COMPARE
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option vs WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund Direct Plan Growth
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund and WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund are both in the Sectoral Fund category, from Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited and WhiteOak Capital Asset Management Limited respectively. Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.31 percentage points.
| Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund Direct Plan Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral Fund | Sectoral Fund |
| AMC | Nippon Life India Asset Management Limited | WhiteOak Capital Asset Management Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Infrastructure TRI | BSE TECK TRI |
| NAV | ₹382.3478 (2026-10-28) | ₹10.512 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹7,467.512 Cr | ₹500.53 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.1% | 1.41% |
| Inception | 2004-03-29 | 2024-09-20 |
Returns
Risk Metrics
This fund is less than three years old, so a three-year risk history does not exist yet.
Portfolio Analytics
WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat 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.
| Nippon India Power & Infra Fund - Direct Plan Growth Plan - Growth Option | WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund Direct Plan Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 24.2147 | 33.3185 |
| P/B Ratio | 9.9087 | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.0342% | 1.1202% |
| Active Share | 67.11% | 60.28% |
| Portfolio Turnover | 46% | 304% |
| YTM | - | 5.2529% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, Nippon India Power & Infra Fund or WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.31 percentage points lower than WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat 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 Power & Infra Fund and WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat 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 Power & Infra Fund or WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund has ₹7,468 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹501 Cr for WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat 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 Power & Infra Fund or WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund?
Nippon India Power & Infra Fund launched on 2004-03-29, making it older than WhiteOak Capital Digital Bharat Fund (launched 2024-09-20). 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.