Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
GLDM vs SIVR: how they differ
GLDM and SIVR are both commodity funds, and over the year SIVR returned more, +54.2% against +19.4%.
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust and abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF.
| GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | SIVR abrdn Physical Silver Shares ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | State Street | abrdn |
| What it is | Gold MiniShares | Physical Silver |
| Total return, 1 year | +19.4% | +54.2% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +1.9 pts | +36.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.45% |
GLDM in plain words
GLDM is a commodity fund tracking the Gold MiniShares. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +19.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. It sat 19.4% below its high of Jan 29, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
SIVR in plain words
SIVR is a commodity fund tracking the Physical Silver. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +54.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.45% a year. It sat 44.9% below its high of Jan 28, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, GLDM or SIVR?
- In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GLDM returned +19.4% and SIVR returned +54.2%, so SIVR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, GLDM or SIVR?
- GLDM charges 0.18% a year and SIVR charges 0.45%, so GLDM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, GLDM against SIVR, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/gldm-vs-sivr Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources