Yatırımcı.AI

AGA vs NZA Fund Comparison

Price, period returns, size, investor count and risk score of AGA (Bereket Emeklilik ve Hayat A.Ş. Altın Katılım Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) and NZA (Allıanz Yaşam ve Emeklilik A.Ş. Altın Katılım Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) side by side.

AGANZA
StockFund

If you had invested TRY 10,000

Metric comparison

AGA vs NZA Fund Comparison
MetricAGANZACategory median
Daily0.82%0.57%0.61%
1 week−1.51%−1.56%−1.51%
1 month−5.52%−5.10%−5.48%
3 months9.13%10.13%9.13%
6 months−0.21%2.62%−0.21%
YTD4.42%2.21%3.54%
1 year28.28%—26.64%
3 years354.14%—297.25%
Returns are based on prices as of September 28, 2026; the fund with the higher return or the lower risk score counts as the leader.

Popular comparisons

Related pages

About the AGA vs NZA comparison

The price, returns, size and risk of AGA (Bereket Emeklilik ve Hayat A.Ş. Altın Katılım Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) and NZA (Allıanz Yaşam ve Emeklilik A.Ş. Altın Katılım Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) are compared side by side as of September 28, 2026. Of the 8 metrics compared, AGA leads in 5 and NZA leads in 3. AGA is a Shariah-compliant Gold Fund fund managed by Bereket Emeklilik ve Hayat A.Ş.; NZA is a Shariah-compliant Gold Fund fund managed by —.

Highlights: Daily: AGA leads (0.82% vs 0.57%). 1 week: AGA leads (−1.51% vs −1.56%). 1 month: NZA leads (−5.10% vs −5.52%). 3 months: NZA leads (10.13% vs 9.13%). 6 months: NZA leads (2.62% vs −0.21%). YTD: AGA leads (4.42% vs 2.21%). Size (TRY): AGA leads (9.1B vs 1B). Investors: AGA leads (83,189 vs 6,865).

Frequently asked questions

Year to date AGA returned 4.42% and NZA returned 2.21%; over the last year AGA returned 28.28% and NZA returned —. Over the last month AGA returned −5.52% and NZA returned −5.10%. Past performance does not indicate future returns.

As of September 28, 2026, AGA has a size of TRY 9.1B with 83,189 investors, while NZA has a size of TRY 1B with 6,865 investors. AGA leads in size and AGA leads in investor count.

The CMB risk score of AGA is 6 out of 7 and that of NZA is 6. The risk score reflects the historical volatility of the fund price; 1 is the lowest and 7 the highest risk. A lower score means less volatility, not a guarantee of higher returns.