Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$GCC Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 11,417 Commodities Broad funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- raclx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Conductor Global Equity Value Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.69% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- rpgix
- Mutual Fund
- Sector Equity
- Industrials
T. Rowe Price Global Industrials Fund
Expenses: 1.05% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Industrials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- ryihx
- Mutual Fund
- Alternative
- Inverse
Rydex Inverse High Yield Strategy Fund Class H
Expenses: 1.59% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Inverse Alternative fund. See why »
- rymnx
- Mutual Fund
- Sector Equity
- Basic Materials
Rydex Precious Metals Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.64% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Basic Materials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- rympx
- Mutual Fund
- Sector Equity
- Basic Materials
Rydex Precious Metals Fund Class H
Expenses: 1.63% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Basic Materials Sector Equity fund. See why »
- sbm
- ETF
- Alternative
- Inverse
ProShares Short Basic Materials
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Inverse Alternative fund. See why »
- scc
- ETF
- Alternative
- Inverse
ProShares UltraShort Consumer Services
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Inverse Alternative fund. See why »
- tpdax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Timothy Plan Defensive Strategies Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.41% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- uvpix
- Mutual Fund
- Alternatives
- Inverse
ProFunds UltraShort Emerging Market Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.78% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Inverse Alternatives fund. See why »