Skip to content

GLTR vs SLV

abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF

GLTRBNYSE Arca

iShares Silver Trust

SLVBNYSE Arca

Overlap

Expense ratio

SLV −0.10pt a year

GLTR0.60%SLV0.50%

Avg volume · 30D

SLV 267.6×the volume

GLTR61.1KSLV16.3M

10Y return · a year

Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.

GLTR+10.1%SLV+10.1%

GLTR vs SLV Performance

Oct 29, 2021 – Oct 30, 2026

+85.0%GLTR+101.9%SLV

Oct 29, 2021 to Oct 30, 2026. GLTR +85.0%. SLV +101.9%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%200%300%400%Oct 2021Apr 2024Oct 2026
Expense ratio
GLTR 0.60%
SLV 0.50%, better
Fund size
GLTR $2.32B
SLV $25.2B
1Y total return
GLTR −3.7%
SLV +1.3%, better
Holdings
GLTR 1
SLV 1
Avg volume (30D)
GLTR 61.1K sh
SLV 16.3M sh, better
NAV per share
GLTR $167.14
SLV $45.22
52W range

ETF.net Grade

GLTR: Cost 41, Risk 62, Mission 92, Tradability 57, Holdings not scored, Durability 69. SLV: Cost 67, Risk 37, Mission 89, Tradability 71, Holdings not scored, Durability 84.
Pillar letters and Scores for GLTR, SLV, with each pillar’s weight
PillarGLTRSLV
Cost30% weightC41B67Higher
Mission25% weightA92HigherA89
Risk15% weightB62HigherD37
Tradability15% weightB57A71Higher
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightB69A84Higher

Rank among Physical Commodities funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. GLTR and SLV are both graded against the same 9 Physical Commodities funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Physical Commodities⁠

Category · 9 funds
See all 9 ›

SLV ranks 2nd and GLTR 4th of 9 funds in the Physical Commodities Category.

  1. Rank 1ASIVRabrdn Physical Silver Shares ETFScore 74
  2. Rank 2BSLViShares Silver TrustScore 69
  3. Rank 3BPLTMGraniteShares Platinum TrustScore 65
  4. Rank 4BGLTRabrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETFScore 63
  5. Rank 5BPPLTabrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETFScore 59

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

GLTRBabrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF

SLVBiShares Silver Trust

In short

GLTR Gold, silver, platinum and palladium in one wrapper, all held as physical bullion. GLTR is the rare one-ticker version of the entire precious-metals complex, running since 2010, and it owns the metal instead of renting exposure through futures.

SLV Silver, unbundled: real bars sitting with a custodian, a share price that shadows the LBMA Silver Price less a 0.50% fee. Trading since 2006 and one of the busiest commodity funds on the tape, it's the default way people put silver in a brokerage account.

Stated mandate

GLTR The Trust holds a physical bullion basket containing gold, silver, platinum, and palladium in specified proportions, with baskets issued against bullion deposits and bullion distributed on redemptions.

SLV The Trust seeks to reflect the performance of silver prices before its expenses and liabilities. Its assets consist primarily of silver held by a custodian.

Why people hold it

  • GLTR Four metals, one ticker: the trust holds physical gold, silver, platinum and palladium in set proportions, with baskets created and redeemed in bullion rather than cash.aberdeeninvestments.com
  • Trading since 2010 and now a multi-billion-dollar trust: one of the longest-standing ways to own the full metals basket inside a brokerage account.
  • Because it holds bullion outright, its results have tracked the underlying metals basket closely, less expenses, among the tighter records in the physical-commodity group.
  • The 0.60% fee sits right at the median for physically backed commodity funds, so the four-metal convenience is not priced above the category norm.
  • SLV The deep end of the silver pool: running since 2006, a multi-billion-dollar trust, and very actively traded, which is what keeps spreads tight and the options market busy.
  • Metal, not machinery. Assets are physical silver held by a custodian and priced off the LBMA Silver Price. No futures roll, no miner earnings, no swap counterparty.sec.gov
  • 0.50% a year, under the typical physical-metal trust, and the design is about as plain as it gets: bullion price minus expenses, tracked closely.

Worth knowing

  • GLTR Single-metal siblings cost less: SIVR charges 0.30% and SLV 0.50%. Bundling four metals into one line item costs a little more than buying one.
  • The proportions are set by the trust, and platinum and palladium bring industrial demand swings a gold-only holding does not. You cannot dial the mix yourself.
  • No income here. It is a grantor trust holding metal, pays no distributions, and volume is moderate rather than heavy, so spreads deserve a glance.
  • SLV SIVR runs the same physical-silver idea for 0.30%. The extra fee here buys size and trading depth, not different metal.
  • No income. Bullion pays nothing, and the trustee sells silver to cover expenses, so the metal behind each share slowly shrinks.sec.gov
  • One metal, one price. Nothing inside the trust cushions a silver drawdown, and silver is a jumpy market by nature.

Full GLTR profile⁠

Full SLV profile⁠

GLTR vs SLV Holdings

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

GLTR vs SLV Cost

Overpaying GLTR vs SLV

$1,838

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • GLTR 0.60%

    $11,817

  • SLV 0.50%

    $9,979

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • GLTR 0.60%
  • SLV 0.50%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2.5K$5K$7.5K$10K$12.5K051015202530GLTR $11,817SLV $9,979

Year by year

YearGLTRSLVOverpaying
10$1,076$900$176
20$4,116$3,460$656
30$11,817$9,979$1,838

Expense ratio

  • 0.60%GLTR
  • 0.50%SLV, cheaper
  • Middle half of Physical Commodities funds
  • Median 0.60%

SLV 3rd cheapest of 9 funds

GLTR 5th cheapest of 9 funds

GLTR vs SLV Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
GLTR None
SLV None

Distribution history

GLTRAll GLTR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SLVAll SLV payments⁠

No distribution history available.

GLTR vs SLV Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

  • GLTR
  • SLV
Oct 29, 2021 to Oct 30, 2026. Worst fall: SLV −57.8% · Oct 2026. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−60%−40%−20%0%Oct 2021Apr 2024Oct 2026

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
GLTR 24.1%, betterSLV 37.0%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
GLTR 0.82, betterSLV 0.75
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
GLTR −41.9%, betterSLV −57.8%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
GLTR 0.68SLV 1.26

GLTR and SLV in the news

Popular comparisons

  • GLTRBvsSIVRA

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.30%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SLVBvsSIVRA

    iShares Silver Trust · abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.30%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GLTRBvsPLTMB

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · GraniteShares Platinum Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SLVBvsPLTMB

    iShares Silver Trust · GraniteShares Platinum Trust

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GLTRBvsPPLTB

    abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF · abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.60% · 0.60%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SLVBvsPPLTB

    iShares Silver Trust · abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.60%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.