Blog

What BDT 5,000 a month actually became in every Bangladeshi mutual fund

By ReturnKoto? | Published 25 August 2026 | Updated 27 August 2026

The same monthly amount, put into each of the mutual funds we track, with dividends reinvested. One table, every fund, recalculated daily from NAV history.

These figures update themselves. Every number below is recalculated from NAV history each day, so this page is current as of 27 August 2026 rather than the day it was written.

Fund managers publish their own numbers. That is normal, and there is nothing wrong with it, but it does mean the comparison you actually want is the one nobody has an incentive to publish: the same amount, the same start date, the same rules, across every fund at once.

That is what this page is. BDT 5,000 a month, paid in on schedule, into each of the 34 funds ReturnKoto? tracks. Cash dividends are reinvested. No fund gets a friendlier start date than another.

The honest window is 2 years

Here is the first thing worth being straight about. The youngest fund in the list has only been running a short time, and you cannot compare a fund against one that did not exist yet. So the all-fund table below covers 2 years, because that is the longest stretch every single fund has actually been tracked for.

A longer table follows further down for the funds old enough to fill it. Splitting them this way is less tidy than one big list, and it is the only version that is true.

Over 2 years, BDT 5,000 a month adds up to BDT 1,20,000 of your own money going in. What came out the other end ranged from BDT 1,45,376 down to BDT 1,21,676, a gap of BDT 23,700 on identical deposits.

The best result over this window came from VIPB Fixed Income Fund at 19.61% a year. The weakest was UCB AML First Mutual Fund at 1.34% a year. Same money, same months, same discipline.

That spread is the entire argument for looking before you choose. It is not a claim that the top fund will stay on top, because it is not one, and anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something. It is a claim that the choice mattered, measurably, over a period that has already happened.

The funds with longer histories

25 of the funds have been running long enough to show 5 years. Over that stretch BDT 5,000 a month means BDT 3,00,000 paid in.

Longer windows are more informative than short ones, because they contain more than one kind of market. A fund that looks strong over two good years has not yet told you what it does in a bad one.

How these numbers are worked out

Total return, not price change. When a fund pays a cash dividend, the NAV drops by roughly the amount paid out, so judging a fund on NAV movement alone quietly penalises the funds that paid you the most. Every figure here assumes dividends were reinvested, which is the closest honest answer to what an investor actually experienced.

The monthly deposits are modelled on a fixed schedule, and units are bought at the NAV in force at the time. What is not modelled: taxes, the spread between buying and selling price, and any fee your platform charges on top of the fund's own management fee. Those are real, and they make live results slightly worse than these. We would rather say so than quietly flatter the numbers.

The NAV history behind all of this runs through 27 August 2026, and it comes from the fund managers' own published prints wherever we can read them, validated against a second source before anything is published.

What this cannot tell you

Past returns are history, not a forecast. A fund at the top of this table did well over a window that has already closed, and the fund managers themselves will tell you the same thing in their prospectus.

What the table is genuinely good for is narrowing a field of 34 down to a handful worth reading properly, and for sanity-checking a number someone has quoted at you. If a fund's own marketing implies a result that this table does not show, that gap is worth a question.

Run these numbers on your own amount