Silver Price Split: Why Producers Are Bypassing New York and London

Silver bars and silver coins from GOLDINVEST - silver price, silver news and silver stocks

There is no official silver price, as there are essentially several prices for silver, each claiming to represent the actual selling price. The best known of these prices are the daily price fixings at the Western and Eastern metal exchanges. However, although only three major metal exchanges dominate the picture at this point, the differences between the price fixings in London, New York, and Shanghai have been more than conspicuous in recent months, with the lowest prices consistently recorded at the LBMA in London and at the Comex in New York.

In contrast, the silver available in Shanghai has always been traded at a premium. Market observers have attributed the persistent premiums in Shanghai to the fact that silver sold on the Chinese exchange must actually be physically available, while in London and New York it is sufficient for a seller to simply promise that the silver being sold is physically present.

For several months now, market participants have therefore been preoccupied with the question of which silver price is the “correct” one. This question became even more complicated last week, as two major silver producers, Hecla Mining and First Majestic Silver, opened their books and published their figures for the fourth quarter of 2025. These figures were not only very good, but they also contained considerable explosive potential regarding the question of the “correct” silver price.

Which Silver Price Is the Correct One?

This explosive potential came in the unassuming form of a small side note. First Majestic Silver reported not only a record silver production of 4.2 million ounces for the fourth quarter of 2025, but also quarterly revenue that increased by 60% to $463.9 million, resulting in record cash flow of $301.0 million or $0.61 per share.

Net income thereby increased by $182.0 million to $250.4 million. It was also so high because First Majestic Silver succeeded in selling its silver at an average price of $69.74 in the last quarter. However, silver was not traded at such a high price on average in London or New York last year.

Only in the very last days of 2025 did the silver price advance into these high ranges. Averaged over the entire fourth quarter, the silver price at the Comex was only $55.20. In other words: First Majestic Silver sold its silver outside the Comex and realized a premium of 26% compared to the simultaneous price at the Comex.

Not Selling Silver in New York or London Is Significantly More Attractive

At an average of $69.29, the average price that Hecla Mining achieved in the fourth quarter was only marginally lower than the proceeds that First Majestic Silver was able to record. Hecla also achieved a selling price outside the exchange that was approximately $14 or 26% above the reference price of one of the world’s most important silver exchanges.

In the last quarter, two of the world’s most important and largest primary silver producers thus turned away from the Comex and its official silver price and had great success with this strategy, as they succeeded in both cases in achieving sales proceeds that were significantly above the “official” selling price of the most important Western metal exchanges by 25 to 26%.

This indicates that both the LBMA in London and the Comex in New York can no longer be regarded as the “correct” places for price discovery, because buyers of physical silver are necessarily willing to pay premiums of 26%. If more than just an unsustainable promise were traded in New York, every buyer could purchase the silver they need at the Comex with a 25% discount.

The Paper Exchanges in London and New York Are Losing Their Benchmark Function

At this point, a development that has long been expected by intimate experts of the silver market is also becoming clear to outsiders: The prices for paper silver and real, physically available silver are diverging massively. The difference between the two prices was already enormous with a premium of 25 to 26% in the fourth quarter of 2025.

It could have increased significantly again in this still young year, as at the end of January the Comex caused a 30% crash in the silver price through multiple sharp increases in its margin requirements within a few days. This was not accompanied by either a short-term massive increase in physical silver supply or a sharp decline in physical silver demand.

In about three months, when the major primary silver producers present their figures for the first quarter of 2026, we may already know the answer to the crucial question of the coming weeks: Will physical silver trading and paper trading at the Comex and the LBMA in London go their separate ways in the future?

It is still too early to answer this question definitively now. However, a positive answer can no longer be surprising.

Keywords

Featured Company

Categories

Further Links

Never miss important news again.

Receive exclusive updates on exciting commodity companies, market analyses, and investment opportunities directly in your inbox.

By submitting the form, you agree that your contact details will be processed for sending the newsletter.

Disclaimer

I. Information Function and Disclaimer: GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH offers editors, agencies, and companies the opportunity to publish comments, analyses, and news on www.goldinvest.de. The content serves exclusively for general information and does not replace individual, professional investment advice. It does not constitute financial analyses or sales offers, nor is it a solicitation to buy or sell securities. Decisions made based on the published information are entirely at your own risk. No contractual relationship arises between GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH and the readers or users, as our information relates exclusively to the company and not to personal investment decisions.

II. Risk Disclosure: The acquisition of securities involves high risks, which can lead to the total loss of the capital invested. Despite careful research, GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH and its authors assume no liability for financial losses or for the content’s guarantee regarding timeliness, accuracy, appropriateness, and completeness of the published information. Please also note our further terms of use.

III. Conflicts of Interest: In accordance with §34b WpHG and §48f para. 5 BörseG (Austria), we point out that GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH, as well as its partners, clients, or employees, hold shares in the aforementioned companies. Furthermore, a consulting or other service agreement exists between these companies and GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH, and it is possible that GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH may buy or sell shares of these companies at any time. These circumstances can lead to conflicts of interest, as the aforementioned companies compensate GOLDINVEST Consulting GmbH for its reporting.