COMPARE
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option vs WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund Direct Plan Growth
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- and WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund are both in the Thematic Fund category, from Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited and WhiteOak Capital Asset Management Limited respectively. WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.39 percentage points.
| Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option | WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund Direct Plan Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Thematic Fund | Thematic Fund |
| AMC | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | WhiteOak Capital Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | S&P JAPAN 500 TRI | NIFTY100 ESG TRI |
| NAV | ₹31.1282 (2026-10-28) | ₹9.794 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹340.048 Cr | ₹45.68 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.37% | 0.98% |
| Inception | 2014-08-08 | 2024-10-11 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
| Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- Direct Plan- Growth Plan- Growth Option | WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund Direct Plan Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | - | 29.9914 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | - | 0.9274% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | 55.00000000000001% | 112.99999999999999% |
| YTM | - | 5.3811% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- or WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund?
WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.39 percentage points lower than Nippon India Japan Equity 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 Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- and WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy 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, Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- or WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund?
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- has ₹340 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹46 Cr for WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy 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 Japan Equity Fund- or WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund?
Nippon India Japan Equity Fund- launched on 2014-08-08, making it older than WhiteOak Capital ESG Best-In-Class Strategy Fund (launched 2024-10-11). 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.