ReturnKoto? star ratings: every fund, every number
The rating table behind the stars on every fund page: all 35 tracked funds, four sub-scores, composite score, and the arithmetic that turns a score into stars. Experimental and a work in progress. Full method on the methodology page.
How a score becomes stars
Every fund is measured over the exact same months: a 3-year rating on the last 36 months (the main rating below) and a 5-year rating on the last 60 months for funds old enough. Nothing is averaged over each fund’s own lifetime, so a fund launched after a crash is never compared on friendlier years than its peers. Four sub-scores are measured inside the window, each 0 to 100. Return is annualized total return against a benchmark measured over the same window: for growth and balanced funds the midpoint of the DSEX index return (-3.2%/yr over the current 3-year window) and the 91-day T-bill average (10.9%), a hurdle of 3.9%; for income funds the T-bill average alone. Matching the benchmark scores 50, and each percentage point above or below moves the score 5 points. Stability is downside deviation, only losing months count: 1% scores 100, 12% scores 0. Drawdown is the worst peak-to-trough fall (0% scores 100, a 30% fall scores 0) and Consistency is the share of 12-month holding periods that ended in profit. The score is 0.40×Return + 0.20×Stability + 0.20×Drawdown + 0.20×Consistency, and stars come from fixed per-category bands, not a curve. One guardrail: stars above 3 require the fund’s return to beat both yardsticks over the window, the 91-day T-bill average and, for growth and balanced funds, the DSEX return itself. A calm NAV alone can never look premium.
Every anchor is pinned to an observable market fact. The T-bill averages come from Bangladesh Bank auction results as reported in the financial press (the 5-year average is approximate, since 2021-22 auction prints are sparse). The DSEX window returns come from our published dsex.json series; DSEX is a price-only index that excludes dividends, which makes the market yardstick slightly easier to beat, and we say so rather than hide it. The downside-deviation cap of 12% sits just above the DSEX’s own 9.9%, and the 30% drawdown cap sits against the DSEX’s worst fall of 36.7%. One honest caveat: income funds hold bonds often priced at amortized cost, which makes their NAVs look smoother than reality; that is one reason return carries the largest weight and the gate exists. Full method and governance.
Growth funds
| Fund | 3-yr rating | 5-yr rating | Return | Stability | Drawdown | Consistency | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ekush Growth Fund (EGF) | 5/5 #1 of 16 | – | 100 14.20%/yr | 51 6.4% downside | 68 -9.7% worst | 100 100% positive | 83.7 +27.7 vs 56 |
| EDGE AMC Growth Fund (EDGEAMCGF) | 5/5 #2 of 16 | 3/5 #3 of 14 | 96 13.20%/yr | 40 7.7% downside | 63 -11.0% worst | 96 96% positive | 78.4 +22.4 vs 56 |
| EDGE Bangladesh Mutual Fund (EDGEBDMF) | 5/5 #3 of 16 | 3/5 #2 of 14 | 95 12.90%/yr | 39 7.7% downside | 62 -11.3% worst | 96 96% positive | 77.4 +21.4 vs 56 |
| BCB ICL Growth Fund | 4/5 #4 of 16 | 3/5 #8 of 14 | 91 12.10%/yr | 36 8.0% downside | 59 -12.4% worst | 92 92% positive | 73.9 +17.9 vs 56 |
| IDLC Growth Fund (IGF) | 3/5 #5 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #9 of 14 | 74 8.80%/yr | 54 6.1% downside | 71 -8.8% worst | 92 92% positive | 73.1 +17.1 vs 56 |
| CWT Emerging Bangladesh First Growth Fund (CWTEBFGF) | 3/5 #6 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 4/5 #1 of 14 | 85 10.90%/yr | 29 8.8% downside | 59 -12.2% worst | 92 92% positive | 70.1 +14.1 vs 56 |
| Esquire ICL Apparel Fund | 3/5 #7 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #10 of 14 | 84 10.70%/yr | 31 8.5% downside | 53 -14.0% worst | 92 92% positive | 69.0 +13.0 vs 56 |
| VIPB Growth Fund | 3/5 #8 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #4 of 14 | 72 8.20%/yr | 41 7.5% downside | 53 -14.2% worst | 96 96% positive | 66.6 +10.6 vs 56 |
| UCB Taqwa Growth Fund | 3/5 #9 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | – | 46 3.10%/yr | 75 3.7% downside | 73 -8.1% worst | 84 84% positive | 64.9 +8.9 vs 56 |
| VIPB NLI 1st Unit Fund | 3/5 #10 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 2/5 #12 of 14 | 67 7.30%/yr | 38 7.9% downside | 55 -13.6% worst | 96 96% positive | 64.6 +8.6 vs 56 |
| VIPB SEBL 1st Unit Fund | 3/5 #11 of 16 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #5 of 14 | 67 7.20%/yr | 36 8.0% downside | 53 -14.0% worst | 96 96% positive | 63.8 +7.8 vs 56 |
| CWT Opportunities Fund (CWTOF) | 3/5 #12 of 16 | 3/5 #6 of 14 | 74 8.60%/yr | 30 8.6% downside | 55 -13.5% worst | 76 76% positive | 61.8 +5.8 vs 56 |
| CWT Sadharan Bima Growth Fund (CWTSBGF) | 3/5 #13 of 16 | 3/5 #7 of 14 | 76 9.10%/yr | 28 8.9% downside | 50 -15.0% worst | 76 76% positive | 61.3 +5.3 vs 56 |
| IDLC AML Shariah Fund (IAMLSF) | 3/5 #14 of 16 | 2/5 #11 of 14 | 47 3.20%/yr | 72 4.1% downside | 67 -9.9% worst | 68 68% positive | 60.0 +4.0 vs 56 |
| Shanta First Income Unit Fund (SFIUF) | 1/5 #15 of 16 | 1/5 #14 of 14 | 29 -0.20%/yr | 30 8.7% downside | 22 -23.3% worst | 60 60% positive | 34.2 -21.8 vs 56 |
| Shanta Amanah Shariah Fund (SASF) | 1/5 #16 of 16 | 2/5 #13 of 14 | 23 -1.60%/yr | 39 7.7% downside | 29 -21.2% worst | 56 56% positive | 34.0 -22.0 vs 56 |
Reference level 56. A score of 74 or more earns 5 stars, at least 62 but under 74 earns 4, above 50 and under 62 earns 3, above 38 up to 50 earns 2, and 38 or below earns 1. Bands are applied to the unrounded score, so a score printed exactly on a boundary can sit on either side of it.
Balanced funds
| Fund | 3-yr rating | 5-yr rating | Return | Stability | Drawdown | Consistency | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ekush First Unit Fund (EFUF) | 5/5 #1 of 10 | 3/5 #3 of 8 | 96 13.00%/yr | 50 6.5% downside | 68 -9.7% worst | 96 96% positive | 81.0 +25.0 vs 56 |
| IDLC Balanced Fund (IBF) | 3/5 #2 of 10 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #2 of 8 | 70 7.90%/yr | 57 5.7% downside | 68 -9.7% worst | 92 92% positive | 71.4 +15.4 vs 56 |
| VIPB Balanced Fund | 3/5 #3 of 10 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 3/5 #1 of 8 | 77 9.40%/yr | 43 7.2% downside | 54 -13.8% worst | 96 96% positive | 69.6 +13.6 vs 56 |
| ICL Balanced Fund | 4/5 #4 of 10 | 3/5 #5 of 8 | 86 11.00%/yr | 32 8.4% downside | 56 -13.2% worst | 88 88% positive | 69.6 +13.6 vs 56 |
| EDGE Al-Amin Shariah Consumer Fund (EDGEALAMIN) | 3/5 #5 of 10 capped: yardsticks not beaten | – | 62 6.30%/yr | 65 4.8% downside | 70 -9.0% worst | 88 88% positive | 69.5 +13.5 vs 56 |
| LankaBangla 1st Balanced Unit Fund (LB1stBUF) | 3/5 #6 of 10 | 2/5 #7 of 8 | 62 6.20%/yr | 55 5.9% downside | 56 -13.3% worst | 68 68% positive | 60.4 +4.4 vs 56 |
| LB Gratuity Opportunities Fund (LBGOF) | 3/5 #7 of 10 | 3/5 #6 of 8 | 54 4.70%/yr | 38 7.8% downside | 49 -15.4% worst | 76 76% positive | 54.2 -1.8 vs 56 |
| UCB AML First Mutual Fund | 2/5 #8 of 10 | 2/5 #8 of 8 | 47 3.30%/yr | 24 9.4% downside | 40 -17.9% worst | 88 88% positive | 49.3 -6.7 vs 56 |
| LankaBangla Al-Arafah Shariah Unit Fund (LBASUF) | 2/5 #9 of 10 | 3/5 #4 of 8 | 39 1.80%/yr | 47 6.8% downside | 36 -19.1% worst | 68 68% positive | 46.1 -9.9 vs 56 |
| LB Gratuity Wealth Builder Fund (LBGWBF) | 1/5 #10 of 10 | – | 29 -0.40%/yr | 24 9.3% downside | 25 -22.6% worst | 36 36% positive | 28.4 -27.6 vs 56 |
Reference level 56. A score of 74 or more earns 5 stars, at least 62 but under 74 earns 4, above 50 and under 62 earns 3, above 38 up to 50 earns 2, and 38 or below earns 1. Bands are applied to the unrounded score, so a score printed exactly on a boundary can sit on either side of it.
Income funds
| Fund | 3-yr rating | 5-yr rating | Return | Stability | Drawdown | Consistency | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCB Income Plus Fund | 4/5 #1 of 6 | – | 61 13.10%/yr | 83 2.8% downside | 87 -4.0% worst | 100 100% positive | 78.4 +6.4 vs 72 |
| Shanta Fixed Income Fund (SFIF) | 3/5 #2 of 6 | – | 55 11.80%/yr | 78 3.5% downside | 87 -3.8% worst | 100 100% positive | 74.8 +2.8 vs 72 |
| EDGE High Quality Income Fund (EDGEHQIF) | 3/5 #3 of 6 | – | 53 11.50%/yr | 85 2.6% downside | 83 -5.1% worst | 100 100% positive | 74.8 +2.8 vs 72 |
| IDLC Income Fund (IIF) | 2/5 #4 of 6 | 3/5 #1 of 2 | 41 9.10%/yr | 64 4.9% downside | 83 -5.2% worst | 100 100% positive | 65.8 -6.2 vs 72 |
| VIPB Accelerated Income Unit Fund | 1/5 #5 of 6 | 1/5 #2 of 2 | 37 8.30%/yr | 37 7.9% downside | 50 -14.9% worst | 96 96% positive | 51.5 -20.5 vs 72 |
| Ekush Stable Return Fund (ESRF) | 1/5 #6 of 6 | – | 62 13.20%/yr | 3 11.7% downside | 33 -20.1% worst | 96 96% positive | 51.0 -21.0 vs 72 |
Reference level 72. A score of 90 or more earns 5 stars, at least 78 but under 90 earns 4, above 66 and under 78 earns 3, above 54 up to 66 earns 2, and 54 or below earns 1. Bands are applied to the unrounded score, so a score printed exactly on a boundary can sit on either side of it.
Shariah group (second rating)
Shariah-compliant funds keep their category rating above and also carry this separate rating against the other Shariah funds, on the Shariah reference level.
| Fund | Stars | Return | Stability | Drawdown | Consistency | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDGE Al-Amin Shariah Consumer Fund (EDGEALAMIN) | 3/5 #1 of 5 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 62 6.30%/yr | 65 4.8% downside | 70 -9.0% worst | 88 88% positive | 69.5 +13.5 vs 56 |
| UCB Taqwa Growth Fund | 3/5 #2 of 5 capped: yardsticks not beaten | 46 3.10%/yr | 75 3.7% downside | 73 -8.1% worst | 84 84% positive | 64.9 +8.9 vs 56 |
| IDLC AML Shariah Fund (IAMLSF) | 3/5 #3 of 5 | 47 3.20%/yr | 72 4.1% downside | 67 -9.9% worst | 68 68% positive | 60.0 +4.0 vs 56 |
| LankaBangla Al-Arafah Shariah Unit Fund (LBASUF) | 2/5 #4 of 5 | 39 1.80%/yr | 47 6.8% downside | 36 -19.1% worst | 68 68% positive | 46.1 -9.9 vs 56 |
| Shanta Amanah Shariah Fund (SASF) | 1/5 #5 of 5 | 23 -1.60%/yr | 39 7.7% downside | 29 -21.2% worst | 56 56% positive | 34.0 -22.0 vs 56 |
Reference level 56. A score of 74 or more earns 5 stars, at least 62 but under 74 earns 4, above 50 and under 62 earns 3, above 38 up to 50 earns 2, and 38 or below earns 1. Bands are applied to the unrounded score, so a score printed exactly on a boundary can sit on either side of it.
Not yet rated
A rating needs a full closed 36-month window on the rating calendar (37 monthly NAV points; stars move only at month close, so a partial current month does not count). These funds are tracked in full, and their figures are already on their pages; the stars arrive automatically once that closed window is covered.
Check one by hand
Take Ekush Growth Fund (EGF). Over the current 3-year window it scores Return 100, Stability 51, Drawdown 68 and Consistency 100 (all in ratings.json). So: 0.40×100 + 0.20×51 + 0.20×68 + 0.20×100 = 83.8, against the published score of 83.7. Sub-scores are printed rounded while the score is computed before rounding, so hand math can differ by a few tenths. It is a growth fund, its reference level is 56, and 83.7 sits +27.7 points versus that level, which lands in the 5-star band. Every rating on this page can be rebuilt the same way.
Ratings are recomputed after every NAV collection, but both windows still end at the last completed calendar month covered by the fund data and the DSEX series, so stars move only when a month closes; calculators use daily prints immediately. Ratings describe past performance only; they do not predict the future. The peer rank shown under each rating is context, never an input: stars come from the fixed bands alone. Reference levels and anchors are reviewed once a year in July under the procedure on the methodology page. Raw inputs for every fund are also on its own page. For learning and research.