SIVR vs. FMED

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

SIVR (abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF) and FMED (Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SIVR is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price ($/ozt), while FMED is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. SIVR is passively managed, while FMED is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SIVR returned 42.25%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for FMED. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SIVR charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FMED.

Performance

SIVR vs. FMED - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIVR achieves a -1.40% return, which is significantly higher than FMED's -4.75% return.

SIVR

• 1D: 3.51%
• 1M: -8.06%
• YTD: -1.40%
• 6M: 9.35%
• 1Y: 92.86%
• 3Y*: 42.25%
• 5Y*: 20.46%
• 10Y*: 14.57%

FMED

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 7.10%
• YTD: -4.75%
• 6M: -6.17%
• 1Y: 8.53%
• 3Y*: 0.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SIVR vs. FMED - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF	-1.40%	145.34%	21.08%	-2.23%
FMED Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF	-4.75%	9.69%	2.29%	-3.59%

Correlation

The correlation between SIVR and FMED is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2023	0.19

Return for Risk

SIVR vs. FMED — Risk / Return Rank

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

SIVR

SIVR Risk / Return Rank: 44
SIVR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
SIVR Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
SIVR Omega Ratio Rank: 54
SIVR Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
SIVR Martin Ratio Rank: 33

FMED

FMED Risk / Return Rank: 15
FMED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
FMED Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FMED Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FMED Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FMED Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

SIVR vs. FMED - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) and Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED). 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.

	SIVR	FMED	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	0.44	+1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	0.79	+1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.09	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	0.47	+1.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.44	1.03	+3.40

SIVR vs. FMED - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIVR Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is higher than the FMED Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIVR and FMED, 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

SIVR vs. FMED - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIVR drawdown since its inception was -75.85%, which is greater than FMED's maximum drawdown of -21.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIVR and FMED.

Drawdown Indicators

	SIVR	FMED	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.85%	-21.84%	-54.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-45.33%	-18.33%	-27.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-45.33%	-21.84%	-23.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.85%	-10.64%	-29.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.83%	-7.09%	-40.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.00%	8.27%	+12.73%

Volatility

SIVR vs. FMED - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) has a higher volatility of 16.52% compared to Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED) at 7.50%. This indicates that SIVR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMED based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SIVR	FMED	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.52%	7.50%	+9.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	59.14%	15.01%	+44.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	59.96%	19.37%	+40.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.53%	18.57%	+17.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.05%	18.57%	+13.48%

SIVR vs. FMED - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIVR has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than FMED's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

SIVR vs. FMED - Dividend Comparison

Neither SIVR nor FMED has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FMED Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.46%
SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SIVR and FMED in my portfolio?

SIVR and FMED have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SIVR or FMED?

SIVR has higher volatility (16.52%) compared to FMED (7.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIVR dropped -75.85% vs FMED's -21.84%.

Which ETF is better, SIVR or FMED?

On 3-year performance, SIVR leads with 42.25% vs 0.73% for FMED. On fees, SIVR is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, FMED has been the lower-risk option at 7.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SIVR or FMED?

Over the 3-year period, SIVR has performed better with a 42.25% return vs 0.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SIVR or FMED?

SIVR is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FMED.

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

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

What is the main difference between SIVR and FMED?

SIVR is categorized as Silver, while FMED is Health & Biotech Equities. They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for SIVR and 0.50% for FMED.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SIVR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 0.44), 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.