Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$TDFAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- pjgzx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
PGIM Jennison Focused Value Fund- Class Z
Expenses: 0.80% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- eapdx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Parametric Dividend Income Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 0.65% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- dqiax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
BNY Mellon Equity Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.03% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- mcbax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
BlackRock Basic Value Fund Investor C Shares
Expenses: 1.61% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- wbiy
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
WBI Power Factor High Dividend ETF
Expenses: 0.70% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- adecx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Columbia Large Cap Value Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.76% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- eplpx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
MainStay Epoch U.S. Equity Yield Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.08% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pceqx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Pioneer Equity Income Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.78% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- tgdix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
TCW Relative Value Large Cap Fund Class Institutional
Expenses: 0.74% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »