PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SIVR vs. UNG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SIVR vs. UNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) and United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIVR achieves a -4.75% return, which is significantly higher than UNG's -7.42% return. Over the past 10 years, SIVR has outperformed UNG with an annualized return of 14.22%, while UNG has yielded a comparatively lower -21.38% annualized return.


SIVR

1D
0.78%
1M
-18.81%
YTD
-4.75%
6M
9.46%
1Y
86.32%
3Y*
41.59%
5Y*
19.07%
10Y*
14.22%

UNG

1D
1.70%
1M
1.70%
YTD
-7.42%
6M
-10.84%
1Y
-30.62%
3Y*
-23.83%
5Y*
-24.47%
10Y*
-21.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SIVR vs. UNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SIVR
abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF
-4.75%145.34%21.08%-0.91%2.59%-12.33%47.52%15.17%-8.96%5.97%
UNG
United States Natural Gas Fund LP
-7.42%-27.07%-17.11%-64.04%12.89%35.76%-45.43%-31.77%5.96%-37.58%

Correlation

The correlation between SIVR and UNG is 0.00, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.00

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.00

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.01

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2009

0.02

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

SIVR vs. UNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SIVR
SIVR Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
SIVR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SIVR Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
SIVR Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
SIVR Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
SIVR Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

UNG
UNG Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
UNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
UNG Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
UNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
UNG Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank
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. UNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) and United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG). 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.


SIVRUNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

0.95

+0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

-0.67

+2.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.12

-0.97

+5.09

SIVR vs. UNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIVR Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the UNG Sharpe Ratio of -0.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIVR and UNG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SIVR vs. UNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIVR drawdown since its inception was -75.85%, smaller than the maximum UNG drawdown of -99.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIVR and UNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SIVRUNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-75.85%

-99.88%

+24.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-45.33%

-43.86%

-1.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-45.33%

-68.16%

+22.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.33%

-92.49%

+47.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.33%

-93.55%

+48.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-41.89%

-99.86%

+57.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-47.83%

-89.96%

+42.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

20.85%

30.28%

-9.43%

Volatility

SIVR vs. UNG - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF (SIVR) has a higher volatility of 16.37% compared to United States Natural Gas Fund LP (UNG) at 12.64%. This indicates that SIVR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SIVRUNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.37%

12.64%

+3.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

59.11%

52.01%

+7.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

59.76%

60.61%

-0.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.48%

64.11%

-27.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.03%

54.77%

-22.74%

SIVR vs. UNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIVR has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than UNG's 1.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

SIVR vs. UNG - Dividend Comparison

Neither SIVR nor UNG has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


SIVR and UNG have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SIVR has higher volatility (16.37%) compared to UNG (12.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIVR dropped -75.85% vs UNG's -99.88%.

On 10-year performance, SIVR leads with 14.22% vs -21.38% for UNG. On fees, SIVR is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, UNG has been the lower-risk option at 12.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SIVR has performed better with a 14.22% return vs -21.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SIVR is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 1.28% for UNG.

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

SIVR is categorized as Silver, while UNG is Oil & Gas. SIVR tracks LBMA Silver Price ($/ozt), while UNG tracks Front Month Natural Gas. They also come from different issuers: abrdn and Concierge Technologies. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for SIVR and 1.28% for UNG.

SIVR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs -0.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SIVR and UNG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer