COMPARE
quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan vs Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth
quant Quantamental Fund and Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund are both in the Sectoral/ Thematic category, from quant Money Managers Limited and Taurus Asset Management Company Limited respectively. quant Quantamental Fund has posted a higher 3-year rolling CAGR. quant Quantamental Fund has the lower expense ratio. See the full table and FAQ below for the complete real-data comparison.
Basics
quant Quantamental Fund has the lower direct-plan expense ratio, by 0.22 percentage points.
| quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Sectoral/ Thematic | Sectoral/ Thematic |
| AMC | quant Money Managers Limited | Taurus Asset Management Company Limited |
| Benchmark | Nifty 200 TRI | BSE BANKEX TRI |
| NAV | ₹25.0375 (2026-10-28) | ₹56.18 (2026-10-28) |
| AUM | ₹1,500.234 Cr | ₹10.362 Cr |
| Expense Ratio (Direct) | 1.62% | 1.84% |
| Inception | 2021-04-13 | 2012-05-02 |
Returns
quant Quantamental Fund leads on 3-year rolling CAGR (23.5% vs Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund's 13.6%) - see the FAQ below for percentile context within each fund's own category.
Risk Metrics
quant Quantamental Fund has been the more volatile of the two by standard deviation.
| quant Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| 3Y Sharpe Ratio | 0.32 | -0.03 |
| 3Y Alpha | 4.6204% | -2.0735% |
| 3Y Std Deviation | 16.1535% | 14.5312% |
| 3Y Calmar Ratio | 0.53 | 0.44 |
Portfolio Analytics
quant Quantamental 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 Quantamental Fund - Growth Option - Direct Plan | Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund - Direct Plan - Growth | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E Ratio | 23.3822 | 14.2436 |
| P/B Ratio | - | - |
| Dividend Yield | 0.8533% | 1.435% |
| Active Share | 94.93% | - |
| Portfolio Turnover | - | 51% |
| YTM | 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 Quantamental Fund or Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund's 3-year rolling CAGR of 23.5% is higher than Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund's 13.6%. quant Quantamental Fund sits in the 92nd percentile of its category on this metric, versus the 17th percentile for Taurus Banking & Financial Services 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 Quantamental Fund or Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund's direct-plan expense ratio is 0.22 percentage points lower than Taurus Banking & Financial Services 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 Quantamental Fund or Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund?
By standard deviation (a measure of how much a fund's returns swing around its own average), quant Quantamental Fund has been more volatile than Taurus Banking & Financial Services 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 (0.32 for quant Quantamental Fund vs -0.03 for Taurus Banking & Financial Services 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 Quantamental Fund or Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund?
quant Quantamental Fund has ₹1,500 Cr in assets under management, versus ₹10 Cr for Taurus Banking & Financial Services 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 Quantamental Fund or Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund?
Taurus Banking & Financial Services Fund launched on 2012-05-02, making it older than quant Quantamental Fund (launched 2021-04-13). 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.