 Based on the provided process variants and their execution times, as well as my domain knowledge, here are the main differences between the treatment of the protected and unprotected groups:

1. **Loan denial frequency**: The unprotected group appears to have a higher overall frequency of loan denial than the protected group. This difference could indicate potential bias in the loan approval process.

2. **Application rejection**: The protected group has a higher frequency of loan application rejection than the unprotected group, which could suggest that their applications are less likely to be accepted for further processing and evaluation.

3. **Appointment denial**: Both groups have appointments being denied, but the unprotected group has a higher frequency of appointment denials (363) compared to the protected group (599). This might indicate that it is more difficult for the unprotected group to secure an appointment.

4. **Credit application verification**: Both groups follow the same process of verifying borrowers' information after receiving a credit application. However, the unprotected group has a higher overall frequency of loan denial after verification (2709), compared to the protected group (227). This could indicate a potential difference in the decision-making criteria.

5. **Co-signer involvement**: Both groups have variants involving requesting a co-signer for the loan. However, the protected group has a higher frequency of co-signer requests in loan denial variants, indicating that co-signer involvement may not lead to a better outcome for the protected group.

6. **Performance and execution time**: The values provided for performance seem to represent the execution time of each process variant (number of days or hours). When comparing the execution times between the groups for similar variants, some differences can be observed. For example, the protected group generally has longer execution times for loan denial variants compared to the unprotected group. However, the significance of these time differences would need further analysis to determine their relevance.

In conclusion, the main differences between the protected and unprotected groups in this context appear to be related to loan denial frequency, application rejection, appointment denial, credit application verification, co-signer involvement, and performance/execution time. Based on these observations, further investigation is warranted to determine whether unequal treatment exists between the groups and to identify potential sources of bias or discrimination in the loan approval