Expense Ratio Rating
2 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
1 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
1 /10
$SCIIX Alternatives
Different Funds
We found 9,394 International Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fngo
- ETF
- Alternative
- Leveraged Equities
MicroSectors FANG+ Index 2X Leveraged ETN
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Leveraged Equities Alternative fund. See why »
- usv
- ETF
- Commodities
- Focused
UBS ETRACS CMCI Silver Total Return ETN
Expenses: 0.40% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Focused Commodities fund. See why »
- hafix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Hartford AARP Balanced Retirement Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.61% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- evifx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Eaton Vance Balanced Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- difcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
MFS Diversified Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.72% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- jcafx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- Municipal Bond
John Hancock California Tax Free Income Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Municipal Bond Bond fund. See why »
- mnbix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Manning & Napier Pro-Blend Extended Term Series Class I
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fbmcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Franklin Managed Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.69% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- spicx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Invesco S&P 500 Index Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.31% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- jahyx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Janus Henderson High-Yield Fund Class T
Expenses: 0.89% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- oosax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Invesco Oppenheimer Senior Floating Rate Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.11% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- gudb
- ETF
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Sage ESG Intermediate Credit ETF
Expenses: 0.35% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- vtaix
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Virtus Tactical Allocation Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.88% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- omgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Mid-Cap Growth
JPMorgan Mid Cap Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.73% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Mid-Cap Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- oibax
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
Invesco Oppenheimer International Bond Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.01% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »
- rsggx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- Total World
Victory RS Global Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Total World Allocation fund. See why »
- sksix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Small Blend
AMG Managers Skyline Special Equities Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.01% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Small Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- silvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
SGI U.S. Large Cap Equity Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- smdsx
- Mutual Fund
- Bond
- High Yield Bond
ALPS/Smith Short Duration Bond Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.49% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a High Yield Bond Bond fund. See why »