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

Performance

SSLN.L vs. XNAQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SSLN.L is traded in GBp, while XNAQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNAQ.L 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 XNAQ.L's 17.14% return.


SSLN.L

1D
5.29%
1M
-20.21%
YTD
-5.21%
6M
9.19%
1Y
88.79%
3Y*
38.49%
5Y*
20.27%
10Y*
14.83%

XNAQ.L

1D
2.42%
1M
0.57%
YTD
17.14%
6M
17.33%
1Y
38.43%
3Y*
23.76%
5Y*
17.97%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
SSLN.L
iShares Physical Silver ETC
-5.21%130.26%23.21%-6.20%15.75%-9.22%
XNAQ.L
Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C
17.14%11.72%28.64%47.82%-25.44%-8.88%

Correlation

The correlation between SSLN.L and XNAQ.L is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.21

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

0.13

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

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2021

0.11

The correlation between SSLN.L and XNAQ.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (5 years) to 0.21 (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.


Return for Risk

SSLN.L vs. XNAQ.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: 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

XNAQ.L
XNAQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. XNAQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.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.LXNAQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.85

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.43

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.09

3.40

-1.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.71

9.85

-5.14

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

The current SSLN.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SSLN.L and XNAQ.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. XNAQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SSLN.L drawdown since its inception was -78.44%, which is greater than XNAQ.L's maximum drawdown of -34.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SSLN.L and XNAQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SSLN.LXNAQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-78.44%

-34.26%

-44.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-42.08%

-10.99%

-31.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.08%

-24.55%

-17.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.08%

-27.52%

-14.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-39.02%

-2.90%

-36.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-59.69%

-13.67%

-46.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

18.73%

3.80%

+14.93%

Volatility

SSLN.L vs. XNAQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Physical Silver ETC (SSLN.L) has a higher volatility of 14.40% compared to Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) at 5.78%. This indicates that SSLN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SSLN.LXNAQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.40%

5.78%

+8.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

52.43%

11.20%

+41.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

55.28%

15.32%

+39.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.41%

23.63%

+12.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.14%

25.98%

+5.16%

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

Both SSLN.L and XNAQ.L have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

SSLN.L vs. XNAQ.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


SSLN.L and XNAQ.L have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SSLN.L and XNAQ.L have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

SSLN.L is categorized as Silver, while XNAQ.L is Nasdaq-100. SSLN.L tracks LBMA Silver Price, while XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SSLN.L and XNAQ.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