Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
4 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$AMECX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 9,682 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- prulx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Government Bond
T. Rowe Price U.S. Treasury Long-Term Fund
Expenses: 0.30% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Government Bond Bond fund. See why »
- habyx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Total US Bond Market
The Hartford Total Return Bond Fund Class Y
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Total US Bond Market Bond fund. See why »
- slyv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Small Value
SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fidu
- ETF
- Sector Equity
- Industrials
Fidelity MSCI Industrials Index ETF
Expenses: 0.08% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Industrials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- idlv
- ETF
- International Stocks
- Large Blend
Invesco S&P International Developed Low Volatility ETF
Expenses: 0.26% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend International Stocks fund. See why »
- fstfx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
Fidelity® Limited Term Municipal Income Fund
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- tlh
- ETF
- Bond
- Government Bond
iShares 10-20 Year Treasury Bond ETF
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Government Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ijk
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
iShares S&P Mid-Cap 400 Growth ETF
Expenses: 0.24% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Mid-Cap Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- gfafx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Funds The Growth Fund of America® Class F-1
Expenses: 0.69% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »