Quantum Dynamic Term Fund vs UTI - Gilt Fund
Direct Plan, Growth option · Data as on 30-10-2026
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund is a Dynamic Bond fund and UTI - Gilt Fund is a Gilt fund. In the 3 years to 30-10-2026, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) returned 6.7% a year and UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) returned 6.3% a year. Quantum Dynamic Term Fund charges 0.50% a year and UTI - Gilt Fund 0.47% (Direct plans). Their portfolios overlap 21.1%: they hold 2 of the same securities.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund
Dynamic Bond
- 3 year return
- 6.7%
- Expense ratio
- 0.50%
- NAV
- ₹22.51
Which is better, Quantum Dynamic Term or UTI - Gilt? Key differences
It depends on what you want from the fund. These are the differences in numbers, from the data on this page.
- Quantum Dynamic Term returned more over 5 years: 6.0% a year against 5.4%.
- Quantum Dynamic Term returned more over 3 years: 6.7% a year against 6.3%.
- UTI - Gilt costs less: 0.47% a year against 0.50% (Direct plans).
- Quantum Dynamic Term swung less over 3 years: a standard deviation of 2.3% a year against 2.6%.
- Quantum Dynamic Term fell less in its worst fall since 21-05-2015: −3.2% against −3.7%.
- UTI - Gilt is the larger fund: ₹415 Cr against ₹84 Cr.
- Their portfolios overlap 21.1%: 2 of the same holdings.
Past returns do not promise future returns. This page is information, not investment advice.
Key facts
From each fund's scheme summary document and AMFI
| Fact | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund | UTI - Gilt Fund |
|---|---|---|
| Fund house | Quantum Mutual Fund | UTI Mutual Fund |
| Category | Dynamic Bond | Gilt |
| AUM | ₹84 Cr (30-09-2026) | ₹415 Cr (30-09-2026) |
| NAV | ₹22.51 (Direct) | ₹67.32 (Direct) |
| Expense ratio (Direct) | 0.50% | 0.47% |
| Expense ratio (Regular) | 1.01% | 0.85% |
| Riskometer | Moderate | Moderate |
| Benchmark | CRISIL Dynamic Bond A-III Index | CRISIL Dynamic Gilt Index |
| Launch date | 19-05-2015 | 21-01-2002 |
| Minimum investment | ₹500 | Regular Plan-Growth- Rs.500, Regular Plan-Reinvestment of IDCW- Rs.20000, Regular Plan-Payout of IDCW- Rs.20000, Direct Plan-Growth- Rs.500, Direct Plan-Reinvestment of IDCW- Rs.20000, Direct Plan-Payout of IDCW- Rs.20000, |
| Lock in | None | None |
| Fund managers | Sneha Pandey, Mayur Chauhan | Pankaj Pathak FM 1, Not Applicable FM 2, Not Applicable FM 3, Not Applicable FM 4 |
| Exit load | Nil | Nil |
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Returns Comparison
Returns as on 30-10-2026. Up to one year they are absolute returns. Longer periods are a rate per year.
| Fund | 1M | 3M | 6M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | 10Y |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | −0.57% | −1.24% | +1.44% | +2.02% | +6.69% | +6.03% | +6.65% |
| UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) | −1.12% | −1.53% | +0.15% | +3.11% | +6.31% | +5.41% | +6.72% |
| Dynamic Bond average | −0.48% | −0.66% | +1.80% | +3.05% | +6.70% | +5.98% | +6.68% |
| Gilt average | −0.69% | −1.34% | +1.62% | +2.12% | +6.19% | +5.46% | +6.64% |
Category average: the average of the 22 Dynamic Bond funds and the 28 Gilt funds, same plan type.
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Year-wise Returns
| Year | Quantum Dynamic TermQuantum Dynamic Term | UTI - GiltUTI - Gilt |
|---|---|---|
| 2026to date | +1.63% | +2.33% |
| 2025 | +6.40% | +5.35% |
| 2024 | +9.67% | +9.20% |
| 2023 | +7.49% | +6.96% |
| 2022 | +4.56% | +3.23% |
| 2021 | +3.28% | +2.56% |
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Rolling Returns
Every holding period of both funds
Rolling returns
Every 3-year holding period, 2,045 of them, one for each trading day from 21-05-2018 to 30-10-2026: the yearly return (CAGR) of each, plotted on the day it ended. One lucky or unlucky start day cannot flatter or hide a fund.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
to
Jan 2019Jun 2017
to
Jun 2020Dec 2018
to
Dec 2021May 2020
to
May 2023Oct 2021
to
Oct 2024Feb 2023
to
Feb 2026
How the periods spread
| Fund | Below 0% | 0-5% | 5-10% | 10-15% | 15-20% | 20-25% | Above 25% | Mean | Median | Lowest | Highest |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantum Dynamic Term | 0.0 | 3.2 | 96.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 7.3% | 7.5% | 4.5% | 9.2% |
| UTI - Gilt | 0.0 | 12.0 | 86.4 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 7.3% | 7.4% | 3.6% | 10.7% |
The table shows the % of periods in each return band; a darker cell holds more of them. Lumpsum: the yearly rate (CAGR) from a period's first NAV to its last. SIP: the XIRR of the monthly instalments. Every fund is measured over the days all of them have, from 21-05-2015. Past returns do not promise future returns.
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: SIP and Lumpsum Returns
What the same monthly or one-time investment would be worth in each fund today, from their own NAV history
Growth of an investment
₹10,000 on the first trading day of every month, from 21-05-2015 to 30-10-2026: 138 instalments, ₹13,80,000 in all.
| Investment | Invested | Value now | Gain | Return a year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantum Dynamic TermQuantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | ₹13,80,000 | ₹20,32,476 | ₹6,52,476 | 6.5% |
| UTI - GiltUTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) | ₹13,80,000 | ₹20,12,038 | ₹6,32,038 | 6.4% |
Quantum Dynamic TermQuantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - GiltUTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
Amount invested
From each plan's published NAV (Growth option), over the same days. Return a year: XIRR for a SIP, CAGR for a lumpsum, shown for a year or more. It does not include exit load, stamp duty or tax. Past returns do not promise future returns.
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Risk and Drawdowns
How much each fund swings, and the worst fall over the same days
Risk and return
| Measure | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) |
|---|---|---|
| Return (CAGR) | +2.02% | +3.11% |
| Standard deviation | 2.17% | 2.46% |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.49 | -0.87 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.98 | -1.18 |
| Maximum drawdown | −2.1% (23-10-2026) | −2.6% (23-10-2026) |
| Beta | -- | -- |
| Alpha | -- | -- |
From daily NAVs, 30-10-2025 to 30-10-2026. Standard deviation: how much the daily value swings, scaled to a year. Sharpe: return above the risk-free rate (NSE's overnight rate index) per unit of swing. Sortino: the same, counting only the falls. Beta and alpha compare each fund with its own benchmark's TRI.
| Measure | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) |
|---|---|---|
| Return (CAGR) | +6.69% | +6.31% |
| Standard deviation | 2.28% | 2.63% |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.29 | 0.11 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.42 | 0.15 |
| Maximum drawdown | −2.1% (23-10-2026) | −3.2% (26-08-2025) |
| Beta | -- | -- |
| Alpha | -- | -- |
From daily NAVs, 30-10-2023 to 30-10-2026. Standard deviation: how much the daily value swings, scaled to a year. Sharpe: return above the risk-free rate (NSE's overnight rate index) per unit of swing. Sortino: the same, counting only the falls. Beta and alpha compare each fund with its own benchmark's TRI.
| Measure | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) |
|---|---|---|
| Return (CAGR) | +6.03% | +5.41% |
| Standard deviation | 2.07% | 2.25% |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.11 | -0.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.16 | -0.24 |
| Maximum drawdown | −2.1% (23-10-2026) | −3.2% (26-08-2025) |
| Beta | -- | -- |
| Alpha | -- | -- |
From daily NAVs, 29-10-2021 to 30-10-2026. Standard deviation: how much the daily value swings, scaled to a year. Sharpe: return above the risk-free rate (NSE's overnight rate index) per unit of swing. Sortino: the same, counting only the falls. Beta and alpha compare each fund with its own benchmark's TRI.
| Measure | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) |
|---|---|---|
| Return (CAGR) | +7.31% | +7.78% |
| Standard deviation | 2.71% | 3.70% |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.64 | 0.47 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.95 | 0.69 |
| Maximum drawdown | −3.2% (22-02-2017) | −8.1% (19-08-2013) |
| Beta | -- | -- |
| Alpha | -- | -- |
From daily NAVs, 21-05-2015 to 30-10-2026. Standard deviation: how much the daily value swings, scaled to a year. Sharpe: return above the risk-free rate (NSE's overnight rate index) per unit of swing. Sortino: the same, counting only the falls. Beta and alpha compare each fund with its own benchmark's TRI.
Drawdowns
How far below its previous high each one was on every day: the falls an investor had to sit through. 0% means it was at a new high.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
| Fund | Worst fall | High before it | Bottom | Back at the high | Time to climb back | Below its high today |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct) | −3.2% | 24-11-2016 | 22-02-2017 | 22-05-2017 | 3 months | −1.9% |
| UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct) | −3.7% | 06-09-2017 | 22-02-2018 | 05-04-2018 | 42 days | −2.1% |
From daily values since 21-05-2015, the first day every fund has.
Rolling standard deviation
Whether the swings have grown or calmed over time: the standard deviation of daily changes over every 1-year window, scaled to a year, plotted on the window's last day. Higher means a bumpier ride.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
Whether the swings have grown or calmed over time: the standard deviation of daily changes over every 3-year window, scaled to a year, plotted on the window's last day. Higher means a bumpier ride.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
Whether the swings have grown or calmed over time: the standard deviation of daily changes over every 5-year window, scaled to a year, plotted on the window's last day. Higher means a bumpier ride.
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (Direct)
UTI - Gilt Fund (Direct)
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Portfolio Overlap
From each fund's latest monthly portfolio: Quantum Dynamic Term Fund, September 2026; UTI - Gilt Fund, September 2026
Holdings in common
- Overlap
- 21.1%
- Held by both
- 2
- Only in Quantum Dynamic Term
- 11
- Only in UTI - Gilt
- 6
| Security | % of Quantum Dynamic Term | % of UTI - Gilt |
|---|---|---|
| 7.71% GOI (MD 18/05/2066) | 11.95% | 12.05% |
| 7.24% GOI (MD 18/08/2055) | 11.34% | 9.15% |
Overlap: for each holding both funds own, the smaller of its two weights, added up. 21.1% means 21.1% of each fund's money sits in positions the other also holds. Matched by ISIN. Cash and hedged positions are left out.
Largest holdings only in Quantum Dynamic Term Fund
| Security | % of fund |
|---|---|
| 7.63% GOI (MD 15/09/2056) | 13.78% |
| 8.95% Power Fin Corp Ltd SR 178 NCD (MD 10/10/28) | 6.11% |
| 7.04% GOI (MD 03/06/2029) | 6.03% |
| 7.33% IRFC NCD Ser 123 (MD 28/08/2027) | 5.96% |
| 7.44% NABARD NCD SR 26F (MD 17/07/2029) | 5.92% |
Largest holdings only in UTI - Gilt Fund
| Security | % of fund |
|---|---|
| 6.90% GSEC MAT - 15/04/2065 | 51.89% |
| 6.79% NI GSEC MAT 15/05/2027 | 6.05% |
| 7.18% TN SDL 26/07/2027 | 3.64% |
| 07.30% UTTARAKHAND SGS Mat - 01/10/2032 | 2.03% |
| 7.77% ANDHRA PRADESH SGS - 10/01/2028 | 1.22% |
Asset and sector split
Share of each fund, from its latest monthly portfolio
Asset allocation
| Asset | Quantum Dynamic Term | UTI - Gilt |
|---|---|---|
| Equity | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Debt | 80.3% | 86.4% |
| Cash and others | 19.7% | 13.6% |
Quantum Dynamic Term vs UTI - Gilt: Expense Ratio
What each plan charges a year, from AMFI's expense ratio file
| Charge | Quantum Dynamic Term Fund | UTI - Gilt Fund |
|---|---|---|
| Total expense ratio (Direct) | 0.50% | 0.47% |
| Base expense ratio (Direct) | 0.41% | 0.38% |
| Total expense ratio (Regular) | 1.01% | 0.85% |
| Base expense ratio (Regular) | 0.84% | 0.72% |
The expense ratio comes out of the fund's assets every day, so every return on this page is already after it. Base expense ratio: the fund house's own fee. The total adds brokerage, transaction costs, and levies with GST.
More comparisons
Each fund against the others of its category
Compare Quantum Dynamic Term with
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund vs UTI - Gilt Fund: Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between Quantum Dynamic Term Fund and UTI - Gilt Fund?
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund is a Dynamic Bond fund, UTI - Gilt Fund is a Gilt fund, run by Quantum Mutual Fund and UTI Mutual Fund. Their portfolios overlap 21.1%. Quantum Dynamic Term Fund charges 0.50% a year and UTI - Gilt Fund 0.47%.
Which has given higher returns, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund or UTI - Gilt Fund?
Over 1 year: Quantum Dynamic Term Fund +2.02%, UTI - Gilt Fund +3.11%. Over 3 years: Quantum Dynamic Term Fund +6.69% a year, UTI - Gilt Fund +6.31% a year. Over 5 years: Quantum Dynamic Term Fund +6.03% a year, UTI - Gilt Fund +5.41% a year. As on 30-10-2026. Past returns do not promise future returns.
Which has the lower expense ratio, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund or UTI - Gilt Fund?
UTI - Gilt Fund charges less: 0.47% a year against 0.50%. These are the Direct plans' total expense ratios reported to AMFI.
How much do Quantum Dynamic Term Fund and UTI - Gilt Fund overlap?
21.1%. They hold 2 of the same securities, the largest shared ones being 7.71% GOI (MD 18/05/2066), 7.24% GOI (MD 18/08/2055). From each fund's latest monthly portfolio.
Which is riskier, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund or UTI - Gilt Fund?
On SEBI's riskometer, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund is rated Moderate and UTI - Gilt Fund Moderate. Over 3 years, the standard deviation of daily returns was 2.28% and 2.63% a year.
Which is better for SIP, Quantum Dynamic Term Fund or UTI - Gilt Fund?
Over the last 5 years, a monthly SIP of ₹10,000 from 01-10-2021 to 30-10-2026 grew to ₹7,07,166 in Quantum Dynamic Term Fund (XIRR 5.8% a year) and ₹7,00,912 in UTI - Gilt Fund (XIRR 5.4% a year). Both received 61 instalments. Past returns do not promise future returns.
Can I invest in both Quantum Dynamic Term Fund and UTI - Gilt Fund?
Yes. 21.1% of each fund's money sits in the same holdings, so some of the two investments would move together.
Who manages Quantum Dynamic Term Fund and UTI - Gilt Fund?
Quantum Dynamic Term Fund: Sneha Pandey, Mayur Chauhan. UTI - Gilt Fund: Pankaj Pathak FM 1, Not Applicable FM 2, Not Applicable FM 3, Not Applicable FM 4.
Sources: NAV and expense ratio from AMFI. Holdings from each fund house's monthly portfolio statement. Fund facts from each scheme summary document.
This page is information, not investment advice. Mutual fund investments are subject to market risks; read all scheme related documents carefully. Past returns do not promise future returns. Figures come from AMFI, NSE, BSE and each fund house's own documents.