SIL vs VTI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

SIL and VTI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SIL is Global X - Silver Miners ETF, while VTI is Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF. VTI is broader by holdings count, with 3,524 positions versus 42 for SIL. SIL is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VTI ahead on AIQ Score, 60 versus 49.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
SIL
Global X
vs
VTI
Vanguard
SIL
Global X - Silver Miners ETF
Issuer
Global X
Inception
2010-04-19
VTI
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2001-05-24

What is the main difference between SIL and VTI?

SIL puts 100% of its assets in Basic Materials, while VTI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 38%.

Expense ratio
SIL
0.65%
VTI
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVTI
Holdings
SIL
42
VTI
3,524
Broader reported basketVTI
1Y return
SIL
+3.6%
VTI
+15.8%
Trailing performanceVTI
Annualized volatility
SIL
55%
VTI
13%
Lower realized volatilityVTI
MetricSILVTI
Fund
Expense ratio0.65%0.03%
Holdings423,524
Top-10 concentration76.2%33.2%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months1.25%1.05%
Average volume1,091,4423,115,564
Performance
1Y return+3.6%+15.8%
YTD return-2.6%+12.5%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+16.3%+11.4%
Risk
Annualized volatility55%13%
Max drawdown (1Y)-39.5%-9.2%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-47.9%-25.4%
Beta2.251.02
Sharpe ratio0.390.86
Sortino ratio0.541.32
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score49/10060/100
AIQ Edge Score4/108/10
Momentum31/10051/100
Risk Resilience46/10086/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Global X - Silver Miners ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Coverage 63/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictCompetitiveAIQ Comparison Conviction 7/10

VTI leads

VTI leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 16 points over 30 sessions.

Competitive: 3 of 3 evidence groups support VTI, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 3Comparison trend: Weakening
SIL

Global X - Silver Miners ETF

AIQ Score
49/100
AIQ Edge Score
4/10
VTI

Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VTI over SIL, 60 versus 49 as of Oct 21, 2026. VTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. VTI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VTI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. VTI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 11 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Global X - Silver Miners ETF and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

SIL vs VTI: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantSILVTIFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.65%0.03%VTI
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings423,524VTI
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings76.2%33.2%VTI
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield1.25%1.05%SIL
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-47.9%-25.4%VTI
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year55%13%VTI

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

SIL
+112.4%
VTI
+71.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

SIL $21,239 · VTI $17,146

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare SIL and VTI against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

SIL advantage
0
VTI advantage
  • Risk Resilience46 vs 86
    VTI +40
  • Momentum31 vs 51
    VTI +20
  • Quality65 vs 74
    VTI +9

3 of 3 evidence groups favor VTI. VTI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

SIL+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +1

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

VTI+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +4

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

VTI's lead was unchanged in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SIL and VTI both carry a full feed there.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureSILVTIWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.65%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings423,524More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume1,091,4423,115,564Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility55%13%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-39.5%-9.2%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.390.86Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta2.251.02Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Basic Materials99.9% vs 2.1%
Consumer Defensive0.1% vs 4.2%
Technology0.0% vs 38.2%
Financial Services0.0% vs 11.6%
Healthcare0.0% vs 9.9%
Communication Services0.0% vs 9.1%
Industrials0.0% vs 8.5%
Consumer Cyclical0.0% vs 8.5%
SILVTI

How much of the same holdings they own

SIL and VTI share 0.03% of their weighted exposure across 3 common holdings.

30 holdings are unique to SIL, and 3,496 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

SIL is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 76.15% of the fund, against 33.24% for VTI (42 holdings vs 3,524). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

Largest shared positions

HoldingSILVTIShared
CDECOEUR MINING INC11.16%0.02%0.02%
HLHECLA MINING CO4.96%0.01%0.01%
HYMCHYCROFT MINING HOLDING CO-A0.55%0%0%

Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.

What SIL adds that VTI doesn’t

HoldingSILVTI
WPMWHEATON PRECIOUS METALS CORP24.16%Not held
PAASPAN AMERICAN SILVER CORP11.19%Not held
CDECOEUR MINING INC11.16%0.02%
HLHECLA MINING CO4.96%0.01%
PE&OLES.MXINDUSTRIAS PENOLES SAB DE CV4.62%Not held
AG.TOFIRST MAJESTIC SILVER CORP4.45%Not held

What VTI adds that SIL doesn’t

HoldingVTISIL
NVDANVIDIA Corp6.4%Not held
AAPLApple Inc6.29%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp4.79%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc3.65%Not held
GOOGLAlphabet Inc2.9%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.56%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VTI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVTI49 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsVTIPrice vs 50-day -11.4% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day -10.8% vs 5.3%
Risk ResilienceVTIRisk Resilience 46 vs 86
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SIL and VTI and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Competitive

The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.

  • The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
  • 3 of 3 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on VTI.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VTI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 11 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 21SIL leads above the line · VTI leads belowOct 20
Today
VTI +11
49 vs 60
7 sessions ago
VTI +13
46 vs 59
30 sessions ago
VTI +16
44 vs 60
90 sessions ago
SIL +1
67 vs 66

The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 11 when VTI moved ahead of SIL.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

SILConflicted

1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only SIL

  • ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.86%)
VTIConflicted

2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VTI

  • ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.96%)
  • EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.7%)

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.

VTI leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

SILNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.01%, AIQ +1 points).

VTIConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.55%, AIQ +1 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1SIL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to VTI's edge.
  2. 2SIL's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate VTI's advantage entirely.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

VTI leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricSILVTI
1 week (5 sessions)-3.2%-1.1%
1 month (20 sessions)-16.4%-1.1%
3 months (63 sessions)5.2%2.2%
6 months (126 sessions)-13.6%8.4%
Year to date-2.6%12.5%
1 year (252 sessions)3.6%15.8%

Technicals

VTI has the stronger structure
MetricSILVTI
RSI (14)38.455.2
ADX (14)20.513.4
Price vs 50-day-11.4%0.2%
Price vs 200-day-10.8%5.3%
Volatility (1M, annualized)38.8%9.8%

Risk

VTI is the more resilient
MetricSILVTI
Beta2.251.02
Sharpe ratio0.390.86
Sortino ratio0.541.32
Max drawdown-39.5%-9.2%
Current drawdown-31%-1.9%
Annualized volatility55%13%
Value at risk (95%)-5.4%-1.4%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between SIL and VTI?

SIL puts 100% of its assets in Basic Materials, while VTI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 38%.

How much do SIL and VTI overlap?

SIL and VTI share 0.03% of their weighted exposure across 3 common holdings. 30 holdings are unique to SIL, and 3,496 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, SIL or VTI?

VTI holds more positions: 3,524 versus 42 for SIL.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VTI has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.65% for SIL.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

SIL, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 1.25% against 1.05% for VTI.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

SIL has been more volatile over the past year, at 55% annualized against 13% for VTI.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VTI fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -25.4% against -47.9% for SIL.

Compare SIL and VTI with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.