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
FWCBX vs. RMATX commentary
Sep 13, 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 FWCBX is a Hold and RMATX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FWCBX has more cash in the bank: 131B vs. RMATX (599M). FWCBX pays higher dividends than RMATX: FWCBX (2.91) vs RMATX (2.63). FWCBX was incepted earlier than RMATX: FWCBX (6 years) vs RMATX (10 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 : 9.25 vs. FWCBX (7.87). FWCBX return over 5 years is better than : 44.51 vs. RMATX (26.94).
| 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 | 10 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 9.823 | 7.836 | 125% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 0 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 131B | 599M | 21,870% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 2.91 | 2.63 | 111% |
| Returns for 1 year | 7.87 | 9.25 | 85% |
| Returns for 3 years | 45.51 | 44.56 | 102% |
| Returns for 5 years | 44.51 | 26.94 | 165% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | N/A | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement