Expense Ratio Rating
2 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
3 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
3 /10
$EIXIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- mhnax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Madison High Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bxgax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Barings Global High Yield Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.05% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- kamcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Kensington Managed Income Fund Class C Shares
Expenses: 2.99% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- eixcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Catalyst Enhanced Income Strategy Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ihiax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated Emerging Market Debt Fund Class A Shares
Expenses: 1.18% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ogyax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Invesco High Yield Bond Factor Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.15% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rnhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
RiverNorth/Oaktree High Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.35% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- kamax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Kensington Managed Income Fund Class A Shares
Expenses: 2.39% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cfoix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Calvert Floating-Rate Advantage Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »