Side-by-side · Q2 2026 data
Ninnescah Valley Bank vs Fusion Bank
Metric by metric
| Measure | Ninnescah Valley Bank | Fusion Bank |
|---|---|---|
| TellerScore | 57 | 88 (stronger) |
| Capital cushion | 70 | 78 (stronger) |
| Loan quality | 0 | 84 (stronger) |
| Earnings | 73 | 100 (stronger) |
| Funding & liquidity | 93 (stronger) | 90 |
| Problem-loan coverage | 70 | 97 (stronger) |
| Peer percentile | 16th | 92nd |
| Total assets | $44.6M | $281.0M |
| Deposits / shares | $40.5M | $219.1M |
| Capital ratio | 12.04% | 12.76% (stronger) |
| Problem loans | 3.54% | 0.47% (stronger) |
| Net charge-offs | 0.03% | -0.00% (stronger) |
| Return on assets | 1.32% | 2.01% (stronger) |
| Loans ÷ deposits | 44.4% (stronger) | 58.3% |
| Uninsured deposits | 21.6% (stronger) | 24.1% |
| Offices | 1 | 3 |
| CFPB complaints (3 yrs) | — | — |
| Complaints per $1B deposits | — | — |
| Mortgage denial rate (HMDA) | — | — |
Fusion Bank has the higher TellerScore (88 vs 57). On the 7 directional measures above (where higher or lower is clearly better), Ninnescah Valley Bank leads on 2 and Fusion Bank on 5. 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.