Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
CIMAX vs FGGBX
CIMAX vs FGGBX Comparison
Open Charts CIMAX vs FGGBX
CIMAX vs FGGBX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
CIMAX vs. FGGBX commentary
Aug 23, 2026
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 CIMAX is a Hold and FGGBX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CIMAX has more cash in the bank: 148B vs. FGGBX (346M). FGGBX pays higher dividends than CIMAX: FGGBX (5.61) vs CIMAX (3.40). CIMAX was incepted earlier than FGGBX: CIMAX (25 years) vs FGGBX (13 years). FGGBX (0.96) is less costly to investors than CIMAX (0.59). CIMAX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 65.00 vs. FGGBX (50.24). CIMAX has a lower initial minimum investment than FGGBX: CIMAX (250) vs FGGBX (1000000). FGGBX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 26.23 vs. CIMAX (9.33). FGGBX return over 5 years is better than : 44.09 vs. CIMAX (30.63).
| CIMAX | FGGBX | CIMAX / FGGBX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.59 | 0.89 | 66% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.59 | 0.96 | 61% |
| Fund Existence | 25 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 10.581 | 16.387 | 65% |
| Front Load | 4% | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 1000000 | 0% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 148B | 346M | 42,775% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 3.40 | 5.61 | 61% |
| Returns for 1 year | 9.33 | 26.23 | 36% |
| Returns for 3 years | 42.31 | 62.32 | 68% |
| Returns for 5 years | 30.63 | 44.09 | 69% |
| Returns for 10 years | 81.49 | 63.04 | 129% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement