COMPARE
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity - Direct Plan - Growth Option vs PGIM India Retirement Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity and PGIM India Retirement Fund are both in the Retirement Fund category, from ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited and PGIM India Asset Management Private Limite respectively. ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.26 percentage points.
| ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity - Direct Plan - Growth Option | PGIM India Retirement Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Retirement Fund | Retirement Fund |
| AMC | ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Limited | PGIM India Asset Management Private Limite |
| Benchmark | Nifty 500 TRI | BSE 500 TRI |
| NAV | ₹36.53 (2026-10-28) | ₹12.06 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹2,064.909 Cr | ₹101.381 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.89% | 1.15% |
| Inception | 2019-02-07 | 2024-03-26 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
PGIM India Retirement 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 Retirement Fund - Pure Equity - Direct Plan - Growth Option | PGIM India Retirement Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 29.1874 | 33.3143 |
| P/B Ratio | 13.9543 | 6.656 |
| Dividend Yield | 1.1504% | 0.8278% |
| Active Share | 67.99% | 65.96% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 41.8% | 2.3% |
| YTM | - | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
PGIM India Retirement Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity or PGIM India Retirement Fund?
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.26 percentage points lower than PGIM India Retirement 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 Retirement Fund - Pure Equity and PGIM India Retirement Fund show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet. 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 Retirement Fund - Pure Equity or PGIM India Retirement Fund?
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity has ₹2,065 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹101 Cr for PGIM India Retirement 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 Retirement Fund - Pure Equity or PGIM India Retirement Fund?
ICICI Prudential Retirement Fund - Pure Equity launched on 2019-02-07, making it older than PGIM India Retirement Fund (launched 2024-03-26). 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.