Expense Ratio Rating
9 /10
Expense Rating
5 /10
Market Score
2 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
2 /10
$KDFI Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- eff
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Plus Fund
Expenses: 3.53% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fam
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
First Trust/Aberdeen Global Opportunity Income Fund
Expenses: 2.88% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pysgx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Payden Strategic Income Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- phyix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Putnam High Yield 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 »
- ucon
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
First Trust TCW Unconstrained Plus Bond ETF
Expenses: 0.75% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- etsix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Short Duration Strategic Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.18% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ecibx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Income Fund of Boston 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 »
- mdwix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
BlackRock Strategic Global Bond Fund, Inc. Investor A Shares
Expenses: 0.88% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hypsx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Virtus Seix High Yield Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.82% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »