What do you actually own?
Across two, three, four portfolio managers, similar mandates quietly converge on the same shortlist. You may be paying four sets of fees to hold one portfolio. Nobody in that chain has an incentive to check. We do the checking, in writing.
Four questions your statements do not answer.
Each manager reports on their own slice. Nobody reports on the whole. These four questions stay open until someone reads across every statement at once.
How much do your managers overlap?
Similar mandates converge on the same liquid shortlist. If two managers hold the same stock, you are paying two fee schedules for one position.
What is your all-in cost across every manager?
Fixed fees, profit shares above hurdles, GST at 18%, transaction and custody charges. Stacked across managers, the true number rarely appears on any single statement.
Which returns were skill, and which were the market?
A strong absolute year says nothing by itself. Net of the right benchmark, year by year, is the only reading that separates alpha from beta.
Has anyone verified strategy drift?
The mandate you signed three years ago and the portfolio you hold today can be different animals. Somebody has to check, and it will not be the manager.
Diversification across managers is not diversification across risk.
Hiring more managers multiplies invoices, meetings and paperwork. Whether it multiplies anything else is exactly what nobody has verified.
One portfolio, four invoices
Managers with similar mandates converge on the same shortlist of liquid, well-covered companies. Four fee schedules, one effective book.
Unintended concentration
Three managers independently sized at 3% each can quietly build a 9% single-stock position. No mandate was broken, and nobody chose it.
Alpha and beta, confused
A 14% year sounds like skill until you learn the benchmark did 16%. Returns without benchmark context are noise dressed as evidence.
How much of your book is the same book?
Toggle the mandate styles your managers run. The X-ray reads the structural proximity between them and estimates how much shared ground the combined portfolio is likely to carry.
Running the same style with two different managers? Treat that as high overlap by default.
Low sits under 20%, Moderate runs 20 to 40%, High starts at 40%. The bar moves as you toggle.
A structural estimate based on style proximity, not a reading of your actual holdings. This tool runs entirely in your browser, nothing is stored or sent.
What stacking managers actually costs.
A worked example, not a calculator: ₹5 Cr across three managers, one ordinary 12% year. Every line is visible arithmetic. Your own numbers will differ, which is precisely why they deserve the same table.
| Line item | Basis | Year one |
|---|---|---|
| Manager A · fixed fee | ₹2.00 Cr at 2.0% a year | ₹4.00 L |
| Manager B · fixed fee | ₹1.50 Cr at 1.5% a year | ₹2.25 L |
| Manager B · profit share | 15% of gains above a 10% hurdle, in a 12% year | ₹0.45 L |
| Manager C · fixed fee | ₹1.50 Cr at 2.5% a year | ₹3.75 L |
| GST on management fees | 18% of ₹10.45 L | ₹1.88 L |
| Transaction, custody, audit | estimated 0.30% of ₹5.00 Cr | ₹1.50 L |
| Total drag, year one | ₹13.83 L on ₹5.00 Cr | 2.77% a year |
Illustrative arithmetic on stated assumptions, not a projection. Both ten-year paths assume the same 12% gross return; the only difference is the 2.77% annual drag, before your capital-gains tax. Realised gains in a PMS are taxed in your hands: 20% short term, 12.5% long term above the ₹1.25 lakh annual exemption.
Net return minus benchmark, year by year.
One subtraction per manager per year. Positive in most years means you are paying for something real. Anything else means you are paying active fees for the market's own work.
An illustrative shape, not any manager's record. Four positive years out of six is a manager earning the fee. The pattern is the evidence, not any single year.
No benchmark at all
A return standing alone on a slide. Impressive, and unfalsifiable, until something comparable sits next to it.
Cherry-picked inception
Performance measured from the market bottom the strategy happened to launch into. The start date is doing the work.
Model versus actual
The deck shows the model portfolio. Your account, with its cash drag and entry dates, holds something else.
Gross versus net
Returns quoted before the fees you actually paid. The only number that compounds in your account is net.
Your statements already hold the answers.
Overlap, cost and attribution are all sitting in documents you already receive. The X-ray just reads them properly, and puts the findings in writing.
Book a private consultationSix signals a mandate is quietly changing.
Drift rarely announces itself. It shows up in the statements, one quarter at a time, for anyone reading them side by side.
Market-cap mix shift
The large-cap sleeve quietly thins while mid and small caps grow. The risk you signed for is not the risk you hold.
Holding-count creep
A 25-stock conviction book drifts to 45 names. Conviction diluted is an index fund with a premium invoice.
Cash pile-ups
Cash climbing quarter after quarter is a manager making a market call you never asked for, at full fees.
Turnover spikes
A sudden burst of churn means new tax events in your hands and a strategy being rethought mid-flight.
Key people leaving
You hired a fund manager, not a brand. When the person who built the track record exits, the record goes too.
AUM ballooning
Strategies that worked at ₹500 Cr can suffocate at ₹5,000 Cr. Size is the one enemy no manager markets.
The written readout.
Not a call, not a pitch deck. A document that answers the four open questions from your own statements, and stands on its evidence.
- 01Holding-level overlap map across every manager you use
- 02Verified all-in cost, rebuilt from your actual fee agreements, GST included
- 03Net-of-fee attribution against the right benchmark, year by year
- 04Drift and concentration flags, each with the evidence behind it
- 05Consolidation options with switching costs in writing: realised tax, exit loads, re-deployment gap
- 06Change nothing, stated as a real possible answer when the evidence supports it
Three files from the pattern book.
Constructed examples for illustration. Not testimonials, and no actual client is depicted.
The accidental index fund
Four managers, four mandates on paper. The combined book held over 70 stocks and tracked the index closely, at several times index cost. Consolidating to two genuinely distinct managers restored the point of paying for active management.
The 9% position nobody chose
Three managers each held roughly 3% of the same lender. No single position broke any mandate. Together they made one company the largest exposure in the family's equity book, without one deliberate decision being taken.
The portfolio that needed nothing
The full X-ray found modest overlap, fair fees and clean attribution. The written recommendation was to change nothing. That readout matters too: it converts hope into evidence, and it cost the client no switch.
Nyra reads the factsheets so you can cross-examine them.
Every SEBI-registered strategy scored on the same 0 to 10 basis, with every answer citing its source. Ask her how your managers compare before anyone asks you to switch.
Asked before every X-ray.
Your account statements and the fee schedule from each manager. That is all. No passwords, no broker logins, no access to anything live.
The other desks.
PMS Sahi Hai is a distributor of portfolio management services, registered with APMI (Registration No. APRN08358). We are not a SEBI-registered investment adviser and nothing on this page is investment advice. We are remunerated by the portfolio managers whose strategies we distribute, and we disclose this to every client. Investments in securities markets are subject to market risks; read all related documents carefully before investing. No returns are assured or guaranteed, and past performance is not indicative of future returns. The worked figures on this page are illustrative arithmetic on stated assumptions, not projections. The overlap tool is a structural estimate that runs entirely in your browser; nothing you enter is stored or sent.