Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement
RGWBX vs TFAFX
RGWBX vs TFAFX Comparison Chart in %
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
RGWBX vs. TFAFX 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 RGWBX is a Hold and TFAFX is a Hold.
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
RGWBX has more cash in the bank: 24.9B vs. TFAFX (37.3M). RGWBX (0.00) and TFAFX (0.00) have matching dividends . RGWBX was incepted earlier than TFAFX: RGWBX (14 years) vs TFAFX (6 years). TFAFX (2.91) is less costly to investors than RGWBX (1.46). RGWBX (250) and TFAFX (250) have matching initial minimum investment requirements. TFAFX (10.87) and RGWBX (10.54) have marching annual gain over last year. RGWBX return over 5 years is better than : 34.10 vs. TFAFX (22.56).
| RGWBX | TFAFX | RGWBX / TFAFX | |
| Total Expense Ratio | 1.46 | 2.64 | 55% |
| Annual Report Gross Expense Ratio | 1.46 | 2.91 | 50% |
| Fund Existence | 14 years | 6 years | - |
| Gain YTD | 18.899 | 12.489 | 151% |
| Front Load | N/A | N/A | - |
| Min. Initial Investment | 250 | 250 | 100% |
| Min. Initial Investment IRA | N/A | N/A | - |
| Net Assets | 24.9B | 37.3M | 66,756% |
| Annual Yield % from dividends | 0.00 | 0.00 | - |
| Returns for 1 year | 10.54 | 10.87 | 97% |
| Returns for 3 years | 48.84 | 50.06 | 98% |
| Returns for 5 years | 34.10 | 22.56 | 151% |
| Returns for 10 years | 94.79 | N/A | - |
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
VS
Interact to see
Advertisement
Advertisement