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. All 6,937 schemes are searchable — by scheme name, by fund house, or by the category you know them as.
3 of 6 chosen
Add another Value fund — overlap says most about funds of one kind:
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| each fundagainst each other | Nippon India Value | Bandhan Value | Mirae Asset Large Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nippon India ValueValue | itself | Nippon India Value and Bandhan Value share 37% of their portfolios | Nippon India Value and Mirae Asset Large Cap share 45% of their portfolios |
| Bandhan ValueValue | Bandhan Value and Nippon India Value share 37% of their portfolios | itself | Bandhan Value and Mirae Asset Large Cap share 43% of their portfolios |
| Mirae Asset Large CapLarge Cap | Mirae Asset Large Cap and Nippon India Value share 45% of their portfolios | Mirae Asset Large Cap and Bandhan Value share 43% of their portfolios | itself |
Closest pair: Nippon India Value Fund and Mirae Asset Large Cap Fund share 45% of their portfolios. Most of what each of them holds, the other does not; whether two funds this far apart belong in one portfolio is a separate question.
Read a cell as: of everything the two funds hold, this much is the same holding at the same weight. It is symmetric — the pair above the diagonal and the pair below it are one number shown twice. A pair at 0% holds nothing in common, which is a real answer, and often the useful one.
Side by side
record, cost, returns, drawdown, size
| Measure | Nippon India Value | Bandhan Value | Mirae Asset Large Cap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Value | Value | Large Cap |
| Fund house | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | Bandhan AMC Limited | Mirae Asset Investment Managers (India) Pvt. Ltd |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 93% of 109 | 67% of 109 | 64% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.82% points | 1.17% points | 1.06% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 82% | 68% | 53% |
| Run by P7 | Meenakshi Dawar · 8.3 yrs | Daylynn Pinto · ≥ 3.5 yrs | Gaurav Misra · 7.7 yrs |
| 1-year return | −2.8% | −1.1% | −3.3% |
| 3 years p.a. | 14.0% | 10.4% | 8.6% |
| 5 years p.a. | 13.4% | 12.8% | 7.8% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −17.6% | −17.9% | −15.8% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹8,875 Cr | ₹10,051 Cr | ₹38,599 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 12 yrs | 4.9 yrs | 5.1 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 94 · 36% | 68 · 47% | 76 · 48% |
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.