SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO
SPPP.L (Invesco Physical Platinum) and SVR-C.TO (iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - SPPP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Platinum, while SVR-C.TO is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SPPP.L returned 3.71%/yr vs 11.53%/yr for SVR-C.TO. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SPPP.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for SVR-C.TO.
Performance
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SPPP.L is traded in GBp, while SVR-C.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the SVR-C.TO values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SPPP.L achieves a -20.95% return, which is significantly lower than SVR-C.TO's -16.00% return. Over the past 10 years, SPPP.L has underperformed SVR-C.TO with an annualized return of 3.71%, while SVR-C.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.53% annualized return.
SPPP.L
- 1D
- -1.64%
- 1M
- -17.86%
- YTD
- -20.95%
- 6M
- -28.29%
- 1Y
- 20.98%
- 3Y*
- 17.64%
- 5Y*
- 8.18%
- 10Y*
- 3.71%
SVR-C.TO
- 1D
- 1.85%
- 1M
- -20.54%
- YTD
- -16.00%
- 6M
- -21.44%
- 1Y
- 69.87%
- 3Y*
- 34.76%
- 5Y*
- 18.05%
- 10Y*
- 11.53%
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SPPP.L Invesco Physical Platinum | -20.95% | 104.81% | -8.43% | -10.70% | 24.01% | -10.35% | 7.05% | 17.67% | -9.95% | -6.88% |
SVR-C.TO iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) | -16.00% | 126.67% | 22.52% | -5.26% | 15.42% | -12.16% | 43.05% | 9.64% | -4.59% | -4.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between SPPP.L and SVR-C.TO is 0.63, 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 | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2014 | 0.39 |
Over the past year, SPPP.L and SVR-C.TO have become more correlated (0.63) than their long-term average of 0.39, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO — Risk / Return Rank
SPPP.L
SVR-C.TO
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Platinum (SPPP.L) and iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-C.TO). 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.
| SPPP.L | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 1.25 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.48 | 1.44 | -0.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.09 | 3.19 | -2.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SPPP.L drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, smaller than the maximum SVR-C.TO drawdown of -60.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPPP.L and SVR-C.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SPPP.L | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.86% | -60.18% | +15.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -43.34% | -48.72% | +5.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -43.34% | -48.72% | +5.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.34% | -48.72% | +5.38% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.86% | -48.72% | +3.86% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -43.34% | -47.15% | +3.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.62% | -32.00% | +12.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.23% | 21.98% | -2.75% |
Volatility
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Physical Platinum (SPPP.L) is 10.41%, while iShares Silver Bullion ETF (Non-Hedged) (SVR-C.TO) has a volatility of 14.65%. This indicates that SPPP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SVR-C.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SPPP.L | SVR-C.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.41% | 14.65% | -4.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 39.73% | 54.74% | -15.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.36% | 57.51% | -11.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.57% | 35.57% | -5.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.77% | 31.86% | -4.09% |
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
SPPP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than SVR-C.TO's 0.66% expense ratio.
Dividends
SPPP.L vs. SVR-C.TO - Dividend Comparison
Neither SPPP.L nor SVR-C.TO has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SPPP.L and SVR-C.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SPPP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SPPP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
SPPP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while SVR-C.TO is Silver. SPPP.L tracks Platinum, while SVR-C.TO tracks LBMA Silver Price. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for SPPP.L and 0.66% for SVR-C.TO.
Find the right allocation for SPPP.L and SVR-C.TO
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