Adjust Text Size

The Safest States for Banking

Written by Nickel - 5 Comments

As a followup to Friday’s post about bank failure rates, I thought I’d highlight a recent MoneyRates.com analysis of the best and worst states for banking.

They rates banks based on customer satisfaction, stability (state-by-state failure rates), availability of high interest rates, and size of the banking community (more choices is better).

The top ten were:

  1. Ohio
  2. Kentucky
  3. Lousiana
  4. Montana
  5. West Virginia
  6. New York
  7. Virginia
  8. North Dakota
  9. Colorado
  10. Texas

And the ten worst (from very worst to 10th worst) were:

  1. Illinois
  2. South Carolina
  3. Oklahoma
  4. Minnesota
  5. Georgia
  6. Rhode Island
  7. North Carolina
  8. New Hampshire
  9. Hawaii
  10. Indiana

While I wasn’t terribly surprised to see the like of Georgia, Illinois, and Minnesota on this list (all were in the top five in failures from 2008-2011) I was blown away that Florida, California, and (to a lesser extent) Washington didn’t fall in the bottom ten.

Florida and California were 2nd and 4th for bank failures from 2008-2011 and Washington was tied for 5th with Minnesota.

Published on March 10th, 2013 - 5 Comments
Filed under: Banking

About the author: is the founder and editor-in-chief of this site. He's a thirty-something family man who has been writing about personal finance since 2005, and guess what? He's on Twitter!

Related articles...

» The Recent History of Bank Failures
» The Safest Banks: Everbank and ING are the Best
» Bank Failures: Two More Just Bit the Dust
» Credit Cards are Safest Online Payment Medium
» The Best (and Worst) States for Retirement
» HSBC Drops APY, FNBO Direct and WaMu Hold Steady
» The Riskiest States for Identity Theft
» A Peek Inside Our FNBO Direct Online Savings Account

Was this article useful? Please sign up to receive our content via e-mail:

You will receive only the daily updates, and can unsubscribe at anytime.

5 Responses to “The Safest States for Banking”

  1. 1
    jim Says:

    The one source looks back 2008-2011. The Moneyrates analysis may not look back that fare and may just look at most recent year. For example there were 17 bank failures in Washington from 2008-2011 but zero failures in 2012.

    You also have to consider failures as % of banks rather than as absolute numbers. Theres almost always going to be more bank failures in a very large state like California as they’d have a large population and a lot of banks. So its the % failure rate that is a better measure.

  2. 2
    Nickel Says:

    Fair point, Jim. California almost certainly has more banks than a much smaller state.

  3. 3
    Alan Says:

    I use PNC who has always seemed reasonable in their rates. Well maybe not what they pay out in savings, but what bank offers that right now. I live in Maryland and would think they would be closer to the top 10 rather than the bottom 10 but could be wrong. I have only lived in the two more better off counties so I do not know about other counties.

  4. 4
    Mike Della Says:

    Regardless of which state the failures occurred, it’s pretty scary to think banks are failing at all. I’m currently using Capital One in NY – and I’ve seen rates increase slightly over the past year.

  5. 5
    jim Says:

    You would think that the # of banks would be proportional to the size of the state but that isn’t really so. The banking regulation and market can vary from state to state. So a smaller state can actually have more banks than a larger one due to exactly how their laws are setup.

    For example California has 239 banks and Georgia has 228. Almost the same number of banks yet CA’s population is close to 4 times as large as GA’s.

    I think this is one reason leading up to why Georgia has had so many failures. Its my understanding that Georgias laws have favored smaller banks more which lead to a lot of small banks. Those smaller banks however ended up less stable so they’ve had a lot more failures.

    Plus the state that a bank is based in is where its said to fail even if the bank operates in many states. If a big bank like Washington Mutual fails then that dings WA but it impacted much/most of the country. And a bank may be based in one state versus another simply due to taxes or details of the laws and nothing really to do with the financial stability of the states economy.

Leave a Reply

Disclaimer...
Because rates and offers from advertisers shown on this website change frequently, please visit referenced sites for current information. This website may be compensated by companies mentioned through advertising, affiliate programs or otherwise.

FiveCentNickel User Survey