Side-by-side · Q2 2026 data
Chambers Bank vs Subiaco Federal Credit Union
Metric by metric
| Measure | Chambers Bank | Subiaco Federal Credit Union |
|---|---|---|
| TellerScore | 81 | 84 (stronger) |
| Capital cushion | 76 | 100 (stronger) |
| Loan quality | 92 (stronger) | 79 |
| Earnings | 91 (stronger) | 46 |
| Funding & liquidity | 46 | 100 (stronger) |
| Problem-loan coverage | 97 | 98 (stronger) |
| Peer percentile | 91st | 75th |
| Total assets | $1.6B | $27.1M |
| Deposits / shares | $1.3B | $22.6M |
| Capital ratio | 12.57% | 16.12% (stronger) |
| Problem loans | 0.23% (stronger) | 0.62% |
| Net charge-offs | 0.02% (stronger) | 0.03% |
| Return on assets | 1.76% (stronger) | 0.64% |
| Loans ÷ deposits | 86.7% | 26.6% (stronger) |
| Uninsured deposits | 40.2% | 0.2% (stronger) |
| Offices | 24 | 2 |
| CFPB complaints (3 yrs) | — | — |
| Complaints per $1B deposits | — | — |
| Mortgage denial rate (HMDA) | 11.0% | — |
Subiaco Federal Credit Union has the higher TellerScore (84 vs 81). On the 7 directional measures above (where higher or lower is clearly better), Chambers Bank leads on 3 and Subiaco Federal Credit Union on 4. They differ a lot in size, so ratios such as capital and liquidity are naturally different — the peer percentile shows how each compares with institutions its own size. Deposits are insured up to $250,000 per depositor, per ownership category, at both.