PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AIEQ vs. SILJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) and ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
AIEQ
AI Powered Equity ETF
-3.53%13.96%14.21%
SILJ
ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF
11.35%183.89%16.02%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIEQ achieves a -3.53% return, which is significantly lower than SILJ's 11.35% return.


AIEQ

1D
0.73%
1M
-4.56%
YTD
-3.53%
6M
-2.63%
1Y
17.02%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

SILJ

1D
3.67%
1M
-22.88%
YTD
11.35%
6M
34.60%
1Y
163.12%
3Y*
44.62%
5Y*
17.55%
10Y*
15.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


AIEQ vs. SILJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIEQ has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than SILJ's 0.69% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

AIEQ vs. SILJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AIEQ
AIEQ Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
AIEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AIEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
AIEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
AIEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
AIEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

SILJ
SILJ Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
SILJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SILJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
SILJ Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
SILJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
SILJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) and ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


AIEQSILJDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.79

2.98

-2.19

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.28

2.97

-1.69

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.42

-0.22

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.21

4.58

-3.37

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.89

15.52

-9.63

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIEQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is lower than the SILJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIEQ and SILJ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AIEQSILJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

2.98

-2.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.10

+0.46

Correlation

The correlation between AIEQ and SILJ is 0.34, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Dividend Comparison

AIEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.45%, less than SILJ's 1.80% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AIEQ
AI Powered Equity ETF
0.45%0.43%0.65%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SILJ
ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF
1.80%2.00%7.26%0.01%0.05%0.36%1.23%1.45%1.66%0.00%0.52%2.46%

Drawdowns

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIEQ drawdown since its inception was -24.19%, smaller than the maximum SILJ drawdown of -79.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIEQ and SILJ.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


AIEQSILJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.19%

-79.04%

+54.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.35%

-34.71%

+19.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-70.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.85%

-23.55%

+17.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.50%

-41.66%

+38.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.17%

10.25%

-7.08%

Volatility

AIEQ vs. SILJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) is 5.35%, while ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ) has a volatility of 20.08%. This indicates that AIEQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SILJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


AIEQSILJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.35%

20.08%

-14.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.76%

46.92%

-37.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.59%

55.05%

-33.46%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.93%

44.06%

-24.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.93%

46.61%

-26.68%