Side-by-side · Q2 2026 data
Piscataqua Savings Bank vs Sugar River Bank
Metric by metric
| Measure | Piscataqua Savings Bank | Sugar River Bank |
|---|---|---|
| TellerScore | 81 (stronger) | 80 |
| Capital cushion | 87 | 91 (stronger) |
| Loan quality | 100 (stronger) | 89 |
| Earnings | 35 | 46 (stronger) |
| Funding & liquidity | 89 (stronger) | 77 |
| Problem-loan coverage | 100 (stronger) | 96 |
| Peer percentile | 80th | 77th |
| Total assets | $373.4M | $424.3M |
| Deposits / shares | $298.1M | $364.3M |
| Capital ratio | 13.67% | 14.13% (stronger) |
| Problem loans | 0.00% (stronger) | 0.33% |
| Net charge-offs | 0.00% (stronger) | 0.03% |
| Return on assets | 0.38% | 0.64% (stronger) |
| Loans ÷ deposits | 66.0% (stronger) | 80.1% |
| Uninsured deposits | 19.8% | 18.2% (stronger) |
| Offices | 1 | 6 |
| CFPB complaints (3 yrs) | — | — |
| Complaints per $1B deposits | — | — |
| Mortgage denial rate (HMDA) | 19.2% | — |
Piscataqua Savings Bank has the higher TellerScore (81 vs 80). On the 7 directional measures above (where higher or lower is clearly better), Piscataqua Savings Bank leads on 4 and Sugar River Bank on 3. Deposits are insured up to $250,000 per depositor, per ownership category, at both.