COMPARE
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs ITI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund and ITI Balanced Advantage Fund are both in the Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage category, from ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited and ITI Asset Management Limited respectively. ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.56 percentage points.
| ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | ITI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage |
| AMC | ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited | ITI Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Hybrid 50+50 - Moderate Index | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 50:50 Index |
| NAV | ₹85.23 (2026-10-28) | ₹15.4018 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹71,029.914 Cr | ₹304.06 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.04% | 1.6% |
| Inception | 2006-11-08 | 2019-12-09 |
Returns
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (12.8% vs ITI Balanced Advantage Fund's 12.5%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
ITI Balanced Advantage Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | ITI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.33 | -0.08 |
| 3Y Alpha | -0.313% | -3.4011% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 7.3035% | 8.6038% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 1.15 | 0.66 |
Portfolio Analytics
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | ITI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | - | 28.8457 |
| P/B Ratio | - | 1.04 |
| Dividend Yield | - | 0.65% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 29.18% |
| YTM | 7.8827% | 7.3972% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | 0.28 yrs |
Punji Fund Health Score
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 12.8% is higher than ITI Balanced Advantage Fund's 12.5%. ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund sits in the 69th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 48th percentile for ITI Balanced Advantage 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, ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.56 percentage points lower than ITI Balanced Advantage 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, ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), ITI Balanced Advantage Fund has been more volatile than ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage 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 (0.33 for ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund vs -0.08 for ITI Balanced Advantage 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, ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund has ₹71,030 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹304 Cr for ITI Balanced Advantage 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), ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund's portfolio YTM (7.8827%) is higher than ITI Balanced Advantage 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, ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund or ITI Balanced Advantage Fund?
ICICI Prudential Balanced Advantage Fund launched on 2006-11-08, making it older than ITI Balanced Advantage Fund (launched 2019-12-09). 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.