Ad is loading...
MFADX vs NLSAX
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSAX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$22.42
Change+$0.05 (+0.22%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets84.4M
Neuberger Berman Long Short A
Price$18.83
Change-$0.01 (-0.05%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets7.33B
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSAX commentary
May 09, 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 MFADX is a Buy and NLSAX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSAX has more cash in the bank: 7.33B vs. MFADX (84.4M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSAX: MFADX (0.97) vs NLSAX (0.00). MFADX was incepted earlier than NLSAX: MFADX (13 years) vs NLSAX (13 years). MFADX (2.20) is less costly to investors than NLSAX (1.68). MFADX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 108.00 vs. NLSAX (48.00). NLSAX has a lower initial minimum investment than MFADX: NLSAX (1000) vs MFADX (2000). NLSAX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 6.86 vs. MFADX (0.62). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 45.25 vs. NLSAX (30.31).
| MFADX | NLSAX | MFADX / NLSAX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.98 | 1.68 | 118% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 2.20 | 1.68 | 131% |
| Fund Existence | 13 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -0.930 | 2.059 | -45% |
| Front Load | N/A | 6% | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000 | 200% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 84.4M | 7.33B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.97 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | 0.62 | 6.86 | 9% |
| Returns for 3 years | 6.99 | 15.84 | 44% |
| Returns for 5 years | 45.25 | 30.31 | 149% |
| Returns for 10 years | 41.25 | 41.58 | 99% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers