Expense Ratio Rating
5 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$KGDIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 633 Allocation Total World funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- aglcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
American Century Focused Global Growth Fund C Class
Expenses: 2.07% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- bglbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
BMO Global Low Volatility Equity Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- mwobx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
MFS Global Growth Fund Class B
Expenses: 2.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- hgxax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Hartford Global Impact Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.10% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- fgilx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Fidelity® Global Equity Income Fund
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- gggax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Gabelli Global Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.22% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- rapax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Cohen & Steers Real Assets Fund Inc Class A
Expenses: 1.15% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- gicpx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Gabelli Global Growth Fund Class AAA
Expenses: 1.22% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- rgcex
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Columbia Select Global Equity Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »