COMPARE
Kotak Gold Fund Growth - Direct vs Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund Direct Plan Growth Option
Kotak Gold Fund Growth and Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund are both in the FoF Domestic category, from Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Company Limited. and Tata Asset Management Limited respectively. Kotak Gold Fund Growth has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Kotak Gold Fund Growth has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.07 percentage points.
| Kotak Gold Fund Growth - Direct | Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund Direct Plan Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | FoF Domestic | FoF Domestic |
| AMC | Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Company Limited. | Tata Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Domestic Gold Price (GOLDBEES) | Domestic Silver Price (SILVERBEES) |
| NAV | ₹57.1814 (2026-10-28) | ₹25.2595 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹6,977.299 Cr | ₹970.05 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.1505% | 0.22% |
| Inception | 2011-03-04 | 2024-01-02 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This is a fund of funds. Its risk profile belongs to the schemes it holds, not to a benchmark of its own.
Portfolio Analytics
Punji Fund Health Score
Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Kotak Gold Fund Growth or Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund?
Kotak Gold Fund Growth's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.07 percentage points lower than Tata Silver ETF Fund of 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 Kotak Gold Fund Growth and Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund show risk metrics like Sharpe ratio or alpha?
This is a fund of funds. Its risk profile belongs to the schemes it holds, not to a benchmark of its own. 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, Kotak Gold Fund Growth or Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund?
Kotak Gold Fund Growth has ₹6,977 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹970 Cr for Tata Silver ETF Fund of 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, Kotak Gold Fund Growth or Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund?
Kotak Gold Fund Growth launched on 2011-03-04, making it older than Tata Silver ETF Fund of Fund (launched 2024-01-02). 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.