Expense Ratio Rating
9 /10
Expense Rating
6 /10
Market Score
2 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
2 /10
$BSJQ Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- dflax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
BNY Mellon Floating Rate Income 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 »
- pebcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PIMCO Emerging Markets Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- sticx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Virtus Seix Corporate Bond Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- plbcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Pacific Funds Floating Rate Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.71% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- smasx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
ALPS/Smith Short Duration Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.74% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cpuax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AAM/Insight Select Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.84% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- jfiax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
John Hancock Funds Floating Rate Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nhicx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Neuberger Berman High Income Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.83% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nstix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Columbia Short Term 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 »