This comparison uses public regulatory filings and TFS methodology. It evaluates financial condition—not checking rates, account fees, service quality, or which institution is universally “best.”
Bank
Oaks, PA
Health score
75.2
Total assets
$208.5M
Bank
Radnor, PA
Health score
87.1
Total assets
$191.0M
Answer first
SEI Private Trust Company leads on capitalization and profitability; The Haverford Trust Company leads on financial health and growth. Those category leads describe current regulatory metrics only and do not establish a universal product or service winner.
Capital and asset-quality definitions are directly comparable for this pair.
Category leaders
Financial health
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher TFS health score
Capitalization
SEI Private Trust Company
Higher comparable capital ratio
Profitability
SEI Private Trust Company
Higher return on assets
Lending quality
Too close to call
Lower problem-loan measure
Growth
The Haverford Trust Company
Higher year-over-year asset growth
Same-source detail
Winner markers appear only where the metric definitions are comparable and both values are available.
| Metric | SEI Private Trust Company | The Haverford Trust Company |
|---|---|---|
| TFS health score | 75.2/100 | 87.1/100Leads |
| Total assets | $208.5M | $191.0M |
| Total deposits / shares | $500.0K | $128.7M |
| Tier 1 capital ratio | 80.40%Leads | 22.49% |
| Return on assets | 53.73%Leads | 8.63% |
| Return on equity | 58.84%Leads |
SEI Private Trust Company
1 branches
The Haverford Trust Company
1 branches
Both institutions report branches in 1 state: PA.
SEI Private Trust Company
Unavailable
The Haverford Trust Company
Unavailable
Counts use an explicitly reviewed CFPB-company-to-regulatory-ID mapping and the same complete 12-month window. Parent-company attribution can include complaints involving affiliates. Lower complaint volume is context—not proof of better service or less consumer harm.
SEI Private Trust Company
0 in TFS registry
The Haverford Trust Company
0 in TFS registry
Institution-level actions come from TFS's exact regulatory-ID registry and are shown as factual context only. They do not affect category winners or the TFS Financial Health Grade. A zero means no action is currently published in this curated registry—not proof that none exists.
Quarterly history
| Quarter | SEI Private Trust Company score | SEI Private Trust Company ROA | The Haverford Trust Company score | The Haverford Trust Company ROA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-Q3 | — | 39.09% | — | 7.46% |
| 2024-Q4 | — | 38.79% | — | 7.63% |
| 2025-Q1 | — | 39.65% | — | 7.45% |
| 2025-Q2 | — | 40.65% | — | 7.06% |
| 2025-Q3 | — | 41.51% | — | 7.20% |
| 2025-Q4 | — | 41.90% | — | 7.97% |
| 2026-Q1 | 74.6/100 |
Keep watching
Get access to your dashboard watchlist and future financial-grade alerts.
Coverage boundaries
Related comparisons
Financial data comes from FDIC BankFind Suite or NCUA Call Reports as labeled. TFS Health Grades are an editorial assessment, not an official government rating or financial advice. Arbitrary comparison pairs are available dynamically but remain noindex unless curated for data completeness and user value.
| 39.97% |
| Non-performing loans | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Net charge-offs | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Efficiency ratio | 56.34%Leads | 80.34% |
| Loan-to-deposit ratio | 0.00% | 100.51% |
| Asset growth (YoY) | -23.00% | 4.36%Leads |
| Deposit / share growth (YoY) | 0.00% | 3.59%Leads |
| Branches | 1 | 1 |
| Published CFPB complaints per $1B deposits (12 months)verified mappings only | — | — |
| 50.45% |
| 83.2/100 |
| 8.96% |
| 2026-Q2 | 75.2/100 | 53.73% | 87.1/100 | 8.63% |