Ad is loading...
MFADX vs NLSIX
MFADX vs NLSIX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSIX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$21.80
Change+$1.47 (+7.23%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets77.87M
Neuberger Berman Long Short Instl
Price$18.63
Change+$0.54 (+2.99%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets6.98B
MFADX vs NLSIX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSIX commentary
Apr 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 MFADX is a Hold and NLSIX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSIX has more cash in the bank: 6.98B vs. MFADX (77.9M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSIX: MFADX (0.96) 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). NLSIX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 48.00 vs. MFADX (30.00). 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 : 1.54 vs. MFADX (-11.02). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 42.12 vs. NLSIX (29.41).
| 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 | -9.965 | -3.520 | 283% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000000 | 0% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 77.9M | 6.98B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.96 | 0.02 | 4,395% |
| Returns for 1 year | -11.02 | 1.54 | -717% |
| Returns for 3 years | -8.98 | 6.12 | -147% |
| Returns for 5 years | 42.12 | 29.41 | 143% |
| Returns for 10 years | 27.13 | 38.57 | 70% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...