Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
FCISX vs RLBAX
FCISX vs RLBAX Comparison
Open Charts FCISX vs RLBAX
FCISX vs RLBAX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
FCISX vs. RLBAX commentary
Sep 05, 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 FCISX is a Hold and RLBAX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RLBAX has more cash in the bank: 283B vs. FCISX (80.4B). FCISX pays higher dividends than RLBAX: FCISX (4.59) vs RLBAX (1.12). FCISX was incepted earlier than RLBAX: FCISX (31 years) vs RLBAX (24 years). RLBAX (1.32) is less costly to investors than FCISX (1.11). FCISX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 62.14 vs. RLBAX (50.00). RLBAX has a lower initial minimum investment than FCISX: RLBAX (250) vs FCISX (1000). FCISX (9.83) and RLBAX (9.51) have marching annual gain over last year. FCISX return over 5 years is better than : 29.29 vs. RLBAX (27.42).
| FCISX | RLBAX | FCISX / RLBAX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.11 | 1.32 | 84% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.11 | 1.32 | 84% |
| Fund Existence | 31 years | 24 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 6.832 | 9.204 | 74% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1000 | 250 | 400% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | 250 | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 80.4B | 283B | 28% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 4.59 | 1.12 | 411% |
| Returns for 1 year | 9.83 | 9.51 | 103% |
| Returns for 3 years | 33.02 | 39.71 | 83% |
| Returns for 5 years | 29.29 | 27.42 | 107% |
| Returns for 10 years | 74.82 | 73.44 | 102% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement