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
| Union Retirement | Nippon India Retirement Fund- Wealth Creation Scheme | |
|---|---|---|
| Union Retirement | itself | 32% |
| Nippon India Retirement Fund- Wealth Creation Scheme | 32% | itself |
Most alike: Union Retirement Fund and Nippon India Retirement Fund- Wealth Creation Scheme share 32% 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 | Union Retirement | Nippon India Retirement Fund- Wealth Creation Scheme |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Retirement | Retirement |
| Share of three-year stretches it beat its category P4 | 100% of 13 | 51% of 104 |
| Regular plan costs more than Direct by, a year P5 | 1.59% | 1.23% |
| Portfolio turned over a year P1 | 80% | 76% |
| Run by P7 | Pratik Dharmshi · 1.7 yrs | Pranay Sinha · 5.4 yrs |
| 1-year return | 3.9% | −2.5% |
| 3 years p.a. | 13.3% | 11.1% |
| 5 years p.a. | — | 10.8% |
| Deepest fall (max drawdown) | −17.8% | −18.3% |
| Assets (AUM) | ₹209 Cr | ₹3,044 Cr |
| Disclosed history | 2.2 yrs | 12 yrs |
| Holdings · top ten weight | 80 · 28% | 74 · 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.