Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
GILAX vs RMFCX
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts GILAX vs RMFCX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity C
Price$13.19
Change+$0.12 (+0.92%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets1.94B
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$58.27
Change+$0.43 (+0.74%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets106.24B
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
GILAX vs. RMFCX commentary
Jun 27, 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: 106B vs. GILAX (1.94B). RMFCX pays higher dividends than GILAX: RMFCX (1.31) vs GILAX (0.19). GILAX was incepted earlier than RMFCX: GILAX (32 years) vs RMFCX (23 years). GILAX (1.70) 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 : 9.64 vs. GILAX (4.59). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 63.87 vs. GILAX (51.82).
| GILAX | RMFCX | GILAX / RMFCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.70 | 0.91 | 187% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.70 | 0.91 | 187% |
| Fund Existence | 32 years | 23 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 2.671 | 7.403 | 36% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1500 | 250 | 600% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 1.94B | 106B | 2% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.19 | 1.31 | 15% |
| Returns for 1 year | 4.59 | 9.64 | 48% |
| Returns for 3 years | 28.19 | 26.42 | 107% |
| Returns for 5 years | 51.82 | 63.87 | 81% |
| Returns for 10 years | 8.94 | 76.11 | 12% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers