COMPARE
Axis Strategic Bond Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option vs Nippon India Medium Term Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
Axis Strategic Bond Fund and Nippon India Medium Term Fund are both in the Medium Duration Fund category, from Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd. and Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited respectively. Axis Strategic Bond Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Nippon India Medium Term Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Nippon India Medium Term Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.21 percentage points.
| Axis Strategic Bond Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | Nippon India Medium Term Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Medium Duration Fund | Medium Duration Fund |
| AMC | Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd. | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | NIFTY Medium Duration Debt Index A-III | CRISIL MEDIUM DURATION DEBT A-III INDEX |
| NAV | ₹33.2294 (2026-10-28) | ₹18.3062 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,943.175 Cr | ₹144.503 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.71% | 0.5% |
| Inception | 2012-03-09 | 2014-06-06 |
Returns
Axis Strategic Bond Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (8.5% vs Nippon India Medium Term Fund's 7.1%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
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
Axis Strategic Bond Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
Punji Fund Health Score
Axis Strategic Bond Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Axis Strategic Bond Fund or Nippon India Medium Term Fund?
Axis Strategic Bond Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 8.5% is higher than Nippon India Medium Term Fund's 7.1%. Axis Strategic Bond Fund sits in the 85th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 31st percentile for Nippon India Medium Term 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 Strategic Bond Fund or Nippon India Medium Term Fund?
Nippon India Medium Term Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.21 percentage points lower than Axis Strategic Bond 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 Axis Strategic Bond Fund and Nippon India Medium Term 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, Axis Strategic Bond Fund or Nippon India Medium Term Fund?
Axis Strategic Bond Fund has ₹1,943 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹145 Cr for Nippon India Medium Term 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), Axis Strategic Bond Fund or Nippon India Medium Term Fund?
Axis Strategic Bond Fund's portfolio YTM (8.6976%) is higher than Nippon India Medium Term 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, Axis Strategic Bond Fund or Nippon India Medium Term Fund?
Axis Strategic Bond Fund launched on 2012-03-09, making it older than Nippon India Medium Term Fund (launched 2014-06-06). 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.