Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$EXHAX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 9,682 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- zeoix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Zeo Short Duration Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- jedax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
JPMorgan Emerging Markets Debt Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.20% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bscnx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Blend
BMO Small-Cap Core Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.90% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- ggocx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- adpax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AB Short Duration Portfolio Class A
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- amapx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Amana Participation Fund Investor Shares
Expenses: 0.87% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dnlax
- Mutual Fund
- Sector Equity
- Basic Materials
BNY Mellon Natural Resources Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.24% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Basic Materials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- evocx
- Mutual Fund
- Alternatives
- Future
Altegris Futures Evolution Strategy Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.69% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Future Alternatives fund. See why »
- lauax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Growth
Columbia Acorn USA Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.41% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Growth US Stocks fund. See why »