LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund vs UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund
LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund (Direct) and UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund (Direct) head to head: growth of ₹100, returns across every window, risk, cost, and portfolio overlap — every figure computed from AMFI NAV history, nothing supplied by a fund house. Both are Banking and PSU Fund schemes — see the best banking & psu mutual funds for the full ranking.
Head to head
NAVs as of 16 Oct 2026
Growth of ₹100 (rebased over the selected window)
Common period 06 Feb 2014 – 16 Oct 2026, limited by UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund. Every series is rebased to ₹100 at the start of this window.
View as table
| Date | LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund | UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund |
|---|---|---|
| 06 Feb 2014 | ₹100.00 | ₹100.00 |
| 27 Feb 2015 | ₹109.12 | ₹109.88 |
| 20 Mar 2016 | ₹116.71 | ₹120.31 |
| 10 Apr 2017 | ₹127.65 | ₹133.83 |
| 01 May 2018 | ₹136.20 | ₹142.62 |
| 22 May 2019 | ₹149.64 | ₹141.68 |
| 12 Jun 2020 | ₹166.91 | ₹155.91 |
| 03 Jul 2021 | ₹176.04 | ₹163.67 |
| 24 Jul 2022 | ₹181.93 | ₹179.60 |
| 14 Aug 2023 | ₹194.28 | ₹192.27 |
| 04 Sep 2024 | ₹210.42 | ₹208.03 |
| 25 Sep 2025 | ₹229.46 | ₹226.41 |
| 16 Oct 2026 | ₹241.31 | ₹240.83 |
| Metric | LIC · Direct NAV ₹40.05 Low to Moderate risk ★★★★☆ | UTI · Direct NAV ₹24.12 Low to Moderate risk ★★★★★ | Category median Banking and PSU Fund · 20 funds |
|---|---|---|---|
| +4.45% | +5.80%Best in row | +4.12% | |
| +7.20% | +7.49%Best in row | +6.98% | |
| +6.23% | +7.76%Best in row | +6.15% | |
| +6.93%Best in row | +6.46% | +7.05% | |
| +7.30% | +7.17% | +7.44% | |
| +6.67% | +7.36%Best in row | — | |
| +7.30%Best in row | +6.87% | +7.52% | |
| +7.23%Best in row | +6.49% | +7.45% | |
| +7.25%Best in row | +6.91% | +7.56% | |
| Risk | |||
| 1.08% | 0.77%Best in row | 1.07% | |
| 0.65 | 1.29Best in row | 0.42 | |
| 0.98 | 2.08Best in row | 0.62 | |
| -2.77% | -6.74% | -2.96% | |
| 0.28% | 0.24%Best in row | 0.35% | |
| ₹1,755Cr | ₹1,449Cr | ₹2,902Cr | |
| ₹100 | ₹500 | — | |
| ₹5.00K | ₹20.00K | — | |
| Pratik Harish Shroff · 3.1y | Anurag Mittal | — | |
| 31 May 2007 | 03 Feb 2014 | — | |
| 5.1% | 2.5% | — | |
10 rows carry the same value for every fund — show
- Benchmark
- —
- Alpha
- —
- Beta
- —
- Upside capture
- —
- Downside capture
- —
- Exit load
- None
- Lock-in
- None
- Portfolio turnover
- —
- Holdings
- —
- Top 10 weight
- —
Best marks the strongest value in a row, and only where the gap is bigger than noise — a near-tie is left unmarked rather than dressed up as a result. SIP XIRR is a ₹10,000/month instalment over 5 years of real NAV history. Nothing here is supplied by a fund house. For research only — not investment advice.
Frequently asked questions
Which fund has delivered higher returns — LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund or UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund?
Over the last 3 years, UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund returned +7.49% CAGR against LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund's +7.20%, computed from AMFI NAV history. Over 5 years: LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund +6.23% vs UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund +7.76% CAGR. Past returns don't guarantee future performance.
Which fund is cheaper — LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund or UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund?
UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund has the lower expense ratio: LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund charges 0.28% a year against UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund's 0.24%. The expense ratio is deducted from the NAV daily, so a lower one compounds in the investor's favour.
Which fund is riskier — LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund or UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund?
LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund has shown higher volatility (+1.08% annualized vs UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund's +0.77%), measured as the annualized standard deviation of daily returns over the trailing 3 years. Worst 3-year drawdown: LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund -0.59% vs UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund -0.41%.
Which fund manages more money — LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund or UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund?
LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund is the larger fund: LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund manages ₹1,755Cr against UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund's ₹1,449Cr in assets. Size cuts both ways — scale lowers costs, but a very large fund can find it harder to move in and out of positions.
Are LIC MF Banking & PSU Debt Fund and UTI Banking & PSU Debt Fund in the same category?
Yes — both are Banking and PSU Fund schemes, so their returns, risk and cost are directly comparable against the same peer set.
Figures update daily from AMFI NAV history; ratings and ranks are WealthTicker’s own — see the methodology. This is data, not investment advice.