Expense Ratio Rating
9 /10
Expense Rating
7 /10
Market Score
10 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
10 /10
$VEIPX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 566 US Stocks Large Value funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- fstkx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated MDT Large Cap Value Fund Service Shares
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- fstrx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Federated MDT Large Cap Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.98% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- pzfvx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
John Hancock Classic Value Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.17% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- twadx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
American Century Value Fund A Class
Expenses: 1.25% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- vgrix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
JPMorgan Growth And Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.93% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- brudx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
MFS Blended Research Value Equity Fund Class A
Expenses: 0.74% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- jivax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
JPMorgan Intrepid Value Fund Class A Shares
Expenses: 0.82% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- nbhax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Value
Neuberger Berman Equity Income Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.06% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »
- rndv
- ETF
- US Stocks
- Large Value
First Trust US Equity Dividend Select ETF
Expenses: 0.50% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Value US Stocks fund. See why »