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 Arbitrage fund — overlap says most about funds of one kind:
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| each fundagainst each other | Invesco India Arbitrage | ICICI Prudential Arbitrage | Nippon India Arbitrage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Invesco India ArbitrageArbitrage | itself | Invesco India Arbitrage and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage share 54% of their portfolios | Invesco India Arbitrage and Nippon India Arbitrage share 47% of their portfolios |
| ICICI Prudential ArbitrageArbitrage | ICICI Prudential Arbitrage and Invesco India Arbitrage share 54% of their portfolios | itself | ICICI Prudential Arbitrage and Nippon India Arbitrage share 50% of their portfolios |
| Nippon India ArbitrageArbitrage | Nippon India Arbitrage and Invesco India Arbitrage share 47% of their portfolios | Nippon India Arbitrage and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage share 50% of their portfolios | itself |
Closest pair: Invesco India Arbitrage Fund and ICICI Prudential Arbitrage Fund share 54% of their portfolios. Holding both is closer to holding one twice than to diversifying.
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 | Invesco India Arbitrage | ICICI Prudential Arbitrage | Nippon India Arbitrage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Arbitrage | Arbitrage | Arbitrage |
| Fund house | Invesco Asset Management (India) Private Limited | ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 93% of 109 | 100% of 109 | 100% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 0.66% points | 0.60% points | 0.70% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 233% | 128% | 118% |
| Run by P7 | Deepak Gupta · ≥ 1 mo | Nikhil Kabra · 5.8 yrs | Rohit Hashmukh Shah · 2.3 yrs |
| 1-year return | 6.9% | 6.7% | 6.8% |
| 3 years p.a. | 7.5% | 7.3% | 7.3% |
| 5 years p.a. | 7.1% | 6.7% | 6.8% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −0.4% | −0.4% | −0.4% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹24,108 Cr | ₹34,536 Cr | ₹16,560 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 11 yrs | 10 yrs | 14 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 582 · 113% | 205 · 41% | 184 · 45% |
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.