Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
NSBAX vs RWMFX
NSBAX vs RWMFX Comparison
Open Charts NSBAX vs RWMFX
NSBAX vs RWMFX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
NSBAX vs. RWMFX commentary
Jun 04, 2026
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 NSBAX is a Hold and RWMFX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RWMFX has more cash in the bank: 214B vs. NSBAX (6.47B). RWMFX pays higher dividends than NSBAX: RWMFX (1.40) vs NSBAX (0.84). NSBAX was incepted earlier than RWMFX: NSBAX (20 years) vs RWMFX (24 years). NSBAX (0.91) is less costly to investors than RWMFX (0.31). RWMFX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 29.00 vs. NSBAX (12.00). RWMFX has a lower initial minimum investment than NSBAX: RWMFX (250) vs NSBAX (2500). RWMFX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 8.10 vs. NSBAX (0.23). RWMFX return over 5 years is better than : 26.71 vs. NSBAX (25.33).
| NSBAX | RWMFX | NSBAX / RWMFX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.91 | 0.31 | 294% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.91 | 0.31 | 294% |
| Fund Existence | 20 years | 24 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 0.462 | 5.575 | 8% |
| Front Load | 6% | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2500 | 250 | 1,000% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 6.47B | 214B | 3% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.84 | 1.40 | 60% |
| Returns for 1 year | 0.23 | 8.10 | 3% |
| Returns for 3 years | 23.38 | 33.11 | 71% |
| Returns for 5 years | 25.33 | 26.71 | 95% |
| Returns for 10 years | 94.80 | 85.42 | 111% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement