COMPARE
IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A - Growth - Direct vs Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth
IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A and Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II are both in the Income category, from IL&FS Infra Asset Management Limited and Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited respectively. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
| IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A - Growth - Direct | Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Income | Income |
| AMC | IL&FS Infra Asset Management Limited | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Medium to Long Duration Debt A-III Index | CRISIL Liquid Debt Index |
| NAV | ₹2004851.5347 (2026-10-22) | ₹39.4151 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | - | ₹7.242 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | - | 0.13% |
| Inception | 2014-03-03 | 2007-05-04 |
Returns
Rolling returns are not available for this fund yet.
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
Punji Fund Health Score
Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Why don't IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A and Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II 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 fund has a longer track record, IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A or Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II?
Nippon India Quarterly Interval Fund - Series II launched on 2007-05-04, making it older than IL&FS Infrastructure Debt Fund Series 2A (launched 2014-03-03). 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 2026-10-25. Source: AMFI disclosures via Punji. Not investment advice.