COMPARE
ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund - Direct Plan Cumulative Option vs Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth
ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund and Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth are both in the ELSS category, from ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited and PPFAS Asset Management Pvt. Ltd. respectively. Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.16 percentage points.
| ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund - Direct Plan Cumulative Option | Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | ELSS | ELSS |
| AMC | ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited | PPFAS Asset Management Pvt. Ltd. |
| Benchmark | Nifty 500 TRI | Nifty 500 TRI |
| NAV | ₹28.83 (2026-10-28) | ₹30.54 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹36.13 Cr | ₹5,423.16 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.81% | 0.65% |
| Inception | 2017-12-22 | 2019-07-04 |
Returns
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.5% vs ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund's 19.2%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
Risk metrics aren't shown for debt funds. Their NAV starts near Rs 10 and compounds steadily, so CAGR, beta and drawdown measure the arithmetic rather than the manager.
Portfolio Analytics
ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund carries the higher portfolio P/E ratio (a rougher proxy for how richly the underlying holdings are valued) - see the table below for the full comparison.
| ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund - Direct Plan Cumulative Option | Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 28.9935 | 17.8397 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.9681% | 2.2993% |
| Active Share | 68.98% | 72.69% |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 20.14% |
| YTM | - | 5.84% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund or Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth?
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.5% is higher than ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund's 19.2%. Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth sits in the 96th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 65th percentile for ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement 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 Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund or Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth?
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.16 percentage points lower than ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement 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.
Why don't ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund and Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
Risk metrics aren't shown for debt funds. Their NAV starts near Rs 10 and compounds steadily, so CAGR, beta and drawdown measure the arithmetic rather than the manager. 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, ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund or Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth?
Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth has ₹5,423 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹36 Cr for ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement 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, ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund or Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth?
ICICI Prudential Long Term Wealth Enhancement Fund launched on 2017-12-22, making it older than Parag Parikh ELSS Tax Saver Fund- Direct Growth (launched 2019-07-04). 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 2026-10-29. Source: AMFI disclosures via Punji. Not investment advice.