COMPARE
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan vs quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund and quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- are both in the Aggressive Hybrid Fund category, from Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited and quant Money Managers Limited respectively. quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.32 percentage points.
| Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Aggressive Hybrid Fund | Aggressive Hybrid Fund |
| AMC | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Hybrid 35+65 - Aggressive Index | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 65:35 Index TRI |
| NAV | ₹115.2825 (2026-10-28) | ₹485.1929 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹3,782.399 Cr | ₹2,048.692 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.12% | 1.44% |
| Inception | 2005-05-10 | 2001-02-19 |
Returns
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (16.2% vs Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund's 13.8%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.13 | 0.31 |
| 3Y Alpha | 0.6316% | 5.1313% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 10.66% | 12.4945% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.65 | 0.59 |
Portfolio Analytics
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan | quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-Growth Option-Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 24.8387 | 26.0509 |
| P/B Ratio | 6.656 | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.0836% | 0.5264% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | 28.999999999999996% | - |
| YTM | 7.43% | 6.5976% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | 3.29 yrs | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s 3-year rolling CAGR of 16.2% is higher than Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund's 13.8%. quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- sits in the 90th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 31st percentile for Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid 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, Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.32 percentage points lower than quant Aggressive Hybrid 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, Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- has been more volatile than Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid 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 (0.13 for Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund vs 0.31 for quant Aggressive Hybrid 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, Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund has ₹3,782 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹2,049 Cr for quant Aggressive Hybrid 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 has a higher yield to maturity (YTM), Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund's portfolio YTM (7.43%) is higher than quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-'s. YTM is the weighted-average return a debt fund's current bond holdings would earn if held to maturity, assuming no defaults and coupons reinvested at the same rate - a useful forward-looking yield estimate for debt funds the way rolling CAGR is for equity funds, though it's an estimate based on today's portfolio, not a guaranteed return, and can move as bonds are bought/sold or as interest rates change.
Which fund has a longer track record, Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund or quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund-?
quant Aggressive Hybrid Fund- launched on 2001-02-19, making it older than Nippon India Aggressive Hybrid Fund (launched 2005-05-10). 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.