Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
FCLKX vs RWMFX
FCLKX vs RWMFX Comparison
Open Charts FCLKX vs RWMFX
FCLKX vs RWMFX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
FCLKX vs. RWMFX commentary
Sep 19, 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 FCLKX is a Hold and RWMFX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RWMFX has more cash in the bank: 218B vs. FCLKX (190M). RWMFX pays higher dividends than FCLKX: RWMFX (1.41) vs FCLKX (0.69). FCLKX was incepted earlier than RWMFX: FCLKX (9 years) vs RWMFX (24 years). FCLKX (0.45) is less costly to investors than RWMFX (0.31). RWMFX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 32.00 vs. FCLKX (18.00). FCLKX has a lower initial minimum investment than RWMFX: FCLKX (0) vs RWMFX (250). FCLKX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 14.37 vs. RWMFX (1.33). FCLKX return over 5 years is better than : 47.42 vs. RWMFX (26.42).
| FCLKX | RWMFX | FCLKX / RWMFX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.45 | 0.31 | 145% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.45 | 0.31 | 145% |
| Fund Existence | 9 years | 24 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 9.527 | 3.404 | 280% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 0 | 250 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 190M | 218B | 0% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.69 | 1.41 | 49% |
| Returns for 1 year | 14.37 | 1.33 | 1,079% |
| Returns for 3 years | 72.39 | 29.00 | 250% |
| Returns for 5 years | 47.42 | 26.42 | 179% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | 80.74 | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers