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 Consumption | ICICI Prudential Technology | |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India Consumption | itself | 6% |
| ICICI Prudential Technology | 6% | itself |
Most alike: Nippon India Consumption Fund and ICICI Prudential Technology Fund share 6% 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 Consumption | ICICI Prudential Technology |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 56% of 109 | 58% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 1.11% | 0.98% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 75% | 61% |
| Run by P7 | Kinjal Desai · 1.0 yrs | Vaibhav Dusad · 6.3 yrs |
| 1-year return | −7.2% | −12.1% |
| 3 years p.a. | 9.9% | 5.3% |
| 5 years p.a. | 12.4% | 3.4% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −23.9% | −28.0% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹2,385 Cr | ₹13,677 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 14 yrs | 13 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 47 · 49% | 71 · 54% |
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.