Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$JHYIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- jassx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
James Alpha Structured Credit Value Portfolio Class S
Expenses: 1.13% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cubcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Calvert Flexible Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- chbcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Calvert High Yield Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.79% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cpucx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AAM/Insight Select Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.56% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mhocx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
MFS Global High Yield Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.80% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- aybax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AllianzGI High Yield Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.07% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pycex
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Payden Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hxiix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Harvest Asian Bond Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.88% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pkcbx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Payden/Kravitz Cash Balance Plan Fund Advisor Class
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »