Skip to content

PLTM vs SLV

GraniteShares Platinum Trust

PLTMBNYSE Arca

iShares Silver Trust

SLVBNYSE Arca

Overlap

Expense ratio

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

PLTM0.50%SLV0.50%

Avg volume · 30D

SLV 118.5×the volume

PLTM138KSLV16.3M

5Y return · a year

SLV +8.5pt

PLTM+6.6%SLV+15.1%

PLTM vs SLV Performance

Oct 29, 2021 – Oct 30, 2026

+37.8%PLTM+101.9%SLV

Oct 29, 2021 to Oct 30, 2026. PLTM +37.8%. SLV +101.9%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.200%300%400%Oct 2021Apr 2024Oct 2026
Expense ratio
PLTM 0.50%
SLV 0.50%
Fund size
PLTM $150M
SLV $25.2B
1Y total return
PLTM −9.2%
SLV +1.3%, better
Yield (12M)
PLTM 0.00%
SLV No data
Holdings
PLTM 1
SLV 1
Avg volume (30D)
PLTM 138K sh
SLV 16.3M sh, better
NAV per share
PLTM $14.20
SLV $45.22
52W range

ETF.net Grade

PLTM: Cost 67, Risk 44, Mission 94, Tradability 42, Holdings not scored, Durability 43. SLV: Cost 67, Risk 37, Mission 89, Tradability 71, Holdings not scored, Durability 84.
Pillar letters and Scores for PLTM, SLV, with each pillar’s weight
PillarPLTMSLV
Cost30% weightB67B67
Mission25% weightA94HigherA89
Risk15% weightC44HigherD37
Tradability15% weightC42A71Higher
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightC43A84Higher

Rank among Physical Commodities funds

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

Same Category. PLTM 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 PLTM 3rd 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

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

PLTMBGraniteShares Platinum Trust

SLVBiShares Silver Trust

In short

PLTM Platinum, in a vault, sliced into shares. PLTM holds allocated bullion and charges 0.50% a year, undercutting the older platinum trust on fee, which is most of what separates two funds holding the same metal.

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

PLTM The Trust seeks to reflect the price of platinum, less its expenses, through allocated physical platinum bullion.

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

  • PLTM At 0.50% a year it is the cheaper of the two US physical platinum trusts, and it sits under the median fee for physical commodity funds.
  • Allocated bars, not futures contracts: no roll calendar, no contango math, just platinum held for the trust.graniteshares.com
  • Simple mandate kept tightly since its 2018 launch: the platinum price less expenses, and one of the closer trackers among physical metal funds.
  • 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

  • PLTM One metal, one line of exposure. Platinum moves in its own lane and can swing hard, with nothing else inside the fund to cushion it.
  • No income here. Expenses are met out of the metal, so each share represents a slightly smaller slice of platinum as the years pass.
  • Volume is moderate rather than mega-trust deep, so spreads and limit orders matter more when you trade in size.
  • 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 PLTM profile⁠

Full SLV profile⁠

PLTM 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.

PLTM vs SLV Cost

Same expense ratio

$9,979

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

  • PLTM 0.50%

    $9,979

  • SLV 0.50%

    $9,979

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • PLTM 0.50%
  • SLV 0.50%
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2K$4K$6K$8K$10K051015202530PLTM $9,979SLV $9,979

Year by year

YearPLTMSLV
10$900$900
20$3,460$3,460
30$9,979$9,979

Expense ratio

  • 0.50%PLTM
  • 0.50%SLV
  • Middle half of Physical Commodities funds
  • Median 0.60%

PLTM 3rd cheapest of 9 funds

SLV 3rd cheapest of 9 funds

PLTM vs SLV Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Yield (12M)
PLTM 0.00%
SLV No data
Payout (12M)
PLTM None
SLV None

Distribution history

Per share, 2010 to 2015, same scale for both

PLTM13 paymentsAll PLTM payments⁠
One bar per payment. 13 payments from 2010 to 2015. Jun 22, 2010 $0.08; Dec 21, 2010 $0.04; Jun 21, 2011 $0.02; Dec 21, 2011 $0.24; Sep 21, 2012 $0.04; Dec 21, 2012 $0.02; Mar 21, 2013 $0.005; Sep 20, 2013 $0.01; Dec 18, 2013 $0.19; Mar 25, 2014 $0.04; Jun 24, 2014 $0.07; Dec 23, 2014 $0.17; Jun 24, 2015 $0.02. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.2520122015
SLVAll SLV payments⁠

No distribution history available.

PLTM vs SLV Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

  • PLTM
  • 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
PLTM 33.0%, betterSLV 37.0%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
PLTM 0.44SLV 0.75, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
PLTM −48.4%, betterSLV −57.8%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
PLTM 0.55SLV 1.26

PLTM and SLV in the news

Popular comparisons

  • PLTMBvsSIVRA

    GraniteShares Platinum 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.
  • 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.
  • PLTMBvsGLTRB

    GraniteShares Platinum Trust · abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket 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.
  • SLVBvsGLTRB

    iShares Silver Trust · abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket 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.
  • PLTMBvsPPLTB

    GraniteShares Platinum 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.
  • 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.