COMPARE
Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option vs UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund and UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund are both in the Conservative Hybrid Fund category, from Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited and UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. respectively. UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.25 percentage points.
| Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Conservative Hybrid Fund | Conservative Hybrid Fund |
| AMC | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Hybrid 85+15 - Conservative Index | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 15:85 Index |
| NAV | ₹68.7638 (2026-10-28) | ₹75.4591 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹972.172 Cr | ₹1,580.354 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1% | 1.25% |
| Inception | 2003-12-10 | 2003-12-01 |
Returns
UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (9.6% vs Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund's 8.5%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
Portfolio Analytics
UTI Conservative Hybrid 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.
Punji Fund Health Score
Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund or UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund?
UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 9.6% is higher than Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund's 8.5%. UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund sits in the 67th percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 29th percentile for Nippon India Conservative 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 Conservative Hybrid Fund or UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund?
Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.25 percentage points lower than UTI Conservative 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 Conservative Hybrid Fund or UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund has been more volatile than Nippon India Conservative 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 (0.57 for Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund vs -0.02 for UTI Conservative 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 Conservative Hybrid Fund or UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund?
UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund has ₹1,580 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹972 Cr for Nippon India Conservative 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 fund has a longer track record, Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund or UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund?
UTI Conservative Hybrid Fund launched on 2003-12-01, making it older than Nippon India Conservative Hybrid Fund (launched 2003-12-10). 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.