Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
6 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
6 /10
$CINCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- mncpx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Manning & Napier Unconstrained Bond Series Class I
Expenses: 0.48% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- shag
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
WisdomTree Yield Enhanced U.S. Short-Term Aggregate Bond Fund
Expenses: 0.12% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mciix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
BMO Corporate Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.42% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hio
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Western Asset High Income Opportunity Fund Inc.
Expenses: 0.86% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- igeb
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
iShares Edge Investment Grade Enhanced Bond ETF
Expenses: 0.18% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hwdtx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
The Hartford World Bond Fund Class R5
Expenses: 0.76% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- skor
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund
Expenses: 0.22% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hyem
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- sshix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Wells Fargo Short-Term Bond Fund - Class Inst
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »