What public data exist on bullion banks’ physical silver inventories and their lease exposures?
Executive summary
The publicly available record on bullion banks’ silver positions is patchwork: exchange and vault inventories, industry aggregates, lease‑rate movements and supply/demand research are reported openly, but granular bank‑by‑bank physical inventories and detailed lease exposures are not disclosed in public filings; commentators therefore infer stress from inventory drawdowns, ETF flows and spiking lease rates rather than from direct balance‑sheet line items [1] [2] [3].
1. What public inventory data exist — exchanges and vaults
Aggregated, location‑level inventories are the clearest public datapoints: CME/COMEX registered warehouse stocks and LBMA‑reported vault holdings are published and have been cited as falling sharply (COMEX/LBMA registered inventories reportedly down dramatically since 2020 and LBMA vaults reported as losing 30–40% of holdings in recent years) — these exchange and vault tallies are the backbone of any public inventory analysis [1] [2] [4].
2. Regional exchange statistics — Shanghai and other hubs
Regional exchange inventories (for example Shanghai exchange stocks) are tracked by market commentators and dealers and have been reported at multi‑year lows, which market participants point to as evidence of mobilization of above‑ground metal and constrained regional availability; such figures are reported by exchanges and cited in industry reports and dealer statements [2] [5] [6].
3. Industry aggregate research — Silver Institute and trade analysts
Independent industry bodies and research shops publish annual supply/demand balances and cumulative drawdown estimates that aggregate mine supply, scrap, industrial consumption and investment flows; the Silver Institute’s supply/demand tables and specialist analysts have quantified deficits and the cumulative ounces withdrawn from so‑called “mobile inventory,” which researchers use to estimate how many ounces remain available to settle delivery versus those locked up in industrial or private hoards [3] [7] [4].
4. Lease rates, premiums and market stress indicators
Publicly accessible market indicators such as reported silver lease rates, spot premiums, and dealer availability provide indirect but timely signals of strain: several sources document spikes in lease rates (above historical near‑zero levels and even above 5% at times), widening spot/physical premiums and “out of stock” notices from major dealers — these are widely quoted as proof of tightened access to physical metal [5] [4] [8].
5. What is not public — bullion‑bank level inventories and lease positions
Crucially, detailed bullion‑bank exposures are opaque in public data: while regulators and banks publish high‑level balance sheets, they do not disclose line‑by‑line unallocated vs allocated metal balances, gross leased ounces, or counterparty short positions in a standardized, public format; as a result, claims about specific banks’ solvency or exact leased volumes rely on inference from aggregate inventory declines, lease‑rate moves and anecdotal reporting rather than direct, verifiable bank‑level data [1] [7].
6. How market participants and reporters bridge the transparency gap
Because bank‑level transparency is lacking, analysts and journalists triangulate using exchange registered stocks, LBMA vault tallies, ETF flows/conversions, dealer inventories and published lease‑rate data to model potential shortfalls and counterparty stress; this method produces plausible scenarios (large cumulative deficits, moved mobile stocks, stressed lease markets) but cannot replace audited disclosure of individual bullion‑bank physical inventories or contractual lease obligations [9] [3] [4].
7. Bottom line — useful public signals, limited granularity
Public data provide robust aggregate signals: shrinking COMEX/LBMA/Shanghai stocks, industry supply/demand deficits, rising lease rates and dealer shortages document material tightening in physical silver [1] [2] [3]. However, the absence of standardized, public bank‑level reporting on allocated vs unallocated metal and on gross leased positions means that any assertion about specific bullion banks’ physical inventories or exact lease exposures remains inferential rather than directly evidenced by public filings [7] [4].