Mid Cap Fund · head to head · AMFI NAVs

Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund vs UTI Mid Cap Fund: SIP returns compared

Same ₹10,000 monthly SIP, same dates, Direct plans: over the last 5 years Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund is worth ₹8.93 L (XIRR 16.4%) and UTI Mid Cap Fund ₹7.68 L (XIRR 10.2%) — Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund ahead by ₹1,24,292. Across every 5-year SIP since Jan 2013, Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund finished ahead in 93 of 106 and UTI Mid Cap Fund in 13.

Same SIP in both funds · real NAVsLive

Historical simulation on actual NAVs — not a forecast and not investment advice. Disclaimer

₹10,000
6%

Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund: invested — over — instalments; valued at NAV of —:

Value today
—
XIRR —
Post-tax
—
If fully redeemed today
Real XIRR
—
After assumed inflation

YearInvestedNippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund valueXIRR to date

₹10,000 a month in each: what it became

Each row is a monthly SIP ending today (1 Oct 2026), Direct plans. Post-tax assumes everything is redeemed today with no other capital gains this year.

SIP periodInvestedNippon India Growth Mid Cap FundXIRRUTI Mid Cap FundXIRRPost-tax (both)
1 year₹1,20,000₹1.20 L-0.0%₹1.19 L-1.5%₹1.20 L / ₹1.19 L
3 years₹3,60,000₹4.03 L7.8%₹3.80 L3.7%₹4.03 L / ₹3.80 L
5 years₹6,00,000₹8.93 L16.4%₹7.68 L10.2%₹8.72 L / ₹7.63 L
10 years₹12,00,000₹33.07 L19.5%₹25.76 L14.8%₹30.63 L / ₹24.23 L

Every 5-year SIP, head to head

We started the same SIP in both funds in every month both have NAVs for — 106 SIPs, the first starting Jan 2013. Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund finished ahead in 88% of them; the median gap was 2.5 percentage points a year in Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund's favour.

Downside on the same dates: Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund's worst 5-year SIP returned -5.8% a year (started Apr 2015) and 3 of 106 lost money; UTI Mid Cap Fund's worst returned -7.7% (started Apr 2015) and 3 lost money.

-10%0%10%20%30%40%Jan 2013Oct 2021
Nippon India Growth Mid Cap FundUTI Mid Cap Fund

XIRR of every 5-year monthly SIP by the month it started. Gap = Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund minus UTI Mid Cap Fund, percentage points a year.

WindowSIPs comparedAhead (Nippon / UTI)Median gapWorst gapBest gap
3-year SIPs13071% / 29%+3.2 pp-14.0 ppstarted Jan 2013+11.1 ppstarted Jan 2021
5-year SIPs10688% / 12%+2.5 pp-4.8 ppstarted Apr 2013+8.1 ppstarted May 2020

Against an index fund, and the cost of the Regular plan

  • Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund beat a plain Nifty Midcap 150 index fund in 100% of 49 rolling 3-year SIPs (median gap +2.6 pp a year) — Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund vs Nifty Midcap 150 index fund.
  • Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund: the Regular plan of the same 10-year SIP ended ₹1,56,306 below Direct.
  • UTI Mid Cap Fund beat a plain Nifty Midcap 150 index fund in 2% of 49 rolling 3-year SIPs (median gap -4.4 pp a year) — UTI Mid Cap Fund vs Nifty Midcap 150 index fund.
  • UTI Mid Cap Fund: the Regular plan of the same 10-year SIP ended ₹1,38,486 below Direct.

Questions

Which has given better SIP returns, Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund or UTI Mid Cap Fund?

Over the last 5 years a ₹10,000 monthly SIP (Direct plans) is worth ₹8.93 L in Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund (XIRR 16.4%) and ₹7.68 L in UTI Mid Cap Fund (XIRR 10.2%). Past returns don't tell you which will do better next.

Has Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund beaten UTI Mid Cap Fund consistently?

In 88% of 106 rolling 5-year SIPs started on the same dates (from Jan 2013), Nippon India Growth Mid Cap Fund ended ahead of UTI Mid Cap Fund (Direct plans). The median difference was +2.5 percentage points a year.

Where does this data come from?

Official daily NAVs published by AMFI. SIP instalments fall on the first business day of each month; both funds are compared on identical dates. Updated monthly.

Comparison on official AMFI NAVs, SIP on the first business day of each month, identical dates for both funds. It shows what happened, not which fund to buy — past performance does not indicate future returns. sipcalculatorhub.com is not a SEBI-registered investment adviser. Methodology.

More comparisons