Expense Ratio Rating
5 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
6 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
6 /10
$FSTKX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- twqax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Transamerica Large Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fstrx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated MDT Large Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pzfvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
John Hancock Classic Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.17% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- twadx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
American Century Value Fund A Class
Expenses: 1.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- vgrix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
JPMorgan Growth And Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- brudx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
MFS Blended Research Value Equity Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.74% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- kdhax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
DWS CROCI Equity Dividend Fund - Class A
Expenses: 1.03% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- svacx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated Strategic Value Dividend Fund Class C Shares
Expenses: 1.81% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pqirx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Pioneer Equity Income Fund Class R
Expenses: 1.39% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »