Ad is loading...
BHCFX vs FSPHX
BHCFX vs FSPHX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
BHCFX vs. FSPHX commentary
Apr 07, 2025
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is BHCFX is a Hold and FSPHX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FSPHX has more cash in the bank: 6.42B vs. BHCFX (183M). BHCFX pays higher dividends than FSPHX: BHCFX (0.21) vs FSPHX (0.02). BHCFX was incepted earlier than FSPHX: BHCFX (7 years) vs FSPHX (44 years). BHCFX (1.20) is less costly to investors than FSPHX (0.65). BHCFX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 51.83 vs. FSPHX (46.00). FSPHX has a lower initial minimum investment than BHCFX: FSPHX (0) vs BHCFX (2000). BHCFX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : -12.95 vs. FSPHX (-14.91). BHCFX return over 5 years is better than : 51.88 vs. FSPHX (2.74).
| BHCFX | FSPHX | BHCFX / FSPHX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.10 | 0.65 | 169% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.20 | 0.65 | 185% |
| Fund Existence | 7 years | 44 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -9.953 | -7.743 | 129% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 0 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 183M | 6.42B | 3% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.21 | 0.02 | 1,272% |
| Returns for 1 year | -12.95 | -14.91 | 87% |
| Returns for 3 years | -11.37 | -15.76 | 72% |
| Returns for 5 years | 51.88 | 2.74 | 1,895% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | 4.19 | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers