SI=F vs. PL=F

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SI=F (Silver) and PL=F (Platinum) are both assets. Over the past 10 years, SI=F returned 16.24%/yr vs 6.66%/yr for PL=F. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

SI=F vs. PL=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Silver (SI=F) and Platinum (PL=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SI=F achieves a 4.38% return, which is significantly higher than PL=F's -6.68% return. Over the past 10 years, SI=F has outperformed PL=F with an annualized return of 16.24%, while PL=F has yielded a comparatively lower 6.66% annualized return.

SI=F

• 1D: -2.46%
• 1M: -4.67%
• YTD: 4.38%
• 6M: 24.79%
• 1Y: 105.82%
• 3Y*: 45.64%
• 5Y*: 21.43%
• 10Y*: 16.24%

PL=F

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: -7.33%
• YTD: -6.68%
• 6M: 14.71%
• 1Y: 67.46%
• 3Y*: 22.36%
• 5Y*: 10.27%
• 10Y*: 6.66%

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

SI=F vs. PL=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SI=F Silver	4.38%	141.44%	21.41%	0.19%	2.95%	-11.59%	47.38%	15.32%	-9.36%	7.23%
PL=F Platinum	-6.68%	123.45%	-9.78%	-6.81%	12.08%	-10.47%	10.37%	22.13%	-14.68%	3.60%

Correlation

The correlation between SI=F and PL=F is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2009	0.61

The correlation between SI=F and PL=F has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SI=F vs. PL=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

SI=F

SI=F Risk / Return Rank: 67
SI=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
SI=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
SI=F Omega Ratio Rank: 71
SI=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
SI=F Martin Ratio Rank: 63

PL=F

PL=F Risk / Return Rank: 58
PL=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
PL=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
PL=F Omega Ratio Rank: 57
PL=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
PL=F Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

SI=F vs. PL=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Silver (SI=F) and Platinum (PL=F). 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.

	SI=F	PL=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	1.32	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	1.71	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.26	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	2.01	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.57	4.03	+0.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SI=F vs. PL=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SI=F Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the PL=F Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SI=F and PL=F, 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

	SI=F	PL=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	1.32	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	0.29	+0.24
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	0.21	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.10	+0.11

Drawdowns

SI=F vs. PL=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SI=F drawdown since its inception was -91.54%, which is greater than PL=F's maximum drawdown of -68.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SI=F and PL=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	SI=F	PL=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.54%	-68.68%	-22.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.21%	-35.55%	-5.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.21%	-35.55%	-5.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.21%	-35.55%	-5.66%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.13%	-49.56%	+6.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.00%	-33.44%	-2.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-61.04%	-36.40%	-24.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.96%	17.98%	+2.98%

Volatility

SI=F vs. PL=F - Volatility Comparison

Silver (SI=F) has a higher volatility of 14.73% compared to Platinum (PL=F) at 10.31%. This indicates that SI=F's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PL=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SI=F	PL=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.73%	10.31%	+4.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	60.44%	48.96%	+11.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	60.00%	54.15%	+5.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.96%	35.63%	+2.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.58%	31.75%	+1.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SI=F and PL=F in my portfolio?

SI=F and PL=F have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SI=F or PL=F?

SI=F has higher volatility (14.73%) compared to PL=F (10.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SI=F dropped -91.54% vs PL=F's -68.68%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SI=F currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.32), 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.