COMPARE
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option vs Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund and Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund are both in the FoF Overseas category, from Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd. and Edelweiss Asset Management Limited respectively. Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.11 percentage points.
| Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | FoF Overseas | FoF Overseas |
| AMC | Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd. | Edelweiss Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | MSCI GOLDEN DRAGON (INR) | MSCI Europe Index (IEUR ETF) |
| NAV | ₹11.68 (2026-10-28) | ₹33.114 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹3,691.053 Cr | ₹265.602 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.57% | 0.68% |
| Inception | 2021-01-29 | 2014-01-17 |
Returns
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (3.6% vs Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund's 10.4%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
Portfolio Analytics
Punji Fund Health Score
Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund or Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund?
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 3.6% is higher than Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund's 10.4%. Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund sits in the 7th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 43rd percentile for Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund - though note both funds may belong to different categories with different medians, so a raw CAGR comparison doesn't account for how each fund performed relative to its own peers. A higher historical return also doesn't necessarily mean lower risk; check the risk metrics below before concluding either fund is the "better" choice.
Which has a lower expense ratio, Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund or Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund?
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.11 percentage points lower than Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore 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.
Which fund carries more risk, Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund or Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has been more volatile than Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund over the trailing window. Standard deviation captures total volatility in both directions - up and down - so a higher figure means bigger swings generally, not necessarily bigger losses specifically. Sharpe ratio (0.53 for Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund vs 1.18 for Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund) is a better single measure of risk-adjusted return, since it weighs the return earned per unit of volatility taken rather than volatility alone.
Which has higher AUM, Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund or Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund?
Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund has ₹3,691 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹266 Cr for Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore 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 fund has a longer track record, Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund or Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund?
Edelweiss Europe Dynamic Equity Offshore Fund launched on 2014-01-17, making it older than Axis Greater China Equity Fund of Fund (launched 2021-01-29). 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.