Side-by-side · Q2 2026 data
The Old Fort Banking Company vs Civista Bank
Metric by metric
| Measure | The Old Fort Banking Company | Civista Bank |
|---|---|---|
| TellerScore | 72 | 75 (stronger) |
| Capital cushion | 39 | 77 (stronger) |
| Loan quality | 93 (stronger) | 69 |
| Earnings | 78 | 78 |
| Funding & liquidity | 78 (stronger) | 64 |
| Problem-loan coverage | 97 (stronger) | 91 |
| Peer percentile | 50th | 77th |
| Total assets | $843.9M | $4.3B |
| Deposits / shares | $781.8M | $3.5B |
| Capital ratio | 8.89% | 12.71% (stronger) |
| Problem loans | 0.20% (stronger) | 0.92% |
| Net charge-offs | 0.01% (stronger) | 0.05% |
| Return on assets | 1.44% | 1.45% (stronger) |
| Loans ÷ deposits | 61.3% (stronger) | 92.4% |
| Uninsured deposits | 33.6% | 18.3% (stronger) |
| Offices | 10 | 42 |
| CFPB complaints (3 yrs) | — | — |
| Complaints per $1B deposits | — | — |
| Mortgage denial rate (HMDA) | 9.8% | 12.5% |
Civista Bank has the higher TellerScore (75 vs 72). On the 7 directional measures above (where higher or lower is clearly better), The Old Fort Banking Company leads on 3 and Civista 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.