Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
FWCBX vs RMGSX
FWCBX vs RMGSX Comparison
Open Charts FWCBX vs RMGSX
FWCBX vs RMGSX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
FWCBX has more cash in the bank: 128B vs. RMGSX (606M). FWCBX pays higher dividends than RMGSX: FWCBX (3.00) vs RMGSX (2.50). FWCBX was incepted earlier than RMGSX: FWCBX (6 years) vs RMGSX (9 years). RMGSX (1.08) is less costly to investors than FWCBX (0.31). RMGSX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 101.00 vs. FWCBX (50.00). RMGSX has a lower initial minimum investment than FWCBX: RMGSX (0) vs FWCBX (250). RMGSX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 14.07 vs. FWCBX (10.71). FWCBX return over 5 years is better than : 43.02 vs. RMGSX (26.09).
| FWCBX | RMGSX | FWCBX / RMGSX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.31 | 0.90 | 34% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.31 | 1.08 | 29% |
| Fund Existence | 6 years | 9 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 8.597 | 7.712 | 111% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 0 | - |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 128B | 606M | 21,122% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 3.00 | 2.50 | 120% |
| Returns for 1 year | 10.71 | 14.07 | 76% |
| Returns for 3 years | 40.46 | 41.17 | 98% |
| Returns for 5 years | 43.02 | 26.09 | 165% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | N/A | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement