RING vs SIL overlap - what they share and where they differ
RING and SIL share 17.0% of their weight across 6 common positions, read from what each fund reported to the SEC.
Each week Ploutos reads the reported positions of the largest US equity ETFs and measures, pair by pair, the weight they share: for every stock both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights counts. Two funds tracking the same index land near 100%. A sector fund inside a broad index fund lands at roughly that sector's weight.
RING and SIL
17.0%
6 shared positions
RING
iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF
Reported positions cover 101% of the fund, 39 positions · Aug 31, 2026
Top 10: 69.6%·Holdings of RING
SIL
Global X Silver Miners ETF
Reported positions cover 100% of the fund, 39 positions · Jul 31, 2026
Top 10: 76.3%·Holdings of SIL
Reported positions cover RING 101%, SIL 100% of each fund. An overlap cannot exceed the smaller coverage, so a low figure can mean little overlap or thin reporting.
SIL vs RING side by side
RINGiShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF
39
stock positions reported to the SEC
83.5% of its weight is in 33 names SIL does not hold
SILGlobal X Silver Miners ETF
39
stock positions reported to the SEC
48.6% of its weight is in 33 names RING does not hold
Where each fund's weight sits
Largest sectors for both funds
The widest gap is Basic Materials: RING has 12.6 points more of it.
The figures side by side
| RING | SIL | |
|---|---|---|
| Filing date | Aug 31, 2026 | Jul 31, 2026 |
| Stock positions reported | 39 | 39 |
| Weight of the ten largest | 69.6% | 76.3% |
| Largest position | NEM 17.2% | WPM 22.4% |
| Held alone | 33 positions, 83.5% | 33 positions, 48.6% |
| Covered by stock positions | 101% | 100% |
Holdings they share
| Stock | In RING | In SIL | Counted |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPMWheaton Precious Metals Corp. | 7.68% | 22.38% | 7.68% |
| CDECOEUR MINING, INC. | 3.45% | 10.59% | 3.45% |
| PAASPan American Silver Corp. | 3.06% | 12.54% | 3.06% |
| SSRMSSR MINING INC. | 1.67% | 3.85% | 1.67% |
| HOCHSCHILD MINING PLC | 0.90% | 1.34% | 0.90% |
| MUXMCEWEN INC. | 0.24% | 0.66% | 0.24% |
What each holds alone
The heaviest positions one fund reports and the other does not.
Only in RING
Only in SIL
Questions people ask
Is RING the same as SIL?
17.0% of their weight sits in the same 6 holdings. RING also reports NEM, AEM, B, which the other does not. SIL also reports INDUSTRIAS PENOLES, S.A.B. DE C.V., HL, AG, which the other does not.
How is the overlap between RING and SIL measured?
For every stock both funds report, the smaller of the two weights counts, and the sum is the overlap. The reported positions cover 101% of RING and 100% of SIL, so the number cannot exceed the smaller coverage.
Which holds more, SIL or RING?
RING reports 39 stock positions and SIL reports 39. 83.5% of RING's weight sits in names SIL does not hold, and 48.6% of SIL's weight in names RING does not hold. The ten largest positions are 69.6% of RING and 76.3% of SIL.
How do RING and SIL differ by sector?
The widest gap is Basic Materials: RING has 12.6 points more of it. Sectors come from each holding's SIC code in its SEC record, summed by the weight the fund reports.
Where do the numbers come from?
From each fund's own N-PORT filing to the SEC, which lists every position and its weight. The comparison uses every equity position the fund reports; cash, futures and bonds are not counted, which is why a coverage figure sits next to every result. Holdings change between filings.
Add a third fund in the tool·All fund pairs
Descriptive data from public SEC filings. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any fund or stock, and holdings change between filings.