Expense Ratio Rating
1 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$MKHCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fadlx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Frost Low Duration Bond Fund Investor Class Shares
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- excpx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Manning & Napier Unconstrained Bond Series Class S
Expenses: 0.75% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ihyix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Voya High Yield Bond Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.75% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- ishg
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
iShares 1-3 Year International Treasury Bond ETF
Expenses: 0.35% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- miidx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
BNY Mellon Intermediate Bond Fund Class Investor
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gsgax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Goldman Sachs Investment Grade Credit Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.72% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dhhix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Diamond Hill High Yield Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.68% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- thicx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Thornburg Limited Term Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dgcax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Delaware Corporate Bond 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 »