Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
8 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
8 /10
$BWLIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fdstx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
AIG Focused Dividend Strategy Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- edow
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
First Trust Dow 30 Equal Weight ETF
Expenses: 0.50% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- qdiv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Global X S&P 500 Quality Dividend ETF
Expenses: 0.20% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hdgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
The Hartford Dividend and Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.77% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fstrx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated MDT Large Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fstkx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated MDT Large Cap Value Fund Service Shares
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- rwvg
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Direxion Russell 1000 Value Over Growth ETF
Expenses: 0.64% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- alvcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
American Beacon Large Cap Value Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- svacx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated Strategic Value Dividend Fund Class C Shares
Expenses: 1.81% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »