SLVP vs. QQWZ

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

SLVP (iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF) and QQWZ (Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SLVP is a Silver fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Silver Miners Investable Market Index, while QQWZ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Pacer. SLVP is passively managed, while QQWZ is actively managed. Over the past year, SLVP returned 93.96% vs 37.64% for QQWZ. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SLVP charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for QQWZ.

Performance

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SLVP achieves a 0.95% return, which is significantly lower than QQWZ's 18.65% return.

SLVP

• 1D: 6.68%
• 1M: -5.16%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 5.72%
• 1Y: 93.96%
• 3Y*: 52.67%
• 5Y*: 16.28%
• 10Y*: 13.10%

QQWZ

• 1D: 2.92%
• 1M: 4.75%
• YTD: 18.65%
• 6M: 18.53%
• 1Y: 37.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SLVP iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF	0.95%	126.06%
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	18.65%	26.23%

Correlation

The correlation between SLVP and QQWZ is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 7, 2025	0.26

Return for Risk

SLVP vs. QQWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SLVP

SLVP Risk / Return Rank: 50
SLVP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
SLVP Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
SLVP Omega Ratio Rank: 49
SLVP Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
SLVP Martin Ratio Rank: 44

QQWZ

QQWZ Risk / Return Rank: 85
QQWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QQWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
QQWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QQWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
QQWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP) and Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ). 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.

	SLVP	QQWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	2.50	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	3.25	-1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.46	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.48	4.84	-2.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.54	16.83	-10.28

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SLVP Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is lower than the QQWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SLVP and QQWZ, 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

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SLVP drawdown since its inception was -80.47%, which is greater than QQWZ's maximum drawdown of -7.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLVP and QQWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SLVP	QQWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.47%	-7.81%	-72.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.06%	-7.81%	-30.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.79%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.18%	-0.46%	-26.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-46.77%	-1.43%	-45.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.41%	2.24%	+12.17%

Volatility

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (SLVP) has a higher volatility of 20.77% compared to Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF (QQWZ) at 7.59%. This indicates that SLVP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SLVP	QQWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	20.77%	7.59%	+13.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.32%	11.09%	+34.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.01%	15.17%	+39.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.26%	15.39%	+27.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.48%	15.39%	+27.09%

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SLVP has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QQWZ's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

SLVP vs. QQWZ - Dividend Comparison

SLVP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.17%, more than QQWZ's 0.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QQWZ Pacer Cash COWZ 100-Nasdaq 100 Rotator ETF	0.55%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SLVP iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF	2.17%	1.78%	1.05%	0.88%	0.63%	1.63%	2.39%	2.03%	1.28%	0.85%	2.32%	0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SLVP and QQWZ in my portfolio?

SLVP and QQWZ have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SLVP or QQWZ?

SLVP has higher volatility (20.77%) compared to QQWZ (7.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SLVP dropped -80.47% vs QQWZ's -7.81%.

Which ETF is better, SLVP or QQWZ?

On 1-year performance, SLVP leads with 93.96% vs 37.64% for QQWZ. On fees, SLVP is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, QQWZ has been the lower-risk option at 7.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SLVP or QQWZ?

Over the 1-year period, SLVP has performed better with a 93.96% return vs 37.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SLVP or QQWZ?

SLVP is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SLVP or QQWZ?

SLVP has the higher dividend yield at 2.17%, compared with 0.55% for QQWZ.

What is the main difference between SLVP and QQWZ?

SLVP is categorized as Silver, while QQWZ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for SLVP and 0.49% for QQWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QQWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 1.72), 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.