COMPARE
quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs UTI - MNC Fund - Growth Option - Direct
quant BFSI Fund and UTI - MNC Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from quant Money Managers Limited and UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. respectively. quant BFSI Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. UTI - MNC Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
UTI - MNC Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.42 percentage points.
| quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI - MNC Fund - Growth Option - Direct | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | quant Money Managers Limited | UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. |
| Benchmark | Nifty Financial Services TRI | Nifty MNC TRI |
| NAV | ₹19.4632 (2026-10-28) | ₹418.923 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹854.191 Cr | ₹2,500.573 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.95% | 1.53% |
| Inception | 2023-06-01 | 2003-02-01 |
Returns
quant BFSI Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (22.8% vs UTI - MNC Fund's 13.0%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant BFSI Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| quant BFSI Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI - MNC Fund - Growth Option - Direct | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.53 | -0.12 |
| 3Y Alpha | 8.8665% | -2.5582% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 17.9855% | 12.9352% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.75 | 0.26 |
Portfolio Analytics
UTI - MNC 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 | UTI - MNC Fund - Growth Option - Direct | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 11.7419 | 22.5524 |
| P/B Ratio | - | 8.7753 |
| Dividend Yield | 1.5958% | 1.2254% |
| Active Share | 97.37% | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 8% |
| 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 UTI - MNC Fund?
quant BFSI Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 22.8% is higher than UTI - MNC Fund's 13.0%. quant BFSI Fund sits in the 91st percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 11th percentile for UTI - MNC 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 UTI - MNC Fund?
UTI - MNC Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.42 percentage points lower than quant BFSI 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 UTI - MNC Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant BFSI Fund has been more volatile than UTI - MNC 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 -0.12 for UTI - MNC 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 UTI - MNC Fund?
UTI - MNC Fund has ₹2,501 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹854 Cr for quant BFSI 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 UTI - MNC Fund?
UTI - MNC Fund launched on 2003-02-01, 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.