Skip to main content
Investing

Mansa X vs Oak Special Fund 2026: Returns, Fees, Verdict

Mansa X returned 20.74% net in 2025 vs Oak's 18.99%, then 10.97% vs 8.06% in H1 2026. Every figure verified against the funds' own 2025 and 2026 fact sheets (all linked), plus fees, minimums and an honest verdict.

January 16, 2026 13 min read PesaCalc Editorial 2431 words

In 2025, Kenya’s two most talked-about special funds finally met in a full calendar year, and the scoreline was closer than the marketing suggests: Mansa X returned 20.74% net, Oak returned 18.99% net. One point seven percentage points apart, yet the two funds took completely different roads to get there. This comparison is built entirely from the funds’ own published fact sheets, all of them linked below, so you can verify every figure yourself.

The 30-second version: Oak won 2024 (29.38% vs 19.53%, powered by one monster quarter at launch). Mansa X won 2025 (20.74% vs 18.99%, taking all four quarters). Mansa X leads H1 2026 (10.97% vs 8.06%). Mansa X has the longer record, the lower entry (KES 250,000 vs 500,000) and the lower base fee (5% vs 6%); Oak has the smaller top-up (KES 50,000 vs 100,000) and a heavier cushion of bonds and cash. Both are CMA-licensed special funds where your capital is genuinely at risk.

Sources used in this article: the Mansa X Special Fund Fact Sheet 2025 and Q1 2026 Fact Sheet from Standard Investment Bank, and the Oak Special Fund September 2025 Fact Sheet, Oak Fund Summary 2025 and Oak Q2 & Half-Year 2026 Fact Sheet (KES) from Faida Investment Bank. Both funds are licensed by the Capital Markets Authority of Kenya. Past performance is not a guarantee of future returns.

Fund Overview: The Basics Side by Side

DetailMansa X (KES Fund)Oak Special Fund (KES)
ManagerStandard Investment Bank (est. 1995)Faida Investment Bank (est. 1995)
RegulatorCapital Markets AuthorityCapital Markets Authority
TrusteeKingsland Court TrusteesCo-operative Bank of Kenya
CustodianI&M BankI&M Bank
AuditorChartafai LLPNjoroge Kuria & Associates
Fund InceptionJanuary 2019 (USD fund: October 2022)February 2024
AUM (latest sheet)KES 132.18 Billion at 31 Mar 2026KES 19.02 Billion at 30 Jun 2026
Base CurrencyKES (USD fund also offered)KES (USD fund also offered)
Minimum InvestmentKES 250,000KES 500,000
Minimum Top-upKES 100,000KES 50,000
Lock-in Period6 months6 months
Withdrawal / Redemption Fee0%0
Management / Financial Services Fee5% p.a. pro-rated6% p.a. pro-rated
Performance Fee10% above a 25% hurdle (KES fund)Not separately disclosed
Stated Benchmark / TargetAbove market average returnsTargets 20% net of fees (not guaranteed); benchmark: 30% 364-day T-Bill + 30% NSE All Share + 40% S&P 500
⚠️
The fee gap is real money. Oak charges 6% per year against Mansa X’s 5%. On KES 1,000,000 that is roughly KES 10,000 more per year before performance enters the conversation. Mansa X adds a 10% performance charge, but only on returns above a 25% hurdle, so in a normal year it never triggers. Both funds quote their returns net of these fees, which is the honest way to read them.

Mansa X: Seven Full Years on the Board

Mansa X is the incumbent. Launched in January 2019 under Standard Investment Bank’s trust umbrella, it runs a long/short, multi-asset strategy across the NYSE, LSE, Frankfurt and Hong Kong exchanges, plus fixed income, precious metals, currencies and NSE positions at home. Its published record now covers seven complete years, and the consistency is the story:

YearGross ReturnNet Return (After Fees)
201924.01%19.01%
202023.75%18.75%
202120.45%15.45%
202220.59%15.59%
202323.01%18.01%
202424.53%19.53%
202525.74%20.74%

Every figure above is from SIB’s own 12-month performance chart in the 2025 fact sheet. Two things stand out. First, the worst year in seven (15.45% in 2021) would still beat most Kenyan investment products. Second, 2025 was Mansa X’s best year on record, quarter by quarter: 5.09% in Q1, 6.05% in Q2, 4.89% in Q3 and 4.71% in Q4. SIB’s fund manager credits a year where nearly everything worked: the S&P 500 gained about 16%, gold broke above USD 4,500 an ounce, and silver staged a 147% rally to a high of USD 84.

📈
KES 1,000,000 invested at Mansa X’s launch (31 January 2019) had grown to KES 3,431,671.87 by 31 December 2025, after all fees. By 31 March 2026 the same shilling million stood at KES 3,594,335. The average annual net return since inception is 18.18% (per the Q1 2026 sheet). Momentum has carried into 2026: 4.74% net in Q1, 5.95% in Q2, a 10.97% net first half, and the combined Mansa X funds crossed USD 1 billion in assets in February 2026.
📈
Try It Yourself
Mansa-X Calculator
Project Mansa-X Special Fund returns and compare against a money market fund.
Open Tool

Oak: The Challenger That Keeps Pulling In Money

Oak Special Fund is Faida Investment Bank’s answer to the same question, launched in February 2024 as a leveraged asset-allocation fund mixing sovereign bonds, cash, NSE and US securities, currencies and CFDs. It is younger, smaller and bolder in how it states its ambition: a published target of 20% net per year, benchmarked against a blend of the 364-day T-bill, the NSE All Share and the S&P 500.

PeriodNet Return
2024 (from February launch)29.38%
2025: Q14.73%
2025: Q24.96%
2025: Q34.16%
2025: Q43.92%
2025 full year18.99%
2026: Q1 (Jan 1.73%, Feb 1.81%, Mar 1.11%)4.72%
2026: Q2 (Apr 1.64%, May 0.61%, Jun 0.91%)3.19%
H1 20268.06%

Per Oak’s 2025 fund summary, KES 1,000,000 invested on 1 January 2025 gained KES 204,909.91 by year end. Sharp-eyed readers will notice that illustration works out to 20.49% while the headline quarterly-compounded figure is 18.99%; both numbers appear in Faida’s own sheet, a presentation difference worth knowing about when you compare marketing materials. Oak’s Q2 2026 sheet shows KES 1,000,000 invested since the February 2024 launch reaching about KES 1,669,985 by 30 June 2026, a 67% total gain in 29 months.

💰
The AUM story is Oak’s loudest endorsement. Investor money in the fund has more than doubled in nine months: KES 8.65 billion in September 2025, KES 11.4 billion by December 2025, and KES 19.02 billion by June 2026. Kenyans are voting with their wallets, even as returns cooled from the 2024 highs.

Head-to-Head: The Periods Where Both Have Published Data

Fair comparisons need identical windows. There are now three of them.

2024: Oak’s knockout year

Oak’s first (11-month) year delivered 29.38% against Mansa X’s 19.53%. Context matters though: per Oak’s September 2025 sheet, 15.40% of that came in Q1 2024 alone, the launch quarter. The remaining three quarters produced 6.78%, 3.15% and 4.05%, a run rate much closer to what came later. Launch-window performance on a small asset base is real money for early investors, but it is not something any fund can promise to repeat at 19 billion shillings of AUM.

2025: Mansa X sweeps the year, four quarters to nil

QuarterMansa X (net)Oak (net)Winner
Q1 20255.09%4.73%Mansa X
Q2 20256.05%4.96%Mansa X
Q3 20254.89%4.16%Mansa X
Q4 20254.71%3.92%Mansa X
Full year20.74%18.99%Mansa X

Notice how close the quarters are, mostly within a percentage point. Neither fund had a losing quarter, and Oak hit its high teens even in a year its target said 20%. But a sweep is a sweep.

H1 2026: The gap widens

PeriodMansa X (net)Oak (net)
Q1 20264.74%4.72%
Q2 20265.95%3.19%
H1 202610.97%8.06%

Q1 was a photo finish, two hundredths of a point in it. Then the paths split: Mansa X posted its strongest quarter since 2022 while Oak recorded its softest since launch, with May (0.61%) and June (0.91%) its two weakest published months so far. KES 1,000,000 placed in each fund on 1 January 2026 was worth roughly KES 1,109,700 in Mansa X and KES 1,080,610 in Oak by the end of June, per each fund’s own illustration. Half a year is far too short to declare a trend, but it is the freshest data either fund has published, and it favours the incumbent.

Inside the Portfolios: Two Different Machines

Mansa X: a global multi-asset book

Per the 2025 fact sheet (Q4 2025, KES fund), the top ten holdings were: fixed income instruments (14.03%), interest rate derivatives (5.07%), the S&P 500 (2.90%), Alphabet (1.94%), Advanced Micro Devices (1.89%), Goldman Sachs (1.71%), Eli Lilly (1.52%), silver futures (1.48%), cash equivalents (1.25%) and VanEck Gold Miners (1.16%). Geographically the book sat 53.42% in the Americas, 23.09% in Africa, 18.23% in Europe, 3.92% in the Middle East and Asia, and 1.34% in Oceania. This is a genuinely global machine with hundreds of moving parts and no single position dominating.

Oak: a bond-and-cash anchor with a trading overlay

Oak’s June 2026 allocation: sovereign bonds 35.23%, cash and equivalents 27.00%, currencies 8.24%, indices, metals and commodities 7.91%, NSE securities 7.61%, US securities 7.52%, commercial papers 2.64%, forwards and swaps 1.64%, options and futures 1.28%, corporate bonds 0.56%, funds of funds 0.37%. Roughly 62 shillings of every 100 sit in bonds and cash, with a leveraged trading sleeve doing the heavy lifting for returns.

Worth watching: Oak’s mix has shifted meaningfully between sheets. Sovereign bonds were 58% of the fund in September 2025, 53% in December 2025, and 35% by June 2026, while cash jumped to 27%. An allocation that moves that much in nine months tells you the manager trades the macro actively. That cuts both ways: flexibility in choppy markets, but less predictability about what you actually hold next quarter.

The Five Differences That Actually Matter

1
Track record: 7 years vs 2 and a half

Mansa X has seven complete audited years spanning COVID, rate shocks and two Kenyan election cycles, averaging 18.18% net per year. Oak has about 29 months. Oak’s record is promising, but Mansa X’s is proven across regimes. If a long, verifiable history is what lets you sleep, this one difference may settle the debate.

2
Scale: KES 132 billion vs KES 19 billion

Mansa X (132.18 Bn, March 2026) is roughly seven times Oak’s size (19.02 Bn, June 2026). Scale brings institutional pricing and makes any single redemption a smaller ripple. The counterpoint: smaller funds can be nimbler, and Oak’s AUM is growing at a pace SIB would envy.

3
Entry ticket: KES 250,000 vs KES 500,000, but top-ups flip it

Mansa X lets you in at KES 250,000; Oak demands double that. Once inside, the roles reverse: Oak accepts KES 50,000 top-ups while Mansa X wants KES 100,000 a time. Starters find Mansa X easier to reach; drip-feeders find Oak easier to build.

4
Portfolio character: global equities engine vs bond-anchored trading book

Mansa X earns its return from a diversified global long/short book, majority Americas. Oak earns its from Kenyan sovereign paper plus a leveraged CFD and derivatives sleeve. Similar headline numbers, structurally different risk sources. Oak’s own sheet is explicit that leveraged products mean the fund "may not be suitable for all investors" and that redemptions can be suspended in certain circumstances.

5
Fees: 5% plus a high-hurdle bonus vs a flat 6%

Mansa X: 5% p.a. financial services charge, plus 10% of any return above 25% (so it rarely bites). Oak: 6% p.a., no separately disclosed performance fee. In a typical year Mansa X’s drag is a point lighter. Both funds publish returns net of these charges, so the tables above already reflect them.

What KES 1,000,000 Actually Did (Straight From the Sheets)

WindowFundEnd ValueGain
31 Jan 2019 to 31 Dec 2025Mansa XKES 3,431,671.87+243.2%
31 Jan 2019 to 31 Mar 2026Mansa XKES 3,594,335+259.4%
Feb 2024 launch to 30 Jun 2026OakKES 1,669,984.68+67.0%
Full year 2025Mansa XKES 1,207,400 (at 20.74%)+20.74%
Full year 2025 (sheet illustration)OakKES 1,204,909.91+20.49% shown; headline 18.99%
H1 2026Mansa X~KES 1,109,700+10.97%
H1 2026OakKES 1,080,609.97+8.06%

For the USD savers: Mansa X’s dollar fund turned USD 10,000 into USD 14,949.02 between November 2022 and December 2025 (12.66% average net per year, 13.37% net in 2025, 6.54% in H1 2026). Oak also offers a USD class with its own fact sheets on oak.africa.

Which Fund Fits Which Investor

ProfileBetter FitWhy
First private-fund investmentMansa XLower entry at KES 250,000, seven audited years, diversified global book
Building up with small monthly additionsOakKES 50,000 top-ups vs Mansa X’s KES 100,000, once you clear the 500K entry
Longest possible verified recordMansa XSeven full years averaging 18.18% net; Oak cannot match that yet by definition
Preference for a bond-heavy baseOakAround 62% in sovereign bonds and cash as at June 2026, with a trading overlay
Chasing the 2024-style outlier yearNeither, honestlyOak’s 29.38% launch year relied on one 15.4% quarter; no fund promises a repeat
Wants both enginesSplit across the twoKES 750,000 covers both minimums and diversifies manager and strategy risk
QWhich fund has better returns, Mansa X or Oak?
It depends on the window. Oak won 2024 with 29.38% against Mansa X’s 19.53%, driven largely by its 15.40% launch quarter. Mansa X won 2025 outright, 20.74% to 18.99%, taking all four quarters, and leads H1 2026 with 10.97% net against Oak’s 8.06%. Over seven full years only Mansa X has data, averaging 18.18% net annually since January 2019. All figures are from the funds’ own published fact sheets.
QWhich fund is safer?
Both are CMA-licensed special funds and both can lose money; neither is a savings account. Mansa X rates itself 2 on its 5-point risk scale, citing diversification across assets and geographies. Oak does not publish a comparable 1-to-5 rating; its sheets carry an explicit warning that it uses leveraged products including CFDs, may not suit all investors, and can suspend redemptions in certain circumstances. Oak’s large bond-and-cash anchor (roughly 62% in mid-2026) is conservative ballast, but the return engine is a leveraged trading sleeve. Read both risk disclosures before committing.
QWhat are the minimum investments for Mansa X and Oak?
Mansa X: KES 250,000 to start, KES 100,000 minimum top-up (USD fund: USD 2,500 and USD 1,000). Oak: KES 500,000 to start, KES 50,000 minimum top-up. Both apply an initial 6-month lock-in and charge no redemption fee. Confirm current terms with Standard Investment Bank or Faida Investment Bank before investing, as minimums can change.
QCan I invest in both funds?
Yes. KES 750,000 clears both minimums and spreads your money across two managers, two strategies and two different risk engines: Mansa X’s global long/short book and Oak’s bond-plus-CFD model. Historically both have reported returns well above Kenyan money market funds, though unlike an MMF neither offers capital stability, and returns are not guaranteed. Keep your emergency fund in a liquid money market fund regardless.
QAre the quoted returns net of all fees?
Mansa X’s published net figures are after the 5% p.a. financial services charge; the 10% performance charge applies separately, and only to returns above the 25% hurdle. Oak’s published figures are net of its 6% p.a. management fee. Withholding tax treatment on special fund distributions depends on your circumstances, so confirm the after-tax picture with the manager or a tax adviser.
⚖️
The honest bottom line: Mansa X is the proven engine: seven years, 18.18% average net, its best year yet in 2025, and a lead through H1 2026. Oak is the fast-growing challenger: a spectacular launch year, a near-target 18.99% in 2025, KES 19 billion gathered in under two and a half years, and friendlier top-ups. If forced to choose one on the published record, the record itself currently favours Mansa X. If you can fund both, the pairing diversifies you across two genuinely different machines. Either way, invest only money you can lock for at least a year and afford to see fluctuate.

Before you commit a shilling, download the fact sheets linked above and confirm current terms with Standard Investment Bank (Mansa X) or Faida Investment Bank (Oak). Then make the numbers personal: model your exact amount and horizon in our Mansa-X calculator, run the two funds side by side in the Mansa X vs Oak comparison calculator, or benchmark against the safe option with the money market fund calculator. For the story behind Mansa X’s latest results, read our H1 2026 results explainer.

This article is for information only and is not investment advice, a projection, or an offer. PesaCalc is independent and is not affiliated with Standard Investment Bank or Faida Investment Bank. All figures are drawn from the funds’ publicly available fact sheets linked above and may have changed since publication. Past performance is not indicative of future returns. Consult a licensed financial adviser before investing.

Share this article
Found this useful? Send it to a friend