Expense Ratio Rating
10 /10
Expense Rating
10 /10
Market Score
2 /10
Category Score
10 /10
Market Size
2 /10
$FCDSX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 8,623 Bond International funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- lglv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF
Expenses: 0.12% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- paxwx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Pax Sustainable Allocation Fund Individual Investor Class
Expenses: 0.30% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- aivsx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
American Funds Investment Company of America® Class A
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- aor
- ETF
- Allocation
- All-In-One
iShares Core Growth Allocation ETF
Expenses: 0.25% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- nmsax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Blend
Columbia Small Cap Index Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- crbn
- ETF
- Allocation
- Total World
iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF
Expenses: 0.20% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- slyv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Small Value
SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fidu
- ETF
- Sector Equity
- Industrials
Fidelity MSCI Industrials Index ETF
Expenses: 0.08% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Industrials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- idlv
- ETF
- International Stocks
- Large Blend
Invesco S&P International Developed Low Volatility ETF
Expenses: 0.26% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend International Stocks fund. See why »