VS
When evaluating costs, SVR features a management fee (MER) of 0.6%, compared to 0.28% for HEWB. Performance-wise, SVR has returned 11.21% year-to-date with +$120 M in net flows, whereas HEWB is at 15.02% with +$12 M. Use the comparison tool below to benchmark these funds across top 10 holdings, yield, sector weights and historical returns.
NAV Performance and Flows
Key Data
Compare
SVR
HEWB
| AuM | $600.30 M | $290.21 M |
| Management Fees | 0.60% | 0.28% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.66% | 0.28% |
| Tracking Difference | - | -0.80% |
Historical performance and flows
As of May 7, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | SVR | +11.21% | -0.41% | +11.21% | +138.43% | +191.68% |
HEWB | +9.67% | +10.04% | +15.02% | +65.38% | +121.08% | |
| Flows | SVR | -$13 M | +$25 M | +$120 M | +$248 M | +$256 M |
HEWB | +$8 M | +$9 M | +$12 M | +$7 M | -$3 M |
SVR vs HEWB exposure
Countries
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Canada
99.99%
Sectors
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Financials
99.99%
As of May 7, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
ROYAL BK CANADA
17.10%
TORONTO DOMINION
16.90%
BNS
16.65%
BANK OF MONTREAL
16.51%
CDN IMPERIAL BK
16.48%
NATIONAL BANK OF CANADA
16.35%
Diversification
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
HEWB
Total weight of top 10 holdings out of 6 total
99.99%
Characteristics
Compare
SVR
HEWB
| Provider | iShares | Global X |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD | Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Commodity | Equity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Capitalization |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | July 15, 2009 | January 23, 2019 |
Frequently asked questions about SVR and HEWB
Which ETF has performed better year to date: SVR or HEWB?
As of May 7, 2026, SVR has returned 11.21% year to date, while HEWB has returned 15.02%. HEWB is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: SVR or HEWB?
As of May 7, 2026, SVR manages $600.30 M in assets, while HEWB manages $290.21 M. SVR is the larger fund by AUM.
How are SVR and HEWB managed?
SVR is passively managed by iShares. It tracks the LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD benchmark. HEWB is passively managed by Global X. It tracks the Solactive Equal Weight Canada Banks GTR Index - CAD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: SVR or HEWB?
Year to date, SVR has seen +$120.09 M in net flows, compared with +$12.19 M for HEWB. SVR has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of SVR and HEWB compare?
SVR has an expense ratio of 0.66%, while HEWB has an expense ratio of 0.28%.
Recent articles about SVR and HEWB
Canadian Silver ETFs Surge 94% as Fed Policy Shift Fuels Rally
Canadian-listed silver ETFs have gained 94% year-to-date, dramatically outperforming gold funds.
Posted on 12/8/2025 by ETF Market Canada inCommodities
The ETF Market Canada is brought to you by Cboe in partnership with Trackinsight SA who is providing all the data, analysis and editorial content on this site. Unless explicitly stated as such, any information that you receive is not real-time.
All content on the ETF Market Canada is for your general information use only, Cboe is not responsible for any use of content by you outside this scope. In particular, the content does not constitute any form of advice, recommendation, representation, endorsement or arrangement by Cboe and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any specific investment or other decisions.
All content on the ETF Market Canada is for your general information use only, Cboe is not responsible for any use of content by you outside this scope. In particular, the content does not constitute any form of advice, recommendation, representation, endorsement or arrangement by Cboe and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any specific investment or other decisions.