Direct vs Regular Mutual Funds:Do Lower Fees Really Mean Higher Returns?

If you've bought a mutual fund in India, you've likely seen two versions of the same scheme: a Direct Plan and a Regular Plan. Both invest in the same portfolio of stocks or bonds, managed by the same fund manager. The only structural difference is cost, and cost compounded over years is a bigger deal than most investors realise.

This raises a fair question: if a direct plan is cheaper, does that automatically mean it earns you more money? The short answer is yes, in a mechanical sense, but the fuller answer depends on what you do with the difference, and what a regular plan is quietly buying you in return.

What Actually Separates the Two

A Direct Plan is bought straight from the Asset Management Company (AMC), with no distributor in between. A Regular Plan is bought through a distributor, bank, or advisor, who is compensated through a commission built into the scheme's ongoing expenses. Both plans hold identical securities and are managed by the same team; the portfolio does not change based on which plan you choose.

Feature	Direct Plan	Regular Plan
How you invest	Directly with the AMC website, app, or MF Central	Through a distributor, bank, or advisor
Commission built in?	No	Yes, paid by the AMC to the distributor from the fund's expenses
Expense ratio	Lower, since no distributor commission	Higher by roughly 0.3%–1% depending on the category
NAV	Slightly higher (lower ongoing cost)	Slightly lower for the same underlying portfolio
Advice and support	None built in; you research and decide	Included fund selection, goal planning, rebalancing help, paperwork
Best suited for	Investors comfortable researching funds and managing their own portfolio	Investors who want ongoing guidance and a single point of contact

The New SEBI Cost Disclosure Rules (2026)

Since April 1, 2026, SEBI's revised Mutual Fund Regulations require every scheme to separately disclose a Base Expense Ratio (BER) covering fund management and administration from other charges such as brokerage, transaction costs, and statutory levies like GST, STT, and stamp duty. Together, these make up the Total Expense Ratio (TER) that investors actually pay. The change doesn't reduce the direct-versus-regular cost gap; it makes the distributor commission embedded in a regular plan's TER easier to see and compare across schemes.

SEBI also caps the maximum TER a scheme can charge, based on its size. For equity funds, the ceiling ranges from about 2.25% for smaller schemes down to roughly 1.05% for very large ones; debt funds are capped somewhat lower at each slab. Direct plans sit below these caps because they simply exclude the distributor commission that regular plans include.

Does Lower Cost Really Mean Higher Returns?

Here the maths is straightforward and not really in dispute: since both plans hold the same underlying investments, whatever the fund earns before expenses is identical for both. The only thing that differs is how much is deducted before it reaches you. A lower expense ratio in a direct plan translates, rupee for rupee, into a higher return in your hands and because mutual fund returns compound year after year, even a modest gap widens noticeably over a long horizon.

	Regular Plan	Direct Plan
Gross fund return (illustrative)	10% p.a.	10% p.a.
Expense ratio	1.5%	0.75%
Net return to investor	8.5%	9.25%
₹1 lakh lump sum after 20 years	≈ ₹5.11 lakh	≈ ₹5.87 lakh

This is an illustrative example rather than a specific fund; actual expense ratios and returns vary by scheme and category. But the direction of the effect is consistent: over a 20-year SIP or lump sum, a 0.5–0.75 percentage point cost difference can plausibly translate into a meaningfully larger corpus, purely from lower charges compounding in your favour rather than a distributor's.

So Is a Regular Plan Ever the Better Choice?

The cost gap is real, but it isn't the whole picture. A regular plan's higher expense ratio is, in effect, the price of a service fund selection help, portfolio reviews, rebalancing reminders, assistance with paperwork and nominee updates, and a point of contact during volatile markets. For investors who are new to mutual funds, short on time, or prone to reacting emotionally to market swings, that guidance has a value that doesn't show up in the expense ratio line but can matter just as much to their eventual outcome.

Research on investor behaviour consistently shows a gap between the returns a fund actually delivers and the returns the average investor in that fund actually earns largely because investors buy at the wrong time, sell in a panic, or stop their SIPs during a downturn. A good advisor's main value is often not fund selection but preventing these costly, self-inflicted mistakes. For some investors, the extra 0.5–1% expense ratio of a regular plan is money well spent if it keeps their long-term plan on track.

Direct plans make the most sense for investors who are willing to research funds themselves, rebalance on their own schedule, and stay disciplined through market ups and downs without needing a reminder. Regular plans make the most sense for investors who value ongoing guidance enough to pay for it which, for many first-time or busy investors, can be worth more than the fee it costs.

How to Decide for Yourself

•  Work out the actual rupee cost. Multiply the expense ratio difference by your investment amount to see what the guidance is costing you each year in absolute terms, not just as a percentage.

•  Be honest about your own discipline. If you've stopped a SIP or sold in panic during a past downturn, a regular plan's hand-holding may be worth more than the fee difference.

•   Consider a mix. Many investors use direct plans for funds they understand well and are comfortable monitoring, and regular plans for goal planning, insurance-linked decisions, or categories where they value a second opinion.

•  Review the choice periodically, not just the fund. As you gain experience and confidence, moving from regular to direct plans (or vice versa, if you need more support) is a valid mid-course correction.

The Bottom Line

Lower fees in a direct plan do mechanically translate into higher net returns, because both plans hold identical investments and the only difference is what's deducted along the way. But “higher returns on paper” and “better outcome for you” aren't always the same thing. The right choice depends on whether you're paying for a service you'll actually use and whether that guidance helps you stay invested long enough for compounding to do its work either way.

Disclaimer

Mutual fund investments are subject to market risks; read all scheme-related documents carefully before investing. The figures used above are illustrative and do not represent the actual performance of any specific scheme. Past performance is not indicative of future returns. This article is for general information and educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Please consult a qualified, SEBI-registered financial advisor or mutual fund distributor to assess which plan type and fund suit your goals and risk profile.

Sources

1. SEBI Investor Website, “Regular and Direct Mutual Funds” explainer.

2. Angel One, “Direct vs Regular Mutual Fund: Know the Difference,” on SEBI's 2026 expense ratio disclosure rules.

Want to read more?

Subscribe to finsightsbysquareleague.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Subscribe Now