Expense Ratio Rating
2 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$MEGBX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 643 US Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- klgbx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
MainStay MacKay Growth Fund Class B
Expenses: 2.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- klgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
MainStay MacKay Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- jpfax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
JPMorgan Equity Focus Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.09% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- pmpcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Putnam Sustainable Future Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.84% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- tgvfx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Touchstone Growth Opportunities Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.24% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- tcgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Thornburg Core Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.18% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- sstfx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Virtus KAR Capital Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- gxxcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Aberdeen U.S. Multi-Cap Equity Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.90% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- rdlcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Columbia Disciplined Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.92% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »