BackBank of the James Financial Group Overview

Bank of the James Financial Group Total Liabilities

Bank of the James Financial Group's total liabilities is $980M.

Get informed when a big investor buys or sells

+ Follow
Total Liabilities
$979.90M
3.87% YoYΔ $36.53M vs prior year quarter

Peer average

Loading

Bank of the James Financial Group Total Liabilities History

Loading

Bank of the James Financial Group vs. peers: Total Liabilities Comparison

Loading

Bank of the James Financial Group Total Liabilities Growth (YoY per quarter)

Latest change versus the prior comparable period (same company).

Loading

Bank of the James Financial Group (BOTJ) FAQ

Bank of the James Financial Group posts a total liabilities of $980M as of March 2026. That compares with $940M in the prior-year period — up 3.9% year over year. Comparing that reading with peers and prior periods is usually more useful than looking at the number in isolation.

In the prior comparable period, Bank of the James Financial Group's total liabilities was $940M. The latest reading is $980M — a 3.9% year-over-year increase (period ending March 2026). Use the history and growth charts on this page for a longer lookback.

Total Liabilities is one piece of Bank of the James Financial Group's financial statement story. At $980M, it should be interpreted next to related metrics — for example revenue with costs, assets with liabilities, or income with margins. Stockcircle links those related pages so you can move from this number to the surrounding context quickly.

Context for BOTJ's total liabilities usually means three checks: (1) trend versus prior periods, (2) level versus peers, and (3) consistency with growth and profitability. This page covers the first two; Bank of the James Financial Group's other metric pages and overview cover the third.

Judging Bank of the James Financial Group against Finance peers is usually better than using a market-wide rule of thumb. Business models inside Finance are more comparable, which makes gaps in total liabilities easier to interpret. Start with $980M here, then scan peer and history charts to see if the gap is persistent.