ANVESHAN Create account

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.

4 of 6 chosen

  • ICICI Prudential Arbitrage FundArbitrage×
  • Kotak Arbitrage FundArbitrage · no portfolio disclosed×
  • Nippon India Arbitrage FundArbitrage×
  • Tata Arbitrage FundArbitrage×

Overlap

share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common

each fundagainst each otherICICI Prudential ArbitrageKotak ArbitrageNippon India ArbitrageTata Arbitrage
ICICI Prudential ArbitrageArbitrage
itself
ICICI Prudential Arbitrage and Kotak Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
ICICI Prudential Arbitrage and Nippon India Arbitrage share 50% of their portfolios
ICICI Prudential Arbitrage and Tata Arbitrage share -0% of their portfolios
Kotak ArbitrageArbitrage
Kotak Arbitrage and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
itself
Kotak Arbitrage and Nippon India Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
Kotak Arbitrage and Tata Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
Nippon India ArbitrageArbitrage
Nippon India Arbitrage and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage share 50% of their portfolios
Nippon India Arbitrage and Kotak Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
itself
Nippon India Arbitrage and Tata Arbitrage share -0% of their portfolios
Tata ArbitrageArbitrage
Tata Arbitrage and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage share -0% of their portfolios
Tata Arbitrage and Kotak Arbitrage: no portfolio disclosed for Kotak Arbitrage
Tata Arbitrage and Nippon India Arbitrage share -0% of their portfolios
itself

Closest pair: ICICI Prudential Arbitrage Fund and Nippon India Arbitrage Fund share 50% of their portfolios. Holding both is closer to holding one twice than to diversifying.

Kotak Arbitrage has no portfolio on file, so its row is blank rather than zero — that is an absence in our data, not a finding about the fund.

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

MeasureICICI Prudential ArbitrageKotak ArbitrageNippon India ArbitrageTata Arbitrage
CategoryArbitrageArbitrageArbitrageArbitrage
Fund houseICICI Prudential Asset Management Company LimitedKotak Mahindra Asset Management Company Limited.Nippon Life India Asset Management LimitedTata Asset Management Limited
Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4100% of 109100% of 109100% of 109100% of 58
Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P50.60% points0.58% points0.70% points0.82% points
Portfolio turned over a year P1128%not measured118%263%
Run by P7Nikhil Kabra · 5.8 yrsnot knownRohit Hashmukh Shah · 2.3 yrsSailesh Jain · ≥ 1.3 yrs
1-year return6.7%6.8%6.8%6.8%
3 years p.a.7.3%7.5%7.3%7.5%
5 years p.a.6.7%6.9%6.8%6.9%
Deepest fall (max drawdown)−0.4%−0.5%−0.4%−0.4%
Assets (AUM)₹34,536 Cr₹70,955 Cr₹16,560 Cr₹24,426 Cr
Disclosed history10 yrs—14 yrs1.3 yrs
Holdings · top ten weight205 · 41%none disclosed184 · 45%212 · 52%

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.