Expense Ratio Rating
1 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$AFMMX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- abhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
American Century High-Yield Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.78% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- eidox
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Emerging Markets Debt Opportunities Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.90% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hsdcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Hartford Short Duration Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.55% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- inclx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Transamerica High Yield Bond C
Expenses: 1.75% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gifpx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Guggenheim Floating Rate Strategies Fund Class P
Expenses: 1.07% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rfrax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Columbia Floating Rate Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- msdix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
MainStay MacKay Unconstrained Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dlenx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund Class N
Expenses: 1.15% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- kcny
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
KraneShares E Fund China Commercial Paper ETF
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »