Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
3 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
3 /10
$NFIAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- pmzcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PIMCO Mortgage Opportunities and Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mxfax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
MainStay Floating Rate Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.09% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fhyax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated High Yield Trust Class A
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rpihx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
T. Rowe Price Global High Income Bond Fund
Expenses: 0.79% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- evfhx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Floating-Rate & High Income 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 »
- ncinx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Nicholas High Income Fund Class Institutional
Expenses: 0.73% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- afrcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Invesco Floating Rate Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.58% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- fhytx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Federated High Yield Trust Service Shares
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nsbtx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Neuberger Berman Short Duration Bond Fund Trust Class
Expenses: 0.69% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »