Widely read:
Anand Kumar/AI-Generated Image
Summary: The penalty for size in small-cap investing is real and getting worse. It surfaces the moment you watch a single fund grow, and the hard truth is that most of today's giants earned their finest returns before they were giants.
When the SBI Small Cap Fund managed about Rs 792 crore, it beat its benchmark by 17.5 percentage points a year on a three-year rolling basis. Today, at Rs 37,141 crore, about 47 times as much, it trails that same benchmark. Same fund house. Same approach. The only thing that changed was the size. That was enough.
SBI is not a special case. Track any small-cap fund against its own assets over the past decade, and the pattern repeats. The alpha, the return earned over and above the Nifty Smallcap 250, holds while the fund is small and fades as it grows heavy. Nippon, DSP, Kotak and Axis all had their best years lean, and their worst once large.
How the five biggest small-cap funds fared as they grew
Barring one, every stalwart’s alpha shrank sharply in a decade
| Fund | AUM grew from → to (Rs crore) | Alpha then → alpha now |
|---|---|---|
| Nippon India | 6,542 → 72,673 | 17.7 → 0.2 |
| HDFC | 951 → 38,168 | -1.1 → -4.5 |
| SBI | 792 → 37,141 | 17.5 → -6.9 |
| Quant | 1 → 30,373 | -9.2 → -0.6 |
| Axis | 304 → 27,364 | 2.8 → -2.8 |
| Data from January 2016 to April 2026. Alpha is the fund’s excess return over the Nifty Smallcap 250 over a three-year period. | ||
Quant looks like the exception. Its alpha rose as it grew. But look at where it started: Rs 1 crore, in a stretch when small caps were running hot. Measure anything from a base that tiny and the early number flatters. Quant, in fact, peaked near 30 when it was about Rs 3,000 crore and has since slid as assets have grown tenfold. So no. Not an exception. The same fund, telling the same story, just from a starting point that hides it.
The first reason: a position you cannot reverse
Why does size eat returns? The first reason is the one a small-cap manager fights every day. Liquidity.
SEBI now requires every small-cap and mid-cap fund to disclose how long it would take to sell its portfolio under stress. The numbers are blunt. SBI would need about 65 days to sell even half its book. DSP needs 52. HDFC needs 51. ITI, a small fund, needs a single day. Sixty-five days is more than two months. In a falling market, the manager who wants out must wait that long to clear half the holding, while the investor sits through the entire crash. The illiquidity that was meant to pay a premium becomes the thing that traps you in the fall.
The AMFI stress test, across the category
Large funds with high small-cap exposure carry the longest exits
| Fund | AUM (Rs crore) | Small-cap (%) | Days to sell half |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nippon India | 72,673 | 73 | 29 |
| HDFC | 38,168 | 83 | 51 |
| SBI | 37,141 | 95 | 65 |
| Quant | 30,374 | 71 | 65 |
| Axis | 27,364 | 78 | 23 |
| Bandhan | 25,346 | 78 | 14 |
| DSP | 17,906 | 95 | 52 |
| Kotak | 17,417 | 81 | 39 |
| Tata | 11,330 | 92 | 48 |
| Invesco | 11,038 | 67 | 12 |
| ITI | 2,937 | 71 | 1 |
| Based on the AMFI stress test disclosure for April 2026 | |||
The mechanism is simple. A fund running a few hundred crores slips in and out of a small stock without a trace. A fund running Rs 37,000 crore pushes the price up as it buys and down as it sells, and the bigger stake it must hold to matter is the harder one to escape. In a rising market, this bleeds returns. In a falling one, the holding becomes a cage.
But size is only half the story. Nippon is the largest fund of all and still clears half its book in 29 days, faster than SBI, DSP or Tata, none of which are even half its size. Read asset size and small-cap exposure together, and that is where the real trap is sprung.
The second reason: the pond is too small
The second reason is structural. India has only so many small companies worth owning, and a large fund runs through them fast. To hold a position that counts, say 1 per cent of the fund, in a Rs 500 crore company, a Rs 40,000 crore fund would have to buy the whole company. It cannot. So it compromises. It can spread the money across a long tail of names. Nippon holds 247 stocks and Bandhan 251, which keeps them liquid but dilutes the high-conviction bets that drive real outperformance. Or it can stay concentrated and give up the ability to trade. There is no third door.
Size limits consistency more than returns
Make no mistake. The giants still make money. Nippon, Quant and Bandhan all sit in positive territory over three and five years, and Bandhan tops the category. Size shapes the odds without dictating the outcome. A skilled manager can still win from a large base: Nippon by cutting concentration, Bandhan by stock-picking sharp enough to carry 251 names. There is honest context too. Small caps ran red-hot when these funds were small and have since cooled, so part of the fading alpha owes to the cycle, not size. What pins it back on size is the gradient: the largest funds faded hardest, while several that stayed small kept their edge.
What it means for your money
A large small-cap fund carries size risk. Risk alone is no reason to reject it. What separates a good fund from a trapped one is how it handles that risk, and you can read the answer in three numbers before you stay in or enter one:
- The trend in its small-cap allocation over the past 12 months. A fund drifting up the cap curve is no longer giving you what you came for.
- The days-to-liquidate figure from the SEBI stress test. The longer the exit, the greater the crash the fund must absorb.
- The three-year alpha against the Nifty Smallcap 250. This tells you whether you are being paid for the risk you carry.
Read together, these three tell you the one thing the brochure never will: whether you own a small-cap fund or a fund that used to be one.
Also read: Small-cap funds reopen. Don't mistake this for a buy signal.
Ask Value Research 
New episodes every Friday 
New Process Alert 
Seems like you've uploaded a wrong QR code. Please upload the QR code downloaded from MF Central platform.
