COMPARE
Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option
Bandhan Financial Services Fund and Nippon India Power & Infra Fund are both in the Sectoral Fund category, from Bandhan AMC Limited and Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited respectively. Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. 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 0.10 percentage points.
| Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral Fund | Sectoral Fund |
| AMC | Bandhan AMC Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Infrastructure TRI |
| NAV | ₹14.484 (2026-10-28) | ₹382.3478 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,027.021 Cr | ₹7,467.512 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1% | 1.1% |
| Inception | 2023-07-10 | 2004-03-29 |
Returns
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (18.0% vs Bandhan Financial Services Fund's 14.8%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| Bandhan Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.31 | 0.36 |
| 3Y Alpha | 3.9007% | 3.1675% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 15.3559% | 18.2841% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.68 | 0.54 |
Portfolio Analytics
Nippon India Power & Infra 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 | Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 18.5356 | 24.2147 |
| P/B Ratio | - | 9.9087 |
| Dividend Yield | 0.8649% | 1.0342% |
| Active Share | 43.03% | 67.11% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 59% | 46% |
| YTM | - | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
Bandhan Financial Services Fund and Nippon India Power & Infra Fund carry the same Punji Quality grade.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Nippon India Power & Infra Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 18.0% is higher than Bandhan Financial Services Fund's 14.8%. Nippon India Power & Infra Fund sits in the 33rd percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 11th percentile for Bandhan Financial Services 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, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Nippon India Power & Infra Fund?
Bandhan Financial Services Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.10 percentage points lower than Nippon India Power & Infra 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, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Nippon India Power & Infra Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has been more volatile than Bandhan Financial Services 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 (0.31 for Bandhan Financial Services Fund vs 0.36 for Nippon India Power & Infra 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, Bandhan Financial Services Fund or Nippon India Power & Infra Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has ₹7,468 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹1,027 Cr for Bandhan 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 Nippon India Power & Infra Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund launched on 2004-03-29, making it older than Bandhan Financial Services Fund (launched 2023-07-10). 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.