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 Japan Equity | ICICI Prudential Technology | |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India Japan Equity | itself | 0% |
| ICICI Prudential Technology | 0% | itself |
Most alike: Nippon India Japan Equity Fund and ICICI Prudential Technology Fund share 0% 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 Japan Equity | ICICI Prudential Technology |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 28% of 109 | 58% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 1.13% | 0.98% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | not measured | 61% |
| Run by P7 | Kinjal Desai · 8.3 yrs | Vaibhav Dusad · 6.3 yrs |
| 1-year return | 28.3% | −12.1% |
| 3 years p.a. | 21.6% | 5.3% |
| 5 years p.a. | 10.9% | 3.4% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −15.7% | −28.0% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹336 Cr | ₹13,677 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 12 yrs | 13 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 33 · 41% | 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.