High Yield
Our review
NASB Ultimate Savings needs a clear explanation of its tiers and fees before the headline rate is enough to choose it.
North American Savings Bank Ultimate Savings is intended for money you can place into a specific online savings product. Its $10,000 opening requirement makes the expected balance an important starting point. I would also want the bank to explain exactly how its blended rate works. A rate comparison is useful only when the return applies to the balance and product you are actually choosing.
Regional eligibility and the actual earning floor
The customer-review pages found for North American Savings Bank often concern mortgages or the bank generally. They do not establish how Ultimate Savings handles opening deposits or larger withdrawals. I would therefore keep a service rating provisional. For this product, the meaningful decision needs both a correct blended-return calculation and an access method suited to the intended balance; a high tier does not compensate for uncertainty about moving the amount the saver actually needs.
The current product page makes several useful distinctions that a broad bank review can miss. Ultimate requires $10,000 to open, while the listed earning floor is only one cent and no maintenance fee is stated for this product. The published footnote also restricts the quoted rates to the Greater Kansas City area. That geographic qualification matters even though the account is opened online. An online application does not necessarily make a quoted rate nationwide. I would filter for eligibility first, then compare the return at the intended balance, rather than assume a large opening deposit is the only condition standing between the saver and the advertised offer.
Blended rates and the early-close condition
The current Ultimate product page lists a $10,000 opening deposit, a one-cent earning minimum and no maintenance fee. Its footnote describes blended rates, restricts the quoted offer to the Greater Kansas City area and lists a $30 closure fee during the first 90 days. Online opening does not make those rates a nationwide offer. The return needs to be calculated for the whole balance using the applicable portions of each tier.
Ultimate uses a blended structure, meaning different portions of a very large balance can receive different treatment. If the upper portion earns less, multiplying the whole account by the most favorable quoted rate exaggerates interest. The current page also lists a $30 account-closure fee within 90 days. That charge matters to someone considering a short stay for a temporary rate advantage, even though it is not a monthly maintenance fee. The opening amount, earning floor, regional availability, tier method and early-close condition answer different questions. Keeping them separate produces a much more useful comparison than calling the account high yield and stopping there.
The online product needs its own comparison
Bankrate's broader NASB review emphasizes the need to meet balance requirements and distinguish online products from accounts that must be opened in a branch. DepositAccounts lists Ultimate Savings separately. Those sources provide context, but an older bank review should not be used to settle the current Ultimate account's tier calculation or complete fee schedule.
Why mortgage reviews cannot grade savings support
A general bank-service rating cannot tell me whether the online savings team will resolve a transfer quickly. I would look for a clear contact route and an explanation of how a blocked withdrawal is escalated, then compare that with the bank's published account terms. I would verify North American Savings Bank's insured-bank identity and relevant limits. Mortgage reviews or a third-party bank-health grade do not establish long-term stability for this savings decision.
NASB's mortgage business produces much of the available customer commentary. A successful mortgage closing or a frustrating loan application can be real without showing how Ultimate Savings handles a delayed withdrawal. I did not find enough detailed, recent savings-specific evidence to make a confident service comparison. The bank's own presentation of capital classification and third-party ratings is also a dated snapshot, rather than a guarantee of future condition. For a saver, the more useful confidence comes from identifying the legal deposit bank, fitting the coverage and understanding the account's access. A marketing badge should not carry more weight than those practical facts.
The case for an eligible long-term saver
Ultimate's blended structure makes a whole-balance dollar comparison more useful than its most favorable quoted rate. The low ongoing earning floor is useful after a withdrawal, despite the larger opening requirement. I would compare it only for an eligible saver in the stated rate market, and include the early-close charge if the intended holding period is short. A regional online offer should not be presented as an unrestricted national alternative.
Compare this account with other savings options →
For an eligible saver in the stated market, the low ongoing earning floor makes Ultimate more flexible after a withdrawal than the $10,000 opening figure alone suggests. That is a reason to compare it seriously once the correct blended return is calculated. The early-close fee makes a brief experiment less attractive, while sparse product-specific service evidence argues against overselling ease of access. I would choose it for an identifiable ongoing role, rather than as a short stop on a rate-chasing circuit. A stable account that remains competitive can simplify savings; a regional offer opened without noticing its restrictions is likely to do the opposite.
Bank account information and disclosures ↗
Comments
View full discussion →