Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
MFADX vs NLSAX
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison
Open Charts MFADX vs NLSAX
Cromwell Long Short Investor
Price$26.86
Change+$0.97 (+3.75%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets91.12M
Neuberger Berman Long Short A
Price$19.60
Change-$0.04 (-0.20%)
VolumeN/A
Net Assets8.16B
MFADX vs NLSAX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
MFADX vs. NLSAX commentary
Feb 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 MFADX is a Buy and NLSAX is a Buy.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
NLSAX has more cash in the bank: 8.16B vs. MFADX (91.1M). MFADX pays higher dividends than NLSAX: MFADX (0.02) 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 (0.96). 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 : 15.90 vs. NLSAX (3.43). MFADX return over 5 years is better than : 35.14 vs. NLSAX (19.35).
| 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 | 1.397 | -0.609 | -230% |
| Front Load | N/A | 6% | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 2000 | 1000 | 200% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 91.1M | 8.16B | 1% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.02 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | 15.90 | 3.43 | 464% |
| Returns for 3 years | 26.44 | 25.30 | 104% |
| Returns for 5 years | 35.14 | 19.35 | 182% |
| Returns for 10 years | 96.81 | 64.99 | 149% |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement