Expense Ratio Rating
3 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
4 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
4 /10
$WPVLX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 643 US Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- jpfcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
JPMorgan Equity Focus Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.59% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- insix
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Catalyst Insider Buying Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.27% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- tgvcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Touchstone Growth Opportunities Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.00% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- jlgax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
JAG Large Cap Growth Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- gcgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Goldman Sachs Concentrated Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.91% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- bfonx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Biondo Focus Fund Investor Class
Expenses: 1.50% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- qclgx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Federated MDT Large Cap Growth Fund Class C Shares
Expenses: 2.23% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- pgiex
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Putnam Focused Equity Fund Class C
Expenses: 2.03% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- pgivx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Putnam Focused Equity Fund Class B
Expenses: 2.03% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »