ICICI Prudential Credit Risk Fund vs Nippon India Credit Risk Fund
Updated June 2026 · both Credit Risk funds · metrics from AMFI NAVs
In short: Nippon India Credit Risk Fund has the higher 3-year return (+8.95%); Nippon India Credit Risk Fund has the lower expense ratio (0.70%); Nippon India Credit Risk Fund has the better risk-adjusted return (Sharpe 0.59). This is analysis from past data, not a recommendation.
| Metric | ICICI Prudential Credit Risk Fund | Nippon India Credit Risk Fund |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y return | +7.86% | +7.98% |
| 3Y CAGR | +8.91% | +8.95% |
| 5Y CAGR | +7.84% | +9.12% |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.59 | 0.59 |
| Max drawdown | -0.8% | -1.2% |
| Volatility | 1.1% | 2.9% |
| Alpha | +1.28% | +1.28% |
| Expense ratio (Direct) | 0.73% | 0.70% |
| AUM | ₹5.9K Cr | ₹1.0K Cr |
Winner on each row highlighted (lower is better for expense ratio and volatility; max drawdown closer to zero is better). Computed from AMFI NAVs - see methodology. No paid placement.
FAQ
Which has the lower expense ratio?
Nippon India Credit Risk Fund has the lower Direct-plan expense ratio (0.70%), versus 0.73% for the other. Over long horizons a lower TER compounds into a meaningful difference.
Which has performed better over 3 years?
Nippon India Credit Risk Fund has the higher 3-year CAGR (+8.95%). Past performance does not predict future returns - check volatility and drawdown too, shown above.
How are these figures calculated?
All returns, risk metrics and alpha are computed independently from AMFI daily NAVs using a disclosed methodology. FindMF takes no commission and this comparison is not a recommendation.