Expense Ratio Rating
5 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
7 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
7 /10
$RYSEX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 197 US Stocks Small Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- avuv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Avantis U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Expenses: 0.25% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- devlx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Delaware Small Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.15% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- frvlx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Franklin Small Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.05% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- psopx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
JPMorgan Small Cap Value Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.99% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- ssgsx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Victory Sycamore Small Company Opportunity Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- vsvix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Victory Integrity Small-Cap Value Fund Class Y
Expenses: 1.12% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- espix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
Wells Fargo Special Small Cap Value Fund - Class Admin
Expenses: 1.20% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- acvix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Value
American Century Small Cap Value Fund I Class
Expenses: 1.05% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pqsv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Small Value
PGIM QMA Strategic Alpha Small-Cap Value ETF
Expenses: 0.29% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Small Value US Stocks fund. See why »