The authors analyze various aspects of relativistic force-free MHD
turbulence and compare them with nonrelativistic MHD. The paper is well
written and definitely worth publication. I only have minor remarks
aimed at improving the accessibility.

1. The fact that there is an imposed magnetic field is not mentioned in
the abstract. I feel this is an important fact that should be mentioned.

2. On the one hand, there is the difference between relativistic and
nonrelativistic MHD, but on the other, there might be a difference between
force-free and nonforce-free MHD. This distinction is not spelled out
and also not addressed, as far as I can see. It would be good to explain
this in the beginning and to address it perhaps again later in the text.

3. The spectra look like those of forced rather than decaying turbulence.
Just before Eq.(2), the authors write "At the beginning of the simulation,
we drive Alfven modes...". If they just mean the initial condition,
the word "drive" is misleading. If they mean a short but finite time
interval, it should be explained more clearly. Note, however, that in
Cho+05, there is no forcing term in his Eqs.(1)-(10). If the turbulence
is actually decaying, something should be said about the decay times
and decay exponents of magnetic energy and length scales.

4. In Sec.3.2, the authors write that strong turbulence develops more
rapidly than weak turbulence. It would be good to write here whether
this is an aspect that is different in nonrelativistic MHD. (I tried to
find PDFs in early work of the author, but didn't see any.)

5. At the end of Sec.3.3.1, the authors write that the presence of
elongated nongaussian tails in the PDF of b are a particular property
of relativistic weak turbulence as opposed to relativistic strong
turbulence. But how does this compare with their nonrelativistic
counterpart?

6. Figure 6 shows a slightly non-systematic trend as chi is increased from
0.25 to 0.5 and 1 in that the blue symbols first rise and then decrease,
while the red ones decrease a bit from 0.25 to 0.5 and then stay put.
I may have missed this, but some words on this would be good.

7. The fact that E.B=0 at all times might suggest that magnetic helicity
fluctuations are also small. Of course, A.B is locally gauge-dependent,
but the spectrum of A.B in the limit of small k is not; see the work
of Hosking and Schekochihin since 2021 and subsequent work, where the
relevant quantity that characterizes magnetic helicity fluctuations
is sometimes called the Hosking integral. Some comments on this would
be useful.

8. I was surprised that in the conclusions, the authors do not mention
their findings at the end of Sec.3.3.1 about the elongated nongaussian
tails in the PDF of b. Maybe I missed this.