Expense Ratio Rating
2 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
2 /10
Category Score
0 /10
Market Size
2 /10
$RYILX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 11,127 Alternative Inverse funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- jensx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Jensen Quality Growth Fund Class J
Expenses: 0.86% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- msxax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
MainStay MacKay S&P 500 Index Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.54% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- olgax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
JPMorgan Large Cap Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- pfpwx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Parnassus Endeavor Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 0.71% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- mln
- ETF
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
VanEck Vectors AMT-Free Long Municipal Index ETF
Expenses: 0.24% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- nulg
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF
Expenses: 0.35% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- astex
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
American Funds Short-Term Tax-Exempt Bond Fund® Class A
Expenses: 0.58% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- swhgx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Schwab MarketTrack Growth Portfolioâ¢
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- beqgx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
American Century Equity Growth Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.67% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »