Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
10 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$AFFT Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 11,484 Other funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fstsx
- Mutual Fund
- International Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
Fidelity® Series International Small Cap Fund
Expenses: 0.01% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Mid-Cap Growth International Stocks fund. See why »
- flcox
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Fidelity® Large Cap Value Index Fund
Expenses: 0.04% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- schg
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Expenses: 0.04% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- iusv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
iShares Core S&P U.S. Value ETF
Expenses: 0.04% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fnbgx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Government Bond
Fidelity® Long-Term Treasury Bond Index Fund
Expenses: 0.03% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Government Bond Bond fund. See why »
- visvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Vanguard Small Capitalization Value Index Fund Investor Shares
Expenses: 0.19% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fsgfx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Strategic Advisers® Growth Fund
Expenses: 0.13% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- vtv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
Expenses: 0.04% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fzilx
- Mutual Fund
- International Stocks
- Large Blend
Fidelity ZERO International Index Fund
Expenses: 0.00% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend International Stocks fund. See why »