Mutual funds, retail investors raise stake in this mid-cap multibagger stock in Q1. Do you own it?
As of the end of June 2025, 33 mutual funds collectively held an 11.4% stake in CAMS, equivalent to 56 lakh shares. This marks a notable increase from the 10.69% stake held at the end of the March quarter, according to shareholding data from Trendlyne.
Meanwhile, Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) also held a 2.85% stake in the company. Key mutual funds currently invested in the stock include Canara Robeco Small Cap Fund, UTI Mid Cap Fund, Axis Small Cap Fund, and ICICI Prudential Innovation Fund.
Retail investors, similar to mutual funds, also increased their stake in the company to 30.7%, up from 28.3% in the March quarter. Foreign investors, on the other hand, trimmed their stake to 52% from 55% in Q1FY25.
CAMS holds a 68% market share among registrars and transfer agents in the mutual fund industry, based on mutual fund average assets under management (AAUM). It services 26 out of 50 fund houses, including 10 of the top 15 mutual funds. In FY25, CAMS managed about 132 new fund offers, mobilizing a cumulative amount of ₹ 73,400 crore.
The growth in mutual fund AUM has gained momentum, supported by consistent SIP inflows and mark-to-market (MTM) gains. Domestic brokerage firm Motilal Oswal expects this trend to continue, driven by the increasing adoption of mutual funds as a preferred savings product. Direct investing through discount brokers has also grown in popularity, and with mutual fund penetration still at just 4%, the brokerage expects this growth trajectory to be sustained.
CAMS Pay recorded significant growth in UPI-based mandate registrations, rising 25% quarter-on-quarter in Q4FY25. As UPI AutoPay becomes the preferred method for SIPs and recurring purchases, CAMS is well-positioned as a key infrastructure partner for AMCs and distributors.
With strong backend integration, CAMS Pay is emerging as a critical component of the recurring digital payments infrastructure for the financial services sector.
Despite several tailwinds for the company, the brokerage has largely maintained its earnings estimates for FY26 and FY27. It believes that healthy AUM growth and increasing traction in non-mutual fund segments will offset the decline in yields, as indicated by the management.
The brokerage expects CAMS' revenue and PAT to grow at a CAGR of 11% and 12%, respectively, over FY25–FY27E. It has retained a BUY rating on the stock with a one-year target price of ₹ 5,000, based on a P/E multiple of 42x on FY27E earnings.
The company's shares made a strong comeback in March 2025 after witnessing severe selling pressure in the preceding two months. From the February low of ₹ 3,126, the stock has gained 64%, ending the last four months in the green.
Over the past three years, the shares have more than doubled. In December, the stock crossed the ₹ 5,000 mark for the first time, hitting a fresh all-time high of ₹ 5,367 apiece.
Disclaimer: The views and recommendations given in this article are those of individual analysts. These do not represent the views of Mint. We advise investors to check with certified experts before taking any investment decisions.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
13 minutes ago
- The Hindu
GST notices to traders: A fiasco that could have been avoided with feet on ground
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) notice fiasco in Karnataka, which ended with the intervention of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, could have been avoided with proper planning and feet on ground by Commercial Tax officers, senior department officials feel. Before issuing notices to traders, a spot visit to assess the nature of business should have been undertaken by the officials, multiple officials in the department said. Nature of business 'When traders were issued notices, officials did not know the nature of businesses in a large number of cases. They had not visited the business premises to conduct a survey. It was a thoughtless and faceless exercise, which embarrassed the government,' a senior official explained. 'There was a lack of clarity and specificity with respect to the nature of supply — whether it was goods or services.' Businesses with a turnover in trade of goods above ₹40 lakh and of services above ₹20 lakh have to be registered under the GST. As many as 18,000 notices have been issued across the State based on the information received by the Service Analysis Wing (SAW) after it sought details from the UPI platforms. Officials said that while details were received from three platforms, transactions in many others had not been received, which meant the exercise was not comprehensive. Goods not under GST As a result, another official pointed out, notices ended up being issued to vendors selling milk, vegetables, flowers, meat, and fruits, all of which are exempted goods under the GST. 'The notices scared the traders with a big tax demand and were issued on mere assumptions, without ascertaining the nature of receipts. Attempts were not made to ascertain whether receipts actually pertain to business transactions, or whether they were unrelated to business, or related to exempted goods.' The notices, if questioned in the High Court, could be struck down, sources said. Higher targets? Multiple officials with whom The Hindu spoke also referred to a very 'high and unreasonable' target set by the State government for the GST collections, which prompted the department to look towards newer sources of revenue or widen the tax base. By tapping the UPI net, the government was expecting at least ₹1,000 crore to ₹1,500 crore revenue, sources said. While the department collected about ₹1.02 lakh crore during 2024-2025, the government has set a target of ₹1.20 lakh crore for 2025-2026. 'Normally, the revision of the target is based on the GDP growth. Targets in the past were increased, which were double the rate of growth of the State's GDP. This time, the target has been raised by 17%, which we believe is very difficult to attain,' another senior official said. Concurring with his view, an officer said, 'The last fiscal had ₹1.02 lakh crore, which included about ₹6,000 crore from the IGST input tax credit reversal, which had not been claimed at all. This will drop down to about ₹1,000 crore this year. If this is considered, the revenue target has been increased by over 20%.'
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13 minutes ago
- Business Standard
PlayStore billing policy: Google appeals NCLAT order in Supreme Court
Google approached the Supreme Court on July 21 Almost three years after the Competition Commission of India (CCI) held that Google leveraged its dominance in the Android ecosystem, and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) partially upheld the order later, the matter has now reached the Supreme Court with the US technology giant challenging the appellate tribunal's ruling. Google approached the Supreme Court on July 21. On March 28 this year, NCLAT partially upheld the CCI ruling against Google for misuse of its dominant position by imposing unfair Play Store policies and promoting its own payments app. The appellate tribunal had said that Google shall allow, and not restrict app developers from using any third party billing services; shall not impose any anti-steering provisions on app developers or restrict them from communicating with their users to promote their apps; and shall not discriminate against other apps facilitating payment through Unified Payments Interface (UPI) in India vis-à-vis its own UPI app, in any manner. The NCLAT, however, overruled several of the more stringent behavioural remedies imposed on Google by the CCI. The CCI had, in its ruling, asked Google to allow third-party app stores within the Play Store, uninstallation of pre-installed apps, and side-loading of apps. In May this year, NCLAT reinstated two CCI directions that obligated Google to disclose data policies and remove advantages for Google Play Billing System (GPBS). In the petition moved now in the apex court, Google has challenged the changes approved by the NCLAT in May.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Apple cites Supreme Court's birthright ruling in fight over Epic Games injunction
Apple is hoping a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling curbing the power of federal judges to issue nationwide orders will help the technology giant win an appeal in a lawsuit requiring it to revamp its lucrative App Store. In a court filing on Tuesday, Apple told the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Supreme Court's June order in a case involving birthright citizenship bolsters the iPhone maker's arguments in a high-stakes standoff with "Fortnite" game developer Epic Games. The Supreme Court limited when judges can issue so-called universal injunctions that apply broadly, and not just to the parties in a lawsuit. The justices did not rule on whether the Trump administration can legally terminate the right to citizenship for people born on U.S. soil, but the decision was a win for the administration, which had complained about individual lower courts blocking its policies nationwide. Even though the case at the high court had nothing to do with Apple, its appeal could test the scope of the justices' ruling. Apple and Epic did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Apple in its appeal is challenging a U.S. district judge's order in April that said the company must open its App Store to more competition, allowing all developers - not just Epic - more freedom to steer consumers to alternative payment options outside of an app. The appeal also challenges the judge's finding that Apple was in contempt for violating a prior injunction in the same case. Epic Games sued Apple in 2020 to loosen its control over transactions in applications that use its iOS operating system and how apps are distributed to consumers. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in 2021 said Apple must allow developers to more easily steer consumers to potentially cheaper non-Apple payment options. Apple defied that court order to maintain a revenue stream worth billions of dollars, Gonzalez Rogers ruled in April. Apple has denied any wrongdoing, and defended its compliance with the court's orders. Apple told the 9th Circuit that, after the Supreme Court's birthright citizenship decision, judges no longer have freestanding authority to issue universal injunctions. Apple also noted that Epic pursued its lawsuit on its own, not as a class action on behalf of a larger group. Epic told the appeals court in May that Apple's App Store changes will have wide-reaching benefits for the industry and consumers. "The sky has not fallen. Instead, developers and consumers are finally beginning to see the long-awaited benefits of increased competition," Epic said. The case is Epic Games Inc v. Apple Inc, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 25-2935. For Epic: Gary Bornstein and Yonatan Even of Cravath, Swaine & Moore For Apple: Gregory Garre and Roman Martinez of Latham & Watkins Read more: Apple, Visa and Mastercard win dismissal of merchant antitrust lawsuit over payment fees Epic Games settles lawsuit against Samsung over app controls Swiss privacy tech firm Proton sues Apple in US over app store rules Apple must face consumer lawsuit over iCloud storage, US judge rules
