Expense Ratio Rating
1 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
6 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
6 /10
$CEMTX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 10,038 International Stocks Emerging Markets funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- 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 »
- arcm
- ETF
- Alternative
- Short
Arrow Reserve Capital Management ETF
Expenses: 0.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Short Alternative fund. See why »
- nnhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Nicholas High Income Fund Class N
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nqvax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Value
Nuveen NWQ Multi Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.15% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- nsccx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Blend
Nuveen NWQ Small-Cap Value Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.99% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- nsmvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
North Star Micro Cap Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.43% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- atgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Blend
Aquila Three Peaks Opportunity Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.20% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- auucx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
AB Select US Equity Portfolio Class C
Expenses: 2.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- stlfx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Target-Date
BlackRock LifePath® Dynamic 2050 Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Target-Date Allocation fund. See why »