Profile Bank vs Piscataqua Savings Bank
Side-by-side bank health comparison using FDIC financial data
Profile Bank (A) and Piscataqua Savings Bank (A) are close on the BankHealth rubric. Asset bases: $302M versus $365M.
With grades this close, the choice between banks turns more on product fit, branch convenience, rates, and digital experience than on rubric-driven safety differences.
Verdict
Profile Bank has a stronger Bank Health Score of 92/100 (A) compared to Piscataqua Savings Bank at 87/100 (A), a difference of 5 points. Profile Bank holds a Tier 1 capital ratio of 16.5% and an NPL ratio of 0.00%.
| Metric | Profile Bank | Piscataqua Savings Bank |
|---|---|---|
| Health Score Composite score (0-100) based on capital, loan quality, liquidity, and profitability | 92/100 (A)* | 87/100 (A) |
| Tier 1 Capital Ratio Core equity capital as % of risk-weighted assets (8%+ is well-capitalized) | 16.5%* | 14.6% |
| NPL Ratio Nonperforming loans as % of total loans (lower is better) | 0.0%* | 0.5% |
| Liquidity Ratio Cash and liquid assets vs obligations | 37.1% | 37.5%* |
| Return on Assets Profitability metric (above 1% is strong) | -0.1%* | -0.3% |
| Total Assets | $302M | $365M |
| Total Deposits | $260M | $300M |
| Location | Rochester, New Hampshire | Portsmouth, New Hampshire |
Profile Bank has a stronger Bank Health Score of 92/100 (A) compared to Piscataqua Savings Bank at 87/100 (A), a difference of 5 points. Profile Bank holds a Tier 1 capital ratio of 16.5% and an NPL ratio of 0.00%.