Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
GILAX vs RMFCX
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts GILAX vs RMFCX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity C
Price$13.94
Change+$0.02 (+0.14%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets2.05B
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$60.57
Change+$0.10 (+0.17%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets108.91B
GILAX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
GILAX vs. RMFCX commentary
Aug 29, 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: 109B vs. GILAX (2.05B). RMFCX pays higher dividends than GILAX: RMFCX (1.26) vs GILAX (0.18). 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 : 6.98 vs. GILAX (4.70). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 54.21 vs. GILAX (44.06).
| 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 | 9.348 | 11.642 | 80% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1500 | 250 | 600% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 2.05B | 109B | 2% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.18 | 1.26 | 15% |
| Returns for 1 year | 4.70 | 6.98 | 67% |
| Returns for 3 years | 31.02 | 29.24 | 106% |
| Returns for 5 years | 44.06 | 54.21 | 81% |
| Returns for 10 years | 23.33 | 91.22 | 26% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement