Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
LBWAX vs RMFCX
LBWAX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts LBWAX vs RMFCX
BrandywineGLOBAL Div US Large Value A
Price$22.28
Change-$0.11 (-0.49%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets97.32M
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$61.88
Change-$0.33 (-0.53%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets112.58B
LBWAX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
LBWAX vs. RMFCX commentary
Oct 10, 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 LBWAX is a Hold and RMFCX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RMFCX has more cash in the bank: 113B vs. LBWAX (97.3M). LBWAX pays higher dividends than RMFCX: LBWAX (1.34) vs RMFCX (1.20). LBWAX was incepted earlier than RMFCX: LBWAX (15 years) vs RMFCX (23 years). LBWAX (1.16) is less costly to investors than RMFCX (0.91). LBWAX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 75.00 vs. RMFCX (31.00). RMFCX has a lower initial minimum investment than LBWAX: RMFCX (250) vs LBWAX (1000). RMFCX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 6.61 vs. LBWAX (1.68). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 58.04 vs. LBWAX (38.94).
| LBWAX | RMFCX | LBWAX / RMFCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.15 | 0.91 | 126% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.16 | 0.91 | 127% |
| Fund Existence | 15 years | 23 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 11.894 | 14.373 | 83% |
| Front Load | 6% | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1000 | 250 | 400% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 97.3M | 113B | 0% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 1.34 | 1.20 | 111% |
| Returns for 1 year | 1.68 | 6.61 | 25% |
| Returns for 3 years | 31.18 | 43.70 | 71% |
| Returns for 5 years | 38.94 | 58.04 | 67% |
| Returns for 10 years | 33.45 | 93.10 | 36% |