Expense Ratio Rating
8 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
9 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
9 /10
$FDIVX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 9,394 International Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- scftx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
Virtus Seix High Grade Municipal Bond Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.60% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- smdsx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
ALPS/Smith Short Duration Bond Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.49% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- wfdax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
Wells Fargo Discovery Fund - Class A
Expenses: 1.20% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- wrldx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Scharf Global Opportunity Fund Retail Class
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- ttac
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
TrimTabs All Cap U.S. Free-Cash-Flow ETF
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- psgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Growth
Virtus KAR Small-Cap Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.10% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- rinf
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF
Expenses: 0.30% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rsggx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Victory RS Global Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- scsax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Blend
Wells Fargo Common Stock Fund - Class A
Expenses: 1.26% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Blend US Stocks fund. See why »