Ad is loading...
MFADX vs NLSCX
MFADX vs NLSCX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSCX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$21.55
Change-$0.90 (-4.01%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets86.17M
Neuberger Berman Long Short C
Price$17.44
Change-$0.23 (-1.30%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets7.25B
MFADX vs NLSCX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSCX commentary
Apr 05, 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 Hold and NLSCX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSCX has more cash in the bank: 7.25B vs. MFADX (86.2M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSCX: MFADX (0.96) vs NLSCX (0.00). MFADX was incepted earlier than NLSCX: MFADX (13 years) vs NLSCX (13 years). NLSCX (2.43) is less costly to investors than MFADX (2.20). NLSCX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 48.00 vs. MFADX (30.00). NLSCX has a lower initial minimum investment than MFADX: NLSCX (1000) vs MFADX (2000). NLSCX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 4.25 vs. MFADX (-1.18). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 70.34 vs. NLSCX (30.76).
| MFADX | NLSCX | MFADX / NLSCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.98 | 2.43 | 81% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 2.20 | 2.43 | 91% |
| Fund Existence | 13 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -0.576 | -0.113 | 509% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000 | 200% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 86.2M | 7.25B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.96 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | -1.18 | 4.25 | -28% |
| Returns for 3 years | 1.22 | 5.37 | 23% |
| Returns for 5 years | 70.34 | 30.76 | 229% |
| Returns for 10 years | 42.98 | 29.14 | 148% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers