What are the holes in Charles Schwab’s argument that they are much more secure than regional banks?

Schwab said the following below. Everything sounds good, but is there a glaring fallacy in their statement or a glaring omission?

(Original article from CNBC)

“Focusing attention on unrealized losses within HTM (Held-to-Maturity portfolio) has two logical flaws,” Schwab said. “First, those securities will mature at par, and given our significant access to other sources of liquidity there is very little chance that we’d need to sell them prior to maturity (as the name implies).”

“Second, by looking at unrealized losses among HTM securities, but not doing the same for traditional banks’ loan portfolios, the analysis penalizes firms like Schwab that in fact have a higher quality, more liquid, and more transparent balance sheet,” the firm added.

Schwab also noted that more than 80% of its total bank deposits fall within the insurance limits of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., adding it has “access to significant liquidity” and its business continues to “perform exceptionally well.”