Expense Ratio Rating
6 /10
Expense Rating
2 /10
Market Score
8 /10
Category Score
10 /10
Market Size
8 /10
$JLVIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 668 US Stocks Large Blend funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- susa
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
iShares MSCI USA ESG Select ETF
Expenses: 0.25% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- basmx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
iShares Total U.S. Stock Market Index Fund Investor A Shares
Expenses: 0.31% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- spyx
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
SPDR S&P 500 Fossil Fuel Reserves Free ETF
Expenses: 0.20% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- malrx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
BlackRock Advantage Large Cap Core Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.47% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- mspix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
MainStay MacKay S&P 500 Index Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.29% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- fitlx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Fidelity® US Sustainability Index Fund
Expenses: 0.11% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- jqua
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF
Expenses: 0.12% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- ameix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
American Century Equity Growth Fund I Class
Expenses: 0.47% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- prcox
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
T. Rowe Price U.S. Equity Research Fund
Expenses: 0.53% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »