Expense Ratio Rating
6 /10
Expense Rating
1 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$OLGAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 643 US Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- faofx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity Advisor® Series Growth Opportunities Fund
Expenses: 0.01% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- prgfx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
T. Rowe Price Growth Stock Fund
Expenses: 0.65% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- fgkfx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity® Growth Company K6 Fund
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- trbcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth Fund
Expenses: 0.69% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- vdeqx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Vanguard Diversified Equity Fund Investor Shares
Expenses: 0.35% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- gfafx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Funds The Growth Fund of America® Class F-1
Expenses: 0.69% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- amcpx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Funds AMCAP Fund® Class A
Expenses: 0.68% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- mtum
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
iShares Edge MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
Expenses: 0.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- fbcgx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Fidelity® Blue Chip Growth K6 Fund
Expenses: 0.45% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »