Yatırımcı.AI

IZS vs OLA Fund Comparison

Price, period returns, size, investor count and risk score of IZS (İstanbul Portföy Altıncı Serbest Fon) and OLA (Osmanlı Portföy İkinci Serbest (Döviz- Avro) Fon) side by side.

IZSOLA
StockFund

If You Had Invested TRY 10,000

Metric Comparison

IZS vs OLA Fund Comparison
MetricIZSOLACategory median
Daily0.10%0.05%0.01%
1 week0.59%0.37%0.30%
1 month2.69%−0.87%0.00%
3 months17.57%2.35%3.96%
6 months27.77%3.30%8.18%
YTD21.02%6.91%15.73%
1 year24.76%11.01%20.69%
3 years146.58%93.83%105.65%
Returns are based on prices as of October 23, 2026; the fund with the higher return or the lower risk score counts as the leader.

Popular Comparisons

Popular Fund Comparisons

Related Pages

About the IZS vs OLA Comparison

The price, returns, size and risk of IZS (İstanbul Portföy Altıncı Serbest Fon) and OLA (Osmanlı Portföy İkinci Serbest (Döviz- Avro) Fon) are compared side by side as of October 23, 2026. Of the 10 metrics compared, IZS leads in 9 and OLA leads in 1. IZS is a Hedge Fund fund managed by İstanbul Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş.; OLA is a Hedge Fund fund managed by Osmanlı Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş..

Highlights: Daily: IZS leads (0.10% vs 0.05%). 1 week: IZS leads (0.59% vs 0.37%). 1 month: IZS leads (2.69% vs −0.87%). 3 months: IZS leads (17.57% vs 2.35%). 6 months: IZS leads (27.77% vs 3.30%). YTD: IZS leads (21.02% vs 6.91%). 1 year: IZS leads (24.76% vs 11.01%). 3 years: IZS leads (146.58% vs 93.83%). Size (TRY): OLA leads (19M vs 11.7M). Investors: IZS leads (52 vs 24).

Frequently Asked Questions

Year to date IZS returned 21.02% and OLA returned 6.91%; over the last year IZS returned 24.76% and OLA returned 11.01%. Over the last month IZS returned 2.69% and OLA returned −0.87%. Past performance does not indicate future returns.

As of October 23, 2026, IZS has a size of TRY 11.7M with 52 investors, while OLA has a size of TRY 19M with 24 investors. OLA leads in size and IZS leads in investor count.

The CMB risk score of IZS is 7 out of 7 and that of OLA is —. 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.