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.
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| Franklin India Dynamic Accrual Fund (No. of segregated portfolios- 3) | Quantum Dynamic Term | |
|---|---|---|
| Franklin India Dynamic Accrual Fund (No. of segregated portfolios- 3) | itself | 0% |
| Quantum Dynamic Term | 0% | itself |
Most alike: Franklin India Dynamic Accrual Fund (No. of segregated portfolios- 3) and Quantum Dynamic Term Fund share 0% of their portfolios. Two funds this different are doing different things; whether that is what you want is a separate question.
Side by side
record, cost, returns, drawdown, size
| Measure | Franklin India Dynamic Accrual Fund (No. of segregated portfolios- 3) | Quantum Dynamic Term |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dynamic Bond | Dynamic Bond |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 40% of 52 | 67% of 52 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | -1.80% | 0.25% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | not measured | not measured |
| Run by P7 | not known | Sneha Pandey · 1.4 yrs |
| 1-year return | 9.3% | 3.7% |
| 3 years p.a. | 5.4% | 6.8% |
| 5 years p.a. | 6.6% | 6.2% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | not computed | −1.6% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹2,054 Cr | ₹89 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 7.1 yrs | 11 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 2 · 100% | 17 · 84% |
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.