Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
MFADX vs NLSAX
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSAX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$26.33
Change-$0.38 (-1.42%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets91.97M
Neuberger Berman Long Short A
Price$19.80
Change-$0.08 (-0.40%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets8.07B
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSAX commentary
Nov 14, 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 MFADX is a Hold and NLSAX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSAX has more cash in the bank: 8.07B vs. MFADX (92M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSAX: MFADX (0.81) vs NLSAX (0.00). MFADX was incepted earlier than NLSAX: MFADX (13 years) vs NLSAX (14 years). MFADX (2.34) is less costly to investors than NLSAX (1.68). MFADX is a more actively managed with annual turnover of: 108.00 vs. NLSAX (48.00). NLSAX has a lower initial minimum investment than MFADX: NLSAX (1000) vs MFADX (2000). MFADX annual gain was more profitable for investors over the last year : 13.90 vs. NLSAX (7.87). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 45.41 vs. NLSAX (21.35).
| MFADX | NLSAX | MFADX / NLSAX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 2.16 | 1.68 | 129% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 2.34 | 1.68 | 139% |
| Fund Existence | 13 years | 14 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 18.291 | 7.692 | 238% |
| Front Load | N/A | 6% | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000 | 200% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 92M | 8.07B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.81 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | 13.90 | 7.87 | 177% |
| Returns for 3 years | 24.34 | 22.24 | 109% |
| Returns for 5 years | 45.41 | 21.35 | 213% |
| Returns for 10 years | 86.04 | 59.60 | 144% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement