Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
NSBCX vs RWMFX
NSBCX vs RWMFX Comparison
Open Charts NSBCX vs RWMFX
NSBCX vs RWMFX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
NSBCX 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 NSBCX is a Hold and RWMFX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RWMFX has more cash in the bank: 214B vs. NSBCX (6.47B). RWMFX pays higher dividends than NSBCX: RWMFX (1.40) vs NSBCX (0.14). NSBCX was incepted earlier than RWMFX: NSBCX (20 years) vs RWMFX (24 years). NSBCX (1.66) is less costly to investors than RWMFX (0.31). RWMFX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 29.00 vs. NSBCX (12.00). RWMFX has a lower initial minimum investment than NSBCX: RWMFX (250) vs NSBCX (2500). RWMFX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 8.10 vs. NSBCX (-0.56). RWMFX return over 5 years is better than : 26.71 vs. NSBCX (20.66).
| NSBCX | RWMFX | NSBCX / RWMFX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.66 | 0.31 | 535% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.66 | 0.31 | 535% |
| Fund Existence | 20 years | 24 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 0.134 | 5.575 | 2% |
| Front Load | N/A | 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 | 0.14 | 1.40 | 10% |
| Returns for 1 year | -0.56 | 8.10 | -7% |
| Returns for 3 years | 20.56 | 33.11 | 62% |
| Returns for 5 years | 20.66 | 26.71 | 77% |
| Returns for 10 years | 84.46 | 85.42 | 99% |