GLTR vs. AGMI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GLTR (Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) and AGMI (Themes Silver Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index, while AGMI is a Silver fund tracking the STOXX Global Silver Mining Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GLTR returned 53.06% vs 112.77% for AGMI. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for AGMI.

Performance

GLTR vs. AGMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) and Themes Silver Miners ETF (AGMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLTR achieves a 1.47% return, which is significantly lower than AGMI's 7.60% return.

GLTR

• 1D: -1.81%
• 1M: -1.45%
• YTD: 1.47%
• 6M: 10.73%
• 1Y: 53.06%
• 3Y*: 32.36%
• 5Y*: 15.32%
• 10Y*: 13.17%

AGMI

• 1D: -4.74%
• 1M: 3.77%
• YTD: 7.60%
• 6M: 20.09%
• 1Y: 112.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GLTR vs. AGMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	1.47%	87.25%	10.69%
AGMI Themes Silver Miners ETF	7.60%	176.11%	-0.74%

Correlation

The correlation between GLTR and AGMI is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2024	0.81

The correlation between GLTR and AGMI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLTR vs. AGMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 36
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 44
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
GLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 28

AGMI

AGMI Risk / Return Rank: 60
AGMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
AGMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
AGMI Omega Ratio Rank: 57
AGMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
AGMI Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

GLTR vs. AGMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) and Themes Silver Miners ETF (AGMI). 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.

	GLTR	AGMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	2.32	-0.90
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	2.52	-0.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.35	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	3.41	-1.61
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.13	9.21	-5.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GLTR vs. AGMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLTR Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the AGMI Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLTR and AGMI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GLTR	AGMI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.42	2.32	-0.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.64	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	1.56	-1.24

Drawdowns

GLTR vs. AGMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLTR drawdown since its inception was -55.70%, which is greater than AGMI's maximum drawdown of -33.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLTR and AGMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLTR	AGMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.70%	-33.26%	-22.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.70%	-33.26%	+3.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-29.70%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.86%	-22.35%	-4.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.83%	-9.14%	-19.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.88%	12.29%	+0.59%

Volatility

GLTR vs. AGMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) is 9.13%, while Themes Silver Miners ETF (AGMI) has a volatility of 17.62%. This indicates that GLTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AGMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLTR	AGMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.13%	17.62%	-8.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.41%	40.98%	-5.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.58%	48.95%	-11.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.63%	44.04%	-20.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.50%	44.04%	-23.54%

GLTR vs. AGMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than AGMI's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLTR vs. AGMI - Dividend Comparison

GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AGMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AGMI Themes Silver Miners ETF	4.12%	4.43%	1.81%
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLTR and AGMI in my portfolio?

GLTR and AGMI have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLTR or AGMI?

AGMI has higher volatility (17.62%) compared to GLTR (9.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLTR dropped -55.70% vs AGMI's -33.26%.

Which ETF is better, GLTR or AGMI?

On 1-year performance, AGMI leads with 112.77% vs 53.06% for GLTR. On fees, AGMI is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 9.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLTR or AGMI?

Over the 1-year period, AGMI has performed better with a 112.77% return vs 53.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLTR or AGMI?

AGMI is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GLTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLTR or AGMI?

AGMI has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 0.00% for GLTR.

What is the main difference between GLTR and AGMI?

GLTR is categorized as Precious Metals, while AGMI is Silver. GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index, while AGMI tracks STOXX Global Silver Mining Index. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for GLTR and 0.35% for AGMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AGMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.42), 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.