Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
RLBFX vs WFAIX
RLBFX vs WFAIX Comparison
Open Charts RLBFX vs WFAIX
RLBFX vs WFAIX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
RLBFX vs. WFAIX commentary
Sep 17, 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 RLBFX is a Hold and WFAIX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RLBFX has more cash in the bank: 285B vs. WFAIX (1.18B). RLBFX pays higher dividends than WFAIX: RLBFX (2.03) vs WFAIX (0.96). RLBFX was incepted earlier than WFAIX: RLBFX (24 years) vs WFAIX (27 years). WFAIX (1.01) is less costly to investors than RLBFX (0.30). RLBFX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 50.00 vs. WFAIX (19.00). RLBFX has a lower initial minimum investment than WFAIX: RLBFX (250) vs WFAIX (1000000). RLBFX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 5.55 vs. WFAIX (-2.47). RLBFX return over 5 years is better than : 31.96 vs. WFAIX (-5.97).
| RLBFX | WFAIX | RLBFX / WFAIX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.30 | 0.90 | 33% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.30 | 1.01 | 30% |
| Fund Existence | 24 years | 27 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 7.455 | 6.163 | 121% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 1000000 | 0% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 285B | 1.18B | 24,071% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 2.03 | 0.96 | 213% |
| Returns for 1 year | 5.55 | -2.47 | -224% |
| Returns for 3 years | 41.25 | 9.92 | 416% |
| Returns for 5 years | 31.96 | -5.97 | -535% |
| Returns for 10 years | 86.00 | 47.19 | 182% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement