Yatırımcı.AI

MTS vs SFS Fund Comparison

Price, period returns, size, investor count and risk score of MTS (Aktif Portföy Tarım ve Sürdürülebilirlik Fon Sepeti Fonu) and SFS (Azimut Portföy Agresif Fon Sepeti Fonu) side by side.

MTSSFS
StockFund

If You Had Invested TRY 10,000

Metric Comparison

MTS vs SFS Fund Comparison
MetricMTSSFSCategory median
Daily−0.97%−1.43%−1.33%
1 week−0.41%−0.84%−0.68%
1 month−3.05%−3.96%−2.96%
3 months−2.27%−2.02%0.00%
6 months−2.31%2.18%2.05%
YTD10.81%20.57%17.79%
1 year14.46%25.65%24.45%
3 years105.50%—158.82%
Returns are based on prices as of November 2, 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 MTS vs SFS Comparison

The price, returns, size and risk of MTS (Aktif Portföy Tarım ve Sürdürülebilirlik Fon Sepeti Fonu) and SFS (Azimut Portföy Agresif Fon Sepeti Fonu) are compared side by side as of November 2, 2026. Of the 9 metrics compared, MTS leads in 4 and SFS leads in 5. MTS is a Fund of Funds fund managed by Aktif Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş.; SFS is a Fund of Funds fund managed by Azimut Portföy Yönetimi A.Ş..

Highlights: Daily: MTS leads (−0.97% vs −1.43%). 1 week: MTS leads (−0.41% vs −0.84%). 1 month: MTS leads (−3.05% vs −3.96%). 3 months: SFS leads (−2.02% vs −2.27%). 6 months: SFS leads (2.18% vs −2.31%). YTD: SFS leads (20.57% vs 10.81%). 1 year: SFS leads (25.65% vs 14.46%). Size (TRY): SFS leads (28.7M vs 24.6M). Investors: MTS leads (533 vs 60).

Frequently Asked Questions

Year to date MTS returned 10.81% and SFS returned 20.57%; over the last year MTS returned 14.46% and SFS returned 25.65%. Over the last month MTS returned −3.05% and SFS returned −3.96%. Past performance does not indicate future returns.

As of November 2, 2026, MTS has a size of TRY 24.6M with 533 investors, while SFS has a size of TRY 28.7M with 60 investors. SFS leads in size and MTS leads in investor count.

The CMB risk score of MTS is 5 out of 7 and that of SFS is 5. 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.