COMPARE
Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds - Direct Plan Growth vs Zerodha Silver ETF FoF - Direct Growth
Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds and Zerodha Silver ETF FoF are both in the FoF Domestic category, from Edelweiss Asset Management Limited and Zerodha Asset Management Private Limited respectively. Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.14 percentage points.
| Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds - Direct Plan Growth | Zerodha Silver ETF FoF - Direct Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | FoF Domestic | FoF Domestic |
| AMC | Edelweiss Asset Management Limited | Zerodha Asset Management Private Limited |
| Benchmark | 60% Nifty Short Duration Debt Index + 40% Nifty 50 Arbitrage TRI | Domestic Silver Price (SILVERBEES) |
| NAV | ₹10.6916 (2026-10-28) | ₹17.4683 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹110.757 Cr | ₹209.12 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.07% | 0.21% |
| Inception | 2025-07-03 | 2025-06-23 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This is a fund of funds. Its risk profile belongs to the schemes it holds, not to a benchmark of its own.
Portfolio Analytics
Punji Fund Health Score
Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds and Zerodha Silver ETF FoF carry the same Punji Quality grade.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds or Zerodha Silver ETF FoF?
Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.14 percentage points lower than Zerodha Silver ETF FoF'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 Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds and Zerodha Silver ETF FoF show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
This is a fund of funds. Its risk profile belongs to the schemes it holds, not to a benchmark of its own. 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, Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds or Zerodha Silver ETF FoF?
Zerodha Silver ETF FoF has ₹209 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹111 Cr for Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds. 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, Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds or Zerodha Silver ETF FoF?
Zerodha Silver ETF FoF launched on 2025-06-23, making it older than Edelweiss Income Plus Arbitrage Active Fund of Funds (launched 2025-07-03). 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.