Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
7 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
7 /10
$TWQAX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- mvebx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Meritage Value Equity Fund Institutional Shares
Expenses: 1.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- idhcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Integrity Dividend Harvest Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.70% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pjgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
PGIM Jennison Focused Value 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 »
- hcmax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Hillman Value Fund No Load Shares
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hulix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Huber Capital Equity Income Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.34% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pwdax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Power Dividend Index Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.52% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- svtix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Symons Value Institutional Fund Class II
Expenses: 1.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- sccux
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Invesco Low Volatility Equity Yield Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.93% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- hdcax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Rational Equity Armor Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »