Comparing PPLT Platinum Bullion ETF and SIL Silver Mining Fund: Which Suits Your Portfolio?

If you’re exploring precious metals investments, two popular options—the abrdn Physical Platinum Shares ETF (PPLT) and the Global X Silver Miners ETF (SIL)—take fundamentally different paths to metals exposure. PPLT offers direct access to platinum bullion, while SIL invests in a portfolio of global silver mining companies. Understanding these distinctions helps clarify which approach aligns with your investment goals and risk tolerance.

Key Performance Metrics: SIL’s Volatility vs PPLT’s Stability

The performance gap between these two funds tells an important story. Over the past year, SIL surged 170.2%, significantly outpacing PPLT’s 136% return. However, this higher return came with substantially greater risk. SIL experienced a maximum drawdown of -56.79% over five years, compared to PPLT’s more modest -35.73% decline.

When measured against the S&P 500, PPLT demonstrates significantly lower volatility with a beta of 0.35, meaning it moves far less dramatically than the broader market. SIL’s beta of 0.90 indicates much tighter correlation with equity market swings. Over a five-year period, a $1,000 investment in PPLT would have grown to $2,360, while the same amount in SIL would have reached $2,702—a difference reflecting SIL’s higher-risk, higher-reward profile.

Direct Platinum Bullion Access: How PPLT Differs from Mining Equity Exposure

The core distinction lies in what each fund holds. PPLT is a physically backed ETF that tracks platinum bullion directly, providing straightforward exposure without the operational or credit risks associated with mining companies. With $286 billion in assets under management and a 16-year track record, PPLT maintains simplicity by holding only physical platinum bullion itself.

SIL takes a different approach, building a portfolio of 39 global mining stocks focused on the silver industry. Its top positions include Wheaton Precious Metals Corp (WPM), Pan American Silver Corp (PAAS), and Coeur Mining (CDE). This structure introduces company-specific risk—factors like balance sheet management, mining costs, and operational efficiency directly impact returns. However, it also creates potential for additional income through dividends, which SIL currently offers at a 1.18% yield.

Cost and Scale Comparison

When it comes to expenses, PPLT holds a slight edge with a 0.60% expense ratio compared to SIL’s 0.65%. While both funds carry costs above the absolute minimum for ETFs, PPLT’s lower fee combined with its physically backed structure makes it marginally more cost-efficient for platinum bullion investors.

In terms of scale, PPLT manages $286 billion in assets, reflecting its established position in the precious metals ETF space. SIL manages $5.05 billion, a smaller but still substantial fund size. PPLT’s larger AUM can translate to tighter bid-ask spreads and greater liquidity for investors.

Inside the Funds: Platinum Bullion vs Mining Companies

PPLT’s structure is straightforward—it holds nothing but physical platinum bullion. This means no sector breakdown or individual holdings to analyze; your entire investment tracks the price movements of platinum itself. This simplicity appeals to investors confident in platinum’s long-term prospects due to its industrial applications in automotive manufacturing and jewelry production.

SIL’s portfolio, by contrast, requires deeper analysis. As a basic materials fund focused exclusively on silver mining equities, it exposes you to both the commodity price of silver and the business performance of mining companies. When silver prices rise, miners typically benefit—but not automatically. Mining companies also face challenges like rising operational costs, labor issues, and capital expenditure requirements for maintaining and expanding mines.

Making Your Investment Decision

Your choice between platinum bullion access and mining company exposure depends on several factors. First, consider your market view. If you believe platinum bullion will appreciate due to its scarcity, industrial demand in clean energy and automotive sectors, or inflation concerns, PPLT’s direct exposure may suit you better. Platinum’s unique properties—high density, resistance to corrosion, and catalytic properties—make it essential for industrial applications beyond jewelry.

Conversely, if you want to capture upside not just from rising commodity prices but also from mining company growth and profitability, SIL offers that amplified exposure. Mining stocks can deliver exceptional returns when both commodity prices and company performance improve simultaneously.

Consider your risk tolerance as well. PPLT’s lower beta (0.35) and smaller maximum drawdown (-35.73%) make it the more conservative choice. SIL’s higher volatility suits investors with stronger risk appetites who can stomach -56.79% declines in pursuit of potentially larger gains.

From a cost perspective, both funds are reasonably priced, with PPLT holding a marginal advantage. Neither should be your sole investment, but rather part of a broader diversified portfolio that includes other asset classes. Both PPLT and SIL have outperformed the S&P 500 on a total return basis recently, making them worth considering if you’re building a diversified investment approach that includes precious metals as an inflation hedge or portfolio diversifier.

Before committing capital, ensure you understand whether you’re seeking direct platinum bullion exposure or company equity participation, and conduct research into the economic drivers that create demand for each metal in industrial applications.