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 20.64%/yr vs 11.16%/yr for SIVR. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
COST vs. SIVR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COST achieves a 6.55% return, which is significantly higher than SIVR's -16.16% return. Over the past 10 years, COST has outperformed SIVR with an annualized return of 20.64%, while SIVR has yielded a comparatively lower 11.16% annualized return.
COST
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- -6.09%
- 6M
- -0.65%
- YTD
- 6.55%
- 1Y
- -5.04%
- 3Y*
- 21.66%
- 5Y*
- 18.59%
- 10Y*
- 20.64%
SIVR
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- -11.29%
- 6M
- -25.37%
- YTD
- -16.16%
- 1Y
- 54.52%
- 3Y*
- 36.76%
- 5Y*
- 17.63%
- 10Y*
- 11.16%
COST vs. SIVR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 6.55% | -5.39% | 39.62% | 49.00% | -19.05% | 51.82% | 32.67% | 45.70% | 10.60% | 22.37% |
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF | -16.16% | 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 -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2009 | 0.08 |
The correlation between COST and SIVR shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.08 (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 | -1.25 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.23 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.30 | 1.19 | -1.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.71 | 2.49 | -3.20 |
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% | -50.92% | +34.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.74% | -50.92% | +30.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.40% | -50.92% | +19.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.40% | -50.92% | +19.52% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.27% | -48.85% | +32.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -47.83% | +34.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.07% | 24.36% | -17.29% |
Volatility
COST vs. SIVR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is 6.92%, while abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) has a volatility of 14.32%. 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 | 6.92% | 14.32% | -7.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.22% | 57.41% | -42.19% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.57% | 60.96% | -41.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.85% | 36.83% | -13.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.98% | 32.18% | -10.20% |
Dividends
COST vs. SIVR - Dividend Comparison
COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, 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 | 0.59% | 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 -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SIVR has higher volatility (14.32%) compared to COST (6.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COST dropped -53.39% vs SIVR's -75.85%.
SIVR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs -0.26), 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