Performance Evaluation of Sharekhan Ltd. With Other Mutual Fund Companies

Internship Report on
“A Study on Performance Evaluation of Selected

Mutual Funds at Sharekhan Ltd., Bangalore”
BY
Shamanth U
1PE14MBA57
Submitted to
VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, BELGAUM
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Business Administration
Under the Guidance of

Internal Guide External Guide
Mrs. Divya Mathur Mr. Vinay R K
Assistant Professor Branch Manager
Department of MBA
PES INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY-BANGALORE SOUTH
CAMPUS,
Electronic City, Hosur Road, Bangalore – 560100
2014-16
PES INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Bangalore South Campus
Electronic City, Hosur Road, Bangalore - 560100
Department of MBA
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Shamanth U bearing USN 1PE14MBA57, is a

bonafide student of Master of Business Administration course of PES
Institute of Technology, Bangalore South Campus batch 2014-16,
affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum.
Internship report on “A Study on Performance Evaluation of Selected
Mutual Funds at Sharekhan Ltd.” is prepared by him/her under the
guidance of Mrs. Divya Mathur, in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the award of the degree of Master of Business Administration of
Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum, Karnataka.
Mrs. Divya Mathur Dr. R. Duraipandian Dr. J. Suryaprasad

Assistant Professor Prof. & Head, Director/Principal
Dept. of MBA Dept. of MBA
External Viva
Name of the Examiner Signature with date

1.
2.
DECLARATION
I, Shamanth U, hereby declare that the internship report titled “A Study

on Performance Evaluation of Selected Mutual Funds at Sharekhan
Ltd.” with reference to Sharekhan Ltd., Vijayanagar, Bangalore
prepared by me under the guidance of Mrs. Divya Mathur, faculty of
MBA Department, PES Institute of Technology, Bangalore South
Campus and external assistance by Vinay R K, Branch Manager,
Sharekhan Ltd., Vijayanagar, Bangalore.
I also declare that this Internship work is towards the partial fulfilment of
the university regulations for the award of degree of Master of Business
Administration by Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum.
I have undergone a summer project for a period of 10 weeks. I further

declare that this project is based on the original study undertaken by me
and has not been submitted for the award of any degree/diploma from any
other University/Institution.
Place: (Signature of the student)
Date:
Acknowledgement
The satisfaction and euphoria that accompany the successful completion
of the project would be incomplete without the mention of the people
who made it possible, whose constant guidance and encouragement
crowned the effort with success.
First and foremost I, Shamanth U, bearing USN 1PE14MBA57, would

like to express my gratitude to my institution PES Institute of
Technology, Bangalore South Campus. I express my sincere gratitude
to our beloved Director/Principal Dr. J Suryaprasad who always has
been a tremendous source of inspiration and strength to me.
I would like to convey my sincere regards to Dr. R. Duraipandian,

Prof. and Head, Department of MBA for having encouraged me
constantly and supporting me throughout the project.
I would like to convey my sincere regards to Mr. Vinay R K, Branch

Manager, Sharekhan Ltd. who was my external guide for his valuable
suggestion and necessary guidance during the course of the project.
I would like to convey my sincere regards to Mrs. Divya Mathur,

Assistant Professor, Department of MBA who was my internal guide
for her continuous encouragement and guidance which helped me greatly
to in the course of the project.
Finally I thank my parents and friends who had been constant source of
inspiration for the completion of this project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Chapter 1 Introduction………………………………………............ 1-7
Chapter 2 Industry and Company profile…………………………… 8-17
Chapter 3 Theoretical Background of the Study……………………. 18-23
Chapter 4 Data Analysis and interpretation…………………………. 24-84
Chapter 5 Summary of Findings, suggestions and Conclusion……… 85-91
Bibliography
Annexure
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Particulars Page
Number
Table-4.0 Table showing calculation of Market Return 26
Table-4.1 Table showing Calculation Mean, Standard Deviation 27
and Beta of Franklin Infotech Fund
Table-4.1(A) Table showing Value of Mean, Standard Deviation and 28
Beta of Franklin Infotech Fund
Table-4.1(B) Table showing Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen 28
measures of Franklin Infotech Fund
and Beta of DSP Blackrock Technology.com Fund
Beta of DSP Blackrock Technology.com Fund
measures of DSP Blackrock Technology.com Fund
and Beta of Birla Sun Life Millennium Fund
Beta of Birla Sun Life Millennium Fund
measures of Birla Sun Life Millennium Fund
and Beta of ICICI Prudential Technology Fund
Beta of ICICI Prudential Technology Fund
measures of ICICI Prudential Technology Fund
and Beta of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund
Beta of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund
measures of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund
and Beta of SBI Magnum Comma Fund
Beta of SBI Magnum Comma Fund
measures of SBI Magnum Comma Fund
and Beta of UTI Transportation & Logistics Fund
Beta of UTI Transportation & Logistics Fund
measures of UTI Transportation & Logistics Fund
and Beta of UTI Energy Fund
Beta of UTI Energy Fund
measures of UTI Energy Fund
and Beta of Reliance Media & Entertainment Fund
Beta of Reliance Media & Entertainment Fund
measures of Reliance Media & Entertainment Fund
and Beta of ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund
Beta of ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund
measures of ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund
and Beta of SBI Pharma Fund
Beta of SBI Pharma Fund
measures of SBI Pharma Fund
and Beta of UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund
Beta of UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund
measures of UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund
and Beta of Reliance Pharma Fund
Beta of Reliance Pharma Fund
measures of Reliance Pharma Fund
and Beta of SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1
Beta of SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1
measures of SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1
and Beta of Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund
Beta of Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund
measures of Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund
and Beta of Religare Invesco Infrastructure Fund
Beta of Religare Invesco Infrastructure Fund
measures of Religare Invesco Infrastructure Fund
and Beta of Kotak Infrastructure & Economic Reform
Fund
Beta of Kotak Infrastructure & Economic Reform
Fund
measures of Kotak Infrastructure & Economic Reform
Fund
and Beta of LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund
Beta of LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund
measures of LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund
and Beta of L & T Infrastructure Fund
Beta of L & T Infrastructure Fund
measures of L & T Infrastructure Fund
and Beta of DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund
Beta of DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund
measures of DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund
and Beta of UTI Infrastructure Fund
Beta of UTI Infrastructure Fund
measures of UTI Infrastructure Fund
and Beta of Sahara Banking & Financial Services
Fund
Beta of Sahara Banking & Financial Services Fund
measures of Sahara Banking & Financial Services
Fund
and Beta of Religare Invesco Banking Fund
Beta of Religare Invesco Banking Fund
measures of Religare Invesco Banking Fund
and Beta of ICICI Prudential Banking & Financial
Services Fund
Beta of ICICI Prudential Banking & Financial Services
Fund
measures of ICICI Prudential Banking & Financial
Services Fund
and Beta of Reliance Banking Fund
Beta of Reliance Banking Fund
measures of Reliance Banking Fund
and Beta of UTI Banking Sector Fund
Beta of UTI Banking Sector Fund
measures of UTI Banking Sector Fund
Table-4.27 Table showing Ranking of twenty six mutual funds 79-80
under Sharpe’s ratio
under Treynor’s ratio
under Jensen’s ratio
LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS
Graph No. Particulars Page
Number
Graph-4.1 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Franklin 27
Infotech Fund
Graph-4.2 Comparing return of Sensex with return of DSP 29
Blackrock Technology.com Fund
Graph-4.3 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Birla Sun 31

Life Millennium Fund
Graph-4.4 Comparing return of Sensex with return of ICICI 33
Prudential Technology Fund
Graph-4.5 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Sahara 35
R.E.A.L Fund
Graph-4.6 Comparing return of Sensex with return of SBI 37
Magnum Comma Fund
Graph-4.7 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI 39
Transportation & Logistics Fund
Graph-4.8 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Energy 41
Fund
Graph-4.9 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Reliance 43
Media & Entertainment Fund
Prudential FMCG Fund
Pharma Fund
Pharma & Healthcare Fund
Pharma Fund
Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1
Graph-4.15 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Canara 55
Robeco Infrastructure Fund
Graph-4.16 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Religare 57
Invesco Infrastructure Fund
Graph-4.17 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Kotak 59
Infrastructure & Economic Reform Fund
Graph-4.18 Comparing return of Sensex with return of LIC 61
NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund
Graph-4.19 Comparing return of Sensex with return of L & T 63
Infrastructure Fund
Graph-4.20 Comparing return of Sensex with return of DSP 65
Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund
Infrastructure Fund
Graph-4.22 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Sahara 69
Banking & Financial Services Fund
Graph-4.23 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Religare 71
Invesco Banking Fund
Prudential Banking & Financial Services Fund
Banking Fund
Banking Sector Fund
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sharekhan ltd. is an enterprise which carries on its business with a view to change the
way investors transact in stock market and avail services. It enables customers with
the access to equity, derivatives, mutual funds, portfolio management services and
IPO’s through secured online platform. This way it has promoted investment activities
in a secure, cost effective and convenient manner. Further to have a wider
participation, it also offers the convenience of trading offline through call and trade,
branch dealing desk, etc.
The title of study “A Study on Performance Evaluation of Selected Mutual Funds at

Sharekhan Ltd.” aims to find out the return of the selected twenty six sectoral mutual
funds and to provide report on best performing sectoral mutual funds out of twenty
six.
The report first look is about the calculation of market return and mutual funds return
which are calculated in similar manner. Then calculation of standard deviation, mean
and beta are shown. The main aim of the study is to rank the twenty six mutual funds
in the order using Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures.
Of the twenty six mutual funds returns, mean, standard deviation and beta were
calculated and ranked with the help of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures. This
helps Sharekhan as the company provides research based investment strategies apart
from fundamental and technical analysis and this study concentrates in providing the
company a research on the twenty six mutual funds.
Sharekhan can suggest investors to invest in the top performing mutual funds shown
in this project as it is yielding good returns with a high risk nature of the investment in
sectoral mutual funds as it is purely equity based in nature.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction about the Internship
The opportunity to work as an intern in Sharekhan Ltd was educational and

motivating. The organization provided a platform to learn the working of an
organization keeping in mind the changing system of modern business environment. It
was a great experience to get acquaintance of the working of the organization and to
learn the performance and operational efficiency under the guidance of the
management with immense knowledge at Sharekhan Ltd.
The study carried out at Sharekhan Ltd with the title “A STUDY ON THE
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SELECTED MUTUAL FUNDS AT
SHAREKHAN LTD.” aims to understand the working of the mutual funds and also
the performance of select mutual funds over the years and suggesting investors on the
same.
The study is conducted by taking twenty six sectoral mutual funds which are of more
than five years and data analysis for all the funds are done for seven years i.e. 2009-
2015. The funds are further ranked according to the performance evaluation measures,
in order to provide suggestions and conclusion to the investors and helping them in
choosing the right fund. In this study BSE-SENSEX is been taken as the benchmark
index for all the twenty six mutual funds.
Along with offering suggestions to investors, it also helps me to understand the

process of mutual fund and its industry and which are the top five sectoral mutual
funds in the industry.
1
1.2 TOPIC CHOSEN FOR STUDY
“A STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SELECTED MUTUAL

FUNDS AT SHAREKHAN LTD”
1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The task of selecting good investments is complicated by way of considering the risk
involved and the returns and the combination of various types available for the
investors. An ideal investor generally seeks to minimize risks and maximize returns,
but some investors love to take risk and achieve high returns from the investment.
This research aims to provide a report to the company on the performance of selected
sectoral mutual funds from past seven years, which in turn may help the company to
advice their customers, a good investment and to get good returns over a period of
time.
1.4 NEED FOR THE STUDY
The mutual funds industry has witnessed a rapid growth in terms of the products and
services offered, returns earned, volumes generated, etc. And also, the industry offers
different schemes ranging from equity and debt to fixed income and money market.
Hence this led to a lot of options for the investors to invest in the Mutual Funds, but
this also led to difficulty in choosing the best scheme for investing. Hence it is
appropriate to understand the mutual fund industry and consider the performance
analysis of the mutual funds before taking investment decisions.
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
 To understand the mutual funds and its various types and schemes in the industry.
 To quantify the performance of selected mutual funds in form of return and risk.
 To evaluate the performance of selected mutual funds by using various portfolio

performance evaluation measures.
 To compare the performance of selected mutual funds and rank them with the
help of each performance measure.
 To suggest investors based on the outcomes of the study.
2
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
 The study covers twenty six sectoral mutual funds.

 For measuring the performance of selected mutual funds with applying theories
and formulas of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratios on risk and return of selected
funds.
1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study was undertaken to know the basic concept of risk, return and the ranking of
the mutual funds with the help of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures which helps
in selecting the best out of the available alternatives. The study is a descriptive
research wherein the researcher has undergone through calculative methods for
evaluation of mutual funds. BSE-SENSEX has been selected as benchmark index and
market return has been calculated. The returns for twenty six funds is calculated and
variables required for applying performance evaluation measures i.e. Mean, Standard
Deviation and Beta are calculated using formulas. After calculating of these variables
each fund was calculated using Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures and ranked
accordingly in decreasing order under each measure.
Sampling Plan
Sample population: Sectoral funds with more than five years of database.
Sampling time frame: Data from past seven years (i.e. 2009 - 2015).
Data Collection: Secondary data with information from BSE website, Moneycontrol,
etc.
3
TOOLS USED
 RETURN
 MEAN
 STANDARD DEVIATION:
 BETA (β)
 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEASURES:
 Sharpe Ratio
 Treynor Ratio
 Jensen Ratio
1.8 LITERATURE REVIEW
Performance Evaluation of the Mutual Funds is one of the most preferred areas of
research where a good amount of studies has been carried out. Each research provides
various views of the same. For instance,
1. Dr. Kuberudu Burlakanti and Ravi Varma Chiruvoori (2013)

The study examined, In short term perspective, stock markets may be volatile but in
long term equity markets have huge potential to yield decent returns especially in
emerging markets like India. In terms of Annual returns and CAGR all funds yields
better returns than their bench mark NIFTY returns. Hence retail investors opting
mutual funds are advised to stay in markets for long term periods rather than investing
for 6 months or one year. Sharpe and Treynor ratio of equity funds are far better than
bench mark NIFTY. It is found that AGR, CAGR, Sharpe Ratio and Treynor Ratio of
funds are higher than their peers.
4
2. Dr. Sarita Bahl and Meenakshi Rani (2012)
The present paper analyses the performance of 29 growth oriented open ended
schemes for the period from April 2005 to March 2011. Monthly NAV of the schemes
have been used to calculate the returns from the funds. BSE has been used for the
market portfolio. The collected data were examined on the basis of Sharpe, Treynor
and Jensen’s measures to help investors for taking better investment decisions. The
study revealed that 14 out of 29 schemes had outperformed the benchmark return. The
Sharpe ratio was positive for all schemes which showed that funds were providing
returns greater than risk free rate. Results of Jensen measure revealed that 19 out of 29
schemes were showed positive alpha which indicated superior performance of the
schemes.
3. Mrs. P. Alekhya (2012)

This paper has evaluated the performance of Indian Mutual fund equity scheme for 3
years past data from 2009 to 2011. The funds sensitivity to the market fluctuations in
terms of beta is examined. To appraise investment performance of mutual funds with
risk adjustment the theoretical parameters as suggested by Sharpe, Treynor and
Jensen. The funds according to Sharpe, Treynor and Jenson performance measure are
ranked.
4. Miguel A Ferreira, Antonio F Miguel and Sofiann Ramos (2011)

This paper studied the performance of mutual funds around the world using a sample
of 10,568 open-end equity funds from 19 countries using different models mainly,
domestic market model, international market model, Carhart domestic four-factor
model, Carhart international four-factor model. With this they came to a conclusion
that the funds size was positively related with fund performance. Larger funds
performed better suggesting significant economies of scale in the mutual funds
industry worldwide. Age of the fund is negatively related with fund performance
indicating that younger funds tend to perform better. This finding seemed mainly
driven by the samples of foreign and US funds. When investing abroad, young mutual
funds seemed to offer investors higher returns.
5
5. Deepak Agarwal (2007)
This study analyzed data at both the fund manager and fund investor levels. It stated
that mispricing on mutual funds could be evaluated by comparing the return on
market and return on stock. Relative performance measurement was used to measure
the performance of the mutual funds with SENSEX and it used Standard Deviation,
Correlation analysis, Co-efficient of Determination and Null hypothesis. It revealed
that standard deviations of 3-month returns were significant with the increase in the
period. The standard deviation increase indicated higher deviations from the actual
means. The variance and co-efficient of variation were also significant.
6. D N Rao (2006)
The study, aimed at analyzing performance of select open ended equity mutual funds
using Sharpe ratio, Hypothesis testing and return based on yield. The finding that the
most of the Growth plans (17 out of 21, approximately 80%) are better than Dividend
plans in terms of superior returns and in terms of risk 14 out of 21 Growth plans had
lesser risk (approximately 70%) had lesser risk and in terms of risk per return 13 out
of 21 Dividend plans had higher coefficient of variation (approximately 65%) than
Growth plans. The striking and most important finding of the study had been that only
four Growth plans and one Dividend plan (5 out of the 42 plans studied) could
generate higher returns than that of the market. The statistical tests in terms of F-test
and t-Test further corroborate the significant performance differences between the
Growth plans and Dividend plans.
7. Sharad Panwar and Dr. Madhumathi (2006)

This study identified differences in characteristics of public-sector and private-sector
sponsored mutual funds and the extent of diversification in the portfolio and compare
the performance of the funds using traditional investment measures. By the use of
Jensen, Sharpe, excess Standard deviation adjusted return (eSDAR) and find out that
portfolio risk characteristics measured through private-sector Indian sponsored mutual
funds seems to have outperformed both the public-sector and private-sector foreign
sponsored mutual funds.
6
8. Dr. S Narayan Rao (2003)
The study, evaluated the performance of Mutual Fund Schemes in a bear market using
relative performance index, risk-return analysis, Treynor ratio, Jensen Measure,
Sharpe ratio and Fama Measure. The study finds that Medium Term Debt Funds were
the best performing funds during the bear period of 1998-2002 and 58 of 269 open
ended mutual funds provided better returns than the overall market returns.
9. Parvez Ahmed, Partha Gangopadhyay and Sudhir Nanda (2001)

The study, examined the performance of equity and bond mutual funds that were
invested primarily in the emerging markets using Treynor ratio, Sharpe ratio and
Jensen Measure. In this research it was found that on an average the U S stock market
outperformed emerging equity markets but the emerging market bonds outperformed
U S bonds.
10. Richard Stehle and Olaf Grewe (2001)

This study examined the risk adjusted performance of open-end mutual funds which
invest mainly in German stocks using Jensen and Sharpe’s measure. The study finds
out that the rates of return of the chosen benchmark and the rate of return of the
mutual funds both must include identical return components. Either both must include
dividends or exclude them. The performance estimates are not very sensitive with
respect to benchmark choice.
1.9 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

 The data collected is basically confined to secondary sources, with very little
amount of primary data associated with the project.
 There is a constraint of time with regard to the allocation for the study.
 The research work concentrates only on twenty six selected mutual funds.
7
2. INDUSTRY PROFILE AND COMPANY PROFILE
2.1 INDUSTRY PROFILE
Financial services industry is a term used to refer to the industry which renders
services in the financial market and also describes the organization that deal with the
management of money. The industry is highly fragmented and the production of this
is divided among different companies however, no single firm is large enough to be
able to influence the direction of the industry and price level.
The industry composition is comprised of various types of businesses providing

services related to accounting, banking, insurance, asset management, etc. The part of
industry in which the firm falls into is linked to the stock market of the country.
INDIAN STOCK EXCHANGE
Indian stock market is one of the oldest stock market in Asia. In the 18th century the
East India Company used to transact loan securities, and in the 1830’s trading on
corporate stocks and shares in bank and cotton took place at Bombay. By 1840-50
there were hardly half a dozen brokers and from the mid-1850’s an informal group of
22 stock brokers began trading under a banyan tree opposite the Town Hall of
Bombay, with each investing a princely amount of rupee 1. This banyan tree still
stands in the Horniman Circle Park, Mumbai.
In 1860, the exchange expanded with 60 brokers, but the share mania in India
flourished when the American Civil War broke and cotton supply to Europe from US
stopped. This further increased the brokers to 250 and this informal group of
stockbrokers organized themselves as “the native share and stockbrokers association”
which in 1875, was formally organized as Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). Later it
was shifted to an old building near the Town Hall, but in 1928, where the BSE
building now stands (at the intersection of Dalal Street) was constructed and occupied
in 1930.
In the year 1956, the Government of India recognized BSE as the first stock exchange
in the country under the Securities Contracts (Regulations) Act.
8
In 1992, the BSE saw major decisions and changes which were due to a major scandal
with market manipulation. In the aftermath of the scandal involving BSE member
Harshad Mehta, the institution responded to the calls for reform with intransigence.
National Stock Exchange (NSE) was created with encouragement from the
Government due to the slow and inefficient working of BSE to resolve issues. NSE
created an electronic marketplace and started trading on November 1994. Within less
than a year the turnover of more than that of the BSE, hence BSE rapidly automated
but it couldn’t catch up with NSE spot market turnover.
LEADING STOCK EXCHANGES IN INDIA
There are two leading stock exchanges in India where the stocks are listed and traded.
The stock exchanges enable free purchase and sale of securities, and commodity
exchange allows trading in commodities. The two stock exchanges are:
 Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE)

 National Stock Exchange (NSE)
1. BOMBAY STOCK EXCHANGE (BSE)
BSE was established in 1875 as “The Native Share and Stock Brokers Association”. It
is one of the oldest stock exchanges. It is a voluntary non-profit making Association
of Persons and has converted itself into demutualized and corporate entity, and has
evolved as the Premier Stock Exchange in the country. It is the first Stock Exchange
in the Country to have obtained permanent recognition in 1956 from the Government
of India under the Securities Contracts (Regulations) Act, 1956.
The BSE, while providing an efficient and transparent market for trading in securities,
debt and derivatives, it also upholds the interests of the investors and ensures redressal
of their grievances whether against the companies or its own member-brokers. It even
strives to educate and enlighten the investors by conducting investor education
programme and making available to them necessary informative inputs.
A Governing Board having 20 directors is the apex body, which decides the policies
and regulates the affairs of the BSE. The Governing Board consists of 9 elected
directors who are from the broking community, three SEBI nominees, six public
9
representatives and an Executive Director & Chief Executive Officer and a Chief
Operating Officer.
2. NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE
NSE is India’s leading exchange covering 364 cities and towns across the country.
NSE was setup with the encouragement from the Government by leading institutions
to provide a modern, fully automated screen-based trading system. It has about
unparalleled transparency, speed, and efficiency, safety and market integrity.
On its recognition as a stock exchange under the Securities Contracts (Regulation)

Act, 1956 in April 1993, NSE commenced operations in the Wholesale Debt Market
segment in June 1994. The Capital Market (Equities) segment commenced operations
in November 1994 and operations in Derivatives segment commenced in June 2000.
Its Board comprises of senior executives from promoter institutions, eminent

professionals in the fields of law, economics, accountancy, finance, taxation, and etc.
public representatives, nominees of SEBI and one full time executive of the
Exchange.
LEADING PLAYERS IN STOCK MARKET
 Motilal Oswal Securities
 Sharekhan Limited
 Angel Broking Limited
 Kotak Securities Limited
 Reliance Money
 Karvy Stock Broking Limited
 Anand Rathi Securities Limited.
10
MUTUAL FUND INDUSTRY
In 1963, the concept of Mutual Funds was introduced in India with the formation of
Unit Trust of India, at the initiative of the Government of India and Reserve Bank of
India. The history of mutual funds in India is classified into four phases:
PHASE 1: 1964 – 1987
The first existence came in the year 1963 with establishment of Unit Trust of India, a
joint effort by Reserve Bank of India and the Government of India with RBI having
the Regulatory and Administrative Control. In 1978 UTI was delinked from the RBI
and the Industrial Development Bank of India took over the regulatory and
administrative control from RBI. At the end of 1987, the industry had assets under
management of Rs. 6,700 crores.
PHASE 2: 1987 – 1993 (ENTRY OF PUBLIC SECTOR FUNDS)
In the year 1987, the industry marked the entry of non-UTI public sector funds set up
by Public Sector Banks, Life Insurance Corporation of India and General Insurance
Corporation of India. SBI was the first non-UTI mutual fund established in the year
1987. At the end of 1993, the industry had assets under management of Rs. 47,004
crores.
PHASE 3: 1993 – 2003 (ENTRY OF PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDS)
In the year 1993, a new era started in the Indian Mutual Fund industry with the entry
of private sector funds, giving wider choice to the investors. In the same year the first
mutual fund regulation was introduced wherein all mutual funds except UTI were to
be registered and governed. The regulations were given by SEBI and the 1993
regulations were revised in 1996 and now the industry functions under SEBI (Mutual
Fund) Regulations, 1996. At end of January 2003, there were a total of 33 mutual
funds with total assets worth of Rs. 121,805 crores.
11
PHASE 4: Since February 2003
In February 2003, by the repeal of the Unit Trust of India Act 1963 the UTI was
divided into two different entities. One being, the Specified Undertaking of the Unit
Trust of India, functioning under an administrator and under Government of India
rules and hence does not come under Mutual Fund Regulations. While the other entity
being, the UTI Mutual Fund is registered with SEBI and comes under Mutual Fund
Regulations. At end of March 2015, the industry had assets under management of Rs.
1,082,757 crores.
ASSOCIATION OF MUTUAL FUNDS IN INDIA
In the year 1995, to protect the interest of the investors as well as the company’s
interest and to ensure proper working and ethical standards in all areas of the
operation in the mutual fund industry, AMFI (Association of Mutual Funds in India)
was incorporated as a non-profit organization. AMFI is the apex body of all the
registered Asset Management Companies (AMCs), currently 46 AMCs that are
registered with SEBI are its members.
The AMFI represents all the AMCs together in representing and it functions under the
supervision and guidance of Board of Directors. The Board of Directors of AMFI is a
15-member panel consisting of one chairman, one vice-chairman and thirteen
directors, all of whom are different asset management companies. In order to function
effectively, AMFI has got various committees formed to look after each function
efficiently.
12
2.2 COMPANY PROFILE
BACKGOUND OF THE COMPANY:
Launched on February 8th, 2000 as an online trading portal, is India’s leading online
retail broking house. Today, it has a pan-India presence with over 1,529 outlets across
450 cities. It also has international presence with branches in the UAE & Oman. It
offers services like portfolio management, trading in equities, futures & options,
commodities, mutual funds, insurance and structured products.
The above services are backed by quality investment advice from an experienced
research team which offers investment and trading ideas based on fundamental &
technical research, market related news, statistical information on equities,
commodities, mutual funds, IPOs and much more. Sharekhan is member of the
Bombay Stock Exchange, National Stock Exchange and the country’s two leading
commodity exchanges, the NCDEX and MCX. It is also registered as a depository
participant with National Securities Depository and Central Depository Services.
Sharekhan has established category leadership through pioneering initiatives like

Trade Tiger, an internet based application that emulates a broker terminal besides
providing information and tools relevant to day traders. Another initiative First Step is
targeted at empowering first time investors. It has also set its global footprint through
the “India First” initiative, a series of seminars conducted by Sharekhan to help the
Non-resident Indians participate and benefit from the huge investment opportunities
in India.
The activities in the capital market started in the year 1987 as a brokerage house for
investors and market making in select scripts and extended to financial intermediation
activities in money, capital and currency markets. Later, the group diversified into
development of databases, back office application for banks and distribution and
portfolio management. The company also provides guidance to the investors through
seminars and regular research publication.
13
VISION STATEMENT
“To be the best retail brokering brand in the retail business of stock marketing.”
MISSION STATEMENT
“To educate and empower the individual investor to make better investment, better
decision through the quality advice and superior services.”
QUALITY POLICY
 Integrity and transparency in all transactions

 Providing investment solutions based on quality and unbiased research
 Achieving success through clients growth
 Providing personalized services to all investors and business associates.
PRODUCTS
 Classic Account
 Trade Tiger
 Mobile Trading through ShareMobile and SharekhanMini.
 Equities and Derivatives
 Commodities
 Mutual Funds
SERVICES
 First Step
 Portfolio Management Services
 Learn to Trade
 Fortune Finder
 Pattern Finder
 Advice Line
14
2.3 COMPETITORS INFORMATION
MOTILAL OSWAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
MOFSL is a diversified firm offering a range of services and products such as Wealth
Management, Private Equity, Asset Management, Retail Broking and Distribution,
Institutional and Commodity Broking, Home Finance and many more. Founded in the
year 1987, with just two people has blossomed into an over 2400 member team with
practices like focus on customer-first attitude, respect for professionalism, research
based value investing and implementing of cutting edge technology. Headquartered in
Mumbai, it has spread to over 600 cities and towns having 870,000 registered
customers. MOFSL is a registered member of BSE, NSE, MCX and NCDEX and also
registered depository participant in NSDL and CDSL.
ANGEL BROKING PRIVATE LIMITED
Angel Broking was founded in the year 1987, the company is registered member of
BSE, NSE, MCX and NCDEX and registered depository participant in CDSL. The
company offers services and products such as Wealth Management, Financial
Services, Depository Services, Investment Advisory Services and many more. The
company has 8500+ sub brokers and franchisee outlets across 850 cities in India.
KOTAK SECURITIES
A part of one of India’s leading financial institutions Kotak Mahindra which offers
complete financial solutions from commercial banking to stock broking, mutual
funds, investment banking, etc. Kotak securities was founded in the year 1994 which
offers services like shares trading, derivatives trading, mutual funds, IPO, portfolio
management and many more. It is a registered member of BSE and NSE and also
registered depository participant with NSDL and CDSL. It has a wide coverage with
around 1128 branches including franchisees spread across 352 cities in the country
and international offices in London, New York, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Singapore and
Mauritius.
15
KARVY STOCK BROKING LIMITED
Karvy is an integrated premium financial services provider, providing services such as

stock broking, depository participants, merchant banking, corporate finance, insurance
broking and many more. It has 400 branches across India, New York and Dubai with
additional 300+ franchisees across the country.
ANANDRATHI GROUP
Founded in 1994, it is one of India’s leading financial services firm offering Wealth
Management, Investment Banking, Brokerage & Distribution Services and many
more. It has offices in Dubai and a vast footprint across India with 1200 branches and
franchisees, employing over 2500 professionals. It is a registered member of BSE,
NSE, MCX and NCDEX and also registered depository participant with NSDL and
CDSL.
2.4 SWOT ANALYSIS
STRENGTHS
 It is one of the leading companies in online trading with over 3000 employees
and turnover of more than 400 crores.
 It has been actively taking initiative in upgrading its working culture with
changing environment.
 The employees in the organization are highly empowered and hence there is a
strong network and good co-operation between employees.
WEAKNESS
 Limited expansion measures taken up by the organization.

 High brokerage charges compared to the competitors resulting in lesser clients.
 Lack of awareness among consumers due to inadequate advertising.
16
OPPORTUNITIES
 With the market booming the organization can introduce new and improved
services and products in order to raise its client base.
 Marketing the organization and its products and services at rural and semi-urban
areas due to improved infrastructure.
 Increasing online trading facilities due to the increasing inclination of consumers
towards technology.
THREATS
 Increasing number of competitors and there aggressive promotional strategies in

the market.
 Less number of branch offices leading to slow delivery of services.
 High pressure to be cost competitive to meet customer’s expectations.
17
3. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
3.1 STOCK MARKET
Stock market also known as equity market or share market is the place wherein the
buyers or sellers of stocks trade on both listed and unlisted companies takes place.
The stock market can be divided into two segments:
PRIMARY MARKET
Companies are mostly started privately by promoters; however the promoter’s capital
and also borrowed capital from the banks or financial institution might not be
sufficient for running the business for long term. Hence, in order to raise capital for
long term the companies turn into public and issue securities in the form of equity and
debt. In simple words, it is part of the capital market that deals with issuing of new
securities into the market with a view to raise funds for long term functioning.
SECONDARY MARKET
Secondary market is the market wherein the previously issued financial instruments
such as stock, bonds, options and futures, etc. are both and sold. The platform for
buying and selling of the financial instruments are called as the stock exchanges,
where the buyers and sellers meet to trade in an organized manner.
There are two prominent stock exchanges in India, discussed in chapter 2:
Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE)

National Stock Exchange (NSE)
To support these two exchanges in handling securities, two prominent depositories are
established:
National Securities Depositories Limited (NSDL)

Central Depository Services (India) Limited (CDSL)
18
3.2 MUTUAL FUND
A mutual fund is a financial intermediary that allows a group of investors to pool their
money together with a pre-determined investment objective. In other words, it is the
pool of money based on the trust who invests the savings of number of investors who
share a common financial goal such as capital appreciation or dividend earnings.
Composition of Mutual Fund Industry
 Investors/ Unit Holders

 Fund Sponsor
 Trustees
 Asset Management Companies
 Custodian (SEBI)
 Fund Manager/ Brokers
 Registrar and Transfer Agent
TYPES OF MUTUAL FUNDS
 BY STRUCTURE
 Open-ended Schemes
 Close-ended Schemes
 Interval Schemes
 BY INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE
 Growth Schemes
 Income Schemes
 Balanced Schemes
 Money Market Schemes
 OTHER SCHEMES
 Tax Saving Schemes

 Special Schemes
 Index Schemes
 Sector Specific Schemes
19
ADVANTAGES OF MUTUAL FUND
 Portfolio Diversification
 Professional Management
 Low Transaction Costs
 Transparency
 Choice of Schemes.
DISADVANTAGES OF MUTUAL FUND
 No customized portfolios
 Difficulty in selecting a suitable fund scheme
 Costs control not in hands of investor.
3.3 NET ASSET VALUE (NAV)
Net Asset value is a mutual fund’s exchange-traded funds per share value. The per-
share amount of the fund is calculated by dividing the total value of all the securities
in its portfolio, less any liabilities, by the number of fund shares outstanding.
NAV is computed once a day based on closing market prices of the securities in the
fund’s portfolio.
3.4 PORTFOLIO EVALUATION
Portfolio evaluation refers to performance of portfolio and it is the process of

comparing the return earned on a portfolio with the return earned on a benchmark
portfolio or one or more other portfolios. In this study all the twenty six mutual funds
are compared with Sensex which is taken as benchmark portfolio. The concept of
portfolio evaluation basically consists of two functions: performance measurement
and performance evaluation. Performance measurement refers to basically is an
accounting function which measures the return earned on a portfolio and,
Performance evaluation addresses issues with regard to whether the performance was
superior or inferior.
20
Portfolio evaluation will help the investors to know about the various choices of
investment available with respect to the risk and return associated with the
investment. In this study all the selected twenty six mutual funds are undergone
performance evaluation using certain performance evaluation measures.
MEASURES OF PORTFOLIO EVALUATION USED IN THE STUDY
 Sharpe Ratio
 Treynor Ratio
 Jensen Ratio
FORMULAS USED FOR CALCULATION
Return Calculation
–
Yearly Return = * 100
Mean Calculation
∑
Mean =
( )
Where, ∑ is the sum of returns of all the years
N is number of years
Standard Deviation Calculation
( Ẍ)
SD =
( )
Where, SD is standard deviation
21
Beta Calculation
∑ ∑ ∑
Beta (β) = ∑ ∑( )
Where, X is market return
Y is fund return
Most main stream equity funds are in the range of 0.85 to 1.05.
BETA DECISIONS:
BETA = + 0.5: 1% change in the market index return causes exactly 0.5% change in
stock return, thus it indicates that the stock is less volatile compared to the market.
BETA = +1.0: 1% change in the market index return causes exactly 1% change in
stock return, hence it indicates that the stock moves together with the market.
BETA = +2.0: 1% change in the market index return causes 2% change in stock
return and hence indicates that the stock is more volatile compared to the market.
NEGATIVE BETA: Indicates that the stock return moves in the opposite direction to
the market return.
Performance Evaluation Measures:
Sharpe Ratio: Also known as ‘Reward to Variability’ ratio, the returns from a
portfolio are adjusted for risk free return and these excess returns attributable as
reward for investing in risky investments are validated in terms of return per unit of
risk and thus it helps in ranking them from highest to lowest.
S=
Where, = Return of portfolio
= Risk free rate of return
= Standard deviation of the portfolio
22
Treynor Ratio: Known as ‘Reward to Volatility’ ratio, it considers portfolio
beta as a measure of risk. It is the average beta of individual assets in a given
portfolio. As in Sharpe ratio standard deviation is used, in Treynor ratio in place of
standard deviation, beta is used and thus ranked from highest to lowest.
T=
β = Beta of fund
Jensen Ratio: The previous two ratios rank the performance of the portfolios on
a risk adjusted basis, whereas Jensen ratio attempts to construct a definite standard
based on the portfolio manager’s predictive ability against which performance of
various funds can be measured.
α= −( + − ∗ )
= Return of market
23
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Introduction to the chapter
This chapter consists of the analysis of collected and tabulated data and interpretation
of results. In the beginning of this chapter the calculations of market return (i.e. BSE
Sensex, taken as the benchmark) is shown and all twenty six sectoral mutual funds are
compared to the benchmark. Later the mean, standard deviation and beta are
calculated for each of the twenty six funds for the purpose of evaluating the funds
under the Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures. Further all the funds are ranked and
listed under all three measures are shown in this chapter.
4A) Analysis of market and mutual funds
In this section is the data of opening and closing price of all selected mutual funds and
BSE-SENSEX for previous seven years i.e. from 2009 to 2015 collected from BSE
and moneycontrol websites. The collected data are then converted into yearly return
using the formula
–
Sensex return is taken as ‘X’ and the funds return is taken as ‘Y’. The calculation of
the return of market is shown in table 4.0. The return of each stock is also calculated
in similar manner and both returns X and Y are compared with help of the graph. The
mean of the stock is calculated with help of the formula
∑
X̄ =
( )
After mean calculation, standard deviation and beta are calculated for twenty six
selected mutual funds. And then with the help of mean and beta of each fund, it is
evaluated using Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures and the values are shown in the
respective tables. The Treasury bill is taken for risk free rate of return and the value of
it is taken as 7.23. The calculations of only fifteen funds are shown here but the
remaining funds calculations are also done in the same manner.
24
4B) Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Sharpe’s measure
In this section each fund is evaluated and ranked under this measure with highest
value ranked as one and the least value at last.
4C) Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Treynor’s measure
4D) Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Jensen’s measure
The calculation and evaluation of fifteen mutual funds are shown in this chapter and
the remaining funds were transferred to the annexure.
25
4A) CALCULATION OF MARKET RETURN AND DATA ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION OF MUTUAL FUNDS
Table 4.0 shows the calculation of market return; the yearly return of seven years of
Sensex is taken as the benchmark. Further, the analysis of the selected mutual funds
are done by taking the market return as ‘X’ and the fund return as ‘Y’.
TABLE 4.0 Calculation of Market Return
YEAR 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Sensex 9720.55 17473.45 20621.61 15534.67 19513.45 21222.19 27485.77
(Open)
Sensex 17464.81 20509.09 15454.92 19426.71 21170.68 27499.42 26117.54
(Close)
YEAR 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Return 79.67 17.37 (25.05) 25.05 8.49 29.58 (4.98)
As per the calculations, it can be known that the market had negative return in the
year 2011 but picked up back again in 2012 and has seen fluctuations from then every
year with a negative return again in 2015. Further, the above calculated Sensex
returns are used in calculation of beta for all the selected mutual funds.
26
FRANKLIN INFOTECH FUND
The data analysis of Franklin Infotech Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.1
wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of the fund is
shown.
TABLE 4.1 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Franklin
Infotech Fund
YEAR X X2 Y Y2 XY Y-Ῡ (Y - Ῡ)2

2009 79.67 6347.31 128.74 16573.99 10256.72 92.03 8469.83
2010 17.37 301.72 32.63 1064.72 566.78 -4.08 16.63
2011 -25.05 627.50 -15.37 236.24 385.02 -52.08 2712.15
2012 25.05 627.50 -0.94 0.88 -23.55 -37.65 1417.40
2013 8.49 72.08 53.52 2864.39 454.38 16.81 282.63
2014 29.58 874.98 17.71 313.64 523.86 -19.00 360.94
2015 -4.98 24.80 3.96 15.68 -19.72 -32.75 1072.45
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 220.25 21069.54 12143.50 14332.03
Source of data: computed by researcher
GRAPH 4.1 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Franklin Infotech Fund
140
120
100
80
60 X (Sensex Return)
40 Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund moved together
in same pattern below the Sensex till 2011 but from the year 2012 to 2014 the fund
return was either higher or lower to that of Sensex. In the year 2015 both the fund and
the market return were moving together in same pattern with fund return being higher.
Hence it can be said that the fund may or may not move with the market and hence is
a high risk investment.
27
In table 4.1 (A) the values of mean, standard deviation and beta obtained by applying
the formulas to values in table 4.1 are shown.
TABLE 4.1 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Franklin Infotech
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 36.71
STANDARD DEVIATION 48.87
BETA 1.25
In table 4.1 (B) the calculated values of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures using
the formulas are shown. For risk free rate of return, present value of Treasury Bills i.e.
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.1 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Franklin Infotech
Fund
SHARPE S= 0.60
TREYNOR T= 23.65
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 11.45
INTERPRETATION:
In the above two table we can clearly see that the mean and standard deviation is
36.71 and 48.87 respectively. The beta is 1.25 which is more than +1, means that the
fund is a bit volatile with respect to the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratios
are 0.60, 23.65 and 11.45 respectively.
28
DSP BLACKROCK TECHNOLOGY.COM FUND
The data analysis of DSP Blackrock Technology.com Fund is carried out in this
section. Table 4.2 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and
beta of the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.2 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of DSP
Blackrock Technology.com Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 103.84 10782.75 8272.93 74.76 5589.31
2010 17.37 301.72 14.44 208.51 250.82 -14.64 214.28
2011 -25.05 627.50 -22.00 484.00 551.10 -51.08 2609.00
2012 25.05 627.50 3.48 12.11 87.17 -25.60 655.27
2013 8.49 72.08 40.67 1654.05 345.29 11.59 134.37
2014 29.58 874.98 24.66 608.12 729.44 -4.42 19.52
2015 -4.98 24.80 9.38 87.98 -46.71 -19.70 388.02
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 174.47 13837.52 10190.05 9609.77
GRAPH 4.2 Comparing return of Sensex with return of DSP Blackrock

Technology.com Fund
120
100
80
60
X (Sensex Return)
40
Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly show us that the fund moved
together with the Sensex till 2011 but from the year 2012 to 2013 the fund return was
at a steady rise irrespective of the Sensex and from 2013 to 2015 it was gradually
decreasing. In the year 2015 both the fund and the market return were moving
together in same direction.
29
TABLE 4.2 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of DSP Blackrock
Technology.com Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 29.08
BETA 1.08
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.2 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of DSP Blackrock
Technology.com Fund
SHARPE S= 0.55
TREYNOR T= 20.31
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 6.29
INTERPRETATION:
In the above two table we can see that the mean and standard deviation is 29.08 and
40.02 respectively, while the beta is 1.08 which is really close to +1 and hence can be
said that the fund moves in line with market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratio are
0.55, 20.31 and 6.29 respectively.
30
BIRLA SUN LIFE MILLENNIUM FUND
The data analysis of Birla Sun Life Millennium Fund is carried out in this section.
Table 4.3 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of the
fund is shown.
TABLE 4.3 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Birla Sun Life
Millennium Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 81.23 6598.31 6471.59 54.78 3000.30
2010 17.37 301.72 15.67 245.55 272.19 -10.79 116.32
2011 -25.05 627.50 -22.22 493.73 556.61 -48.68 2369.26
2012 25.05 627.50 2.67 7.13 66.88 -23.79 565.73
2013 8.49 72.08 49.42 2442.34 419.58 22.97 527.39
2014 29.58 874.98 21.24 451.14 628.28 -5.22 27.20
2015 -4.98 24.80 10.72 114.92 -53.39 -15.74 247.59
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 158.73 10353.11 8361.75 6853.78
GRAPH 4.3 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Birla Sun Life Millennium
Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tells us that the fund in line together
with the Sensex till 2011 but from the year 2012 to 2015 the fund return was either
less or more to that of Sensex. In the year 2015 both the fund and the market return
were declining with fund return being a bit higher than Sensex.
31
TABLE 4.3 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Birla Sun Life
Millennium Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 26.46
BETA 0.84
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.3 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Birla Sun Life
Millennium Fund
SHARPE S= 0.57
TREYNOR T= 22.94
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 7.11
INTERPRETATION:
From the above tables we know that the mean and standard deviation are 26.46 and
33.80 respectively with beta being 0.84 which is less than +1. The Sharpe, Treynor
and Jensen measure are 0.57, 22.94 and 7.11 respectively.
32
ICICI PRUDENTIAL TECHNOLOGY FUND
The data analysis of ICICI Prudential Technology Fund is carried out in this section.
Table 4.4 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of the
fund is shown.
TABLE 4.4 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of ICICI
Prudential Technology Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 119.97 14392.80 9558.01 77.90 6068.67
2010 17.37 301.72 43.35 1879.22 752.99 1.28 1.64
2011 -25.05 627.50 -18.97 359.86 475.20 -61.04 3725.68
2012 25.05 627.50 16.63 276.56 416.58 -25.44 647.11
2013 8.49 72.08 61.80 3819.24 524.68 19.73 389.34
2014 29.58 874.98 26.46 700.13 782.69 -15.61 243.62
2015 -4.98 24.80 3.17 10.05 -15.79 -38.90 1513.08
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 252.41 21437.86 12494.36 12589.14
GRAPH 4.4 Comparing return of Sensex with return of ICICI Prudential Technology
Fund
140
120
100
80
40 Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tells us that the fund moved in a
similar pattern with the Sensex but the fund return was always higher to that of
Sensex with a drop in 2011 but a good recovery till 2013 and again gradual decline till
2015.
33
TABLE 4.4 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of ICICI Prudential
Technology Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 42.07
BETA 1.21
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.4 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of ICICI Prudential
Technology Fund
SHARPE S= 0.76
TREYNOR T= 28.83
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 17.37
INTERPRETATION:
In the above tables we get to know that the mean and standard deviation at 42.07 and
45.81 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.21 which is more than +1 and hence is a bit
volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.76, 28.83 and 17.37
respectively.
34
SAHARA R.E.A.L FUND
The data analysis of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.5
shown.
TABLE 4.5 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Sahara
R.E.A.L Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 54.70 2992.09 4357.95 30.27 916.17
2010 17.37 301.72 10.83 117.29 188.12 -13.60 185.01
2011 -25.05 627.50 -29.72 883.28 744.49 -54.15 2932.40
2012 25.05 627.50 32.92 1083.73 824.65 8.49 72.05
2013 8.49 72.08 -0.06 0.00 -0.51 -24.49 599.84
2014 29.58 874.98 72.44 5247.55 2142.78 48.01 2304.80
2015 -4.98 24.80 5.48 30.03 -27.29 -18.95 359.17
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 146.59 10353.97 8230.17 7369.44
GRAPH 4.5 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tells us that the fund was below the
Sensex till 2011 but it has seen fluctuations from 2012 with 2014 witnessing a highest
growth in fund return. But in the year 2015 it is on the declining trend.
35
TABLE 4.5 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Sahara R.E.A.L Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 24.43
BETA 0.85
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.5 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Sahara R.E.A.L
Fund
SHARPE S= 0.49
TREYNOR T= 20.18
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 4.87
INTERPRETATION:
In the above tables the mean and standard deviation is 24.43 and 35.05 respectively,
with beta value at 0.85 which is less than +1 and hence the fund being less volatile.
The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures are 0.49, 20.18 and 4.87 respectively.
36
SBI MAGNUM COMMA FUND
The data analysis of SBI Magnum Comma Fund is carried out in this section. Table
4.6 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of the fund
is shown.
TABLE 4.6 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI Magnum
Comma Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 94.64 8956.73 7539.97 78.71 6195.00
2010 17.37 301.72 6.91 47.75 120.03 -9.02 81.39
2011 -25.05 627.50 -29.03 842.74 727.20 -44.96 2021.55
2012 25.05 627.50 13.24 175.30 331.66 -2.69 7.25
2013 8.49 72.08 -13.88 192.65 -117.84 -29.81 888.74
2014 29.58 874.98 30.88 953.57 913.43 14.95 223.45
2015 -4.98 24.80 -7.17 51.41 35.71 -23.10 533.69
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 95.59 11220.15 9550.15 9951.06
GRAPH 4.6 Comparing return of Sensex with return of SBI Magnum Comma Fund
120
100
80
60
X (Sensex Return)
40
Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund which dropped
below the Sensex return in 2010 has been moving similar to the market fluctuations
but as never crossed Sensex back again by achieving more return than Sensex.
37
TABLE 4.6 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI Magnum Comma
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 15.93
BETA 1.20
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.6 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of SBI Magnum
Comma Fund
SHARPE S= 0.21
TREYNOR T= 7.23
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (8.70)
INTERPRETATION:
volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.21, 7.23 and (8.70)
respectively.
38
UTI TRANSPORTATION & LOGISTICS FUND
The data analysis of UTI Transportation & Logistics Fund is carried out in this
TABLE 4.7 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI

2009 79.67 6347.31 128.01 16386.56 10198.56 77.62 6024.86
2010 17.37 301.72 23.62 557.90 410.28 -26.77 716.63
2011 -25.05 627.50 -20.58 423.54 515.53 -70.97 5036.74
2012 25.05 627.50 38.78 1503.89 971.44 -11.61 134.79
2013 8.49 72.08 23.78 565.49 201.89 -26.61 708.09
2014 29.58 874.98 103.43 10697.76 3059.46 53.04 2813.24
2015 -4.98 24.80 5.30 28.09 -26.39 -45.09 2033.11
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 302.34 30163.23 15330.76 17467.47
GRAPH 4.7 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Transportation &
Logistics Fund
140
120
100
80
40 Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund has been moving
with the market but by achieving higher return than Sensex with the fund achieving its
second highest return in the year 2014, the first being in year 2009. In 2015, it is
declining at a rapid pace.
39
TABLE 4.7 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Transportation &
Logistics Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 50.39
BETA 1.50
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.7 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of UTI
SHARPE S= 0.80
TREYNOR T= 28.70
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 21.42
INTERPRETATION:
53.96 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.50 which is more than +1 and hence is
respectively.
40
UTI ENERGY FUND
The data analysis of UTI Energy Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.8 wherein
the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.8 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Energy
Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 71.30 5083.69 5680.47 57.01 3250.14
2010 17.37 301.72 2.48 6.15 43.08 -11.81 139.48
2011 -25.05 627.50 -28.99 840.42 726.20 -43.28 1873.16
2012 25.05 627.50 13.94 194.32 349.20 -0.35 0.12
2013 8.49 72.08 -6.02 36.24 -51.11 -20.31 412.50
2014 29.58 874.98 34.99 1224.30 1035.00 20.70 428.49
2015 -4.98 24.80 -1.96 3.84 9.76 -16.25 264.06
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 85.74 7388.97 7792.60 6367.95
GRAPH 4.8 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Energy Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund moved in the
same pattern of the Sensex but with a less return than Sensex but this was changed
when the fund return exceeded Sensex return in 2014 and has been that way till date.
41
TABLE 4.8 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Energy Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 14.29
BETA 0.96
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.8 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of UTI Energy Fund
SHARPE S= 0.22
TREYNOR T= 7.35
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (6.82)
INTERPRETATION:
32.58 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.96 which is less than +1 but is really close to
+1 and hence moves in tandem with the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are
0.22, 7.35 and (6.82) respectively.
42
RELIANCE MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT FUND
The data analysis of Reliance Media & Entertainment Fund is carried out in this
TABLE 4.9 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Reliance
Media & Entertainment Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 65.21 4252.34 5195.28 36.94 1364.56
2010 17.37 301.72 15.80 249.64 274.45 -12.47 155.50
2011 -25.05 627.50 -18.88 356.45 472.94 -47.15 2223.12
2012 25.05 627.50 60.00 3600.00 1503.00 31.73 1006.79
2013 8.49 72.08 -2.16 4.67 -18.34 -30.43 925.98
2014 29.58 874.98 41.03 1683.46 1213.67 12.76 162.82
2015 -4.98 24.80 8.62 74.30 -42.93 -19.65 386.12
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 169.62 10220.87 8598.07 6224.90
GRAPH 4.9 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Reliance Media &
Entertainment Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
with the Sensex till 2011 with little fluctuation but from 2011 onwards it showed huge
fluctuations cutting Sensex returns with huge difference.
43
TABLE 4.9 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Reliance Media &
Entertainment Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 28.27
BETA 0.84
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.9 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Reliance Media &
Entertainment Fund
SHARPE S= 0.65
TREYNOR T= 24.95
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 8.85
INTERPRETATION:
32.21 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.84 which is less than +1 and hence is
comparatively less volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.65,
24.95 and 8.85 respectively.
44
ICICI PRUDENTIAL FMCG FUND
The data analysis of ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund is carried out in this section. Table
is shown.
Prudential FMCG Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 63.90 4083.21 5090.91 32.14 1032.77
2010 17.37 301.72 24.79 614.54 430.60 -6.97 48.63
2011 -25.05 627.50 14.56 211.99 -364.73 -17.20 295.95
2012 25.05 627.50 41.88 1753.93 1049.09 10.12 102.35
2013 8.49 72.08 8.63 74.48 73.27 -23.13 535.15
2014 29.58 874.98 32.11 1031.05 949.81 0.35 0.12
2015 -4.98 24.80 4.71 22.18 -23.46 -27.05 731.88
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 190.58 7791.40 7205.51 2746.85
GRAPH 4.10 Comparing return of Sensex with return of ICICI Prudential FMCG
Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund has a drop in the
2010 but has never achieved lesser returns than Sensex even during the 2011 period
even if the fund and market return move in similar pattern.
45
FMCG Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 31.76
BETA 0.57
7.23 is taken.
SHARPE S= 1.15
TREYNOR T= 43.25
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 16.33
INTERPRETATION:
21.40 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.57 which is less than +1 and hence is not
much volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 1.15, 43.25 and 16.33
respectively.
46
SBI PHARMA FUND
The data analysis of SBI Pharma Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.11
shown.
TABLE 4.11 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI Pharma
Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 81.22 6596.69 6470.80 39.26 1541.61
2010 17.37 301.72 29.57 874.38 513.63 -12.39 153.43
2011 -25.05 627.50 -5.58 31.14 139.78 -47.54 2259.73
2012 25.05 627.50 37.50 1406.25 939.38 -4.46 19.86
2013 8.49 72.08 25.69 659.98 218.11 -16.27 264.60
2014 29.58 874.98 56.34 3174.20 1666.54 14.38 206.88
2015 -4.98 24.80 27.00 729.00 -134.46 -14.96 223.70
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 251.74 13471.63 9813.77 4669.82
GRAPH 4.11 Comparing return of Sensex with return of SBI Pharma Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund even after being
in the similar pattern as the Sensex it has never achieved less returns than the Sensex
and has been improving with time.
47
TABLE 4.11 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI Pharma Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 41.96
BETA 0.80
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.11 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of SBI Pharma Fund
SHARPE S= 1.24
TREYNOR T= 43.67
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 23.23
INTERPRETATION:
27.90 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.80 which is less than +1 and hence is less
respectively.
48
UTI PHARMA & HEALTHCARE FUND
The data analysis of UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund is carried out in this section.
Table 4.12 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation and beta of
the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.12 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Pharma
& Healthcare Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 65.71 4317.80 5235.12 32.91 1083.18
2010 17.37 301.72 37.42 1400.26 649.99 4.62 21.36
2011 -25.05 627.50 -9.99 99.80 250.25 -42.79 1830.84
2012 25.05 627.50 25.05 627.50 627.50 -7.75 60.04
2013 8.49 72.08 22.98 528.08 195.10 -9.82 96.40
2014 29.58 874.98 43.17 1863.65 1276.97 10.37 107.57
2015 -4.98 24.80 12.45 155.00 -62.00 -20.35 414.05
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 196.79 8992.09 8172.92 3613.44
GRAPH 4.12 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Pharma & Healthcare
Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund return cut
through Sensex return in 2009 and has been moving in the same direction and similar
pattern as the market.
49
TABLE 4.12 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Pharma &
Healthcare Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 32.80
BETA 0.70
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.12 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of UTI Pharma &
Healthcare Fund
SHARPE S= 1.04
TREYNOR T= 36.57
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 15.46
INTERPRETATION:
24.54 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.70 which is less than +1 and hence is less
respectively.
50
RELIANCE PHARMA FUND
The data analysis of Reliance Pharma Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.13
shown.
Pharma Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 116.77 13635.23 9303.07 73.37 5382.91
2010 17.37 301.72 32.00 1024.00 555.84 -11.40 130.00
2011 -25.05 627.50 -11.57 133.86 289.83 -54.97 3021.88
2012 25.05 627.50 34.93 1220.10 875.00 -8.47 71.77
2013 8.49 72.08 20.48 419.43 173.88 -22.92 525.40
2014 29.58 874.98 48.48 2350.31 1434.04 5.08 25.79
2015 -4.98 24.80 19.32 373.26 -96.21 -24.08 579.93
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 260.41 19156.21 12535.43 9737.68
GRAPH 4.13 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Reliance Pharma Fund
140
120
100
80
40 Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund even after
moving in the similar pattern for past seven years it has never achieved less returns
than the Sensex returns.
51
TABLE 4.13 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Reliance Pharma
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 43.40
BETA 1.19
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.13 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Reliance Pharma
Fund
SHARPE S= 0.90
TREYNOR T= 30.35
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 18.94
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
52
SBI INFRASTRUCTURE FUND- Sr 1
The data analysis of SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 is carried out in this section. Table
is shown.
TABLE 4.14 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI
Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1

2009 79.67 6347.31 70.68 4995.66 5631.08 55.41 3069.71
2010 17.37 301.72 1.15 1.32 19.98 -14.13 199.52
2011 -25.05 627.50 -33.46 1119.57 838.17 -48.74 2375.10
2012 25.05 627.50 18.03 325.08 451.65 2.76 7.59
2013 8.49 72.08 -13.42 180.10 -113.94 -28.70 823.40
2014 29.58 874.98 46.35 2148.32 1371.03 31.08 965.66
2015 -4.98 24.80 2.32 5.38 -11.55 -12.96 167.83
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 91.65 8775.44 8186.42 7608.81
GRAPH 4.14 Comparing return of Sensex with return of SBI Infrastructure Fund-
Sr1
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund achieved lesser
return than Sensex from 2009 to 2013 but it increased in the year 2014 by achieving
more return than Sensex.
53
TABLE 4.14 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of SBI Infrastructure
Fund- Sr 1
MEAN X Y
21.69 15.28
BETA 1.00
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.14 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of SBI Infrastructure
Fund- Sr 1
SHARPE S= 0.23
TREYNOR T= 8.01
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (6.47)
INTERPRETATION:
35.61 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.00 which is equal to +1 and hence is similar
to the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.23, 8.01 and (6.47) respectively.
54
CANARA ROBECO INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
The data analysis of Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund is carried out in this section.
the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.15 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Canara
Robeco Infrastructure Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 84.51 7141.94 6732.91 57.39 3293.42
2010 17.37 301.72 10.64 113.21 184.82 -16.48 271.65
2011 -25.05 627.50 -20.63 425.60 516.78 -47.75 2280.22
2012 25.05 627.50 22.80 519.84 571.14 -4.32 18.68
2013 8.49 72.08 -9.53 90.82 -80.91 -36.65 1343.34
2014 29.58 874.98 68.47 4688.14 2025.34 41.35 1709.68
2015 -4.98 24.80 6.47 41.86 -32.22 -20.65 426.49
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 162.73 13021.41 9917.86 9343.49
GRAPH 4.15 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Canara Robeco

Infrastructure Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
with the Sensex till 2012 but from the year 2013 it started showing huge difference
between fund return and Sensex return. In 2014 it achieved high returns more than the
Sensex.
55
TABLE 4.15 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Canara Robeco
Infrastructure Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 27.12
BETA 1.07
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.15 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Canara Robeco
Infrastructure Fund
SHARPE S= 0.50
TREYNOR T= 18.63
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 4.46
INTERPRETATION:
39.46 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.07 which is more than +1 but is still similar
to the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.50, 18.63 and 4.46 respectively.
56
RELIGARE INVESCO INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
The data analysis of Religare Invesco Infrastructure Fund is carried out in this section.
the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.16 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Religare
Invesco Infrastructure Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 60.32 3638.50 4805.69 37.62 1415.26
2010 17.37 301.72 9.01 81.18 156.50 -13.69 187.42
2011 -25.05 627.50 -29.49 869.66 738.72 -52.19 2723.80
2012 25.05 627.50 22.24 494.62 557.11 -0.46 0.21
2013 8.49 72.08 -4.68 21.90 -39.73 -27.38 749.66
2014 29.58 874.98 82.14 6746.98 2429.70 59.44 3533.11
2015 -4.98 24.80 -3.34 11.16 16.63 -26.04 678.08
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 136.20 11864.00 8664.64 9287.55
GRAPH 4.16 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Religare Invesco

Infrastructure Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tells us that the fund achieved less
returns than Sensex returns till 2013 but in 2014, it was the opposite. In 2015 the fund
and the Sensex return are almost at a point of being the same.
57
TABLE 4.16 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Religare Invesco
Infrastructure Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 22.70
BETA 0.95
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.16 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Religare Invesco
Infrastructure Fund
SHARPE S= 0.39
TREYNOR T= 16.29
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 1.74
INTERPRETATION:
39.34 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.95 which is less than +1 and hence is a bit
respectively.
58
KOTAK INFRASTRUCTURE & ECONOMIC REFORM FUND- STANDARD
PLAN
The data analysis of Kotak Infrastructure & Economic Reform Fund is carried out in
this section. Table 4.17 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard deviation
and beta of the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.17 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Kotak

2009 79.67 6347.31 86.74 7523.83 6910.58 59.04 3485.13
2010 17.37 301.72 9.21 84.82 159.98 -18.50 342.07
2011 -25.05 627.50 -21.95 481.80 549.85 -49.66 2465.62
2012 25.05 627.50 18.97 359.86 475.20 -8.74 76.30
2013 8.49 72.08 -7.42 55.06 -63.00 -35.13 1233.77
2014 29.58 874.98 80.84 6535.11 2391.25 53.14 2823.33
2015 -4.98 24.80 -0.16 0.03 0.80 -27.87 776.46
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 166.23 15040.50 10424.65 11202.67
GRAPH 4.17 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Kotak Infrastructure &
Economic Reform Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund was in a similar
trend till the year 2011 but from 2012 it started fluctuating and had fund returns
sometimes more than market returns and sometimes less than market returns.
59
TABLE 4.17 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Kotak Infrastructure
& Economic Reform Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 27.71
BETA 1.14
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.17 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Kotak
SHARPE S= 0.47
TREYNOR T= 18.02
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 4.05
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
60
LIC NOMURA MF INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
The data analysis of LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund is carried out in this
TABLE 4.18 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of LIC
NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 59.21 3505.82 4717.26 43.32 1876.91
2010 17.37 301.72 7.44 55.35 129.23 -8.45 71.35
2011 -25.05 627.50 -35.63 1269.50 892.53 -51.52 2653.97
2012 25.05 627.50 26.05 678.60 652.55 10.16 103.29
2013 8.49 72.08 -4.49 20.16 -38.12 -20.38 415.21
2014 29.58 874.98 49.21 2421.62 1455.63 33.32 1110.44
2015 -4.98 24.80 -6.47 41.86 32.22 -22.36 499.82
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 95.32 7992.92 7841.31 6730.99
GRAPH 4.18 Comparing return of Sensex with return of LIC NOMURA MF

Infrastructure Fund
100
80
60
40
X (Sensex Return)
20
Y (Fund Return)
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
-60
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund had less returns
than the market and it equaled the market return in the year 2012 and fluctuated in the
year 2013 and 2014 and again equaled in 2015.
61
TABLE 4.18 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of LIC NOMURA MF
Infrastructure Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 15.89
BETA 0.94
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.18 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of LIC NOMURA
MF Infrastructure Fund
SHARPE S= 0.26
TREYNOR T= 9.21
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (4.93)
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
62
L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
The data analysis of L & T Infrastructure Fund is carried out in this section. Table
is shown.
TABLE 4.19 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of L & T
Infrastructure Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 67.56 4564.35 5382.51 46.55 2166.90
2010 17.37 301.72 5.29 27.98 91.89 -15.72 247.12
2011 -25.05 627.50 -35.99 1295.28 901.55 -57.00 3249.00
2012 25.05 627.50 27.18 738.75 680.86 6.17 38.07
2013 8.49 72.08 -7.80 60.84 -66.22 -28.81 830.02
2014 29.58 874.98 63.67 4053.87 1883.36 42.66 1819.88
2015 -4.98 24.80 6.15 37.82 -30.63 -14.86 220.82
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 126.06 10778.90 8843.31 8571.80
GRAPH 4.19 Comparing return of Sensex with return of L & T Infrastructure Fund
100
80
60
40
X (Sensex Return)
20
Y (Fund Return)
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
-60
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tells us that the fund earned less
returns till 2011 than the market. In the year 2012 it equaled the market return and
started fluctuating up and down from 2013 to 2015.
63
TABLE 4.19 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of L & T Infrastructure
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 21.01
BETA 1.01
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.19 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of L & T
Infrastructure Fund
SHARPE S= 0.36
TREYNOR T= 13.69
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (0.77)
INTERPRETATION:
37.80 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.01 which is more than +1 but still is similar
to the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.36, 13.69 and (0.77) respectively.
64
DSP BLACKROCK T.I.G.E.R FUND
The data analysis of DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund is carried out in this section.
the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.20 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of DSP
Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 72.27 5222.95 5757.75 49.06 2406.56
2010 17.37 301.72 12.88 165.89 223.73 -10.33 106.78
2011 -25.05 627.50 -33.11 1096.27 829.41 -56.32 3172.32
2012 25.05 627.50 36.69 1346.16 919.08 13.48 181.62
2013 8.49 72.08 -10.30 106.09 -87.45 -33.51 1123.14
2014 29.58 874.98 60.45 3654.20 1788.11 37.24 1386.57
2015 -4.98 24.80 0.40 0.16 -1.99 -22.81 520.45
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 139.28 11591.73 9428.64 8897.43
GRAPH 4.20 Comparing return of Sensex with return of DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R
Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
than the market return till 2011 but it exceeded the market return in 2012 and
fluctuated frequently and had higher returns in the year 2015.
65
TABLE 4.20 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of DSP Blackrock
T.I.G.E.R Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 23.21
BETA 1.06
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.20 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of DSP Blackrock
T.I.G.E.R Fund
SHARPE S= 0.42
TREYNOR T= 15.09
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 0.67
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
66
UTI INFRASTRUCTURE FUND
The data analysis of UTI Infrastructure Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.21
shown.
TABLE 4.21 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI
Infrastructure Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 62.66 3926.28 4992.12 46.13 2127.52
2010 17.37 301.72 -0.17 0.03 -2.95 -16.71 279.06
2011 -25.05 627.50 -37.03 1371.22 927.60 -53.57 2869.21
2012 25.05 627.50 31.86 1015.06 798.09 15.33 234.86
2013 8.49 72.08 -12.19 148.60 -103.49 -28.73 825.13
2014 29.58 874.98 59.83 3579.63 1769.77 43.30 1874.46
2015 -4.98 24.80 -5.75 33.06 28.64 -22.29 496.62
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 99.21 10073.87 8409.78 8706.84
GRAPH 4.21 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Infrastructure Fund
100
80
60
40
X (Sensex Return)
20
Y (Fund Return)
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
-60
than the market return till 2011 but increased in the year 2012 and dipped in the year
2013 and again increased in the year 2014 and equaled in the year 2015.
67
TABLE 4.21 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Infrastructure
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 16.54
BETA 1.02
7.23 is taken.
Infrastructure Fund
SHARPE S= 0.24
TREYNOR T= 9.15
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) (5.40)
INTERPRETATION:
volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.24, 9.15 and (5.40)
respectively.
68
SAHARA BANKING & FINANCIAL SERVICES FUND
The data analysis of Sahara Banking & Financial Services Fund is carried out in this
TABLE 4.22 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Sahara

2009 79.67 6347.31 120.03 14407.20 9562.79 84.55 7148.70
2010 17.37 301.72 34.10 1162.81 592.32 -1.38 1.90
2011 -25.05 627.50 -32.38 1048.46 811.12 -67.86 4604.98
2012 25.05 627.50 58.05 3369.80 1454.15 22.57 509.40
2013 8.49 72.08 -15.15 229.52 -128.62 -50.63 2563.40
2014 29.58 874.98 60.15 3618.02 1779.24 24.67 608.61
2015 -4.98 24.80 -11.92 142.09 59.36 -47.40 2246.76
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 212.88 23977.91 14130.35 17683.76
GRAPH 4.22 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Sahara Banking & Financial
Services Fund
140
120
100
80
60
X (Sensex Return)
40
Y (Fund Return)
20
0
-20 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-40
-60
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund had higher
returns than the market return but in the year 2011 it decreased drastically below
market return and fluctuated in simultaneous years.
69
TABLE 4.22 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Sahara Banking &
Financial Services Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 35.48
BETA 1.58
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.22 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Sahara Banking
& Financial Services Fund
SHARPE S= 0.52
TREYNOR T= 17.93
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 5.47
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
70
RELIGARE INVESCO BANKING FUND
The data analysis of Religare Invesco Banking Fund is carried out in this section.
the fund is shown.
TABLE 4.23 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of Religare
Invesco Banking Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 67.60 4569.76 5385.69 38.44 1477.76
2010 17.37 301.72 37.38 1397.26 649.29 8.22 67.60
2011 -25.05 627.50 -30.30 918.09 759.02 -59.46 3535.29
2012 25.05 627.50 57.40 3294.76 1437.87 28.24 797.59
2013 8.49 72.08 -10.76 115.78 -91.35 -39.92 1593.47
2014 29.58 874.98 55.80 3113.64 1650.56 26.64 709.78
2015 -4.98 24.80 -2.17 4.71 10.81 -31.33 981.46
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 174.95 13414.00 9801.89 9162.96
GRAPH 4.23 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Religare Invesco Banking
Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
INTERPRETATION: The above graph clearly tell us that the fund had higher fund
returns than the market return but decreased drastically in 2011 to below market
return and fluctuated frequently in coming years.
71
TABLE 4.23 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Religare Invesco
Banking Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 29.16
BETA 1.01
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.23 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Religare Invesco
Banking Fund
SHARPE S= 0.56
TREYNOR T= 21.62
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 7.26
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
72
ICICI PRUDENTIAL BANKING & FINANCIAL SERVICES FUND
The data analysis of ICICI Prudential Banking & Financial Services Fund is carried
out in this section. Table 4.24 wherein the calculation for return (mean), standard
deviation and beta of the fund is shown.
Prudential Banking & Financial Services Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 74.61 5566.65 5944.18 40.86 1669.27
2010 17.37 301.72 31.70 1004.89 550.63 -2.05 4.22
2011 -25.05 627.50 -31.96 1021.44 800.60 -65.71 4318.24
2012 25.05 627.50 71.30 5083.69 1786.07 37.55 1409.75
2013 8.49 72.08 -4.10 16.81 -34.81 -37.85 1432.87
2014 29.58 874.98 68.66 4714.20 2030.96 34.91 1218.48
2015 -4.98 24.80 -7.69 59.14 38.30 -41.44 1717.55
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 202.52 17466.82 11115.92 11770.38
GRAPH 4.24 Comparing return of Sensex with return of ICICI Prudential Banking &
Financial Services Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
73
MEAN X Y
21.69 33.75
BETA 1.14
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.24 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of ICICI Prudential
SHARPE S= 0.60
TREYNOR T= 23.30
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 10.06
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
74
RELIANCE BANKING FUND
The data analysis of Reliance Banking Fund is carried out in this section. Table 4.25
shown.
Banking Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 79.46 6313.89 6330.58 46.42 2154.97
2010 17.37 301.72 44.20 1953.64 767.75 11.16 124.58
2011 -25.05 627.50 -32.19 1036.20 806.36 -65.23 4254.74
2012 25.05 627.50 60.21 3625.24 1508.26 27.17 738.30
2013 8.49 72.08 -11.78 138.77 -100.01 -44.82 2008.68
2014 29.58 874.98 64.37 4143.50 1904.06 31.33 981.67
2015 -4.98 24.80 -6.04 36.48 30.08 -39.08 1527.12
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 198.23 17247.72 11247.08 11790.06
GRAPH 4.25 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Reliance Banking Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
75
TABLE 4.25 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of Reliance Banking
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 33.04
BETA 1.17
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.25 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of Reliance Banking
Fund
SHARPE S= 0.58
TREYNOR T= 22.04
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 8.88
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
76
UTI BANKING SECTOR FUND
The data analysis of UTI Banking Sector Fund is carried out in this section. Table
is shown.
TABLE 4.26 Calculation showing mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Banking
Sector Fund

2009 79.67 6347.31 74.86 5604.02 5964.10 46.02 2117.38
2010 17.37 301.72 35.74 1277.35 620.80 6.90 47.54
2011 -25.05 627.50 -32.80 1075.84 821.64 -61.65 3800.11
2012 25.05 627.50 57.77 3337.37 1447.14 28.93 836.66
2013 8.49 72.08 -14.93 222.90 -126.76 -43.78 1916.25
2014 29.58 874.98 64.00 4096.00 1893.12 35.16 1235.87
2015 -4.98 24.80 -11.57 133.86 57.62 -40.42 1633.37
TOTAL 130.13 8875.89 173.07 15747.35 10677.66 11587.18
GRAPH 4.26 Comparing return of Sensex with return of UTI Banking Sector Fund
100
80
60
20 Y (Fund Return)
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-20
-40
77
TABLE 4.26 (A) Value of mean, standard deviation and beta of UTI Banking Sector
Fund
MEAN X Y
21.69 28.85
BETA 1.16
7.23 is taken.
TABLE 4.26 (B) Value of Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures of UTI Banking
Sector Fund
SHARPE S= 0.49
TREYNOR T= 18.71
JENSEN α= −( + − ∗ ) 4.91
INTERPRETATION:
respectively.
78
4B) RANKING OF TWENTY SIX MUTUAL FUNDS UNDER SHARPE’S
MEASURE
Based on all the determined values from the calculations above, Table 4.27 the
ranking of twenty six sectoral mutual funds using Sharpe’s ratio is shown.
TABLE 4.27 Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Sharpe’s ratio
Mutual Fund Sharpe Rank
SBI Pharma Fund (G) 1.24 1
ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund (G) 1.15 2
UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund 1.04 3

(G)
Reliance Pharma Fund (G) 0.90 4
UTI Transportation & Logistics 0.80 5

Fund (G)
ICICI Prudential Technology Fund 0.76 6
(G)
Reliance Media & Entertainment 0.65 7
Fund (G)
Franklin Infotech Fund (G) 0.60 8
ICICI Prudential Banking & 0.60 8

Financial Services Fund (G)
Reliance Banking Fund (G) 0.58 9
Birla Sun Life New Millennium 0.57 10

(G)
Religare Invesco Banking Fund 0.56 11
(G)
DSP Blackrock Technology.com 0.55 12
(G)
Sahara Banking and Financial 0.52 13
Services Fund (G)
Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund 0.50 14
(G)
Sahara R.E.A.L Fund (G) 0.49 15
UTI Banking Sector Fund (G) 0.49 15
Kotak Infrastructure & Economic 0.47 16

Reform Fund- Standard Plan (G)
DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund 0.42 17
(G)
79
Religare Invesco Infrastructure 0.39 18
Fund (G)
L & T Infrastructure Fund (G) 0.36 19
LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure 0.26 20

Fund (G)
UTI Infrastructure Fund (G) 0.24 21
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G) 0.23 22
UTI Energy Fund (G) 0.22 23
SBI Magnum Comma Fund (G) 0.21 24
INTERPRETATION:
Based on the ranking of the funds with respect to Sharpe’s measure, the top ranked
funds under Sharpe’s measure SBI Pharma Fund (G), ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund
(G), UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund (G), Reliance Pharma Fund (G) and UTI
Transportation & Logistics Fund (G) and low ranked funds were UTI Infrastructure
Fund (G), SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G), UTI Energy Fund (G) and SBI Magnum
Comma Fund (G).
80
4C) RANKING OF TWENTY SIX MUTUAL FUNDS UNDER TREYNOR’S
MEASURE
ranking of twenty six sectoral mutual funds using Treynor’s ratio is shown.
TABLE 4.28 Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Treynor’s ratio
Mutual Fund Treynor Rank

(G)

(G)
Fund (G)
Fund (G)

(G)

(G)
(G)

(G)
Services Fund (G)
Fund (G)
81
(G)
L & T Infrastructure Fund (G) 13.69 21
LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure 9.21 22

Fund (G)
UTI Infrastructure Fund (G) 9.15 23
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G) 8.01 24
UTI Energy Fund (G) 7.35 25
SBI Magnum Comma Fund (G) 7.23 26
INTERPRETATION:
Based on the ranking of the funds with respect to Treynor’s measure, the top ranked
funds under Treynor’s measure SBI Pharma Fund (G), ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund
(G), UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund (G), Reliance Pharma Fund (G) and ICICI
Prudential Technology Fund and low ranked funds were UTI Infrastructure Fund (G),
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G), UTI Energy Fund (G) and SBI Magnum Comma
Fund (G).
82
4D) RANKING OF TWENTY SIX MUTUAL FUNDS UNDER JENSEN’S
MEASURE
ranking of twenty six sectoral mutual funds using Jensen’s ratio is shown.
TABLE 4.29 Ranking of twenty six mutual funds under Jensen’s ratio
Mutual Fund Jensen Rank

Fund (G)

(G)

(G)


Fund (G)
(G)
(G)
(G)
Services Fund (G)

(G)
Fund (G)
83
(G)
L & T Infrastructure Fund (G) (0.77) 21
LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure (4.93) 22

Fund (G)
UTI Infrastructure Fund (G) (5.40) 23
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G) (6.47) 24
UTI Energy Fund (G) (6.82) 25
SBI Magnum Comma Fund (G) (8.70) 26
INTERPRETATION:
Based on the ranking of the funds with respect to Jensen’s measure, the top ranked
funds under Jensen’s measure SBI Pharma Fund (G), UTI Transportation & Logistics
Fund (G), Reliance Pharma Fund (G), ICICI Prudential Technology Fund and ICICI
Prudential FMCG Fund (G) and low ranked funds were UTI Infrastructure Fund (G),
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G), UTI Energy Fund (G) and SBI Magnum Comma
Fund (G).
84
5. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION
5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The first thing that an investor must know in order to select any security for the
investment purpose is to be aware of the performance of the security. In this case, the
study concentrates on analyzing and evaluating performance of twenty six sectoral
mutual funds in comparison to BSE-SENSEX. The selected sectors are: Technology,
Infrastructure, FMCG, Pharma & Healthcare, Banking & Finance and others. All the
selected funds are analyzed with the help of calculation of mean, standard deviation,
beta and finally by applying the Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratio measures for
performance evaluation and raking the mutual funds under each measure.
The findings of this study will help the investors to understand mutual funds and the
performance of selected funds for past seven years. The study will also guide the
investors in comparing the mutual funds with the index and analyze. As far as sectoral
mutual funds is concerned it has got a long and bright future ahead as it is just a
portfolio of selected equity stocks and moves similar to the equity market and it can
be seen with growing number of new mutual funds on sectoral basis.
 Franklin Infotech Fund: The fund moved together in same pattern below the
Sensex till 2011 but from the year 2012 to 2014 the fund return was either higher
or lower to that of Sensex. In the year 2015 both the fund and the market return
were moving together in same pattern with fund return being higher. The mean
and standard deviation is 36.71 and 48.87 respectively. The beta is 1.25 which is
more than +1, means that the fund is a bit volatile with respect to the market. The
Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratios are 0.60, 23.65 and 11.45 respectively.
 DSP Blackrock Technology.com Fund: The fund moved together with the
Sensex till 2011 but from the year 2012 to 2013 the fund return was at a steady
rise irrespective of the Sensex and from 2013 to 2015 it was gradually decreasing.
In the year 2015 both the fund and the market return were moving together in
same direction. The mean and standard deviation is 29.08 and 40.02 respectively,
while the beta is 1.08 which is really close to +1 and hence can be said that the
fund moves in line with market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratio are 0.55,
85
 Birla Sun Life Millennium Fund: The fund in line together with the Sensex till
2011 but from the year 2012 to 2015 the fund return was either less or more to
that of Sensex. In the year 2015 both the fund and the market return were
declining with fund return being a bit higher than Sensex. The mean and standard
deviation are 26.46 and 33.80 respectively with beta being 0.84 which is less than
+1. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measure are 0.57, 22.94 and 7.11
respectively.
 ICICI Prudential Technology Fund: The fund moved in a similar pattern with
the Sensex but the fund return was always higher to that of Sensex with a drop in
2011 but a good recovery till 2013 and again gradual decline till 2015. The mean
and standard deviation at 42.07 and 45.81 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.21
which is more than +1 and hence is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe,
Treynor and Jensen are 0.76, 28.83 and 17.37 respectively.
 Sahara R.E.A.L Fund: The fund was below the Sensex till 2011 but it has seen
fluctuations from 2012 with 2014 witnessing a highest growth in fund return. But
in the year 2015 it is on the declining trend. The mean and standard deviation is
24.43 and 35.05 respectively, with beta value at 0.85 which is less than +1 and
hence the fund being less volatile. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen measures are
0.49, 20.18 and 4.87 respectively.
 SBI Magnum Comma Fund: The fund which dropped below the Sensex return
in 2010 has been moving similar to the market fluctuations but as never crossed
Sensex back again by achieving more return than Sensex. The mean and standard
deviation at 15.93 and 40.72 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.20 which is more
than +1 and hence is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen
are 0.21, 7.23 and (8.70) respectively.
 UTI Transportation & Logistics Fund: The fund has been moving with the
market but by achieving higher return than Sensex with the fund achieving its
second highest return in the year 2014, the first being in year 2009. In 2015, it is
declining at a rapid pace. The mean and standard deviation at 50.39 and 53.96
respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.50 which is more than +1 and hence is volatile
than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.80, 28.70 and 21.42
respectively.
86
 UTI Energy Fund: The fund moved in the same pattern of the Sensex but with a
less return than Sensex but this was changed when the fund return exceeded
Sensex return in 2014 and has been that way till date. The mean and standard
deviation at 14.29 and 32.58 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.96 which is less
than +1 but is really close to +1 and hence moves in tandem with the market. The
Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.22, 7.35 and (6.82) respectively.
 Reliance Media & Entertainment Fund: The fund moved together with the
Sensex till 2011 with little fluctuation but from 2011 onwards it showed huge
fluctuations cutting Sensex returns with huge difference. The mean and standard
than +1 and hence is comparatively less volatile than market. The Sharpe,
 ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund: The fund has a drop in the 2010 but has never
achieved lesser returns than Sensex even during the 2011 period even if the fund
and market return move in similar pattern. The mean and standard deviation at
31.76 and 21.40 respectively. Beta of the fund is 0.57 which is less than +1 and
hence is not much volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 1.15,
 SBI Pharma Fund: The fund even after being in the similar pattern as the
Sensex it has never achieved less return than the Sensex and has been improving
with time. The mean and standard deviation at 41.96 and 27.90 respectively. Beta
of the fund is 0.80 which is less than +1 and hence is less volatile than market.
The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 1.24, 43.67 and 23.23 respectively.
 UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund: The fund return cut through Sensex return in
2009 and has been moving in the same direction and similar pattern as the
market. The mean and standard deviation at 32.80 and 24.54 respectively. Beta of
the fund is 0.70 which is less than +1 and hence is less volatile than market. The
Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 1.04, 36.57 and 15.46 respectively.
 Reliance Pharma Fund: The fund even after moving in the similar pattern for
past seven years it has never achieved less return than the Sensex returns. The
mean and standard deviation at 43.40 and 40.29 respectively. Beta of the fund is
1.19 which is more than +1 and hence is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe,
87
 SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1: The fund achieved lesser return than Sensex
from 2009 to 2013 but it increased in the year 2014 by achieving more return
than Sensex. The mean and standard deviation at 15.28 and 35.61 respectively.
Beta of the fund is 1.00 which is equal to +1 and hence is similar to the market.
The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.23, 8.01 and (6.47) respectively.
 Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund: The fund moved together with the
Sensex till 2012 but from the year 2013 it started showing huge difference
between fund return and Sensex return. In 2014 it achieved high returns more
than the Sensex. The mean and standard deviation at 27.12 and 39.46
respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.07 which is more than +1 but is still similar to
the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.50, 18.63 and 4.46
respectively.
 Religare Invesco Infrastructure Fund: The fund achieved less returns than
Sensex returns till 2013 but in 2014, it was the opposite. In 2015 the fund and the
Sensex return are almost at a point of being the same. The mean and standard
 Kotak Infrastructure & Economic Reform Fund: The fund was in a similar
trend till the year 2011 but from 2012 it started fluctuating and had fund returns
sometimes more than market returns and sometimes less than market returns. The
mean and standard deviation at 42.07 and 45.81 respectively. Beta of the fund is
1.21 which is more than +1 and hence is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe,
 LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure Fund: The fund had less returns than the
market and it equalled the market return in the year 2012 and fluctuated in the
year 2013 and 2014 and again equalled in 2015. The mean and standard deviation
at 42.07 and 45.81 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.21 which is more than +1
and hence is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.76,
 L & T Infrastructure Fund: The fund earned less returns till 2011 than the
market. In the year 2012 it equalled the market return and started fluctuating up
and down from 2013 to 2015. The mean and standard deviation at 21.01 and
88
37.80 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.01 which is more than +1 but still is
similar to the market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.36, 13.69 and (0.77)
respectively.
 DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund: The fund had less returns than the market
return till 2011 but it exceeded the market return in 2012 and fluctuated
frequently and had higher returns in the year 2015. The mean and standard
 UTI Infrastructure Fund: The fund had less returns than the market return till
2011 but increased in the year 2012 and dipped in the year 2013 and again
increased in the year 2014 and equalled in the year 2015. The mean and standard
are 0.24, 9.15 and (5.40) respectively.
 Sahara Banking & Financial Services Fund: The fund had higher returns than
the market return but in the year 2011 it decreased drastically below market
return and fluctuated in simultaneous years. The mean and standard deviation at
35.48 and 54.29 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.58 which is more than +1 and
hence is volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.52, 17.93 and
5.47 respectively.
 Religare Invesco Banking Fund: The fund had higher fund returns than the
market return but decreased drastically in 2011 to below market return and
fluctuated frequently in coming years. The mean and standard deviation at 29.16
and 39.08 respectively. Beta of the fund is 1.01 which is more than +1 and hence
is a bit volatile than market. The Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen are 0.56, 21.62 and
7.26 respectively.
 ICICI Prudential Banking & Financial Services Fund: The fund had higher
fund returns than the market return but decreased drastically in 2011 to below
market return and fluctuated frequently in coming years. The mean and standard
89
 Reliance Banking Fund: The fund had higher fund returns than the market
return but decreased drastically in 2011 to below market return and fluctuated
frequently in coming years. The mean and standard deviation at 33.04 and 44.33
respectively.
 UTI Banking Sector Fund: The fund had higher fund returns than the market
return but decreased drastically in 2011 to below market return and fluctuated
frequently in coming years. The mean and standard deviation at 28.85 and 43.95
respectively.
5.2 SUGGESTION:
Based on the analysis and the ranking of the funds under the performance evaluation
measures such as Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen ratios, the investor can invest in the top
most ranked funds as the risk is high in all the funds but these top funds are a better
investment than other funds.
Investors can invest in sectors such as FMCG, Pharma & Healthcare and Technology
funds more than investing in Banking & Financial, Infrastructure and other sector
funds.
90
5.3 CONCLUSION:
The performances of various selected mutual funds have been examined under
various parameters. The collected data have been tabulated, analysed and interpreted
with BSE- SENSEX as the benchmark.
The study helped in having a clear understanding of the mutual fund industry and the
way it functions. This study helps an investor to decide out of the selected mutual
funds which fund is worth investing. In company’s perspective this study will
definitely help the company to provide research based options for investment.
The performance evaluation measures helps to achieve the overall objective of the
study and to calculate return & risk and applying the same into Sharpe, Treynor and
Jensen ratios and rank the funds, which in turn help investors in selecting best
investment options.
Based on all three measures the funds which are performing well can be suggested by
the company, such as SBI Pharma Fund, ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund, etc.
91
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ARTICLES
1. BAHL, DR. SARITA; RANI, MEENAKSHI “A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MUTUAL

FUND SCHEMES IN INDIA” International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services &
Management Research Vol.1 Issue 7, July 2012, ISSN 2277 3622
2. BURLAKANTI, DR. KUBERUDU; CHIRUVOORI, RAVI VARMA “PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION OF SELECT EQUITY FUNDS IN INDIA” International Journal of Social
Science & Interdisciplinary Research, ISSN 2277 3630, IJSSIR, Vol. 2 (5), MAY (2013)
3. MRS. P ALEKHYA, “A STUDY ON 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
WEBLIOGRAPHY
1. Ferreira, Miguel A. and Keswani, Aneel and Miguel, Antonio F. and Ramos, Sofia Brito,
“The Determinants of Mutual Fund Performance: A Cross-Country Study” (July 27, 2011).
Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper No. 31. Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available at
SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=947098 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.947098
2. Agrawal, Dr. Deepak, “Measuring Performance of Indian Mutual Funds” (September 15,
2007). Finance India , June 2011. Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1311761
3. Rao, D. N., “Investment Styles and Performance of Equity Mutual Funds in India” (August
6, 2006). Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=922595 or
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.922595
4. Panwar, Sharad and Madhumathi, R., “Characteristics and Performance Evaluation of

Selected Mutual Funds in India.” Indian Institute of Capital Markets 9th Capital Markets
Conference Paper. Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=876402 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.876402
5. Sapar, Narayan Rao and Madava, Ravindran, “Performance Evaluation of Indian Mutual
Funds.” Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=433100 or
6. Ahmed, Parvez and Gangopadhyay, Partha and Nanda, Sudhir, “Performance of

Emerging Market Mutual Funds and U.S. Monetary Policy” (November 2001). Retrieved
on 25/02/2016 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=289278 or
7. Grewe, Olaf and Stehle, Richard, “The Long-Run Performance of German Stock Mutual
Funds” (May 15, 2001). EFMA 2001 Lugano Meetings. Retrieved on 25/02/2016 Available
at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=271452 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.271452
92
93
ANNEXURE
Calculated values of Standard Deviation, Beta, Sharpe, Treynor and Jensen

Mutual Fund Standard Beta Sharpe Treynor Jensen
Deviation
Franklin Infotech Fund (G) 48.87 1.25 0.60 23.65 11.45
DSP Blackrock Technology.com 40.02 1.08 0.55 20.31 6.29

(G)
Birla Sun Life New Millennium 33.80 0.84 0.57 22.94 7.11
(G)
ICICI Prudential Technology Fund 45.81 1.21 0.76 28.83 17.37
(G)
Sahara R.E.A.L Fund (G) 35.05 0.85 0.49 20.18 4.87
SBI Magnum Comma Fund (G) 40.72 1.20 0.21 7.23 (8.70)
UTI Transportation & Logistics 53.96 1.50 0.80 28.70 21.42

Fund (G)
UTI Energy Fund (G) 32.58 0.96 0.22 7.35 (6.82)
Reliance Media & Entertainment 32.21 0.84 0.65 24.95 8.85

Fund (G)
ICICI Prudential FMCG Fund (G) 21.40 0.57 1.15 43.25 16.33
SBI Pharma Fund (G) 27.90 0.80 1.24 43.67 23.23
UTI Pharma & Healthcare Fund 24.54 0.70 1.04 36.57 15.46
(G)
Reliance Pharma Fund (G) 40.29 1.19 0.90 30.35 18.94
SBI Infrastructure Fund- Sr 1 (G) 35.61 1.00 0.23 8.01 (6.47)
Canara Robeco Infrastructure Fund 39.46 1.07 0.50 18.63 4.46

(G)
Religare Invesco Infrastructure 39.34 0.95 0.39 16.29 1.74
Fund (G)
Kotak Infrastructure & Economic 43.21 1.14 0.47 18.02 4.05
LIC NOMURA MF Infrastructure 33.49 0.94 0.26 9.21 (4.93)
Fund (G)
94
L & T Infrastructure Fund (G) 37.80 1.01 0.36 13.69 (0.77)
DSP Blackrock T.I.G.E.R Fund 38.51 1.06 0.42 15.09 0.67

(G)
UTI Infrastructure Fund (G) 38.09 1.02 0.24 9.15 (5.40)
Sahara Banking and Financial 54.29 1.58 0.52 17.93 5.47

Services Fund (G)
Religare Invesco Banking Fund 39.08 1.01 0.56 21.62 7.26
(G)
ICICI Prudential Banking & 44.29 1.14 0.60 23.30 10.06
Reliance Banking Fund (G) 44.33 1.17 0.58 22.04 8.88
UTI Banking Sector Fund (G) 43.95 1.16 0.49 18.71 4.91
95

Performance Evaluation of Sharekhan Ltd. With Other Mutual Fund Companies

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Performance Evaluation of Sharekhan Ltd. With Other Mutual Fund Companies

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Internship Report on

“A Study on Performance Evaluation of Selected

VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, BELGAUM

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

Master of Business Administration

Under the Guidance of

This is to certify that Shamanth U bearing USN 1PE14MBA57, is a

Mrs. Divya Mathur Dr. R. Duraipandian Dr. J. Suryaprasad

Name of the Examiner Signature with date

I, Shamanth U, hereby declare that the internship report titled “A Study

I have undergone a summer project for a period of 10 weeks. I further

Place: (Signature of the student)

First and foremost I, Shamanth U, bearing USN 1PE14MBA57, would

I would like to convey my sincere regards to Dr. R. Duraipandian,

I would like to convey my sincere regards to Mr. Vinay R K, Branch

I would like to convey my sincere regards to Mrs. Divya Mathur,

Chapter 1 Introduction………………………………………............ 1-7

Chapter 2 Industry and Company profile…………………………… 8-17

Chapter 3 Theoretical Background of the Study……………………. 18-23

Chapter 4 Data Analysis and interpretation…………………………. 24-84

Chapter 5 Summary of Findings, suggestions and Conclusion……… 85-91

Graph-4.3 Comparing return of Sensex with return of Birla Sun 31

The title of study “A Study on Performance Evaluation of Selected Mutual Funds at

1.1 Introduction about the Internship

The opportunity to work as an intern in Sharekhan Ltd was educational and

Along with offering suggestions to investors, it also helps me to understand the

“A STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SELECTED MUTUAL

1.3 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1.4 NEED FOR THE STUDY

1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 To evaluate the performance of selected mutual funds by using various portfolio

 To suggest investors based on the outcomes of the study.

 The study covers twenty six sectoral mutual funds.

1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.8 LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Dr. Kuberudu Burlakanti and Ravi Varma Chiruvoori (2013)

3. Mrs. P. Alekhya (2012)

4. Miguel A Ferreira, Antonio F Miguel and Sofiann Ramos (2011)

7. Sharad Panwar and Dr. Madhumathi (2006)

9. Parvez Ahmed, Partha Gangopadhyay and Sudhir Nanda (2001)

10. Richard Stehle and Olaf Grewe (2001)

1.9 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

2.1 INDUSTRY PROFILE

The industry composition is comprised of various types of businesses providing

INDIAN STOCK EXCHANGE

LEADING STOCK EXCHANGES IN INDIA

 Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE)

1. BOMBAY STOCK EXCHANGE (BSE)

2. NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE

On its recognition as a stock exchange under the Securities Contracts (Regulation)

Its Board comprises of senior executives from promoter institutions, eminent

LEADING PLAYERS IN STOCK MARKET

 Motilal Oswal Securities

 Angel Broking Limited

 Kotak Securities Limited

 Karvy Stock Broking Limited

 Anand Rathi Securities Limited.

PHASE 1: 1964 – 1987

PHASE 2: 1987 – 1993 (ENTRY OF PUBLIC SECTOR FUNDS)

PHASE 3: 1993 – 2003 (ENTRY OF PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDS)

ASSOCIATION OF MUTUAL FUNDS IN INDIA

BACKGOUND OF THE COMPANY:

Sharekhan has established category leadership through pioneering initiatives like