Which Silver Mining ETF Is the Better Buy: Global X's SIL or iShares' SLVP?
Key Points
iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF offers a lower expense ratio and a higher historical total return over the last year than Global X - Silver Miners ETF.
Global X - Silver Miners ETF manages a significantly larger pool of assets, totaling $4.8 billion compared to $974.2 million for the iShares fund.
Both ETFs are 100% concentrated in the basic materials sector, but they hold different top constituents and show variations in dividend yields.
Global X-Silver Miners ETF (NYSEMKT:SIL) and iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF (NYSEMKT:SLVP) both target silver mining stocks, but the iShares fund offers lower costs and higher historical total returns.
Investing in silver miners offers leveraged exposure to the underlying metal, but selecting the right vehicle requires looking at costs and concentration. Both the iShares and Global X funds provide concentrated plays on silver extraction, yet they differ in their geographic reach, expense structures, and how they weight their largest constituents.
Snapshot (cost & size)
| Metric | SLVP | SIL |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | Global X |
| Share price | $36.49 (as of 2026-08-13) | $88.68 (as of 2026-08-13) |
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.65% |
| 1-yr return (as of Aug. 13, 2026) | 84.2% | 65.4% |
| Dividend yield | 1.9% | 1.1% |
| Beta | 0.95 | 0.89 |
| AUM | $974.2 million | $4.8 billion |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from monthly returns over the available fund history (up to five years). The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months. Dividend yield is the trailing-12-month distribution yield.
Fees can significantly erode gains in the volatile precious metals mining space. The iShares fund is the more affordable option here, carrying a 0.39% expense ratio that is 26 basis points lower than the 0.65% charged by the Global X fund. This cost advantage is coupled with a higher trailing-12-month distribution yield of 1.9%.
Performance & risk comparison
| Metric | SLVP | SIL |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (5 yr) | (47.7%) | (47.9%) |
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years (total return) | $2,781 | $2,341 |
What's inside
The Global X-Silver Miners ETF focuses exclusively on the basic materials sector, seeking to mirror the Solactive Global Silver Miners Total Return Index. Its largest positions include Wheaton Precious Metals (NYSE:WPM) at 22.57%, Pan American Silver (NYSE:PAAS) at 11.48%, and Coeur Mining (NYSE:CDE) at 10.93%. With 39 holdings, the portfolio is highly concentrated in its top tier of silver producers. The fund was launched in 2010. Global X-Silver Miners ETF has paid $1.02 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$88.68 share price works out to a 1.1% yield.
The iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF similarly allocates 100% of its assets to basic materials, though it follows an index of global stocks involved in both silver and other metal mining. Its largest holdings include Hecla Mining (NYSE:HL) at 13.29%, Indust Penoles at 10.74%, and First Majestic Silver (TSX:AG) at 9.78%. The portfolio is slightly narrower with 35 holdings and was launched in 2012. iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF has paid $0.70 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$36.49 share price works out to a 1.9% yield.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.
Which looks like the better buy
Silver spent years in gold's shadow before staging one of the most dramatic comebacks in the precious metals market over the last two years. Beyond its traditional role as a store of value, silver's industrial applications in solar panels, AI data centers, and electronics have created a structural demand that gold simply does not have. When silver moves, silver miners tend to move further, amplifying both the gains and the losses that come with owning the metal itself.
Both SIL and SLVP are riding that wave, but the data tells a clear story about which fund has done it better. SLVP has outperformed SIL across one year, five years, and 10 years, while charging less and paying a higher yield. SIL's larger asset base gives it an edge in liquidity, which matters more to institutional traders and active investors than to long-term buy-and-hold investors.
For most investors, SLVP's lower cost, higher yield, and superior long-term performance make it the stronger choice. SIL is worth considering for those who specifically prioritize liquidity and the added diversification that comes with its larger, more established portfolio.
Sara Appino has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.