Anda di halaman 1dari 55

CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

A mutual fund is a financial intermediary that pools the savings of investors for collective
investment in a diversified portfolio of securities. A fund is “mutual” as all of its returns,
minus its expenses, are shared by the fund’s investors.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (mutual funds) Regulations, 1996 defines a
mutual fund as a fund established in the form of a trust to raise money through the sale of
units to the public or a section of the public under one or more schemes for investing in
securities, including money market instruments.

According to the above definition, a mutual fund in india can raise resources through sale of
units to the public. It can be set up in the form of a trust under the Indian Trust Act . The
definition has been further extended by allowing mutual funds to diversify their activities in
the following areas:

 Portfolio management services

 Management of offshore funds

 Providing advice to offshore funds

 Management of pension or provident funds

 Management of venture capital funds

 Management of money market funds

 Management of real estate funds

A mutual fund serves as a link between the investor and the securities market by mobilising
savings from the investors and investing them in the securities market to generate returns.
Thus, a mutual fund is a collective savings scheme. Mutual funds play an important role in
the savings of small investors and channelising the same for productive ventures in the Indian
economy.

1.2 MUTUAL FUND IN INDIA

Unit Trust of india was the first mutual fund set up in the year 1963. In lare 1980s,
Government allowed public sector banks and institutions to set up mutual funds .In the year
1992, securities and Exchange Board of india (SEBI) Act was passed. The objectives of SEBI
are to protect the interest of investors in securities to promote the development of and to
regulate the securities market. As far as mutual funds are concerned , SEBI formulates
policies, regulates and supervises mutual funds to protect the interest of the investors. SEBI
notified regulations for mutual funds in 1993. Thereafter, mutual funds sponsored by private
sector entities were allowed to enter the capital market. The regulations were fully revised in
1996 and have been amended thereafter from time to time. SEBI has also issued guidelines
through circulars to mutual funds from time to time.

All mutual funds whether promoted by public sector entities including those promoted by
foreign entities are governed by the same set of Regulations. There is no distinction in
regulatory requirements for these mutual funds and all are subject to monitoring and
inspections by SEBI.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Mutual funds pool the funds of small investor and invest it in the securities. As the
investors do not know in which portfolio the fund managers will go investment, the
performance such as the risk and the return associated with each fund type will only affect the
investor. Here the risk associated with each type will vary, hence the return will also vary.
Since the investors are investing based on the scheme category such as private or public
sector funds.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the study is to analyze the investor’s satisfaction level towards investing
in mutual fund. It contains inclusion of behaviour of all segments of investors like private
employee, government employee and business people and professionals regarding mutual
fund investment and the factors like advertisement to influence the investors investing in
mutual fund .

1.4 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

 To identify the preference level of investment in mutual fund.


 To examine the factors influencing while investing in mutual fund.
 To analyse the investor’s satisfaction with investment in mutual fund.
 To study the problems faced in investment of mutual fund..
1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The process of systematically solving a research problem is set to be a research methodology.


This study is designed to document explore and analyze the influence of the preference and
satisfaction of the investors in mutual fund. Diagnosis of the information needs and selection
of relevnt variables about which valid information is gathered, recorded and analyzed.
Research comprise rectifying and defining problems formulating hypothesis of suggestion,
solutions collecting, organizing and evaluating data, making decisions, and research
conclusion, and at the last carefully testing the conclusion to determine whether they fit the
formulating hypothesis.
1.5.1 Source of Data
Primary data:

The present study is based on primary data which was collected from 200 respondents using a
structured questionnaire method.

Secondary data:

Secondary data have been gathered from various journals, magazines, books and websites.

1.5.2 Area covered and sampling techniques:

The purposive technique sampling method has been used to collect the data. A sample size of
200 respondents has been collected from professionals like those who wants to invest in
mutual funds and other investment option.

1.5.3 Tools and techniques used for Analysis:

 Percentage analysis`

 Descriptive statistics

 ANOVA

 t-Test

 Firedman Ranking
1.5.4 Period of study:

The study has been conducted from December 2018 to March 2019.

1.5.5 Area of the study

The study is under taken in and arround coimbatore city.

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

 The study area is limited to in and arround coimbatore area only.


 The study is based on primary data collected from investor’s who invested in
mutual fund.
 The findings are entirely depends upon the willingness of the respondent. All
these factors acted as limitation to the objectivity of the primary data.

1.7 CHAPTER SCHEME

Chapter 1: Introduction

The first chapter deals with the introduction of the study, statement of the problem, scope of
the study, objective of the study, research methodology, limitations of the study and the
period of the study.

Chapter 2: Review of Literature

The second chapter deals with the introduction of the literature reviews related to the study.

Chapter 3: Overview of the study

The third chapter deals with the data analysis and interpretation.

Chapter 4: Analysis and interpretation

The fourth chapter deals with the data analysis and interpretation.

Chapter 5: Findings, Suggestions Conclusion

The fifth chapter deals with the findings, suggestions and conclusion of the study.
CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Review of related literature serves as the base for any researcher to understand his or her
research problem clearly and to design the methodology by which the study is to be
conducted. Various studies conducted earlier on the topics related to the current research
problem are included in the literature. It gives an idea for the researcher to determine the
research problem and to frame the objectives. It also enables the researcher for the smooth
conduct of the present study. The literature review of the study on investors satisfaction level
towards mutual fund includes journals, online websites, etc. These studies have been
reviewed carefully and summarized in this chapter.

2.2 REVIEWS

Latha. A, Deepa. P (2018) has done their study on “Investors Level of Satisfaction
Towards Mutual Fund Investments with Special Reference to Tirupur District”. The
objective of the study is to aim and analyse the level of satisfaction of investors towards the
mutual fund investment in Tirupur District . The tools used in the study is descriptive in
nature. The study concluded that the investors are most concerned with their investments and
they want to earn maximum return on their investments with a minimum risk. Most of the
investors have exhibited a high degree of satisfaction towards the returns they earn from
mutual fund investments and the liquidity factor in mutual fund investment.

Ashok Reddy.G, Raghunatha Reddy (2017) have done their study on “Satisfaction of
mutual fund investors towards the services of investor forum: A Study of Kadapa
district”. The objective of the study is to assess the satisfaction levels of investors towards
the services rendered by investor forum. The tools used for the study are ANOVA, t-test, and
mean. The study concludes that the urban investors have higher satisfaction towards investors
forum comparatively to the rural investors, further it was found that there was significant
difference in satisfaction levels between urban and rural investors.

Ankit Goel, Rajendra K. Khatik (2017) have done their study on “Investor’s awareness
and preference towards mutual funds as an investment option”. The objective of the
study was to know the Investor’s awareness level towards mutual fund investment. The
research study is descriptive in nature. In this study the total of 90 respondents where
collected for the purpose of analysis.The study concludes that majority of the investors are
able to save between 20 to 35% out of their total earnings,balance funds and Tax relief
schemes are most preferred schemes among the respondents.

Nishu Gupta and Arpita Sharma (2016) have done their study on “Factors Effecting the
Satisfaction Level of Mutual Funds Investors in jaipur city”.The objective of the study
was to find out the satisfaction level of mutual fund investors with respect to their mutual
fund companies. The statistical tools used in in the study are Descriptive Analysis method,
Where the sample of 90 investors where taken through questionnaire method. The study
concludes and suggests that the companies should provide quick feedback whatever the
problems faced by the investors during investment and states that the problems that most
investors faced are lack of conceptional understanding, and no time for problem solving.

Priti Mane (2016) have done their study on “Investors perception towards mutual fund in
the city of Aurangabad”. The objective of the study is to know the awareness of mutual
fund in Aurangabad people and to know the preference of people for investment. The tools
used for the study are chi-square test for association. In this study the total of 30 respondents
where collected and only educated group is targeted. This study concludes that the awareness
level of mutual fund among the investor’s are very low because of only having the partial
knowledge about the mutual fund which prevent them to invest in mutual fund to avoid risk
bearing factor and fear of losing money.

Rajesh Kumar, Nithin Goel (2014) have done their Empirical study on “Investor’s
perception towards mutual funds”. The objective of the study was the methods used for
evaluating the performance of mutual funds. The statistical tools used in the study are
tabulation, percentage, ranking and scoring, weighted average score, kendall’s coefficient of
concordance, where the sample of 200 investors within the punjab state, for this purpose,
sampling has been carried in two steps. At first stage, four districts have been selected based
upon the traditional geographical division of the state like majha, malwa, doaba. At the
second stage, 50 respondents has been taken from each of the above districts. The study
concludes that the growth has been considered as the most important objectives while making
investment in mutual funds followed by regular income and liquidity at second and third
place.

Gaurav Agrawal, Mini Jain (2013) have done their study on”Investor’s preference
towards mutual fund in comparison to other investment avenues”.The objective of the
study is to find out the overall criterion of investors regarding investment. The tools used in
the study are percentage method for analysis. In this study the total of 300 respondents where
collected for small & big investors.The study concludes that more than 80% investors are
aware about mutual funds, Real Estate and NSC investment avenues.

Tariq Zafar. S.M, Adeel Maqbool (2013) have done their study on “A strategic study on
investors preference of mutual funds in india.” The objective of the study is to measure the
investors perception and preference among nine most trusted mutual funds. Tools used in
their Percentage analysis and Chi - square Test, and it found that majority of the respondents
96.7% are familiar with benifits, terms and condition of mutual fund only 3.3% of
respondents are not aware of mutual fund. The study concluded that survey for the study was
done to facilitate MF companies to identify the customer’s expectations and to bring
improvement in the quality of the provided service according to desired expectations.

Alekhya. P (2012) have done their study on “performance evaluation of public & private
sector mutual funds in india”.The objective of the study is to analyze the trends in returns
of selected mutual funds. The tools used for the study are sharpe, Treynor and jenson. This
paper has evaluated the performance of indian mutual fund equity scheme of three years past
data from 2009- 2011.The results of performance measures suggested that most of the mutual
fund schemes in the sample of 58 were able to satisfy investor’s expectations by giving
excess return over expected returns based on both premium for systematic risk and total risk.

Binod Kumar Singh (2012) Has done their study on “Investors attitude towards mutual
fund as an investment option.” The study observed that most of respondents are still
confused about the mutual funds and have not formed any attitude towards the mutual fund
for investment purpose. On the other hand the other two demographic factors like age and
occupation have not been found influencing the attitude of investors towards mutual funds. It
has been observed that most of the respondents having lack of awareness about various
function of mutual fund.
Kousalya, PR and Gurusamy, P (2012) has done their study on “Women Investors
Perception towards Investments”. The objective of the study is to find the awareness level
on investment. Through their study they have found that, there is no significant relationship
between age of the women investors and their level of investment. They have also concluded
that the educational level of women investors does not influence the level of awareness.

Saini, S, Anjum, B et., al. (2011) have done their study on “Investors Awareness and
Perception about Mutual Funds”. The objective of the study was to know the factors that
attract the investors to invest in mutual fund. The study analyzed investor’s behaviour,
opinion and perception relating to various issues like type of mutual fund scheme, liquidity,
simplicity in offer documents, online trading, regular updates through SMS and stringent
follow up of provisions laid by AMFI.

Babitha, B (2006) have done their study on “A Study on Investment Patterns of investors
in ING Vsya mutual fund at Coimbatore city”. The objective of the study was to know the
satisfaction level towards investing in mutual fund. The study showed that most of the
investors are investing nearly 20% of their income in ING Vysya mutual funds. The study has
concluded that ING Vysya mutual funds have to concentrate more on its performance and
services so as to survive in the competitive mutual fund industry.

Gupta, P and Gpta, A (2004) have done their study on “Performance Evaluation of select
Indian Mutual Fund scheme”.”An Empirical study”,The paper used performance
evaluation measures of Sharpe, Jensen, Treynor and Fama to arrive at the finding that some
funds performed better than the market because only few managers had the stock selection
skills and as a result funds were exposed to large diversifiable risk.

Syama Sunder (1998) has done their study on”Growth prospects of mutual funds and
investor perception with special reference to kothari pioneer mutual fund”. Carried out a
survey to get an insight into mutual fund operations of private institutions with reference to
kothari pioneer. The survey point out that awareness about mutual fund was poor during that
time in small cities like vishakapatnam.The study concluded that the agents play important
role in spreading the mutual fund culture; open-end schemes image and return are the prime
considerations while investing in any mutual fund.
Jambodekar (1996) conducted a study on assess “The awareness of mutual funds among
investor’s”. The objective of the study was to identify the information sources influencing
the buying decision and the factors influencing the choice of a particular fund. The study
revels among other things that income schemes and open ended schemes are more preferred
than growth schemes and close ended schemes during the prevalent conditions. Newspapers
and magazines are the first source of information through which investors get to know about
mutual fund schemes.

Jambodekar (1996) Marketing strategies of mutual funds - current practices and furture
directions, Working paper, UTI- IIMB Centre for capital markets education and research.
REFERENCE

 Latha.A, Deepa. P (2018) “ A Study on Investors Level of Satisfaction Towards Mutual


Fund Investment with special Reference to Tirupur District”. ISSN: 2321- 9653; IC
Value: 45. 98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887, Volume 6 Issue VII, July 2018.

 Ashok Reddy.G, Raghunatha Reddy (2017) “Satisfaction of mutual fund investors


towards the services of investor forum.” International Journal of Commerce and
Management Research, ISSN; 2455- 1627, Impact Factor: RJIF 5.22, Volume 3; Issue
11; November 2017.

 Ankit Goel, Rajendra k. Khatik (2017) “Investor’s Awareness and Preference towards
mutual funds as an investment option”. International Journal of Commerce and
Management Research . ISSN: 2455-1627, Impact Factor: RJIF 5.22, Volume 3; March
2017; Page No. 61-65.

 Nishu Gupta and Arpita Sharma (2016) “Factors Effecting the Satisfaction Level of
Mutual Funds Investors in Jaipur city”. SIBM Pune Research Journal, Vol XII, 80-84,
December 2016.

 Priti Mane (2016) “Investors Perception towards mutual fund in the city of Aurangabad”.
The SIJ Transaction on Industrial, Financial & Business Management (IFBM), Vol. 4,
No. 2, February 2016.

 Rajesh Kumar, Nithin Goel (2014) “An Emperical Study On Investor’s Perception
Towards Mutual Funds”. Internal Journal of Research in Management & Business
Studies (IJRMBS 2014), Vol. 1 Issue 4 Oct-Dec. 2014.

 Gaurav Agrawal, Mini Jain (2013) “ Investor’s preference towards mutual fund in
comparison to other investment avenues”. Journal of Indian Research (ISSN : 2321 -
4155) Vol. 1, No, October - December, 2013, 115 - 131.

 Tariq Zafar. S.M, Adeel Maqbool (2013) A Strategic Study on Investors Preference of
mutual Fund in India”. ISSN 2277- 3622, Vol. 2, No 8, August (2013).
 Alekhya. P (2012) “Performance evaluation of public & private sector mutual funds in
india”. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Management Review. Vol. 1, No 2, October
2012, ISSN 2319 - 2836

 Binod Kumar Singh (2012) A Study on investors attitude towards mutual fund as an
investment option, International Journal of Research in Management, Vol 2, Issue 2, pp.
61-70.

 Kousalya, PR and Gurusamy P (2012) Women Investors, perception towards


investments, International Journal of Scientific Research, Vol. 1, issue, pp. 80-81.

 Saini, S, Anjun B, and Saini R (2011) “Investors Awareness and Perception about
Mutual Funds”. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. No. 1, pp. 14-
29, accessed on 30, June 2012.

 Babitha, B (2006) A Study on Investment patterns of investors in ING Vysya mutual


funds at Coimbatore city. Volume, 3 Issue 7, (2006).

 Gupta, P and Gupta, A (2004) “Performance Evaluation of Select Indian Mutual Fund
scheme”. An Empirical Study. The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, December, 81-98.

 Syama Sundar ,P.V (1998) “Growth prospects of mutual funds and investor perception
with special reference to Kothari Pioneer mutual funds”. Project Report, Sri Srinivas
Vidya Parishad, Andhra University, Vishakhapatnam.

 Jambodekar (1996) Marketing strategies of mutual funds - current practices and furture
directions, Working paper, UTI- IIMB Centre for capital markets education and research.
CHAPTER-3

PROFILE OF THE STUDY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

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 realized 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.
3.2.1 ORGANIZATION OF A MUTUAL FUND

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

3.2.2 ADVANTAGES OF MUTUAL FUNDS

 Professional Management
 Diversification
 Convenient Administration
 Return Potential
 Low Costs
 Liquidity
 Transparency
 Flexibility
 Choice of schemes
 Tax benefits
 Well regulated
3.2.3 TYPES OF MUTUAL FUND SCHEMES

Wide variety of Mutual Fund Schemes exist 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.

3.3 TERMS USED IN MUTUAL FUND

3.3.1 Net Asset Value (NAV)

Net Asset Value is the market value of the assets of the scheme minus its liabilities. The
per unit NAV is the net asset value of the scheme divided by the number of units outstanding
on the Valuation Date.

3.3.2 Sale Price

Is the price we pay when we invest in a scheme. Also called Offer Price. It may
include a sales load.

3.3.3 Repurchase Price

Is the price at which a close-ended scheme repurchases its units and it may include a
back-end load. This is also called Bid Price.
3.3.4 Redemption Price

Is the price at which open-ended schemes repurchase their units and close-ended
schemes redeem their units on maturity. Such prices are NAV related.

3.3.5 Sales Load

Is a charge collected by a scheme when it sells the units. Also called, ‘Front-end’
load. Schemes that do not charge a load are called ‘No Load’ schemes.

3.3.6 Repurchase or ‘Back-end’ Load

Is a charge collected by a scheme when it buys back the units from the unit holders.

3.4 BENIFITS OF INVESTING IN MUTUAL FUND:

An investor can invest directly in individual securities or indirectly through a financial


intermediary. Globally, mutual funds have established themselves as the means of investment
for retail investor.

3.4.1 Professional Management

When you invest in a mutual fund, your money is managed by finance professionals.
Investors who do not have the time or skill to manage their own portfolio can invest in
mutual funds. By investing in mutual funds, you can gain the services of professional fund
managers, which would otherwise be costly for an individual investor.

3.4.2 Diversification

Mutual funds provide the benefit of diversification across different sectors and companies.
Mutual funds widen investments across various industries and asset classes. Thus, by
investing in a mutual fund, you can gain from the benefits of diversification and asset
allocation, without investing a large amount of money that would be required to build an
individual portfolio.
3.4.3 Liquidity

Mutual funds are usually very liquid investments. Unless they have a pre-specified lock-in
period, your money is available to you anytime you want subject to exit load, if any.
Normally funds take a couple of days for returning your money to you. Since they are well
integrated with the banking system, most funds can transfer the money directly to your bank
account.

3.4.4 Flexibility

Investors can benefit from the convenience and flexibility offered by mutual funds to invest
in a wide range of schemes. The option of systematic (at regular intervals) investment and
withdrawal is also offered to investors in most open-ended schemes. Depending on one’s
inclinations and convenience one can invest or withdraw funds.

3.4.5 Low Transaction Cost

Due to economies of scale, mutual funds pay lower transaction costs. The benefits are passed
on to mutual fund investors, which may not be enjoyed by an individual who enters the
market directly.

3.4.6 Transparency Funds

provide investors with updated information pertaining to the markets and schemes through
fact sheets; offer documents, annual reports etc.

3.4.7 Tax benefits:

Mutual fund investors now enjoy income- tax benefits. Dividents received from mutual funds
debt schemes are tax exempt to the overall limit of Rs. 9,000 allowed under section 80L of
the Income Tax Act.
3.4.8 Stability to the stock market:

Mutual funds have a large amount of funds which provide them economies of scale by which
they can absorb any losses in the stock market and continue investing in the stock market. In
addition, mutual funds increase liquidity in the money and capital market.

3.4.9 Well Regulated

Mutual funds in India are regulated and monitored by the Securities and Exchange Board of
India (SEBI), which endeavors to protect the interests of investors. All funds are registered
with SEBI and complete transparency is enforced. Mutual funds are required to provide
investors with standard information about their investments, in addition to other disclosures
like specific investments made by the scheme and the quantity of investment in each asset
class.

3.5 Risk Involved in Investing in Mutual Funds

· The biggest risk of investing in a mutual fund is one of under performance. When an
investor decides to invest in a particular asset class, he typically expects to get the return that
the benchmark of the asset provides.

· For example, if someone is investing in large-cap equity stocks, he would expect to make at
least as much return (with similar risk) as a benchmark index, say Sensex or Nifty.

· Mutual funds try to maximize the returns on the funds invested through them -- but all of
the funds cannot succeed an outperforming each other or the benchmark. Hence, some of
them under-perform the benchmark.

· Similarly, the cost of investing in a mutual fund (discussed below), eats in the returns. In
high return years (like the last few years, where returns have been in the high 30% in equity,
2% costs may not make a material impact: however, at more moderate or negative returns,
costs can be a big inch).

· The other risk with mutual funds is 'style drift.' If you invest in a large cap fund and it
begins to invest in mid cap stocks, or if you invest in a long term debt fund but it starts to
invest a greater proportion in cash instruments, you might not the type of risk return reward
that you have been expecting.

· Change of the fund manager can also introduce an element of risk into your portfolio. There
is a wide debate as to whether investing is a science or an art: most authorities concede that it
is a blend of the two. If so, the artist may contribute to the success of the returns
CHAPTER-4

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the analysis and interpretation of the study “A STUDY ON INVESTOR’S
SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS MUTUAL FUND” based on 200 respondents are
presented. The collected data are classified and tabulated and the following statistical are as
follows

 Percentage Analysis

 Descriptive statistics

 ANOVA

 t-Test

 Firedman Ranking

Necessary hypothesis have been framed and tested whenever necessary.

PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

Percentage Analysis has been carried out for analysing the data collected through the
questionnaire. It is used mainly for the demographic questions to find out a valid percentage.
Number of respondent’s distribution shows the number of frequencies in various classes
which helps to get some preliminary ideas with respect to the objectives under study.

NO.OF RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE = ---------------------------------------------------- X 100

TOTAL NO. OF RESPONDENTS


DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics is used to describe the basic features of the data in a study. They
provide simple summaries about the sample and the measures. Together with simple
graphical analysis, they form the basis of virtually every quantitative analysis of data.

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA)

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a form of statistical hypothesis testing used in the


analysis of experimental data. ANOVA is used to analyze the difference between group
means and their associated procedures. It is used as a test of means for two or more
populations. The variance must have a dependent variable that is metric, one or more
independent variables that are all categorical (non metric) also called factors.

ANALYSIS USING T-TEST

T-Test is the most commonly used to evaluate the differences in means of two groups.
T-test is used for judging whether there is any significant difference between the means of
two samples. The t-test will indicate if the perceived differences among the two groups are
significantly different.
4.1 PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS

AGE

The table 4.1.1 describes the age wise distribution of the respondents.

TABLE 4.1.1

AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS

AGE PERCENT
NO. OF RESPONDENTS

below30years 71 35.5
30-40years 75 37.5
40-50years 34 17
above 50years 20 10
Total 200 100
Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.1 shows that 35.5 percent of the respondents belong to the age group of
Below 30 years, 37.5 percent of the respondents belong to the age group of 30 – 40 years, 17
percent of the respondents to the age group of 40 - 50 years and 10 percent of the respondents
are in the age group of above 50 years

Majority of the respondents (37.5 percent) are in the age group of 30 - 40 years.
4.1.2 MARITAL STATUS

The table 4.1.2 describes the marital status wise distribution of the respondents.

TABLE 4.1.2

MARITAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS

MARITAL STATUS NO.OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT

Married 74 37

Unmarried 126 63

Total 200 100


Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.2 shows that 37 percent of the respondents are married and 63 percent of
the respondents are unmarried

Majority of the respondents (63 percent) are unmarried.


4.1.3 FAMILY TYPE

The table 4.1.3 describes the Family Type wise distribution of the respondents.

TABLE 4.1.3

FAMILY TYPE OF THE RESPONDENTS


Famiy Type NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT

Nuclear 90 45.0

Joint 110 55.0

Total 200 100.0


Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.3 shows that 45 percent of the respondents from Nuclear Family and 55
percent of the respondents From Joint Family.

Majority of the respondents (55 percent) are from joint.


4.1.4 GENDER

The table 4.1.4 describes the gender wise distribution of the respondents.

TABLE 4.1.4

GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS

Source: primary data

GENDER NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT

117 58.5
Male

83 41.5
Female

200 100
Total
Interpretation:

From the table 4.1.4, it is inferred that 58.5 percent of the respondents are male and 41.5
Percent of the respondents are female.

Majority of the respondents (58.5 percent) are male.

4.1.5 OCCUPATION STATUS

The table 4.1.5 describes the marital status wise distribution of the respondents.
TABLE 4.1.5

OCCUPATION STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS

MARITAL STATUS NO.OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT

Private Job 102 51.0

Govt Job 63 31.5

Business 35 17.5

Total 200 100.0


Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.5 shows that 51 percent of the respondents belongs to Private job, 31.5
percent of the respondents belongs to Govt Job and 17.5 percent of the respondents belongs
to Business.

Majority of the respondents (51 percent) are Private job people.

4.1.6 FAMILY INCOME PER MONTH

The table 4.1.6 describes the family income per month wise distribution of the respondents.
TABLE 4.1.6

FAMILY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

FAMILY INCOME NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT

below rs,50,000
49 24.5
rs.50,000-rs.1,00,000
40 20.0

rs.1,00,000-rs.1,50,000
39 19.5
Above rs.1,50,000
72 36.0

Total 200 100.0


Source: primary data

Interpretation:

It is evident from the above table 4.1.6 shows that, 24.5 percent of the respondents earn a
family monthly income less than Rs.50,000 followed by 20 percent of the respondents who
earn a family monthly income between Rs.50,000 to Rs.1,00,000 and 19.5 percent of the
respondents earn a family monthly income between Rs.1,00,000 to Rs.1,50,000. And the
remaining 36 percent of the respondents earn a family monthly income of more than
Rs.1,50,000.

Majority of the respondents (36 percent) earn a family monthly income of

Above 1,50,000.

4.1.7 INVESTMENT OPTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS

The table 4.1.7 describes the investment options of the respondents.


TABLE 4.1.7

INVESTMENT OPTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS

STATUS NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT


returns 103 51.5
Minimum Investment amount 32 16.0
locking period 30 15.0
risk 19 9.5
type of investment option 16 8.0
Total 200 100.0

Source: primary data

Interpretation:

It is evident from the above table 4.1.7 shows that, 51.5 percent of the respondents are
looking for returns, 16 percent of the respondents are looking for minimum investment
amount and 15 percent of the respondents are looking for locking period and 9.5 percent of
the respondents are looking for risk and 8 percent of the respondents are looking for type of
investment option.

Most of the respondents (51.5 percent) are prefer returns.

4.1.8 RESPONDENTS SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT MUTUAL FUND

The table 4.1.8 describes the respondents sources of knowledge about mutual fund.
TABLE 4.1.8

RESPONDENTS SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT MUTUAL FUND

NATURE NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT


Television
37 18.5
Internet
69 34.5
Newspaper/Journals
43 21.5
Friends and Relatives
34 17.0
Sales representative
17 8.5

Total 200 100.0


Source: primary data

Interpretation:

It is evident from the above table 4.1.8 shows that 18.5 percent of the respondents gained
knowledge from Television, 34.5 percent of the respondents gained knowledge from Internet
and 21.5 percent of the respondents gained knowledge from Newspaper/Journals 17 percent
of the respondents gained knowledge from Friends and Relatives 8.5 percent of the
respondents gained knowledge from sales representative .

Majority of the respondents (34.5 percent) live in a nuclear family.

4.1.9 PERIOD PREFER TO INVEST IN MUTUAL FUND

The table 4.1.9 describes the source of awareness of the respondents.


TABLE 4.1.9

PERIOD PREFER TO INVEST IN MUTUAL FUND

PERIOD OF
NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT
INVESTMENT
Less than 1year 36 18.0
1-3year 90 45.0
3-5year 74 37.0
Total 200 100.0

Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.9 shows that 18 percent of the respondents are prefer less than 1 year, 45
percent of the respondents are prefer 1 – 3 years and 37 percent of the respondents are prefer
3 – 5 years.

Majority of the respondents (45 percent) are prefer 1 – 3 years.

4.1.10 TYPES OF INVESTMENT SCHEMES PREFER TO INVEST IN MUTUAL


FUND
The table 4.1.10 describes the nature of the family wise distribution of the respondents.

TABLE 4.1.10

RESPONDENTS SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT MUTUAL FUND

NATURE NO. OF RESPONDENTS PERCENT


Equity
35 17.5
Debit
18 9.0
Hybrid
53 26.5
Gilt fund
19 9.5
Growth schemes
22 11.0
Income schemes
17 8.5
Balanced schemes
22 11.0
Liquid schemes
14 7.0
Total
200 100.0

Source: primary data

Interpretation:

The above table 4.1.10 shows that 17.5 percent of the respondents are prefer Equity, 9
percent of the respondents are prefer debit,26.5 percent of the respondents are prefer hybrid,
9.5 percent of the respondents are prefer gilt fund 11 percent of the respondents are prefer
growth schemes, 8.5 percent of the respondents are prefer income schemes 11 percent of the
respondents are prefer balanced scheme, 7 percent of the respondents are prefer liquid
scheme.

Majority of the respondents (26.5 percent) are prefer hybrid.

4.2. TO IDENTIFY THE PREFRENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL


FUND AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.2.1
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

AGE IN YEARS N MEAN STD. DEVIATION


below30years 71 2.3459 .20960
30-40years 75 2.3644 .21579
40-50years 34 2.3170 .21734
above 50years 20 2.2889 .22628
Total 200 2.3422 .21466

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3644 is found among the age group between 30 – 40 years
the respondents. Hence it is inferred that those respondents have high opinion towards the
mutual fund investment when compared to other age group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.2.2

ANOVA

Sum of mean
Variable Group df f sig. Inference
Squares square
Between Groups .117 3 .039
AGE Within Groups 9.053 196 .841 .473 NS
.046
Total 9.169 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant


The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .473which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is no significantly
differ among the age group of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.3 TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL


FUND BETWEEN THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS
TABLE 4.3.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
MONTHLY INCOME IN
N Mean Std. Deviation
RUPEES
below rs,50,000 49 2.3656 .18774
Rs.50,000-rs.1,00,000 40 2.3312 .20280
Rs.1,00,000-Rs.1,50,000 39 2.3355 .19354
Above rs.1,50,000 72 2.2350 .20090
Total 200 2.3058 .20277

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3656 is found among the family monthly income of below
50,000 of the respondents. Hence it is inferred that income of below 50,000 have high
opinion towards mutual funds when compared to other family monthly income group of the
respondents.

ANOVA TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.3.2
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .126 3 .042
Monthly
Within Groups 9.043 196 .912 .436 NS
Income .046
Total 9.169 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .436 which is less than the 5% level of
significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is does no differ
significantly among the family monthly income of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is Rejected.

4.4 TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL


FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS OF INVESTMENT OPTIONS
TABLE 4.4.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESMENT OPTIONS N Mean Std. Deviation


returns 103 2.2999 .22049
Minimum investment amount 32 2.4306 .16396
locking period 30 2.3667 .19388
risk 19 2.3684 .25134
type of investment option 16 2.3611 .21276
Total 200 2.3422 .21466

Source :Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.4306 is found among the preference of risk . Hence it is
inferred risk have high opinion towards mutual funds when compared to other option group
of the respondents.

ANOVA TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS OF INVESTMENT OPTIONS

TABLE 4.4.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .026 4 .118
INVESTMENT
Within Groups 9.143 195 2.639 .035 NS
OPTION .045
Total 9.169 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .035 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards risk is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.
Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5 TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL


FUND OF THE SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF INVESTOR

TABLE 4.5.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
SOURCE OF
N Mean Std. Deviation
KNOWLEDGE
Television 37 2.3423 .21971
Internet 69 2.3366 .23336
Newspaper/Journals
43 2.3411 .21331
Friends and Relatives 34 2.3366 .18244
Sales representative 17 2.3791 .20809
Total
200 2.3422 .21466

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3791 is found sales representative among the awareness of
the mutual funds. . Hence it is inferred television have high opinion towards the awareness
when compared to other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL FUND OF THE SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF INVESTOR

TABLE 4.5.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .471 4 .007
SOURCE OF
Within Groups 8.698 195 .141 .967 NS
KNOWLEDGE .047
Total 9.169 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .967 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards awareness is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.6 TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL


FUND TOWARDS INVESTMENT SCHEMES

TABLE 4.6.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESTMENT SCHEMES N Mean Std. Deviation

Equity 35 2.3714 .24245


Debit 18 2.3704 .15713
Hybrid 53 2.2998 .20393
Gilt fund 19 2.2924 .28739
Growth schemes 22 2.3535 .18026
Income schemes 17 2.4118 .19549
Balanced schemes 22 2.3939 .20781
Liquid schemes 14 2.2778 .19852
Total 200 2.3422 .21466

Source : Primary Data


The highest mean value 2.4118 is found among the Income scheme of the mutual
funds. . Hence it is inferred equity have high opinion towards the which the respondents are
seeing for when compared to other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL FUND TOWARDS INVESTMENT SCHEMES

TABLE 4.6.2

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .389 7 .056
INVESTMENT
Within Groups 8.781 192 1.214 .297 NS
SCHEMES .046
Total 9.169 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .297 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards equity is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.7 TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.7.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
AGE IN MINIMUM MAXIMUM STD.
N MEAN
YEARS DEVIATION

below30years 71 1 3 2.3052 .19311


30-40years 75 1 3 2.2867 .21101
40-50years 34 1 3 2.3064 .19648
above 50years 20 1 3 2.3792 .21370
Total 200 4 12 2.3058 .20277

Source :Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3792 is found among the age group between above 50
years the respondents. Hence it is inferred that those respondents have high opinion towards
the mutual fund investment when compared to other age group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.7.2

ANOVA
Sum of mean
Variable Group df f sig. Inference
Squares square
Between Groups .135 3 .045
AGE Within Groups 8.047 196 1.097 .351 NS
.041
Total 8.182 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .351which is greater than the 5% level
ofsignificance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is no significantly
differ among the age group of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8 TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS MONTHLY INCOME

TABLE 4.8.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
STD.
AGE IN YEARS N MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN
DEVIATION

below rs,50,000 49 1 3 2.3656 .18774


rs.50,000-rs.1,00,000 40 1 3 2.3312 .20280
rs.1,00,000-rs.1,50,000 39 1 3 2.3355 .19354
Above rs.1,50,000 72 1 3 2.2350 .20090
Total 200 4 12 2.3058 .20277

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3656 is found among the family monthly income of below 50,000
of the respondents. Hence it is inferred that income of below 50,000 have high opinion
towards mutual funds when compared to other family monthly income group of the
respondents.

ANOVA TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS MONTHLY INCOME

TABLE 4.8.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .597 3 .199
Monthly
Within Groups 7.585 196 5.143 .002 NS
Income .039
Total 8.182 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .002 which is less than the 5% level of
significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is does no differ
significantly among the family monthly income of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is Rejected.

4.9 TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTORS INVESTMENT OPTION
TABLE 4.9.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESMENT Std.
N Mean
OPTIONS MINIMUM MAXIMUM Deviation
returns 103 1 3 2.2824 .21076
Minimum 1 3
32 2.3698 .13543
investment amount
locking period 30 1 3 2.2917 .19908
risk 19 1 3 2.3509 .21798
type of investment 1 3
16 2.3021 .23741
option
Total 200 5 15 2.3058 .20277

Source : Computed

The highest mean value 2.3509 is found among the preference of risk . Hence it is
inferred risk have high opinion towards mutual funds when compared to other option group
of the respondents.

ANOVA TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTORS INVESTMENT OPTION

TABLE 4.9.1

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
INVESTMENT Between Groups .232 4 .058 1.425 .227 NS
OPTION Within Groups 7.950 195
.041
Total 8.182 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .227 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards risk is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.10.1 TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE

TABLE 4.10.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

SOURCE OF Std.
N Mean
KNOWLEDGE MINIMUM MAXIMUM Deviation
Television 37 1 3 2.3694 .20837
Internet 69 1 3 2.3309 .19279
Newspaper/Journals 1 3
43 2.2849 .21611
Friends and 1 3
34 2.2426 .19285
Relatives
Sales representative 17 1 3 2.2451 .17547
Total 5 15
200 2.3058 .20277

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3694 is found among the awareness of the mutual funds. .
Hence it is inferred television have high opinion towards the awreness when compared to
other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE
TABLE 4.10.2

ANOVA

Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .410 4 .103
SOURCE OF
Within Groups 7.772 195 2.572 .039 NS
KNOWLEDGE .040
Total 8.182 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .039 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards awareness is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.11 TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT SCHEMES

TABLE 4.11.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESTMENT
N Mean Std. Deviation
SCHEMES MINIMUM MAXIMUM
Equity 35 1 3 2.3714 .24245
Debit 18 1 3 2.3704 .15713
Hybrid 53 1 3 2.2998 .20393
Gilt fund 19 1 3 2.2924 .28739
Growth schemes 22 1 3 2.3535 .18026
Income schemes 17 1 3 2.4118 .19549
Balanced 1 3
22 2.3939 .20781
schemes
Liquid schemes 14 1 3 2.2778 .19852
Total 200 8 24 2.3422 .21466

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3286 is found among the equity of the mutual funds. .
Hence it is inferred equity have high opinion towards the which the respondents are seeing
for when compared to other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE INVESTING IN


MUTUAL FUNDS OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT SCHEMES

TABLE 4.11.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
INVESTMENT Between Groups .272 7 .039
.944 .474 NS
SCHEMES Within Groups 7.910 192 .041
Total 8.182 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .474 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards equity is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.12 TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF INVESTMENT


IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.12.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

AGE IN STD.
N MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN
YEARS DEVIATION

below30years 71 1 3 2.2984 .19600


30-40years 75 1 3 2.3015 .21411
40-50years 34 1 3 2.3290 .15714
above 50years 20 1 3 2.2594 .18281
Total 200 4 12 2.3009 .19524

Source: Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3290 is found among the age group between 40 – 50 years
the respondents. Hence it is inferred that those respondents have high opinion towards the
mutual fund investment when compared to other age group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG THE AGE GROUP

TABLE 4.12.2

ANOVA
Variable Group Sum of df mean f sig. Inference
Squares square
Between Groups .062 3 .021
AGE Within Groups 7.485 196 .537 .657 NS
.038
Total 7.547 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .657 which is greater than the 5% level
ofsignificance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is no significantly
differ among the age group of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.13 TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF INVESTMENT


IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE INVESTORS

TABLE 4.13.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

STD.
AGE IN YEARS N MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN
DEVIATION
below Rs,50,000 49 1 3 2.3648 .20545
Rs.50,000-Rs.1,00,000 40 1 3 2.3500 .19447
Rs.1,00,000- 1 3
39 2.2714 .21419
Rs.1,50,000
Above Rs.1,50,000 72 1 3 2.2457 .15920
Total 200 4 12 2.3009 .19524

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3648 is found among the family monthly income of below
50,000 of the respondents. Hence it is inferred that income of below 50,000 have high
opinion towards mutual funds when compared to other family monthly income group of the
respondents.

ANOVA TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG THE MONTHLY INCOME OF THE
INVESTORS

TABLE 4.13.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .549 3 .183
Monthly
Within Groups 6.998 196 5.102 .002 NS
Income .036
Total 7.547 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .002 which is less than the 5% level of
significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards mutual fund is does no differ
significantly among the family monthly income of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is Rejected.

4.14 TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF INVESTMENT


IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT OPTION
TABLE 4.14.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESMENT Std.
N Mean
OPTIONS MINIMUM MAXIMUM Deviation
returns 103 1 3 2.2718 .21575
Minimum 1 3
32 2.3828 .15453
investment amount
locking period 30 1 3 2.3042 .15461
risk 19 1 3 2.3618 .16348
type of investment 1 3
16 2.2417 .18124
option
Total 200 5 15 2.3009 .19524

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3828 is found among the preference of risk . Hence it is
inferred risk have high opinion towards mutual funds when compared to other option group
of the respondents.

ANOVA TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT
OPTION

TABLE 4.14.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
INVESTMENT Between Groups .425 4 .106
2.895 .023 NS
OPTION Within Groups 7.122 195 .037
Total 7.547 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .023 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards risk is does no differ significantly
among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.15.1 TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS OF SOURCE OF
KNOWLEDGE

TABLE 4.15.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

SOURCE OF Std.
N Mean
KNOWLEDGE MINIMUM MAXIMUM Deviation
Television 37 1 3 2.3530 .20792
Internet 69 1 3 2.2754 .21499
Newspaper/Journals 43 1 3 2.2976 .16438
Friends and Relatives 34 1 3 2.2904 .19025
Sales representative 17 1 3 2.3199 .15607
Total 200 5 15 2.3009 .19524

Source :Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3530 is found among the awareness of the mutual funds. .
Hence it is inferred television have high opinion towards the awareness when compared to
other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS OF SOURCE OF
KNOWLEDGE

TABLE 4.15.2

ANOVA
Variable Groups Sum of df Mean F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .156 4 .039
SOURCE OF
Within Groups 7.391 195 1.023 .397 NS
KNOWLEDGE .038
Total 7.547 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .397 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards awareness is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.16 TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF INVESTMENT


IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT SCHEMES

TABLE 4.16.1

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

INVESTMENT
N Mean Std. Deviation
SCHEMES MINIMUM MAXIMUM
Equity 35 1 3 2.3464 .21985
Debit 18 1 3 2.3194 .21425
Hybrid 53 1 3 2.2877 .19815
Gilt fund 19 1 3 2.2961 .17658
Growth schemes 22 1 3 2.2857 .15382
Income schemes 17 1 3 2.3125 .21424
Balanced 1 3
22 2.2869 .16441
schemes
Liquid schemes 14 1 3 2.2500 .21651
Total 200 8 24 2.3009 .19524

Source : Primary Data

The highest mean value 2.3194 is found among the equity of the mutual funds. .
Hence it is inferred equity have high opinion towards the which the respondents are seeing
for when compared to other option group of the respondents.

ANOVA TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND OF THE RESPONDENTS INVESTMENT
SCHEMES

TABLE 4.16.2

ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Variable Groups df F Sig. Inference
Squares Square
Between Groups .136 7 .019
INVESTMENT
Within Groups 7.411 192 .501 .833 NS
SCHEMES .039
Total 7.547 199

NS- Not significant at 5% level of significant

The ANOVA result shows that the significant value is .833 which is greater than the 5% level
of significance. Since it is inferred that the opinion towards equity is does no differ
significantly among the other factors of the respondents.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.3 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL
4.3.1 T- TEST TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN
MUTUAL FUND AMONG MARITAL STATUS

TABLE 4.3.1

T-TEST OF MARITAL STATUS


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Marital status .069 .006 198
NS

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the marital status and preference level of
investment in mutual fund. The sig. Value .069 is greater than .006 value. Hence there is no
significant difference between the marital status and the preference of the investors.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.

4.3.2 T-TEST TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL AMONG FAMILY TYPE

TABLE 4.3.2

T-TEST OF FAMILY TYPE


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Family Type .352 -.235 198
NS
T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the Family type and preference level of
investment in mutual fund. The sig. Value .352 is greater than -.235 value. Hence there is no
significant difference between the family type and the preference of the investors.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.

4.3.3 T-TEST TO IDENTIFY THE PREFERENCE LEVEL OF INVESTMENT IN


MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN GENDER

TABLE 4.3.3

T-TEST BETWEEM GENDER


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Gender .298 .418 198
S

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the gender and preference level of
investment in mutual fund. The sig. Value.298 islesser than .418 value. Hence there is
significant difference between the gender and the preference of the investors.

Hence the hypothesis is not accepted.

4.4 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE


INVESTING IN MUTUAL FUND

4.4.1 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE


INVESTING IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG MARITAL STATUS OF THE
RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.4.1
T-TEST OF MARITAL STATUS

Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE


FREEDOM
Marital Status .691 -2.223 198
NS

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the marital status and factors influencing
while investing in mutual fund. The sig. Value.691 is greater than -2.223 value. Hence there
is no significant difference between the marital status and factors influencing while investing
in mutual fund.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.

4.4.2 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE


INVESTING IN MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN THE FAMILY TYPE OF THE
RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.4.2

T-TEST OF FAMILY TYPE


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Family type .016 1.034 198
S

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the family type and factors influencing
while investing in mutual fund. The .016 is lesser than 1.034 value. Hence there is significant
difference between the marital status and factors influencing while investing in mutual fund.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.

4.4.3T-TEST ANALYSIS TO EXAMINE THE FACTORS INFLUENCING WHILE


INVESTING IN MUTUAL FUND AMONG THE GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS
T-TEST ANALYSIS TO THE INVESTORS SATISFACTION LEVEL WITH
INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN FAMILY TYPE OF THE
RESPONDENTS

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the gender and factors influencing while
investing in mutual fund. The sig. Value .998 is greater than -1,442. Hence there is no
significant difference between the gender and factors influencing while investing in mutual
fund.

Hence the hypothesis is not accepted.

4.5. T-TEST TO ANALYSE THE INVESTOR’S SATISFACTION LEVELWITH


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND

4.5.1 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO THE INVESTORS SATISFACTION LEVEL WITH


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN MARITAL STATUS OF THE
RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.5.1

T-TEST OF MARITAL STATUS

Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE


FREEDOM
Marital status .116 -.105 197
NS

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the marital status and investors
satisfaction level with investment in mutual fund. The sig. Value.116 is greater than -
.105value. Hence there is no significant difference between the marital status and satisfaction
level of investors investing in mutual fund.

Hence the hypothesis is not accepted.


4.5.2 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO THE INVESTORS SATISFACTION LEVEL WITH
INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN FAMILY TYPE OF THE
RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.5.2

T-TEST OF FAMILY TYPE


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Family type .606 2.571 197
S
T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the family type and satisfaction level with
investment in mutual fund. The sig.value .606 is lesser than 2.571. Hence there is significant
difference between the family type and satisfaction level of investors investing in mutual
fund.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.3 T-TEST ANALYSIS TO THE INVESTORS SATISFACTION LEVEL WITH


INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND BETWEEN GENDER OF THE
RESPONDENTS

TABLE 4.5.3

T-TEST BETWEEM GENDER


Variable P VALUE T VALUE DEGREE OF INFERENCE
FREEDOM
Gender .020 -1.218 197
NS

T-Test is applied to find out the difference between the gender and satisfaction level with
investment in mutual fund. The sig.value .020 is greater than -1.218 value. Hence there is no
significant difference between the gender and satisfaction level of investors investing in
mutual fund.

Hence the hypothesis is accepted.


4.6 TO IDENTIFY THE PROBLEMS FACED IN INVESTMENT OF MUTUAL
FUNDS

“Ranking” refers to the data transformation in which numerical or ordinal values are replaced
by their rank when data are sorted. Ranks are assigned to the values in ascending order (in
some other cases, descending ranks are used). Ranks are related to the indexed list of order
statistics, which consist of the original data set rearranged into ascending order.

PROBLEM MEAN RANK RANK

Too much choices 3.92 1


Lack of timely information 4.28 3
Lack of unbaised opinion 4.28 3
Lack of information in advertisements 4.22 2
Lack of inititatives by the industry 4.66 5
No clear data 4.80 7
Insufficient agent and brokers 5.08 8
Risk factor 4.78 6

Test Statisticsa

N 200
Chi-Square 34.672
df 7
Asymp. Sig. .000

From the above table, it is clearly shown that the Insufficient agent and brokers has
the highest mean value (5.08) is ranked higher by the respondents, No clear data mean value
(4.80) is ranked the second highest value and Too Much Choice mean value (3.92) is ranked
the least by the respondents. The ranking as per the above table is valid as the chi square table
values (34.672, p<0.000) are statistically significant.

It is clear that most of the mutual fund risk are caused due to Insufficient agent and
brokers so it is better to increase the agent and brokers which is the result of the analysis done
above.