COMPARE
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund and quant BFSI Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited and quant Money Managers Limited respectively. quant BFSI Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.70 percentage points.
| ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Financial Services TRI |
| NAV | ₹140.72 (2026-10-28) | ₹19.4632 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹10,760.226 Cr | ₹854.191 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.25% | 1.95% |
| Inception | 2008-07-09 | 2023-06-01 |
Returns
quant BFSI Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.8% vs ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund's 15.9%) - 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.
| ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.09 | 0.53 |
| 3Y Alpha | 0.4049% | 8.8665% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 13.181% | 17.9855% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.48 | 0.75 |
Portfolio Analytics
quant BFSI Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 17.505 | 11.7419 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.9401% | 1.5958% |
| Active Share | 34.49% | 97.37% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 73% | - |
| YTM | 5.3204% | 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, ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.8% is higher than ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund's 15.9%. quant BFSI Fund sits in the 91st percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 36th percentile for ICICI Prudential 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, ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.70 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, ICICI Prudential 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 ICICI Prudential 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 (0.09 for ICICI Prudential 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, ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund has ₹10,760 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹854 Cr for quant BFSI 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 Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's portfolio YTM (5.3279%) is higher than ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services 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 Banking and Financial Services Fund or quant BFSI Fund?
ICICI Prudential Banking and Financial Services Fund launched on 2008-07-09, 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.