COMPARE
Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund - Direct Plan - Growth vs LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth
Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund and LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Company Limited. and LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited respectively. Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.41 percentage points.
| Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Company Limited. | LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Rural TRI | Nifty Infrastructure TRI |
| NAV | ₹9.12 (2026-10-28) | ₹59.1519 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹700.788 Cr | ₹1,102.82 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 0.9186% | 1.33% |
| Inception | 2025-11-06 | 2008-01-31 |
Returns
This fund is less than a year old, so there is not yet enough history to calculate rolling returns.
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
LIC MF Infrastructure 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.
| Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 22.4821 | 29.8606 |
| P/B Ratio | 3.27 | 7.2862 |
| Dividend Yield | 1.3526% | 0.8311% |
| Active Share | - | 85.12% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 2002% | 102% |
| YTM | - | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund or LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-?
Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.41 percentage points lower than LIC MF Infrastructure 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 Rural Opportunities Fund and LIC MF Infrastructure 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, Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund or LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-?
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- has ₹1,103 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹701 Cr for Kotak Rural Opportunities 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 Rural Opportunities Fund or LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-?
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- launched on 2008-01-31, making it older than Kotak Rural Opportunities Fund (launched 2025-11-06). 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.