Ad is loading...
MFLDX vs NLSAX
MFLDX vs NLSAX Comparison
Open Charts MFLDX vs NLSAX
Cromwell Long Short Institutional
Price$22.36
Change+$0.06 (+0.27%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets83.23M
Neuberger Berman Long Short A
Price$18.60
Change+$0.05 (+0.27%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets7.22B
MFLDX vs NLSAX Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFLDX vs. NLSAX commentary
Apr 28, 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 MFLDX is a Buy and NLSAX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSAX has more cash in the bank: 7.22B vs. MFLDX (83.2M). MFLDX pays higher dividends than NLSAX: MFLDX (1.22) vs NLSAX (0.00). MFLDX was incepted earlier than NLSAX: MFLDX (18 years) vs NLSAX (13 years). MFLDX (1.95) is less costly to investors than NLSAX (1.68). NLSAX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 48.00 vs. MFLDX (30.00). NLSAX has a lower initial minimum investment than MFLDX: NLSAX (1000) vs MFLDX (100000). NLSAX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 6.41 vs. MFLDX (-1.81). MFLDX return over 5 years is better than : 51.34 vs. NLSAX (30.16).
| MFLDX | NLSAX | MFLDX / NLSAX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.73 | 1.68 | 103% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.95 | 1.68 | 116% |
| Fund Existence | 18 years | 13 years | - |
| Gain YTD | -2.909 | 0.758 | -384% |
| Front Load | N/A | 6% | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 100000 | 1000 | 10,000% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 83.2M | 7.22B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 1.22 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | -1.81 | 6.41 | -28% |
| Returns for 3 years | 3.97 | 12.79 | 31% |
| Returns for 5 years | 51.34 | 30.16 | 170% |
| Returns for 10 years | 38.69 | 39.56 | 98% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers