Expense Ratio Rating
6 /10
Expense Rating
1 /10
Market Score
1 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
1 /10
$RBESX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 1,315 Bond High Yield Bond funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- nerax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.16% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hahcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Hartford High Yield 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 »
- sihsx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Guggenheim High Yield Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.02% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- cpctx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Counterpoint Tactical Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.54% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- eeidx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Eaton Vance Emerging Markets Debt Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- sainx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Virtus Seix Corporate Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- hxiix
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Harvest Asian Bond Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.88% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- bxfcx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Barings Global Floating Rate Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.74% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- pycex
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Payden Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »