COMPARE
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- DIRECT PLAN - GROWTH OPTION vs quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- and quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- are both in the Aggressive Hybrid Fund category, from Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited and quant Money Managers Limited respectively. quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.82 percentage points.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- DIRECT PLAN - GROWTH OPTION | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Aggressive Hybrid Fund | Aggressive Hybrid Fund |
| AMC | Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Hybrid 35+65 - Aggressive Index | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 65:35 Index TRI |
| NAV | ₹31.2105 (2026-10-28) | ₹485.1929 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,180.16 Cr | ₹2,048.692 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.62% | 1.44% |
| Inception | 2017-03-17 | 2001-02-19 |
Returns
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (16.2% vs Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s 15.6%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- DIRECT PLAN - GROWTH OPTION | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.21 | 0.31 |
| 3Y Alpha | 1.4009% | 5.1313% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 10.0297% | 12.4945% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.71 | 0.59 |
Portfolio Analytics
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- DIRECT PLAN - GROWTH OPTION | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 25.4482 | 26.0509 |
| P/B Ratio | 6.656 | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.1092% | 0.5264% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | 93% | - |
| YTM | 7.836% | 6.5976% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | 2.09 yrs | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s 3-year rolling CAGR of 16.2% is higher than Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s 15.6%. quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- sits in the 90th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 76th percentile for Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid 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, Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s direct-plan expense ratio is 0.82 percentage points lower than quant Aggressive Hybrid 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, Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has been more volatile than Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid 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 (0.21 for Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- vs 0.31 for quant Aggressive Hybrid 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, Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has ₹2,049 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹1,180 Cr for Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid 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), Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s portfolio YTM (7.836%) is higher than quant Aggressive Hybrid 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, Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- launched on 2001-02-19, making it older than Baroda BNP Paribas Aggressive Hybrid Fund- (launched 2017-03-17). 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.