Expense Ratio Rating
6 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
10 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$SDYAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 668 US Stocks Large Blend funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- sopax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
ClearBridge Dividend Strategy Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.04% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- eiutx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Eaton Vance Dividend Builder Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.76% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- fclkx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Fidelity® Large Cap Stock K6 Fund
Expenses: 0.44% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- nsbax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Nuveen Santa Barbara Dividend Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.96% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- egoix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Wells Fargo Large Cap Core Fund - Class Inst
Expenses: 0.67% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- gtlox
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Core Equity Portfolio
Expenses: 0.86% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- lfeq
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
VanEck Vectors Long/Flat Trend ETF
Expenses: 0.60% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- nbsrx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Neuberger Berman Sustainable Equity Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.86% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »
- sciu
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Blend
Global X Scientific Beta US ETF
Expenses: 0.19% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is an OK choice for a Large Blend US Stocks fund. See why »