Expense Ratio Rating
1 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$FACSX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 8,182 US Stocks Mid-Cap Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fsagx
- Mutual Fund
- Sector Equity
- Basic Materials
Fidelity® Select Gold Portfolio
Expenses: 0.78% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Basic Materials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- gtrnx
- Mutual Fund
- Alternatives
- Short
Gotham Total Return Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.25% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Short Alternatives fund. See why »
- gmfzx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Target-Date
GuideStone Funds MyDestination 2045 Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.41% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Target-Date Allocation fund. See why »
- hflix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Hartford Floating Rate Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.71% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gimax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
Columbia Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund Class V
Expenses: 0.71% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ffxsx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Government Bond
Fidelity® Limited Term Government Fund
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Government Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mgfix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Total US Bond Market
AMG Managers Loomis Sayles Bond Fund Class N
Expenses: 0.72% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Total US Bond Market 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 »
- mfbfx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
MFS Corporate Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.78% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »