Ad is loading...
MFADX vs NLSIX
MFADX vs NLSIX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSIX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$22.42
Change+$0.05 (+0.22%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets84.4M
Neuberger Berman Long Short Instl
Price$19.14
Change-$0.01 (-0.05%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets7.33B
MFADX vs NLSIX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSIX 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 NLSIX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSIX has more cash in the bank: 7.33B vs. MFADX (84.4M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSIX: MFADX (0.97) vs NLSIX (0.02). MFADX was incepted earlier than NLSIX: MFADX (13 years) vs NLSIX (13 years). MFADX (2.20) is less costly to investors than NLSIX (1.32). MFADX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 108.00 vs. NLSIX (48.00). MFADX has a lower initial minimum investment than NLSIX: MFADX (2000) vs NLSIX (1000000). NLSIX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 7.25 vs. MFADX (0.62). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 45.25 vs. NLSIX (32.79).
| MFADX | NLSIX | MFADX / NLSIX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.98 | 1.32 | 150% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 2.20 | 1.32 | 167% |
| Fund Existence | 13 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -0.930 | 2.133 | -44% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000000 | 0% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 84.4M | 7.33B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.97 | 0.02 | 4,482% |
| Returns for 1 year | 0.62 | 7.25 | 9% |
| Returns for 3 years | 6.99 | 17.21 | 41% |
| Returns for 5 years | 45.25 | 32.79 | 138% |
| Returns for 10 years | 41.25 | 46.91 | 88% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers