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.”
Credit union
BAKERSFIELD, CA
Health score
61.1
Total assets
$30.1M
Credit union
SAN MATEO, CA
Health score
58.8
Total assets
$31.8M
Answer first
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES leads on financial health and profitability; SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES leads on capitalization and lending quality. 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
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES
Higher TFS health score
Capitalization
SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES
Higher comparable capital ratio
Profitability
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES
Higher return on assets
Lending quality
SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES
Lower problem-loan measure
Same-source detail
Winner markers appear only where the metric definitions are comparable and both values are available.
| Metric | BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES | SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES |
|---|---|---|
| TFS health score | 61.1/100Leads | 58.8/100 |
| Total assets | $30.1M | $31.8M |
| Total deposits / shares | $26.4M | $25.9M |
| Net worth ratio | 12.10% | 18.36%Leads |
| Return on assets | 0.38%Leads | 0.34% |
| Return on equity | 3.14%Leads |
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES
2 branches
SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES
3 branches
Both institutions report branches in 1 state: CA.
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES
Unavailable
SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES
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.
BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES
0 in TFS registry
SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES
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 | BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES score | BAKERSFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES ROA | SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES score | SAN MATEO CITY EMPLOYEES ROA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-Q1 | 74.8/100 | 1.11% | 59.1/100 | 0.19% |
| 2026-Q2 | 61.1/100 | 0.38% | 58.8/100 | 0.34% |
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. Every valid pair is viewable; pairs enter search automatically only when current data, comparability, and visitor interest meet the publication rules.
| 1.87% |
| 60+ day delinquency | 0.03% | 0.00%Leads |
| Net charge-offs | 0.15%Leads | 1.53% |
| Efficiency ratio | — | — |
| Loan-to-deposit ratio | 52.78% | 18.20% |
| Asset growth (YoY) | — | — |
| Deposit / share growth (YoY) | — | — |
| Branches | 2 | 3 |
| Published CFPB complaints per $1B deposits (12 months)verified mappings only | — | — |