Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund vs JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (
Aggressive Hybrid Fund · Direct Plan – Growth · Compared on official AMFI NAV data · NAVs as of 10-Jul-2026
| Metric | Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund | JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( |
|---|---|---|
| Latest NAV | ₹75.59 | ₹136.71 |
| 1-Year Return | +0.97% | -3.67% |
| 3-Year Return (CAGR) | +15.70% | +16.40% |
| 5-Year Return (CAGR) | N/A | N/A |
| Volatility (1Y, annualised) | 10.2% | 12.3% |
| Max Drawdown | −12.0% | −17.0% |
| Fund House | Edelweiss Mutual Fund | JM Financial Mutual Fund |
Growth of ₹10,000
If you had invested ₹10,000 in each fund
Embed this chart on your site (free)
Copy this code into your website or blog. It stays up to date automatically.
<iframe src="https://moneydock.in/embed/fund-compare/edelweiss-aggressive-hybrid-fund-vs-jm-aggressive-hybrid-fund" width="100%" height="520" style="border:1px solid #e5e7eb;border-radius:12px;max-width:760px" title="Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund vs JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( by MoneyDock" loading="lazy"></iframe> <p style="font-size:12px">Powered by <a href="https://moneydock.in" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MoneyDock</a></p>
See the embed documentation for all widgets, sizing options and usage terms.
Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund vs JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (: which is better?
Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund and JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( are both aggressive hybrid fund mutual funds (direct plan, growth option). This comparison uses each fund's official AMFI NAV history — the same daily data the fund houses publish — to compare returns, volatility and drawdowns side by side.
On 3-year returns (annualised), JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( leads with +16.40% against +15.70% — a gap of about 0.70 percentage points per year over that period.
Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund has been the steadier fund over the past year, with annualised volatility of 10.2% versus 12.3%. Looking at worst falls, Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund's deepest drawdown in the stored history is −12.0% against −17.0% for JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (.
Which fund suits you depends on your horizon and appetite for swings: the higher-return fund is only the better pick if you can hold through its rougher months. Use the ₹10,000 growth chart above to see how each fund actually behaved through market cycles, and consider consulting a SEBI-registered adviser before investing. This comparison is informational, not investment advice.
Key takeaways
- JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( has delivered higher 3-year returns (+16.40% vs +15.70%).
- Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund has shown lower volatility over the trailing year.
- Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund has had the shallower maximum drawdown (−12.0%).
Frequently Asked Questions
Which fund has given higher returns — Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund or JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (?
Over the past 3 year period, JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund ( has delivered higher returns: +16.40% versus +15.70% annualised. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which fund is less risky — Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund or JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (?
Based on the trailing year, Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund has shown lower day-to-day volatility (Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund: 10.2%, JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (: 12.3% annualised). Volatility and drawdowns describe past behaviour, not future safety — both funds carry the market risk of their category.
Can I invest in both Edelweiss Aggressive Hybrid Fund and JM Aggressive Hybrid Fund (?
Yes — many investors split a SIP across two funds. If both funds are from the same category, remember they will hold overlapping stocks, so diversification benefits may be smaller than they appear. Check each scheme's portfolio before doubling up within one category.
More Aggressive Hybrid Fund comparisons
Returns, volatility and drawdowns are computed from official AMFI NAV history for direct-growth plans and may differ slightly from fund-house factsheets due to date conventions. Mutual fund investments are subject to market risks. This comparison is for informational purposes only — not investment advice.