COST vs. SIVR
COST (Costco Wholesale Corporation) is a stock, while SIVR (abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF) is Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price ($/ozt). Over the past 10 years, COST returned 21.10%/yr vs 10.56%/yr for SIVR. Their 0.07 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
COST vs. SIVR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COST achieves a 10.87% return, which is significantly higher than SIVR's -18.61% return. Over the past 10 years, COST has outperformed SIVR with an annualized return of 21.10%, while SIVR has yielded a comparatively lower 10.56% annualized return.
COST
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 3.11%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- YTD
- 10.87%
- 1Y
- 2.04%
- 3Y*
- 21.34%
- 5Y*
- 18.51%
- 10Y*
- 21.10%
- ALL TIME*
- 16.98%
SIVR
- 1D
- -2.08%
- 1M
- -2.25%
- 6M
- -30.49%
- YTD
- -18.61%
- 1Y
- 57.47%
- 3Y*
- 33.21%
- 5Y*
- 17.49%
- 10Y*
- 10.56%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.45%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.83B | $2.11B | $2.34B | |
| $49.50M | $48.83M | $86.59M |
COST vs. SIVR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 10.87% | -5.39% | 39.62% | 49.00% | -19.05% | 51.82% | 32.67% | 45.70% | 10.60% | 22.37% |
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF | -18.61% | 145.34% | 21.08% | -0.91% | 2.59% | -12.33% | 47.52% | 15.17% | -8.96% | 5.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between COST and SIVR is -0.07, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.07 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.05 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2009 | 0.07 |
The correlation between COST and SIVR shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
COST vs. SIVR — Risk / Return Rank
COST
SIVR
COST vs. SIVR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| COST | SIVR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.22 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.12 | 1.10 | -0.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.26 | 2.11 | -1.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COST vs. SIVR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COST drawdown since its inception was -53.39%, smaller than the maximum SIVR drawdown of -75.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COST and SIVR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COST | SIVR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.39% | -75.85% | +22.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.57% | -52.27% | +35.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.74% | -52.27% | +31.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.40% | -52.27% | +20.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.40% | -52.27% | +20.87% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.88% | -50.35% | +37.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -47.84% | +34.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.81% | 27.28% | -19.47% |
Volatility
COST vs. SIVR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is 7.34%, while abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) has a volatility of 11.28%. This indicates that COST experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SIVR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COST | SIVR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.34% | 11.28% | -3.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.13% | 55.47% | -40.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.96% | 61.33% | -41.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.93% | 37.00% | -14.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.03% | 32.26% | -10.23% |
Dividends
COST vs. SIVR - Dividend Comparison
COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.72%, while SIVR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 0.72% | 0.59% | 0.49% | 2.87% | 0.76% | 0.54% | 3.38% | 0.86% | 1.08% | 4.81% | 1.09% | 4.06% |
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COST and SIVR have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SIVR has higher volatility (11.28%) compared to COST (7.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COST dropped -53.39% vs SIVR's -75.85%.
SIVR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.94 vs 0.10), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for COST and SIVR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer