Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
RSLFX vs SCWFX
RSLFX vs SCWFX Comparison
Open Charts RSLFX vs SCWFX
RSLFX vs SCWFX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
RSLFX vs. SCWFX commentary
Sep 02, 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 RSLFX is a Hold and SCWFX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RSLFX (89B) and SCWFX (89B) have equal amount of cash in the bank . RSLFX pays higher dividends than SCWFX: RSLFX (0.81) vs SCWFX (0.56). RSLFX was incepted earlier than SCWFX: RSLFX (24 years) vs SCWFX (25 years). SCWFX (1.07) is less costly to investors than RSLFX (0.70). RSLFX (41.00) and SCWFX (41.00) have comparable annual turnover. RSLFX (250) and SCWFX (250) have matching initial minimum investment requirements. RSLFX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 11.43 vs. SCWFX (10.73). RSLFX return over 5 years is better than : -8.86 vs. SCWFX (-11.02).
| RSLFX | SCWFX | RSLFX / SCWFX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 0.70 | 1.07 | 65% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 0.70 | 1.07 | 65% |
| Fund Existence | 24 years | 25 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 12.162 | 11.896 | 102% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 250 | 100% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 89B | 89B | 100% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.81 | 0.56 | 145% |
| Returns for 1 year | 11.43 | 10.73 | 106% |
| Returns for 3 years | 34.88 | 33.02 | 106% |
| Returns for 5 years | -8.86 | -11.02 | 80% |
| Returns for 10 years | 86.48 | 78.02 | 111% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement