COMPARE
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs UTI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund and UTI Balanced Advantage Fund are both in the Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage category, from quant Money Managers Limited and UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. respectively. UTI Balanced Advantage Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. UTI Balanced Advantage Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
UTI Balanced Advantage Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.68 percentage points.
| quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage | Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage |
| AMC | quant Money Managers Limited | UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. |
| Benchmark | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 50:50 Index | NIFTY 50 Hybrid Composite Debt 50:50 Index |
| NAV | ₹16.3281 (2026-10-28) | ₹12.6689 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹785.655 Cr | ₹2,852.106 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.59% | 0.91% |
| Inception | 2023-03-23 | 2023-07-21 |
Returns
UTI Balanced Advantage Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (8.1% vs quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund's 18.4%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.27 | 0.03 |
| 3Y Alpha | -0.5242% | -2.5385% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 13.7165% | 7.7647% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.58 | 0.70 |
Portfolio Analytics
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation 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 Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI Balanced Advantage Fund - Direct Plan - Growth Option | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 29.0582 | 21.9117 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.931% | 1.3269% |
| Active Share | - | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 57.99999999999999% |
| YTM | 5.3228% | - |
| Duration (Macaulay) | - | - |
Punji Fund Health Score
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a higher 3-year return, quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI Balanced Advantage Fund?
UTI Balanced Advantage Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 8.1% is higher than quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund's 18.4%. UTI Balanced Advantage Fund sits in the 3rd percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 100th percentile for quant Dynamic Asset Allocation 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 Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI Balanced Advantage Fund?
UTI Balanced Advantage Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.68 percentage points lower than quant Dynamic Asset Allocation 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 Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI Balanced Advantage Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund has been more volatile than UTI Balanced Advantage 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 (0.27 for quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund vs 0.03 for UTI Balanced Advantage 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 Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI Balanced Advantage Fund?
UTI Balanced Advantage Fund has ₹2,852 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹786 Cr for quant Dynamic Asset Allocation 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 Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI Balanced Advantage Fund?
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund launched on 2023-03-23, making it older than UTI Balanced Advantage Fund (launched 2023-07-21). 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.