Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
PZFVX vs RMFCX
PZFVX vs RMFCX Comparison
Open Charts PZFVX vs RMFCX
JHancock Classic Value A
Price$25.07
Change-$0.36 (-1.42%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets600.89M
American Funds American Mutual R3
Price$60.89
Change-$0.48 (-0.78%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets111.34B
PZFVX vs RMFCX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
PZFVX vs. RMFCX commentary
Sep 26, 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 PZFVX is a Hold and RMFCX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RMFCX has more cash in the bank: 111B vs. PZFVX (601M). PZFVX pays higher dividends than RMFCX: PZFVX (2.48) vs RMFCX (1.24). PZFVX was incepted earlier than RMFCX: PZFVX (29 years) vs RMFCX (23 years). PZFVX (1.16) is less costly to investors than RMFCX (0.91). RMFCX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 31.00 vs. PZFVX (29.00). RMFCX has a lower initial minimum investment than PZFVX: RMFCX (250) vs PZFVX (1000). RMFCX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 6.02 vs. PZFVX (-25.94). RMFCX return over 5 years is better than : 62.19 vs. PZFVX (16.27).
| PZFVX | RMFCX | PZFVX / RMFCX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.15 | 0.91 | 126% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.16 | 0.91 | 127% |
| Fund Existence | 29 years | 23 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 8.029 | 12.543 | 64% |
| Front Load | 5% | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 1000 | 250 | 400% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 601M | 111B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 2.48 | 1.24 | 201% |
| Returns for 1 year | -25.94 | 6.02 | -430% |
| Returns for 3 years | -19.36 | 40.53 | -48% |
| Returns for 5 years | 16.27 | 62.19 | 26% |
| Returns for 10 years | 22.10 | 103.10 | 21% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement