COMPARE
quant Business Cycle Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan
quant Business Cycle Fund and quant Quantamental Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from quant Money Managers Limited. quant Quantamental Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. quant Business Cycle Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
quant Business Cycle Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.17 percentage points.
| quant Business Cycle Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | quant Money Managers Limited | quant Money Managers Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty 500 TRI | Nifty 200 TRI |
| NAV | ₹16.114 (2026-10-28) | ₹25.0375 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹889.432 Cr | ₹1,500.234 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.45% | 1.62% |
| Inception | 2023-05-12 | 2021-04-13 |
Returns
quant Quantamental Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (23.5% vs quant Business Cycle Fund's 14.8%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant Business Cycle Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| quant Business Cycle Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.08 | 0.32 |
| 3Y Alpha | 0.0335% | 4.6204% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 17.9715% | 16.1535% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.29 | 0.53 |
Portfolio Analytics
quant Business Cycle Fund carries the higher portfolio YTM.
| quant Business Cycle Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 27.689 | 23.3822 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.575% | 0.8533% |
| Active Share | 97.49% | 94.93% |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | - |
| YTM | 5.3466% | 5.3265% |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant Quantamental Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, quant Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 23.5% is higher than quant Business Cycle Fund's 14.8%. quant Quantamental Fund sits in the 92nd percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 28th percentile for quant Business Cycle 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 Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
quant Business Cycle Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.17 percentage points lower than quant Quantamental 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 Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant Business Cycle Fund has been more volatile than quant Quantamental 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 (0.08 for quant Business Cycle Fund vs 0.32 for quant Quantamental 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 Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund has ₹1,500 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹889 Cr for quant Business Cycle 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 has a higher yield to maturity (YTM), quant Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
quant Business Cycle Fund's portfolio YTM (5.3466%) is higher than quant Quantamental Fund's. YTM is the weighted-average return a debt fund's current bond holdings would earn if held to maturity, assuming no defaults and coupons reinvested at the same rate - a useful forward-looking yield estimate for debt funds the way rolling CAGR is for equity funds, though it's an estimate based on today's portfolio, not a guaranteed return, and can move as bonds are bought/sold or as interest rates change.
Which fund has a longer track record, quant Business Cycle Fund or quant Quantamental Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund launched on 2021-04-13, making it older than quant Business Cycle Fund (launched 2023-05-12). 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.