Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
NWALX vs RMEBX
NWALX vs RMEBX Comparison
Open Charts NWALX vs RMEBX
NWALX vs RMEBX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
NWALX vs. RMEBX 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 NWALX is a Hold and RMEBX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RMEBX has more cash in the bank: 115B vs. NWALX (873M). NWALX pays higher dividends than RMEBX: NWALX (1.28) vs RMEBX (1.04). NWALX was incepted earlier than RMEBX: NWALX (6 years) vs RMEBX (12 years). NWALX (1.19) is less costly to investors than RMEBX (1.07). RMEBX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 30.00 vs. NWALX (8.73). RMEBX has a lower initial minimum investment than NWALX: RMEBX (250) vs NWALX (2000). NWALX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 17.02 vs. RMEBX (9.98). RMEBX return over 5 years is better than : 32.93 vs. NWALX (5.13).
| NWALX | RMEBX | NWALX / RMEBX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.10 | 1.07 | 103% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.19 | 1.07 | 111% |
| Fund Existence | 6 years | 12 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 10.687 | 5.801 | 184% |
| Front Load | 6% | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 250 | 800% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 873M | 115B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 1.28 | 1.04 | 124% |
| Returns for 1 year | 17.02 | 9.98 | 171% |
| Returns for 3 years | 30.13 | 34.14 | 88% |
| Returns for 5 years | 5.13 | 32.93 | 16% |
| Returns for 10 years | N/A | 89.84 | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement