COMPARE
360 ONE Overnight Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs NJ Overnight Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
360 ONE Overnight Fund and NJ Overnight Fund are both in the Overnight Fund category, from 360 ONE Asset Management Limited and NJ Asset Management Private Limited respectively. NJ Overnight Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
NJ Overnight Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.05 percentage points.
| 360 ONE Overnight Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | NJ Overnight Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Overnight Fund | Overnight Fund |
| AMC | 360 ONE Asset Management Limited | NJ Asset Management Private Limited |
| Benchmark | No benchmark required for this fund category | No benchmark required for this fund category |
| NAV | ₹1070.5502 (2026-10-28) | ₹1283.5983 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹132.93 Cr | ₹377.75 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.13% | 0.08% |
| Inception | 2025-07-01 | 2022-07-29 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
Risk metrics aren't shown for debt funds. Their NAV starts near Rs 10 and compounds steadily, so CAGR, beta and drawdown measure the arithmetic rather than the manager.
Portfolio Analytics
360 ONE Overnight Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
Punji Fund Health Score
360 ONE Overnight Fund and NJ Overnight Fund carry the same Punji Quality grade.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, 360 ONE Overnight Fund or NJ Overnight Fund?
NJ Overnight Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.05 percentage points lower than 360 ONE Overnight Fund's. Over long holding periods, a persistent expense-ratio gap compounds into a materially different final corpus even if the two funds' gross returns are similar - it's one of the few fund attributes you can compare with total certainty upfront, unlike future returns, since the fee is contractually fixed rather than a historical estimate.
Why don't 360 ONE Overnight Fund and NJ Overnight Fund show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
Risk metrics aren't shown for debt funds. Their NAV starts near Rs 10 and compounds steadily, so CAGR, beta and drawdown measure the arithmetic rather than the manager. This is a deliberate methodology choice, not missing data - risk metrics like alpha and Sharpe ratio are most meaningful for actively-managed funds where a manager makes decisions that can add or subtract value versus a benchmark. For a fund that mechanically tracks an index, the equivalent useful metric is tracking error (how closely it follows its index), not alpha.
Which has higher AUM, 360 ONE Overnight Fund or NJ Overnight Fund?
NJ Overnight Fund has ₹378 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹133 Cr for 360 ONE Overnight Fund. A larger AUM generally means deeper liquidity and lower per-unit fixed costs for the AMC to spread across investors, but an AUM that's very large relative to a fund's category and strategy (especially in small/mid cap categories, where the investable universe is smaller) can also make it harder for a manager to enter and exit positions without moving the price - bigger isn't automatically better, especially for less liquid categories.
Which has a higher yield to maturity (YTM), 360 ONE Overnight Fund or NJ Overnight Fund?
360 ONE Overnight Fund's portfolio YTM (5.2626%) is higher than NJ Overnight Fund's. YTM is the weighted-average return a debt fund's current bond holdings would earn if held to maturity, assuming no defaults and coupons reinvested at the same rate - a useful forward-looking yield estimate for debt funds the way rolling CAGR is for equity funds, though it's an estimate based on today's portfolio, not a guaranteed return, and can move as bonds are bought/sold or as interest rates change.
Which fund has a longer track record, 360 ONE Overnight Fund or NJ Overnight Fund?
NJ Overnight Fund launched on 2022-07-29, making it older than 360 ONE Overnight Fund (launched 2025-07-01). A longer track record means more real market cycles (bull runs, corrections, rate cycles) the fund has actually navigated, which is useful context for judging consistency - but it isn't a guarantee of future performance, and a newer fund isn't automatically worse, especially if it's run by an experienced manager or team with a track record at a prior fund.
Data as of 2026-10-29. Source: AMFI disclosures via Punji. Not investment advice.