Expense Ratio Rating
0 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
8 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
8 /10
$EGRCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- jedcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
JPMorgan Emerging Markets Debt Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- wtltx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Segall Bryant & Hamill Quality High Yield Fund Retail Class
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cpitx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Counterpoint Tactical Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.54% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pcwax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PGIM Corporate Bond Fund- Class A
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pdhvx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PGIM Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency Fund-Class Z
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bxgyx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Barings Global High Yield Fund Class Y
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- wbrrx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
William Blair Income Fund Class N
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- sghcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
DWS Global High 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 »
- csoax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Credit Suisse Strategic Income Fund Class A Shares
Expenses: 1.24% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »