Expense Ratio Rating
3 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
6 /10
Category Score
10 /10
Market Size
6 /10
$OMSOX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 7,874 US Stocks Large Blend funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- plcnx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Total US Bond Market
Pacific Funds Strategic Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.65% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total US Bond Market Bond fund. See why »
- mbcax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
MFS California Municipal Bond Fund Class B
Expenses: 1.45% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mllbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Target-Date
MFS Lifetime Income Fund Class B
Expenses: 0.99% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Target-Date Allocation fund. See why »
- mllcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Target-Date
MFS Lifetime Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 0.99% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Target-Date Allocation fund. See why »
- mltcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Target-Date
MFS Lifetime 2030 Fund Class C
Expenses: 0.99% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Target-Date Allocation fund. See why »
- mwocx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
MFS Global Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.07% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- nstix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Columbia Short Term Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.38% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- niicx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Columbia Capital Allocation Moderate Conservative Portfolio Class C
Expenses: 1.24% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- aabfx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Thrivent Balanced Income Plus Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.04% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »