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 Conservative Hybrid Fund (Existing number of Segregated Portfolios - 1) | ICICI Prudential Conservative Hybrid | |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund (Existing number of Segregated Portfolios - 1) | itself | 8% |
| ICICI Prudential Conservative Hybrid | 8% | itself |
Most alike: Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund (Existing number of Segregated Portfolios - 1) and ICICI Prudential Conservative Hybrid Fund share 8% 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 Conservative Hybrid Fund (Existing number of Segregated Portfolios - 1) | ICICI Prudential Conservative Hybrid |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Conservative Hybrid | Conservative Hybrid |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 28% of 109 | 100% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.83% | 0.83% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 5% | 2% |
| Run by P7 | Sushil Budhia · 6.5 yrs | Manish Banthia · 13 yrs |
| 1-year return | 6.8% | 3.1% |
| 3 years p.a. | 8.7% | 8.8% |
| 5 years p.a. | 8.3% | 8.3% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −1.8% | −3.0% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹962 Cr | ₹3,355 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 14 yrs | 2 mo |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 93 · 37% | 137 · 25% |
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.