Regular and Direct expense ratios – 3 ways to compare

Share on whatsapp
Whatsapp share
Share on twitter
Tweet it out
Share on facebook
Share on FB
Share on linkedin
Post on LinkedIn

When you compare the regular and direct expense ratios of mutual funds, how do you decide something is expensive or not? At PrimeInvestor, we have a new tool to help you make this comparison. But the tool alone can’t help you decide. This article will tell you how to use it effectively and what other factors should go into deciding your choice of plan.

regular and direct expense ratios

Before we get into comparing direct and regular plans – if you are new to mutual funds, we recommend that you read our primer on how mutual fund expense ratio works.

You can also read our article on the expense ratio differences across categories to know which categories cost more through the regular plan.  This article is for investors who are beginners or have some experience with mutual funds. For the pros, you know what to do – just use the expense ratio tool along with other performance metrics such as the ones in our category rolling returns tool to arrive at your conclusions.

How to compare expense ratios

When it comes to understanding how your fund’s expense ratio compares with others, there are broadly 3 points you need to consider before coming to a decision on whether to hold a fund or not.

#1 Comparison within category of same plan

The first due diligence is to check how a fund’s cost compares with its category within the same plan. For example, if you hold a flexi cap fund under the regular plan, you must know where your fund stands in terms of cost with its own category under the regular plan. 

In the image below, (you can check our tool –  Mutual fund expense ratio Direct Vs Regular for more data) Edelweiss Flexi Cap’s regular plan has a marginally higher expense ratio than the category average while UTI Flexicap costs a bit lower than the category’s average. 

You can make a similar comparison of the direct plan with its own category. In the same example, you will see that Edelweiss Flexicap’s cost is lower than UTI Flexicap under the Direct plan. But let’s not conclude that Edelweiss is a better alternative to the UTI fund because it’s lower on expenses, without knowing the performance. In other words, how a fund’s expense ratio compares against peers is just one among the metrics to look at. It is not the deciding factor. You can have both a low-expense fund with poor performance and a high-expense fund with high performance. What you need to see is whether your fund’s costs are high in relation to its peers and whether returns are compensating for the costs.

regular and direct expense ratios

Expense ratio will play an important role in debt funds where cost can significantly eat into your net returns. For example, in the image below for short duration funds, HSBC Short Duration regular plan will find it challenging to ever beat IDFC Bond Fund Short Term with its 50 basis point higher cost – unless the fund takes significantly higher risks. Hence, debt funds are a lot more ‘cost sensitive’ than equity funds.

regular and direct expense ratios

#2 Difference between direct and regular

If you hold a regular plan and see that its expense ratio is within category limits and it’s a good performer, that’s step 1 done and you may stop with it. But if you are seriously contemplating whether to switch to direct or just curious to know how much more you pay to be in a regular plan, then our tool will give you the simple difference between the direct and regular plan expense ratios. In the first example above, you know that UTI Flexicap’s regular plan is 0.91 percentage points more than its direct plan. Yes, it is not low per se but how does it compare with its peers? Is the scheme reasonable in the extra cost it charges for the regular plan? 

This is where comparing the difference for the category makes sense. In this case, for the category on an average, the difference between the direct and regular plan works to 1.13%. UTI Flexicap’s figure is thus lower than the category. So, you know that your fund’s additional expense is at least within the trend in the category! 

But if you take hybrid balanced advantage funds (image below), you will see that even top performing funds such as Edelweiss Balanced Advantage have a difference (between regular and direct) as high as 1.42% – that is higher than the category’s differential. What does this tell you? That these are likely distribution-driven products – where commission plays a large role in gaining AUM traction.

regular and direct expense ratios

#3 Categories that are expensive in regular

With the above, you will know the difference between direct and regular cost. You will also know whether a fund is within its category average in the extra cost it charges for the regular plan.  But then, there can be categories where the difference per se for the entire set itself can be very high. 

Let us continue with the example above of the hybrid balanced advantage category. The image will tell you that 8 funds have a difference of over 1.5 percentage points over their direct plan. That is a significant difference for a category where returns are lower than regular equity (since they hold derivatives and debt that cap returns). Clearly, in categories such as this, if you have the right approach or guidance to choosing funds, direct plans make more sense. This is the case with multi asset allocation funds too!

regular and direct expense ratios

In categories such as debt, the difference between direct and regular can be very stark when some categories are hard to sell and need a push. In such cases, the distribution commission can be quite high. Look at the credit risk category given below. Notice that the expense ratio of regular plans of the credit risk category is more than twice the average of the corporate bond category. What’s more, the difference between regular and direct is just 0.39% on an average in the case of corporate bond funds as opposed to 0.75% for the credit risk category. 

In the debt space, a marginally high cost can eat into your returns since your returns are typically in the single digits, unlike equity.

regular and direct expense ratios
regular and direct expense ratios

Many hybrid categories, thematic and international fund categories also showcase high expense ratios and high differences between regular and direct.

What you need to keep in mind with expense ratios

In fund expense ratios, there are different factors to consider when concluding whether a fund is too expensive or not. Keep the following points in mind:

  • A category with a higher component of active management can have a higher expense ratio, in general, than those with relatively less active management. For example, multi asset category or sector funds have higher expense ratios than say Equity Flexicap or Multicap. A credit risk fund involves a lot more active debt management and due diligence than a corporate bond fund. Hence, its expense per se is higher than the later, whether you’re looking at direct or regular. Of course, whether the credit risk delivers for the risk and cost is a separate matter.
  • When the differential between regular and direct is higher than the category average, it means your fund is paying more towards distribution and commission than other funds. Whether you see value in such a higher cost is a call you would need to take. At PrimeInvestor, where a fund is performing well but its additional cost of regular plan is far higher than the category’s average, we specifically give a call of ‘Buy through direct’ in our MF review tool. In such cases, it is a clear red flag that the regular plan cost is very high and can be avoided. 
  • Higher-than-category difference expense ratios can also occur for 2 other reasons: one, a fund that has a small AUM is allowed to charge at a higher slab as per SEBI’s regulation. This occurs when the fund house is also new. Hence, to promote the funds and make use of the higher cap allowed, many new AMCs with small AUMs will have higher differential in expense ratios. Given below is an example of Quant AMC and how some of their funds garnered AUM on the back of performance as well as high distribution & commission spends. Two, the fund house may be large and established and still have a higher regular expense ratio to promote/push certain schemes to be marketed more. This can be seen in categories such as multi asset allocation with lower AUM as also other hybrid categories, besides thematic funds, or certain debt funds – depending on the market’s flavour. In these cases, it is your call on whether you find the performance of the fund enough to take the higher cost in stride.

Your takeaways

  • In general, you need to worry less about a high expense ratio in a scenario where the fund and the market are both delivering. That also means that expense ratio is less important in potentially double-digit earning categories such as equity and becomes more important in relatively lower returning classes such as debt, equity savings or balanced advantage. No doubt both make an impact on your returns with compounding. 
  • That said, where a fund’s expense ratio is unusually high in the regular plan, then it calls for a decision. If you are a user of a platform such as PrimeInvestor there is little reason for you to go for a regular plan, especially in funds where we have issued an ‘invest through direct’ call.
  • Some categories that are high maintenance (multiple asset classes or high due diligence on credit risk etc.) can have higher costs. Therefore, the larger call for you to take would be whether you need to own funds from such categories at all. 
  • Expense ratio should not be seen as a standalone metric. Performance, portfolio quality and fitment of strategy in your portfolio should take precedence. Higher cost will in any case eventually show up in performance. You might see a few funds we recommend having a higher expense ratio than peers. That will likely be due to the nature of category. And remember, we recommend the direct plan. 
  • When the difference between regular and direct is high and you decide to switch to direct, take into consideration your own tax situation and cash outgo. This is entirely individual to you. It is not possible for us to give a ‘strategy’ for this. 
  • New fund offers, funds heavily promoted by AMCs or distributors, or banks need to be viewed from a cost (expense ratio) angle, beyond its fancied appeal. 

P.S: Some of you have already asked us for a calculator on the difference in your corpus arising from direct plan over regular plan. We plan to build a tool where you can input your return assumptions. The current tool would get too crowded and confusing if we introduced multiple data with assumptions in it. We mean it as a simple expense ratio comparison tool. We will sound you off once the calculator is ready!

Share on whatsapp
Share via Whatsapp
Share on twitter
Tweet it out
Share on facebook
Share on FB
Share on linkedin
Post on LinkedIn

More like this

Please note that any specific queries on any of our recommendations will be answered ONLY through email. If you are a subscriber, please mail contact@primeinvestor.in.  Only general queries or discussions will be answered through the comment section of the blog. For full details, please refer to this post – How to communicate with PrimeInvestor.

13 thoughts on “Regular and Direct expense ratios – 3 ways to compare”

  1. Hi Vidya
    Sorry I did not get what you are trying to explain.
    My query is- Is there a plan for Prime Investor to update Actual TER for FoF/ Feeder Funds which give TER of Fund + Weighted Avg. of Underlying Funds also because these type of information is not readily available.
    Regars
    Keyur

    1. The TER of an FOF is the full expense ratio that is charged to the fund. You don’t pay any higher charge than this. The funds/ETFs in which the FOF invests will already have the expense built into their own NAV – the FOF buys at these NAVs. So yes, you’re bearing the underlying fund expenses, but the FOF itself has only one comprehensive expense ratio.

      As of now, we don’t have plans to list the expense ratios of all the underlying funds/ETFs in an FOF. That would be a separate tool, if we do plan something like it. But note that some FOFs invest in multiple funds/ETFs and the allocations can change – it would not be a simple calculation of underlying fund weights, in these cases. – thanks, Bhavana

  2. Hello Vidya & Bhavana

    You n Team are doing fabulous job of creating Financial Awareness; unfortunately, most are lacking as it’s not taught anywhere.

    I have a suggestion in terms of Expense Ratio.

    Many Fund of Fund are required to charge it’s own Expense Ratio as well as Expense Ratio of underlying Fund/ ETF. But MF Sites do not disclose these Expenses of underlying Funds most of the time. This mostly misleads DIY Investors.

    E. G. Kotak Asset Allocator (FoF)- Direct Plan has Expense Ratio of 0.30% … But this is plain misleading fact because this FoF needs to additionally charge Expense of underlying Funds also. So weighted average expense of underlying funds + Funds own 0.3% = Total Expense Ratio of ~ 0.97%

    Same is MO NASDAQ 100 FoF Direct Plan has expense of 0.1% but that is misleading fact because underlying ETF has Expense Ratio of 0.56%. Thus, TER of FoF will become 0.66%

    Same is case of all Feeder Funds where few AMCs don’t disclose Expense Ratio of main overseas fund which is actually eating into returns. E. G. Edelweiss declares Expense including Foreign Funds expense while Franklin does not include.

    Can you n Team include this facts for all funds so that DIY Direct MF Investors can see actual TER of each n every MFs?

    Regards
    Keyur

  3. Dear Prime Investor Team,

    This recent tool with details of fund category, Regular expense ratio, Direct expense ratio and their difference value is awesome. Prime Investor team is giving a wonderful financial literacy.
    Moving forward I have some request, once get the details from Fund house for the latest NFO like SBI Next 50, UTI Focused etc, please update your tools also.

    As rightly said, with this regular Vs direct alone we cannot arrive at investing, so I have a request if you can club your other MF tools information like Buy/sell/hold, star rating and other details, so that this tool will become a single massive tool. This is my suggestion.

    Regards
    Sridharan R

    1. Hello Sir, Many thanks! On expense ratio, anything that is available on our feed (once released by AMC) is made available. If it is not released yet, we won’t have. On your other suggestions, when we build our MF screener (WIP), you will have multiple data points to compare and contrast. thanks, Vidya

  4. Wonderful article…Looking forward eagerly for the Primeinvestor calculator on the difference in corpus arising from direct plan over regular plan.

  5. Hello Mam,
    Why the fund houses keep on changing their expense ratio very frequently. Is there any methodology to it and do they have any cap beyond which they cannot increase it.

    1. We won’t know why funds change expense ratios 🙂 They are free to do it based on their expenses. SEBI sets maximum limits for expense ratio that funds can charge, depending on the fund category and fund AUM. We’ve given the caps in the expense ratio tool, below the table. – thanks, Bhavana

  6. Thank you for this great article. Very helpful information. In the past I noted that some direct equity plan does not perform well as compared to their regular plan. Could you please advise ?

    1. Can you cite a specific example? Because the direct plan is lower-expense than a regular plan, it cannot be performing worse than a regular plan. The underlying performance will be the same, the expense ratio will be the only differentiating factor – thanks, Bhavana

    2. This is not possible practically.

      Most probably, a typo error on the platform which you might have used for checking Expense Ratio.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Register for FREE!

Gain instant access to more PrimeInvestor articles, researched products, and portfolios

The essence of PrimeInvestor

Register for FREE!

Gain instant access to more PrimeInvestor articles, researched products, and portfolios

Legal Disclaimer : PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd (with brand name PrimeInvestor) is an independent research entity offering research services on personal finance products to customers. We are a SEBI registered Research Analyst (Registration: INH200008653). The content and reports generated by the entity does not constitute or is not intended to constitute an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation to an offer to buy or sell financial products, units or securities. All content and information are provided on an ‘as is’ basis by PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd. Information herein is believed to be reliable but PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd does not warrant its completeness or accuracy and expressly disclaims all warranties and conditions of any kind, whether express or implied. The services rendered by PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd are on a best-effort basis. PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd does not assure or guarantee the user any minimum or fixed returns. PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd or any of its officers, directors, partners, employees, agents, subsidiaries, affiliates or business associates will not liable for any losses, cost of damage incurred consequent upon relying on investment information, research opinions or advice or any other material/information whatsoever on the web site, reports, mails or notifications issued by PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd or any other agency appointed/authorised by PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd. Use of the above-said information is at the user’s own risk. The user must make his own investment decisions based on his specific investment objective and financial position and using such independent advisors as he believes necessary. All intellectual property rights emerging from this website, blog, and investment solutions are and shall remain with PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd. All material made available is meant for the user’s personal use and such user shall not resell, copy, or redistribute the newsletter or any part of it, or use it for any commercial purpose. PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd, or any of its officers, directors, employees, or subsidiaries have not received any compensation/ benefits whether monetary or in kind, from the AMC, company, government, bank or any other product manufacturer or third party, whose products are the subject of its research or investment information. The performance data quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results. Investing in financial products involves risk. Investments are subject to market risk. Please read all related documents carefully. As a condition to accessing the content and website of PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd, you agree to our Terms and Conditions of Use, available here. This service is not directed for access or use by anyone in a country, especially the USA, Canada or the European Union countries, where such use or access is unlawful or which may subject PrimeInvestor Financial Research Pvt Ltd or its affiliates to any registration or licensing requirement.

Aditya Birla Mutual FundAxis Mutual Fund Baroda Mutual FundBNP Paribas Mutual FundBOI AXA Mutual FundsCanara Robeco Mutual FundDSP Mutual Fund Edelweiss Mutual FundEssel Mutual FundFranklin Templeton Mutual FundHDFC Mutual FundHSBC Mutual FundICICI Mutual FundIDBI Mutual FundIDFC Mutual FundIIFL Mutual FundIndiabulls Mutual FundInvesco Mutual FundITI Mutual FundKotak Mahindra Mutual FundL&T Mutual FundLIC Mutual FundMahindra Mutual FundMirae Asset Mutual FundMotilal Oswal Mutual FundNippon India Mutual FundPGIM Mutual FundPPFAS Mutual FundPrincipal Mutual FundQuant Mutual FundQuantum Mutual FundSahara Mutual FundSBI Mutual FundShriram Mutual FundSundaram Mutual FundTata Mutual FundsTaurus Mutual FundsUnion Mutual FundsUTI Mutual FundsYes Mutual Funds

Equity: Large Cap Funds | Mip Cap Funds | Large And Mid Cap Funds | Small Cap Mutual Funds | Contra Mutual Funds | Dividend Yield | Focused Mutual Funds | Find Top Index Funds | Best Sector Funds | Thematic Mutual Fund | Best Value Mutual Funds | Equity Linked Savings Scheme | Tax Saving Funds
Debt: Banking And PSU Funds | Corporate Bond Funds | Credit Risk Funds Mutual Funds | Dynamic Bond Funds | Floating Rate Funds | Gilt Mutual Funds India | Find Top Liquid Funds In India | Long term debt funds | Low Duration Funds Debt Funds | Medium Duration Debt Funds | Medium To Long Duration Funds | Money Market Debt Funds | Overnight Debt Funds | Short Duration Debt Funds | Ultra Short Term Debt Fund
Hybrid: Aggressive Hybrid Funds | Arbitrage Mutual Funds | Balanced Advantage Mutual Funds | Conservative Hybrid Funds | Dynamic Asset Allocation | Equity Saving Funds | Multi Asset Funds | Multi Asset Allocation

Mutual fund rolling returns by category: Balanced Advantage | Conservative Hybrid Fund | Corporate Bond | Dividend Yield | Dynamic Bond | Equity Linked Savings Scheme | Floating Rate | Index Funds | Large and Midcap fund | Large Cap Fund | Liquid funds | Low Duration | Mid Cap Fund | Multi Cap Fund | Short Duration | Small cap Fund | Solution Oriented – Childrens Fund | Ultra Short Duration

Login to your account
OR