Expense Ratio Rating
7 /10
Expense Rating
3 /10
Market Score
8 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
8 /10
$TCLCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- pnbcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
AllianzGI Large-Cap Value Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.87% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hdctx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Rational Equity Armor Fund Institutional
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- gsgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Goldman Sachs Equity Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.85% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- wflvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Wells Fargo Large Company Value Fund - Class C
Expenses: 1.58% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- tveix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Guggenheim RBP® Dividend Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hrsvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Heartland Select Value Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- sfvax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
AIG Strategic Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.45% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hadux
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Horizon Active Dividend Fund Advisor Class
Expenses: 1.24% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fadvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Frost Value Equity Fund Investor Class Shares
Expenses: 0.95% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »