Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
GILAX vs RMFCX
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts GILAX vs RMFCX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity C
Price$13.02
Change+$0.13 (+1.01%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets1.92B
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$57.64
Change+$0.31 (+0.54%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets105.22B
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
GILAX vs. RMFCX commentary
Jun 07, 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: 105B vs. GILAX (1.92B). RMFCX pays higher dividends than GILAX: RMFCX (1.31) vs GILAX (0.19). GILAX was incepted earlier than RMFCX: GILAX (31 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 : 9.01 vs. GILAX (3.23). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 51.66 vs. GILAX (35.63).
| GILAX | RMFCX | GILAX / RMFCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.70 | 0.91 | 187% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.70 | 0.91 | 187% |
| Fund Existence | 31 years | 23 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 1.257 | 5.919 | 21% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1500 | 250 | 600% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 1.92B | 105B | 2% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.19 | 1.31 | 15% |
| Returns for 1 year | 3.23 | 9.01 | 36% |
| Returns for 3 years | 15.89 | 17.82 | 89% |
| Returns for 5 years | 35.63 | 51.66 | 69% |
| Returns for 10 years | 6.15 | 70.47 | 9% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement