GUK vs NBZ Fund Comparison
Price, period returns, size, investor count and risk score of GUK (Garanti Portföy Gümüş Katılım Serbest Fon) and NBZ (Neo Portföy Birinci Serbest (Döviz) Fon) side by side.
If You Had Invested TRY 10,000
Metric Comparison
| Metric | GUK | NBZ | Category median |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daily | −3.10% | 0.06% | 0.01% |
| 1 week | −2.81% | 0.40% | 0.30% |
| 1 month | −13.41% | 1.86% | 0.00% |
| 3 months | −3.41% | 6.05% | 3.96% |
| 6 months | −22.57% | 12.57% | 8.18% |
| YTD | −18.69% | 19.12% | 15.73% |
| 1 year | — | 23.31% | 20.69% |
| 3 years | — | 100.12% | 105.65% |
Popular Comparisons
Popular Fund Comparisons
Related Pages
About the GUK vs NBZ Comparison
The price, returns, size and risk of GUK (Garanti Portföy Gümüş Katılım Serbest Fon) and NBZ (Neo Portföy Birinci Serbest (Döviz) Fon) are compared side by side as of October 23, 2026. Of the 9 metrics compared, GUK leads in 2 and NBZ leads in 7. GUK is a Hedge Fund fund managed by Garanti Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş.; NBZ is a Hedge Fund fund managed by Neo Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş..
Highlights: Daily: NBZ leads (0.06% vs −3.10%). 1 week: NBZ leads (0.40% vs −2.81%). 1 month: NBZ leads (1.86% vs −13.41%). 3 months: NBZ leads (6.05% vs −3.41%). 6 months: NBZ leads (12.57% vs −22.57%). YTD: NBZ leads (19.12% vs −18.69%). Size (TRY): GUK leads (1.1B vs 1B). Investors: GUK leads (2,316 vs 160). Risk: NBZ leads (6 vs 7).
Frequently Asked Questions
Which earned more, GUK or NBZ?
Year to date GUK returned −18.69% and NBZ returned 19.12%; over the last year GUK returned — and NBZ returned 23.31%. Over the last month GUK returned −13.41% and NBZ returned 1.86%. Past performance does not indicate future returns.
Which is larger and which has more investors, GUK or NBZ?
As of October 23, 2026, GUK has a size of TRY 1.1B with 2,316 investors, while NBZ has a size of TRY 1B with 160 investors. GUK leads in size and GUK leads in investor count.
What do the risk scores of GUK and NBZ mean?
The CMB risk score of GUK is 7 out of 7 and that of NBZ 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.