Expense Ratio Rating
0 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
1 /10
Category Score
5 /10
Market Size
1 /10
$TPDCX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 748 Allocation All-In-One funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- nvgbx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Wells Fargo Growth Balanced Fund - Class Admin
Expenses: 0.89% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- wbalx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Weitz Balanced Fund - Investor Class
Expenses: 0.85% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- acoax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
American Century Strategic Allocation: Moderate Fund A Class
Expenses: 1.31% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- lmrnx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
1919 Socially Responsive Balanced Fund Class I
Expenses: 0.91% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fitrx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Delaware Total Return Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.18% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fncax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Franklin NextStep Conservative Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.60% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- fmsdx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
Fidelity® Multi-Asset Income Fund
Expenses: 0.84% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- mrkax
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
AB All Market Income Portfolio Class A
Expenses: 0.78% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »
- jdvcx
- Mutual Fund
- Allocation
- All-In-One
JPMorgan Diversified Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a All-In-One Allocation fund. See why »