Expense Ratio Rating
5 /10
Expense Rating
1 /10
Market Score
3 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
3 /10
$PLAHX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- ecdax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Ashmore Emerging Markets Corporate Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.42% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- dnfrx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Dunham Floating Rate Bond Fund Class N
Expenses: 1.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- sasfx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
AIG Senior Floating Rate Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rsfcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Victory Floating Rate Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.80% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- phscx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PIMCO High Yield Spectrum Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.72% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nfiax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Neuberger Berman Floating Rate Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nwjtx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Nationwide Loomis Short Term Bond Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.27% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- eshax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Short Duration High Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.90% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- frfcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
PGIM Floating Rate Income Fund- Class C
Expenses: 1.72% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »