Expense Ratio Rating
0 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
1 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
1 /10
$IOCCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 748 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fbpbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
FBP Appreciation & Income Opportunities Fund
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- pfdbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
PFG Balanced Strategy Fund Class R
Expenses: 2.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- tcshx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Transamerica Multi-Asset Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.85% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- htaax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Highland Total Return Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.20% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- clcnx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Columbia Multi-Asset Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.66% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- tcgax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Timothy Plan Conservative Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- hcvcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Hartford Conservative Allocation Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.36% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- wfgwx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Wells Fargo Growth Balanced Fund - Class C
Expenses: 1.82% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- nsoix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
North Star Opportunity Fund Class I Shares
Expenses: 1.34% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »