COMPARE
HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund - Growth Direct vs Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- Direct Plan- Growth
HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund and Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- are both in the FoF Overseas category, from HSBC Asset Management (India) Private Ltd. and Navi AMC Limited respectively. Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.75 percentage points.
| HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund - Growth Direct | Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- Direct Plan- Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | FoF Overseas | FoF Overseas |
| AMC | HSBC Asset Management (India) Private Ltd. | Navi AMC Limited |
| Benchmark | MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan (AAXJ ETF) | CRSP US Total Market Index |
| NAV | ₹36.8863 (2026-10-30) | ₹22.4635 (2026-10-30) |
| AUM | ₹81.911 Cr | ₹1,079.95 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.82% | 0.07% |
| Inception | 2014-02-03 | 2022-02-04 |
Returns
Rolling returns are not available for this fund yet.
Risk Metrics
HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
Portfolio Analytics
Punji Fund Health Score
HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund or Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-?
Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-'s direct-plan expense ratio is 0.75 percentage points lower than HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield 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, HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund or Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund has been more volatile than Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- 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 (1.15 for HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund vs 1.41 for Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-) 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, HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund or Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-?
Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- has ₹1,080 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹82 Cr for HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield 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, HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund or Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF-?
HSBC Asia Pacific (Ex Japan) Dividend Yield Fund launched on 2014-02-03, making it older than Navi Total Stock Market US Specific Equity Passive FoF- (launched 2022-02-04). 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 2026-11-01. Source: AMFI disclosures via Punji. Not investment advice.