COMPARE
quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs Taurus Infrastructure Fund - Direct Plan - Growth
quant BFSI Fund and Taurus Infrastructure Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from quant Money Managers Limited and Taurus Asset Management Company Limited respectively. quant BFSI Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. quant BFSI Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
quant BFSI Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.10 percentage points.
| quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Infrastructure Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | quant Money Managers Limited | Taurus Asset Management Company Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty Infrastructure TRI |
| NAV | ₹19.4632 (2026-10-28) | ₹61.2 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹854.191 Cr | ₹7.777 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.95% | 2.05% |
| Inception | 2023-06-01 | 2007-02-05 |
Returns
quant BFSI Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.8% vs Taurus Infrastructure Fund's 16.4%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
Taurus Infrastructure Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Infrastructure Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.53 | -0.19 |
| 3Y Alpha | 8.8665% | -6.9204% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 17.9855% | 18.4026% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.75 | 0.14 |
Portfolio Analytics
Taurus 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.
| quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Infrastructure Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 11.7419 | 16.2451 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.5958% | 1.8503% |
| Active Share | 97.37% | 57.14% |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 44% |
| YTM | 5.3279% | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant BFSI Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, quant BFSI Fund or Taurus Infrastructure Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.8% is higher than Taurus Infrastructure Fund's 16.4%. quant BFSI Fund sits in the 91st percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 39th percentile for Taurus 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, quant BFSI Fund or Taurus Infrastructure Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.10 percentage points lower than Taurus 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, quant BFSI Fund or Taurus Infrastructure Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), Taurus Infrastructure Fund has been more volatile than quant BFSI 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 (0.53 for quant BFSI Fund vs -0.19 for Taurus Infrastructure 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, quant BFSI Fund or Taurus Infrastructure Fund?
quant BFSI Fund has ₹854 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹8 Cr for Taurus 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, quant BFSI Fund or Taurus Infrastructure Fund?
Taurus Infrastructure Fund launched on 2007-02-05, making it older than quant BFSI Fund (launched 2023-06-01). 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.