Expense Ratio Rating
4 /10
Expense Rating
0 /10
Market Score
5 /10
Category Score
8 /10
Market Size
5 /10
$WVALX Alternatives
Similar Funds
We found 643 US Stocks Large Growth funds. Here they are ordered by FI Score.
- nefsx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Natixis Funds Trust I U.S. Equity Opportunities Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.17% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- acslx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
American Century Select Fund C Class
Expenses: 1.97% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- deucx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Delaware U.S. Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.86% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- plxgx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Virtus KAR Capital Growth Fund Class I
Expenses: 1.02% (Better than 1% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- illlx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Transamerica Capital Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.93% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- sdgcx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
DWS Capital Growth Fund - Class C
Expenses: 1.78% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- dlqax
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
BNY Mellon Large Cap Equity Fund Class A
Expenses: 1.09% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- arttx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
Artisan Focus Fund Investor Shares
Expenses: 1.37% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »
- jcicx
- Mutual Fund
- US Stocks
- Large Growth
JPMorgan Intrepid Growth Fund Class C
Expenses: 1.34% (Better than 0% of similar funds)
This is a bad choice for a Large Growth US Stocks fund. See why »