LITP vs. PSLV

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

LITP (Sprott Lithium Miners ETF) and PSLV (Sprott Physical Silver Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - LITP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Sprott Lithium Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while PSLV is a Silver fund tracking the No Index (Physical Silver). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LITP returned -4.55%/yr vs 38.41%/yr for PSLV. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LITP charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for PSLV.

Performance

LITP vs. PSLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Lithium Miners ETF (LITP) and Sprott Physical Silver Trust (PSLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LITP achieves a 13.53% return, which is significantly higher than PSLV's -8.96% return.

LITP

• 1D: -9.58%
• 1M: -24.71%
• YTD: 13.53%
• 6M: 26.16%
• 1Y: 165.49%
• 3Y*: -4.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PSLV

• 1D: -8.15%
• 1M: -14.05%
• YTD: -8.96%
• 6M: 10.52%
• 1Y: 80.47%
• 3Y*: 38.41%
• 5Y*: 16.65%
• 10Y*: 13.13%

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

LITP vs. PSLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LITP Sprott Lithium Miners ETF	13.53%	94.65%	-43.85%	-36.14%
PSLV Sprott Physical Silver Trust	-8.96%	145.08%	19.43%	1.25%

Correlation

The correlation between LITP and PSLV is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2023	0.36

Return for Risk

LITP vs. PSLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

LITP

LITP Risk / Return Rank: 79
LITP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
LITP Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
LITP Omega Ratio Rank: 65
LITP Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
LITP Martin Ratio Rank: 83

PSLV

PSLV Risk / Return Rank: 38
PSLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
PSLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
PSLV Omega Ratio Rank: 45
PSLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
PSLV Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

LITP vs. PSLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Lithium Miners ETF (LITP) and Sprott Physical Silver Trust (PSLV). 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.

	LITP	PSLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	1.37	+1.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	1.71	+1.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.28	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.35	1.98	+3.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.98	4.35	+11.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LITP vs. PSLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LITP Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the PSLV Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LITP and PSLV, 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

	LITP	PSLV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	1.37	+1.45
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.47	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.14	0.16	-0.30

Drawdowns

LITP vs. PSLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LITP drawdown since its inception was -74.72%, smaller than the maximum PSLV drawdown of -79.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LITP and PSLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	LITP	PSLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-74.72%	-79.38%	+4.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.12%	-40.79%	+9.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-74.31%	-40.79%	-33.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-40.79%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.71%	-40.79%	+16.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.23%	-58.14%	+15.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.40%	18.56%	-8.16%

Volatility

LITP vs. PSLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Sprott Lithium Miners ETF (LITP) is 14.29%, while Sprott Physical Silver Trust (PSLV) has a volatility of 17.38%. This indicates that LITP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PSLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LITP	PSLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.29%	17.38%	-3.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.07%	57.99%	-16.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	59.18%	59.10%	+0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.60%	35.81%	+11.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.60%	31.25%	+16.35%

LITP vs. PSLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

LITP has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than PSLV's 0.51% expense ratio.

Dividends

LITP vs. PSLV - Dividend Comparison

LITP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.53%, while PSLV has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
LITP Sprott Lithium Miners ETF	6.53%	7.41%	6.55%	2.80%
PSLV Sprott Physical Silver Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LITP and PSLV in my portfolio?

LITP and PSLV have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LITP or PSLV?

PSLV has higher volatility (17.38%) compared to LITP (14.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LITP dropped -74.72% vs PSLV's -79.38%.

Which ETF is better, LITP or PSLV?

On 3-year performance, PSLV leads with 38.41% vs -4.55% for LITP. On fees, PSLV is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, LITP has been the lower-risk option at 14.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LITP or PSLV?

Over the 3-year period, PSLV has performed better with a 38.41% return vs -4.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LITP or PSLV?

PSLV is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for LITP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LITP or PSLV?

LITP has the higher dividend yield at 6.53%, compared with 0.00% for PSLV.

What is the main difference between LITP and PSLV?

LITP is categorized as Energy Equities, while PSLV is Silver. LITP tracks Nasdaq Sprott Lithium Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while PSLV tracks No Index (Physical Silver). Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LITP and 0.51% for PSLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LITP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 1.37), 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.