Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
FSCNX vs RLBAX
FSCNX vs RLBAX Comparison
Open Charts FSCNX vs RLBAX
FSCNX vs RLBAX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
FSCNX vs. RLBAX commentary
Jun 04, 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 FSCNX is a Hold and RLBAX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RLBAX has more cash in the bank: 279B vs. FSCNX (5.61B). RLBAX pays higher dividends than FSCNX: RLBAX (1.14) vs FSCNX (0.89). FSCNX was incepted earlier than RLBAX: FSCNX (19 years) vs RLBAX (24 years). FSCNX (1.70) is less costly to investors than RLBAX (1.32). RLBAX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 50.00 vs. FSCNX (29.00). FSCNX has a lower initial minimum investment than RLBAX: FSCNX (0) vs RLBAX (250). FSCNX (17.37) and RLBAX (16.80) have marching annual gain over last year. RLBAX return over 5 years is better than : 31.17 vs. FSCNX (23.78).
| FSCNX | RLBAX | FSCNX / RLBAX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.67 | 1.32 | 127% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.70 | 1.32 | 129% |
| Fund Existence | 19 years | 24 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 9.438 | 9.354 | 101% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 0 | 250 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 5.61B | 279B | 2% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.89 | 1.14 | 79% |
| Returns for 1 year | 17.37 | 16.80 | 103% |
| Returns for 3 years | 38.59 | 42.23 | 91% |
| Returns for 5 years | 23.78 | 31.17 | 76% |
| Returns for 10 years | 78.53 | 77.06 | 102% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement