Yatırımcı.AI

BGL vs TTA Fund Comparison

Price, period returns, size, investor count and risk score of BGL (Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik A.Ş. Altın Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) and TTA (İş Portföy Altın Fonu) side by side.

BGLTTA
StockFund

If you had invested TRY 10,000

Metric comparison

BGL vs TTA Fund Comparison
MetricBGLTTACategory median
Daily0.49%0.53%0.48%
1 week−1.42%−1.45%−1.62%
1 month−5.37%−5.34%−5.37%
3 months9.19%8.82%10.27%
6 months0.18%0.85%2.08%
YTD0.75%0.60%8.02%
1 year23.42%19.72%27.56%
3 years278.41%247.54%287.47%
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 BGL vs TTA comparison

The price, returns, size and risk of BGL (Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik A.Ş. Altın Emeklilik Yatırım Fonu) and TTA (İş Portföy Altın Fonu) are compared side by side as of September 28, 2026. Of the 10 metrics compared, BGL leads in 7 and TTA leads in 3. BGL is a Gold Fund fund managed by Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik A.Ş.; TTA is a Gold Fund fund managed by İş Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş..

Highlights: Daily: TTA leads (0.53% vs 0.49%). 1 week: BGL leads (−1.42% vs −1.45%). 1 month: TTA leads (−5.34% vs −5.37%). 3 months: BGL leads (9.19% vs 8.82%). 6 months: TTA leads (0.85% vs 0.18%). YTD: BGL leads (0.75% vs 0.60%). 1 year: BGL leads (23.42% vs 19.72%). 3 years: BGL leads (278.41% vs 247.54%). Size (TRY): BGL leads (68.6B vs 25.7B). Investors: BGL leads (772,144 vs 224,278).

Frequently asked questions

Year to date BGL returned 0.75% and TTA returned 0.60%; over the last year BGL returned 23.42% and TTA returned 19.72%. Over the last month BGL returned −5.37% and TTA returned −5.34%. Past performance does not indicate future returns.

As of September 28, 2026, BGL has a size of TRY 68.6B with 772,144 investors, while TTA has a size of TRY 25.7B with 224,278 investors. BGL leads in size and BGL leads in investor count.

The CMB risk score of BGL is 6 out of 7 and that of TTA 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.