COMPARE
Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option
Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund and Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- are both in the Thematic Fund category, from Bandhan AMC Limited and Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited respectively. Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 1.21 percentage points.
| Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Thematic Fund | Thematic Fund |
| AMC | Bandhan AMC Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | BSE 200 TRI | S&P JAPAN 500 TRI |
| NAV | ₹8.879 (2026-10-28) | ₹31.1282 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹563.505 Cr | ₹340.048 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 2.58% | 1.37% |
| Inception | 2025-07-10 | 2014-08-08 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
| Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 20.3039 | - |
| P/B Ratio | 15.3738 | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.1983% | - |
| Active Share | 77.03% | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 55.00000000000001% |
| YTM | - | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund or Nippon India Japan Equity Fund-?
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund-'s direct-plan expense ratio is 1.21 percentage points lower than Bandhan Multi-Factor 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 Multi-Factor Fund and Nippon India Japan Equity 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 Multi-Factor Fund or Nippon India Japan Equity Fund-?
Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund has ₹564 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹340 Cr for Nippon India Japan Equity 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 Multi-Factor Fund or Nippon India Japan Equity Fund-?
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- launched on 2014-08-08, making it older than Bandhan Multi-Factor Fund (launched 2025-07-10). 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.