Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$BJBHX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- meaix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund, Inc. Emerging Markets Fixed Income Opportunities Portfolio I
Expenses: 0.83% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fhycx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated High Yield Trust Class C
Expenses: 1.78% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- psrwx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PIMCO Senior Floating Rate Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.80% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fcnbx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Templeton International Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.38% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pcwax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PGIM Corporate Bond Fund- Class A
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fhbbx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated High-Income Bond Fund Class B Shares
Expenses: 1.74% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- adpcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AB Short Duration Portfolio Class C
Expenses: 1.18% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pyicx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Pioneer High Yield Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.94% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dfrax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
DWS Floating Rate Fund - Class A
Expenses: 1.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »