SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L
SSLN.L (iShares Physical Silver ETC) and CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SSLN.L is a Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price, while CSP1.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SSLN.L returned 16.71%/yr vs 16.07%/yr for CSP1.L. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SSLN.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSP1.L.
Performance
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SSLN.L achieves a 3.18% return, which is significantly lower than CSP1.L's 10.55% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SSLN.L having a 16.71% annualized return and CSP1.L not far behind at 16.07%.
SSLN.L
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- 1.18%
- YTD
- 3.18%
- 6M
- 28.32%
- 1Y
- 115.93%
- 3Y*
- 42.31%
- 5Y*
- 22.99%
- 10Y*
- 16.71%
CSP1.L
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 5.54%
- YTD
- 10.55%
- 6M
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 29.13%
- 3Y*
- 19.02%
- 5Y*
- 14.94%
- 10Y*
- 16.07%
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SSLN.L iShares Physical Silver ETC | 3.18% | 130.26% | 23.21% | -6.20% | 15.75% | -11.64% | 40.73% | 12.68% | -3.48% | -5.59% |
CSP1.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 10.55% | 9.37% | 27.35% | 19.79% | -9.05% | 31.07% | 13.65% | 26.42% | 0.01% | 10.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between SSLN.L and CSP1.L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2011 | 0.09 |
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
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L — Risk / Return Rank
SSLN.L
CSP1.L
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L). 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.
| SSLN.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.51 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.98 | 4.07 | -1.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.53 | 14.99 | -8.46 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SSLN.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11 | 2.73 | -0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 | 1.04 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | 1.03 | -0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.17 | 1.09 | -0.92 |
Drawdowns
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SSLN.L drawdown since its inception was -69.95%, which is greater than CSP1.L's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SSLN.L and CSP1.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SSLN.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.95% | -25.48% | -44.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.72% | -7.12% | -31.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -38.72% | -20.77% | -17.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.72% | -20.77% | -17.95% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.72% | -25.48% | -13.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -33.62% | -0.24% | -33.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -45.32% | -3.32% | -42.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.69% | 1.94% | +15.75% |
Volatility
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) has a higher volatility of 16.31% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) at 2.62%. This indicates that SSLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSP1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SSLN.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.31% | 2.62% | +13.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 51.81% | 7.16% | +44.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 54.53% | 10.62% | +43.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 33.31% | 14.31% | +19.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.69% | 15.57% | +14.12% |
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SSLN.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CSP1.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
SSLN.L vs. CSP1.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SSLN.L nor CSP1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SSLN.L and CSP1.L have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSP1.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSP1.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for SSLN.L.
SSLN.L is categorized as Silver, while CSP1.L is S&P 500. SSLN.L tracks LBMA Silver Price, while CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SSLN.L and 0.07% for CSP1.L.
Find the right allocation for SSLN.L and CSP1.L
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