JM Financial · Arbitrage

JM Arbitrage Fund

Hybrid Scheme - Arbitrage Fund Direct plan, growth riskometer: Low benchmark: Nifty 50 Arbitrage Index launched 1 Jun 2006 open-ended

At a glance

the fund as it stands today, from public disclosures

NAV, 21 Sep 2026

₹37.42

+0.05% since 18 Sep 2026, the previous NAV

1 year

6.4%

return

3 years

7.0%

a year

5 years

6.4%

a year

Since launch

5.9%

a year, over 12.0 years

Assets (AUM)

₹453 Cr

Sep 2026 factsheet

Expense ratio, Direct / Regular

0.35% / 0.91%

a year, as of Sep 2026

Holdings

129

top ten are 36% of the fund · Aug 2026

Disclosed history

14 yrs

Dec 2012 – Aug 2026 · 5 of 11 checks could run

Fund managers

Asit Bhandarkar · since Jul 2014Ruchi Fozdar · since Oct 2024 · debt portionSatish Ramanathan · since Oct 2024 · co-managerDeepak Gupta · since Apr 2025 · co-manager

All managers →

As the Sep 2026 factsheet printed it: portfolio turnover 1.41×. Exit load and minimum investment are not yet extracted from the scheme documents.

What only Anveshan can tell you

measured from the disclosures, not quoted from a brochure — each links to how it was done

P5Cost, measured

Regular plan costs 0.56% a year more than Direct

₹9,186 on ₹1 lakh over ten years. Same portfolio, two prices — the difference is what the Regular plan's distribution costs you, read from the two NAVs.

See how it is measured →

P7Whose record

Run by Asit Bhandarkar for 12 yrs

with Ruchi Fozdar, Satish Ramanathan, Deepak Gupta. A return earned before they arrived is the house's record, not theirs — the tenure table shows the fund against its category over exactly their months.

Asit Bhandarkar's other funds →

NAVTracking gap

Not replicated: the portfolio cannot be priced line by line in this build.

Each day, the NAV the fund published against the NAV its last disclosed portfolio would have produced at that day's prices. A gap that opens and stays is a change the fund has made and not disclosed yet.

See the daily gap →

P4Consistency

Beat its category in 0% of three-year stretches, and averaged −0.6 points a year across all of them

109 rolling windows since 2014 · behind by 0.6 when it lost points a year — and never won one. A single five-year figure depends on the day you look; the share of stretches won does not — and the average margin says whether winning often was worth anything.

See every window →

NAV and drawdown

Direct plan, growth class · as of 21 Sep 2026

Month-end NAV, indexed to 100 at Sep 2014

145 month-ends · ₹18.75 → ₹37.42, 2.0× since Sep 2014

Deepest fall (max drawdown)

−0.5%

3 Aug 2026 → 6 Aug 2026

Worst month

0.1%

May 2026

Days to recover

from the deepest trough back to the old high

Drawdown is measured on the last year of daily NAV; trailing returns are CAGR of the direct growth class. A single end date decides them — the consistency card (P4) below is the record that does not, and it reports both how often the fund beat its category and by how much, because the first without the second can point the wrong way.

Holdings

Aug 2026 disclosure · 129 lines · when each was first held and the change over the last three disclosures

#	Holding	Sector	Weight	First held	Held for	3-mo change
76	Ambuja Cements Limited equity	Cement & Cement Products	0.36%	Oct 2025	11 mo	-0.07%
77	Lupin Limited equity	Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology	0.35%	Aug 2026	1 mo	+0.35%
78	Adani Green Energy Limited equity	Power	0.33%	Mar 2026	6 mo	-0.20%
79	Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited equity	Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology	0.31%	Nov 2025	10 mo	-0.06%
80	Coal India Limited equity	Consumable Fuels	0.30%	Jun 2026	3 mo	+0.30%
81	Tata Consumer Products Limited equity	Agricultural Food & other Products	0.30%	Jun 2026	3 mo	+0.30%
82	Divi's Laboratories Limited equity	Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology	0.29%	Apr 2025	1.4 yrs	+0.02%
83	Indian Energy Exchange Limited equity	Capital Markets	0.27%	May 2026	4 mo	+0.25%
84	Muthoot Finance Limited equity	Finance	0.24%	Jul 2026	2 mo	+0.24%
85	Aurobindo Pharma Limited equity	Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology	0.23%	Mar 2025	1.5 yrs	+0.17%
86	Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles Limited equity	Automobiles	0.22%	Jun 2026	3 mo	+0.22%
87	Mankind Pharma Limited equity	Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology	0.21%	Jun 2026	3 mo	+0.21%
88	Patanjali Foods Limited equity	Agricultural Food & other Products	0.21%	Sep 2025	1.0 yrs	-0.14%
89	UPL Limited equity	Fertilizers & Agrochemicals	0.21%	Oct 2025	11 mo	-0.08%
90	Colgate Palmolive (India) Limited equity	Personal Products	0.19%	Aug 2026	1 mo	+0.19%
91	UltraTech Cement Limited equity	Cement & Cement Products	0.19%	Aug 2025	1.1 yrs	+0.08%
92	The Tata Power Company Limited equity	Power	0.19%	Mar 2024	2.5 yrs	+0.01%
93	Hero MotoCorp Limited equity	Automobiles	0.19%	Apr 2026	5 mo	+0.15%
94	GMR Airports Limited equity	Transport Infrastructure	0.18%	Apr 2024	2.4 yrs	-0.01%
95	Hindustan Zinc Limited equity	Non - Ferrous Metals	0.15%	May 2025	1.3 yrs	+0.09%
96	Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited equity	Petroleum Products	0.15%	Feb 2026	7 mo	+0.11%
97	JSW Energy Limited equity	Power	0.14%	Jun 2026	3 mo	+0.14%
98	CG Power And Industrial Solutions Ltd equity	Electrical Equipment	0.13%	Dec 2025	9 mo	+0.02%
99	APL Apollo Tubes Limited equity	Industrial Products	0.13%	Mar 2026	6 mo	-0.01%
100	Cummins India Limited equity	Industrial Products	0.11%	Aug 2026	1 mo	+0.11%

Showing 76–100 of 129 · page 4 of 6 rows per page102550 all

Largest sectors, Aug 2026 · grey: a year ago

Banks23.6% · 22.0%

Telecom - Services6.7% · 3.9%

Finance6.2% · 6.7%

Automobiles5.2% · 3.2%

Ferrous Metals4.7%

Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology3.6% · 3.9%

Petroleum Products3.4% · 2.8%

Construction2.6% · 2.6%

share of the book05%10%15%20%25%

By market cap, Aug 2026

Large cap56.8%

Mid cap17.5%

Small / micro cap6.2%

Cash & equivalents5.8%

Other13.7%

share of the book025%50%75%100%

Composition by market cap, month by month — what the fund actually held against what its label says

Large cap 57%
Mid cap 18%
Small / micro 6%
Cash & other 6%

The seven checks, in full

each: the plain claim, where it sits in the category, and — folded — how it is measured and the case against. A flag fires only where headline and record disagree.

P4 Consistency, not a single end date

Beat its category in 0% of three-year stretches, and averaged −0.6 points a year across all of them

109 rolling windows since 2014 · behind by 0.6 when it lost points a year — and never won one

What this means. Take every three-year stretch since the fund had a NAV, one starting each month, and ask two things of each: did it beat the typical fund in its category, and by how much. Counting the wins tells you the record does not depend on when you happen to look; averaging the margin tells you whether winning often was worth anything, because four small wins do not pay for one large loss.

How often, and by how much. The count and the average agree. It did not win one of the 109; the average across all of them is −0.6 points. The worst window ended Sep 2021, 1.2 points behind.

lowest in categoryhighest in category

5th percentile · bottom decile of 24 funds · category median 33%

windows measured109windows won0average across every window−0.61 pts a year · median −0.46when behind, by how much−0.61 pts a year over 109 windowsworst window−1.22 pts a year, ended Sep 2021best window−0.14 pts a year, ended Sep 2017non-overlapping windows in that span4 — the rolling count overlaps, this does not

Fund minus category, each rolling three-year window

ahead of categorybehind

Each bar is one window's margin in percentage points a year. The height of the bars, not the count of green ones, is what the average across every window measures.

How it is measured, and the case against

A fund that beats its category in most rolling three-year windows has a record; one that beats it in a few has an end date. How often it won and by how much are different questions, and this card answers both, because a fund can win four windows in five and still be behind across all five.

How often has it beaten its category, across every window?

Why this might matterRolling every three-year window forward month by month gives hundreds of overlapping observations instead of one. A single end date decides a headline five-year figure; the share of windows won cannot be flattered by when you happen to look. The average margin across every window is that share and the payoff multiplied together — win share x average beat plus loss share x average shortfall is exactly the average — so a high share bought with a few ruinous windows cannot hide behind the count.

Why it might notRolling windows overlap heavily, so they are not independent observations and the true sample is far smaller than the count suggests — the card says how many non-overlapping windows the same span holds, and it is usually a handful. A fund that changed manager or mandate carries a record that is only partly its own. The average margin is only as meaningful as the category: where a category is a grab bag (“Other ETFs” holds gold beside equity), a large shortfall says the comparison is wrong, not that the fund is. And none of this forecasts: our own study found the share of windows won does not predict the next three years, and weighting it by payoff gives no reason to think otherwise.

P5 Cost, measured

Regular plan costs 0.56% a year more than Direct

₹9,186 on ₹1 lakh over ten years

What this means. The Regular and Direct plans hold the same portfolio; the Regular one pays a distributor out of your money every day. The gap between the two NAVs is that cost, measured from the NAVs rather than quoted from a document.

0.56 pp a year

costliest in categorycheapest in category

95th percentile · top decile of 30 funds · category median 0.71 pp

on ₹1,00,000 over ten years₹9,186Direct vs Regular, annualised5.9% vs 5.4%measured over12 years

How it is measured, and the case against

The Direct plan is the same portfolio, priced differently; the divergence of the two NAVs is the cost, measured rather than quoted.

What does the Regular plan actually cost against its Direct twin?

Why this might matterSame manager, same holdings, same day. The gap between the two NAV series is the one number on this page that is knowable today rather than hoped for, and it compounds for as long as the units are held.

Why it might notA Regular plan buys advice. If that advice stops someone selling in a drawdown it can be worth more than the fee — the cost is visible and the behavioural saving is not, which makes this comparison unfair in exactly one direction.

P1 Churn, and what it bought

Turns over 148% of the portfolio a year

−0.00 pts of excess return per unit of turnover

What this means. How much of the portfolio was bought and sold in a year, computed from what the fund disclosed each month. Trading costs something certain; the extra return it is meant to buy is not.

148% a year

costliest in categorycheapest in category

48th percentile · below median of 24 funds · category median 142%

excess return per unit of turnover−0.00 pts

How it is measured, and the case against

Turnover measured from consecutive disclosures — Σ|Δweight|/2 — costs something certain; the excess return it is meant to buy is not.

Is the trading paying for itself?

Why this might matterAMCs define their own turnover figure inconsistently. This one is computed from what the fund disclosed month to month, so two funds are comparable on it. Read it beside the excess return per unit of turnover.

Why it might notTurnover computed from month-end snapshots misses everything bought and sold inside a month, and a fund forced to sell by redemptions is charged for churn it did not choose.

P2 Conviction or inertia

Typical top-10 holding kept 20 months

What this means. How long a typical top-10 position has been in the top ten. Long-held positions are a decision; a top ten that changes every quarter is a reaction.

20 months

lowest in categoryhighest in category

63th percentile · above median of 24 funds · category median 16 months

active sharenot yet computable — needs index constituent files

How it is measured, and the case against

The median months a top-10 position has been held separates a portfolio somebody chose from one that drifted.

How long does a top-10 position stay a top-10 position?

Why this might matterConcentration is how a manager expresses conviction, and persistence is how long they keep it. Long-held positions with a rising weight are a decision; a top ten that turns over every quarter is a reaction.

Why it might notPersistence without active share is inertia: a portfolio of 166 names that tracks its category closely has diversified away the reason to pay for it. Active share needs index constituent files, which are not loaded yet.

P3 Hit rate of the top ten

5 of 10 top picks beat their peers over the next 6 months, and averaged 3.6 points ahead of them

1487 positions judged, one disclosure at a time · ahead by 21.1 points when it won, behind by 15.3 when it lost

What this means. Take each month's ten largest holdings and check whether each one beat the typical stock its category holds over the next six months, and by how much. A blended return can hide two wins and eight losses; a count of wins can hide one position that lost half its value.

How often, and by how much. The count and the average agree. Ahead by 21.1 points in the 770 positions it won and behind by 15.3 in the 717 it lost, so the average across all 1487 is +3.6 points. The worst position was INE062A01012 at the Sep 2014 disclosure, 95.3 points behind.

52%

lowest in categoryhighest in category

71th percentile · above median of 23 funds

positions judged1487beat the median stock770average across every position+3.60 pts · median +0.63when ahead, by how much+21.06 pts over 770 positionswhen behind, by how much−15.34 pts over 717 positionsworst position−95.32 pts, INE062A01012 at the Sep 2014 disclosurebest position+252.76 pts, INE423A01024 at the Sep 2020 disclosure

How it is measured, and the case against

A manager's largest bets, judged one by one over the following six months, say more than the fund's blended return — and how far each one beat or missed the median stock says more than counting how many did.

Of its top-10 positions, how often did they beat the category-median stock?

Why this might matterA fund can beat its category on two positions and lose on eight; the hit rate shows the pattern the aggregate hides. The average margin then shows what the hit rate hides in turn: six winners worth a point each do not pay for four losers worth ten, and only the margin says which happened.

Why it might notSix months is short, sizing matters more than counting, and a manager who is right on the biggest position and wrong on nine small ones has done their job — the margins here are unweighted, so they answer the counting question better, not the sizing one. Overlapping disclosures judge the same position again each month it is held, so one long-held winner is counted many times. And this is a description of six months already past, not a forecast of the next six.

P6 Size against edge

₹453 Cr, 27th percentile in category; 92% of growth came from inflows

smaller than 73% of the funds in its category (24 funds) · AUM Sep 2023 → Sep 2026 · Regular plan expense ratio 0.91%

What this means. Where the fund sits by size in its category, and how much of its growth was money arriving rather than the portfolio compounding. A very large fund cannot buy what a small one can; size should buy a lower fee in return.

27th percentile by AUM

largestsmallest

73th percentile · above median of 24 funds

median holding weight, trendrisingexpense ratio, Regular / Direct0.91% / 0.35% · category median 2.09%AUM, Sep 2023 → Sep 2026₹117 Cr → ₹453 Cr (+57% a year)of that change, from flows rather than returns92% net inflows · NAV +22% over the window

Assets under management, ₹ crore, Jun 2010 – Sep 2026

109 points · months without a factsheet figure use AMFI's quarterly average · Regular-plan expense ratio 1.15% in Jun 2018 → 0.91% in Sep 2026

How it is measured, and the case against

Past a certain size the smaller end of a mandate becomes unreachable, and the fund starts to look like its index; what size should buy in return is a lower expense ratio.

Has the fund outgrown the universe it invests in — and did size buy a lower fee?

Why this might matterSize narrows what the manager can meaningfully hold and should lower what the investor pays. Read the AUM history beside the expense ratio: a fund that has tripled through inflows while its Regular-plan TER sits above the category median has kept the benefit of scale for the house. The flow decomposition says how much of the growth was money arriving rather than the portfolio compounding.

Why it might notScale funds research teams, and plenty of large funds have gone on compounding for decades. Inflows follow performance, so a fund growing fast is usually one that did well; the constraint is real but not automatically binding, and a TER is a ceiling the AMC can cut at any time.

P7 Whose record is this

Run by Asit Bhandarkar for 12 yrs

with Ruchi Fozdar, Satish Ramanathan, Deepak Gupta

What this means. How long the people running it now have been running it, read from the monthly factsheets. A five-year record earned under someone else is not evidence about these managers.

12 yrs · Asit Bhandarkar

newest teamlongest-serving

95th percentile · top decile of 16 funds · category median 2.2 yrs

running it nowAsit Bhandarkar (since Jul 2014), Ruchi Fozdar (since Oct 2024), Satish Ramanathan (since Oct 2024), Deepak Gupta (since Apr 2025)share of the fund's life under the longest-serving current manager60%changes of hands in the archive2 — last Apr 2025

Who ran it, month by month · factsheets through Sep 2026

running it nowearlier

Manager	Role	From	To	Fund vs category, those months	3-yr stretches won in tenure
Asit Bhandarkar	fund manager	Jul 2014	now	5.9% vs 6.5% p.a. (−0.52 pp)	0% of 109
Ruchi Fozdar	debt portion	Oct 2024	now	6.5% vs 6.8% p.a. (−0.31 pp)	—
Satish Ramanathan	co-manager	Oct 2024	now	6.5% vs 6.8% p.a. (−0.31 pp)	—
Deepak Gupta	co-manager	Apr 2025	now	6.1% vs 6.4% p.a. (−0.29 pp)	—

* dated by first appearance in the archive we hold, not by a date the factsheet printed. Co-managed months count for every manager named; a factsheet names the manager of record, not who made each call. All managers →

How it is measured, and the case against

A record earned under different people is not evidence about these ones.

Does the displayed record predate the people running it?

Why this might matterA five-year figure on a fund whose longest-serving manager joined two years ago is the house's record more than the person's. The tenure here comes from what each monthly factsheet named, so a change of hands is dated to the month it was disclosed, and the fund's return against its category can be read over exactly those months.

Why it might notFund houses have processes, research desks and mandates that outlast individuals, so a manager change is not a reset. Co-managed funds attribute the same months to every named manager, and a factsheet names the manager of record, not necessarily the person making the calls.

Tracking gap

the NAV the fund published, against the NAV its last disclosed portfolio would have produced at each day's prices

No signal. Replication needs a fully disclosed domestic-equity portfolio and daily prices for every line; this fund has not been replicated in this build.

Share classes

latest NAV per AMFI code

Plan	Option	NAV	Date
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Growth Option	growth	₹37.42	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct)- IDCW	idcw	₹17.63	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Half Yearly IDCW	idcw	₹17.31	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Monthly IDCW	idcw	₹15.11	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Annual IDCW	idcw	₹17.03	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Quarterly IDCW	idcw	₹17.78	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹20.03	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Advantage Fund (Direct) - Half Yearly Bonus Option	—	₹—	—
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Annual Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹19.22	21 Sep 2026
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Half Yearly Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹33.87	27 Jan 2025
direct JM Arbitrage Fund (Direct) - Quarterly Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹33.88	27 Jan 2025
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Growth Option	growth	₹34.80	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - IDCW	idcw	₹16.15	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Annual IDCW	idcw	₹15.38	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Monthly IDCW	idcw	₹13.68	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Quarterly IDCW	idcw	₹15.72	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Half Yearly IDCW	idcw	₹15.49	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹18.92	21 Sep 2026
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Annual Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹32.11	27 Jan 2025
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Quarterly Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹32.16	27 Jan 2025
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Half Yearly Bonus Option - Principal Units	—	₹32.16	27 Jan 2025
regular JM Arbitrage Fund (Regular) - Bonus Option - Bonus Units	—	₹—	—

The Direct / Regular gap, in rupees

Direct growth NAV: ₹37.42
Regular growth NAV: ₹34.80
NAV divergence to date: 7.5% — same portfolio, priced differently
Regular costs more by: 0.56% a year
On ₹1,00,000 over ten years: ₹9,186

A Regular plan buys advice. The fee is visible and the behavioural saving is not; both are shown, neither is netted off.

Compare with

same category, by size

Kotak Arbitrage Fund SBI Arbitrage Fund ICICI Prudential Arbitrage Fund ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE ARBITRAGE FUND pick any fund…