COMPARE
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct
quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund and UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct are both in the Dynamic Asset Allocation or Balanced Advantage category, from quant Money Managers Limited and UTI Asset Mgmt. Co. Ltd. respectively. UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.48 percentage points.
| quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct | |
|---|---|---|
| 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) | ₹45.5924 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹785.655 Cr | ₹4,868.434 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.59% | 1.11% |
| Inception | 2023-03-23 | 2003-02-01 |
Returns
Rolling returns are not available for this fund yet.
Risk Metrics
Portfolio Analytics
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct 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.
Punji Fund Health Score
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct has the stronger Punji Quality grade of the two.
Frequently asked questions
Which has a lower expense ratio, quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct?
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.48 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 has higher AUM, quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund or UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct?
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct has ₹4,868 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 - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct?
UTI - Unit Linked Insurance Plan- Direct launched on 2003-02-01, making it older than quant Dynamic Asset Allocation Fund (launched 2023-03-23). 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.