Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
1 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$HDIVX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 633 Allocation Total World funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- gxscx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Goldman Sachs Satellite Strategies Portfolio Class C
Expenses: 1.31% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- aglox
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Ariel Global Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.13% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- hgxax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Hartford Global Impact Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.10% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- gicpx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Gabelli Global Growth Fund Class AAA
Expenses: 1.22% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- hmanx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Horizon Multi-Asset Income Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.09% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- fiyy
- ETF
- Allocation
- Total World
Barclays ETN+ FI Enhanced Global High Yield ETN B
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- fgilx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Fidelity® Global Equity Income Fund
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- gggax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Gabelli Global Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.22% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- sgapx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Virtus SGA Global Growth I Class
Expenses: 1.19% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »