COMPARE
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct - Growth Option vs quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund and quant BFSI Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited and quant Money Managers Limited respectively. quant BFSI Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 1.16 percentage points.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct - Growth Option | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | Baroda BNP Paribas Asset Management India Private Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Financial Services TRI |
| NAV | ₹52.2227 (2026-10-28) | ₹19.4632 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹511.44 Cr | ₹854.191 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.79% | 1.95% |
| Inception | 2012-06-01 | 2023-06-01 |
Returns
quant BFSI Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.8% vs Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund's 14.1%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant BFSI Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct - Growth Option | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.29 | 0.53 |
| 3Y Alpha | 3.633% | 8.8665% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 15.4784% | 17.9855% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.70 | 0.75 |
Portfolio Analytics
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct - Growth Option | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 20.0505 | 11.7419 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.6938% | 1.5958% |
| Active Share | 49.75% | 97.37% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 66% | - |
| YTM | 5.8% | 5.3279% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant BFSI Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.8% is higher than Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund's 14.1%. quant BFSI Fund sits in the 91st percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 20th percentile for Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and 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, Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 1.16 percentage points lower than quant BFSI 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 Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant BFSI Fund has been more volatile than Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and 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 (0.29 for Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund vs 0.53 for quant BFSI 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 Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund has ₹854 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹511 Cr for Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and 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 has a higher yield to maturity (YTM), Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund's portfolio YTM (5.8%) is higher than quant BFSI 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 Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
Baroda BNP Paribas Banking and Financial Services Fund launched on 2012-06-01, making it older than quant BFSI Fund (launched 2023-06-01). 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.