Expense Ratio Rating
5 /10
Expense Rating
1 /10
Market Score
1 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
1 /10
$BMHAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- hyls
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
First Trust Tactical High Yield ETF
Expenses: 1.23% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pysgx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Payden Strategic Income Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- jsd
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Nuveen Short Duration Credit Opportunity Fund
Expenses: 3.45% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pbtrx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PGIM Global Total Return Fund - Class B
Expenses: 1.63% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fam
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
First Trust/Aberdeen Global Opportunity Income Fund
Expenses: 2.88% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gilfx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Guggenheim Limited Duration Fund C-Class
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- medbx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
MFS Emerging Markets Debt Fund Class B
Expenses: 1.81% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bsl
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Blackstone/GSO Senior Floating Rate Term Fund
Expenses: 3.54% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mzhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Muzinich U.S. High Yield Corporate Bond Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »