(Submitted for the degree of B.Com.

Honours in Accounting & Finance under the

University of Calcutta)

“ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE OF
FRANKLIN INDIA BLUE CHIP FUND”
Submitted By
Name of the candidate: ANIRBAN GHOSH

Registration No.: 023-1121-0132-10

College Roll No.:

Name of the college: New Alipore College

Supervised by

Name of the Supervisor: SAMYABRATA DAS

Name of the College: New Alipore College

Month & Year of Submission: FEBRUARY, 2013

Annexure-I
Supervisor’s Certificate
This is to certify that Mr. ANIRBAN GHOSH, a student of B.com. Honours in
Accounting & Finance of NEW ALIPORE COLLEGE under the University of Calcutta,
has worked under my supervision and guidance for his/her project work and prepared a
Project Report with the title “ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE OF FRANKLIN
INDIA BLUE CHIP FUND”. The Project Report which he/she is submitting, is his/her
genuine and original work to the best of my knowledge.
Signature:

Place: KOLKATA Name: SAMYABRATA DAS

Date: Designation: ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Name of the College: NEW ALIPORE COLLEGE
Annexure-II
Student’s Declaration
I hereby declare that the Project work “ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE OF
FRANKLIN INDIA BLUE CHIP FUND” submitted by me for the partial fulfilment of
the degree of B.Com. Honours in Accounting & Finance under the university of Calcutta
is my original work and has not been submitted earlier to any other University/Institution
for the fulfilment of the requirement for any course of study.
I also declare that no chapter of this manuscript in whole or in part has been incorporated
in this report from any earlier work done by others or by me. However, extracts of any
literature which has been used for this report has been duly acknowledged providing
details of such literature in the references.
Place: KOLKATA Signature:
Date:
Name: ANIRBAN GHOSH
Registration No: 023-1121-0132-10
Roll No:
CHAPTER 1: Introduction …………………….

CHAPTER 2: Conceptual Framework/National &

International Scenario…………..

CHAPTER 3: Presentation, Analysis

&Findings……

CHAPTER 4: Conclusion & Recommendations….

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Different investment avenues are available to investors. Mutual funds also offer good
investment opportunities to the investors. Like all investments, they also carry certain
risks. The investors should compare the risks and expected yields after adjustment of tax
on various instruments while taking investment decisions. Mutual fund is a mechanism
for pooling the resources by issuing units to the investors and investing funds in securities
in accordance with objectives as disclosed in offer document. Investments in securities
are spread across a wide cross-section of industries and sectors and thus the risk is
reduced.
A mutual fund is just the connecting bridge or a financial intermediary that allows a
group of investors to pool their money together with a predetermined investment
objective. 
A mutual fund is a type of professionally managed collective investment vehicle that
pools money from many investors to purchase securities. A mutual fund is an investment
vehicle that is made up of a pool of funds collected from many investors for the purpose
of investing in securities such as stocks, bonds, money market instruments and similar
assets. Mutual funds are operated by money managers, who invest the fund's capital and
attempt to produce capital gains and income for the fund's investors. A mutual fund's
portfolio is structured and maintained to match the investment objectives stated in its
prospectus.
A mutual fund is not an alternative investment option to stocks and bonds; rather it pools
the money of several investors and invests this in stocks, bonds, money market
instruments and other types of securities. Buying a mutual fund is like buying a small
slice of a big pizza. The owner of a mutual fund unit gets a proportional share of the
fund’s gains, losses, income and expenses.
A mutual fund pools funds from the public and invests them in a diversified portfolio of
securities. So, “pooling” is the key to mutual fund investing. In this way, it establishes a
link between savings and the capital market (Singh, 2006). A mutual fund is nothing but
a diversified portfolio of stocks, bonds, or other securities, which is managed by a
professional money manager or by a management team (Fredman and Wiles, 1997).

Quite simply, a mutual fund is a mediator that brings together a group of people and
invests their money in stocks, bonds and other securities. Each investor owns shares,
which represent a portion of the holdings of the fund. Thus, a mutual fund is one of the
most viable investment options for the common man as it offers an opportunity to invest
in a diversified, professionally managed basket of securities at a relatively low cost.
A Mutual Fund is a trust that pools the savings of a number of investors who share a
common financial goal. The money thus collected is then invested in capital market
instruments such as shares, debentures and other securities. The income earned through
these investments and the capital appreciation realized is shared by its unit holders in
proportion to the number of units owned by them. Thus a Mutual Fund is the most
suitable investment for the common man as it offers an opportunity to invest in a
diversified, professionally managed basket of securities at a relatively low cost. The flow
chart below describes broadly the working of a mutual fund:
Mutual Fund Operation Flow Chart

ORGANISATION OF A MUTUAL FUND

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

ADVANTAGES OF MUTUAL FUNDS

 Professional Management
  Diversification
 Convenient Administration
 Return Potential
 Low Costs
 Liquidity
 Transparency
 Flexibility
 Choice of schemes
 Tax benefits
 Well regulated

TYPES OF MUTUAL FUND SCHEMES

Wide variety of Mutual Fund Schemes exists to cater to the needs such as financial
position, risk tolerance and return expectations etc. The table below gives an overview
into the existing types of schemes in the Industry.

 Introduction to ELSS

The mutual fund industry in India started its journey in 1963 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 can be broadly divided into four distinct phases:
First Phase (1964-87)
Unit Trust of India (UTI) was established on 1963 by an Act of Parliament. It was set up
by the RBI and functioned under the Regulatory and administrative control of the RBI. In
1978, UTI was de-linked from the RBI and the Industrial Development Bank of India
(IDBI) took over the regulatory and administrative control in place of RBI. The first
scheme launched by UTI was Unit Scheme 1964. At the end of 1988 UTI had Rs.6, 700
crores of assets under management.
Second Phase (1987-1993) (Entry of Public Sector Funds)
1987 marked the entry of non- UTI, public sector mutual funds set up by public sector
banks and Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and General Insurance Corporation
of India (GIC). SBI Mutual Fund was the first non- UTI Mutual Fund established in June
1987 followed by Canbank Mutual Fund (Dec 87), Punjab National Bank Mutual Fund
(Aug 89), Indian Bank Mutual Fund (Nov 89), Bank of India (Jun 90), Bank of Baroda
Mutual Fund (Oct 92). LIC established its mutual fund in June 1989 while GIC had set
up its mutual fund in December 1990. At the end of 1993, the mutual fund industry had
assets under management of Rs.47,004crores.
Third Phase (1993-2003) (Entry of Private Sector Funds)
With the entry of private sector funds in 1993, a new era started in the Indian mutual fund
industry, giving the Indian investors a wider choice of fund families. Also, 1993 was the
year in which the first Mutual Fund Regulations came into being, under which all mutual
funds, except UTI were to be registered and governed. The erstwhile Kothari Pioneer
(now merged with Franklin Templeton) was the first private sector mutual fund registered
in July 1993. The 1993 SEBI (Mutual Fund) Regulations were substituted by a more
comprehensive and revised Mutual Fund Regulations in 1996. The industry now
functions under the SEBI (Mutual Fund) Regulations 1996. The number of mutual fund
houses went on increasing, with many foreign mutual funds setting up funds in India and
also the industry has witnessed several mergers and acquisitions. As at the end of January
2003, there were 33 mutual funds with total assets of Rs. 1,21,805crores. The Unit Trust
of India with Rs.44,541crores of assets under management was way ahead of other
mutual funds.

Fourth Phase (since February 2003)

In February 2003, following the repeal of the Unit Trust of India Act 1963, UTI was
bifurcated into two separate entities. One is the Specified Undertaking of the Unit Trust
of India with assets under management of Rs.29,835crores as at the end of January 2003,
representing broadly, the assets of US 64 scheme, assured return and certain other
schemes. The Specified Undertaking of Unit Trust of India, functioning under an
administrator and under the rules framed by Government of India and does not come
under the purview of the Mutual Fund Regulations. The second is the UTI Mutual Fund,
sponsored by SBI, PNB, BOB and LIC. It is registered with SEBI and functions under the
Mutual Fund Regulations. With the bifurcation of the erstwhile UTI which had in March
2000 more than Rs.76,000crores of assets under management and with the setting up of a
UTI Mutual Fund, conforming to the SEBI Mutual Fund Regulations, and with recent
mergers taking place among different private sector funds, the mutual fund industry has
entered its current phase of consolidation and growth.
The graph indicates the growth of assets over the years:

Here, the chosen scheme is an open-ended diversified equity scheme. An open-ended

fund or scheme is one that is available for subscription and repurchase on a continuous
basis. These schemes do not have a fixed maturity period. Investors can conveniently buy
and sell units at Net Asset Value (NAV) related prices which are declared on a daily
basis. The key feature of open-end schemes is liquidity.
An equity fund is one which invests at least 65% in equity or equity-related instruments.
An investment fund that contains a wide array of securities to reduce the amount of risk
in the fund is known as diversified equity fund. Actively maintaining diversification
prevents events that affect one sector from affecting an entire portfolio, make large losses
less likely. The aim of equity funds is to provide capital appreciation over the medium to
long- term. These schemes provide different options to the investors like dividend option,
capital appreciation, etc. and the investors may choose an option depending on their
preferences. Growth schemes are good for investors having a long-term outlook seeking
appreciation over a period of time.

Review of Literature

Several scholarly articles were written over the years on different dimensions of mutual
funds by academicians, researchers, and committees. Performance evaluation of mutual
fund is an area of research in the western countries for more than six decades. Research
on evaluation of performance of mutual fund contributed a lot to the wealth of knowledge
with the help of tools developed by Sharpe, Jensen, Treynor and others. Sharpe’s (1966)
study revealed that in total 19 funds outperformed the benchmark in terms of total risk on
an analysis of 34 funds selected by him. Treynor’s (1966) study with respect to 57
mutual funds revealed that none of the fund managers predicted about the market in terms
of their ability in market timing. Study of Jensen (1968) dealt with the ability of
established fund managers in forming portfolio with undervalued securities. He selected
115 mutual funds as sample. Findings of the study pointed out that the fund managers
were not able to forecast security prices to recover all expenses including research
expenses and fees. Kaura and Jayadev (1995) studied (using Sharpe, Treynor and
Jensen measures) the performance of five growth oriented scheme in 1993-94 and
concluded that Master Gain

91, Can Bonus and IndSagar showed better performance when dealt with systematic risk
and not with total risk. Gupta and Amitabh (2004) dealt with 57 growth schemes for the
period from April 1999 to March 2003. Different evaluation measures like Sharpe,
Treynor, Jensen ratios and regression analysis were used for the study. In conclusion, it
was pointed out that some sample mutual funds performed superior to the market while
others underperformed the market. Tripathy (2008) dealt with thirty one tax planning
schemes(ELSS) in India over the period from December 1995 to January 2004 using
Jensen-Mazuy model and Hendrickson and Merton Model The study pointed out that
due to timing the market in wrong direction fund managers failed to generate returns in
excess of market returns.

Methodology and Objective:

The study is based on secondary data which are obtained from books, journals, finance-
based magazines, and web resources. The effects of ‘Entry Load’ and ‘Exit Load’ have
not been taken into consideration. The “Growth” option of the chosen scheme is taken
into consideration, and not the dividend option. The retail plan is considered for the
purpose of the study, and not the institutional plan.
The main objective of the study is to analyze the performance of the chosen open-ended
diversified equity scheme of Franklin Templeton AMC in the line of risk-return
parameters.

CHAPTER 2:

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK/NATIONAL & INTERNATIONAL SCENARIO

Franklin Templeton's association with India dates back to more than a decade as an
investor. As part of the group's major thrust on investing in markets around the world, the
India office was set up in 1996 as Templeton Asset Management India Pvt. Limited. It
flagged off the mutual fund business with the launch of Templeton India Growth Fund in
September 1996, and since then the business has grown at a steady pace.
Since starting its operations in India, Franklin Templeton has invested a considerable
amount of time, effort and resources towards investor and distributor education in order
to be successful in the long term. This has resulted in various advertising campaigns
aimed at educating investors, participation in seminars and distributor training
programmes. Franklin Templeton has played a pivotal role in steering the industry to its
current stage, and as long term players, it continues to strive to achieve the objective of
'making mutual funds an investment of choice' for both individual and institutional
investors.
In July 2002, Franklin Templeton India acquired Pioneer ITI, another leading fund house
in India to create an organization with rich investment experience over market cycles, one
of the most comprehensive product portfolios, footprint across the country and an in-
house shareholder servicing function. The huge synergies that existed in the two
organizations have helped the business grow at a rapid pace, catapulting the company to
among the top two fund houses in India.
Its vision is to be the premier global investment management organization by offering
high quality investment solutions, providing outstanding service and attracting,
motivating and retaining talented individuals.

The company was founded in 1947 in New York by Rupert H. Johnson, Sr., who ran a
successful retail brokerage firm from an office on Wall Street. He named the company
for US founding father Benjamin Franklin because Franklin epitomized the ideas of
frugality and prudence when it came to saving and investing. The company's first line of
mutual funds, Franklin Custodian Funds, was a series of conservatively managed equity
and bond funds designed to appeal to most investors.

The quantitative growth of the mutual fund industry across the globe has been
phenomenal, especially since 2000. The following tables will substantiate this fact:

Table 2: Worldwide Total Net Assets of Mutual Funds ($ US Million, year-end)

Continent/Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
World 26131494 18920057 22952806 24699170 23779874
 US 12001463 9603649 11120153 11820650 11621595
UK 897460 504681 729141 854413 816537
India 108582 62805 130284 111421 87519
China 434063 276303 381207 364985 339037
Source: Investment Company Fact Book, 2012
The following table will depict the number of mutual funds in selected countries of the
globe:
Table 3: Worldwide Number of Mutual Funds
Continent/Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
World 66347 69032 67551 69518 72657
US 8026 8022 7684 7580 7637
UK 2057 2371 2266 2204 1941
Japan 2997 3333 3656 3905 4196
India 555 551 590 658 680
China 341 429 547 660 831
Source: Investment Company Fact Book, 2012
The quantitative growth (measured in terms of Assets under management) over the years
in Indian mutual fund industry is depicted below:
Table 4: Growth in AUM over the Years
Month and Year AUM (INR crore) Month and Year AUM (INR crore)
March, 1965 25 March, 2005 149554
March, 1987 4564 March, 2006 231862
March, 1993 47000 March, 2007 326388
January, 2003 121805 March, 2008 505152
February, 2003 87190 March, 2009 417300
March, 2003 79464 March, 2010 613979
March, 2004 139616 March, 2011 592250
Source: AMFI
CHAPTER III

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Before analyzing the performance of the chosen scheme, it is worthwhile to look into
some key portfolio statistics of the schemes.
 TABLE 5: Fund At A Glance.

Fund Month&Year Benchmark AUM (as on Equity Debt Cash

of Launch 31st Dec 2012) (%) (%) (%)
Franklin Nov 1993 BSE 5040.4 CR 90.89 0.02 9.09
India Sensex
Bluechip
Source: valueresearchonline.com
* AUM= Assets under management.
The fund has been in existence for more than 19 years. As such, it has witnessed several
ups and downs of the market. Its AUM is one of the largest in the category which
signifies that the investors have confidence in the fund. The fund has heavy exposure
towards equity and very little exposure towards debt. But during adverse times, debt
portion of the portfolio gives some sort of cushion to the fund which is lacking in this
case. Cash component, however, is not very low. Some amount of cash is useful during
adverse market conditions. The various components of the fund are depicted below with
the help of a chart:
100.00%
90.89%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
Series1
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
9.09%
10.00%
0.02%
0.00%
EQUITY DEBT CASH

The following table will depict the top 10 sector holding of the fund:
Table 6: Top 10 Sector Holding of the Fund
Sector Holding (%)
Financial 20.88
Energy 18.13
 Technology 10.43
Healthcare 8.82
Communication 7.44
Metals 6.33
Diversified 5.89
Automobile 3.90
FMCG 3.67
Engineering 3.57
Source: valueresearchonline.com
It is observed that the top 5 sector accounts for more than 65% of the total holdings. The
following chart will depict the top 10 sector holding of the fund:

Holding (%)
25
20.88
20 18.13

15
10.43
10 8.82 Holding (%)
7.44 6.33 5.89
5 3.9 3.67 3.57

0
ial gy gy re
tio
n als ed bi
le CG in
g
anc n er olo hca a et sifi o FM er
E n alt ic M r m e
Fin ch un ve to gin
Te He m Di A u En
m
Co

The annual returns generated by the fund and its benchmark in the last five years from
2008 to 2012 are presented below. Such returns are calculated on the basis of closing
year-end NAV of the fund (Franklin India Bluechip) and closing year-end values of its
benchmark index (BSE Sensex).

Table 7: Annual Return(%)

Fund& Benchmark 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP -48.14 84.89 22.96 -18.25 26.79
BSE Sensex -52.45 81.43 17.43 -24.64 25.7
+/- BSE Sensex 4.31 3.46 5.53 6.39 1.09
 O/U 0 0 0 0 0
Source: valueresearchonline.com
O = Out Perform; U = Under Perform
The fund and its benchmark have generated positive returns in three out of five years
(2009, 2010, and 2012) and they have generated negative returns in the years 2008 and
2011. The fund has outperformed its benchmark in all the years from 2008 to 2012. The
said return figures are arrived at on the basis of year-end NAV of the fund (Franklin India
Blue Chip) and the year-end value of BSE Sensex. The annual returns of the fund and its
benchmark are pictorially presented below:

100
84.89
81.43
80

60

40
26.79
25.7
22.96
17.43 FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP
20 BSE Sensex

0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-20
-18.25
-24.64
-40

-48.14
-60 -52.45

The following table will show the annualized returns of the fund and of the category to
which the fund belongs:
Table 8: Annualized Returns(%)

Fund & Category 1-YR 3-YR 5-YR 7-YR 10-YR

FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP 7.39 8.95 7.12 13.16 25.79
 Category 5.89 6.45 2.13 9.59 19.82
O/U O O O O O
Source: valueresearchonline.com
O = Out Perform
U = Under Perform
It is seen that the fund has been able to outperform its category in all the periods (short-
term, medium-term, and long term). The fact is diagrammatically explained below:

30
25.79
25
19.82
20
13.16 FRANKLIN INDIA
15 BLUECHIP
8.95 9.59 Category
10 7.39 6.45 7.12
5.89
5 2.13

0
1-YR 3-YR 5-YR 7-YR 10-YR

Returns from “Systematic Investment Plan” (SIP) are presented hereunder:

Table 9: SIP Return(%)

Fund 1-YR 3-YR 5-YR 7-YR 10-YR

FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP 18.75 8.17 13.38 11.78 17.94
Source: valueresearchonline.com
Note: SIP= Systematic Investment Plan

In short,
1. Very Short term (i.e. 1-Year) SIP return is very good.
2. Very Long term (i.e. 10-year) SIP return is also excellent.
3. Medium term and long term (5-year, and 7-year) SIP return is very much
satisfactory.
4. However, short-term return (3-year) is not very good.
 5. Further, SIP returns for the scheme in different time periods are in the positive
range, implying that the capital of the investors is very much protected.

Returns from SIP is shown below with the help of a diagram:

SIP RETURN
18.75
20 17.94
18
16 13.38
14 11.78
12 FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP
10 8.17
8
6
4
2
0
1-YR 3-YR 5-YR 7-YR 10-YR

Various measures of risk are presented below:

Table 6: Risk Measurement

Fund S.D Sharpe Ratio Beta R-Squared Alpha

FRANKLIN INDIA BLUECHIP 15.66 0.34 0.81 0.97 2.71
Source: valueresearchonline.com
For the purpose of Risk Measures the following points are important to be taken note of:
Standard Deviation
Standard deviation measures the total risk and lower figure of standard deviation signifies
lower risk for the fund. With the increase in standard deviation risk will increase.
Likewise, with the decrease in standard deviation risk will decrease.

Sharpe Ratio
Sharpe Ratio = (Rp – Rf) / SDp
[Where, Rp = Fund Return. Rf = Risk-Free Rate. SDp = Stander Deviation of the Fund]
If Sharpe Ratio is positive (Rp>Rf) then it’s good in the sense that the fund has been able
to generate returns in excess of the risk-free rate. Here, the Sharpe ratio of the fund is
positive which signifies that the fund has performed better than the risk-free instrument.
Beta(β)
 Beta of the benchmark index is taken as 1 (one).
 If fund β>1 then it is Aggressive.
 If fund β<1 then it’s Conservative/Defensive.
Here β = 0.81
If the benchmark (S&P BSE Mid Cap) increases by 100, the fund will increase by
81(100*0.81)
Likewise, if the benchmark (S&P BSE Mid Cap) decreases by 100, the fund will decrease
by 81(100*0.81)
Further, the fund is a defensive one in comparison to its benchmark.
R –SQUARED (RSQ)
RSQ = Co-efficient of Determination
The value of RSQ ranges between 0 and 1. RSQ value closer to 1 implies that there is
strong correlation between the fund and its benchmark.

Hear RSQ value is 0.97

So, it can be inferred that there exists very strong correlation between the scheme and its
benchmark index. Further, such RSQ value also implies that the beta of the scheme is
very much reliable.
Alpha(α)

If Alpha (α) is positive then it is good. The positive alpha means that the fund has
outperformed its benchmark.
Hear Alpha is 2.71
Since it is positive it can be said that the fund has outperformed its benchmark. The
outperformance is also very significant. Such a positive value of Jensen Alpha of the fund
signifies that the fund managers are efficient in selecting undervalued assets.

CHAPTER 4:
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On the whole, it can be said that the fund has stood out in terms of risk-return parameters.
It has positive alpha, very satisfactory RSQ value, and beta of 0.81. It is not aggressive
and at the same time it has very strong correlation with the benchmark. It has positive
Sharpe ratio which is also a good sign because it implies that it has been able to generate
more returns than the risk-free instrument. Further, in all occasions, it has generated more
return (annualized) than its peers. The SIP returns for most of the periods are excellent.

However, there are certain limitations of the study which are enumerated below:
a) The study involves performance analysis of scheme from only one fund house, i.e.,
Franklin mutual fund. The mutual fund industry in India has many AMCs who keep the
market competitive.
(b) The study deals with only one open-ended diversified scheme while the mutual fund
industry of India has a large basket of such schemes managed by fund managers of
different AMCs.
(c) The study is based on a few traditional measures to analyze the performance of the
chosen mutual fund scheme. There are many more measures with their specific
interpretations to analyze the performance of mutual funds.
(d) The present benchmark of the scheme is assumed to be the benchmark throughout the
period of study. Benchmark change, if any, between the study periods is not taken into
consideration.
(e) The period of study involves three year, five year, seven year and ten year time frame
while the scheme has been in existence for much more than the chosen time frame.

Nevertheless, the findings of the study are expected to be relevant in many respects. The
findings should provide a basis for understanding the performance of the chosen open-
ended diversified scheme of Sundaram mutual fund. Further, the study should encourage
researchers and institutions to undertake similar or different kind of analysis for the
benefit of all stakeholders associated with mutual funds.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books:
Fredman, Albert J & Wiles, Russ (1997): “How Mutual Funds Work”, Prentice Hall,
New Delhi
Singh, Jaspal (2006): “Mutual Funds: Growth, Performance and Prospects”, Deep &
Deep Publication, New Delhi
Articles:
Gupta, O P and Gupta, Amitabh (2004): “Performance Evaluation of Selected Indian
Mutual Fund Schemes: Empirical Study”, The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, pp81-
98
Jensen, M.C (1968): “the Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945-1964”,
Journal of Finance, vol 23, No 2, pp389-416
Kaura, M.N., and Jayadev M., (1995): “Performance of Growth Oriented Mutual
Funds: An Evaluation”, The ICFAI Journal of Applied Finance, Vol. 1, No.1, January,
pp1-14.
Sharpe, William F (1966): “Mutual Fund Performance”, Journal of Business, 39,
pp119-138
Treynor, J.L. and Mazuy, K.K (1966): “Can Mutual Funds Outguess the Market”,
Harvard Business Review, 44, July-August, pp131-36
Tripathy, Nalini Prava (2008): “Market Timing Abilities and Mutual Fund
Performance: An Empirical Investigation into Equity Linked Saving Schemes”,
Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of Management, June, pp127-138
Websites:
www.valueresearchonline.com
www.amfiindia.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_fund
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/diversifiedfund.asp#axzz2MPNoEdjT
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mutualfund.asp#axzz2MPNoEdjT
http://www.mutualfundsindia.com/mfbasic.asp
http://www.moneycontrol.com/planning_desk/understandingmf.php?step1=1
http://www.sebi.gov.in/faq/mf_faq.html
http://www.idfcmf.com/mutualfundsbasics.aspx
http://www.franklintempletonindia.com/