Expense Ratio Rating
1 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$EKSCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 748 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- mgxbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
MainStay Growth Allocation Fund Class B
Expenses: 1.30% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- abpax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
AB Conservative Wealth Strategy Class A
Expenses: 1.05% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- dfbax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Delaware Strategic Allocation Class A
Expenses: 1.16% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- wmbfx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Wells Fargo WealthBuilder Moderate Balanced Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- htayx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Highland Total Return Fund Class Y
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- wflex
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Westwood Flexible Income Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.79% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- weacx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Wells Fargo WealthBuilder Equity Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- calcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Calvert Conservative Allocation Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.19% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- gdma
- ETF
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF New
Expenses: 0.77% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »