Expense Ratio Rating
9 /10
Expense Rating
6 /10
Market Score
7 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
7 /10
$GCOZX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 748 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- cagix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Calvert Growth Allocation Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- swhgx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Schwab MarketTrack Growth Portfolioâ¢
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- nadmx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Nationwide Investor Destinations Moderate Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.53% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- aadax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Invesco Select Risk: Growth Investor Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.49% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- aceix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Invesco Equity and Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.78% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- ftcox
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Franklin Corefolio Allocation Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.44% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fsdix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Fidelity® Strategic Dividend & Income® Fund
Expenses: 0.71% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fsanx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Fidelity Asset Manager® 60% Fund
Expenses: 0.69% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- jabax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Janus Henderson Balanced Fund Class T
Expenses: 0.82% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »