Why silver deserves its own portfolio allocation
Gold and silver are often grouped as "precious metals," but their macro drivers are meaningfully different. Gold is primarily a monetary commodity — it responds to real interest rates, central-bank buying, safe-haven demand, and currency debasement narratives. Silver is a monetary commodity too, but it has a substantial industrial demand component: photovoltaic solar panels, electronics, electric vehicle contacts, and photography (declining but still meaningful). That industrial demand layer introduces correlation with manufacturing activity and grid-buildout capex that gold simply doesn't have.
The practical consequence: silver often moves less than gold in a risk-off episode (lower monetary premium) but more than gold in a cyclical expansion (higher industrial beta). Silver equities tend to be more volatile than gold equities for the same reason. A portfolio construction view that says "silver is just leveraged gold" captures some of the truth but misses the industrial demand angle.
The gold-silver ratio and what it means
The gold-silver ratio — gold price divided by silver price — has cycled between roughly 50 and 100 over the past two decades, with extreme moves to 120+ in crisis conditions. A high ratio (>80) historically implies silver is "cheap" relative to gold; a low ratio (<60) implies silver is rich. Contrarian investors use the ratio as an allocation signal between gold and silver equities. The framework does not score the ratio directly, but it's a reasonable input for sizing between gold and silver holdings.
Our silver coverage today
GoGold Resources is currently our only silver-primary scorecard at 21/25. The composite clears the BUY threshold but the WATCH rating reflects editorial considerations around silver's distinct macro behavior within a gold-anchored framework. Los Ricos (Mexico) is the development asset; Parral (Mexico) is the producing cash-flow base. Geology scores 5/5; catalyst scores 5/5. From a pure-framework-math perspective, GoGold is the strongest silver-primary name in our universe.
The senior silver peer set we don't yet score
Seven senior silver names are queued for coverage: Aya Gold & Silver (Morocco), MAG Silver (Mexico, Juanicipio joint venture with Fresnillo), Pan American Silver (Americas), Fortuna Mining (Americas and West Africa), Endeavour Silver (Mexico and Chile), Silvercorp Metals (China and Ecuador), and First Majestic Silver (Mexico). These names span the spectrum from high-grade single-asset operators (MAG) to multi-asset regional producers (Pan American, Fortuna). Each will get a scorecard in the 2026 coverage cycle.
Until the scorecards are published, these names are best evaluated against the general framework principles — but without the specific factor scoring that makes direct comparison possible. Read individual company 43-101s and financial filings for the primary analysis; scorecards will follow.
How to size silver within a precious-metals portfolio
Rough construction guidance: for a 20-30% precious-metals allocation in a broader portfolio, silver typically represents 20-40% of the precious-metals sleeve. That is, 4-12% of total portfolio exposure. The actual allocation within that range should track gold-silver ratio dynamics — more silver when the ratio is high (silver cheap), less silver when the ratio is low. Position sizing within silver should reflect the higher volatility profile: if your gold position sizing is 3-5% per name, silver positions should sit at 2-3% per name to equalise risk contribution.