Compare
Up to six funds side by side, and how much of each is the same portfolio as the others. Overlap is Σ min(weight) over the stocks both hold, from the latest disclosures. All 6,937 schemes are searchable — by scheme name, by fund house, or by the category you know them as.
3 of 6 chosen
Add another Small Cap fund — overlap says most about funds of one kind:
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| each fundagainst each other | Quant Small Cap | Nippon India Growth Mid Cap | HDFC Small Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quant Small CapSmall Cap | itself | Quant Small Cap and Nippon India Growth Mid Cap share 4% of their portfolios | Quant Small Cap and HDFC Small Cap share 3% of their portfolios |
| Nippon India Growth Mid CapMid Cap | Nippon India Growth Mid Cap and Quant Small Cap share 4% of their portfolios | itself | Nippon India Growth Mid Cap and HDFC Small Cap share 6% of their portfolios |
| HDFC Small CapSmall Cap | HDFC Small Cap and Quant Small Cap share 3% of their portfolios | HDFC Small Cap and Nippon India Growth Mid Cap share 6% of their portfolios | itself |
No two of these hold much of the same portfolio. The closest pair, Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund and HDFC Small Cap Fund, share 6%. That is a number, not a resemblance: at this level the two funds are doing separate things, and nothing here says whether that is what you wanted.
Read a cell as: of everything the two funds hold, this much is the same holding at the same weight. It is symmetric — the pair above the diagonal and the pair below it are one number shown twice. A pair at 0% holds nothing in common, which is a real answer, and often the useful one.
Side by side
record, cost, returns, drawdown, size
| Measure | Quant Small Cap | Nippon India Growth Mid Cap | HDFC Small Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Small Cap | Mid Cap | Small Cap |
| Fund house | quant Money Managers Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | HDFC Asset Management Company Limited |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 69% of 109 | 87% of 109 | 63% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.84% points | 0.86% points | 1.25% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 75% | 52% | 46% |
| Run by P7 | Ankit Pande · ≥ 2.5 yrs | Rupesh Patel · 3.6 yrs | not known |
| 1-year return | 12.7% | 7.0% | −2.6% |
| 3 years p.a. | 18.5% | 18.6% | 11.3% |
| 5 years p.a. | 19.2% | 18.0% | 14.8% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −24.4% | −19.9% | −22.6% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹34,069 Cr | ₹48,143 Cr | ₹42,162 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 7.5 yrs | 14 yrs | 2.4 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 120 · 43% | 105 · 25% | 87 · 35% |
Funds in different categories are not comparable on returns — a category error is the first thing the postulates refuse to make. Compare each to its own category on its fund page.