SILJ vs. CEF
Compare and contrast key facts about ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF).
SILJ is a passively managed fund by ETFMG that tracks the performance of the Prime Junior Silver Miners & Explorers Index. It was launched on Nov 28, 2012. CEF is an actively managed fund by Sprott. It was launched on Jan 16, 2018.
Performance
SILJ vs. CEF - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
SILJ vs. CEF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SILJ ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF | 11.35% | 183.89% | 6.39% | -5.21% | -15.42% | -23.21% | 33.00% | 57.06% | -27.95% | -5.65% |
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust | 5.55% | 92.76% | 24.07% | 6.80% | 1.07% | -8.32% | 31.99% | 16.91% | -6.34% | 18.78% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SILJ achieves a 11.35% return, which is significantly higher than CEF's 5.55% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SILJ having a 15.15% annualized return and CEF not far ahead at 15.18%.
SILJ
- 1D
- 3.67%
- 1M
- -22.88%
- YTD
- 11.35%
- 6M
- 34.60%
- 1Y
- 163.12%
- 3Y*
- 44.62%
- 5Y*
- 17.55%
- 10Y*
- 15.15%
CEF
- 1D
- 1.30%
- 1M
- -13.66%
- YTD
- 5.55%
- 6M
- 30.90%
- 1Y
- 71.30%
- 3Y*
- 36.73%
- 5Y*
- 22.27%
- 10Y*
- 15.18%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
SILJ vs. CEF - Expense Ratio Comparison
SILJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than CEF's 0.48% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
SILJ vs. CEF — Risk / Return Rank
SILJ
CEF
SILJ vs. CEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ) and Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF). 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.
| SILJ | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.98 | 1.92 | +1.07 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.97 | 2.19 | +0.78 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.35 | +0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.58 | 2.62 | +1.96 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.52 | 9.59 | +5.93 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SILJ | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.98 | 1.92 | +1.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 | 0.94 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | 0.71 | -0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.10 | 0.23 | -0.13 |
Correlation
The correlation between SILJ and CEF is 0.72, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
SILJ vs. CEF - Dividend Comparison
SILJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%, while CEF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SILJ ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF | 1.80% | 2.00% | 7.26% | 0.01% | 0.05% | 0.36% | 1.23% | 1.45% | 1.66% | 0.00% | 0.52% | 2.46% |
CEF Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.08% | 0.07% | 0.09% | 0.10% |
Drawdowns
SILJ vs. CEF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SILJ drawdown since its inception was -79.04%, which is greater than CEF's maximum drawdown of -62.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SILJ and CEF.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| SILJ | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.04% | -62.29% | -16.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.71% | -26.77% | -7.94% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.09% | -26.77% | -29.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -70.06% | -29.10% | -40.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.55% | -18.36% | -5.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.66% | -27.38% | -14.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.25% | 7.31% | +2.94% |
Volatility
SILJ vs. CEF - Volatility Comparison
ETFMG Prime Junior Silver Miners ETF (SILJ) has a higher volatility of 20.08% compared to Sprott Physical Gold and Silver Trust (CEF) at 13.56%. This indicates that SILJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| SILJ | CEF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 20.08% | 13.56% | +6.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.92% | 35.38% | +11.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 55.05% | 37.38% | +17.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.06% | 23.78% | +20.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.61% | 21.58% | +25.03% |