CTWO vs SIVR

CTWO—COtwo Advisors Physical European Carbon Allowance Trust

SIVRAabrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF

In short

CTWO —No data

SIVR Silver bullion in a vault, wrapped in a ticker. SIVR has done that one job since 2009 at 0.30% a year, half the going rate for physical metal funds, and fee is most of the tracking gap here.

Stated mandate

CTWO —No data

SIVR The Trust seeks to track the price of physical silver, after deducting its expenses.

Why people hold it

CTWO —No data

• SIVR 0.30% a year, versus a 0.60% median across physical metal funds and 0.50% at the biggest silver trust, SLV. When the mandate is just holding metal, cost is the differentiator.
• The mandate is one sentence: track the price of physical silver after expenses. Real metal, not futures contracts, swaps, or miner stocks standing in for the metal.
• A multi-billion-dollar trust that trades actively, so entering and exiting is usually a routine order rather than a hunt for the other side.
• Running since 2009 and rated among the strongest implementations in the physical commodity group, on both cost and how closely it delivers its stated mandate.

Worth knowing

CTWO —No data

• SIVR One metal, one price. Silver moves hard in both directions and there is no diversification inside the trust to soften it.
• Bullion generates no cash flow, so this is a price-only holding rather than an income one.
• It is a commodity trust, not a registered 1940 Act fund, so the legal protections and tax treatment differ from a standard stock or bond ETF.

Full CTWO profile⁠

Full SIVR profile⁠