PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SSLN.L achieves a -21.90% return, which is significantly lower than XLVP.L's 5.31% return. Over the past 10 years, SSLN.L has outperformed XLVP.L with an annualized return of 10.30%, while XLVP.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.46% annualized return.


SSLN.L

1D
-0.80%
1M
-21.14%
6M
-37.37%
YTD
-21.90%
1Y
46.37%
3Y*
29.07%
5Y*
17.13%
10Y*
10.30%

XLVP.L

1D
0.75%
1M
6.66%
6M
4.08%
YTD
5.31%
1Y
23.34%
3Y*
7.50%
5Y*
6.71%
10Y*
9.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SSLN.L
iShares Physical Silver ETC
-21.90%130.26%23.21%-6.20%15.75%-11.83%41.04%12.68%-3.48%-5.59%
XLVP.L
Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF
5.31%6.91%3.77%-3.87%8.97%29.14%8.22%16.79%10.28%11.01%

Correlation

The correlation between SSLN.L and XLVP.L is -0.04, 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

-0.04

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

-0.06

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

-0.03

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

0.04

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2014

0.04

The correlation between SSLN.L and XLVP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (3 years) to 0.04 (all time), 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.


Return for Risk

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L — 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: 2727
Overall Rank
SSLN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
SSLN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

XLVP.L
XLVP.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
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. XLVP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.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.

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.LXLVP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.26

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.93

2.01

-1.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.98

5.01

-3.03

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SSLN.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.81, which is lower than the XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SSLN.L and XLVP.L, 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. XLVP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SSLN.L drawdown since its inception was -78.44%, which is greater than XLVP.L's maximum drawdown of -19.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SSLN.L and XLVP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SSLN.LXLVP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-78.44%

-19.67%

-58.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-49.75%

-11.56%

-38.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-49.75%

-19.67%

-30.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.75%

-19.67%

-30.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.75%

-19.67%

-30.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-49.75%

-1.84%

-47.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-59.59%

-4.60%

-54.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

23.38%

4.65%

+18.73%

Volatility

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) has a higher volatility of 12.58% compared to Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L) at 5.61%. This indicates that SSLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLVP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SSLN.LXLVP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.58%

5.61%

+6.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

51.16%

11.27%

+39.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

56.81%

15.36%

+41.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.88%

14.44%

+22.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.10%

15.68%

+15.42%

SSLN.L vs. XLVP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SSLN.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than XLVP.L's 0.14% 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. XLVP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SSLN.L nor XLVP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


SSLN.L and XLVP.L have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XLVP.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLVP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for SSLN.L.

SSLN.L is categorized as Silver, while XLVP.L is Health & Biotech Equities. SSLN.L tracks LBMA Silver Price, while XLVP.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for SSLN.L and 0.14% for XLVP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SSLN.L and XLVP.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