Side-by-side · Q2 2026 data
Royal Bank vs Conservation First Bank
Metric by metric
| Measure | Royal Bank | Conservation First Bank |
|---|---|---|
| TellerScore | 79 | 82 (stronger) |
| Capital cushion | 55 | 90 (stronger) |
| Loan quality | 98 (stronger) | 75 |
| Earnings | 79 | 100 (stronger) |
| Funding & liquidity | 83 (stronger) | 47 |
| Problem-loan coverage | 99 (stronger) | 91 |
| Peer percentile | 75th | 82nd |
| Total assets | $816.1M | $127.5M |
| Deposits / shares | $723.1M | $101.3M |
| Capital ratio | 10.53% | 13.96% (stronger) |
| Problem loans | 0.06% (stronger) | 0.74% |
| Net charge-offs | 0.01% | 0.01% (stronger) |
| Return on assets | 1.48% | 2.12% (stronger) |
| Loans ÷ deposits | 76.8% (stronger) | 108.0% |
| Uninsured deposits | 11.9% (stronger) | 19.9% |
| Offices | 21 | 3 |
| CFPB complaints (3 yrs) | — | — |
| Complaints per $1B deposits | — | — |
| Mortgage denial rate (HMDA) | 13.0% | — |
Conservation First Bank has the higher TellerScore (82 vs 79). On the 7 directional measures above (where higher or lower is clearly better), Royal Bank leads on 3 and Conservation First Bank 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.