Expense Ratio Rating
2 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
8 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
8 /10
$HFLCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- dsicx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Diamond Hill Corporate Credit Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.65% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bifix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
William Blair Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fdbcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated Bond Fund Class C Shares
Expenses: 1.66% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dflax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
BNY Mellon Floating Rate Income Fund - Class A
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- plbcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Pacific Funds Floating Rate Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.71% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- jfiax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
John Hancock Funds Floating Rate Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cpuax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AAM/Insight Select Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.84% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pplcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
DWS Short Duration Fund - Class C
Expenses: 1.54% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pelnx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PIMCO Emerging Markets Local Currency and Bond Fund Class I-3
Expenses: 1.85% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »