How do ICOP and SLV differ regarding investment exposure?

ICOP provides equity exposure to companies involved in copper and metals mining, meaning its value is tied to the stock performance of these firms. In contrast, SLV offers direct commodity exposure to silver by tracking the spot price of the metal. The fundamental difference lies in the asset class: ICOP is an equity-based natural resources fund, while SLV is a commodity-focused fund, leading to different drivers of return and risk.

Can investors receive income from these two ETFs?

Yes, potentially. ICOP holds equity shares of mining companies, which may pay dividends to the fund. Consequently, it reports a dividend yield of 1.63%. Conversely, SLV is a commodity trust holding physical silver bullion, which inherently generates no income. As a result, SLV has a reported dividend yield of 0.00%. Investors seeking periodic income from these specific funds would generally look towards ICOP, whereas SLV relies solely on capital appreciation based on silver price movements.

What is the expense ratio difference between ICOP and SLV?

ICOP carries an expense ratio of 0.47%, while SLV has an expense ratio of 0.50%. This means there is a 0.03 percentage point difference between the two funds. The expense ratio represents the annual fee deducted from the fund's assets to cover operational costs. Although the absolute difference is small, it reflects the varying management structures; ICOP involves active equity management, whereas SLV involves the costs associated with storing and securing physical bullion.

What type of investing goal does ICOP typically serve?

ICOP is associated with investors seeking equity growth and income exposure to the industrial metals sector. By holding shares of mining companies, it allows investors to participate in the operational performance and potential dividends of these firms. This structure suits those looking for correlated exposure to the stock market alongside commodity price movements, offering a blend of industrial demand leverage and traditional corporate earnings potential within the natural resources category.

What is the primary objective of the SLV fund?

SLV is designed to provide direct exposure to the price of silver. Its main goal is to reflect the spot price of the metal, minus expenses. This makes it a tool for investors seeking uncorrelated commodity exposure, often used as a hedge against inflation or market volatility. Because it holds no income-generating assets, the return relies entirely on the appreciation of silver, making it a pure price-play on the precious metals market.

How do the top holdings of ICOP and SLV compare?

There are no shared top-10 holdings between ICOP and SLV. ICOP lists major mining equities such as Freeport-McMoRan (FCX), Newmont (NEM), and Southern Copper (SCCO) as its top positions. In contrast, SLV does not publish specific top holdings, as it holds pooled silver bullion rather than individual company shares. This highlights the complete lack of overlap in the underlying assets, confirming that the two funds track entirely different financial instruments.

Do ICOP and SLV operate within the same market category?

No, they do not. ICOP is classified under Natural Resources, reflecting its focus on companies that extract materials. SLV is classified as Commodities Focused, reflecting its direct ownership of the physical metal. This categorisation difference signals how the funds react to market events. Natural Resources equities can be influenced by corporate management and broader equity trends, while Commodities are driven primarily by supply and demand dynamics for the specific physical asset.

What is the historical performance record for these funds?

SLV has a longer track record, with an inception date in April 2006, providing over 17 years of historical data. ICOP is relatively new, having been launched in June 2023. This means ICOP has only a short history of performance and limited data for tracking its behaviour over different market cycles. Investors reviewing ICOP should note that its performance history is not yet as established as SLV's long-standing presence in the ETF market.

How does fund size affect these two ETFs?

Fund size is often measured by net assets. SLV holds substantial net assets of $32.8 billion, which contributes to deep liquidity and tight bid-ask spreads for traders. ICOP has smaller net assets of $480 million. While still a significant amount, a smaller asset base compared to SLV means ICOP may experience different liquidity dynamics during periods of high market stress. The large difference highlights SLV's established dominance versus ICOP's newer, niche position.

Are dividend yields comparable for these two funds?

No, the dividend yields are distinct. ICOP reports a yield of 1.63%, derived from the dividends paid by the mining companies it holds. These are typically distributed to shareholders quarterly. SLV reports a yield of 0.00% because it holds physical bullion, which generates no cash flow. Therefore, ICOP functions as a total return fund including income, while SLV is strictly a capital appreciation vehicle relying on price increases in silver.

ICOP vs SLV

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare ICOP and SLV to see their fees, holdings, dividends and index focus. ICOP tracks copper and metals miners at a 0.47% expense ratio, while SLV focuses on silver commodities at 0.50%. This page outlines how each fund operates within its respective market category. Educational content, not financial advice.

Compare ICOP and SLV to see their fees, holdings, dividends and index focus. ICOP tracks copper and metals miners at a 0.47% expense ratio, while SLV focuses on silver commodities at 0.50%. This page ...

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

ICOP

Metric

SLV

0.47%

Expense Ratio

0.50%

1.63%

Dividend Yield

0.00%

$480.19M

Net Assets

$32.81B

100

Holdings

1

Jun 21, 2023

Inception Date

Apr 21, 2006

–

Index Tracked

–

Natural Resources

Fund Category

Commodities Focused

ICOP costs about $3.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

These funds do not share any of their top holdings.

Discover More Comparisons

ICOP vs PICK

Compare ICOP and PICK ETFs. Review expense ratios, net assets, dividend yields, holdings, and tracking details for both iShares metals mining funds.

PSLV vs SLV

PSLV vs SLV compared: two physical silver trusts charging 0.52% and 0.50% a year. See the fee difference, structure, fund size and how each tracks silver.

SIVR vs SLV

SIVR vs SLV: both hold physical silver and track the LBMA Silver Price. SIVR charges 0.30% on $4.69B, SLV 0.50% on $32.81B, a 0.20% fee gap each year.

Investment Analysis

ICOP

Pros

iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF offers exposure to industrial metals demand via equity holdings.
The fund maintains a modest dividend yield of 1.63% from its constituent mining companies.
Top holdings include established global miners such as Freeport-McMoRan and Newmont for diversified access.

Considerations

The expense ratio of 0.47% is significantly higher than typical broad-market equity ETFs.
Net assets of $480 million are smaller than established funds, potentially impacting liquidity.
Inception in June 2023 means the fund lacks a long-term performance and tracking record.

SLV

Pros

Ishares Silver provides direct exposure to the silver spot price without equity market correlation.
The fund holds substantial net assets of $32.8 billion, indicating high liquidity and trading volume.
Established in April 2006, it offers a long history of performance and investor confidence.

Considerations

The expense ratio of 0.50% is relatively high for a commodity-based fund compared to equities.
Investors receive no income as the dividend yield is currently reported at 0.00%.
Specific top holdings are not available, limiting transparency on the underlying bullion structure.

Related Market Insights

Paper vs Physical: The Smart Way to Play Commodities

Balance commodity price speculation with equity stakes in producers. Diversify exposure to raw materials, hedge inflation, and invest smart with Nemo.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

25 July 2025

Read Insight

Related Market Insights

Paper vs Physical: The Smart Way to Play Commodities

Balance commodity price speculation with equity stakes in producers. Diversify exposure to raw materials, hedge inflation, and invest smart with Nemo.

Aimee Silverwood | Financial Analyst

25 July 2025

Read Insight

About ICOP and SLV

ICOP (ICOP)

iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP) is an exchange-traded fund that gives investors targeted exposure to companies involved in copper and other metals mining. Managed by iShares (BlackRock), the ETF typically includes producers, developers and related service companies across global mining hubs. Its performance is closely linked to commodity prices — particularly copper — and broader industrial demand, which means returns can be cyclical and volatile. ICOP can offer a convenient way to gain sector-level exposure without selecting individual miners, but be mindful of concentration risks (large miners can dominate holdings), country and regulatory risks, and currency effects. Fees, index methodology and turnover can affect outcomes, so check the current prospectus and factsheet before investing. This summary is educational and not personal advice; values can fall as well as rise and past performance is not a guide to future results.

SLV (SLV)

Which Baskets Do They Appear In?

Paper Vs. Physical

Discover a carefully curated collection of investments that balance commodity price speculation with the companies that bring those resources to market. Our analysts have selected these assets to give you exposure to both sides of the materials economy in one strategic package.

Published: 17 June 2025

Explore Basket