Expense Ratio Rating
0 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$PBQIX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- shxpx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
American Beacon Shapiro Equity Opportunities Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.17% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- suvcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
PGIM QMA Large-Cap Value Fund- Class C
Expenses: 2.13% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- gtmex
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Glenmede Large Cap Value Portfolio
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- cvlex
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Cullen Value Fund Retail Class
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- tvvix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Guggenheim RBP® Large-Cap Value Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- nwgyx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Nationwide Ziegler Equity Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pfaax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Pacific Funds Large-Cap Value Class A
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- dalvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Dunham Large Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.39% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- zdivx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Zacks Dividend Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.30% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »