COMPARE
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund-direct Plan-growth Option vs Tata Arbitrage Fund-Direct Plan-Growth
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- and Tata Arbitrage Fund- are both in the Arbitrage Fund category, from Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited and Tata Asset Management Limited respectively. Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 1.35 percentage points.
| Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund-direct Plan-growth Option | Tata Arbitrage Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Arbitrage Fund | Arbitrage Fund |
| AMC | Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited | Tata Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty 50 Arbitrage | Nifty 50 Arbitrage |
| NAV | ₹18.3848 (2026-10-28) | ₹16.4478 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,043.89 Cr | ₹24,714.09 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.35% | 1.7% |
| Inception | 2016-12-08 | 2018-12-10 |
Returns
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (7.6% vs Tata Arbitrage Fund-'s 6.3%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
Arbitrage funds target a small, steady spread rather than market returns, so beta and alpha against an equity index describe nothing useful.
Portfolio Analytics
Tata Arbitrage Fund- carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund-direct Plan-growth Option | Tata Arbitrage Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 14.0357 | 17.0374 |
| P/B Ratio | 6.656 | 6.656 |
| Dividend Yield | 1.1815% | 1.2795% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | 1261% | 293% |
| YTM | 5.624% | 6.99% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | 0.23 yrs | 0.32 yrs |
Punji Fund Health Score
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund-'s 3-year rolling CAGR of 7.6% is higher than Tata Arbitrage Fund-'s 6.3%. Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- sits in the 100th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 35th percentile for Tata Arbitrage 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 Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund-'s direct-plan expense ratio is 1.35 percentage points lower than Tata Arbitrage 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 Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- and Tata Arbitrage Fund- show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
Arbitrage funds target a small, steady spread rather than market returns, so beta and alpha against an equity index describe nothing useful. 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, Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Tata Arbitrage Fund- has ₹24,714 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹1,044 Cr for Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage 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 Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Tata Arbitrage Fund-'s portfolio YTM (6.99%) is higher than Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage 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 has longer duration (more interest-rate sensitivity), Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Tata Arbitrage Fund- has the longer Macaulay duration of the two, meaning its NAV is more sensitive to interest-rate changes - a longer-duration debt fund tends to gain more when rates fall and lose more when rates rise, compared to a shorter-duration fund. Duration is expressed in years but isn't literally about how long you hold the fund; it's a measure of price sensitivity to rate moves. If you expect rates to fall, the longer-duration fund benefits more; if you expect rates to rise or want to minimize that swing, the shorter-duration fund is the more conservative pick.
Which fund has a longer track record, Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- or Tata Arbitrage Fund-?
Baroda Bnp Paribas Arbitrage Fund- launched on 2016-12-08, making it older than Tata Arbitrage Fund- (launched 2018-12-10). 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.