COMPARE
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-Direct Plan-Growth vs quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- and quant BFSI Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited and quant Money Managers Limited respectively. quant BFSI Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.30 percentage points.
| LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Financial Services TRI |
| NAV | ₹22.0061 (2026-10-28) | ₹19.4632 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹251.221 Cr | ₹854.191 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.65% | 1.95% |
| Inception | 2015-03-09 | 2023-06-01 |
Returns
quant BFSI Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.8% vs LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-'s 10.8%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant BFSI Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | -0.16 | 0.53 |
| 3Y Alpha | -3.3883% | 8.8665% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 15.5872% | 17.9855% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.28 | 0.75 |
Portfolio Analytics
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services 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.
| LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 23.4202 | 11.7419 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.6057% | 1.5958% |
| Active Share | - | 97.37% |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | - |
| YTM | - | 5.3279% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant BFSI Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.8% is higher than LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-'s 10.8%. quant BFSI Fund sits in the 91st percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 7th percentile for LIC MF Banking and Financial Services 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, LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- or quant BFSI Fund?
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund-'s direct-plan expense ratio is 0.30 percentage points lower than quant BFSI 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.
Which fund carries more risk, LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- or quant BFSI Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant BFSI Fund has been more volatile than LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- over the trailing window. Standard deviation captures total volatility in both directions - up and down - so a higher figure means bigger swings generally, not necessarily bigger losses specifically. Sharpe ratio (-0.16 for LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- vs 0.53 for quant BFSI Fund) is a better single measure of risk-adjusted return, since it weighs the return earned per unit of volatility taken rather than volatility alone.
Which has higher AUM, LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- or quant BFSI Fund?
quant BFSI Fund has ₹854 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹251 Cr for LIC MF Banking and Financial Services 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, LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- or quant BFSI Fund?
LIC MF Banking and Financial Services Fund- launched on 2015-03-09, making it older than quant BFSI Fund (launched 2023-06-01). 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.