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 Mid Cap fund — overlap says most about funds of one kind:
Overlap
share of the portfolio the two funds hold in common
| each fundagainst each other | Mirae Asset Midcap | Motilal Oswal Midcap | UTI Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mirae Asset MidcapMid Cap | itself | Mirae Asset Midcap and Motilal Oswal Midcap share 21% of their portfolios | Mirae Asset Midcap and UTI Value share 11% of their portfolios |
| Motilal Oswal MidcapMid Cap | Motilal Oswal Midcap and Mirae Asset Midcap share 21% of their portfolios | itself | Motilal Oswal Midcap and UTI Value share 4% of their portfolios |
| UTI ValueValue | UTI Value and Mirae Asset Midcap share 11% of their portfolios | UTI Value and Motilal Oswal Midcap share 4% of their portfolios | itself |
Closest pair: Mirae Asset Midcap Fund and Motilal Oswal Midcap Fund share 21% 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 | Mirae Asset Midcap | Motilal Oswal Midcap | UTI Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Mid Cap | Mid Cap | Value |
| Fund house | Mirae Asset Investment Managers (India) Pvt. Ltd | Motilal Oswal Asset Management Company Limited | UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 41% of 51 | 54% of 109 | 37% of 109 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 1.55% points | 1.37% points | 0.79% points |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 89% | 92% | 47% |
| Run by P7 | Ankit Jain · 7.2 yrs | Rakesh Shetty · 3.8 yrs | Amit Premchandani · 8.6 yrs |
| 1-year return | 9.1% | −0.5% | −4.1% |
| 3 years p.a. | 16.4% | 19.5% | 12.1% |
| 5 years p.a. | 15.8% | 21.1% | 11.0% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −22.5% | −28.9% | −17.2% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹20,000 Cr | ₹41,706 Cr | ₹9,603 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 5.1 yrs | 4.0 yrs | 12 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 68 · 32% | 32 · 54% | 71 · 41% |
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.