PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SSLN.L vs. ING
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SSLN.L vs. ING

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

SSLN.L (iShares Physical Silver ETC) is Silver fund tracking the LBMA Silver Price, while ING (ING Groep N.V.) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, SSLN.L returned 14.83%/yr vs 17.10%/yr for ING. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

SSLN.L vs. ING - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and ING Groep N.V. (ING). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SSLN.L is traded in GBp, while ING is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ING values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SSLN.L achieves a -5.21% return, which is significantly lower than ING's 12.61% return. Over the past 10 years, SSLN.L has underperformed ING with an annualized return of 14.83%, while ING has yielded a comparatively higher 17.10% annualized return.

SSLN.L

1D
5.29%
1M
-22.94%
YTD
-5.21%
6M
9.19%
1Y
88.53%
3Y*
38.49%
5Y*
20.27%
10Y*
14.83%

ING

1D
1.87%
1M
2.68%
YTD
12.61%
6M
14.88%
1Y
53.08%
3Y*
38.65%
5Y*
27.96%
10Y*
17.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SSLN.L vs. ING - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SSLN.L
iShares Physical Silver ETC		-5.21%130.26%23.21%-6.20%15.75%-11.83%41.04%12.68%-3.48%-5.59%
ING
ING Groep N.V.		12.61%77.50%14.21%25.29%7.17%56.88%-23.96%15.47%-37.66%23.81%

Correlation

The correlation between SSLN.L and ING is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.19

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

0.14

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

0.07

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

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2011

0.04

The correlation between SSLN.L and ING shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (all time) to 0.19 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Physical Silver ETC

ING Groep N.V.

Often compared with SSLN.L:
SSLN.L vs. PHSP.LSSLN.L vs. SLVPSSLN.L vs. SGLP.LSSLN.L vs. SILG.LSSLN.L vs. ISLN.LSSLN.L vs. HOC.LSSLN.L vs. AG
Often compared with ING:
ING vs. ABN.ASING vs. BBVAING vs. HSBCING vs. MUFGING vs. JPMING vs. NA.TOING vs. LYG

Return for Risk

SSLN.L vs. ING — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SSLN.L
SSLN.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
SSLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank
ING
ING Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
ING Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ING Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
ING Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
ING Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ING Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

SSLN.L vs. ING - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and ING Groep N.V. (ING). 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.

SSLN.LINGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.59
2.19

-0.60

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.03
2.97

-0.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.37

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.09

3.05

-0.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.71

9.98

-5.27

SSLN.L vs. ING - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SSLN.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the ING Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SSLN.L and ING, 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

SSLN.L vs. ING - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SSLN.L drawdown since its inception was -78.44%, smaller than the maximum ING drawdown of -89.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SSLN.L and ING.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SSLN.LINGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-78.44%

-89.52%

+11.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-42.08%

-17.50%

-24.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.08%

-18.92%

-23.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.08%

-41.47%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.08%

-70.85%

+28.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-39.02%

-3.24%

-35.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-59.69%

-45.12%

-14.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

18.73%

5.34%

+13.39%

Volatility

SSLN.L vs. ING - Volatility Comparison

iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) has a higher volatility of 14.40% compared to ING Groep N.V. (ING) at 7.86%. This indicates that SSLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SSLN.LINGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.40%

7.86%

+6.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

52.43%

19.43%

+33.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

55.28%

24.35%

+30.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.41%

28.89%

+7.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.14%

32.90%

-1.76%

Dividends

SSLN.L vs. ING - Dividend Comparison

SSLN.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.92%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ING
ING Groep N.V.		4.92%4.78%7.65%5.86%7.16%5.09%0.00%5.92%2.63%3.28%4.24%2.58%
SSLN.L
iShares Physical Silver ETC		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

SSLN.L and ING have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SSLN.L and ING

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