Expense Ratio Rating
3 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
3 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
3 /10
$MGHAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- ineax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Columbia High Yield Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.04% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gfrax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Goldman Sachs High Yield Floating Rate Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.04% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mzhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Muzinich U.S. High Yield Corporate Bond Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.59% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ecblx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Floating - Rate Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.78% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- tghyx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
TCW High Yield Bond Fund Class Institutional
Expenses: 0.55% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- aft
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Apollo Senior Floating Rate Fund
Expenses: 4.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- itacx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Transamerica Short-Term Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.61% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- jsd
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Nuveen Short Duration Credit Opportunity Fund
Expenses: 3.45% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- acp
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Aberdeen Income Credit Strategies Fund
Expenses: 3.89% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »