A long-term client calls you after seeing an online advertisement claiming they are losing thousands of rupees by not opting for a ‘Direct Plan’ in their portfolio. They are confused, looking at the difference in the Net Asset Value and the expense ratio between their current regular scheme and the direct option, and they are now questioning the value of your services.
This is a moment where you must articulate clearly that while direct plans are an alternative route for self-directed investors, they lack the structural support, suitability analysis, and behavioural discipline that you provide as an MFD.
In the Indian mutual fund landscape, the primary distinction between a regular and a direct plan lies in the distribution expenses incurred by the Asset Management Company. Regular plans include the trail commission paid to the MFD for providing research-backed recommendations, onboarding assistance, transaction support, and periodic portfolio reviews. In contrast, direct plans do not carry these distribution costs, resulting in a slightly lower expense ratio for the investor.
The regulator, SEBI, mandates this transparency to ensure investors understand that the price they pay includes both the underlying asset management and the professional distribution services they receive.
Think of the regular plan as a comprehensive service package rather than a mere product. Most retail investors struggle with asset allocation, portfolio rebalancing during market cycles, and staying invested when volatility spikes. As an MFD, your value is not in the transaction itself, but in the ongoing guidance that prevents emotional errors.
A client might save a few basis points in expense ratio by going direct, but if they churn their portfolio prematurely or fail to invest due to a lack of professional oversight, the opportunity cost far outweighs the modest cost savings of a direct plan.
When conducting a suitability assessment, explain to the client that your role is to ensure the right scheme is chosen for their specific time horizon and risk profile. You act as a buffer between the client and market noise, ensuring that tax-efficient redemptions and goal-aligned investing remain the priority. When clients understand that your fee—integrated into the regular plan—is a cost for personalized financial hand-holding, they are better equipped to make an informed choice that balances their desire for cost-efficiency with their need for professional reliability.
Always remember that your professional commitment is to the client’s success, which is often tied more to their investment behaviour than to the marginal difference in expense ratios. By anchoring your practice in value, transparency, and consistent guidance, you transform a potentially difficult conversation into a demonstration of why a dedicated MFD remains an indispensable partner for their long-term wealth creation.
Nuance
Check Your Understanding
An investor approaches you asking to switch their current holdings in a Multi-Cap Fund from a ‘Regular’ plan to a ‘Direct’ plan to save on expense ratios. As an MFD, what is the most appropriate professional response?
Which of the following best describes the difference in expense ratios between Regular and Direct plans as per SEBI regulations?
This is a companion read for Section 12.6 — Do’s and Don’ts while selecting mutual fund schemes from Ace the NISM Mutual Fund Distributors Exam by Akhilesh Gururani, available on Amazon Kindle.
Copyright © 2026 Akhilesh Gururani. All rights reserved.