Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
MFADX vs NLSCX
MFADX vs NLSCX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSCX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$23.57
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets87.71M
Neuberger Berman Long Short C
Price$18.24
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets7.39B
MFADX vs NLSCX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSCX commentary
Jun 06, 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 NLSCX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSCX has more cash in the bank: 7.39B vs. MFADX (87.7M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSCX: MFADX (0.92) vs NLSCX (0.00). MFADX was incepted earlier than NLSCX: MFADX (13 years) vs NLSCX (13 years). NLSCX (2.43) and MFADX (2.34) have similar cost to investors . MFADX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 108.00 vs. NLSCX (48.00). NLSCX has a lower initial minimum investment than MFADX: NLSCX (1000) vs MFADX (2000). MFADX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 8.63 vs. NLSCX (7.36). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 44.32 vs. NLSCX (22.24).
| MFADX | NLSCX | MFADX / NLSCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 2.16 | 2.43 | 89% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 2.34 | 2.43 | 96% |
| Fund Existence | 13 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 4.384 | 3.109 | 141% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000 | 200% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 87.7M | 7.39B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.92 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | 8.63 | 7.36 | 117% |
| Returns for 3 years | 9.28 | 12.25 | 76% |
| Returns for 5 years | 44.32 | 22.24 | 199% |
| Returns for 10 years | 51.13 | 33.93 | 151% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
Interesting Tickers