VS
When evaluating costs, SVR features a management fee (MER) of 0.6%, compared to 0.4% for SBT. Performance-wise, SVR has returned 29.26% year-to-date with +$118 M in net flows, whereas SBT is at 29.97% with +$17 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
SBT
| AuM | $384.85 M | $49.58 M |
| Management Fees | 0.60% | 0.40% |
| Exp. ratio | 0.66% | 0.21% |
| Tracking Difference | - | - |
Historical performance and flows
As of November 6, 2026
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | SVR | -14.58% | -16.27% | -29.26% | +3.71% | +107.64% |
SBT | -14.96% | -16.39% | -29.97% | +2.92% | +105.53% | |
| Flows | SVR | +$3 M | +$7 M | +$118 M | +$142 M | +$257 M |
SBT | -$1 M | -$2 M | +$17 M | +$27 M | +$45 M |
SVR vs SBT exposure
Countries
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
SBT
Exposure data will be available soon
Sectors
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
SBT
Exposure data will be available soon
As of November 6, 2026
Top 10 Holdings
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
SBT
Exposure data will be available soon
Diversification
SVR
Exposure data will be available soon
SBT
Exposure data will be available soon
Characteristics
Compare
SVR
SBT
| Provider | iShares | Purpose Investments |
| Management | Passively managed | Passively managed |
| Benchmark | LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD | LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD |
| Replication Method | Direct (Physical) | Direct (Physical) |
| Asset Class | Commodity | Commodity |
| Dividend Policy | Distributing | Distributing |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Meets ESG criteria | No | No |
| Inception Date | July 15, 2009 | July 28, 2009 |
Frequently asked questions about SVR and SBT
Which ETF has performed better year to date: SVR or SBT?
As of November 6, 2026, SVR has returned -29.26% year to date, while SBT has returned -29.97%. SVR is ahead on YTD performance.
Which ETF is larger by assets under management: SVR or SBT?
As of November 6, 2026, SVR manages $384.85 M in assets, while SBT manages $49.58 M. SVR is the larger fund by AUM.
How are SVR and SBT managed?
SVR is passively managed by iShares. It tracks the LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD benchmark. SBT is passively managed by Purpose Investments. It tracks the LBMA Silver Price - Price/USD - USD benchmark.
Which ETF is attracting more investor flows: SVR or SBT?
Year to date, SVR has seen +$117.72 M in net flows, compared with +$17.48 M for SBT. SVR has attracted more net investor money so far.
How do the fees of SVR and SBT compare?
SVR has an expense ratio of 0.66%, while SBT has an expense ratio of 0.21%.
Recent articles about SVR and SBT
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.