1

“Measuring Performance of Indian Mutual funds”

Abstract

Since the development of the Indian capital Market and deregulations of the economy in
1992 it has came a long way with lots of ups and downs. There have been structural
changes in both primary and secondary markets since 1992 scandal where the no
seduce to the bottom and was bravely survived in ICU. Mutual funds are key
contributors to the globalization of financial markets and one of the main sources of
capital flows to emerging economies. Despite their importance in emerging markets, little
is known about their investment allocation and strategies. This article provides an
overview of mutual fund activity in emerging markets. It describes their size, asset
allocation. This paper is a process to analyze the Indian Mutual Fund Industry pricing
mechanism with empirical studies on its valuation. It also analyzes data at both the
fund-manager and fund-investor levels. The study reveled that the performance is
affected saving and investment habits of the people at the second side the confidence
and loyalty of the fund Manager and rewards affects the performance of the MF industry
in India.
Key words: Net Asset Value (NAV), Sales Load, Repurchase or ‘Back-end’ Load, Asset Under
Management (AUM)

Deepak Agrawal, Asstt. Professor , (Faculty of Management), LNCT-MER, Sanwar Road, Indore (M.P.)
deepakcupid@rediffmail.com

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1311761

 2

I Introduction
Mutual funds have been a significant source of investment in both government and corporate
securities. Decades it has been the monopoly of the state with UTI being the key player, with
invested funds exceeding Rs.300 bn. The state-owned insurance companies also hold a portfolio
of stocks. Presently, numerous mutual funds exist, including private and foreign companies and
mainly state-owned Banks. Foreign participation in mutual funds and asset management
companies (AUM) is permitted on a case-by-case basis.

UTI, the government in 1964 set up the largest mutual fund in the country, to encourage small
investors in the equity market, presently having extensive marketing network of over 35, 000
agents spread over the country. The UTI scrip’s have performed relatively well in the market, as
compared to the Sensex trend. However, the same cannot be said of all mutual funds.

All MFs are allowed to apply for firm allotment in public issues. SEBI regulates the functioning
of mutual funds, and it requires that all MFs should be established as trusts under the Indian
Trusts Act. The actual fund management activity shall be conducted from a separate asset
management company (AMC). The minimum net worth of an AMC or its affiliate must be Rs.
50 million to act as a manager in any other fund. MFs can be penalized for defaults including
non-registration and failure to observe rules set by their AMCs. MFs dealing exclusively with
money market instruments have to be registered with RBI. All other schemes floated by MFs are
required to be registered with SEBI.

In 1995, the RBI permitted private sector institutions to set up Money Market Mutual Funds
(MMMFs). They can invest in treasury bills, call and notice money, commercial paper,
commercial bills accepted/co-accepted by banks, certificates of deposit and dated government
securities having unexpired maturity up to one year.

II Objective of the study

This paper is a process to analyze the Indian Mutual Fund Industry pricing mechanism with
empirical studies on its valuation. It also analyzes data at both the fund-manager and fund-
investor levels.

Concept

A Mutual Fund is a trust that pools the savings of a number of investors who share a common
financial goal. The money thus collected is then invested in capital market instruments such as
shares, debentures and other securities. The income earned through these investments and the
capital appreciation realised are shared by its unit holders in proportion to the number of units
owned by them. Thus a Mutual Fund is the most suitable investment for the common man as it
offers an opportunity to invest in a diversified, professionally managed basket of securities at a
relatively low cost. The flow chart below describes broadly the working of a mutual fund:

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1311761

 3

Mutual Fund Process

III Literature Review:

Michael C. Jensen (1967) derived a risk-adjusted measure of portfolio performance (Jensen’s
alpha) that estimates how much a manager’s forecasting ability contributes to fund’s returns.

Sharpe, William F.(1994) suggested the ‘Sharp- Ratio technique for the measurement for the
performance measurement of the MF.

Michael K. Berkowitz et, (1997), supports the argument& states that, past fund performance
influences individual investment decisions along with implying strong incentives for managers
increase the performance of Mutual funds.

Mishra et, al (2000) measured MF performance using lower partial moment Risk from the
lower partial moment is measured by taking into account only those states in which return is
below a pre-specified “target rate” like risk-free rate.

Graciela L. Kaminsky, el,al,(2001), Due to large redemptions and injections, funds' flows are
not stable. Withdrawals from emerging markets during recent crises were large, which is
consistent with the evidence on financial contagion.

Bala Ramasamy et,(2003), agreed that Three elements consistent past performance, size of
funds & cost of transaction effects the performance.

Prof. S. Rao, et,al evaluated performance in a bear market through Relative Performance
Management index & risk – return analysis.

Sharad Panwar et (2005). uses Residual Variance (RV) as the measure of MF portfolio
diversification. RV has a direct impact on shape fund performance measure.

Marcin T. Kacperczyk,et,al (2005)demonstrated that unabsorbed information create values for

some funds. Return gap helps to predict future fund performance & investors should use
additional measures to evaluate the performance.

Bijan Roy, et,al used conditional performance evaluation on a sample of 89 Indian MF

schemes measuring with both unconditional and conditional form of CAPM model. The
 4

results suggest that the use of conditioning lagged information variables improves the
performance of mutual fund schemes, causing alphas to shift towards right and reducing the
number of negative timing coefficients.

IV History & Growth of Mutual Funds Industry in India

UTI pioneered the mutual fund industry in India ( 1963) with slow & staidly growth , but it
accelerated from the year 1987 when non-UTI players entered the industry.

In the past decade, Indian mutual fund industry had seen a dramatic improvement, both qualities
wise as well as quantity wise. Before, the monopoly of the market had seen an ending phase; the
Assets Under Management (AUM) was Rs.67 bn. The private sector entry to the fund family
raised the AUM to Rs. 470 bn in March 1993 and till April 2004; it reached the height of Rs.
1,540 billion.

Putting the AUM of the Indian Mutual Funds Industry into comparison, the total of it is less than
the deposits of SBI alone, constitute less than 11% of the total deposits held by the Indian
banking industry.
The main reason of its poor growth is that the mutual fund industry in India is new in the
country. Large sections of Indian investors are yet to be intellectuated with the concept. Hence, it
is the prime responsibility of all mutual fund companies, to market the product correctly abreast
of selling.

The mutual fund industry can be broadly put into four phases according to the development of
the sector. Each phase is briefly described as under.

First Phase - 1964-87

Unit Trust of India (UTI) was established on 1963 by an Act of Parliament. It was set up by the
Reserve Bank of India and functioned under the Regulatory and administrative control of the
Reserve Bank of India. In 1978 UTI was de-linked from the RBI and the Industrial Development
Bank of India (IDBI) took over the regulatory and administrative control in place of RBI. The
first scheme launched by UTI was Unit Scheme 1964. At the end of 1988 UTI had Rs.6,700
crores of assets under management.

Second Phase - 1987-1993 (Entry of Public Sector Funds)

During this period Banks entered into mutual fund market. Pioneered by SBI Mutual Fund (June
87) followed by Canbank Mutual Fund (Dec 87), PNB Mutual Fund (Aug 89), Indian Bank
Mutual Fund (Nov 89), Bank of India (Jun 90), Bank of Baroda Mutual Fund (Oct 92). LIC in
1989 and GIC in 1990. By the end of 1993 AUM was Rs.47,004 crores .

Third Phase - 1993-2003 (Entry of Private Sector Funds)

The third phase saw the entry of private sector funds . There was change in Regulation of Mutual
fund. It was now governed by SEBI (MF) Regulation Act, which was further revised in 1996.
The erstwhile Kothari Pioneer (now merged with Franklin Templeton) was the first private
sector mutual fund registered in July 1993. The total AUM was 1.21 lakh crores invested by the
end of Jan. 2003.
 5

Fourth Phase - since February 2003 (Entry of Foreign Firms)

It was the period for the entry of foreign firms who created Boom in the in Indian Capital
market. As at the end of April 2007, there were 32 funds managing firms with more than 756
schemes having AUM worth Rs. 3.50 lakh crores.

GROWTH IN ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT

Source: www.finance.indiamart.com

IV a) Types of Mutual Funds Schemes in India

Wide variety of Mutual Fund Schemes exists to cater to the needs such as financial position, risk
tolerance and return expectations etc. The table below gives an overview into the existing types
of schemes in the Industry.

TYPES OF MUTUAL FUND SCHEMES

• By Structure :
o Open - Ended Schemes
o Close - Ended Schemes
o Interval Schemes

• By Investment Objective
o Growth Schemes
o Income Schemes
o Balanced Schemes
o Money Market Schemes

• Other Schemes
o Tax Saving Schemes
o Special Schemes

Index Schemes
 6

Sector Specific Schemes

IV c) Mutual Funds - Organisation

There are many entities involved and the diagram below illustrates the organisational set up of a
mutual fund:

Organisation of a Mutual Fund

V Hypothesis:

The following Hypothesis are tested:

H0 : There is no direct relationship between the Prices of Mutual Fund Investments (NAV)
and the SENSEX movements.

H1 : There is relationship between MF NAV and the SENSEX movements which affects the
MF performance.

H2 : There is extreme relationship between MF NAV and the BSE SENSEX movements
which affects the MF performance.

H3 : Performance of the Fund Managers affects the returns of the firm.

VI Database & Methodology:

a) Database for current Study:

 7

i) NAV selected for the short term & medium term ranging within 1 week to 5 years (10th
May, 2002 to 10th May, 2007) along with the index- value of BSE SENSEX is considered
for the same period.
ii) Secondary data is used for the analysis.

b) Methodology:
Mispricing of the Mutual funds can be evaluated by comparing the return on market and
return on stock. During the pricing period of the return on stock is negative, then it
indicates overpricing and if are positive indicates under pricing. Relative performance
measurement is used to measure the performance of the MF with SENSEX.

Step I : Standard Deviation (SD) – It’s significance lies in the fact that sample is free
from defects of sampling , it measures the absolute dispersion, the greater the SD, greater
will be magnitude of the deviation of the values from their mean.
Small SD means high degree of uniformity & homogeneity of a series. The actual mean
is considered for the given Tabulated data .
The square of standard deviation of returns gives the Variance. Coefficient of variation
(COV) is found by dividing standard deviation by mean returns.

Step II : Correlation analysis (r) : It deals with the association between two or more
variables. It is analysed in 3 steps.
a) To determine whether any relation exists or not.
b) Testing its significance.
c) Establishing cause and effect relationship.

(r ) is always measured in absolute ± 01. If r=+1 , means there is perfect co-relation

between variables. If it is r= -1 there is perfect negative correlation, r =0 there is no
relationship between variables.
∑ xy
So, r = ---------------
________
2 2
√ ∑x *∑y

Step III : The Coefficient of Determination (r2) : The square of the r is called as The
Coefficient of Determination.
Explained variation
r2 = -------------------------
Total variation

b) Testing Hypothesis:
Although various methodologies is being used by the various Authors to test the
hypothesis like Residual Variance (RV) by Mr. Sharad Panwar, CAPM model by Bijan
Roy, Sharp- Ratio technique by Sharpe, William F, so as Relative Performance
Management index & risk – return analysis by Prof. Rao , to test the null Hypothesis the
 8

methodology considered by the use of ‘t-test’. To test the hypothesis of the variables in
the population are uncorrelated, the following test is applied:

r
t= * n−2
1− r2

Where t is based on (n-2) degrees of freedom. If the calculated value of t exceeds t 0.05 for
(n-2) , d.f.(degree of freedom), value of r is significant at 5% level. If t< t 0.05 the data are
consistent i.e. Ho is accepted.

Behind the Scenes:

The MF industry in India has undergone a most successful phase in the recent times, Crores of
rupees was pumped by the retail investors, how were handsomely awarded in the form of double
or even triple digit dividends. The success story lies due to rocking performance of Indian market
with GDP growth rate about 9.4% (2006-07).

Table 01:

Year GDP - real growth rate % Change

in %

1999 5 -----

2000 6 20.00

2001 5.80 -03.33

2002 4.30 -25.86

2003 8.30 93.02

2004 6.20 -25.30

2005 8.40 35.48

2006 8.50 01.17

2007 9.40 10.58%

Source: CIA World Factbook

Reviewing the chart indicates positive growth rate in past couple of years with only two years
2002 & 2004 sustained negative groth rate of 30% and 25.30% respectively.
 9

A positive reform in the economic policies of the country increases the confidence of FII’s. On
an average, the stock funds have gained @30% per annum over the last Three years due to
excellent performance and returns. Table exhibit below indicates the performance of Mutual
Fund companies as on 31st March 2007.

Table: 02
Assets Under Management (AUM) as at the end of Mar-2007 (Rs in Lakhs)
Average AUM For The
AUM
Month
Mutual Fund Name
Excluding Fund Of Excluding Fund Of
Fund Of Funds Funds Fund Of Funds Funds
1. ABN AMRO Mutual Fund 480524.43 38664.67 491030.27 36526.71
2. AIG Global Investment Group Mutual
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fund
3. Benchmark Mutual Fund 385153.16 0 424959.33 0
4. Birla Sun Life Mutual Fund 1904678.44 1897.6 2201383 1879.51
5. BOB Mutual Fund 9045.87 0 11066.04 0
6. Canbank Mutual Fund 218464.77 0 229158.71 0
7. DBS Chola Mutual Fund 176730.66 0 228167.2 0
8. Deutsche Mutual Fund 590528.54 0 611024.19 0
9. DSP Merrill Lynch Mutual Fund 1206325.74 0 1284901.34 0
10. Escorts Mutual Fund 11833.09 0 10599.65 0
11. Fidelity Mutual Fund 582968.82 5470.2 569207.86 6365.59
12. Franklin Templeton Mutual Fund 2201879.65 31938.51 2236356.93 32584.7
13. HDFC Mutual Fund 2835798.73 0 3195926.69 0
14. HSBC Mutual Fund 1103923.7 0 1278200.45 0
15. ICICI Prudential Mutual Fund 3786958.51 3665.52 4374968.08 3639.58
16. ING Vysya Mutual Fund 277781.5 85346.48 395756.68 88388.51
17. JM Financial Mutual Fund 314769.45 0 352219.13 0
18. JPMorgan Mutual Fund N/A N/A N/A N/A
19. Kotak Mahindra Mutual Fund 1160415.01 52100.14 1247051.27 53191.62
20. LIC Mutual Fund 964280.87 0 1081900.17 0
21. Lotus India Mutual Fund 117185.24 0 142412.62 0
22. Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund 285418.3 0 282177.21 0
23. PRINCIPAL Mutual Fund 928934.78 0 1086191.85 0
24. Quantum Mutual Fund 6042.75 0 5003.89 0
25. Reliance Mutual Fund 4630677.62 0 4766531.39 0
26. Sahara Mutual Fund 18008.85 0 17900.47 0
27. SBI Mutual Fund 1680732.61 0 1898384.15 0
28. Standard Chartered Mutual Fund 1154847.88 2382.5 1396808.83 2757.43
29. Sundaram BNP Paribas Mutual
744061.15 0 772958.77 0
Fund
30. Tata Mutual Fund 1262446.8 0 1449247.08 0
31. Taurus Mutual Fund 27825.01 0 27173.35 0
32. UTI Mutual Fund 3548824.73 0 3761293.72 0
Grand Total 32617066.66 221465.62 35829960.32 225333.65
www.amfiindia.com
 10

Table: 3
ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT AS ON 31st MARCH, 2007 (Rs. in Crore)
Category & Type wise
Open End Close End Total % to Total
Income 30894 88428 119322 36
Growth 96357 17029 113386 35
Balanced 7409 1701 9110 3
Liquid/Money
72006 - 72006 22
Market
Gilt 2257 - 2257 1
ELSS 8398 1813 10211 3
Gold ETF 96 - 96 @
Total 217417 108971 326388 100
@ Less than1%

Source : Finance.indiamart.com

TABLE 4- Return on Mutual Funds , SD, Variance, Coefficient of Variation, SENSEX & S & P CNX NIFTY
Index return (11May, 2002 to 11May, 2007)

Period Mean of Standard Variance COV Sensex S&P CNX

MF returns devation Returns Nifty
Return
1wk -0.34 0.93 0.96 -274.62 -2.2 -2
1mth 2.89 2.36 1.54 81.77 4.4 5.7
3mth 1.12 2.90 1.70 258.29 -3 0.2
6mth 5.44 5.94 2.44 109.21 3.7 6.1
1yr 9.55 10.20 3.19 106.79 9.2 8.3
2yr 50.54 43.08 6.56 85.24 113.4 103.9
3yr 72.21 82.53 9.08 114.29 147.9 129.9
5yr 96.78 173.51 13.17 179.29 301.3 264.3

Note: Table 4 shows the performance of mutual funds. Fund returns, Standard deviation of returns, BSE SENSEX &
Nifty Index returns are also calculated using the formula depicted above. The square of standard deviation of
returns gives the Variance. Coefficient of variation (COV) is found by dividing standard deviation by mean returns.

VIIa) Outcomes:
The result of the Statistical test indicates :
a) SD shows degree of correlation between the variables of the tabulated data for the
various periods. (Appendex ….). The square of standard deviation of returns gives the
Variance. Coefficient of variation (COV) is found by dividing standard deviation by mean
returns.
However, the standard deviations of the 3-month are significant with the increase in the
period the SD increases indicates higher deviations from the actual means. The
variance and coefficient of variation (COV) are also significant. The smaller the value of
 11

Variance, the lesser is the variability or greater stability. Variance increases in the later
periods indicates higher variability in the returns. As the time horizon increases COV
gets decreases means value are less consistent as compared to small duration of
Investments.

The methodology considered by the use of ‘t-test’. To test the hypothesis of the variables in the
population are uncorrelated, the following test is applied.

• t value at BSE SENSEX is 10.8558. As t is based on (n-2) degrees of freedom where r

value at 5% significant level is 1.943. The value of t is greater than the r at 5%
significance level hence null hypothesis is rejected.

• t value at S&P CNX NIFTY is 10.9359. As t is based on (n-2) degrees of freedom where
r value at 5% significant level is 1.943. The value of t is greater than the r at 5%
significance level hence null hypothesis is rejected, which significantly accepts H1, H2
and H3.

VII b) Findings :

• Past performance influences the future performance of the funds.

• Performance of the funds can be drastically improved by the better incentives to
the fund manager.
• High rate of domestic savings and a fast –developing liberalizing economy can
elevate the growth of MF Sector in our country.

The other result reveled in the research related to the investing in a Mutual Fund are:

• Diversification: The best mutual funds design their portfolios so as individual investments will
react differently to the same economic conditions, like rise in interest rates may cause certain
securities in a diversified portfolio to decrease in value and other securities will respond by
increasing in value. When a portfolio is balanced in this way, the value of the overall portfolio
should gradually increase over time, even if some securities lose value.

• Regulatory oversight: Mutual funds are subject to many government regulations that protect
investors from fraud.

• Liquidity: It's easy to get your money out of a mutual fund. Write a check, make a call, and
you've got the cash.

• Convenience: You can buy mutual fund shares by mail, phone, or over the Internet.

• Low cost: Mutual fund expenses are often no more than 1.5 percent of your investment.
Expenses for Index Funds are less than that, because index funds are not actively managed.
Instead, they automatically buy stock in companies that are listed on a specific index

• Transparency
 12

• Flexibility

• Choice of schemes

• Tax benefits

• Well regulated

Drawbacks of Mutual Funds

Mutual funds have their drawbacks and may not be for everyone:
• Professional Management: Indian Fund Managers average tenure is of barely 4 years in
a particular fund even than most mutual funds handsomely rewards their topflight
professionals to manage their investments.

• No Guarantees: No investment is risk free. If the entire stock market declines in value,
the value of mutual fund shares will go down as well, no matter how balanced the
portfolio. Investors encounter fewer risks when they invest in mutual funds than when
they buy and sell stocks on their own. However, anyone who invests through a mutual
fund runs the risk of losing money.

• Fees and commissions: All funds charge administrative fees to cover their day-to-day
expenses. Some funds also charge sales commissions or "loads" to compensate brokers,
financial consultants, or financial planners. Even if you don't use a broker or other
financial adviser, you will pay a sales commission if you buy shares in a Load Fund.

• Taxes: During a typical year, most actively managed mutual funds sell anywhere from 20
to 70 percent of the securities in their portfolios. If your fund makes a profit on its sales,
you will pay taxes on the income you receive, even if you reinvest the money you made.

• Management risk: When you invest in a mutual fund, you depend on the fund's manager
to make the right decisions regarding the fund's portfolio. If the manager does not
perform as well as you had hoped, you might not make as much money on your
investment as you expected. Of course, if you invest in Index Funds, you forego
management risk, because these funds do not employ managers.

VIII Conclusion:

There has been a tremendous growth in the mutual fund industry in India, attracting large
investments not only from the domestic investments but also form the foreign investors.
Increasing number of Asset based Management Companies providing opportunity to the
investors in the form of safety, hedging and arbitrage. With the growing middle-class
household families with limited risk bearing capacity, it provides better returns than any
other long-term securities. India’s high rate of savings and a rapid-liberalizing economy
is expected to elevate the mutual fund sector to new hikes.
 13

IX SCOPE FOR FUTURE RESEARCH:

There is lot of scope for improvement in the research for evaluating mutual fund
performances. Various other multi-criteria decision models could be tested for evaluating
mutual fund performances. Although MF market is too young but in the long run testing of
fund performances can be made. Portfolio risk through the measure of value at risk (VaR)
can also be tested for differences in mutual fund classes.

X References & Bibliography:

a) Text:
Dipak Kumar, Research Methodology (2006), Excel Books, New Delhi
Dr.S.P.Gupta, Statistical Methods (2005), Sultan Chand & Sons, New Delhi
Mark Shipman, The Next Big Investment Boom (2006), Kogan Page, London
Business Standard, Mumbai, 09/03/06, Pg10.
Business World, Mumbai, 16 October’2006,pp 31-66
b) Journals articles
Bala Ramasamy et,(2003), Evaluating mutual funds in an emerging market: factors that matter to
Finance, Vol. 23, No. 2,1967, 389-416.financial advisors, under URL: www.emeraldinsight.com/
10.1108/02652320310469502.
Graciela L. Kaminsky, Richard K. Lyons and Sergio L. Schmukler, “Mutual Fund
Investment in Emerging Markets: An Overview”, University of California, Berkeley, and the
National Bureau of Economic Research, 2006.
Marcin T. Kacperczyk, et, al (2005), "Unobserved Actions of Mutual Funds" (November
2005). NBER Working Paper No. W11766.
Michael C. Jensen,” The Performance of Mutual Funds in the period 1945-1964”, Journal of
Michael K. Berkowitz et, (1997), Management Compensation and the Performance of Mutual
Funds, University of Toronto, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with
number berk-97-01.
Mishra, Mahmud Rahman, (2001) “Measuring mutual fund performance using lower partial
moment”, Global Business Trends, Contemporary Readings , 2001 edition.
Sharad Panwar et ( 2005), “Characteristics & performance evaluation of selected Mutual Funds in
India” , I.I.T. Madras, Chennai.
Sharpe, W.F., “The Sharpe ratio”, Journal of Portfolio Management 21, 1994,49-59.
Divya Nigam, “MF: A Prospering Reality”, ICFAI University Journals, Vol VII,
issue- II, 2006.
 14

c) Webliography :
Bijan Roy, Saiket Sovan Deb, “The conditional performance of Indian mutual funds: an empirical
study”, Working paper, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=593723
Richard L Smith & Kenji Kutsuna (2000), papers.ssrn.com
S. Narayan Rao , M. Ravindran ,”Performance Evaluation of Indian Mutual Funds”, Working paper
www.papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=433100

d) Web Resources:
www.bseindia.com www.nseindia.com www.amfiindia.com
www.mutulfundsindia.com www.primedatabase.com www.hdfcfunds.com
www.finance.indiamart.com www.indexmundi.com

e) Search engine:
Google.com

XI Tables & Graphs (Appendix) :

Appx 01
Indices

Indices: BSE Sensex For the period: From year 1991 to year 2007

Price/ Price/Book Dividend

Year Open High Low Close Earnings value Yield
1991 1,027.38 1,955.29 947.14 1,908.85 22.30 3.58 1.24
1992 1,957.33 4,546.58 1,945.48 2,615.37 36.19 6.35 0.80
1993 2,617.78 3,459.07 1,980.06 3,346.06 31.78 4.81 0.98
1994 3,436.87 4,643.31 3,405.88 3,926.90 45.45 6.07 0.68
1995 3,910.16 3,943.66 2,891.45 3,110.49 23.63 3.81 1.13
1996 3,114.08 4,131.22 2,713.12 3,085.20 16.07 3.02 1.50
1997 3,096.65 4,605.41 3,096.65 3,658.98 14.45 2.80 1.53
1998 3,658.34 4,322.00 2,741.22 3,055.41 13.00 2.25 1.80
1999 3,064.95 5,150.99 3,042.25 5,005.82 17.35 3.07 1.38
2000 5,209.54 6,150.69 3,491.55 3,972.12 24.48 3.81 1.14
2001 3,990.65 4,462.11 2,594.87 3,262.33 17.60 2.51 1.83
2002 3,262.01 3,758.27 2,828.48 3,377.28 15.22 2.30 2.14
2003 3,383.85 5,920.76 2,904.44 5,838.96 15.02 2.49 2.14
2004 5,872.48 6,617.15 4,227.50 6,602.69 17.26 3.28 2.01
2005 6,626.49 9,442.98 6,069.33 9,397.93 16.21 3.94 1.58
2006 9,422.49 14,035.30 8,799.01 13,786.91 20.18 4.75 1.35
2007 13,827.77 14,723.88 12,316.10 13,879.25 21.19 5.18 1.22

Source: bseindia.com
 15

Appx. 02: Performance of Sensex

Index 1wk 1mth 3mth 6mth 1yr 2yr 3yr 5yr

Sensex -2.2 4.4 -3 3.7 9.2 113.4 147.9 301.3
Nifty -2 5.7 0.2 6.1 8.3 103.9 129.9 264.3
BSE Auto -1.5 6.5 -10 -6.1 -13.4 84.8 -- --
BANKEX -1 4 -6.8 1.9 18.2 83.7 118.8 --
BSE CD 1.9 2.1 0.4 16.3 3.1 123.3 268.4 383.7
BSE FMCG 0.5 0.4 -3.4 -12.2 -21 62.2 99.2 102.9
BSE Healthcare -1.3 -0.1 -1.2 -1.8 -9.4 45.4 50.6 162.4
BSE IT -4.8 1 -10.1 0.4 17.9 93.5 172.6 194.5
BSE PSU -2.2 4.7 4.1 5 -3.3 50.9 56.6 291.4
BSE-Midcap -0.9 6.5 -0.1 3.9 -3.6 -- -- --
BSE TECk -3.6 3.6 -4 9.1 28.7 118.3 204.5 274.9

Appx. 03 Graph: GDP Growth Rate of India

GDP Growth rate

10 9.4 1999
8.3 8.5 8.5
8 2000
6 6.2 2001
6 5.8
5 2002
Rate 4.3
4 2003
2004
2
2005
0 2006
Year 2007

Appx. 04 : NAV of the Mutual Funds of India between period 10th May, 2002 to 10th May, 2007

Equity Diversified NAV 1wk 1mth 3mth 6mth 1yr 2yr 3yr 5yr
Assets
(Rs. cr.)
1 Fidelity Special Situations(G) 2,078.32 12.87 -1.2 5.8 -0.8 4.2 28.7 -- -- --

2 Templeton (I) Equity Income(G) 1,774.09 12.86 -- 5.8 4.4 13.7 28.6 -- -- --
3 ICICI Pru Services Indus. (G) 508.5 15.85 -1.2 4.6 0.1 13.8 22.3 -- -- --
4 Reliance NRI Equity Fund (G) 135.03 24.46 -1.8 4.9 -0.3 2.4 20.4 116.9 -- --
5 Birla Frontline Equity (G) 168.4 52.25 -1 4.5 1.8 6.2 20.3 115.7 170.2 --
 16

6 JM Auto Sector Fund (G) 9.94 21.02 -2.1 6.9 -6 -4.4 -3.5 58.9 -- --
7 UTI Auto Sector (G) 69.76 17.4 -1.5 4.9 -11.2 -8.8 -16.6 37.1 83 --
8 ICICI Pru FMCG Fund (G) 81.58 39.97 2.9 0.9 -1 -0.4 -3.3 101.1 240.8 352.1
9 Franklin FMCG Fund (G) 27.98 34.1 1.4 1.9 -1.5 -5.2 -12.3 66.9 140.7 205.3
10 Magnum FMCG Fund 9.51 13.77 -1.1 2.3 -1.6 -8.4 -17.2 36.8 97.2 197.6
11 DSP-ML Technology.Com (G) 84.33 26.93 -1.2 5.8 6.5 29 42 154.8 257.2 406.2
12 Magnum IT Fund 121.42 28.5 -1 3.3 -1.9 16.2 31.4 164.1 287.8 324.1
13 Birla New Millennium (G) 128.69 21.14 -1.9 5.4 0.5 15.8 30.3 126.6 236.6 318.6
14 ICICI Pru Tech. Fund (G) 181.61 16.04 -2.4 5.2 0.4 20.8 28.7 131.5 229.4 348
15 UTI Software Fund (G) 126.91 27.44 -2.7 2.5 -6.1 9.8 26.2 119.3 207.9 242.4
16 Reliance Pharma Fund (G) 126.06 21.43 -1.9 5.9 7.7 3.6 1.1 72 -- --
17 JM Healthcare Sector Fund (G) 7.71 17.28 -2.3 1.2 -2.1 3 -6.5 46.1 -- --
18 Franklin Pharma Fund (G) 61.38 28.9 -1.9 -0.3 0.4 2 -6.7 52.5 67.6 180.6
19 UTI Pharma & Health (G) 73.28 22.13 -1.4 2 2.1 0.1 -10.1 38 60.8 155.1
20 Magnum Pharma Fund (G) 49.68 34.5 -1.6 2.1 -1.3 -4.9 -16.1 62.7 116.3 348.6
21 UTI Banking Sector (G) 64.7 20.78 0.5 5.8 -4.5 5.6 21.6 68.3 118.5 --
22 Reliance Banking Fund (G) 113.94 39.23 1.1 9.4 2.5 6.7 14.8 56.5 109.1 --
23 Birla MNC Fund (G) 195.66 124.17 -1.1 5.6 1.4 3 1.9 74.6 133 300.3
24 Kotak MNC 44.38 28.14 -0.2 8.7 5.9 8 -3.6 62.6 140.4 326
25 UTI MNC Fund (G) 148.93 35.1 0.6 6.1 3.1 1.2 -3.9 57.2 94.2 216.5
26 Reliance Diversified Power (G) 932.49 38.41 0.5 6.8 5.7 14.1 24.4 156.2 286 --
27 Reliance Media & Entertain (G) 92.27 26.34 0.1 4.1 8.6 22.1 23.3 132.4 -- --
28 UTI Services Sector (G) 444.1 48.44 -1.4 3.9 -4.8 3.3 13.8 89.5 124.2 329.4
29 Tata Life Sc & Tech Fund (G) 47.08 48.76 -0.8 3.5 -0.1 7.8 12.5 104.2 164.3 449.5
30 JM Basic Fund 9.17 20.7 -0.6 6.4 4.1 16.3 11.8 98.1 113.7 243.9
SBI Magnum Tax Gain Scheme
31 (D) 1,910.53 44.72 -1.2 3.8 -0.8 6 12.1 119.1 366.8 780.7
32 Fidelity Tax Advantage (G) 711.82 12.94 -0.8 4.6 1.6 8.7 12.1 -- -- --
33 Principal Tax Savings 167.49 78.99 -0.2 5.7 0.6 6.8 7.1 114.8 191.8 497.5
34 Birla Equity Plan (D) 114.82 59.69 0.2 7.3 4.3 6 6.5 86 167 538
35 Principal Personal Tax Saver 38.84 134.76 0.7 6.8 3.8 10.9 6.2 80.5 142.5 --
36 Benchmark Bank BeES 3,300.33 566.62 -0.2 6.9 -6.2 -3.6 13.2 65.6 -- --

37 Tata Index Fund Sensex Plan(A) 3.59 34.84 -1.2 4.3 -2.8 2.3 12.1 105.2 152.8 --
38 ICICI Pru SPIcE Plan 0.77 141.36 -1.2 4.4 -2.7 2.9 11.5 116.5 163.2 --
39 ING Vysya Nifty Plus Fund (G) 3.76 20.99 -1.2 5 0.1 6 11.5 101.8 131.4 --
40 Magnum Index Fund (G) 10.42 36.94 -1.3 5 -0.3 4 11.3 103.3 137.6 267.2
41 Principal Child Benefit - CBP 12.5 59.56 0.9 5.3 3.7 14.1 18.8 93.6 130.3 261.5
42 Principal Child Benefit - FGP 2.72 58.77 0.9 5.3 3.7 14.1 18.8 93.6 130.4 261.5
43 HDFC Prudence Fund (G) 2,284.17 115.11 -0.5 2.6 -0.3 4.9 16.4 84.1 147.3 399.2
44 Templeton (I) CAP- Gift (G) 4.7 31.46 -0.4 3.1 0.4 5.5 11.3 50.4 60.7 91.8
45 Birla 95 Fund (G) 135.09 183.32 -- 4.2 1.1 5.8 9.9 76 123.1 270.8
46 Reliance Liquidity Fund (G) 5,590.10 11.36 0.1 0.7 2.3 4.2 7.8 -- -- --
47 LIC MF Liquid Fund (G) 5,134.16 13.74 0.1 0.7 2 4.1 7.7 14.4 20.1 35.6
HDFC Cash Mgmt. Fund - SP
48 (G) 3,976.71 15.79 0.1 0.7 2.1 4.1 7.6 13.8 19.4 33.6
HDFC CMF - Savings Plus RP
49 (G) 974.7 16.41 0.1 0.7 2.1 4 7.6 13.7 19.3 32.3
50 ICICI Pru Liquid (Sweep Plan) 18.13 12.87 0.2 0.7 2.2 4 7.6 12.8 16.9 27.2
51 ABN Amro MIP (G) 66.99 13.07 -0.1 0.7 -0.2 4.7 8.6 23 -- --
52 HDFC MIP - LTP (G) 1,138.92 14.97 -0.2 0.8 0.6 3.1 7.6 31.1 42.9 --
53 HSBC MIP - Savings Plan (G) 64.24 13.44 -- 1.9 1.7 3.1 7 25.4 32.8 --
 17

54 Birla Sun Life MIP (G) 144.75 25.5 -0.2 0.9 0.5 2.1 6.6 20.8 26.2 64.8
55 Birla MIP II - Savings 5 (G) 766.34 11.75 0.2 0.8 1.3 2.9 6.4 12.8 17.5 --
56 FT (I) Dyn. PE Ratio FOF (G) 39.14 24.89 -0.9 3.3 -0.6 2.2 10.8 79.7 116.3 --
57 Birla AAF- Aggressive (G) 8.27 20.81 -0.8 3.7 0.5 3.5 9.9 68.8 114.7 --
58 ICICI Pru Advisor - Aggres (G) 7.88 21.66 -0.9 4.1 2.1 6.3 9.4 83.5 120.1 --
59 Birla AAF - Moderate Plan (G) 4.83 18.03 -0.4 3.2 1.3 3.4 9 51.3 83.5 --
60 ICICI Pru Advisor -Moderate(G) 10.13 17.85 -0.6 3.2 2.5 5.9 8.9 60.1 76.7 --
61 ABN Amro Flexi Debt - RP (G) 11.79 11.72 0.1 0.8 2.3 4.6 9.5 15 -- --
62 Birla Short Term Plan (G) 62.73 13.53 0.2 0.8 2.4 4.6 8.1 13.6 18.9 34.7
63 DWS Money Plus Fund (G) 357.37 10.93 0.1 0.7 2.3 4.2 7.9 -- -- --
64 Tata Short Term Bond Fund (G) 32.96 13.47 0.2 0.8 2 4.1 7.9 13.9 19.9 --
65 Sundaram Debt STP AP (G) 7.3 13.22 0.1 0.5 2 3.8 7.8 13.2 18.4 --
66 BOB Gilt Fund - PF Plan (G) 4.58 10.93 0.4 2.4 3.4 5.2 8.6 12.5 8.7 --
67 Birla Income Fund (G) 26.51 26.2 0.1 0.9 1.8 3.8 8.3 13.2 13.3 37.8
68 ICICI Pru Flexible Income (G) 2,010.10 13.89 0.2 0.8 2.3 4.2 7.9 13.6 15.7 --
69 Taurus Libra Bond (G) 1.07 14.31 -- 0.3 1.9 3.1 7.5 7 17.1 30.9
70 ICICI Pru Long Term Plan (G) 7.7 15.79 0.2 0.7 2.1 3.6 7.5 13.7 27 55.6
71 LIC MF Floating Rate Fund (G) 984.6 12.1 0.1 0.7 2.2 4.3 8 14.7 20.4 --
ABN AMRO Money Plus -Reg
72 (G) 7.16 11.1 0.1 0.7 2.1 4.2 7.9 -- -- --
73 Reliance Floating Rate (G) 937.52 11.81 0.1 0.7 2.3 4.3 7.9 14 -- --
74 Principal FRF- FMP RP (G) 28.75 11.81 0.2 0.7 2.2 4.2 7.9 14 -- --
75 DBS Chola Short Term FRF (G) 655.43 11.28 0.1 0.7 2.2 4.2 7.9 -- -- --
76 Kotak Cash Plus (G) 23.16 11.31 0.3 0.8 2.6 4.8 8.3 -- -- --
77 Benchmark Derivative Fund (G) 121.14 1,176.40 -- 0.5 2.5 4.6 8.1 15.8 -- --
78 DSP-ML SPF - Aggressive (G) 63.72 14.13 -0.4 1.7 1.3 4.6 7.7 29.2 -- --
79 LIC MF Childrens Fund 13.36 15.32 0.1 1.1 1 2.9 7.5 22 23.8 44.9
80 ICICI Pru Income Multi. RP (G) 457.45 14.54 -- 0.8 0.3 3.1 7.3 33.5 47 --
81 ICICI Pru Liquid Plan -Inst -I 16.01 10.87 0.1 0.8 2.3 4.3 7.9 -- -- --
82 Templeton (I) TMA - SIP (G) 949.75 1,119.45 0.1 0.7 2.1 4.1 7.6 -- -- --

83 HDFC Liquid - Premium Plus (G) 891.52 15.16 0.1 0.7 2.1 4.1 7.6 13.8 19.4 --

84 HDFC Liquid - Premium Plan (G) 522.76 15.13 0.1 0.7 2.1 4.1 7.6 13.8 19.3 --
85 ING Liquid - Super Inst (G) 990.11 11.26 0.2 0.7 2.1 4 7.6 -- -- --
86 Sundaram FRF- IP LTP (G) N.A. 13.35 0.1 0.5 1.6 21 24.9 31.2 -- --
ABN AMRO Money Plus-Inst.
87 (G) 354.09 11.15 0.2 0.7 2.2 4.2 8 -- -- --
88 Principal FRF- FMP -Inst (G) 127.32 11.85 0.2 0.7 2.2 4.2 8 14.3 -- --
89 Principal FRF- SMP - Inst (G) 615.73 11.81 0.2 0.7 2.2 4.2 7.8 14.1 -- --
90 Templeton FRIF -LTP (IP) (G) 151.17 11.17 0.1 0.7 2.3 4.3 7.8 -- -- --