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 Value | Mirae Asset Large Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quant Small CapSmall Cap | itself | Quant Small Cap and Nippon India Value share 5% of their portfolios | Quant Small Cap and Mirae Asset Large Cap share 3% of their portfolios |
| Nippon India ValueValue | Nippon India Value and Quant Small Cap share 5% of their portfolios | itself | Nippon India Value and Mirae Asset Large Cap share 45% of their portfolios |
| Mirae Asset Large CapLarge Cap | Mirae Asset Large Cap and Quant Small Cap share 3% of their portfolios | Mirae Asset Large Cap and Nippon India Value share 45% of their portfolios | itself |
Closest pair: Nippon India Value Fund and Mirae Asset Large Cap Fund share 45% of their portfolios. Most of what each of them holds, the other does not; whether two funds this far apart belong in one portfolio is a separate question.
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 Value | Mirae Asset Large Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Small Cap | Value | Large Cap |
| Fund house | quant Money Managers Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | Mirae Asset Investment Managers (India) Pvt. Ltd |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 69% of 109 | 93% of 109 | 64% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.84% points | 0.82% points | 1.06% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 75% | 82% | 53% |
| Run by P7 | Ankit Pande · ≥ 2.5 yrs | Meenakshi Dawar · 8.3 yrs | Gaurav Misra · 7.7 yrs |
| 1-year return | 12.7% | −2.8% | −3.3% |
| 3 years p.a. | 18.5% | 14.0% | 8.6% |
| 5 years p.a. | 19.2% | 13.4% | 7.8% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −24.4% | −17.6% | −15.8% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹34,069 Cr | ₹8,875 Cr | ₹38,599 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 7.5 yrs | 12 yrs | 5.1 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 120 · 43% | 94 · 36% | 76 · 48% |
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.