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
| Nippon India Banking & Financial Services | ICICI Prudential India Opportunities | |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India Banking & Financial Services | itself | 29% |
| ICICI Prudential India Opportunities | 29% | itself |
Most alike: Nippon India Banking & Financial Services Fund and ICICI Prudential India Opportunities Fund share 29% 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 | Nippon India Banking & Financial Services | ICICI Prudential India Opportunities |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 46% of 109 | 100% of 57 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.87% | 1.47% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 53% | 76% |
| Run by P7 | Vinay Sharma · 8.3 yrs | Roshan Chutkey · 7.7 yrs |
| 1-year return | 2.9% | −0.6% |
| 3 years p.a. | 12.3% | 13.8% |
| 5 years p.a. | 13.4% | 16.6% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −16.7% | −13.7% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹7,583 Cr | ₹38,633 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 14 yrs | 7.3 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 40 · 58% | 80 · 45% |
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.