on a particular matter) on any of the proposals to be voted on will be counted only for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum.

You may vote your shares in one of several ways, depending on how you own your shares.

Registered Shareholders (Shares held in your name)

Registered shareholders can vote in person, by Internet, by telephone, or by mail, by casting their vote as follows:

Beneficial Shareholders (Shares held in the name of a broker, bank or other holder of record on your behalf)

If your shares are held in the name of a broker, bank, or other nominee or holder of record, follow the voting instructions on the voting instruction form provided to you by the holder of record to vote your shares.

Proposal One – Election of Directors: Each nominee for director is elected by the vote of the majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election (meaning the number of votes cast “for” a nominee must exceed the number of votes cast “against” such nominee). Holders of common stock are not entitled to cumulative votes in the election of directors. Abstentions from voting on this matter will not be counted. Brokers and other holders of record do not have discretionary voting authority to vote your shares in the election of directors, absent voting instructions from you. Therefore, if you are a beneficial shareholder and do not provide voting instructions on proposal number one to the holder of record for your shares, they will not be voted in the election of directors.

Proposal Two – Say-on-Pay Vote (non-binding): The non-binding advisory vote on this proposal will be approved if the majority of votes cast are in favor of the proposal (meaning the number of votes cast “for” the proposal must exceed the number of votes cast “against” the proposal). Abstentions from voting on this matter will not be counted. Brokers and other holders of record do not have discretionary voting authority to vote your shares for this proposal, absent voting instructions from you. Therefore, if you are a beneficial shareholder and do not provide voting instructions on proposal number two to the holder of record for your shares, they will not be voted on this proposal.

Proposal Three – Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditor: The appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accountant for 2018 will be ratified if the majority of the votes cast are in favor of the proposal (meaning the number of votes cast “for” the proposal must exceed the number of votes cast “against” the proposal). Abstentions from voting on this matter will not be counted. Brokers and other holders of record do have discretionary authority to vote shares on this matter. Therefore, there will be no broker non-votes on the ratification of the Company’s independent registered public accountant.

Unless contrary instructions are specified, if the proxy is completed and submitted (and not revoked) prior to the annual meeting, the shares represented by the proxy will be voted as follows: (i) FOR proposals one, two, and three; and (ii) in accordance with the best judgment of the named proxies on any other matters properly brought before the annual meeting.

2

Revocability of Proxies

Shares represented at the annual meeting by properly signed proxies will be voted at the annual meeting in accordance with the instructions given in the proxy. A shareholder may revoke a proxy at any time before the vote. Mere attendance at the annual meeting will not revoke a proxy. A proxy may be revoked only by:

If the annual meeting is postponed or adjourned for any reason, at any subsequent reconvening of the annual meeting, all proxies will be voted in the same manner as the proxies would have been voted at the original convening of the annual meeting (except for any proxies that have at that time effectively been revoked or withdrawn).

Proxy Solicitation

For the 2018 annual meeting, we have retained Innisfree M&A Incorporated to aid in the solicitation of proxies. We will bear the cost of such solicitation of proxies, which we estimate will be approximately $10,000, plus expenses. Proxies may be solicited by personal contact, mail, email, telephone, or facsimile. In addition, we may reimburse brokerage firms and other persons representing beneficial owners of our common stock for their reasonable expenses in forwarding solicitation materials to the beneficial owners. Our directors, officers, and employees may also solicit proxies personally or by telephone, without additional compensation.

3

PROPOSAL 1 – ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Board of Directors (Board) is divided into three classes, with each director holding office for a three-year term or until his or her successor has been duly elected and qualified, or until his or her death, resignation or removal from office. At the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (Annual Meeting), shareholders are being asked to re-elect three Class 2 directors for terms of three years or until their death, resignation or removal from office or their successors are duly elected and qualified. Unless authority is withheld, the persons named as proxies will vote for the election of the nominees listed below. If any of the nominees become unavailable to serve, the persons named as proxies will have discretionary authority to vote for a substitute nominee.

Our Board has nominated the following persons for election to the Board. Each nominee is currently a director and has indicated that he is willing and able to continue to serve as a director.

Class 2 (to serve until the 2021 annual meeting)

Philip C. Mezey

Daniel S. Pelino

Timothy M. Leyden

We have concluded that each of the nominees for re-election, as well as the other directors who will continue in office, have the skills, experience, knowledge, and personal attributes that are necessary to effectively serve on our Board. As described below in their biographies and the section “Director and Director Nominee Qualifications” that follows, the qualifications of our directors and director nominees support our conclusion that each of the individuals should serve as a director in light of our current business operations and structure.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE FOR

THE ELECTION OF EACH OF THE THREE NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR.

MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OUR DIRECTORS

Retiring Directors – Class 1 – Decrease in Size of Board

Kirby A. Dyess, age 71, and Peter Mainz, age 53, have been directors of Itron since 2006 and 2016, respectively, and their current terms will expire at the Annual Meeting. Both notified the Board that they will not stand for re-election to the Board and will retire at the Annual Meeting. We recognize and appreciate the exemplary dedication and long-time service to the Company by Ms. Dyess and Mr. Mainz during their tenures on the Board. Upon their retirement at the Annual Meeting, the Board of Directors will be reduced from eleven to nine members.

Nominees to Serve until 2021 (Class 2)

Philip C. Mezey (age 58) has been a director since 2013. Effective January 1, 2013, he was elected Itron’s President and Chief Executive Officer, and was previously President and Chief Operating Officer of Itron’s Energy segment from March 2011 until December 31, 2012. Mr. Mezey joined Itron in March 2003 as Managing Director of Software Development for Itron’s Energy Management Solutions Group as part of Itron’s acquisition of Silicon Energy Corp., where he had most recently served as its Senior Vice President of Product Development and Strategy. Mr. Mezey was promoted to Group Vice President and Manager of Software Solutions in 2004. In 2005, he became Senior Vice President Software Solutions, and in 2007 Mr. Mezey became Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Itron North America.

Mr. Mezey brings to the Board more than thirteen years of experience in research and development, manufacturing, and business development for metering software and related services. While at Silicon Energy Corp., he managed the marketing department and was directly involved with a number of mergers and acquisitions prior to Itron’s acquisition of that company. During his tenure at Itron, he has had extensive exposure to international systems and utilities throughout the world, and, as the only employee director, Mr. Mezey provides the Board with valuable insight into management’s views and perspectives, as well as the day-to-day operations of Itron.

4

Daniel S. Pelino (age 60) has been a director since November 2014. Mr. Pelino retired from International Business Machines Corp., the multinational technology company (NYSE: “IBM”) in November 2016, where he had been employed since 1980, most recently as General Manager of IBM’s public sector business, a position he had held since 2012. The public sector business focused on government, education, healthcare and life sciences industries, including IBM’s Smarter Cities initiative. While at IBM, Mr. Pelino held several other positions of escalating responsibility focused on helping organizations, states, and countries transform and digitize their technology systems. Mr. Pelino currently serves on the executive committee for the Patient Centered Primary Care Collaborative and on the board of directors of the Healthcare Executive Network.

Mr. Pelino provides the Board with a strong background in technology, brand marketing, and business innovation and development. With his worldwide experience in governmental business and strategies, he brings a current global business perspective to the Board. In addition, Mr. Pelino’s knowledge of digitized services created for economic development adds invaluable insight to the Company’s smart metering systems and strategies for its utility customers.

Timothy M. Leyden (age 66) has been a director since March 2015. Mr. Leyden retired in 2015 after eight years with Western Digital Corporation (NASDAQ: “WDC”), a company that manufactures hard-disk drives used to record, store, and recall volumes of data. He served as WDC’s Chief Financial Officer from 2013 until January 2015, President of Western Digital, one of WDC’s two operating subsidiaries, from 2012 to 2013, its Chief Operating Officer from 2010 to 2012, and its Executive Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer from 2007 to 2010. Prior to joining WDC, Mr. Leyden was Vice President and then Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer for Sage Software PLC, a customized software solutions business, from 2001 to 2007. Mr. Leyden serves on the board of directors of Oakgate Technology, Inc., a privately-held company that provides test, validation and benchmarking products and services to the storage industry. He also serves on the board of directors of Virtium LLC, a private company that provides storage and memory innovation for various imbedded industrial segments.

Mr. Leyden brings to the Board a mix of financial and operational experience (in both hardware and software industries), in addition to a background that includes mergers and acquisitions and integration experience related to the assimilation of acquired companies into both WDC and Sage Software. His prior experience with overseeing global manufacturing, engineering, marketing, and sales operations, when combined with his financial and accounting background, adds a depth of international insight to the Board.

Directors Continuing in Office until 2019 (Class 3)

Lynda L. Ziegler (age 65) has been a director since February 2013 and was elected Vice Chair of the Board in April 2015, and then Chair of the Board in September 2016. In September 2012, Ms. Ziegler retired from Southern California Edison (SCE), one of the largest electric utilities in the U.S. (and a customer of Itron), whose parent is Edison International. During her tenure at SCE, she held various management positions related to customer program offerings, customer service, development, communication and implementation of energy efficiency programs, marketing and communication of smart meters, and generally led all aspects of delivering power to almost 5 million customers. From 2006 to 2011, Ms. Ziegler was Senior Vice President of Customer Service, and from January 1, 2011 until her retirement in September of 2012, she served as Executive Vice President of Power Delivery Services, where she was responsible for transmission and distribution construction and maintenance, customer service, information technology (IT), and support services including procurement and real estate management. In the past, she has served on the advisory committee for power delivery and utilization at the Electric Power Research Institute and was a founding member of the Board of the Association for Women in Water and Energy.

Ms. Ziegler brings to the Board her extensive background with public utilities, especially with her recent responsibilities in the industry related to smart meters and customer relations from the utility perspective. Her breadth of knowledge of software services, transmission and distribution construction and maintenance, IT, and business development adds to the diverse business backgrounds of our other members of the Board.

5

Thomas S. Glanville (age 59) has been a director since May 2001. Since 2003, Mr. Glanville has been the Managing Partner of Eschelon Advisors, LP and affiliates, providing energy and private equity investment and advisory services. From 1999 to 2002, Mr. Glanville served as Vice President of Technology and New Ventures for Reliant Energy, Inc., one of the world’s largest international energy services companies, and its affiliate, Reliant Resources, Inc. In September 2015, he was appointed to the board of directors of Mitcham Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ: “MIND”), a publicly traded technology company for the oceanographic, hydrographic, defense, seismic, and security industries, where he also serves as chair of the board’s audit committee. He currently serves on the board of directors of a privately-held oil and gas exploration and production company, Strand Energy, LLC. He served as Chairman of the Texas TriCities Chapter of the National Association of Corporate Directors (Houston, Austin, San Antonio) from 2011 through 2016.

Mr. Glanville brings to the Board financial expertise, industry-related experience through his association with Reliant Energy, energy sector exposure through the Eschelon entities and Mitcham Industries, and technology skills that include his involvement with electric metering studies and research while he was Vice President of Technology and New Ventures for Reliant Energy.

Diana D. Tremblay (age 58) has been a director since May 2015. In September 2017, Ms. Tremblay retired from General Motors Company, the motor vehicle manufacturer and distributor multinational corporation (NYSE: “GM”). She had been with that company since 1977, and during her tenure at GM, she held a variety of positions in engineering, manufacturing and labor relations, including direct operational responsibility for over 50,000 employees. From July 2013 to her retirement, Ms. Tremblay served as Vice President of Global Business Services, where she was charged with streamlining administrative processes around the world to improve service quality, reduce complexity, and achieve cost efficiencies in such areas as finance, human resources, real estate, purchasing, asset management, and master data. From December 2009 to July 2013, Ms. Tremblay held the position of Vice President of Manufacturing at GM.

Ms. Tremblay brings to the Board her broad business experience that includes her previous roles at GM as an engineer, plant manager, head of manufacturing, and lead labor relations negotiator, which together with her knowledge of business services and global manufacturing processes, provide additional international, administrative and manufacturing perspectives to the Board.

Directors Continuing in Office until 2020 (Class 1)

Jerome J. Lande (age 42) has been a director since December 2015. Mr. Lande joined Scopia Capital Management LP (Scopia), an asset management firm and one of Itron’s principal minority shareholders, as the Head of Special-Situation Investments in April 2016 and currently serves as a Partner at Scopia. He was previously the Managing Partner of Coppersmith Capital Management LLC (Coppersmith), an asset management firm focused on equity investing in small to mid-cap markets and in long-term value creation, which he co-founded in April 2012. Prior to co-founding Coppersmith, Mr. Lande was a partner of MCM Capital Management, LLC, the general partner of MMI Investments, LP, a small-cap investment fund founded in 1996 to employ private equity investing methodologies in public equities, and where Mr. Lande oversaw research, trading and activism from 1998 to 2011. Prior to that time, he was associated with other equity investment firms where he was directly involved with corporate development as well as equity growth. Mr. Lande is a member of the board of directors of CONMED Corporation (NASDAQ: “CNMD”), a public global medical technology company, where he also serves on the compensation and strategy committees.

Mr. Lande brings to the board financial and investing acumen gained through his many years of experience at several equity investment firms, including his current employer Scopia (and affiliates), who is a principal minority shareholder of the Company.

Frank M. Jaehnert (age 60) has been a director since May 2015. From 1995 to his retirement in 2013, Mr. Jaehnert held several roles with Brady Corporation (NYSE: “BRC”), a publicly traded manufacturer and marketer of complete solutions that identify and protect premises, products and people. These roles included President and Chief Executive Officer from 2003 to 2013, Senior Vice President and President of a business line

6

from 2002 to 2003, and Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 1996 to 2001. Prior to joining Brady Corporation, Mr. Jaehnert held various financial and management positions for Robert Bosch GmbH, a German multinational engineering and electronics company. Mr. Jaehnert serves on the board of directors of Nordson Corporation (NASDAQ: “NDSN”), which he joined in 2012, and Briggs & Stratton Corporation (NYSE: “BGG”), which he joined in 2014. NDSN and BGG are both publicly traded large manufacturing companies. Mr. Jaehnert also serves on the audit committees of both BGG and NDSN.

Mr. Jaehnert has extensive, broad-based international business and executive management and leadership experience. Mr. Jaehnert’s diverse background, his experience with geographic expansion and acquisitions, as well as his experience serving on other public company boards bring valuable perspectives to the Board.

Gary E. Pruitt (age 68) has been a director since 2006. In 2010, Mr. Pruitt retired as Chairman of Univar N.V. (Univar), a multi-national chemical distribution company based in Bellevue, Washington, and retired as Chief Executive Officer in October 2009. Before joining Univar in 1978, Mr. Pruitt was a chartered accountant with Arthur Andersen from 1973 through 1977. Mr. Pruitt is a member of the board of directors of Public Storage, Inc. (a real estate investment trust specializing in self-storage facilities) (NYSE: “PSA”) and PS Business Parks, Inc. (a full service real estate company) (NYSE: “PSB”). Mr. Pruitt is a Lead Independent Trustee of PSA and also serves as a member of its audit committee and nominating/corporate governance committee. He also is a member of the audit committee of PSB.

Mr. Pruitt brings to the Board his experience as a chief executive officer of a multi-national company and all the business attributes required of that position, along with operational and manufacturing expertise through his various other management positions held with Univar. His public accounting financial background and other public board experiences provide strategic and global perspectives on our business as well.

Director and Director Nominee Qualifications

Our Corporate Governance Committee assists the Board in reviewing the business and personal background of each of our directors with respect to our business and business goals. Our skill criteria for our Board members includes a person who adheres to and demonstrates the highest ethical standards and integrity, in addition to the following: executive leadership experience; functional knowledge of technology and technology applications; international business experience; knowledge of the utility and energy industry; marketing and sales experience; financial experience gained from a chief financial officer position, a CPA, or other financial reporting background; expertise in manufacturing or software services; experience as an independent board member with a public company; knowledge and experience of executive compensation and benefits; and experience in business integrations, including mergers and acquisitions. In addition, we look for the following personal criteria: an effective negotiator, listener, and team player; a visionary with a strategic and global perspective; a successful leader with a proven record of accomplishments; a problem-solver; an effective decision-maker; and a person who will take a strong interest in the Company.

Our Corporate Governance Committee generally considers diversity as one of several factors relating to overall composition when making nominations to our Board. Although we do not have a formal policy governing how diversity is considered, the Corporate Governance Committee generally considers diversity by examining the entire Board membership and, when making nominations to our Board, reviewing the diversity of the entire Board. The Corporate Governance Committee construes Board diversity broadly to include many factors, including, but not limited to, gender, age, and ethnicity. As a result, the Corporate Governance Committee strives to ensure that our Board is represented by individuals with a variety of different opinions, perspectives, personal, professional, and industry experience and backgrounds, skills, and expertise. Currently, of the eight independent directors on our Board who are nominees or continuing on the Board after the Annual Meeting, three are either former Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) or former Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), three are under the age of 60, six have global business experience, and two are women, including our Board Chair.

7

When the Corporate Governance Committee considers candidates to be recommended to the Board for inclusion on the slate of director nominees for the next annual meeting of shareholders, it creates a matrix for each candidate to address our criteria. The following matrix summarizes the skills and attributes of our directors and director nominees for 2018 that we believe are essential to our business:

Director Qualifications and Attributes

We have concluded that all of our directors, including the nominees for re-election, have the skills, experience, knowledge, and personal attributes that are necessary to effectively serve on our Board and to contribute to the overall success of our Company. We believe that the diverse background of each of our Board members ensures that we have a Board that has a broad range of industry-related knowledge, experience, and business acumen. See also “CORPORATE GOVERNANCE – Director Nominations by Shareholders” in this proxy statement.

COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS

In 2017, the Company increased the aggregate annual retainer for our Board Chair by $20,000, with the increase equally divided between cash and equity compensation. Except for the compensation paid to the Board Vice Chair and the Value Enhancement Committee members, both of which were established in 2015, as described below, the compensation paid to our non-employee directors has remained the same since 2011. Both equity and cash compensation were determined using benchmark data from our peer companies provided by the Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant, Frederic W. Cook & Co. (F.W. Cook).

Director Fees. Our non-employee directors (other than our Board Chair and Vice Chair, if any) receive an aggregate annual retainer equal to $165,000, with $65,000 paid in cash and $100,000 paid in shares of our common stock. For our Chair, the aggregate annual retainer is equal to $250,000, with $120,000 paid in cash and $130,000 paid in shares of our common stock. For our Vice Chair, if any, the aggregate annual retainer is equal to $200,000, with $100,000 paid in cash and $100,000 paid in shares of our common stock. Members of the Audit/Finance Committee and the Value Enhancement Committee receive an additional annual retainer of $10,000 paid in cash, and members of our Compensation and Corporate Governance Committees receive an additional annual retainer of $6,500 and $5,000, respectively, paid in cash. The committee Chairs for the

8

Corporate Governance and Compensation Committees receive an additional annual retainer of $15,000, and the Chairs of the Audit/Finance Committee and Value Enhancement Committee receive an additional annual retainer of $20,000, all paid in cash in quarterly installments. Our Board Chair receives no additional retainers for serving on any of our committees. See “LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS” in this proxy statement for more information on the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board.

New non-employee directors receive a grant of restricted stock units (RSUs) equal in value to $32,500, which is 50% of the annual cash retainer for directors other than the Board Chair and Vice Chair, if any. Upon election to the Board, the non-employee directors’ RSUs vest in equal installments on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of grant. Shares of our common stock and RSUs granted to non-employee directors are issued under our Second Amended and Restated 2010 Stock Incentive Plan (Second A&R 2010 Plan).

In 2014, the Board adopted a policy that permits a director age 65 or older to elect to receive all of his or her retainer in cash, provided they continuously meet the stock ownership guidelines described in the following paragraph.

Stock Ownership Guidelines. Since 2006, we have maintained stock ownership guidelines for our non-employee directors. We expect our directors to accumulate shares equal to five times their annual cash retainer within five years from their initial appointment or election as a director, or to be making progress towards meeting the guidelines. For our Board Chair that equates to a value of $600,000, for our Vice Chair, if any, that equates to a value of $500,000, and for the other directors, it equates to a value of $325,000. All of our non-employee directors currently comply with these ownership guidelines, with the exception of Peter Mainz who joined the Board within the last three years.

Deferred Compensation Plan. Pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated Executive Deferred Compensation Plan dated January 1, 2012, our non-employee directors are eligible to participate in that plan, and may defer up to 100% of any director fees and 100% of any shares of common stock that he or she anticipates receiving into a nonqualified account.

2017 Director Compensation Table (for all non-employee Directors)

9

LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The leadership of our Board is managed by our Board Chair. Our Corporate Governance Guiding Principles (Governance Principles) require the role of Board Chair to be held by an independent director who meets the independence requirements of NASDAQ. The Board believes having separate roles of Board Chair and CEO allows for a more balanced workload between the Board Chair and the CEO, especially in light of the current duties and responsibilities of the Board Chair, which include the following:

10

Pursuant to the Governance Principles, the Board Chair must be an independent director unless the Board determines that the best interests of shareholders would otherwise be better served. The Board Chair is elected by the members of the Board following the annual meeting of shareholders (or at such other time as a vacancy for the role of Board Chair may occur). The Board Chair serves for a term of three years (provided such director is re-elected by shareholders if his or her term as a director does not coincide with his or her term as Board Chair). The Board Chair may not serve more than two consecutive terms, unless the Board approves an extended term. Our current Chair, Lynda L. Zeigler, is serving her first term that will expire at the 2019 annual meeting.

If the Board determines that it is in the best interests of the shareholders to combine the roles of CEO and Board Chair, the Board will appoint a Lead Independent Director with the duties set forth in the Governance Principles.

Since February 2015, our Governance Principles have provided for the role of Vice Chair, to be held by an independent director who meets the independence requirements of NASDAQ, unless the Board determines that the best interests of shareholders would otherwise be better served. As stated in the Governance Principles, the Vice Chair is appointed by the members of the Board and serves for a term to be determined by the Board (provided such director is re-elected by shareholders if his or her term as a director does not coincide with his or her term as Vice Chair). At the 2016 annual meeting after the elevation of Lynda L. Zeigler from Vice Chair to Chair, the Board chose to leave the position of Vice Chair vacant.

The Vice Chair, who like the Board Chair may serve on Board committees, has the following duties and responsibilities:

The current Governance Principles, as amended, may be found online at www.itron.com by selecting “Investors” and then “Corporate Governance.”

See “CORPORATE GOVERNANCE” in this proxy statement for additional information on our Board.

11

PROPOSAL 2 – ADVISORY APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (Say-on-Pay)

We are asking our shareholders to approve a non-binding advisory resolution on the Company’s executive compensation programs for our Named Executive Officers (NEOs) (commonly known as “say-on-pay”) as we have described them in this proxy statement. Although this advisory vote is non-binding, the Board and the Compensation Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote when considering future compensation decisions for our executives. As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) section of this proxy statement, we believe our compensation programs are reasonable, competitive and strongly focused on pay-for-performance principles that will result in the creation of long-term shareholder value. Some of the features of our compensation programs that illustrate our philosophy are:

We believe our executive compensation policies have enabled us to retain and attract exceptional senior executives whose talent and experience have helped Itron become a leader in our industry. Our Compensation Committee (and the independent members of the Board for CEO compensation), which provides overall direction for our compensation programs, believes the fiscal year 2017 compensation paid to our NEOs is reasonable and appropriate and adequately reflects the Company’s overall performance in 2017.

12

Shareholders are encouraged to read the full details of our executive compensation programs as described in the Executive Compensation section of this proxy statement.

For the reasons provided above, we recommend that the shareholders vote in favor of the following resolution:

RESOLVED, that the shareholders approve, on a non-binding advisory basis, the compensation of the Company’s NEOs, as disclosed in the Executive Compensation section of the Company’s proxy statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (which disclosure includes the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A), the Executive Compensation Tables, and the accompanying footnotes and narratives within the CD&A section of the proxy statement).

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION OF OUR NEOs.

13

PROPOSAL 3 – RATIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT

The Board, upon the recommendation of its Audit/Finance Committee, has selected Deloitte & Touche LLP to serve as the Company’s independent registered public accountant for the 2018 fiscal year, subject to ratification by our shareholders. Although not required to do so, the Board is submitting the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP for ratification by the Company’s shareholders for their views on the Company’s independent registered public accountant and as a matter of good corporate practice. Deloitte & Touche LLP has advised the Company that it has no direct, nor any material indirect, financial interest in the Company or any of its subsidiaries. Representatives of Deloitte & Touche LLP are expected to be present at the Annual Meeting, will have the opportunity to make a statement, if they desire to do so, and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

In the event that our shareholders fail to ratify the selection, it will be considered as a direction to the Board and the Audit/Finance Committee to consider the selection of a different firm. Even if the selection is ratified, the Audit/Finance Committee in its discretion may select a different independent registered public accounting firm, subject to ratification by the Board, at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interest of the Company and our shareholders.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE FOR THE RATIFICATION

OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP AS OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED

PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT FOR THE 2018 FISCAL YEAR.

14

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate Governance Guiding Principles

The Company’s Governance Principles are available on the Company’s website, www.itron.com, by selecting “Investors” and then “Corporate Governance.”

Board Matters – Meeting Attendance

Our business, property, and affairs are managed under the direction of our Board. Members of our Board are kept informed of our business through discussions with our CEO and other officers, by reviewing materials provided to them, by visiting our offices, and by participating in meetings of the Board and its committees.

In accordance with our Governance Principles, directors are expected to attend the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders. All but one of our directors attended the 2017 annual meeting of shareholders in person or by telephone. During 2017, the Board met sixteen times. All of the directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and committees on which he or she served.    

Also in accordance with our Governance Principles, our independent directors meet in an executive session as often as necessary, but no less than four times annually.

Director Independence

Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ stock exchange. Under the rules of NASDAQ, independent directors must comprise a majority of a listed company’s board of directors. In addition, the rules of NASDAQ require that, subject to specified exceptions, each member of a listed company’s audit, compensation, and nominating and corporate governance committees be independent. Under the rules of NASDAQ, a director will only qualify as an “independent director” if that company’s board of directors determines that the person does not have a relationship that would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.

As recommended by the Corporate Governance Committee, the Board has determined that a majority of our Board are independent directors as defined under the rules of NASDAQ and the SEC, with Mr. Mezey serving as the sole non-independent director. As Mr. Mezey does not sit on any committees, and as recommended by the Corporate Governance Committee, the Board has determined that all members of Itron’s committees are independent under SEC rules and NASDAQ listing standards.    In addition, as recommended by the Corporate Governance Committee, the Board has determined that all members of our Audit/Finance Committee are independent under Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act.

Committees of the Board

We have four committees to assist the Board in fulfilling its responsibilities: Corporate Governance, Audit/Finance, Value Enhancement, and Compensation. Each of the four committees operates under a written charter that has been approved by the Board. The committee charters are reviewed annually and are updated as necessary to reflect changes in regulatory requirements and evolving oversight practices. In 2017, with the exception of the Value Enhancement Committee, all of the committee charters were amended, as described below, and all four of the current committee charters are available on our website, www.itron.com, by selecting “Investors” and then “Corporate Governance.”

15

The following table shows the current membership of each committee at the end of fiscal 2017:

Our sole employee director, Philip C. Mezey, does not sit on any committees.    

Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee (CGC) is responsible for developing and implementing our Governance Principles, evaluating the performance of our Chair of the Board and the CEO, as well as the other directors and the Board as a whole, soliciting recommendations for candidates for the Board, determining the qualification of the directors serving on the Board, making recommendations to the Board regarding the independence of the directors serving on the Board, recommending candidates to serve on the Board, and reviewing and making recommendations to the Board with respect to candidates for directors proposed by shareholders. To assist the committee in its identification of qualified director candidates, it has historically engaged an outside search firm and may do so in the future. The CGC also reviews the compensation paid to our directors and makes recommendations to the Board on director fees and other compensation payable to the Board members.

The Board amended the CGC’s charter in December 2017 to remove the responsibility of reviewing succession plans for the CEO and key executives as this is done by the full Board.    All of the members of the CGC are independent under SEC rules and NASDAQ listing standards. The CGC held five meetings during 2017.    

Audit/Finance Committee. The Audit/Finance Committee (AFC) monitors our borrowings and capital structure, accounting policies, internal controls over financial reporting, and financial results, and reviews at least quarterly our business financial risks to determine if management and our internal controls are identifying and mitigating risks associated with our business operations. In addition, the AFC determines the compensation of our independent auditors, and makes recommendations to the Board to retain or terminate our independent auditors. The Board has determined that all members of the AFC are independent under SEC rules and NASDAQ listing standards, including Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act.

The Board amended the AFC’s charter in 2017 to reorganize current functions to reflect order of importance and added a periodic review of critical accounting policies to the AFC’s responsibilities. The CGC has determined that all of the current members of the Audit/Finance Committee are financially literate in accordance with the Standards of NASDAQ Rule 5605(c)(2)(A)(iv), and “audit committee financial experts” as defined in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K. The AFC held eight meetings during 2017.

Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee (CC) is responsible for making recommendations to the Board for our CEO’s total annual and long-term incentive compensation, and for setting compensation levels for our other executive officers. The CC also oversees the administration of various incentive compensation and benefit plans, which includes an annual evaluation of our compensation plans and policies. The CC, when appropriate, may form and delegate authority to subcommittees and may delegate authority to one or more designated members of the Board or to Company officers.

16

The Board amended the CC’s charter in December 2017 to remove the responsibility of reviewing executive and management development plans. The Board has determined that all members of the CC are independent under SEC rules and NASDAQ listing standards. In addition, all CC members are “non-employee directors” under Section 16b-3 of the Exchange Act and “outside directors” for the purposes of Section 162 (m) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The CC held nine meetings during 2017. See “EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION – CD&A” in this proxy statement for more information on the CC’s responsibilities regarding the compensation of our executives.

Value Enhancement Committee. The Value Enhancement Committee (VEC) reviews, studies and develops potential initiatives and transactions designed to create durable, sustainable long-term shareholder value. The VEC is charged with making recommendations to the Board regarding actions to be considered in furtherance of the committee’s purpose. The Board has determined that all members of the VEC are independent under SEC rules and NASDAQ listing standards. The VEC held six meetings in 2017.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

No member of our Board’s Compensation Committee has served as an officer or employee of the Company. None of our executive officers serve as a member of the compensation committee of any other company that has an executive officer serving as a member of our Board. None of our executive officers serve as a member of the board of directors of any other company that has an executive officer serving as a member of our Board’s Compensation Committee.

Transactions with Related Persons

There were no related person transactions required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K in fiscal year 2017. In order to determine this, the Board requires our executive officers, directors or director nominees to disclose certain information regarding related person transactions. A “related person transaction” generally is a transaction (including any indebtedness or a guarantee of indebtedness) that involves the Company’s directors, executive officers, director nominees, 5% or more beneficial owners of the Company’s common stock, immediate family members of these persons, or entities in which one of these persons has a direct or indirect material interest. The current threshold required to be disclosed under SEC regulations is $120,000. Under its charter, the Corporate Governance Committee of the Board has been delegated with the responsibility of reviewing and approving any related person transactions.

Our Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

The Board has overall responsibility for risk oversight, including, as part of regular Board and committee meetings, general oversight of our executives’ management of risks relevant to the Company. The Board routinely determines, directly or through Board committees, that: (i) there are adequate processes designed and implemented by Company management such that risks have been identified and are being managed; (ii) the risk management processes are intended to ensure that Company risks are taken into account in corporate decision-making; and (iii) the risk management processes and procedures ensure that material risks to the Company are brought to the attention of the Board or an appropriate committee of the Board. Each of the Company’s risk management processes are reviewed periodically (but at least once a year) by either the Board or an appropriate committee to which the Board has delegated specific oversight responsibility, as described below. Throughout the year, the Board and each committee spend a portion of their time reviewing and discussing specific risk topics. Committee Chairs regularly report to the full Board on actions taken at committee meetings. At least annually, the Board conducts a review of our long-term strategic plans, and at each of our quarterly meetings, our General Counsel updates the Board on material legal and regulatory matters.

The Audit/Finance Committee is responsible for reviewing our major financial risk exposures, financial reporting, internal controls, credit and liquidity risk, compliance risk, and key operational risks. It meets regularly with our independent auditors and in executive session to facilitate a full and candid discussion of risk and other issues. Our Compensation Committee is responsible for overseeing compensation risks, including assessing

17

possible risks from our compensation plans and policies for our executives and ensuring that our executive compensation is aligned with Company performance. The Compensation Committee reviews a summary and assessment of such risks annually and in connection with discussions of various compensation elements and benefits throughout the year. Our Corporate Governance Committee oversees risks related to our overall corporate governance, including Board and committee composition, Board size and structure, and our director independence. The Corporate Governance Committee reviews our Governance Principles annually pursuant to its charter.

Following a review of the Company’s current risk management systems and processes, the Board has concluded that the current allocation of oversight responsibilities between the Board and its committees is adequate, provided that the committees continue to coordinate their risk oversight responsibilities, share information appropriately with the other Board members, and provide timely and adequate reports to the full Board. The Board continually evaluates its risk oversight role.

Code of Conduct

The Company has adopted a Code of Conduct that applies to all directors, officers, and employees of the Company and any subsidiary of the Company and is available on the Company’s website, www.itron.com, by selecting “Investors” and then “Corporate Governance.” In addition, we have adopted policies and procedures for reporting and investigating suspected violations of the Code of Conduct. The Company intends to satisfy any future disclosure requirement under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K regarding an amendment to or waiver from application of the code of ethics or provisions of the Code of Conduct, that applies to the CEO or the CFO, by posting such information on our website, www.itron.com.

Anti-Hedging Policy

The Company has adopted an Anti-Hedging Policy that prohibits our directors, officers, and employees from entering into transactions involving our securities that are designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of Itron securities. See “EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION – CD&A – Anti-Hedging Policy” in this proxy statement for more information on this policy.

Incentive Repayment (Clawback) Policy

The Company has adopted a repayment or “clawback” policy, which provides that if a bonus or equity award (Award) is paid that is conditioned on meeting certain financial metrics, and, subsequently, there is a required financial restatement, which had the correct information been known at the time would have resulted in a lower Award, then the Board has the right to demand repayment of the excess amount of the Award, net of taxes, from an executive officer who has received an Award. If the Board (or its delegated committee) determines that fraud has resulted in a material financial restatement, it is required that the Board demand repayment from the executive officer engaged in the fraud of the full Award, net of taxes.

Director Nominations by Shareholders

In accordance with the Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws, in order to nominate a director for election to the Board at an annual meeting of shareholders, a shareholder must deliver written notice of such nomination to the Corporate Secretary of the Company at the Company’s executive offices no fewer than 60 days nor more than 90 days prior to the date of the annual meeting (or if less than 60 days’ notice or prior public disclosure of the date of such annual meeting is given or made to the shareholders, not later than the tenth day following the day on which notice of the date of the annual meeting was mailed or public disclosure was made). The notice of a shareholder’s intention to nominate a director must include:

18

and the following information with respect to the person nominated by the shareholder:

Other directors and senior management of the Company may also recommend director nominees for consideration by the Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee evaluates director nominees, including nominees that are submitted to the Company by a shareholder, taking into consideration the qualification criteria set forth under “ELECTION OF DIRECTORS – Director and Director Nominee Qualifications” in this proxy statement. In the event of a shareholder recommendation, the Corporate Governance Committee screens and evaluates the person recommended in the same manner as other candidates. In addition, the Corporate Governance Committee determines if the proposed director nominee will have sufficient time available to carry out his or her Board duties and responsibilities effectively. The Corporate Governance Committee may then recommend the director candidate to the Board for its consideration, if deemed appropriate.

Shareholder Communications with the Board

The Company’s Board provides a process whereby shareholders may contact the Board or any committee as a group or any committee Chair or individual director, by email addressed to boardofdirectors@itron.com. Shareholders should clearly specify in each communication the name of the director to whom the communication is addressed. Shareholders may also write to the Board or any committee as a group or any committee Chair or individual director by sending the communication to: Itron, Inc., Attn: Corporate Secretary, 2111 N. Molter Road, Liberty Lake, WA 99019. Communications may also be submitted through our website at www.itron.com by selecting “Investors,” “Corporate Governance,” and then “Contact the Board.”

Shareholder communications are delivered directly to the Corporate Secretary of the Company, who then determines whether to forward such communications to the specified director addressees. You can access a description of the process that the Corporate Secretary uses for determining whether to forward shareholders’ communications to directors at our website, www.itron.com, by selecting “Investors,” “Corporate Governance,” and then “Contact the Board.”

Shareholders wishing to submit proposals for inclusion in the proxy statement relating to the 2019 annual shareholders meeting should follow the procedures specified under “SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS FOR THE 2019 ANNUAL MEETING” in this proxy statement. Shareholders wishing to nominate directors should follow the procedures specified under “CORPORATE GOVERNANCE – Director Nominations by Shareholders” in this proxy statement.

19

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Discussion & Analysis (CD&A)

This CD&A explains our executive compensation program for our named executive officers (NEOs) listed below. The CD&A also describes the process followed by the Compensation Committee of the Board (referred to as the Compensation Committee or the Committee in this CD&A) for making pay decisions, as well as its rationale for specific decisions related to 2017.

Executive Summary

Business Performance

In 2017, we improved our business results compared to 2016 driven by higher sales of our smart solutions and continued focus on our Company objectives for improved predictability, profitability, and growth. We exceeded Company targets for non-GAAP earnings per diluted share⁽¹⁾ (EPS), while annual revenue remained roughly the same. We incurred higher costs in the second half of 2017 as we implemented changes in our supply chain, and we fell short on our earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (Adjusted EBITDA)⁽¹⁾⁽²⁾ management target. These measurements are all strongly embedded in our executive compensation program:

These financial results reflect our continued operational transformation, including the implementation of global sourcing projects. The transition of our global supply chain will provide long-term flexible capacity and lower costs, while driving our core business objectives of predictability, profitability, and growth. During this time, our executive leadership team also remained focused on the Company’s strategic vision to be a leading partner with utilities in the resourceful delivery and use of energy and water. The Company took additional steps to invest in the internet of things (IoT) and networking capabilities to reduce operating expenses and create new revenue opportunities. The 2017 acquisitions of Comverge, Inc. and Silver Spring Networks, Inc. were of significance —

20

further advancing our strategy of delivering highly-secure, value-generating solutions for utilities, smart cities, and the broader industrial IoT sector. These achievements demonstrate our executive leadership’s balanced approach to driving long-term growth in addition to near-term financial improvements at a time when our industry dynamics are changing.

Compensation Highlights

Our executive compensation program has three primary elements: base salary, annual cash incentives (as part of our Executive Management Incentive Plan (EMIP)), and long-term equity incentives (as part of our Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP)). Each of these compensation elements serves a specific purpose in our compensation strategy. Base salary is an essential component to any market-competitive compensation program. Annual incentives reward the achievement of short-term goals, while long-term incentives drive our NEOs to focus on shareholder value creation. Based on our performance and consistent with the design of our program, the Compensation Committee made the following executive compensation decisions for fiscal 2017:

These payouts are aligned with the Company’s business performance in 2017. The Compensation Committee believes that the design and structure of the Company’s incentive program provide a direct link between Company performance and pay outcomes for the executives, as described in greater detail in the following section.

Linking CEO Pay and Performance

A key component of our executive compensation philosophy is the link between compensation and overall business results and shareholder value creation. We strive to clearly communicate this to our shareholders and believe that looking at realizable pay in different contexts can illustrate this point effectively:

CEO Realizable Pay versus Pay Opportunity. Many of the required disclosures concerning CEO compensation discuss pay elements or opportunities that may be earned by the CEO. Realizable pay, on the other hand, more closely considers actual compensation earned (or earnable) based on performance. To illustrate the differences, we compared pay opportunity to realizable pay on a year-by-year basis over the past three years; for this purpose, we use the following definitions:

Pay opportunity represents:

21

Realizable pay represents:

The chart below illustrates Mr. Mezey’s realizable pay compared to his pay opportunity, as well as the corresponding year-end stock price for the last three years.

CEO Realizable Pay for Performance Relative to Peer Group. To provide another perspective, it is also helpful to understand the degree of alignment between CEO realizable pay and performance relative to our peer companies. See “Our Decision Making Process – The Role of Peer Companies” in this CD&A for a list of the peer companies. To evaluate this alignment, we analyzed the relationship between realizable total direct compensation (TDC) for the CEO over 2014-2016 for the peer companies and for the Company, and TSR for the three years ended December 31, 2016. This time period was selected because it was most closely aligned with the compensation information available for our peer group companies for the years that Mr. Mezey has been our CEO.

For this purpose, realizable TDC is defined as the sum of:

22

The chart below illustrates the percentile ranking of our three-year TSR and Mr. Mezey’s realizable TDC relative to our peer companies. As the chart indicates, during the three-year period our TSR performance was above the median of the peer companies and Mr. Mezey’s realizable TDC was also above the median. Mr. Mezey’s realizable TDC was within an “alignment corridor” representing a strong correlation between compensation and performance.

Best Compensation Practices & Policies

We also believe the following practices and policies promote sound compensation governance and are in the best interests of our shareholders and executives:

2017 Say-On-Pay & Shareholder Engagement

Each year, we carefully consider the results of our shareholder say-on-pay vote from the preceding year. We also take into account the feedback we receive from our major shareholders, which is solicited by the Chair of the Board, and the Chair of the Compensation Committee, either in person or via telephone.

23

In 2017, approximately 95% of the votes cast supported our executive compensation decisions. Since 2012, the Board has regularly conducted proactive outreach meetings with the company’s largest shareholders. During 2017, the Company offered meetings to shareholders representing 45% of shares outstanding, and directors met with shareholders representing 15% of shares outstanding to discuss topics including Company strategy and performance, governance, and executive compensation. Overall, our shareholders are highly supportive of our executive compensation program and its direction. Based on the positive feedback we received from our major shareholders, in addition to the vote result in 2017, we did not make substantive changes to the structure of our program. We will continue to keep an open dialogue with our shareholders to help ensure that we have a regular pulse on investor perspectives.

What Guides Our Program

Our Compensation Philosophy & Objectives

The philosophy underlying our executive compensation program is to employ the best leaders in our industry to ensure we execute on our business goals, promote both short-and long-term profitable growth of the Company, and create long-term shareholder value, all grounded in the following guiding principles:

24

The Principal Elements of Pay: Total Direct Compensation (TDC)

Our compensation philosophy is supported by the following principal pay elements:

25

Pay Mix

The charts below show the target TDC of our CEO and our other NEOs for fiscal 2017. These charts illustrate that a majority of NEO TDC is variable (84% for our CEO and an average of 71% for our other NEOs).

Our Decision Making Process

The Role of the Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee oversees the executive compensation program for our NEOs. The Committee is comprised of independent, non-employee members of the Board. The Committee works very closely with its independent consultant and management to examine the effectiveness of the Company’s executive compensation program throughout the year. Details of the Committee’s authority and responsibilities are specified in the Committee’s charter, which may be accessed at our website, www.itron.com, by clicking “Investors,” and then “Corporate Governance.”

The Committee makes all final compensation and equity award decisions regarding our NEOs, except for the CEO, whose compensation is determined by the independent members of the full Board, based upon recommendations of the Committee.

The Role of Management

Members of our management team attend regular meetings where executive compensation, Company and individual performance, and competitive compensation levels and practices are discussed and evaluated. Only the Committee members are allowed to vote on decisions regarding NEO compensation.

The CEO reviews his recommendations pertaining to other executives (non-NEO) pay with the Committee providing transparency and oversight. Decisions on non-NEO pay are made by the CEO. The CEO does not participate in the deliberations of the Committee regarding his own compensation. Independent members of the Board make all final determinations regarding CEO compensation.

The Role of the Independent Consultant

The Committee engages an independent compensation consultant to provide expertise on competitive pay practices, program design, and an objective assessment of any inherent risks of any programs. Pursuant to authority granted to it under its charter, the Committee has hired F.W. Cook as its independent consultant. F.W. Cook reports directly to the Committee and does not provide any additional services to management. The Committee has conducted an independence assessment of F.W. Cook in accordance with SEC rules.

The Role of Peer Companies

For some of our direct competitors who are not publicly held, or are smaller business units within a conglomerate, there is limited compensation information available. As a result, our peer companies for purposes

26

of benchmarking executive compensation (Peer Companies) generally consist of direct competitors for which public information is available, who are part of the same broad Standard & Poor’s (S&P) industry classifications of technology hardware and equipment or in software and services, and who are similar in size and scope of global operations as Itron. The Committee reviews the Peer Companies on an annual basis.

For the purposes of setting 2017 compensation, and with the support of F.W. Cook, the Committee did not make any changes to the Peer Companies. Note that due to acquisition by MicroChip technology in April 2016, Atmel Corporation was eliminated.

For each of the Peer Companies, data regarding base salaries, annual incentives, and long-term incentives was obtained from their annual proxy statements and reviewed by the Committee’s compensation consultant, Pearl Meyer. This data was supplemented with survey data prepared by Radford Survey & Consulting (Radford Survey), which provides compensation market information on more than 700 technology companies, aggregated and presented anonymously. The Radford Survey data was narrowed to those technology companies with revenues between $1 billion and $3 billion, similar to Itron.

With the support of F.W. Cook, the Committee evaluates this data for informational purposes when establishing a range of competitive compensation for our NEOs. For each NEO, the Committee determines the salary range, annual incentive target, and long-term incentive taking into consideration market data for the position being evaluated. However, market data is not the sole determinant of the Company’s practices or executive compensation levels. The Committee also takes into account the experience, performance, responsibilities, and contributions to the Company by each NEO when making its decisions. For the CEO, the Committee makes a recommendation to the full Board, and the independent members of the Board review and approve the CEO’s compensation.

27

The 2017 Executive Compensation Program in Detail

Base Salary

Base salary represents annual fixed compensation and is a standard element of compensation necessary to attract and retain executive leadership talent. In making base salary decisions, the Committee considers the CEO’s recommendations, as well as each NEO’s position and level of responsibility within the Company. The Committee takes into account factors such as relevant market data as well as individual performance and contributions. The Committee approved the CEO recommended annual base salary rate, and the independent members of the Board approved the CEO annual base salary rate as follows:

Annual Cash Incentives: The Executive Management Incentive Plan (EMIP)

The 2017 EMIP provided our NEOs the opportunity to earn a performance-based annual cash bonus. Actual bonus payouts depend on the achievement of pre-established performance objectives and can range from 0% to 180% of target award amounts. Target annual bonus opportunities are expressed as a percentage of base salary and were established by the NEO’s level of responsibility and his or her ability to impact overall results. The Committee also considers market data in setting target award amounts. 2017 target award opportunities remained unchanged from 2016 target award opportunities and were as follows:

2017 Performance Objectives. An individual NEO’s EMIP award is based on a combination of financial and strategic objectives.

28

In 2017, we used total Company consolidated revenue and Adjusted EBITDA as the financial performance metrics in the EMIP because we believe it is important to focus on both top line growth (revenue), as well as profitability. Total Company Adjusted EBITDA provides a more useful illustration of our financial performance and the ongoing operations of our business, since the adjustments exclude certain expenses that are not indicative of our recurring core operating results. This facilitates better comparisons to our historical performance and our competitors’ operating results. To continue our focus on profits and sales performance, the weighting of the financial performance objectives (which represent 80% of a NEO’s EMIP award) for 2017 was 70% total Company Adjusted EBITDA and 30% total Company consolidated revenue. A schedule reconciling Adjusted EBITDA to net income and non-GAAP EPS to GAAP EPS is available on page 41 of our 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Each year, the Committee reviews the financial performance and considers adjustments for items that are not reflective of normal operating performance for that year. These adjustments are items that the Committee believes are fair to both participants and shareholders, encourage appropriate actions that foster the long-term health of the business, and are consistent with the objectives underlying our predetermined performance goals. Such exclusions may consist of the costs and financial effects of restructuring, acquisitions and dispositions, selected legal costs and settlements, and the effects of foreign currency translation.

2017 Financial Performance Levels & Results. The following table shows the performance necessary to achieve threshold, target and maximum bonus payout amounts, along with actual results for 2017:

Note: Payouts are linearly interpolated for performance between threshold, target and maximum.

2017 Strategic Goals & Achievements. The strategic goals for the NEOs, as determined in consultation with the CEO and reviewed with the Committee, generally encompass objectives as they relate to both the individual business segments and the entire Company. For 2017, they were developed to continue to strengthen our operational results through objectives that align to predictability, profitability, and growth.

Approved strategic goals included meeting return on invested capital targets, growth in Software and Services revenue and margin, cost of non-quality targets, improvement in predictability of quarterly financial results, and new hire goals focused on diversifying and broadening our organizational talent capabilities. The Company achieved partial results on goals relating to predictability in results and diversifying and refreshing organizational talent. The Company missed the goal related to growth in Software and Services revenue and margin, but fully achieved specific strategic goals relating to return on invested capital and cost of non-quality.

2017 EMIP Results and Payouts. The following table summarizes the financial and strategic performance results for 2017:

29

Based on the above results, the following table lists the actual awards and bonuses paid to the NEOs in 2017:

Long-Term Incentives

The NEOs are eligible for long-term incentives, all of which were issued under the terms of our A&R 2010 Plan or Second A&R 2010 Plan. For fiscal year 2017, long-term incentives were granted as follows:

2017 Target Long-Term Incentive Award Grants. The table below shows the long-term incentive award values granted for fiscal 2017 for each of the NEOs, which remained unchanged from 2016 values, except with respect to Ms. Votava who received an additional $50,000 in value as a result of benchmarking compensation data provided by F.W. Cook:

30

A Closer Look at Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units (PRSUs). The actual number of PRSUs that are earned and vested are based on the achievement of specific financial performance goals and relative TSR results. Specifically, actual awards are linked to a three-year performance period that consists of three annual performance cycles. The performance result used to determine the actual award earned is calculated at the end of the three-year performance period by averaging the results of the three annual performance cycles, then is adjusted based on performance relative to TSR as compared to the Russell 3000 Index.

2017 Performance Metrics: Non-GAAP EPS & Relative TSR. PRSUs are driven by the achievement of non-GAAP EPS and relative TSR performance targets.

Note: The non-GAAP EPS results shown are based on financial results as reported for 2015, 2016, and 2017 (as reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017). Performance for levels achieved between threshold, target, and maximum are linearly interpolated.

31

Note: Adjustments for levels achieved between the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles are linearly interpolated.

For the 2017 PRSUs, the TSR targets and point multipliers were all established in February 2017 by the Committee and by the independent members of the full Board for the CEO.

PRSUs Earned and Vested In 2017 (1/1/2015 – 12/31/2017). In 2015, the NEOs at that time were granted their target PRSUs with vesting based on achievement of the non-GAAP EPS and relative TSR performance targets for 2015, 2016, and 2017 as outlined above. The actual award earned was calculated at the end of the three-year performance period by averaging the results of the three annual performance cycles:

Consistent with the terms of the LTIP, the average performance attainment for the 2015-2017 PRSUs was then adjusted upward by 123% since our TSR was at the 72^nd percentile of the Russell 3000 index. As a result, the NEOs (other than who was not employed at Itron in 2015) earned 111.07% of their target PRSUs for the 2015-2017 performance cycle, as follows:

Other Practices, Policies and Guidelines

Stock Ownership Guidelines

We believe that when our executives hold an equity interest in the Company, they will be less inclined to take excessive business risks. We maintain stock ownership guidelines to encourage our key executives to own stock at least equal in value to:

Common stock, vested and unvested restricted shares, the net after-tax value of unexercised vested and unvested stock options, and stock held in the deferred compensation, 401(k) and the Employee Stock Purchase plans all

32

count towards satisfaction of the guidelines. Additionally, participants are required to retain 50% of net profit shares from all stock acquired upon exercise or vesting unless the guideline level is achieved. Net profit shares are defined as the number of shares of stock acquired after payment of (i) in the case of options, any exercise price and tax withholding upon exercise, or (ii) in the case of restricted stock or restricted stock units, tax withholding upon vesting. We annually review the levels of stock ownership of our executives, and, based on a rolling 12-month average of our stock price as of the end of 2017, all of our NEOs have met the guidelines, with the exception of Ms. Hooper who joined the Company within the last year and is making progress towards her goal. We also have stock ownership guidelines for the members of our Board.

Anti-Hedging Policy

We prohibit the NEOs and other executives from engaging in transactions designed to insulate them from changes in the Company’s stock price. Therefore, the Company has an Anti-Hedging Policy that prohibits our NEOs from entering into transactions that include (without limitation) equity swaps or short sales of our securities, margin accounts or pledges of our securities, and hedges or monetization transactions involving our securities that are designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of Itron securities. In addition, the purchase or sale of puts, calls, options, or other derivative securities based on the Company’s securities is prohibited under this policy, and borrowing against any account in which our securities are held is prohibited.

Change-in-Control Agreements

We have entered into change-in-control agreements with our executives to encourage their full attention and dedication to the Company in the event of a change-in-control of the Company, and to provide them with reasonable compensation and benefits in the event of a change-in-control and a subsequent loss of employment. All equity awards granted have “double trigger” requirements before vesting upon a change-in-control. See “EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES – Potential Payments upon Change-in-Control” in this CD&A for descriptions of the benefits provided under the change-in-control agreements.

Employment Agreements; Severance Policy

We do not have formal employment agreements with our executives. However, we do have an Executive Severance Policy for our executives that provides severance pay equal to one year’s base salary, employer benefit premium payments or reimbursements for one year, and outplacement assistance provided there is a release of claims, non-disparagement, and confidentiality agreement with the executive. In addition, the executive must enter into a one-year non-compete agreement, where enforceable.

In 2017, in connection with their roles, both Ms. Hooper and Mr. Farrow became participants under the Company’s Executive Severance Policy and also entered into indemnification agreements in the form customary for the Company’s officers and directors.

Incentive Repayment (Clawback) Policy

Under our Incentive Repayment (Clawback) Policy, in the event of a restatement of the Company’s financial results, the Compensation Committee, as designated by the Board, may review all cash or equity incentive awards that were based in whole or in part on the achievement of certain financial results.

Where award(s) were predicated, in part or in whole, upon the achievement of certain financial results that were subsequently the subject of a material financial restatement and, as determined by the Compensation Committee, the executive(s) engaged in fraud that caused or partially caused the need for the restatement, the Compensation Committee will seek forfeiture or reimbursement to the Company of the award(s) from the executive(s) engaged in fraud in full, net of tax. If a material financial restatement was not due to fraud, the Compensation Committee may review the circumstances and, in its discretion to the extent practicable and allowable under applicable laws, determine to require forfeiture or reimbursement to the Company of the amount of the award(s) that exceeded the lower amount, payment or value that would have been made based on the restated financial results, net of tax.

33

Any recoupment under this policy may be in addition to, and shall not otherwise limit, any other remedies that may be available to the Company under applicable law, including disciplinary actions up to and including termination of employment.

Executive Deferred Compensation

Executives located in the U.S. are eligible to participate in our Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (EDCP). We offer the EDCP to our highly-compensated employees to give them the benefit of being able to defer some of their taxable income, which also encourages their retention with the Company. Participants may defer up to 50% of their base salary and annual cash incentive into a nonqualified account.

Executives are also permitted to elect to defer an additional portion of their base salary under the EDCP equal to the amount of any contributions returned to them during the year from the Company’s 401(k) Plan. In 2017, the Company made matching contributions to the account of each participating executive at the rate of 75% of the first 6% of base salary and annual incentive deferred by the executive during that year, which is the same matching formula as the Company’s 401(k) Plan. The employer match into the EDCP starts after the employee reaches IRS limits on the 401(k) Plan and is no longer eligible for the 401(k) match. The executives’ account balances are adjusted for hypothetical investment earnings or losses according to the returns of the specified “measurement funds” selected by the executives. The measurement funds correspond to the mutual funds available for investment under the 401(k) Plan (but currently do not include a Company stock fund).

See “EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES – 2017 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table” in this CD&A for more details.

General Benefits and Perquisites

Our NEOs receive the same benefits as our U.S. based salaried employees generally, including medical and dental benefits, group term life insurance, and short- and long-term disability protection. Itron also has relocation policies and benefits in place that may be applicable if an employee is required to move or has long term extended business travel to a new location.

401(k) Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan

Executives located in the U.S. are eligible to participate in our 401(k) Plan which provides our employees, including executives, with a 75% Company match on the first 6% of compensation deferred, subject to qualified plan limits. Similarly, executives located in the U.S. may participate in the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan, along with our other U.S. employees.

We do not maintain any defined benefit or supplemental retirement programs for our NEOs.

2017 Risk Assessment

It is our belief that a majority of an executive’s total compensation should be variable “at risk” compensation, meaning it is tied to the Company’s financial performance. However, because performance-based incentives play a large role in our compensation program, we strive to ensure that incentives do not result in actions that may conflict with the long-term best interests of the Company and our shareholders. Therefore, the Committee evaluated all of our plans and policies (applicable to executives and employees below the executive level) in December 2017 for attributes that could cause excessive risk-taking. We concluded that our programs and policies do not encourage excessive risk-taking because: (a) the salary component of our program is a fixed amount; (b) the majority of the average compensation paid to our executive officers is delivered in the form of equity ownership, which aligns the interest of our executives with those of our shareholders; (c) executive officers are subject to our executive stock ownership guidelines; and (d) the annual cash-based incentive plan and long-term incentive plans are designed with risk-mitigating characteristics such as (i) maximum award payouts based on the attainment of various and continually evolving Company financial objectives which diversify risks

34

associated with a single indicator of performance, (ii) our equity-based incentives encourage a longer-term focus through multi-year performance periods, (iii) our risk-mitigating policies in place such as insider trading and hedging prohibitions and clawbacks, and (iv) review and approval of final awards by our Committee (and the independent members of the full Board in the case of the CEO), which is composed entirely of independent directors who have discretion under our plans to approve, modify, or eliminate any award earned.

CEO Pay Ratio

For 2017, the annual total compensation of our CEO was 124 times that of the median of the annual total compensation of all employees, based on annual total compensation of $5,884,658 for the CEO and $47,538 for the median employee. This calculation is based on employee population of 6,922 as of October 1, 2017. The median employee was identified using base pay, overtime pay, short-term incentives, and long-term incentive grant date fair values using data for the twelve months ended September 30, 2017.

Annual total compensation for both the CEO and the median employee was calculated in accordance with Item 402(c)(2)(x) of Regulation S-K. This pay ratio is a reasonable estimate calculated in a manner consistent with SEC rules based on our payroll and employment records and the methodology described above. The SEC rules for identifying the median compensated employee and calculating the pay ratio based on that employee’s annual total compensation allow companies to adopt a variety of methodologies, to apply certain exclusions, and to make reasonable estimates and assumptions that reflect their compensation practices. As such, the pay ratio reported by other companies may not be comparable to the pay ratio reported above, as other companies may have different employment and compensation practices and may utilize different methodologies, exclusions, estimates and assumptions in calculating their own pay ratios.

Impact of Tax and Accounting

We regularly consider the various tax and accounting implications of our compensation plans. When determining the amount of long-term incentives and equity grants to executives and employees, the compensation costs associated with the grants are reviewed, as required by FASB ASC Topic 718.

Section 162(m) of the Code generally prohibits any publicly held corporation from taking a federal income tax deduction for compensation paid in excess of $1 million in any taxable year to the CEO and the other “covered employees” as defined in the rule. Under the tax laws in effect for 2017, there was an exception for qualified performance-based compensation and the Committee had the flexibility to structure certain compensation programs in a manner intended to be deductible as qualified performance-based compensation. However, as a result of new tax legislation that went into effect on December 22, 2017, this performance-based exception will not be available for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, unless the compensation qualifies for certain transition relief in the new legislation. Therefore, while considering tax deductibility as a factor in determining compensation, the Committee may not limit compensation to those levels or types of compensation that will be deductible if it believes that the compensation is commensurate with the performance of the covered employee.

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis with Itron’s management. Based on the review and discussions, the Compensation Committee has recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the Company’s 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K and the Company’s 2018 proxy statement.

Compensation Committee

Diana D. Tremblay, Chair

Peter Mainz

Daniel S. Pelino

Frank M. Jaehnert

Kirby A. Dyess

35

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES

Summary Compensation Table

The following table provides information regarding compensation of the Company’s NEOs. The amounts shown include amounts deferred at the executives’ election. All numbers are rounded to the nearest dollar.

36

2017 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table

The following table provides information regarding grants of plan-based awards to the NEOs during 2017.