COMPARE
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth vs SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- and SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited and SBI Funds Management Limited respectively. SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.14 percentage points.
| LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | LIC Mutual Fund Asset Management Limited | SBI Funds Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Infrastructure TRI | Nifty Financial Services TRI |
| NAV | ₹59.1519 (2026-10-28) | ₹46.0304 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,102.82 Cr | ₹10,460.714 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.33% | 1.19% |
| Inception | 2008-01-31 | 2015-02-11 |
Returns
SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (17.1% vs LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-'s 15.6%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.58 | 0.43 |
| 3Y Alpha | 8.7418% | 5.3074% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 21.1543% | 14.3753% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.73 | 0.82 |
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.
| LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-Direct Plan-Growth | SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 29.8606 | 18.6102 |
| P/B Ratio | 7.2862 | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.8311% | 0.9381% |
| Active Share | 85.12% | 48.24% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 102% | 148% |
| YTM | - | 5.3459% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- and SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund carry the same Punji Quality grade.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- or SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund?
SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 17.1% is higher than LIC MF Infrastructure Fund-'s 15.6%. SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund sits in the 46th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 34th percentile for LIC MF Infrastructure 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 Infrastructure Fund- or SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund?
SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.14 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.
Which fund carries more risk, LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- or SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- has been more volatile than SBI Banking & 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 (0.58 for LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- vs 0.43 for SBI Banking & Financial Services 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 Infrastructure Fund- or SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund?
SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund has ₹10,461 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹1,103 Cr for LIC MF Infrastructure 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 Infrastructure Fund- or SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund?
LIC MF Infrastructure Fund- launched on 2008-01-31, making it older than SBI Banking & Financial Services Fund (launched 2015-02-11). 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.