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 Balanced Advantage | ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage | |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India Balanced Advantage | itself | 39% |
| ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage | 39% | itself |
Most alike: Nippon India Balanced Advantage Fund and ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund share 39% 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 Balanced Advantage | ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 71% of 109 | 86% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 1.18% | 0.93% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 53% | 42% |
| Run by P7 | Sushil Budhia · 5.4 yrs | Manish Banthia · 17 yrs |
| 1-year return | 2.8% | 3.9% |
| 3 years p.a. | 10.8% | 11.3% |
| 5 years p.a. | 9.8% | 10.7% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −8.6% | −8.2% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹9,674 Cr | ₹75,356 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 13 yrs | 12 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 148 · 31% | 239 · 35% |
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.