GLTR vs. SIVR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) and SIVR (abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index, while SIVR is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLTR returned 11.27%/yr vs 12.91%/yr for SIVR. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for SIVR.

Performance

GLTR vs. SIVR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLTR achieves a -9.21% return, which is significantly higher than SIVR's -13.39% return. Over the past 10 years, GLTR has underperformed SIVR with an annualized return of 11.27%, while SIVR has yielded a comparatively higher 12.91% annualized return.

GLTR

• 1D: -3.07%
• 1M: -12.32%
• YTD: -9.21%
• 6M: -12.60%
• 1Y: 33.31%
• 3Y*: 29.08%
• 5Y*: 14.31%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

SIVR

• 1D: -5.41%
• 1M: -18.43%
• YTD: -13.39%
• 6M: -13.95%
• 1Y: 69.45%
• 3Y*: 39.67%
• 5Y*: 18.54%
• 10Y*: 12.91%

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

GLTR vs. SIVR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	-9.21%	87.25%	20.63%	2.01%	-0.25%	-9.60%	29.52%	20.96%	-2.85%	12.94%
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF	-13.39%	145.34%	21.08%	-0.91%	2.59%	-12.33%	47.52%	15.17%	-8.96%	5.97%

Correlation

The correlation between GLTR and SIVR is 0.95, 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2010	0.92

The correlation between GLTR and SIVR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLTR vs. SIVR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 24
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 29
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
GLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 20

SIVR

SIVR Risk / Return Rank: 32
SIVR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
SIVR Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SIVR Omega Ratio Rank: 40
SIVR Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
SIVR Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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. SIVR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) 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.

	GLTR	SIVR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	1.16	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.22	1.55	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.25	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.97	1.48	-0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.27	3.18	-0.91

GLTR vs. SIVR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is comparable to the SIVR Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLTR and SIVR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GLTR vs. SIVR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLTR drawdown since its inception was -55.70%, smaller than the maximum SIVR drawdown of -75.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLTR and SIVR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLTR	SIVR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.70%	-75.85%	+20.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.55%	-47.16%	+12.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.55%	-47.16%	+12.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.55%	-47.16%	+12.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.55%	-47.16%	+12.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.55%	-47.16%	+12.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.83%	-47.83%	+19.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.68%	21.88%	-7.20%

Volatility

GLTR vs. SIVR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) is 10.06%, while abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) has a volatility of 14.32%. This indicates that GLTR 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.

Volatility by Period

	GLTR	SIVR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.06%	14.32%	-4.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.51%	59.26%	-22.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.78%	60.27%	-21.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.90%	36.61%	-12.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.68%	32.12%	-11.44%

GLTR vs. SIVR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than SIVR's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLTR vs. SIVR - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLTR nor SIVR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLTR and SIVR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, GLTR and SIVR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GLTR or SIVR?

SIVR has higher volatility (14.32%) compared to GLTR (10.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLTR dropped -55.70% vs SIVR's -75.85%.

Which ETF is better, GLTR or SIVR?

On 10-year performance, SIVR leads with 12.91% vs 11.27% for GLTR. On fees, SIVR is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 10.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLTR or SIVR?

Over the 10-year period, SIVR has performed better with a 12.91% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLTR or SIVR?

SIVR is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GLTR.

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

GLTR and SIVR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GLTR and SIVR?

GLTR is categorized as Precious Metals, while SIVR is Silver. GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index, while SIVR tracks LBMA Silver Price ($/ozt). Their fees differ too: 0.60% for GLTR and 0.30% for SIVR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SIVR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.16 vs 0.86), 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.