Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
FWCBX vs RMATX
FWCBX vs RMATX Comparison
Open Charts FWCBX vs RMATX
FWCBX vs RMATX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FWCBX has more cash in the bank: 130B vs. RMATX (610M). FWCBX pays higher dividends than RMATX: FWCBX (2.93) vs RMATX (2.67). FWCBX was incepted earlier than RMATX: FWCBX (6 years) vs RMATX (9 years). RMATX (1.08) is less costly to investors than FWCBX (0.31). RMATX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 101.00 vs. FWCBX (50.00). RMATX has a lower initial minimum investment than FWCBX: RMATX (0) vs FWCBX (250). RMATX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 13.79 vs. FWCBX (12.11). FWCBX return over 5 years is better than : 47.40 vs. RMATX (29.57).
| FWCBX | RMATX | FWCBX / RMATX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.31 | 0.80 | 39% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.31 | 1.08 | 29% |
| Fund Existence | 6 years | 9 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 11.695 | 9.288 | 126% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 0 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 130B | 610M | 21,311% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 2.93 | 2.67 | 110% |
| Returns for 1 year | 12.11 | 13.79 | 88% |
| Returns for 3 years | 49.26 | 48.35 | 102% |
| Returns for 5 years | 47.40 | 29.57 | 160% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | N/A | - |