Ad is loading...
GILAX vs RMFCX
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts GILAX vs RMFCX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity C
Price$12.14
Change+$0.81 (+7.15%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets1.67B
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$53.56
Change+$3.33 (+6.63%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets92.19B
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
GILAX vs. RMFCX commentary
Apr 11, 2025
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 GILAX is a Buy and RMFCX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RMFCX has more cash in the bank: 92.2B vs. GILAX (1.67B). RMFCX pays higher dividends than GILAX: RMFCX (1.34) vs GILAX (0.19). GILAX was incepted earlier than RMFCX: GILAX (31 years) vs RMFCX (23 years). GILAX (1.69) is less costly to investors than RMFCX (0.91). GILAX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 39.00 vs. RMFCX (31.00). RMFCX has a lower initial minimum investment than GILAX: RMFCX (250) vs GILAX (1500). RMFCX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : -4.43 vs. GILAX (-10.41). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 45.42 vs. GILAX (36.01).
| GILAX | RMFCX | GILAX / RMFCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.69 | 0.91 | 186% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.69 | 0.91 | 186% |
| Fund Existence | 31 years | 23 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -10.998 | -7.697 | 143% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1500 | 250 | 600% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 1.67B | 92.2B | 2% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.19 | 1.34 | 14% |
| Returns for 1 year | -10.41 | -4.43 | 235% |
| Returns for 3 years | -2.08 | -0.65 | 321% |
| Returns for 5 years | 36.01 | 45.42 | 79% |
| Returns for 10 years | -6.55 | 46.29 | -14% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...