COMPARE
Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth
Bandhan Financial Services Fund and Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund are both in the Sectoral Fund category, from Bandhan AMC Limited and Groww Asset Management Limited respectively. Bandhan Financial Services Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Bandhan Financial Services Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.26 percentage points.
| Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral Fund | Sectoral Fund |
| AMC | Bandhan AMC Limited | Groww Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Financial Services TRI |
| NAV | ₹14.484 (2026-10-28) | ₹12.2468 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,027.021 Cr | ₹89.44 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1% | 1.26% |
| Inception | 2023-07-10 | 2024-01-17 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund carries the higher portfolio P/E ratio (a rougher proxy for how richly the underlying holdings are valued) - see the table below for the full comparison.
| Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 18.5356 | 21.9532 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.8649% | 0.4923% |
| Active Share | 43.03% | 81.31% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 59% | - |
| YTM | - | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund?
Bandhan Financial Services Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.26 percentage points lower than Groww Banking & Financial Services 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 Bandhan Financial Services Fund and Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet. 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, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund?
Bandhan Financial Services Fund has ₹1,027 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹89 Cr for Groww Banking & Financial Services 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, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund?
Bandhan Financial Services Fund launched on 2023-07-10, making it older than Groww Banking & Financial Services Fund (launched 2024-01-17). 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.